The Collegiate Game Changers study presents 10 case studies of universities that are leading the way to create more environmentally sustainable practices as well as green facilities. Among the universities recognized are The University of Washington and the $250 million renovation of the school’s Husky Stadium.

Designed by 360 Architecture, with offices in San Francisco, the 72,500- seat stadium is seeking LEED Silver certification. The stadium reopened in time for the 2013 fall football season.

“Husky Stadium is integrating resource-efficient features with multiuse design that ensures the building will be used year-round,” said Chris deVolder, project manager with 360 Architecture. “One of the keys to the success was including athletics operations in the design process from the beginning and engaging local resources. This includes reaching out past the edge of the stadium, working with the university and local transit authorities to design a bike parking system that accommodates day-to-day use as well as expanding to accommodate game-day use.”

Some green practices utilized at the stadium include 100 percent recyclable and compostable service ware and fan engagement programs to promote sustainability. Additionally, approximately 95 percent of construction waste from the project was diverted from landfill; locally sourced steel, wood and stone were used in the renovation; an advanced energy management system is being utilized and the stadium uses LED lighting.

The university’s athletics department also received a $3,500 grant from the GLAD One Bag College Waste Diversion Grant program in order to enhance waste management practices. The athletic department used those funds to hire Milepost Consulting to advise the department on operational efficiency and goal setting.

Driven by student demand, Husky Stadium is trailblazing green practices in university sports.

“Students are now coming into college not asking about sustainability performance, but demanding it. It’s becoming part of how they decide where to go to school,” deVolder said. “Nationwide, we’re really just starting to scratch the surface of sustainability performance with collegiate sports, and Husky Stadium is helping to lead the way.”

Other schools recognized for greening their campus sports include the University of Colorado Boulder, University of North Texas, Ohio State University, University of Florida, Arizona State University, University of Oregon, University of Minnesota, University of Arizona and Yale University.

The post Collegiate Game Changers Study Acknowledges Green Sports appeared first on School Construction News.

Prill, who teaches indoor air quality classes and has inspected hundreds of schools and other facilities, recommends that schools pay attention to the following five conditions: dryness, cleanliness, comfort, pollution control and ventilation.

Dryness

“The building needs to be dry. A wet building is a failed building,” says Prill. “It will have structural and cosmetic damage, look ugly and be expensive to repair. It will be a health hazard that attracts fungus, mold, bacteria, insects and rodents, all of which affect air quality.”

Follow these suggestions to keep your building dry:

• Have a pitched rather than a flat roof. Leaks are more infrequent and easier to find. The HVAC system has to go inside, out of the weather, for increased energy savings.
• Make sure all the gutters, sidings, windows and doors are free of leaks.
• “Often, schools are built on the cheapest property, in moist lowlands, so you have a whole wet building,” says Prill. Make sure all underground moisture from the basement, crawlspaces and site drainage doesn’t seep into the building. Make sure water drains away from the school.

Schools are being built faster and cheaper, so air conditioning and plumbing elements may not be attached or installed properly, resulting in leaks, says Prill. Check those connections.

Cleanliness

“One of the first line items that gets impacted when there is a shortage of funds is the custodial staff,” says Prill. During the design phase, minimize awkward spaces so the building is easy to clean.

• Don’t use carpets in hallways or heavy traffic areas. Teachers often like carpets because it helps to muffle noise. If you must use carpets in classrooms, look for vinyl-backed partial carpets that can be easily removed for cleaning.
• Utilize proper landscaping so kids track in as little dirt as possible.
• Increase classroom storage, but do not have permanent cabinets near the windows or exterior walls, because those are areas where moisture can gather.
• Suspended ceilings tend to attract loads of particles on their tops, which then drift into the air handling system and are recycled. Make sure you have good filters and an air duct that sucks up those particles before they get to the ceiling. If the air duct is filled with dust and other contaminants, it may be worth calling in a HVAC Duct Cleaning company to help fix the problem. It is very important to make sure that you get this sorted as soon as you can, as this could case many problems later on in life. So it is far easier to just get on with the duct cleaning then hoping that no one will notice a problem. Other things that you should consider would be keeping the ceiling tiles clean, and making sure you don’t have exposed fiberglass or other materials above the ceiling tile.
• Provide the cleaning staff with easy-to-use, efficient cleaning equipment, and instruct them in the proper cleaning techniques.
• Use environmentally friendly cleaning products. Plan ahead: Don’t choose floor tiles that require an industrial-strength chemical cleanser.

Comfort

At first glance, comfort might not seem related to air quality. But Prill explains that discomfort issues caused by loud noise or poor lighting often are confused with air quality problems. In any event, if the student is feeling nauseated, dizzy or faint, he or she is probably not breathing properly. One thing that can often help when the air quality is poor, is using air purifiers to make breathing more comfortable. This might also help to stop bacteria spreading through the air. To research more on this check out Best Air Purifier India reviewing site.

• Proper insulation protects against excessive heat or cold. But even the best insulation can’t regulate heat from the sun streaming in through the windows. Keep it cool inside by using proper shades.
• Use natural light when possible. Allow teachers to control lighting so it will not be too bright or too dim.
• Keep windows closed to keep outside noise at bay.

Pollution Control

Know where pollutants are located in the building and make sure people are not exposed to them.

