Timber - Glass Curtain Wall

An embodied carbon, structural and thermal performance study

for timber and glass bonded with structural silicone

P5 Presentation

Building Technology Graduation Project

MSc Architecture, Urbanism & Building Sciences

Academic year 2021 - 2022

Student: Mariana Georgoulopoulou | Main Mentor: Mauro Overend | Second Mentor: Tillmann Klein| Partner companies: DOW, EOC Engineers
 P R O B L E M S TAT E M E N T

Embodied Carbon
Emissions
of Conventional
Façade systems

a
Timber Element Sizing
b Effective use
of materials

2
Saunalahti Daycare, Finland, 2011 JKMM Architects
 DESIGN VISION
Research
Framework
Design & Develop a Structurally Glazed Timber Curtain Wall System
with the aim to minimize the amount of embodied carbon in the build environment.
Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation
Aluminum Hybrid Timber-Aluminum Timber-Glass Composite
Curtain Wall Curtain Wall
Conclusions

3
 MAIN RESEARCH QUESTION
Research
Framework

To what extend can Timber-Glass Composites affect the Structural, Thermal, and Environmental
Performance of Timber Curtain Wall façade systems?
Literature
Review

Design
Façade Panel Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study
Sizing Embodied
Structural
Material Carbon
Assessment
Bonding Assessment
Numerical
Evaluation

Thermal
Conclusions Assessment

4
 SUB - QUESTIONS
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

1: What are the main differences of existing 3: Which Materials are more suitable in terms of
Design
Guidelines
Hybrid Aluminum-Timber Curtain Walls & structural performance & embodied carbon
Timber-Glass Composites ? footprint ?

Geometry
Study
2: What are the Design Principles & Criteria 4: What are the Methods to assess the Structural &
for developing a curtain wall façade Thermal performance & the Embodied Carbon
Numerical
Evaluation with timber products ? footprint of a curtain wall profile ?

Conclusions

5
LITERATURE DESIGN GEOMETRY NUMERICAL
CONCLUSIONS
REVIEW GUIDELINES STUDY EVALUATION

6
 Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

Stick system Unitized system

7
Source: Marriage, G. (2020). Tall: The Design and Construction of High-Rise Architecture.
 Hybrid Aluminum-Timber
Research Profiles
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Stick system Coupling system

Numerical
Evaluation

Façade system Application Composition Manufacture Timber option Cost

Conclusions Stick Low-rise Components On-site On-market Low

Unitized High-rise Panels On-workshop On-research High

8
Source: RAICO Bautechnik GmbH. (2016). THERM H-I/H-V Planning Timber curtain wall. (modified)
 Structural Principles
Research
Framework Vertical loads
• Dead load
• Barrier loads
Literature
Review Horizontal loads
• Wind load
• Barrier loads
Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation
Glass Pane
Load Distribution
Tributary area
Conclusions

Sources: Murray, S. (2009). Contemporary Curtain Wall Architecture. (modified) 9

Ibrahim, H.M. (2007). Load Distribution from slabs to beams.
 Timber – Glass Composites
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

10
Sources: Pascha, K., Pascha, V., & Winter, W. (2016). Geometrical aspects for the design of prefabricated load-bearing timber-glass facades.
 Structural Principles
Research
Framework Adhesive bonding Section
Composite Action

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

11
Sources: Swedish wood. (2016). Design of timber structures: Structural aspects of timber construction.
 Timber Limitations & Solutions
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical Avoidance immediate

Evaluation Sizing with allowable Constant horizontal or Charring layer Protect from
contact with metal
tolerances diagonal elements add to calculation exterior
fasteners

Conclusions

12
Sources: Swedish wood. (2016). Design of timber structures: Structural aspects of timber construction.
 Adhesive Limitations & Solutions
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical Timber moisture content Only by testing Only by testing Timber with low
Evaluation between 12 ± 1% porosity level

