anc - acoustic awards · the anc awards highlight the unique skills of our uk-based acoustic and...
TRANSCRIPT
ACOUSTIC AWARDS 2017
WINNERCommercial BuildingsHoare Lea Hanover House, Reading
Conversion of this former office building to affordable private residential with minimum internal areas for living standards was only financially viable if the thickness of the Part E compliant party wall construction was kept to no more than 135mm. The consultants believe this to be an unprecedented technical brief for a residential development. They convinced the client that risks could be mitigated by use of pioneering engineering design tools and a collaborative approach.
The project features a bespoke drywall system, and through innovative design, reliable prediction software and collaboration a partition system as thin as the length of an iPhone5 was developed to meet the performance standards. As the partition construction had never been tested before, the consultants had to estimate performance and mitigate the risks associated with flanking and quality of workmanship. There was no built-in tolerance or design margin. The performance of the partition was estimated by an in-depth review of similar tested partition systems and by predictions using in-house sound insulation prediction software which is based on statistical energy analysis.
The judges were impressed that in a field where a standard method is the obvious solution, the consultants had worked with the construction side demonstrating innovation and tackling complexity. This was a very neat solution which achieved the result and must have involved flawless onsite monitoring and inspection.
ACOUSTIC AWARDS 2017ANC members provide consultancy advice in all areas of acoustics, noise and vibration to support the built environment, and transportation and entertainment sectors with innovation and best practice. Their expertise creates usable environments from the most challenging sites. Members also aid the well-being and comfort of building-users across the whole spectrum of use, in public, private and commercial places.
The ANC awards highlight the unique skills of our UK-based acoustic and noise professionals, and the dynamic and diverse nature of the industry overall, to inspire the next generation of acoustic consultants.
These accolades demonstrate excellence among our members in addressing challenges across the nation and around the world – championing innovation and originality and showcasing the significance of a profession which blends art and science to transformational effect.
This year the Awards categories are:
• Architectural Acoustics: Commercial Buildings (sponsored by H & H Acoustic Technologies),
• Architectural Acoustics: Education Buildings (sponsored by Ecophon),
• Environmental Noise (sponsored by ANV Measurement Systems)
• Smaller Projects (sponsored by Bruel & Kjaer),
• Vibration (sponsored by Pliteq)
The entries were reduced to a shortlist of 15 across the five categories and all those entrants requested to make a brief presentation on their project immediately before the Awards ceremony. An award was made for the best presentation by one of the shortlisted projects and this was determined by those attending. The Awards look for examples of work that display innovation, and originality in acoustic design or approach to a particular project. Work must have been undertaken in the last two years and the consultancy must be in operating in the UK although the project may be elsewhere.
The judging panels were made up of representatives from other professions, academics, and consultants as well as the sponsor for each category. Any conflicts of interest were declared
COMMENDED: SRL Technical Services Dubai Opera House – mechanical services
This project is one of the few world class music venues created and so acousticians rarely get the opportuni-ty to work on them. The auditorium acousticians were Sandy Brown Associates who set all the sound insulation requirements for the building. SRL were employed by the main contractor and M&E subcontractor on this high profile, prestige project with a budget to match.
It is also acoustically special as the specification con-tained very onerous requirements, such as achieving NR15 within the main auditorium with all the services operating. The M&E design presented some challenges, which needed to be addressed to meet the necessary acoustic performance. An example of this was that noise data for selected products was limited and one supplier was unable to show their product could work. During regular site visits, the consultants identified issues such as ducts being rigidly fixed to the walls of a riser al-though the specification stipulated isolated connections. Despite the challenges faced, they were able to predict t=he reradiated noise within the auditorium and ensure that the very low noise criterion was met.
The judges observed that this project demonstrated complexity throughout, as well as showing a high level of consultancy in guiding the client to a successful conclu-sion. Commended status is recognition that the entry relates to the one element of the acoustics consultancy on this impressive project.
HIGHLY COMMENDED: Sandy Brown Associates YouTube Space, St Pancras, London
A project involving the reconfiguration of two floors of an office building into specially created studio and editing space where YouTubers and vloggers can learn and connect. The consultants were at the centre of a project where an attentive working style had to be provided and the expectations from the client and design team were high. By their nature very high acoustic performance was required with the two primary studios being horizontally adjacent, creating a multi-functional space while being able to be used simultaneously for recording.
As the architect commented “Sandy Brown Associates provided timely expert advice which helped steer the design at crucial points and kept the acoustic performance at the top of the agenda. The success of their approach is demonstrated in the performance of the completed space.”
