1

First Canadian Place

Renewal FromThe Outside In

16th Annual Symposiumon Building ScienceJuly 30, 2012

Halsall (A Parsons Brinckerhoff Company)

2

Services

Green Planning & Design

Property Condition Assessment

Restoration Engineering

Structural Engineering

Cladding Engineering

Outline• Background• Marble Management• Building Renewal Vision• Existing Construction Evaluation• Re-Cladding Design• Energy Retrofits

3

Outline• Background• Marble Management• Building Renewal Vision• Existing Construction Evaluation• Re-Cladding Design• Energy Retrofits

72STOREYS

3MSQ-FT

8,500OCCUPANTS

First Canadian Place

4

1975 Construction978 ft - Tallest in Canada

Photo by Brookfield PropertiesPhoto by Clifford Restoration

6,800cornerpanels

38,200face panels

9,000 IGUs4,500 windows

5

Brookfield et.alHalsallMdeAs

B+HBLWTL/RWDI

Ellis DonSota/CliffordViracon/PPGTMP/Aquila

BSC

Team

Timelines

• Marble Management(2005-2010)

• Re-Cladding Design(2007-2009)

• Energy retrofits(2008-2012)

• Re-Cladding Construction(2010-2012)

6

Outline• Background• Marble Management• Building Renewal Vision• Existing Construction Evaluation• Re-Cladding Design• Energy Retrofits

Staining from Silicone Sealant

7

Cracks & Panel Thickness Variations

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41

Freq

uenc

y(%

)

Corner Panel Thickness (mm)Measured…

Thermal Hysteresis & Strength Loss

• Anisotropic behavior withthin marble &heat/moisture

• Volumetric expansion andbowing

• Reduced density andstrength loss

• Cracking

8

Bowing Marble Panels

Sister Buildings byEdward Durell Stone Architect

images by MdeAs

Amoco (Aon Centre)Chicago ‘73

GM BuildingNew York ‘68

9

Amoco Re-CladdingGranite Re-clad ‘89 -’92

$80M USD

Lincoln Bank, Rochester, NYConstructed 1970 – ‘80’s Aluminum Re-clad

10

Finlandia Hall, HelsinkiConstructed ‘71 – Marble Reclad ‘97-’99

Management Strategy

• Comprehensive review,testing and monitoringprogram

• Targeted replacement tomaintain acceptable safetyand progressively renew

11

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

0-50

50-1

0010

0-15

015

0-20

020

0-25

025

0-30

030

0-35

035

0-40

040

0-45

045

0-50

050

0-55

055

0-60

060

0-65

065

0-70

070

0-75

075

0-80

080

0-85

085

0-90

090

0-95

095

0-10

0010

00-1

050

1050

-110

011

00-1

150

1150

-120

012

00-1

250

1250

-130

013

00-1

350

1350

-140

014

00-1

450

1450

-150

015

00-1

550

1550

-160

016

00-1

650

1650

-170

017

00-1

750

1750

-180

018

00-1

850

1850

-190

019

00-1

950

1950

-200

020

00-2

050

2050

-210

021

00-2

150

2150

-220

022

00-2

250

2250

-230

023

00-2

350

2350

-240

024

00-2

450

2450

-250

025

00-2

550

2550

-260

026

00-2

650

2650

-270

027

00-2

750

2750

-280

028

00-2

850

2850

-290

029

00-2

950

2950

-300

0

Flexural Strength (psi)

Freq

uenc

y(%

)

112 Old Panels, f lexural st rength tested in 2006 (C880) and inspected in 2002

432 New Panels, f lexural st rength tested in 2002-2006 (C880)

Zoom in on Existing Panel St rength

Old vs New Marble Strength

Bow Measurements

12

Bow vs. Strength Analysis

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22

Flex

ural

Stre

ngth

,C88

0(p

si)

Bow (mm)

First Canadian Place - Marble CladdingBow vs C880 Flexural Strength of Panel Populations Tested in 2005/2006

Acoustic Testing

13

Acoustic Testing vs Strength

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400

Acou

stic

Test

Res

ults

(mic

rose

cs)

C880 Flexural Test Results (psi)

First Canadian Place - 100 King St., Toronto100 microsec Acoustic Threshold Applied to Acoustic and Flexural Test Data

from 291 panels removed in 2005

If 100 ms Acoustic Threshold Applied(panels above the threshold will be

Avg. ProbableStrength, 875 psi

62% of panels would be

10% ofremainingpanelswould bebelow avg.