Conclusions

13
Sources: Cruz, P., Pequeno, J. (2015) Structural Timber-Glass Adhesive Bonding
LITERATURE DESIGN GEOMETRY NUMERICAL
CONCLUSIONS
REVIEW GUIDELINES STUDY EVALUATION

14
 Design Criteria
Research
Framework
PRIMARY

Literature Horizontal Embodied

Review Carbon
stability

Design
Guidelines
Design for
Watertightness disassembly
Geometry
Study

Numerical SECONDARY
Evaluation

Aesthetics Ease of
Conclusions
Maintenance

15
 Material study
Research
Framework
Timber Selection Criteria

Literature
Review

BENDING SHEAR
Design
STRENGTH STRENGTH STIFFNESS
Guidelines

Geometry
Study
ADHESIVE
BONDING
Numerical
EMBODIED
Evaluation
DENSITY Moisture Content CARBON
650 < x < 950 kg/m3 12 ± 1 %

Relative humidity
Conclusions 65 ± 5 %

16
 Modulus of
Shear strength Density Adhesive Embodied
Material study CRITERIA
(MPa)
Elasticity
Kg/m3 Bonding carbon (origin)
(GPa)
Research
Framework
Timber Selection European 6–7 14 – 17 460 - 560 Good Europe
Softwood Spruce
Sitka 7–9 11 – 13 400 – 490 Good Europe
Literature
Review Fir Silver 6–8 11 – 13 400 – 490 Good Europe

Douglas Fir 9 – 11 12 – 15 480 – 590 Good America

Design Scots 8 – 10 12 – 14 480 - 580 Good Europe

Guidelines
Maritime 10 12 510 Good Europe

Pine Radiata 10 – 12 10 – 12 460 – 570 Good Africa

Geometry
Study
Southern 9 – 11 13 – 16 590 – 730 Good America

Corsican 10 13 510 Good Europe

Numerical
Evaluation European 9 – 12 12 – 15 520 – 640 Bad Europe
Larch
Siberian 10 10,6 560 Bad Europe Source
Acceptable
Conclusions Cedar 7 8 580 Good Europe Average
Not acceptable
Hemlock 8 – 10 11 – 14 450 - 550 Good America

17
Sources: Granda Edupack
 Material study
Research
Framework
Timber Selection CRITERIA
Shear strength Modulus of Density Adhesive Embodied
Hardwood (MPa) Elasticity (GPa) Kg/m3 Bonding carbon (origin)

Literature
Review Oak 10 14 670 – 720 Bad Europe

Teak 11,7 -14,3 11 – 13 610 – 750 Good Asia

Design Keruing 13 – 16 14 – 17 770 – 940 Good Asia

Guidelines
Beech 9 – 11 14 – 17 680 – 830 Medium Europe

Poplar 6–7 9 – 11 430 – 530 Good Europe

Geometry
Study
Angelique 10 – 13 15 – 18 670 – 810 Good America

Ekki / Azobe 12 – 15 18 – 22 960 – 1.180 Good Africa

Numerical
Evaluation Meranti 9 – 11 11 – 13 510 – 630 Bad Asia

Source
Frake / Limba 9 – 11 7–8 420 – 520 Good Africa
Acceptable
Conclusions
Padauk 12 13 640 - 850 Good Africa Average
Not acceptable

18
Sources: Granda Edupack
 Material study
Research
Framework
Mass Timber Products

Literature
Bending Shear Modulus of Embodied
Review Density
CRITERIA Strength strength Elasticity carbon Cost
Kg/m3
(MPa) (MPa) (GPa) (kgCO2eq/kg)

Design
Glulam
Guidelines 28 2,7 12,6 380 0,5 Low
GL28c
European
LVL 35P 35 3,2 9,6 440 0,65 Medium
Spruce
Geometry
Study Solid C30 30 4 12 460 0,59 Low