• Air should always flow from the cleanest area to the dirtiest. For example, air should flow from the classroom to the hallway into the storage area and out the exhaust, or from the science class to where the chemicals are stored and out the exhaust, or from the hallways to the restrooms and out. “Air should be designed to move to a lower air pressure,” says Prill. “Typically, designers check air flow balance but neglect the flow from clean to dirty air and out.”
• Be smart about landscape design. Shrubbery should be kept away from the building and less water, fertilizer and herbicides should be used.

Ventilation

“Buildings have to breathe,” Prill says. “Use current guidelines for ventilation in an energy-efficient manner. Use natural ventilation where appropriate as part of an integrated design, but don’t use it as a substitute for pollution control.

Use the best filters you can get.

• Avoid having your fresh-air intake in an area where it will draw in pollutants, such as near the toilet, kitchen, sewer exhausts or bus parking area.

Avoid duct linings inside the system because they can become contaminated and flake off.

As a final recommendation, Prill says, “Have a written indoor air quality program that everybody can understand, from the administration to the teachers to the operations and maintenance staff to the students. Then, everyone should work together to make it happen.”

Thomas G. Dolan is a freelance writer based in the Pacific Northwest.

The post Healthy Air, Healthy Students appeared first on School Construction News.

Working with its architect, Elementary School District 159 obtained $87,500 in design and research grants and a $90,000 grant for construction assistance virtually free money for high-performance systems for its new 6-8 Grade Center in Matteson, Ill. The school features daylighting systems, roofs designed to accommodate green roof systems, and one of the largest geothermal pond systems in the state.

Board members, determined to satisfy taxpayers, often focus solely on minimizing construction costs. Consequently, valuable sustainable design and high-performance building systems – elements of the “state-of-the-art” factor – often get value-engineered out of program.

However, recent studies suggest that brushing off high-performance systems to pay rock-bottom construction prices does not result in the best bang for the buck.

Building owners who decline the sustainable design approach and technology typically do so for one of two reasons. First, they fear a “green premium” will skyrocket construction costs, despite a growing body of research that suggests otherwise.

Second, during initial programming and construction planning, owners do not consider the operation and maintenance costs that start eating away at budgets virtually as soon the red ribbon gets cut. Owners often overlook the significant decreases in future costs that result from “expensive” green design. These savings greatly (and often quickly) exceed any green premiums that do occur in the initial stages of construction.

Designers and contractors who are not fully informed about the true benefits of sustainability only exacerbate the problem. They may not even mention high-performance systems to their clients to avoid rousing fear about possible increases in construction costs.

The “Green Premium”

Recent studies place the “green premium” somewhere between 0.0 and 2.5 percent of total building construction cost. However, as architects and construction companies gain more experience with sustainable materials and high-performance systems, such as time cards, these premiums will continue to decrease. Today, only firms unfamiliar with sustainable design technologies or high-performance systems shy away from pursuing sustainability. While these firms may lose some competitive advantage, the true losers are taxpayers, who miss out on the latest cost-saving technologies.

The U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design rating system has helped provide more information about how sustainability affects construction costs. As the most widely accepted measure of a building’s sustainability, the LEED system awards “green” points to buildings, which then receive one of four ratings: LEED certified, silver, gold or platinum.

A Davis Langdon study published in November 2004 compared construction costs per square foot of 93 non-LEED and 45 LEED-based facilities. Fifty-two of the buildings were academic classroom facilities. The study found “no indication that LEED-based projects tended to be any more expensive than non-LEED.” According to this study, “green” buildings span the “cost spectrum,” suggesting sustainability is not the main cost-driving factor.

At the new Lake Zurich Elementary/Middle School (see SCN “Facility of the Month,” September 2004), maintenance-free vegetation helps conserve water and brings the site back to its Illinois prairie roots. The mix includes 40 different types of seeds that yield a variety of plants adapted to the local climate; plant types include tall grasses, ryes, clovers and flowers. The area does not need watering or cutting, and it blends well with the existing wetlands.

Building owners who do address “green premiums” early in the process can take advantage of various incentive programs that mitigate some of these costs. The Database for State Incentives for Renewable Energy provides valuable information on “state, local, utility, and selected federal incentives that promote renewable energy.”

Build Green, and the Savings Will Come

Sustainable design is ideal for building owners who view school construction as a long-term investment, rather than a quick fix. The useful life of the typical school building can extend well beyond 70 years. Throughout this time, high-performance systems will pump savings back into school budgets, while programmatic suitability allows educators to easily convert space over time – instead of building costly additions. So rather than spending their money on utilities and maintenance, owners will have more funds to improve academic programs or hire more teachers.

The often-quoted report, “The Costs and Financial Benefits of Building Green,” concludes that an investment of 2 percent of construction costs on high-performance systems yields life cycle savings of 10 times the investment. So investing $100,000 on sustainable features in a $5 million project could result in savings of $1 million over the first 20 years of a building’s life.

Methods of Costing

Sustainability

Just how do sustainable systems compare to conventional systems in terms of cost? Getting the true answer requires looking beyond initial construction. Depending on the size of the project, owners can choose from two cost/benefit analyses to determine the cost-effectiveness of sustainable systems:

Simple Payback Analysis

Typically used for smaller projects, a simple payback analysis determines the number of years a high performance system takes to pay for itself. The total first cost of the feature is divided by the first-year energy cost savings. Simple payback analyses do not consider unpredictable factors (e.g., operations, maintenance expenses) that further reduce costs. See Figure 2.