The judges recognised this was a difficult and challenging brief with skilful application of known techniques. The innovation came through putting these together and resulted in a project which not only met but exceeded expectations.
ALL DIMENSIONS, LEVELS AND CLEARANCES TO BECHECKED ON SITE PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING
THIS DRAWING SHOULD BE READ IN CONJUNCTIONWITH ALL OTHER PROJECT RELATED DRAWINGS,SPECIFICATIONS AND DOCUMENTS AS PART OF ASINGLE PROJECT PACKAGE.
ANY DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THIS DRAWING, OTHERDRAWINGS FORMING PART OF THIS CONTRACT, ORTHE SPECIFICATION / BILLS OF QUANTITIES MUST BECLARIFIED BEFORE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK ORORDERING OF ANY MATERIALS.
PLEASE CONSULT THE AUTHOR OR PROJECT MANAGERSHOULD THE READER REQUIRE CLARIFICATION ONANY PART OF THIS DRAWING.
THE COPYRIGHT OF THE DRAWING AND DESIGN IS THEPROPERTY OF THE COMPANY. THIS INFORMATION HASBEEN ISSUED UNDER SPECIFIC TERMS FOR THISPROJECT AND MAY ONLY BE USED AND REPRODUCEDACCORDINGLY.
NOTES
A1 DO NOT SCALE
Rev Date By Chk Comment
B R
I N G
I N G
I D E A
S T O
L I F E
Wootton Business ParkBesselsleigh Road
Wootton, Abingdon,Oxfordshire. OX13 6FD
T: 01865 322500F: 01865 327393
Frankham Consultancy Group Limited
3rd Floor,Baird House,
15-17 St Cross St,London. EC1N 8UWT: 020 7651 0790F: 020 7248 3144
1st Floor,21 Perrymount Road,
Haywards Heath.RH16 3TP
T:01444 444900F:01444 455642
Irene House,Five Arches Business Estate,
Maidstone Road,Sidcup, Kent.DA14 5AE
T: 020 8309 7777F: 020 8309 7890
OXFORD OFFICESIDCUP OFFICE
LONDON OFFICE HAYWARDS HEATH OFFICE
X:\600000\612592 - Hanover House\02-Drawings\01-Architect\01-WIP Drawings 2D\24XX-Details\612592-MB-04-A-2401-AB.dwg
Job No/ File Ref
Number Revision
Scale @ A1:
Drawn By: Designed By: Checked By: Approved By:
Original Issue Date:
Status:
Drawing Title:
Project Title:
Client:
Originator
FCGZone Level
SuitabilityDisciplineType
CONSTRUCTION ISSUE
Adelais Properties Ltd
Hanover House202 Kings Road - Reading
Misc Details - Sheet 1Typical Partition Abutments
CFB CFB CFB XX
15/10/15 1:5 / 1:10
612592 MB ZZ
DR A 2401 S1 AB
P1 30.10.15 CB CB PRELIMINARY ISSUE
2401
2401
P2 03.11.15 CB CB MINOR REVISIONS-PRELIMINARY ISSUE
C1 11.11.15 CB CB CONSTRUCTION ISSUE
AB 06:06:16 CB CB AS BUILT ISSUE
ISSUEAS BUILT
3A 4A2A2
F
E
D
C
B
A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
7 8 9 10
F
E
D
C
B
A
6
1200
2000
1200
MIN 4750MIN 2710
MIN 2710MIN 2710
MIN 3490
1000
2100
2100
2000
MIN 3520
MIN 4160
3000
MIN 2970
MIN
440
0M
IN 4
550
2000
MIN
207
0
954
700
MIN
240
0
MIN
451
0
2750
MIN
900
1700
400
MIN 3000
MIN
260
0
700
700
930
5
700
930
700
930
700
930
RETURN TO LINE UP WITHINSIDE FACE OF COLUMN
711
827
407458