Glulam
28 2,7 12,6 410 0,9 Low
GL32c
Numerical
Evaluation Beech LVL 50P 50 4,8 12,6 580 0,65 Medium

Source
Solid D60 60 4,8 17 840 0,3 Medium
Acceptable
Conclusions
Average
Not acceptable

19
Sources: Hand calculations & Hammond, G., & Jones, C. (2011). Embodied Carbon: The Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE).
 Material study
Research
Framework
Adhesive Selection Criteria

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines WEATHERING
STRENGTH FLEXIBILITY RESISTANCE

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation TENSILE EMBODIED
STRENGTH CREEP CARBON

Conclusions

20
 Material study
Research
Framework
Adhesive Selection

Literature
Review CRITERIA Epoxy Polyurethane Silicone

Strength High Medium Low

Design
Flexibility Low Medium High
Guidelines

Weathering
Low Low High
resistance
Geometry
Study
Tensile
High High Medium
strength

Numerical Creep High Medium Low

Evaluation Embodied
High Medium Low
carbon
Source
Acceptable
Conclusions
Average
Not acceptable

Sources: Hammond, G., & Jones, C. (2011). Embodied Carbon: The Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE). 21
Ber, B., Premrov, M., Strukeli, A., & Kuhta, M. (2013). Experimental study of timber-glass composite wall elements.
 Material study
Research
Framework
Glass Selection

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

22
Source: Partner company (EOC)
LITERATURE DESIGN GEOMETRY NUMERICAL
CONCLUSIONS
REVIEW GUIDELINES STUDY EVALUATION

23
 Case Study
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

Unitized system
In the market in the end of 2022
24
Source: RAICO Bautechnik GmbH. (modified)
 Design for Disassembly
Research
Framework Functional decomposition
R A I C O ’s s y s t e m Systematization

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

2.
Geometry
Study 1. 3. 4.

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

25
 Design for Disassembly
Research
Framework Functional decomposition
Composite system Systematization

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

1. 3.
Geometry
Study
2.

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

26
 Design for Disassembly
Research
Framework Technical decomposition
R A I C O ’s s y s t e m Hierarchy

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

27
 Design for Disassembly
Research
Framework Technical decomposition
Composite system Hierarchy

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

28
 Design Process
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

29
 FINAL DESIGN
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

30
 FINAL DESIGN
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

PLAN SECTION

31
 FINAL DESIGN
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions
AXONOMETRIC

32
 FINAL DESIGN
Research
Framework R A I C O ’s s y s t e m Composite system

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

33
LITERATURE DESIGN GEOMETRY NUMERICAL
CONCLUSIONS
REVIEW GUIDELINES STUDY EVALUATION

34
 Methodology
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

35
 Boundary Conditions
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Netherlands
Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Office
Study
Building

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions European
Standards

36
 Geometry
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

37
 Assumptions
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

38
Source: Partner company (EOC), SG Mepla (Version 5.0.9.): structural calculations
 STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

39
 Methodology
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

40
 Load cases
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Wind load = 1, 5 kN /m2

Numerical
Evaluation Barrier loads
Point = 1 kN
Horizontal Line = 0,74 kN /m
Conclusions Vertical Line = 0,6 kN /m
Uniformal = 1 kN /m2

41
Source: IStructE/TRADA. Manual for Design of Timber Building Structures to Eurocode 5.
 Load cases
Research
Framework
Load combinations

Literature 1. Wind Load (WL)

Review 2. Self weight (SW)
3. Point Load (PL)
4. Vertical Line Load (VL)
Design 5. Horizontal Line Load (HL)
Guidelines 6. Uniformal Load (UL)
7. WL + PL
8. WL + VL
9. WL + HL
Geometry
Study 10. WL + UL

Numerical
Evaluation
Load Cases Load Cases
Mullion Transom
Conclusions

42
Source: IStructE/TRADA. Manual for Design of Timber Building Structures to Eurocode 5.
 Ansys Simulations
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