Life Cycle Cost Analysis

For larger projects, a life cycle cost analysis is a more comprehensive means of assessing the total cost of ownership over the useful life of a building. It includes four factors: initial costs (design and construction); operating costs (utilities, personnel, energy); maintenance costs (major rehab); and environmental and social costs/benefits (productivity, absenteeism, etc.).

“Our 40-year life cycle costing system is an effective tool that helps owners determine the best value for their project,” says Patrick Brosnan, educational planner and principal at Legat Architects Inc. “So when building owners ask about first-time costs, we try to refocus them on the true cost: life cycle cost. The community’s investment is a 100-year commitment; we have to think of cost with this in mind.”

The Source of the Savings

The West Metro Education Program’s interdistrict Downtown School, in Minneapolis, is a “green living school” that serves nine Minnesota districts. A mixture of materials showcases the school’s interdistrict and environmental focus, while minimizing maintenance expenses and maximizing lifespan. In addition to brick (100-year lifespan), the exterior features metal cladding (100-year lifespan) and stucco to (75 to 100 year lifespan). This project also includes a solar wall, which was funded by a $50,000 grant from the Minnesota Department of Public Service.

Following are a few of the life cycle cost savings that sustainable educational facilities offer over conventional buildings:

Reduced Energy Costs

High performance systems using a Powerblanket solution can reduce utility bills 20 to 60 percent on new construction, and 20 to 30 percent on renovated schools. Daylighting systems reduce lighting costs and heat gain. In turn, well-designed schools can function with smaller, less expensive HVAC systems. Typically, daylighting systems pay for themselves within a few years. The shape and proper orientation of the building will further reduce energy costs.

Geothermal heat pump systems are 25 to 40 percent more cost effective than conventional, high-efficiency HVAC systems. Geothermal systems use underground or underwater pipes to bring the earth’s natural heat into the building during winter, and to discharge heat back into the earth during summer.

Reduced Water Costs

Sustainable designers also use a variety of techniques to reduce water usage. For instance, schools may use recycled or rain water for toilet flushing. A gray water system can collect rainwater for site irrigation, while appropriate landscaping using native plant species requires minimal water use.

Reduced Maintenance Costs

Sustainable design reduces costs associated with facility upkeep. For instance, highly durable materials like copper and other metals have long life spans and require little maintenance.

Unlike conventional HVAC systems, geothermal systems do not require costly annual maintenance and inspections by experts. Rather, the owners’ maintenance staff can address the minimal annual maintenance necessary.

Brighter, Healthier Students

Other benefits of sustainable design also have an indirect impact on funding. For instance, recent studies reveal that daylighting systems in schools may significantly increase student performance, sometimes by as much as 20 percent. High-performing schools will not only improve test scores, but will also attract families who value education, ultimately increasing the revenue available to school systems. When children are performing well and excited about going to school, local communities will be more likely to support future referendums and school districts’ funding needs.

Daylighting was proven to decrease absenteeism among students and teachers for two reasons. First, daylight eliminates molds and bacteria that cause illness. Second, daylight creates a more natural, stimulating environment – a space where students and teachers want to be. So playing “hooky” to avoid a gloomy workspace seems less likely to happen. Also, the current per student revenue rates that range from $4,300 to $5,200 depend on average daily attendance. Even small increases in attendance can have a significant financial impact on schools.

A Logical Investment

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, annual school energy and water-related operating costs average $125 per student. Sustainable design can cut those costs nearly in half.

One cannot reasonably expect a modern, state-of-the-art facility with energy-efficient systems to cost the same as a “cookie cutter” design equipped with the cheapest possible systems. Thus, embracing sustainability requires looking beyond the cost of construction during planning; although high performance systems may incur additional construction costs, they will pay for themselves through reduced utilities, reduced maintenance costs and increased student performance and attendance.

Those who do consider costs of ownership rather than solely construction cost while planning and programming new school facilities will ultimately have more money to invest in the tools (e.g., technology, textbooks) and teachers that enhance the quality of education.

Over the life of the building, the financial savings of sustainable design are over 10 times the initial investment. And the educational gains are even more valuable. This is why having

Vuk Vujovic is director of sustainable design at Legat Architects Inc. He is a member of the America’s Schoolhouse Council’s Green Team, the U.S. Green Building Council, and the Healthy and High Performing Schools Task Force. In September, he presented “Integrating Sustainability into Educational Buildings” at the 2005 World Sustainable Building Conference in Tokyo. He can be reached via e-mail at vvujovic@legat.com.

The post Tired of Expensive School Buildings? appeared first on School Construction News.

The challenges to using space wisely are also articulated based on their possible impact on a project. The final ingredient is to consider the potential adaptability of the facility for uses other than educational, which maximizes the initial investment while also providing a venue for use by others.

The Four Keys

The first key is to know what you have and how it is used. A thorough inventory establishes the foundation for all current and future space use, and it saves time when planning is required. The inventory should include who uses the space (day and hours), how spaces are classified (general classroom, science lab, etc.), and seating (population and type). This data must be updated as changes occur to make certain that current information is always available and ready for use.

Instructional Space Utilization (by hour)

The second key involves understanding the curriculum schedule. Is it traditional or non-traditional? In other words, are the weeks per course/semester the same across the board or are there variances or different patterns? Full semester or partial? The type of schedule(s) can significantly impact space use.