BATHROOM BATHROOM BATHROOMBATHROOM
BATHROOMBATHROOM
MIN 3510MIN 3510MIN 3510 MIN 3490MIN 3490MIN 3510MIN 3490
111TYPICAL
BATHROOMBATHROOMBATHROOM
3025
700
930
930
700
930
3025 3025
2100
2000
BATHROOM BATHROOM
BATHROOM BATHROOM
MIN
260
0
MIN
306
0
25
3837 3902
700
930
25
MIN
345
0
700
600
MIN 700
MIN
440
0M
IN 3
450
111
TYP
ICA
L
111 TYPICAL
CONTRACTOR TO SET OUT WALLBASED ON MIN. SIZE OF BEDROOM.PROXIMITY OF WALL TO LIFT SURROUNDTO THEN BE AGREED ON SITE
EQ
EQ
700
930
WALL BELOW SILL TO RETURNIN LINE WITH PARTITION WALLIN THIS POSITION
WALL BELOW SILL TO RETURNIN LINE WITH PARTITION WALLIN THIS POSITION
WALL BELOW SILL TO RETURNIN LINE WITH PARTITION WALLIN THIS POSITION
BEDROOM
D 01
D 01 D 01
D 01 D 01
D 01 D 01
D 01 D 01
D 01 D 01
D 01D 01
D 01
D 01
D 01D 01
D 01
D 01
D 01
D 01
D 01
D 01
D 01
D 01
D 01
D 01
D 02D 02
D 02
D 02
D 02
D 02
D 02
D 02
D 02
BEDROOM BEDROOM BEDROOM 1 BEDROOM 2BEDROOMKITCHEN/DINING/LIVING KITCHEN/DINING/LIVING
KITCHEN/DINING/LIVING
KITCHEN/DINING/LIVING
KITCHEN/DINING/LIVINGKITCHEN/DINING/LIVING
BEDROOMBEDROOM
BEDROOM
2100
930
KITCHEN/DINING/LIVINGKITCHEN/DINING/LIVING
KITCHEN/DINING/LIVING
KITCHEN/DINING/LIVING
KITCHEN/DINING/LIVING
BEDROOM 1
BEDROOM 2
BATHROOM
BEDROOM
BEDROOM BEDROOM
BEDROOM 1BEDROOM
BEDROOM 2
KITCHEN/DINING/LIVINGKITCHEN/DINING/LIVING
KITCHEN/DINING/LIVING
KITCHEN/DINING/LIVING
CONTRACTOR TO SETOUT BEDROOMWALLS FIRST AND CONFIRMNECESSARY SIZE OF NIBFOR CUPBOARD
NOTE THESE DOORS ARE TYPE D02-B (826mm Doors)
D 01
D 01
D 01
D 01
D 01
STUDIO
S8
2675
2700 700
S14
2100 2000
2000
3023
S7
S3
S13 S19
S12
S10
S1
S2
S5
S6
1200
S20S16
S9
S18S17
S21
3025
S1A S1B
S/S with AAVFirst Floor only
S15
Stair 1
S11 D 02D 02
S/S with AAVFirst Floor only
Stair 2 (Smoke Shaft)
D 02
S4a
S4
S4b
S3a
S3b
S3a + S3bFirst Floor Only
S4a + S4bFirst Floor Only
S5a FirstFloor Only
S2a FirstFloor Only
S5a
waste connections to S8in ceiling void below
Existing RWPrelocated
PLOTS 108, 208,308,508
1 BEDPLOTS 109,209,309,509
1 BEDPLOTS 111,211,311,511
1 BEDPLOTS 110,210,310,510
1 BEDPLOTS 112,212,312,512
2 BEDPLOTS 114,214,314,514
1 BEDPLOTS 101,201,301,501
2 BEDPLOTS 102,202,302,502
1 BEDPLOTS 103,203,303,503
1 BEDPLOTS 104,204,304,504
1 BEDPLOTS 105,205,305,505
1 BEDPLOTS 106,206,306,506
2 BEDPLOTS 107,207,307,507
1 BEDPLOTS 115,215,315,515
1 BEDPLOTS 116,216,316,516
RISER 4(WATER + ELEC)
FD60
FD30(S)SC FD30(S)SC FD30(S)SC FD30(S)SC
FD30(S)SC
FD30(S)SC
FD30
(S)S
C
FD30
(S)S
C
FD30
(S)S
C
FD30(S)SC
FD30(S)SC FD30(S)SC FD30(S)SC FD30(S)SCFD30(S)SC
ACOUSTIC/THERMAL LINING
FD20
ACOUSTIC/THERMAL LINING
ACOUSTIC/THERMAL LINING
ACOUSTIC/THERMAL LINING
Relocated Dry Riser
RIS
ER
1 (E
LEC
)
FD60(S)-SC-VP
S4c
S4c - First Floor Only
FR90
AA A A A A
AAAA
A
AA
A
A BATHROOM
D 03 D 03 D 03 D 03
D 03D 03D 03D 03
D 03
D 03
D 06D 09
