brook waldman design/make/research

Brook WaldmanDesign Make Research

Craft of Up-cycling

Approach

Waste to Furniture

Ecology of Process

On Exhibit: Ecology & ProductionNordic Heritage Museum

Design / Build / PlayCo-op School Natural Playground

Lifecycle Assessment Research Is the Passive House Upgrade worth it?

Design/Build/PlayCo-op School Natural Playground[UO Community Design-Build]

ApproachAn Ecology of Design ProcessFour overlapping bedrock principles permeate my design / thinking.

>> Lifecycle ThinkingInvestigate and communicate the processes and environmental impacts of extraction, production, use, and waste. This means tracing upstream where stuff comes from; and looking downstream to where it goes.

>> Head / Heart / Hands Develop Eco-Literacy: a holistic understanding and breadth of competencies for addressing environmental issues. a) Knowledge of issues & concepts; critical thinking skills. b) Values grounded in empathy & sense of personal connection with our environment.c) Technical know-how & hands-on action of doing real work in service of these values.

>> Use What’s HereSeek to understand ecological and social functions of a place. Re-think Waste. Make the most of [and foster a sense of place through the use of] available resources — materials, energy, human capital.

>> Criteria Drives ProcessDevelop rigorous project criteria — both quantitative/technical & qualitative/experiential — based on research, analysis, and synthesis. Include metrics to gauge relative merits of design decisions. This criteria drives the design, and at the same time is malleable, itself informed by the design process as ideas are tested.

Waste to Furniture

Utility: Using What’s HereSilver Maple logs salvaged from cut city tree.Unique steel hardware from scrapyard.

Firmness: Craft of ReuseMaterial informs design: structural path of forces follows irregular path of wood grain.Final products showcase material character & irregularity .

Delight: Lifecyle Made TangibleUltra-local-ness & character of materials.

Craft of Up-cycling

Ecology & Production

Nordic Heritage MuseumBallard//Seattle, WA Thesis Architecture StudioUniversity of Oregon

1492 Pre-Development 2013 ExistingWhere the Water Goes1492 2013 2016PRE-DEVELOPMENT EXISTING GOAL

1.87 million gallonsAnnual Rainfall on Site

Runoff from above

50% Groundwater Recharge935,000 gal/yr

30% Surface Runoff 561,000 gal/yr

15% Transpiration280,000 gal/yr

5% Evaporation93,000 gal/yr


Runoff from above

0% Groundwater Recharge

negligible


0 Transpirationnegligible



Runoff from above


30% Filtered+slowed, to storm drain 561,000 gal/yr



J F M A M J J A S O N D

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

WAT

ER B

UD

GET

Kilo

-Gal

/ m

onth

SUPPLYCatchable Rainfall

SUMMER DEFICIT

DEMANDEstimated Building Water Use

0

store in cistern

J F M A M J J A S O N D

0

1

2

3

4

SOLA

R EN

ERG

Y BU

DG

ETkB

tu /

sf /

mon

th

SUPPLY PV Generation

SUMMER SURPLUSgive back to grid WINTER

DEFICITpurchase from grid

DEMAND Electricity Use Potential

WH

ERE

THE

WAT

ER G

OES

Stor

mw

ater

then

and

now

Context + CriteriaThe Seattle Nordic Heritage Museum is planning for a new museum building on its Ballard property.

Our school architecture studio used this real project as a platform for testing sustainability-oriented design ideas--particularly for net-zero energy and water use.

Ecological BudgetStay within the solar and water carrying capacity of the site. Manage Stormwater on-site.

Heritage of ProductionTake advantage of site’s heritage of industrial and ecological production: -Wetlands: stormwater filter & sponge. -Plants: photosynthesizing energy producers.-Ballard: hub for local industry.

[Collaboration: Amber Whitmer]

Celebrating & Remaking Heritagea new ecological-industrial production: clean water + energy on exhibit.

Ballard: a heritage of production.

Entry at Burke Gilman Trail

First Flush Diverter

Storm Overflow

16,000 gal Cistern + Pump

1.87 million gallons

Annual Rainfall on Site

???

Runoff from

watershed

above

50%Groundwater Recharge

935,000 gal/yr

30%Surface Runoff

561,000 gal/yr

15%Transpiration

280,000 gal/yr

5%Evaporation

93,000 gal/yr

WHERE THE WATER GOES

Pre-development condition

???