RAICO 43
 Limit states
Research TIMBER GLASS
Framework

Glulam Hardwood
Literature
Review
BENDING
STRENGTH ≤ 27,1 58,08 40

(MPa)

Design
Guidelines
ULS LATERAL
STABILITY

Geometry
Study SHEAR
STRENGTH ≤ 2,38 4,22 8
(MPa)
Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions
SLS DEFORMATION
(mm)
≤ 16,33 25

44
Source: IStructE/TRADA. Manual for Design of Timber Building Structures to Eurocode 5.
 Limit states
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions
DEFORMATION
(mm)
≤ 16,33
LOAD CASE
Wind Load

45
Source: IStructE/TRADA. Manual for Design of Timber Building Structures to Eurocode 5.
 Ansys model setup
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

46
 Research
Framework Timber Size
DEPTH 180 180 180 180 200 200 225 225

BREADTH 40 50 60 70 50 60 60 50
Literature
Review
Timber Deformation (mm)
1st LEVEL _ Timber type: GL28c | Silicone size: 30 x 6 mm Limit < 16, 33 mm
STIFFEST 18 15,9 14,2 14,8
Design
Guidelines DOWSIL 993 18,3 18 13,7 17
DOWSIL 895 18,9 14,7

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

Acceptable
Not acceptable

47
 Research
Framework Timber Size
DEPTH 180 180 180 180 200 200 225 225

BREADTH 40 50 60 70 50 60 60 50
Literature
Review
Timber Deformation (mm)
1st LEVEL _ Timber type: GL28c | Silicone size: 30 x 6 mm Limit < 16, 33 mm
STIFFEST 18 15,9 14,2 14,8
Design
Guidelines DOWSIL 993 18,3 18 13,7 17
DOWSIL 895 18,9 14,7

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

Acceptable
Not acceptable

48
 Research
Framework Timber Size
DEPTH 180 180 180 180 200 200 225 225

BREADTH 40 50 60 70 50 60 60 50
Literature
Review
Timber Deformation (mm)
1st LEVEL _ Timber type: GL28c | Silicone size: 30 x 6 mm Limit < 16, 33 mm
STIFFEST 18 15,9 14,2 14,8
Design
Guidelines DOWSIL 993 18,3 18 13,7 17
DOWSIL 895 18,9 14,7

Geometry
Study 2nd LEVEL _ Timber type: GL28c | Silicone type: Stiffest
30 x 4 mm 15,3
20 x 6 mm 18,3 16,4
Numerical 20 x 4 mm 17,9 15,6
Evaluation

Conclusions

Acceptable
Not acceptable

49
 Research
Framework Timber Size
DEPTH 180 180 180 180 200 200 225 225

BREADTH 40 50 60 70 50 60 60 50
Literature
Review
Timber Deformation (mm)
1st LEVEL _ Timber type: GL28c | Silicone size: 30 x 6 mm Limit < 16, 33 mm
STIFFEST 18 15,9 14,2 14,8
Design
Guidelines DOWSIL 993 18,3 18 13,7 17
DOWSIL 895 18,9 14,7

Geometry
Study 2nd LEVEL _ Timber type: GL28c | Silicone type: Stiffest
30 x 4 mm 15,3
20 x 6 mm 18,3 16,4
Numerical 20 x 4 mm 17,9 15,6
Evaluation

Conclusions

Acceptable
Not acceptable

50
 Research
Framework Timber Size
DEPTH 180 180 180 180 200 200 225 225

BREADTH 40 50 60 70 50 60 60 50
Literature
Review
Timber Deformation (mm)
1st LEVEL _ Timber type: GL28c | Silicone size: 30 x 6 mm Limit < 16, 33 mm
STIFFEST 18 15,9 14,2 14,8
Design
Guidelines DOWSIL 993 18,3 18 13,7 17
DOWSIL 895 18,9 14,7