D 05
D 05
D 04
D 04
D 05
D 02B
D 02B
997
2602
4628
1195
1259
1088
32864010 3554
1014 3449
3771FROM FACE OF PLINTHFROM FACE OF PLINTH
FRO
M F
AC
E O
F P
LIN
TH
2908FROM FACE OF PLINTH
3227FROM FACE OF EXISTING WALL
2706
2100
2000
2073FROM FACE OFEXISTING WALL
20002780
MIN MIN
MIN2100MIN
MIN
2100 2100
1454
1897
1831
2100 21002100 2100MINMIN
MIN
MINMIN
MIN
BETWEEN FINISHED FACES
BETWEEN FINISHED FACES BETWEEN FINISHED FACES
BE
TWE
EN
FIN
ISH
ED
FA
CE
S
BE
TWE
EN
FIN
ISH
ED
FA
CE
S
BE
TWE
EN
FIN
ISH
ED
FAC
ES
BETWEENFINISHED FACES
BETWEEN FINISHED FACESBETWEEN
FINISHED FACES BETWEEN FINISHED FACES
BETWEEN FINISHED FACESBETWEEN FINISHED FACESBETWEEN FINISHED FACES BETWEEN FINISHED FACES BETWEEN FINISHED FACES BETWEEN FINISHED FACES BETWEEN FINISHED FACES BETWEEN FINISHED FACES
2050
MIN
MIN
MIN
MIN
MIN
1357
1337
926
1010 1010
Structural Opening
926
D 02
1010 1010
Structural Opening
Structural Opening
926
1010
926
926
10101010 1010Structural Opening Structural Opening
Stru
ctur
al O
peni
ng
Structural Opening
1010
926
1010
1010
926
1010
926
1010
3695
219
51
4167
625
229
2000
MIN
MIN
MIN
CLE
AR
CO
RR
IDO
RW
IDTH
MIN
CLE
AR
CO
RR
IDO
RW
IDTH
MIN CLEARCORRIDOR WIDTH
Stru
ctur
al O
peni
ng
StructuralOpening
POINT BPOINT A 575 687
316
1531
open
ing
D 07
D 07
1079
open
ing
1079
open
ing
FD60
FD60
2427
EQ
EQ
FD60D 08
750
open
ing
1331
EQ
EQ
750
100
opening
1329 Structural Opening
926
1010
2324
238
2368
FRO
M F
AC
EO
F P
LIN
TH
FRO
M F
AC
EO
F P
LIN
TH
2324
238
2368
FRO
M F
AC
EO
F P
LIN
TH
238
2324
2831
FRO
M F
AC
EO
F P
LIN
TH
238
2324
2831
FRO
M F
AC
EO
F P
LIN
TH
BETWEENFINISHED FACES
RAMP UP
Existing RWP tobe relocated. Positionand connection to existingroof outlet to be confirmed
waste connections to S7in ceiling void below5th Floor only
Stub Stack with AAVserving Levels 1, 2 & 3 only
RIS
ER
2(M
EC
H)
RIS
ER
3(E
LEC
)
Existing RWP tobe relocated
FD30
FD30
maxBE
TWE
EN
FIN
ISH
ED
FA
CE
S
eqeq 714
15
25
ALL DIMENSIONS, LEVELS AND CLEARANCES TO BECHECKED ON SITE PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING
THIS DRAWING SHOULD BE READ IN CONJUNCTIONWITH ALL OTHER PROJECT RELATED DRAWINGS,SPECIFICATIONS AND DOCUMENTS AS PART OF ASINGLE PROJECT PACKAGE.
ANY DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THIS DRAWING, OTHERDRAWINGS FORMING PART OF THIS CONTRACT, ORTHE SPECIFICATION / BILLS OF QUANTITIES MUST BECLARIFIED BEFORE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK ORORDERING OF ANY MATERIALS.
PLEASE CONSULT THE AUTHOR OR PROJECT MANAGERSHOULD THE READER REQUIRE CLARIFICATION ONANY PART OF THIS DRAWING.
THE COPYRIGHT OF THE DRAWING AND DESIGN IS THEPROPERTY OF THE COMPANY. THIS INFORMATION HASBEEN ISSUED UNDER SPECIFIC TERMS FOR THISPROJECT AND MAY ONLY BE USED AND REPRODUCEDACCORDINGLY.