Next, evaluate people requirements. This includes the teacher-to-student ratio and whether or not the budget will allow for the facilities that are required to meet the desired ratio. This is especially important when it comes to new construction. Knowing the nature of the classes involved – fine arts, general classroom, industrial arts, etc. – again comes into consideration at this point.

Finally, a facility condition assessment is required, and this involves two aspects. First, assess the facility’s health as measured by its lifecycle status or the remaining useful life of its components. This is important, and has greater significance with older facilities. Numerous factors must be considered such as building systems, including HVAC and electrical, as well as security and other aspects. Deferred maintenance requirements must be identified and documented by area.

The second aspect is to look at functional adequacy. There’s almost always competition for use of the best classrooms – those with the most technology or windows, or flexible furniture. Identify spaces that are lacking and determine if there are cost-efficient ways to make them better.

Challenges

There are three major challenges to using space wisely. The first is to analyze demographics and to use the resulting data. Gathering information and not putting it to use accomplishes nothing. For example, knowing that you will have a major increase in population within two years will likely require adjustments in how space is used or equipped.

The second involves what courses will be taught and what spaces are required to meet those needs. A drama class has different requirements from a math class. You must understand the technology and system requirements, if any, to support the defined curriculum.

This further requires an understanding of the pedagogy for each course. The space, furniture and equipment must be matched to the pedagogy or teaching method for each instructor because this impacts space requirements and efficiency. Seating, as one example, must be flexible in order to support individual preferences. Tables and chairs are likely better than standard seats with attached desks, often found in K-12 classrooms. Tables and chairs allow the instructor to maximize flexibility within the classroom since they can be configured in numerous arrangements.

Finally, you must determine who "owns" the classroom or "turf," because this almost always impacts the potential for change. An elementary school principal, for example, typically assigns rooms based on overall needs, and then individual needs. At a college, a department may assign smaller classes within a large space that has traditionally been assigned to the department, thereby underutilizing the assets.

This re-emphasizes the need to continually know who is using what space and when. In some instances, personnel may have to justify the need for a certain room when others are looking for more space to accommodate growing enrollments. An accurate inventory, again, is always critical.

Adaptability

Others use schools or colleges in many communities for various events. A high school, for example, may be designed to also serve as the home of the community theater or shared with the community college. This has an obvious impact on the facility’s design and the ability of the building to be adapted for use by different populations. Separate entrances may be required in order to close off restricted areas.

Technology also falls under the adaptability umbrella. There are different requirements for information technology versus instructional technology. The desire to have a "digital canopy" or fully wireless environment impacts design in multiple ways. Again, the leadership must determine what is required today and what will be required in the future.

For cash-strapped school districts and colleges going to a wireless environment may actually be a relief valve. It is almost always cheaper to install wireless access points throughout a building or campus rather than hard-wired connections. Addressing how technology must be adaptable in the future for changing requirements may well show that going wireless is the best option.

Overall, how well are you using the space that you have? The answer makes a difference in efficiency today and capacity for tomorrow.

Mike Managan, AIA, is senior vice president with 3D/I in Houston, Texas. He can be reached at (713) 871-7473, or via e-mail at managan@3DI.com.

The post Smart Spaces appeared first on School Construction News.

A 3/8-inch ribbed concrete panel with a light sandblast finish was chosen for the façade of MCG’s Interdisciplinary Research Building . This subtle pattern creates an interesting play of light and shadow throughout the day.

When the Medical College of Georgia (MCG) in Augusta charged its design team to build a high-performance research laboratory building with an extremely tight move-in date only 14 months away, traditional ways of erecting the structure had to be discarded. The design team’s answer to MCG’s challenge was the creation of a novel process for erecting precast that involved an innovative "inside-out" method of construction in which the building envelope was installed first and the precast was installed last.

The design and construction of MCG’s Interdisciplinary Research Building, Phase II (IRB) is a testament to teamwork and dedication. As a core component of MCG’s research campus, the $27.3 million, 94,000-square-foot IRB houses specialty labs ranging from tissue culture and bacterial culture suites to clean rooms, bioinformatics and radio-isotope suites. It provides MCG with the ability to respond to the changing field of scientific research for many years to come and will also help to stimulate the local economy by providing incubator space for growing and newly formed business ventures.

Why Precast?

Precast was selected as the material of choice because of the aesthetic it would provide, its durability (the building was designed with a lifespan of 50 years), its schedule efficiency and its overall cost effectiveness. The surrounding campus architecture, which ranges from brick and stucco to metal paneling, is complemented by the precast. A 3/8-inch ribbed concrete panel with a light sandblast finish was chosen for the façade.

The Challenge: High Performance in 14 Months

The challenge here was twofold: not only did the project have to be designed and constructed within 14 months, but the nature of the facility required a controlled environment and tight building envelope to prevent contamination of the research inside. Negative pressure zones in the laboratory areas can create a higher thermal/moisture drive through the exterior walls, and a true precast veneer did not lend itself to the high-performance requirements of the building envelope. A typical alternative in these situations is an 8-inch concrete masonry unit (CMU) backup wall system, but this method called for a longer construction schedule than was available. The solution, a process the design team would come to call "inside-out" construction, would provide for a better performing facility and would also allow the interior construction to progress concurrently with the design and installation of the concrete panels, rather than waiting for the finished exterior.

Inside-Out Construction

The solution was straightforward. It was determined that a high-performance barrier had to serve as the exterior envelope. Installed behind the precast, the membrane brought the precast panels out of the critical path for building envelope construction. It could be installed faster, allowing the building to dry more rapidly, thereby facilitating interior construction. The membrane also performs better than a typical CMU backup system – a perfect fit for the special requirements of the building.