Geometry
Study 2nd LEVEL _ Timber type: GL28c | Silicone type: Stiffest
30 x 4 mm 15,3
20 x 6 mm 18,3 16,4
Numerical 20 x 4 mm 17,9 15,6
Evaluation

3rd LEVEL _ Timber type: D60 | Silicone size: 30 x 6 mm

Conclusions
STIFFEST 13,2 10,4 8,7
DOWSIL 993 13 10,4 Acceptable
Not acceptable
DOWSIL 895 13,5 10,5
51
 Research
Framework Timber Size
DEPTH 180 180 180 180 200 200 225 225

BREADTH 40 50 60 70 50 60 60 50
Literature
Review
Timber Deformation (mm)
1st LEVEL _ Timber type: GL28c | Silicone size: 30 x 6 mm Limit < 16, 33 mm
STIFFEST 18 15,9 14,2 14,8
Design
Guidelines DOWSIL 993 18,3 18 13,7 17
DOWSIL 895 18,9 14,7

Geometry
Study 2nd LEVEL _ Timber type: GL28c | Silicone type: Stiffest
30 x 4 mm 15,3
20 x 6 mm 18,3 16,4
Numerical 20 x 4 mm 17,9 15,6
Evaluation

3rd LEVEL _ Timber type: D60 | Silicone size: 30 x 6 mm

Conclusions
STIFFEST 13,2 10,4 8,7
DOWSIL 993 13 10,4 Acceptable
Not acceptable
DOWSIL 895 13,5 10,5
52
 Research
Framework Timber Size
DEPTH 180 180 180 180 200 200 225 225

BREADTH 40 50 60 70 50 60 60 50
Literature
Review
Timber Deformation (mm)
1st LEVEL _ Timber type: GL28c | Silicone size: 30 x 6 mm Limit < 16, 33 mm
STIFFEST 18 15,9 14,2 14,8
Design
Guidelines DOWSIL 993 18,3 18 13,7 17
DOWSIL 895 18,9 14,7

Geometry
Study 2nd LEVEL _ Timber type: GL28c | Silicone type: Stiffest
30 x 4 mm 15,3
4th LEVEL _ RAICO profile
20 x 6 mm 18,3 16,4
Numerical 20 x 4 mm 17,9 15,6
Evaluation Timber size = 180 x 60 mm
Timber Deformation = 14,3 mm
3rd LEVEL _ Timber type: D60 | Silicone size: 30 x 6 mm Hand Calculation
Conclusions
STIFFEST 13,2 10,4 8,7
DOWSIL 993 13 10,4 Acceptable
Not acceptable
DOWSIL 895 13,5 10,5
53
 Output – Profit in material % LESS TIMBER /unit

Research
Framework 1 st L E V E L

With stiffer adhesive 20%

Literature (*Young’s modulus = 4,8 MPa)
Review

2 nd L E V E L
Design
Guidelines
With thinner bond
0%
(4 mm)
Geometry
Study 3 rd L E V E L

With stronger timber

Numerical (Bending strength = 60 MPa)
Evaluation
17% 33%
4 th L E V E L
Conclusions
With Timber-Glass Composites With conventional With stiffest
silicone silicone

54
*Source: DOW
 THERMAL ASSESSMENT
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

55
 Methodology
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

56
 Input
Research
Framework
RELATIVE HUMIDITY

Literature
40% (office building)
Review 60% (residential)

Design
DEW POINT
Guidelines Limits
< 7,74 oC (office building)
< 13,85 oC (residential)
Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

57
 Ansys Simulations
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Timber - Glass Composite RAICO Profile

Conclusions
< 7,74 oC (office building) < 7,74 oC (office building) Acceptable
< 13,85 oC (residential) < 13,85 oC (residential) Not acceptable