Pot

entia

lmin

imum

stre

ngth

obta

ined

Lower "best fit" line

1974 Wind Tunnel Testing

Max –50 / +30 psf

Cladding designed for +/- 60psf

14

2002 Wind Tunnel TestingMax -92 psf and +53 psf

East North West South

Original FCP Compartment Layout (Red)

15

Corner Closure Influence

Images Adopted from “Guide to Energy Efficiency in Masonry and Concrete Buildings” (1982) and Windand Air Pressures on the Building Envelope (1986)

PressureMeasurement

16

Pressures at Middle of Wall

Pressures at Corners

17

Prioritized Replacement by Safety Factor

Panels Replacedto 2008

(300 panels/yr -0.7%/yr)

18

Current Cladding MaintenancePercent Replaced Panels Per Elevation

Percent Replacement

Silicone Strip Testing for Secondary Restraint

19

Outline• Background• Marble Management• Building Renewal Vision• Existing Construction Evaluation• Re-Cladding Design• Energy Retrofits

Decision to Reclad – Business Drivers

• Minimize Risks/Improve Durability• Eliminate Ongoing Disruption and Cost• Marketability (LEED EB)• Renewed Image

20

Outline• Background• Marble Management• Building Renewal Vision• Existing Construction Evaluation• Re-Cladding Design• Energy Retrofits

Interior/Exterior Evaluation (Scope)S E N W

21

Interior/Exterior Evaluation

Typ. Section

22

• spandrels• window components• sealants

Finishes

Control Layers

Others:• condensation• fire/smoke• uv/solar

23

• anchorage/structure• wind• seismic• movement accom.

Supports

Key Considerations• Frame fading/staining• IGU aesthetics and

service life

• Air/water tightness• Solar/glare/comfort• Thermal/condensation• Fire

• Frame/anchorage/glasscapacity and condition

• Blast resistance• Cavity Air Pressures

24

Air Seals Generally in Good Condition

Air Seals Generally in Good Condition

25

Air Seals Generally in Good Condition

Minor Air Flow ControlLayer Discontinuities

26

Corrosion Impacting Air Seal Durability

Corrosion Impacting Air Seal Durability

27

Missing Fire Separation (window term. at fullheight marble)

Exterior Window Frame and MetalFlashing Finish Faded/Stained

28

IGU’s ApproachingEnd of Service Life

IGU’s Approaching End of Service Life

Original Units are from 1974/1975

29

Premature IGU Failures WhereOriginal Units Replaced

Window Sill Connection RequiredReinforcement

30

Corrosion at Window Sill Connection

Window Assembly CapacitySatisfactory for New Wind Loads

• Mullion Assembly Structural Capacity• Full Scale Testing – ASTM E330

31

Energy Consumption Not Sensitiveto Cladding Upgrades

• low glazing-to-wall ratio

• core dominated building

• enclosure’s role is largelycomfort-related in theperimeter zones

Outline• Background• Marble Management• Building Renewal Vision• Existing Construction Evaluation• Re-Cladding Design• Energy Retrofits

32

Re-Cladding vs. Over-Cladding

• New Cladding Finish at Spandrels• Repair Existing Support/ Control at

– Spandrels– Windows

• Restore Finish at Window Frames• Replace IGU’s where Required

• New Continuous façade:– Finish– Control– Support

• Remove Existing IGU’s• Interior Trim Modifications

Over-cladding rejected:costscheduletenant disruptionchange to original design intent

Design Objectives

• Renew Image• Improve Durability• Restore Performance• Streamline Process/Schedule• Facilitate Future Maintenance• Economical

33

Project Challenges

• Several Owners• Building Fully Occupied• Aggressive Schedule• Architectural Requirements• Site Constraints

Architect’s Vision

images by MdeAs

White/BrightImproved ScalePatterned Glass

34

35

36

37

Conceptual Work Flow

image by MdeAs

38

Removals

image by B&H

RestoreConcealed Seals

39

RestoreConcealed Seals

UpgradeSecondary

Drainage PlaneSeals

40

SupplementalAnchors and

Corrosion Protection

Insulation and USP Support Trials

41

Thermal Modeling

Performance Modeling Glare Analysis

Glare Threshold: 5,451 cd/m2

Max Glare: 58,374 cd/m2

% Over Threshold: 971%

Centre ofSun Reflection

ExchangeTowerShadow

ExchangeTowerReflection

FCP West Elevation

Simulated a Cladding with Reflective (Mirror-like) Glass SpandrelsView from Exchange Tower 38th Floor, September 21, 5:00pm