Precast was selected as the material of choice because of the aesthetic it would provide, its durability (the building was designed with a lifespan of 50 years), its schedule efficiency and its overall cost effectiveness.

This construction process also brought its unique challenges. One challenge was the need to protect the high-performance barrier during the installation of the precast panels. Typical welding procedures would damage this critical element, so the solution was to weld only at the bottom row of the concrete panels. From there on up, the panels were stacked and attached with mechanical fasteners, allowing most of the weight to sit on the bottom row. This process influenced the design of the individual panels. An interlocking design was needed, so a male-female connect was created, resulting in inverted "T" and "I" shaped precast panels. This interlocking pattern led to a stronger veneer, and an easily recognizable "lighting bolt" pattern arose from the design process. This pattern facilitated installation because of its strong visual clues.

Another unique challenge was the location of all connections between the high- performance barrier and the panels. The connections, accessible only from the outside of the panels, demanded a solution that enabled the installers to reach behind the panels to fasten the connections. In order to allow for this, the design increased the clear space between the concrete precast and the barrier to twice the typical size. Instead of a 2-inch space, the clear space for this facility is 4 inches. Likening the installation process to "changing the oil on a Honda," the design team took extra steps to assure the erector team that they could successfully complete the installation of the fasteners – to the point that they conducted in-house studies and created rough mock-ups that could be tested.

The Result

The unique challenge of this project led to opportunities and advancements in the design and installation of the precast with success solely achieved through a concerted, team-oriented effort among the architect, contractor, fabricator and erector. The novel approach resulted in a four-week reduction of the construction schedule: three weeks were saved by separating the panels from the critical path and allowing the panels to be installed as a veneer material, and one week was saved through the management of the fabrication and installation of the precast materials.

In the long run, the durability and permanence of the precast concrete panels will lead to an overall reduction in life-cycle costs. The design was, in effect, influenced by the nature of precast itself and stands as a tribute to the properties of concrete and, of course, the persistence of a hardworking and dedicated team.

Howard Wertheimer, AIA , LEED AP, (hwertheimer@lasarchitect.com) and R. Grant Stout, Jr., (gstout@lasarchitect.com) are principal and project architect, respectively, with Lord, Aeck & Sargent, an architectural firm that designs and renovates educational buildings from K-12 private schools to multi-use facilities and science research laboratories on college and university campuses.

The post Fast—Track Inside—Out Construction appeared first on School Construction News.

Studies show that students are more productive and have higher morale when they work inwell-maintained, clean buildings — and that includes the floors. A well-maintained floor is aesthetically appealing and can also help prevent the spread of disease.

Floors, Health, Dust and IAQ

It’s a conundrum: While a clean, well-maintained floor can improve indoor air quality, some floor maintenance tasks can actually harm IAQ. For instance, when floors are polished or burnished, the pads create dust particles that can quickly spread throughout a facility. The dust particles may contain fungal spores, volatile organic compounds, residuesfrom cleaning chemicals, pesticides, bacteria and germs. Students who breathe this dust may be at risk for developing health problems.

Maintenance workers can reduce health risks by using machines designed to reduce the dust generated in floor care and by following certain precautions.

Creating Less Dust

Passive vacuum systems are most widely used in the United States. They can reduce the amount of particulates released into the air by as much as 50 percent. Of course, their effectiveness depends on the quality of the pad used, the finish applied to the floor, and the machine’s rotations per minute (RPM).

David Stanislaw, a floor care engineer with Tornado Industries in Chicago, says the shroud over the base of a passive floor machine helps trap the dust so that it is not released into the air. "By using centrifugal force and ‘holes’ in the pad driver, the dust and debris is propelled through filters into a container, hopper, or bag area at the rear of the machine," hesays. "This prevents the dust from escaping and contaminating the air."

The dust produced in floor care also can be reduced by taking the following steps:

Always dust and damp mop the floor before burnishing. This prevents the machine from throwing dust particulates into the air to contaminate surfaces and IAQ.

Assure proper pad and finish compatibility. Burnishers require finishes that can withstand the heat generated by these high-speed machines. A finish that is not compatible with a high speed will quickly be sanded away by the machine. This can also damage the floor, and when the old finish’s particulates become airborne, they can potentially create seriousIAQ problems. Always check the manufacturer’s instruction on the label to ensure compatibility.

Avoid burnishing near raised objects on the floor, such as outlets.

Perform a final sweeping of the floor with a dust mop following all buffing and burnishing tasks to remove dust and soil that vacuuming may have missed.

Use high-quality chemicals and finishes. The old expression "You get what you pay for" definitely applies to floor maintenance chemicals and finishes. Cheaper products often require more coats and more time and labor because they do not hold up as well, which in turn can increase dust problems.

Choose green cleaning chemicals that have been certified by either the Environmental Choice Program in Canada or Green Seal in the United States. These products are safer for facility occupants, cleaning workers and the environment because they do not contain many of the harmful chemical ingredients found in traditional floor care products.

Change the pads regularly or as soon as they are dirty. Using clean pads can significantly reduce the amount of dust generated.