58
 Output
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Timber-Glass
RAICO Profile
Design Composite
Guidelines DEPTH 180 180
Timber
size BREADTH 50 60

Geometry
Study U values _ W/m2K
U – value Glass Pane (Up) 1,1 1,1
U – value Timber Frame (Uf) 11,8 18,3
Numerical
Evaluation TOTAL U – Value Profile 1,12 1,14

Conclusions

Acceptable
Not acceptable

59
Source: NEN-EN-ISO 10077: Thermal performance of windows, doors and shutters - Calculation of thermal transmittance
 EMBODIED CARBON ASSESSMENT
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

60
 Methodology
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

61
 Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

62
Source: IStructE (2020). How to calculate embodied carbon (modified).
 Research
Framework
2

Functional
Literature
Review
Unit

Global Warming Potential (GWP)

1 m2
Design Embodied Carbon kg CO2eq/ m2
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical 3,4 m
Evaluation

Conclusions

VIEW 1,5 m 63
 Research
Framework
Timber-Glass Case Study
2.
2
1. Composite VS. RAICO profile
Literature
Review
A. Glulam Softwood

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

180 mm
Numerical 180 mm
Evaluation

Conclusions 1.A. 2.A.

60 mm 60 mm
64
 Research
Framework
Timber-Glass Case Study
2.
2
1. Composite VS. RAICO profile
Literature
Review
B. Solid Hardwood

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

180 mm
Numerical 180 mm
Evaluation

Conclusions 1.B. 2.B.

50 mm 60 mm
65
 Research Material Assumptions
Framework

Silicone (Source: DOW)

Literature • Carbon neutral
Review

Aluminum, produced in Europe (Source: ICE V3.0)

Design • 83 % recycled material
Guidelines

Timber (Source: ICE V3.0)

Geometry
• 99 % recycled material
Study
• Including carbon storage

Numerical
Evaluation Glass (Source: EPD, Glass, OKALUX GmbH)
• 70 % material disposed to landfills

Conclusions

66
 12%
Research
Framework 10%
1%

Literature
Review
77%

Softwood lumber Aluminum EPDM Laminated Glass

Design
Guidelines
1.A. %mass(kg) per façade unit

12% 1%
Geometry 0% 1%
Study 0%

Numerical
Evaluation
86%

Conclusions 2.A. Softwood lumber

Plastic
Silicone
EPDM
Norton tape
Laminated Glass

%mass(kg) per façade unit

67
 Applied Carbon Factors

Research Silicone (Source: DOW)

Framework
• 0 kgCO2/kg (+ ALL Modules)

Literature Aluminum, produced in Europe (Source: ICE V3.0)

Review
• Module A = 5,58 kgCO2/kg
• Module D = - 3,64 kgCO2/ per unit
Design
Guidelines Timber (Source: ICE V3.0)
• Module A = - 0,9 kgCO2/kg (Glulam) | - 1,29 kgCO2/kg (Hardwood)

Geometry
Study Glass (Source: ICE V3.0)
• Module A = 35,21 kgCO2/m2
Numerical • Module D = -0,93 kgCO2/m3 of material (Source: EPD, Glass, OKALUX GmbH)
Evaluation

For all materials (Source: RICS Standards)

Conclusions
• Module C1 = 3,4 kgCO2/ per m2 of façade
• Module C2 = 0,005 kgCO2/kg
• Module C3 - C4 = 1,17 (timber) | 0,013 (rest)
68
 Research
Framework

Calculation method
Literature
Review

𝑘𝑔𝐶𝑂2 𝑒𝑞
Design
𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑘𝑔 × 𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑏𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 ൗ𝑘𝑔
Guidelines = 𝒆𝒎𝒃𝒐𝒅𝒊𝒆𝒅 𝒄𝒂𝒓𝒃𝒐𝒏 𝒌𝒈𝑪𝑶𝟐 𝒆𝒒