Uphill Runoff



???

Runoff from

watershed

above


935,000 gal/yr

30%Surface Runoff

561,000 gal/yr

15%Transpiration

280,000 gal/yr

5%Evaporation

93,000 gal/yr



???

Uphill Runoff



???

Runoff from

watershed

above


935,000 gal/yr

30%Surface Runoff

561,000 gal/yr

15%Transpiration

280,000 gal/yr

5%Evaporation

93,000 gal/yr



???

Uphill Runoff

Systems on ExhibitPeople & Water

Water systems build on historical ecological functions of site.

Museum experience continues into landscape. The flows of water--natural and designed--are on display.


Nordic Heritage MuseumBallard//Seattle, WA

Storm Overflow

Filter / Disinfect

SEASONAL SPONGE dry in summer + wet in winter[Porous detention basins provide gathering space when it’s sunny, and stormwater absorption/flood attenuation during the rainy season. Stored water releases gradually to wet filter zone.]

DRY porch for people

WET filtering plants/stormwater retention[Infiltration basins with filtering plants remove solids and toxins. Clean water infiltrates to the water table or gradually enters the storm system before ending up in Salmon Bay.]

Where the Water Goes1492 2013 2016PRE-DEVELOPMENT EXISTING GOAL


Runoff from above






Runoff from above

0% Groundwater Recharge

negligible


0 Transpirationnegligible



Runoff from above


30% Filtered+slowed, to storm drain 561,000 gal/yr



Where the Water Goes // 2018 Proposed

Indoor Use


Nordic Heritage MuseumBallard//Seattle, WA

ATRIUM GALLERYpeople on exhibit

Systems on ExhibitNet-Zero Energy Visit

VAULT + FRAMESensitive artifacts preserved in a sealed vault, with super-insulated walls and passive humidity buffer of unfired clay bricks. Museum-goers “offset” their visit’s energy use with hand-cranked fans that move air through humidity buffer.

The rest of the building is a highly operable frame: able to shift with daily, seasonal, and generational fluctuations of museum use and outside weather.

South Wall: Performance in the Details

Winter/Summer Comfort:Building Systems on Display

8” 0 2” 4” 8”

Insulated Operable Louvres

Tilt-Out Window

Cont. Air + Vapor Barriers

Bug Screen

Fiberglass Reinforced Cement Panel

5.5” Polyiso

5/8” Gyp. Board

Vertical Z-Girt Rail, vent. cavity between3” Mineral Wool Insul.Cont. Horiz. Z-Girt

Modified Insulated Cold Storage Door

Cont. Compressible Rubber Gasket

Horiz. Sliding Door Track

pv

turbine ventilators

highly insulated envelope

diiffuse N light in

vertical shade fins

block N summer

sun

summer: PV blocks sun

winter: sun in

operable windows/vents for cross/stack ventilation

shaded porch

street-side awning

evapotranspiration

slab as mass

radiant heat

operable insulated

louvers

Material added to building for Passive House upgrade

Material removed from building in Passive house upgrade

Environmental Impacts of Materials Added

Environmental Impacts of Materials Removed

+_

∆ Material Impacts

∆ Operations Impacts

Energy required for operations of Earth Advantage version

Energy required for operations of Passive

House version

Full Lifespan Environmental Impacts of EA Operations

Full Lifespan Environmental Impacts of PH Operations

+

_

LIFE

CYC

LE A

SSES

SMEN

T

Material removed from building for Passive House

upgrade

=

=M

ATER

IALS

OPE

RATI

ON

S

Total ∆ Impacts from Upgrade

∑

ROADMAP: methodology

MATERIAL INVENTORYPARTS REMOVED from the design PARTS ADDED to the design

Lifecycle AssessmentResearchIs the Passive House Upgrade Worth It?

The Case Study BuildingsThe Stellar Apartments, a multifamily housing development in Eugene, OR.

The UpgradeThe project team decides to design one 6-unit block to the ultra-high-performance Passive House standard.

The Research QuestionIs the upgrade worth it in terms of full lifespan environmental impacts? i.e... Will it result in a smaller carbon footprint (and other reduced negative impacts) over the building’s lifetime?