Opt for cylindrical brush technology. Cylindrical floor care machines, which can be used on all types of floors, have counter-rotating brushes on each end that rotate at more than 1,000 RPMs at three-and-a-half to five times the contact pressure provided by a rotary machine. These machines use less water, chemicals, and tend to produce less dust — keeping it confined within the width of the machine. Rotary machines tend to slosh water, dirt and chemicals about 30 percent beyond the width of the machine and use about 30 percent more water, as well

Check that all equipment is in good working order. Propane burnishers may need periodic oil changes, air filter and spark plug checks, and the engine pulley belts may have to be adjusted. Grease fittings should be serviced with a grease gun, the pad driver should be checked for wear or slippage, and wheel, engine mount and handle bolts all should be checked and tightened.

Worker Training

Worker training is an essential component in proper floor care maintenance. Workers should attend floor care courses and be certified by a reputable organization, such as the Institute of Inspection, Cleaning, and Restoration.

Incorporating these floor care measures can make a major contribution to reducing dust and other IAQ contaminants. This can greatly improve the health, wellbeing and performance of facility workers and students, which is the ultimate goal of cleaning.

Robert Kravitz is a former building service contractor and the author of four books on the cleaning industry. He can be reached at rkravitz@rcn.com.

The post There’s More to Floors Than the Shine appeared first on School Construction News.

Each surface has its pluses and minuses, and choosing can be difficult. Which is best? Read on to make an informed decision that’s right for your facility.

History

Before 1950, grass was the only way to create a playing field. It had its problems, though, particularly in intemperate climates. The ground would freeze solid in the winter, only to turn to slick mud with the thaw or morph into dried straw in the heat of summer. But with proper maintenance, a lush, springy grass field was the perfect site for a game of football, soccer or baseball.

Along came AstroTurf, a 1950s invention that was originally designed to encourage people to be more active outdoors. In 1966, it was installed in the Texas Astrodome where for many years, professional athletes played on its bright-green carpet. But AstroTurf, too, had its problems. "Basically, AstroTurf was a glorified carpet over concrete," says Dr. Michael Meyers, head of the department of sports and exercise sciences at West Texas A&M and lead author of a study on turf injury rates. AstroTurf was blamed for a variety of sports injuries, including "turf toe" and concussions, because its surface was harder than that of natural grass.

Over the past 10 years, new artificial turf surfaces have been developed, and they purport to offer vast improvements over the old AstroTurf. Synthetic turf today usually consists of artificial fibers embedded in a thick layer of pulverized tires and sand. Manufacturers claim that the new products are more durable, better-cushioned to prevent injuries and nearly maintenance-free. But some environmental and safety concerns have been raised.

Cost

New-generation synthetic turf can have a high initial installation cost, but manufacturers say that the savings in maintenance will make up for it. Installation of a new artificial turf field might cost $500,000 or more. Although the initial capital cost is high, maintenance costs over the life of the synthetic turf should be lower than those associated with natural grass.

But it’s a mistake to assume that natural grass is always cheaper. "When you’re talking about higher-end natural grass systems-sand-based, under-drained, irrigated field systems-the costs of those systems can oftentimes exceed the capital costs of a newer synthetic turf," says Patrick Maguire, president of Geller Sports, a Boston-based turf installation company. "It’s a no-brainer to install synthetic turf at that point in time." A plain old soil-based grass field will likely be cheaper than synthetic turf, but without proper maintenance, it will not last as long.

Maintenance

Unlike natural grass fields, synthetic turf playing fields do not have to be watered, mowed, re-seeded or painted (field markings are woven directly into the fabric), so the turf is less expensive to maintain. Keeping a natural turf field in top shape is also more complicated than keeping up a synthetic turf field. Real grass must be aerated, herbicides must be applied and gophers must be battled. These maintenance tasks usually fall to the school maintenance staff, and if a boiler fails, field upkeep may fall to the bottom of the priority list. By choosing to install a synthetic field, school administrators may save money on maintenance and relieve some of the burden on their maintenance workers. However, litter and other solid waste must be removed from both types of surfaces. In fact, dog feces will not biodegrade on synthetic turf, so additional cleanup or stricter leash laws may be required.

Because synthetic turf won’t freeze or get muddy like natural grass, it can be used year-round, even in conditions that would usually get a game called on account of rain. Synthetic turf fields have built-in drainage channels to keep the fields from flooding, and of course, ground rubber won’t turn to sludge, even in a downpour. But when temperatures skyrocket in the summer, natural grass fields may have the advantage. Proponents of natural turf studied both grass fields and synthetic turf surfaces at Brigham Young University. They found that on hot days, synthetic turf heats up faster and retains heat longer. The synthetic turf had an average temperature of 117 F on its surface and even reached a high of 200 F on a 98-degree day. Watering the field cooled the synthetic surface down significantly, but only temporarily. In contrast, natural turf only reached an average temperature of 78 F. Superheated synthetic turf could adversely affect players if they are exposed to the high temperatures for long periods of time.

Safety

Both synthetic turf and natural turf have the potential to cause injuries, but Maguire cites anecdotal evidence that injuries are less likely on synthetic turf. Dr. Meyers conducted a study of high-school football injuries on natural turf and on synthetic turf. The study, which was published in the American Journal of Sports Medicine, found that different types of turf caused different types of injuries.