NOTES
A0 DO NOT SCALE
Rev Date By Chk Comment
B R
I N G
I N G
I D E A
S T O
L I F E
Wootton Business ParkBesselsleigh Road
Wootton, Abingdon,Oxfordshire. OX13 6FD
T: 01865 322500F: 01865 327393
Frankham Consultancy Group Limited
3rd Floor,Baird House,
15-17 St Cross St,London. EC1N 8UWT: 020 7651 0790F: 020 7248 3144
1st Floor,21 Perrymount Road,
Haywards Heath.RH16 3TP
T:01444 444900F:01444 455642
Irene House,Five Arches Business Estate,
Maidstone Road,Sidcup, Kent.DA14 5AE
T: 020 8309 7777F: 020 8309 7890
OXFORD OFFICESIDCUP OFFICE
LONDON OFFICE HAYWARDS HEATH OFFICE
Job No/ File Ref
Number Revision
Scale @ A0:
Drawn By: Designed By: Checked By: Approved By:
Original Issue Date:
Status:
Drawing Title:
Project Title:
Client:
Originator
FCGZone Level
SuitabilityDisciplineType
AS BUILT
Adelais Properties Ltd
Hanover House202 Kings Road, Reading
1st 2nd, 3rd, 5th FLOORSSETTING OUT
CFB CFB CFB XX
28/09/2015 1:50
612592 MB ZZ
DR A 2002 S1 AB
C1 14:10:15 CB CB CONSTRUCTION ISSUE
1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th FLOORS ONLYDRAWING BASED ON HAMILTON ARCHITECTS DRAWING - A-10-174-C3
INITIAL SETTING OUT SEQUENCE NOTES
1. BEGIN SETTING OUT BY PLOTTING A LINE ON SITE BETWEENPOINT A AND POINT B.
2. OFFSET A LINE 25MM TO THE NORTH OF THE FIRST LINE.THIS LINE WILL BE THE FINISHED FACE OF THE SOUTHWALL OF THE CORRIDOR.
3. OFFSET A LINE 1200MM NORTH OF THE SECOND LINE. THISWILL THE FINISHED FACE OF THE NORTH WALL OF THECORRIDOR.
GENERAL NOTES
1. GRID IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONDIMENSIONING
2. BATHROOM DIMENSIONS ARE TO FINISHED FACES3. WATER TANK CUPBOARDS ARE CURRENTLY PLOTTED AS
700MM FROM BACK WALL TO FRONT FACE. CONTRACTOR ISTO CONFIRM IF THIS IS CAN BE REDUCED, PRIOR TO FINALCONFIRMATION OF SETTING OUT.
Add 15mm to the leading edge where an architrave lies at 90deg to thewall and impacts on the clear opening dim.
TYPICAL CONDITIONS (ALL DOORS)
Allow 25mm min between structural opening and return walls.This enables a perfect scribe for the full architrave.
C2 15:10:15 CB CB ADDITIONAL SETTING OUT DIMS &
DOOR DETAILS ADDED
P1 - Party wall General - FR60 (o/a 133mm)
P2 - Standard Internal Partition (o/a 88mm)
P5 - Shaft Walls - FR120 (o/a 80mm)
L1 - Sill Lining
L2 - Acoustic / Thermal Lining
OPENING SIZES ADDED
C3 22:10:15 CB CB SETTING OUT DIMS FOR RISERS ADDED
DOOR STRUCTURAL OPENING SIZES
DOOR TYPE
D02D02A
D01AD01
D02B
D03D04D05D06D07D08D09D010
DESCRIPTION
BEDROOMBATHROOMFLAT ENTRANCEFLAT ENTRANCE (4th Floor only)
UTILITY CUPBOARD
FLAT ENTRANCE
UTILITY CUPBOARDUTILITY CUPBOARDSTAIR 2RISER 2 + 3RISER 1RISER 1 (6th Floor Only)RISER 4
STRUCTURAL OPENINGWIDTH HEIGHT910 21109101010970910
929107913311010107913317021531
2110211021102110
21102110211021102110211021102110
(Flats 101 + 102, 201 + 202301 + 302, 501 + 502 only )
ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS ADDED
C4 27:10:15 CB CB DOOR TYPE D06 REVISED
OT FO O T O O T O O OT O T O OTO
T
T
T T O
O
T
O
T
O
T
OT O O O O O O TTO
O
TT
O
T
O
T
T
O
F
T
OTOOT
F
T
T
T
O
O
T
T
T
O
O
C5 04:11:15 CB CB RWP RELOCATIONS NOTED
MODIFICATIONS TO WINDOWS ADDED
BOXING TO 2 BED FLAT DETAILED
T
OWORKS TO EXISTING WINDOWS
TF
WINDOW TO REMAIN SIDE HUNG - OPENABLE BEYOND 30deg
WINDOW CONVERTED TO TILT ACTION ONLY
WINDOW FIXED PERMANENTLY SHUT
WINDOW TO BE FITTED WITH REMOVABLE OPENING RESTRICTORS
C6 17:11:15 CB CB BATHROOM DOOR HANDED AS INDICATED
ABOVE GROUND DRAINAGE AMENDMENTS
AS INDICATED
C7 18:11:15 CB CB PARTITION ADDED ADJACENT STAIR 2
LINING INDICATED IN BACK WALL OF
RISER 2 + 3
C8 30:11:15 CB CB CHANGES AS INDICATED.
