Shelter

Engineers Without Borders Challenger, 2016

Vincent Law, UTS

Table of Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................3
Problem Definition......................................................................................................................................3
Technical Review.........................................................................................................................................4
Design Options:...........................................................................................................................................5
Assessment Criteria.....................................................................................................................................6
Design Selection/Conclusion.......................................................................................................................7
Recommendation........................................................................................................................................7
References...................................................................................................................................................9

2
Introduction
Mayukwayukwa, a refugee settlement within the third-world developing country of Zambia,
holds over 11,000 refugees (EWB Challenge 2014a) and, in its current state, is unable to provide
sufficient necessities such as shelter for all of its residents at an acceptable standard.
Mayukwayukwa is home to many refugees, however not all of the residents don’t have access
to a comfortable shelter to live in either indefinitely or until they are transferred to a different
settlement. The cause is primarily due to the lack of money to purchase and to use higher
quality materials in order to build shelters for the residents as well as the man-power in order
to do so.

Shelter is one of the primary necessities that a human being must have access to in order to
live, let alone survive. Together, with a team of civil engineers, we aim to address and resolve
this problem, providing and evaluating potential possibilities and ideas in hopes to find a way to
raise the living quality of the refugee settlement for both present and future refugees. In this
research report, I will be presenting my suggestions to help resolve this issue.

Problem Definition
A typical family in Mayukwayukwa consists of about six members (EWB Challenge 2014b).
However, of course, the refugee settlement is not composed entirely of six member families.
There will be single residents, smaller and larger families also meaning that a single base design
will not be sufficient in order to properly accommodate for the residents.

3
Technical Review
Interior Room Designs: Walls

After brainstorming potential ideas for the interior room design I have come down to a handful
of suggestions, the later designs being variations of the second.

Below is a set of illustrations of potential interior house designs that could be applied at the
refugee settlement to accommodate for families of different sizes as well as individuals.

Figure 1. Interior House Illustration

4
Design Options:
1) Normal Room Design (no interior walls): This basic design is ideal for a large family. It
allows the entire family to remain close to each other whilst they sleep. Without any
interior walls it is cheaper and requires less time to construct, therefore mass
construction of this design alone would be ideal so that we can move residents into a
stable home quickly if we move individuals and small groups of people with smaller
families of 3 to 5.

2) Single Wall Design (separation for 2 small families): For smaller families of about 3-5, this
design allows us to be more space efficient by moving 2 families of this similar size
together in a house, providing a small amount of privacy for both through a single wall
instead of building 2 smaller homes for the same amount of people. As for cost and
construction time, producing this design would not take too much more resources than
the first design as the addition of a single wall does not require much time and materials
to construct.

3) Single Wall Design, second variant (for separating smaller families and individuals): This
design allows us to move a certain number of individuals (perhaps 1-2) in with a smaller
family of about 3-5, providing a separating wall for privacy. However, if the dimensions of
the house are not big enough, the smaller sectioned space in the house design may prove
to be claustrophobic and uncomfortable for whoever may stay in that area.

4) Multi Wall Design (separation for multiple individuals): For individuals who do not have a
family, individuals can live together with the separating walls to give themselves some
privacy. As appealing as this may be for a potential design to accommodate for single
individuals, the more people we want to put in a single house hold, the more walls we’d
have to implement, thus increasing the cost and construction time for just a single house.
Another factor we have to consider, however, is each person’s comfort within a set
space, meaning that one person may not feel claustrophobic in a space where another
feels relaxed.

5
Assessment Criteria
Cost – Although our budget is currently unknown it would be best to assume that we want to
idealise a low cost option.

Construction Time – In order to move the residents in as quickly as possible quick construction
is a factor we must consider for the sake of the refugees.

Privacy – In first world countries privacy is valued highly in many situations, particularly in
households and I assume that privacy may be valued similarly in a third world community such
as Mayukwayukwa.

Evaluation

Design Cost Construction Privacy Comment

Time
I don’t believe that privacy has as high of a
No extra No extra Unavailable demand due to these households only
1 cost time serving a purpose to shelter individuals and
thus can be compromised for the sake of
cost and construction time.

Within an awkward environment or two

Low extra Estimated 2- Available families, privacy may be a demand and
2 cost 4 extra hours building a single wall to accommodate for
that would be a fine solution at a small cost
of extra resources and time.

This is similar to the second design as it is

Low extra Estimated 2- Available just a different variation of it. This design
3 cost 4 extra hours may prove to be irrelevant as individuals
can be moved in with other individuals in
designs 1 and 4.

This design is put up against the first

Scaling Scaling extra Available design, coming down to whether or not we
4 extra cost hours want to prioritise lower cost and
construction time over the potential
demand for privacy.

6
Design Selection/Conclusion
After careful consideration in regards to the evaluation criteria I’ve decided that Designs 1 and
2 would be the best options in terms of interior house design. Design 3 is fairly redundant as
individual residents can be moved in with other individual residents in Design 1, and even if
there was a small excess of individual residents, they could be moved into a house with Design
2. Design 3 could potentially be claustrophobic for the minority and may only comfortably fit
one or two persons depending on the dimensions of the entire house itself. Design 4 poses the
same problems in terms of space as the spacing between walls would be a set distance
however not everybody may be comfortable with that set distance and thus comfortability may
be compromised for the sake of privacy.

Recommendation
Design 1 can be used to accommodate large families or multiple individuals without the need of
extra cost and time to construct a separating wall. The second recommendation, Design 2 can
comfortably house two smaller families, given that the dimensions of the house is big enough,
and its single dividing wall provides a satisfactory level of privacy for the two families. There’s
no reason why we can’t use two designs for interior housing, especially if we are being
indiscriminate towards varying family sizes, therefore I feel that these two would be the best
options and would serve their purpose comfortably for their respective residents.

7
8
References
EWB Challenge 2014a, Ewbchallenge.org, 2014, Introduction to Mayukwayukwa | EWB Challenge,
viewed 3 September 2016, <http://www.ewbchallenge.org/unhcr-zambia/introduction-
mayukwayukwa>

EWB Challenge 2014b, Ewbchallenge.org, 2014, Design Area 4: Shelter | EWB Challenge, viewed 3
September 2016, <http://www.ewbchallenge.org/unhcr-zambia/shelter>