"This new generation of synthetic turf typically results in far fewer injuries than we see on the old-generation AstroTurf, the old synthetic artificial carpeted turf. What we found out was typically, we get less joint problems, less major joint damage as far as less ACL injuries on FieldTurf versus natural grass," Dr. Meyers says. "We get fewer cranial injuries, fewer concussions, on FieldTurf versus natural grass because it is a softer surface." In general, Dr. Meyers says, FieldTurf will cause less-traumatic injuries because of its softer surface. It can be softer than grass because in many parts of the country, grass dries out in the fall and winter, so the ground becomes very hard, Dr. Meyers says.

However, another study shows that the risk of concussion is the same, whether players are on grass or artificial turf. Dr. Roseanne Naunheim, an associate professor of emergency medicine at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, published her findings in the Journal of Trauma-Injury, Infection and Critical Care. She found that there was little difference among playing surfaces in terms of concussion risk.

Making the Decision

For facilities that must weather long, cold winters, an artificial turf product might be best. For example, Clark University in Worcester, Mass., installed a synthetic playing field, and this spring, it was the only useable playing field in the area because mud and snow had ruined the natural grass fields. In more temperate climates, the lower initial costs of natural grass might make it more attractive. And of course, there’s nothing wrong with a mix of the two. Patrick Maguire, of Geller Sports, says that the Phillips Academy at Andover, Mass., is installing some synthetic turf fields to take the burden off its natural grass fields, but synthetic turf will not completely replace natural grass. Only after a careful consideration of the pros and cons of each type of surface can administrators decide which type of playing field is right for their schools.

The post Artificial Turf vs. Natural Turf appeared first on School Construction News.

Picture the auditoriums from your K-12 days. Chances are one was a large, box-shaped, concrete block room with a stage on one end, mobile risers and a metal ceiling. It was used for everything from band concerts to basketball tournaments. Chances are also good that you had to strain to hear the lead actress in the class play, but your ears rang after the band recital.

In the past, too little thought was given to acoustics during the design and construction of school auditoriums. If trained acousticians were involved at all, it was after construction when they were asked to solve sound issues that could have easily been avoided in the design phase.

Today, new school construction is generally abandoning the multipurpose gymnasium/auditorium/cafeteria approach in favor of more suitable, individual spaces with acousticians consulted during the initial design stage. Because the conflicting acoustical objectives of an auditorium (to reinforce sound from a single location) and that of a gymnasium (to suppress noise from many sources) are impossible to resolve, the combination of the two spaces is now generally avoided. Although budget is always a consideration, the cost of building one space with the variable systems necessary to make it acoustically acceptable for both purposes often equals the cost of building two acoustically accurate spaces.

Russ Berger, president of the architectural acoustics firm Russ Berger Design Group, knows well the challenges associated with blending architectural styling with acoustical considerations. "There are three basic acoustical ingredients that architects and acousticians have to work with in building a good sounding room – the volume of the space, shape of the space, and the architectural/acoustical finishes. Usually the finishes are the one component that the designer has the most control over and oftentimes is the only component that can be modified," says Berger.

Reverberation Control

The most common acoustical challenge is excessive reverberation caused by the large physical volume and hard surfaces. Excessive reverberation results in poor speech intelligibility and distorted musical performances.

The proper amount of reverberation depends on the type of performance. Dramatic performances and lectures require very little reverberation to ensure clarity of speech. Music performances, on the other hand, usually require some amount of reverberation.

Auditorium flexibility is a reality most of the time and effective acoustical finish treatments can help alleviate, if not solve many of the problems, advises Berger.

Parallel walls are a major culprit of excessive reverberation and echoes. Good design avoids parallel surfaces, or breaks up surfaces with irregularities or angles. Parallel surfaces are minimized to avoid flutter echoes and redirect sound back toward the audience.

The rear wall should be shaped to reflect energy down to the audience, or incorporate acoustic absorbers to "trap" the sound. A concave-shaped rear wall should be avoided because it will cause disturbing echoes for those on stage. The use of more absorbent building materials, such as glass fiber panels, as opposed to bare gypsum wallboard and concrete will also help to cut down reflections.

The ceiling above the stage should be angled down to reflect sound to the audience. The ceiling above the audience should also have sections that are angled to spread reflections throughout the space.

Overhead reflectors that raise, lower, or change the ceiling configuration and portable stage enclosures are available to alter the way sound is reflected based upon performance type. While these options can be very effective, the cost and labor involved can be prohibitive.

Adding Absorption

In addition to construction features that enhance acoustics, materials can be introduced that provide absorption. A primary source of absorption in an auditorium is the audience. Auditorium seating should be upholstered to provide approximately the same amount of absorption as a seated person, thereby keeping the acoustical properties of the room constant regardless of whether it’s a packed house or an empty audition.

Carpet, curtains and certain types of ceiling tiles are also popular ways to provide absorption. Retractable banners and draperies that slide horizontally or rise vertically are another way to add absorption when necessary and remove it when unnecessary.

The most cost-effective way to incorporate absorption in a space is to install acoustical absorptive panels made of porous mineral fiber, e.g. glass, and covered by acoustically transparent fabric.

For adequate absorption, at least 10 percent to 20 percent of available wall space should be treated with acoustical absorbers. But note that absorption can be overdone, causing the reflected sound from the stage to be absorbed before it reaches the listener. Some reverberation is necessary to create intimacy, a feeling of musical envelopment by the audience. This can be achieved through diffusion and redirection of sound energy. Acoustical diffusers use highly engineered, complex surfaces to evenly distribute sound and provide the same degree of high quality sound to every person in the auditorium. This is often referred to as widening the "sweet spot" or eliminating "hot spots" and "nulls."