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

69
Source: IStructE (2020). How to calculate embodied carbon
 % LESS
G W P/ m 2 o f f a c a d e
Research
Framework

Literature ≃ 50%
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation
≃ 50%

Conclusions

70
 % Material Contribution in
Output T O TA L E m b o d i e d c a r b o n
Research
Framework

3%
Literature
Review

Softwood lumber
44% Aluminum
Design 53%
Guidelines Laminated Glass

Geometry
1.A.
Study
5%

Numerical
Evaluation Softwood lumber
Silicone
Laminated Glass
Conclusions 95%

2.A.
71
 Aesthetic quality
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

RAICO profile Timber-Glass Composite 72

 Aesthetic quality
Research
Framework

Literature
Review

Design
Guidelines

Geometry
Study

Numerical
Evaluation

Conclusions

RAICO profile Timber-Glass Composite 73

LITERATURE DESIGN GEOMETRY NUMERICAL
CONCLUSIONS
REVIEW GUIDELINES STUDY EVALUATION

74
 Overview To what extend can Timber-Glass Composites affect the
Research Structural, Thermal, and Environmental Performance of
Framework Timber Curtain Wall façade systems?

Literature
Review
With conventional
silicone
17%
Design
Guidelines

With stiffest
Geometry
Study
silicone 33% = ≃ 50%

Numerical
LESS THERMAL LESS
Evaluation
TIMBER PERFORMANCE EMBODIED
M AT E R I A L CARBON
Conclusions

75
 Research Horizontal stability Watertightness Embodied Carbon Design for
Framework TIMBER SIZE TIMBER disassembly
C O N D E N S AT I O N

Literature 180 x 40
Review 10

TIMBER SILICONE
TYPE TYPE
Design
180 x 50 ALLOWABLE 20 MORE
Guidelines FOR INDEPENDENT
GL 28c STIFFNESS RESIDENCES ELEMENTS

Geometry 30
180 x 60
Study
DOWSIL 993
D 60 ALLOWABLE LESS
DOWSIL 895
FOR OFFICE INDEPENDENT
40 ELEMENTS
Numerical
Evaluation 225 x 60

50
Conclusions

RAICO 180 x 60
Profile
 Further research
Research
Framework DESIGN LEVEL

1. Calculation of bolted connections frequency

Literature 2. Timber interlocking – alternative design without bolts
Review
3. Detailing of Mullions and Transoms connection
4. Detailing of Brackets – connection to the building slab
5. Alternative filling materials
Design
Guidelines 6. Application of structural principles in other products (ex. Interior = staircases)

Geometry ASSESSMENT LEVEL

Study
1. Experimental testing
• On material level (silicone)
Numerical • Uniaxial tensile and shear test
Evaluation • Peeling test
• Ageing test
• On panel level (one façade unit)
Conclusions • four-bending test
• Seismic test

77
Thank you !
 Calendar November December January February March April May June
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
Reference Projects
Scope of research
Mass timber products research
Hybrid Timber-Aluminum CW research
Timber-Glass Composites research
Regulations & Standards
Material research methodology
Material study - Wood
Material study - Adhesives
Material study - Glass

Design Criteria
Façade Requirements
Geometry study – Design for disassembly
Case study – RAICO profile
Design Alternatives

FEM analysis – Learn ANSYS principles

Build Numerical model: Structural
Build Numerical model: Thermal
System evaluation

Build calculation model: Sustainability

System comparison & conclusions

Report
Presentations P1 P2 P3 P4
79
P5
 Appendix

Spruce, Beech,
Pine, Douglas Fir

C14

C24
Construction
timber
Glued Laminated

GL32
GL28

GL30
GL24
Beams (Glulam)
Laminated Veneer
Lumber (LVL)
Roundwood

Characteristic
14 18 24 28 30 35 50 (Mpa)
Bending Strength

Spruce, Fir, Pine, Larch,

Douglas Fir, Hemlock, Cedar

Sources: Marriage, G. (2020). Tall: The Design and Construction of High-Rise Architecture. 80
Lugt, P. (2020). Tomorrow's Timber: Towards the next Building Revolution.
 Appendix

