2012 Structural Engineering Traveling Fellowship
Elegance, Economy, Efficiency, and the Environment

Sustainability has always been a part of my world. Long before I arrived, my parents had created lives where time spent experiencing the world was emphasized over material possessions and “reduce, reuse, recycle” was not a foreign concept but routine. From their careers as craftsmen to the state they moved to, they showed a predilection for a simpler life. Growing up in southern Maine, it would have been difficult for me not to enjoy the natural world, but it was not clear how this would shape my life.

Upon initial observation, harmony with nature contrasts with the current urban emphasis on statement architecture. Where the two unite, however, are green buildings—and not just buildings with the latest energy efficient technology but buildings that passively attain their environmentally friendly goals, blending with their natural surroundings and simultaneously standing out as unique structures. While the solutions may differ, the common ground is a commitment to the belief that this is the direction architecture and structural engineering is and should be heading.

This trip was inspired by David Billington’s The Tower and the Bridge that expounds the notions of efficiency, economy, and elegance in structural design. Through this book I began to understand the processes leading to a successful—and beautiful—structure, in contrast to architecture, and my appreciation grew. The more I learned and observed within the world of buildings, however, the more I felt that something was missing. As the impact of humans on the earth comes closer and closer to causing irreversible damage, the environment must be first and foremost in all our designs. While being an efficient and economic structure inherently speaks to some level of a reduced impact through material conservation, it does not necessarily mean the environment has been considered throughout the design.

Structures able to provide heating and cooling and protect against the elements had been successfully built long before we had mechanical ventilation or steel I-beams. There are inherent design principles that have been lost in the push for hermetically sealed, static environments. Natural ventilation, daylighting, and local materials are elements of a building that have become afterthoughts rather than central design features.

The buildings discussed in the following pages have all demonstrated a drive towards environmentally friendly design principles. Some are successful, some are not. The intent here, however, is not to define a successful green structure but rather to present the ideas and motivations behind them, to explore their commonalities, and display their regional differences. Many of the buildings chosen utilized unique structural components, whether through the selection of alternative, low-carbon materials, like rammed earth and air-filled plastic insulating pillows, or by incorporating efficient designs, like geodesic domes and timbrel vaults. A focus on passive strategies was also emphasized when selecting the buildings to visit. These include daylighting and natural ventilation, along with other methods that take advantage of thermal differentials or the orientation of the sun.

The buildings that follow have been grouped according to their featured material: stone/masonry, earth, wood, concrete, and steel. The categories, in turn, have been ordered by their modernity and complexity—from Stonehenge—which, despite its impressive construction for its time, is a simple structure—to the steel and glass skyscrapers of Norman Foster that make significant use of modern technology.

This journey has led me around the globe and through a variety of regions, climates, and cultures. It has provided me with a number of adventures, and some great stories, but, ultimately, it has created in me optimism for the future of green buildings. There are people, policies, standards, and historical precedence all over the world that are pushing for structures that are more environmentally friendly, or, it might be more appropriate to say, less environmentally harmful. While the environment has not been specifically targeted in the past as a design objective, it is on a clear trajectory to be a necessary inclusion in the future.

Some questions to consider when learning about these buildings:

• Does this structure act locally? Is there an emphasis on regional materials, community inclusion, does it take into account region-specific solutions rather than applying an inappropriate technology?
• Does this structure think globally? Is it trying to set an example for other buildings?
• Is the structure emphasized? Does the function follow the form? The building functions because of the form, not in spite of it.
• How are heating, cooling, and light dealt with? Do these solutions work with the occupants, in spite of them, or against them? Are they passive solutions, or active?

Traveling with the sole purpose of looking at architecture was a dream. I enjoyed each and every one of the buildings I visited. While some resonated more than others, my love of structural engineering and architecture allowed me to appreciate both the unique and the understated elements of these structures.

There are some themes in the discussions of these buildings that I hope stand out. The first few fall under the umbrella of natural—natural ventilation, natural lighting, and natural materials. As I emphasized throughout, the buildings I chose to visit were ones that used passive strategies to achieve their sustainability goals. Utilizing what already occurs in nature, letting it work to the building’s advantage, seems as if it would be common sense, but is actually quite difficult to implement. Compared to mechanical systems, nature is unpredictable. We can attempt to understand it, and by accounting for the range of possibilities we observe, utilize it, but it also means we have to be tolerant of more conditions—slightly warmer or cooler temperatures, less constant light, or higher levels of humidity. In return we not only gain lower energy costs, but reduce our environmental impacts that can multiply in a building over its years of operation. Additionally, with natural materials like wood and rammed earth, the structural characteristics are less consistent and therefore accounting for their behavior can be more difficult than for a tried-and-true concrete mix or a steel I-beam. That extra effort, however, balanced by their additional properties, such as thermal benefits or fire protection, which can be used to the designer’s advantage.

Another theme that encompasses quite a few of the explored buildings is a unique structural system. From rammed earth to diagrids to timbrel vaulting, these are not necessarily the common forms of construction we often see, unlike steel frames or reinforced concrete. As I have reiterated time and again, efficiency in structural design directly translates to lower embodied environmental impacts. It is also convenient that an efficient structure helps lead to an elegant structure, as many of the presented buildings demonstrate.

One final element, which can often get overlooked in green buildings, is the occupant experience. It is impossible for a building to account for all the variables people create (temperature preference, water consumption, electronics use, etc.) to maintain optimal operating conditions. Many buildings designed today forget to take into account the weight of the books, metaphorically speaking. They are so finely tuned to reach net-zero energy use, for example, that they cannot handle the addition of one more computer or too many manually opened windows. At the same time, given full occupant control, particularly in an office building, it would be just as difficult to function optimally. It appears to me that the ideal lies in a balance of computer-controlled systems and user control—letting a user open a window could prevent the thermostat from being lowered, while automatic closing of that window after a certain amount of time will make sure the interior comfort can be maintained.

There is not a catch-all solution. Each design for a sustainable building will depend on a variety of factors—location, climate, and function, to name a few. The examples presented in the earlier building discussions may be applicable, or they may not. They will, however, contribute to the understanding of principles that can be incorporated in a multitude of ways. They will also show that elegant, economic, efficient, and environmentally friendly buildings do not have to be an exception, but rather, should be the norm.

Australia

Canada

Iceland, South Africa, and United Arab Emirates

United Kingdom