Ensuring accurate listening conditions in school auditoriums is not costly, nor time consuming. It is a simple matter of involving a trained consultant in the design of the space that will provide quality performances and increased learning.

Jeff D. Szymanski, PE is the chief acoustical engineer for Auralex Acoustics Inc. His experience covers many acoustics areas including a concentration on architectural acoustics. He can be reached at (317) 842-2600 or savant@auralex.com.

National Council of Acoustical Consultants: www.ncac.com

The post Designing Auditoriums appeared first on School Construction News.

"Going underground" doesn’t mean what it used to. In the turbulent sixties, it was the mythical place where fugitives escaped the long arm of the law. It was also the place where journalists felt free to espouse views perceived as subversive by conservative policymakers and the press. Today "going underground" is a proactive design strategy used by a creative cadre of architects and engineers to address ever-evolving site requirements and their impact on facility design and construction.

Site requirements were an initial cause of concern for the Washington, D.C.-based National Cathedral School (NCS). A needs assessment revealed that the private, all-girls school, located on the stately grounds of the Washington National Cathedral, required a larger gymnasium, in addition to other facility renovations. "It was clear to us if we wanted to meet the needs of our students, we needed to build a large facility," notes former board member Llewellyn Bensfield. "The challenge was how to build such a facility on the existing grounds, which were designed to provide open views of the Cathedral." Given limited space to build above ground, school officials opted to create the new facility beneath the girl’s practice field. "If we built below ground," Bensfield notes, "not only would we improve and enlarge the practice field, we’d also maximize existing green space."

School officials recognized that selecting the right design and construction team to lead the school’s efforts was critical. "At the time," Bensfield cites, "we knew this was going to be an engineering feat. We also knew we didn’t have many examples to study."

Architectural responsibilities were awarded to Cannon Design. Heery International was charged with project management. "We were offered several design options," noted Dueane Dodson, Heery’s project manager. "Finding the one that maximized green space and Cathedral views – while protecting the groves of 100-year-old trees – proved challenging and required extensive study and review."

A lengthy approval process followed, involving Cathedral officials, historic preservation review board members, historic society members, parents and the surrounding community. "One of the lessons we learned early on," Bensfield offers, "is that no facility is without neighborhood groups that have a vested interest in how a facility is built. Compromise is an integral part of the building process," Bensfield adds. Adapting plans to make the building face a certain direction, moving cooling and heating equipment farther from the neighborhood, and signing a facility usage agreement to limit access were just three of approximately 80 concessions NCS made to gain community buy-in.

Bensfield and Dodson believe that four of the key issues that any owner or facility manager "going underground" must address are waterproofing, drainage, lighting, and HVAC. "We spent a lot of time discussing and exploring options for building and waterproofing what we called "the bathtub," notes Dodson. "Before putting on the roof structure, it literally looked like we were building a bathtub. In our project, however, we were trying to keep the water out."

Rather than a conventional roof, most of the building is topped by one of the school’s two fields that were constructed as part of the project. "We used a continuous waterproofing membrane over the roof, down the sides and under the slab-on-grade," Dodson says. Insulation, gravel, soil, an irrigation system, and finally grass, cover the initial waterproofing materials on the roof.

Groundwater issues dictated the design of a special drainage system. "This building is 14 feet below the water table," Dodson says. "With this much finished space below the water table, we were very concerned with the potential for water migrating into the building. To relieve the hydrostatic pressure of the groundwater, we installed a perimeter drainage system around the entire foundation wall. An extensive maze of under-slab drainage pipe routes the groundwater to a sump pit where it is pumped into the storm water collection system."

Massive windows mark the above-ground front entrance to the building, allowing ample light to flow inside. "We really had to overcome concerns that walking into this building would be like entering a cave," Bensfield notes. "If anything, we went overboard on the lighting." While a decision to place glass walls against the fitness and weight rooms met with initial resistance for fear of flung book-bags shattering glass walls, Bensfield held firm, knowing the light from above would bounce off the glass wall, providing an even greater sense of light. Soft-colored walls also add to the sense of light felt throughout the facility.

Visitors who wonder how air flows in and out only have to wander into the adjacent garden to view the air shaft hidden amongst the blossoming flora. "The greatest challenge we faced with the HVAC system wasn’t as much about intake and exhaust, but how to site the HVAC equipment that normally goes on the roof," Dodson cites. "Rather than place them onsite, the decision was made to put these systems in a separate central plant located away from the neighborhood. The challenge then became how to gain access to the utilities from across the Close without adversely affecting a number of 100-year-old trees adjacent to the new building."

Another requirement of going underground is the sanitary sewer ejector pumps located in the pump room. "Most school buildings," Dodson notes, "do not need these because their toilets aren’t typically located below the sewer systems. Here, they are. We’ve even got backup pumps just in case."

Although it took four years to design and construct the facility, Bensfield knows it was worth the wait. "Our vision was to create a cutting edge facility that would serve future generations of students," Bensfield said. "People who come to visit are just blown away. This facility, with its one-of-a-kind standalone climbing wall, state-of-the-art fitness and weight centers and dance room, has really lifted girl’s athletics to a new level. It has had and will continue to have a great impact on both our athletes and non-athletes."

Sue Wasserman is the public relations manager at Heery International. She can be reached at swasserm@heery.com.

The post Promoting Underground Athletic Activities appeared first on School Construction News.