42

Architects and Glass

Key Considerations – Finish/Support

• Glass Size• Glass Colour/Pattern• Glass Type

43

Typ. Section

Closure Trims

44

Glass• IGU vs Laminated Glass• Frit Study• Flatness• Retention

image by MdeAs

Glass Mockups

image by MdeAs

45

Typ. Perimeter Framing

Unitized Spandrel Frame and Support

Lateral Connection:• prevents in/out movements

• accommodates:

• in - plane movement

• up - down movement

Fixed Gravity Connection:• provides gravity support

• prevents in/out movements

Sliding Gravity Connection:• provides gravity support

• prevents in/out movements

• accommodates:

• in - plane movement

46

On-Site Mockups

47

Typical Panel

• Transparency• Aesthetics• Constructability• Availability

• Load Types• Glass Types• Components• Redundancy• Post breakage

• Exposure• VLT/SHG/UV• Comfort• Condensation

Glass Design Considerations

48

• Transparency• Aesthetics• Constructability• Availability

• Load Types• Glass Types• Components• Redundancy• Post breakage

• Exposure• VLT/SHG/UV• Comfort• Condensation

Glass Design Considerations

Performance / Maintenance / Repair / Replacement / Cost

Glass Design

Codes & Standards vs. Rational Engineering Analysis

Balance between Actions and ReactionsAction: Applied LoadsReactions: Glass Strength

Limit State Design– Strength and Stability– Serviceability

49

Design Issues

• Laminated glass behavior– Monolithic– Laminated– Layered

Load Resistance– Heat treatment– Load duration– Design temperature

PVB Interlayer Shear Modulus

50

Design Issues

• Laminated glass behavior– Monolithic– Laminated– Layered

• Load Resistance– Heat treatment– Load duration– Design temperature

CGSB/ASTM

CGSB12.20

ASTM E1300-09

51

1974 Wind Loads

WLT: Max –50 / +30 psf

Design: +/- 60 psf

Wind Tunnel Re-Analysis

52

2008 Wind Tunnel Study

Design Loads<= 60 psf 85% area60 to 94 psf 15% area>94 psf <0.5% area

Original Cladding designwind loads +/- 60 psf

Max loads- 117 / +56 psf

Wind vs. Temp

53

Glass/USP QA/QC Considerations

• Performance Testing– Static and Cyclic Structural– Inter-storey Drift/Lateral Movement– Post-Breakage

• Fabrication Monitoring and testing– Heat Treatment– Lamination Process– Laminated Testing Services– Shop Reviews

Construction Logistics

image by Ellis Don

54

Access

image by Ellis Don

55

Access

image by B&H

Access

56

Replacement

Completed Product

57

Completed Product

photo by B&H image by MdeAs

58

Outline• Background• Marble Management• Building Renewal Vision• Existing Construction Evaluation• Re-Cladding Design• Energy Retrofits

The ProcessThe Process

PLANNING INVESTIGATION > IMPLEMENTATION > TEACHING > MONITORING

59

OccupantUse

BuildingOperations

BuildingSystems

NOT:“Is this the most efficient pump?”BUT: “Is this pump needed, and is it running when and how it should?”

Approach

Benchmarking

60

Energy Modelling

Tower

Podium

Use Breakdown

MODELLED ENERGY DISTRIBUTION

61

Tower Lighting Power ReductionGarage Lighting Power ReductionVFD’s on MAU’sReduce OA to ASHRAEDemand Control VentilationExhaust ReductionExhaust Heat RecoveryInduction Unit SwitchoverReplace ChillersConsolidate Chiller PlantReplace BoilersReplace Condenser PumpsReplace Chilled Water PumpsReplace Low Temp Heating PumpsVFD on Induction Supply/Return FansFull Floor Retrofits

Building Systems

Sub-meteringChiller Heat Recovery PlantInduction Unit SwitchoverInduction Unit FansBoiler PlantCompartment UnitsSanitary ExhaustsMechanical operating schedulesLighting schedules

Building Operations

62

Daytime cleaningLighting schedulesOperating schedulesSupplemental coolingTenant awareness/engagement

Occupant Use

-

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

9,000,000

10,000,000

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Con

sum

ptio

n[k

Wh]

FCP Electricity Consumption

2009

2010

2011

22%REDUCTIONfrom 2009

CONSUMPTION

Energy Savings

strategic advisor for energy/LEED EB services

63

Thank You