Collaboration

Erin Moore, UO Asst. Professor; Peter Reppe, Solarc A+E

Funding: University of Oregon & City of Eugene Green Building

R-49 Blown-in Fiberglass Insulation in Attic

“Intermediate Framing”2x6 wood studs, 16” o.c.

R-21 Fiberglass Batt Insulation in Walls

Double Glazed, Low-e, Argon-Filled, Vinyl-frame Windows

Electrical Resistance Wall Heaters

20” R-3.66/in. Mineral Wool Insulation in Attic Advanced Framing 2x6 wood studs, 24” o.c.

SIGA Air-Sealing Tape at Plywood Sheathing Joints

5.5” Blown-in Fiberglass

3” Exterior Polyisocyanurate Rigid Foam Insulation

Double Glazed, “Heat Mirror” Low-e, Argon-Filled Vinyl-frame WindowsHeat Recovery Ventilators

Stainless Steel Duct work from HRVs to individual rooms

Δ Materials = 50 MT

Δ Operations = -1,030 MT

200

0

-200

-400

-600

-800

-1,000Lifetime G

HG E

miss

ions

, MT

CO 2e

ΣOverall, the building’s full lifecycle emissions will be reduced by 980 MT CO2e.

Research ConclusionThe upgrade is worth it in terms of environmental impacts. The savings in GHG emissions (and other environmental factors) from increased operations performance far outweigh the initial cost.

DuctsHRVExterior InsulationWindows

Attic InsulationWall Cavity InsulationFraming LumberElectric Heaters

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Electric Resistance Heaters, net change Framing Lumber, net change

Wall Cavity Insulation, net change Attic Insulation, net change

Windows, net change Exterior Wall Insulation

HRV Ducts

OPERATIONAL SAVINGS // greenhouse gas emissions: The improved performance will mean a lifetime reduction of over 1000 MT CO2e from the building’s use.

MATERIAL IMPACTS // by building part & environmental impact

MATERIAL INVESTMENT//greenhouse gas emissions The new materials will be responsible for emitting an additional 50 MT CO2e as a result of the Upgrade.

roughly equivalent to 1 year’s GHG emissions from 10 cars. [EPA]

Design / Build / Play

Natural Playground Co-op Family CenterEugene, OR

Observe/DesignWhat is “natural play”? How can it be supported in an urban/suburban environment?

PlayLeave some components ”un-finished”. Allow children to continually re-finish their environment...to be authors of their own learning.Fixed and loose parts.Interaction with seasonal change: plants, rain, sun.

Build: Use What’s HereIncorporate volunteers of all skill-levels. Make use of existing boulders, trees, & concrete stemwall.Use donated/salvaged materials.

Lifecycle ThinkingBolted connections for replacement/disassembly.

[Collaboration: Jon Creighton, Brian Nguy, Jess Yarish, Lauren Jones, Collin Janke, Giddeon Burris, Daniel Rosenthal]

observe

design

build

design

play

build

Brook [email protected]

1274 W 5th AveEugene, OR 97402

EDUCATIONM. Arch. University of Oregon

Ecological Design Certificate Ecosa Institute

B.A. Philosophy Wesleyan University

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

>> SUSTAINABILITY RESEARCHGraduate Research Fellow: Lifecycle AssessmentUniversity of Oregon Dept. of Architecture

Municipal Energy & Climate Change Report WriterSustainable Cities Initiative, Eugene, OR

Fossil Fuels Research InternCity of Eugene Office of Sustainability

>> TEACHINGGraduate Teaching Fellow: StructuresUniversity of Oregon Dept. of Architecture

Math + Environmental Seminar Teacher Forest Grove Community School, Forest Grove, ORThe Outdoor Academy, Pisgah Forest, NC

>> BUILDINGProject Manager: Construction & BudgetDesignBridge: UO Community Design-Build

AmeriCorps Construction Crew LeaderHabitat for Humanity, Portland, OR

LEED Green Associate

mailto:brookwaldman%40gmail.com?subject=

FRAME STUDY: Light + Operable

brook waldman design/make/research

Documents

design thinking

gallonsannual rainfall

groundwater recharge935

water goesstormwater

water goes1492

surface runoff

environmental issues

sense of place