C9 16:12:15 CB CB CHANGES AS INDICATED.
C10 19:01:16 CB CB CHANGES AS INDICATED.
C11 29:01:16 CB CB BUILDERS WORK IN CONNECTION
WITH SMOKE SHAFT INTAKE INDICATED
AB 06:06:16 CB CB AS BUILT ISSUE
ISSUEAS BUILT
The Judges have not visited any of the projects or heard the results and so their decision is based on review of paperwork only. In a number of cases the projects are not built and so it is not possible to validate the results which has in some cases influenced the final decision. Entrants are reminded to explain the unique features in their submission as decisions can only be made on the information provided.
Chair of judging panelsSue Bird, ANC Honorary Member
Commercial BuildingsJoe Cilia, Finishes & Interiors SectorAndy Moorhouse, Salford University
Education BuildingsClaire Barton, Haverstock AssociatesStephen Dance, London South Bank University
Environmental NoiseStephen Turner, ST AcousticsSomayya Yaqub, LB Hammersmith & Fulham
Smaller ProjectsPhil Dunbavin, PDAJohn Pritchard, Derby University
VibrationTom Brodowski, Noise & Vibration EngineeringDavid Waddington, Salford University
And sponsor representatives
Cover photo: © Tom Bright
WINNEREnvironmental NoiseApex Acoustics United House, Swanley, Kent
A residential site affected by noise from the adjacent paper mill as well road and rail traffic, where the consultants worked with the design team on an innovative acoustic design to achieve planning permission. By prioritising acoustic considerations throughout the stages of the project, they developed an approach that can be applied to other sites affected by similar noise issues.
A previous application by the developer for this site had been refused so the consultants approached the project with the aim of achieving a good acoustic design, aware that this concept underlies the ProPG which had yet to be published at the time this was completed. As well as modelling and measuring, this is a complex design project and used features such as windows on the ends of the building that are cranked by extending the building envelope so they have no line of sight to the industrial noise source.
The developer commented: “Apex Acoustics took an entirely fresh approach to addressing noise issues and managed to get both the paper mill and local authority on board. Apex also advised us on the ventilation and overheating risks associated with acoustics – we will definitely take this on board for consideration as the detailed design progresses”.
The judges felt this was a good example of making a site viable for residential development and showed how the two sides could work together to achieve a mutually acceptable conclusion. This was a reminder of how to approach such projects both in terms of acoustic design and working with all the parties concerned.
COMMENDED: AECOM Thames Tideway Tunnel
This issue of environmental noise and vibration impacts during the construction phase to upgrade London’s sewerage system, was under intense scrutiny during the public examination and was seen as weighing against consent for the development. Noise was therefore one of the foremost environmental constraints and the consultants provided acoustic services focussing on environmental modelling and compliance management. They also volunteered as STEMNET Ambassadors including delivering an interactive session on Bringing Sound to Life.
The judges would like to have known more details about the monitoring undertaken and the consultancy provided. With the project data providing the source of a paper at Internoise 2016 on the different methods for calculation of typical sound levels from long-term monitoring data, it would have been interesting to know more about how the information was now being used.
HIGHLY COMMENDED: Southdowns Environmental Consultants Ministry of Defence Land Ranges
There is a public perception that activities on MoD Land Ranges can produce noise and vibration that may be damaging to property through airborne or seismic shock waves. This investigation required the continuous monitoring of sound pressure, air overpressure and groundborne vibration at multiple locations over 6 months. Pioneering and innovative approaches to continuous data capture, processing and assessment were required and, in collaboration with an equipment supplier, system hardware and software capability was designed and tested and then deployed.
This project is unusually broad requiring innovative, use of and trialling of unproven measurement and telecommunications technologies and techniques; rigorous testing of bespoke systems, monitoring within highly sensitised communities; capturing high quality sound, air over pressure and groundborne vibration signals and measurement metrics.
The judges were very interested in this project which was innovative in its use of technology. They were not sure how much consultancy was involved and would have liked to know more about how the project was managed and controlled and how the results can be used.
COMMENDED: Pace Consult University of Warwick, The Oculus Building
An inter-disciplinary, two floor building with two lecture theatres, 12 teaching spaces, an open plan learning space under a wooden roof and a double height atrium. An important concept during the design was the use of natural light which penetrates across a double height glazed window, whilst the state of the art wooden roof gives a special character to the building. These peculiarities created different acoustic challenges.