STRENGTH
GRADING

Source: M.Y.H. Banglash. (2009). Structural Detailing in Timber: A 81

comparative study of international codes and practices. .
Appendix
On research

COMPANY RAICO GUTMANN batimet STABALUX Scandinavian Timber GEM SRL

Name THERM + 50 H-I Lara GF TM50 SE / TM50 SE SG STABALUX H Curtain walling WOODY SG 212 CWWS
System Stick system Stick system Stick system Stick system Stick system Unitized system
Thermal insulation Uf = 0.8 Ucw = 0.63 Uw >= 0.62 Ucw = 0.79 -

TIMBER FRAME
Laminated timber, Laminated Softwood
Timber All types LVL Glulam
LVL, Multiplex or Hardwood
Spruce, Pine, Fir, Oak, Spruce, Fir, Pine,
Softwood, Hardwood,
Wood All types Hemlock, Douglas Fir, Larch, Cedar, Beech, -
Bamboo
Multiplex Angelique, Azobe
Widths 50, 56, 76, 96 mm 50, 60, 80 mm 50, 60, 80 mm 50, 60, 80 mm 50 mm 150 mm

GLASS
Thickness 4 – 64 mm 9 – 64 mm 64 mm 4 – 64 mm 26 mm 26 mm

PERFORMANCE
Wind load 2500 PA / 3200 PA 1500 PA / 2250 PA 2000 PA 2000 PA EN 13116 EN 13116
Water tightness RE1200, RE2100 RE1200 RE2250/ RE 1200 RE 1650 Pa EN 12154 EN 12155

82
Appendix

On research
Vienna University of
COMPANY Otto Chemie KNAPP Walchfenster Gumpp & Maier GmbH
Technology (VUT)
Name Uniglas | Facade FASCO walchfester04 - -
System Stick system Stick system Unitized system Stick system Stick system
Thermal
Ucw = 0.7 W/m2K - - - -
insulation

TIMBER FRAME
Material Glulam Glulam Spruce/Larch/Oak Glulam Glulam
Widths up to 56mm 60, 80mm 82 mm (2x 37mm) 60 mm 160mm

GLASS
Thickness - At least 8mm - - Triple glazing

ADAPTER FRAME
Overlapping
Geometry Coupling profiles Special geometry Double L-profiles each side Rectangular frames each side
L-shapes
Birch veneer
Material FRP Spruce/Larch/Oak Birch veneer plywood Plywood
plywood

BOND LINE
Dimensions 3.2 x 6mm 4,8 x ? mm - 3 x 14 mm 3 x 12 mm
Otto Coll 660
Material Silicone 2K Silicone Otto Coll Silicone Nolax
Silicone
83
 Appendix

Structural Glazing Unit

Source: RAICO Bautechnik GmbH. (2016). THERM H-I/H-V Planning Timber curtain wall. (modified) 84
 Appendix

Structural Calculations
Glass Panes

Timber-Glass Composite RAICO Profile

Outer Pane Inner Pane Outer Pane Inner Pane
Limits Limits
12,8 8,8 12,8 6

49 46,42 90,6 51,02

ULS
49 39,88 49 40,63

23,08 17,16 23,08 18,83

SLS 3,72 1,59 3,72 1,14

3,72 1,4 3,72 1

85
Source: SG Mepla (Version 5.0.9). Provided by EOC Engineers
 Appendix Ansys 19.0 results

Deformation Shear stress Principal stress

86
Source: Ansys 19.0
 Appendix

Shear lag

DOWSIL 895 Stiffest silicone

87
Source: Ansys 19.0
 Appendix

Results U-value Glass

88
Source: CalumenLive. Provided by EOC Engineers