(This appendix is not part of this code. It is merely informative and does not contain requirements necessary for conformance to the code. It has not been processed according to the ANSI requirements for a code and may contain material that has not been subject to public review or a consensus process. Unresolved objectors on informative material are not offered the right to appeal at ASHRAE or ANSI.)

    SECTIONF101 (F1)
    Integrated Design Process/Integrated
    Project Delivery

    Integrated design, and related concepts such as integrated project delivery and integrative design, leverages early stakeholder collaboration, through the sharing of knowledge and expertise among project team members, to develop stronger, more balanced design solutions. This integrated design process stands in contrast to traditional design methods, where there is limited use of the skills and knowledge of all stakeholders. An integrated design process provides increased predictability of project outcomes earlier and enables the construction of high-performance green buildings that consume fewer resources and provide better comfort and functionality.

    Integrated design introduces major issues and key participants into the project early, where more opportunities occur for creative problem solving. The complex interactions of sophisticated building systems require early coordination to maximize their effectiveness and output. Early team building and goal setting may also reduce total project costs. The collaborative process can inform building envelope, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and other building system design. The later in the design process that systems are introduced, the more expensive their implementation will be. Information technology can also be a valuable asset in increasing predictability of outcomes earlier in the project and is recommended for all integrated teams.

    In contrast with a linear design process, which addresses problems sequentially, an integrated process approaches each problem with input from the various viewpoints of the participants and the domains they represent, circling back after each design decision to collectively evaluate the impact on all stakeholders. This process acknowledges the complex interdependency of building systems and their relationship to resource consumption and occupant well being.

    Several existing, and currently evolving, models for collaboration should be considered, including ASHRAE Handbook—HVAC Applications, Chapter 57; the MTS 1.0 WSIP Guide, Whole Systems Integrated Process Guide for Sustainable Buildings and Communities; and Integrated Project Delivery: A Guide by the AIA and AIA California Council.

    Project-specific integrated design and/or integrated project delivery processes should be determined with full participation of the stakeholder team. What works for one project may not be the best approach for the next. Additionally, the team should collectively identify the performance standards and the associated metrics by which project success will be evaluated. Design charrettes of varying duration may be an effective tool to consider, though ultimately it is the responsibility of the stakeholder team to determine the process that will best fit a specific problem or project.

    F101.1 (F1.1)Design Charrette.

    The following outlines one type of design charrette process that resulted in a successful integrated design. A charrette process can be initiated at the initial stages of building design, and the members of the process should include all stakeholders.

    Scheme #1—with Atrium, maximum exposure on the south, three-story office building.
    Aggregate index8661.5626.8
    Least numbers under energy and cost column defines consumption of substantial energy with high initial cost.
    Scheme #2—without Atrium, three-story, minimum exposure on the south and west side.
    Aggregate index6677776.8
    High numbers on all columns indicate the building is conceived optimally.

    FIGURE F101.1 (FIGURE F-1)


    F101.1.1 (F1.1.1)Charrette Process.

    Experienced personnel representing each specialty should participate in the charrette process. A discussion of all systems and all items that affect the integrated design should be discussed. Stakeholders should be able to decide and vote on the best integrated system.

    The integrative team process should entail the following steps of design optimization:

    1. a.The original goals and budget of the project should be revisited to see whether the overall intentions of the project are intact.

    2. b.The project should be compared with this code or at least one existing green rating system.

    3. c.Each of the building and site components should be scrutinized to help ensure that natural systems for energy conservation, lighting, ventilation, and passive heating and cooling are maximized before mechanical systems are engaged.

    4. d.The appropriateness and integration logic of the building’s primary systems should be confirmed.

    5. e.The impact of the design on the site and its larger context should be evaluated, including the environmental impact on a life-cycle cost basis.

    6. f.Building information modeling (BIM) software, design tools, and the experience of the design team should be used, where practical, to help optimize the design.

    7. g.All members of the design team should be included when making design decisions.

    8. h.Commissioning and consideration of future operation and maintenance (O&M) requirements should be included within the design optimization process.

    F101.1.2 (F1.1.2)Design Charrette Matrix.

    At the end of the charrette process, a matrix for each proposed building scheme can be developed and evaluated to summarize the impact on the site, water, energy, materials, and indoor environmental quality and to help in deciding on the best integrated system. The matrix contains cells indicating the high-performance value, grading a particular building system to its appropriate high-performance criteria. Each high-performance value is qualitatively rated from 1 to 10, with 1 being the lowest (minimal energy savings, low air quality, low water efficiency, high cost) and 10 being the highest (high energy savings, high air quality, high water efficiency, low cost). The average of the high-performance values for each building system is the aggregate index. Selection of the best system should be based on a comparison of the aggregate indices for each matrix.