The judges observed that the consultants had produced innovative solutions whilst respecting the architectural features. They noted that control of reverberation time was a factor during the whole design process and that working closely with the architect and main contractor had helped achieve this. The extensive use of modelling to address the different challenges was recognised
HIGHLY COMMENDED: Adrian James Acoustics Britten Building, Gresham’s School, Norfolk
A very high level building with excellent acoustics provided within a limited budget. It far exceeds the standards in DfE exemplar designs and building bulletins through close collaboration between the client, project manager, architect and acousticians from the start.
The consultants undertook regular site visits during the construction phase, enabling issues to be resolved early on without the need for expensive remedial work. They developed bespoke details to meet enhanced sound insulation criteria using lightweight constructions which were only possible due to their early input to the layout. Acoustically critical spaces were located on the ground floor, utilising a fully floated floor construction consisting of structural screeds on resilient bearers for use as required.
The judges were impressed by the detailing and high standards of acoustic design, and the on-site inspections and discussions held at an early stage to understand the requirements and aspirations of the teaching staff and students. The head of music stated: “This is the most flexible music recital room that I have ever worked in, and the practice and teaching rooms are the best out of any school or music conservatoire that I know.”
Education BuildingsSandy Brown Associates New Adelphi Building, University of Salford
A new performing arts building, which brings many disciplines under one roof. The consultants provided design advice on all architectural acoustics, working with the design team and client to accommodate all proposed spaces within the building, while still providing high levels of sound insulation between the spaces and adequately controlling noise egress from performance and rehearsal spaces. Auralisation of airborne sound insulation for the music/drama spaces was used to demonstrate the targeted standards to the client, using measurements from band rehearsals and music lessons at the university.
The judges noted this was a large project with complex sound insulation requirements. It had highly elegant solutions internally, complex acoustic detailing and displayed integrated architecture and acoustic design. They were impressed by the use of a box within a box design and that recording studios, music and drama spaces had been provided in a location so close to the railway.
The building houses many different performing arts spaces. The majority require low background noise levels and generate high sound levels. It also forms an entrance from the railway station into the campus and is a cut-through at lower levels. The A6 main road is 130m south of the site and Salford Crescent station is 60m west.
The architects, Stride Treglowan, said: “The acoustic consultancy worked well as part of a cross functional design team and their knowledge and experience of the other design disciplines was helpful to the development of the overall design. The acoustic design of the building enabled the multi-use building …. to function as intended.”
WINNER
Photos: © Tom Bright
WINNERSmaller ProjectsApex Acoustics TupTup Palace, Newcastle
This project illustrates a ground-breaking approach to solving the problem of noise from nightclub smoking areas. The modelling techniques, solutions to controlling noise break out through doors, and control of noise from patrons in the smoking area have the potential for wide application in addressing this perpetual problem. The consultants took room acoustics modelling methods and applied them to environmental noise propagation, appreciating that understanding the limitations of using the software in this manner is key to its successful application.
A novel approach to reducing noise generated by patrons in the alley was adopted by having a walk-through attenuator in front of the doors, sound absorption on the walls and rafts above the alley. The concept is an extension of a “sound lobby”, but built entirely externally within the alley due to space constraints inside the building. The smoking shelter guidelines were re-evaluated to enable design of compliant spaces capable of providing acoustic screening.
The client said: ”We had tried everything we could think of to reduce the noise but could not stop the complaints from the residents. Apex Acoustics came with a scientific approach to understanding the problem, and totally out-of-the-box solutions that we would never have thought of. “
The judges recognised that this addresses a current issue with an innovative approach to a significant problem. It was a clever approach to take indoor noise modelling and use it outdoors and then design sound barrier and absorption panels to cope with the noise.
COMMENDED: Red Twin Sound Insulation & Flanking Assessment
A new school was experiencing problems with sound insulation of a movable wall product. The consultant reviewed the design and tested the system to establish the reasons for under-performance. They used an acoustic camera to identify hot spots whilst recognising that this is an uncalibrated and arbitrary method of assessment which could not confirm if the wall met the specification. They used sound intensity measurements to establish weaknesses in the building fabric but provided specific performance for the pass door and the flank elements which it had not previously been possible to separate.
The judges liked the measurement of the performance of actual elements and the application of existing technology in a different way. This was a good technique for resolving the problem and whilst perhaps not unique it was unusual to see it applied in the field rather than in the laboratory.
HIGHLY COMMENDED: AECOM Acoustic Shell for Theatre Royal, Glasgow
Scottish Opera wished to move their orchestra from the pit to the stage, using a collapsible orchestra shell to improve on stage acoustics. The consultants looked at developing an acoustic shell to determine the extent of the improvement, the sense of ensemble and the expected sound pressure levels on stage, as well as the change in sound quality in audience areas. They used a unique facility – the Immersive Sound Studio (ISS) – during the design process to produce auralisations and allow Scottish Opera to hear how the orchestra would sound from different locations. The ISS technology is applicable to a wider variety of acoustic projects and lets non-technical people easily and intuitively understand complex issues without complicated terminology and reports.
The judges were impressed by this technically challenging project, carried out to a high standard, and the client’s involvement in reaching a decision based on how the theatre would sound. The technology is complex but it produces a very simple outcome which people clearly relate to.
COMMENDED: RBA Acoustics Omerara and The Flat Iron Square, London
A project involving the conversion of active railway arches into a mixed use development including a live music venue, on a site in a busy urban environment. Extensive computer modelling was used to predict noise breakout and patron noise egress, as ensuring nearby noise-sensitive areas would not be overly disturbed was vital to the planning and design stages.
The two aspects of noise breakout and effects of structure-borne train noise on an intimate music venue make this an interesting project. The judges noted that due to budget restrictions and loss of space, a box in box solution was not possible so the consultants came up with a number of construction solutions and achieved a result which markedly surpassed the target level, resulting in train passbys being mostly inaudible during performances. Innovative design and analysis were used and the final construction required high quality workmanship and regular inspections.
HIGHLY COMMENDED: WSP Berkeley Hotel, London
An iconic hotel in Knightsbridge is being extended to construct a 9 storey building based on a complex lightweight structure. The development also involves excavation for 4 basement levels, bringing the raft foundation within approximately 6 metres of the Piccadilly Line tunnel. Vibration is a key concern as high end Spa and treatment facilities will be accommodated in the basement.
This project has helped further understanding in building isolation schemes as the consultants undertook a building vibration isolation performance detailed study, based on numerical modelling in a real case scenario. In sessions with client representatives they explained and demonstrated sources of uncertainties and isolation complexities, justifying their design and managing expectations. Academia were involved in various subject elements of the design and modelling.
The judges considered there were huge risks arising from the proximity to the Underground and complemented the consultants on their grasp of the project and alertness to possible problems. Focused on the superstructure only and dealing with the basement rooms individually, this project takes low frequency understanding to new levels and could change the approach to future projects.
VibrationCole Jarman Francis Crick Institute, London
This is a unique building housing over 1200 scientists in a world class research facility in an unconventional location. Although well connected for rail, Eurostar, London Underground and major road routes, their proximity create significant sources of ground borne vibration. Furthermore, mechanical services plant linked to the laboratories, provide more sources of vibration.
The design team and vibration consultants collaborated with the other disciplines to consider the building to unprecedented levels of detail to address these conflicting requirements. Any process inside the building with the potential to generate vibration was reviewed and assessed, with mitigation incorporated to reduce the risk.
Impressive in its own right visually, few will realise the interior vibration environment was one of the key design drivers. This project shows how giving due credence to the discipline of vibration design can create world class facilities in what would otherwise be considered sub-prime locations. As well as the design process, there was scrutiny to ensure the full execution of design measures during construction. The end result is a low vibration environment in the building, which can easily be missed on a visit.
The architects commented: “The vibration consultants were integral to the design and realisation of an exceptional interactive, open environment, encouraging collaboration across disciplines and a highly flexible structure that will easily adapt to accommodate the rapid developments of scientific discovery” The judges were impressed by the interlinked vibration projects which make it unique, as well as the amount of work invested in the design. It is an incredible project which had to achieve the right outcome to enable the building to operate. The size, location and complexity make it stand out as the winner of this year’s award.
The alley �sed as the smo�in� area �rior to ref�r�ishment� loo�in� from the street end� The �am�oo�fa�ed rafts
were to �ee� rain off �atrons
The alley loo�in� from the street end�
The view towards the alley from the residents’ flat
The alley loo�in� from the rear towards the street�
�lley
3 The view towards
the alley from the
residents’ flat
1 The alley looking from
the street end. 4 The alley looking from the rear towards the
street.
2 The alley used as the smoking area
prior to refurbishment, looking from the
street end. The bamboo-faced rafts were
to keep rain off patrons
Satellite view of the site Surrounding images show views
from the ground prior to the refurbishment
3
2
1
4
Alley
WINNER
Airport House
Purley Way
Croydon CR0 0XZ
Tel: 020 82534518
Email: [email protected]
www.theanc.co.uk