FACADE ENGINEERING REPORT

MSc Facade Engineering

COMPONENT B – Report

1.0: Outline:

Part 1 Testing of rainscreen systems

A manufacturer has developed a new rainscreen system consisting of large ceramic panels and aluminium support rails. He has been advised to test it for weathertightness prior to putting it on the market.

· What tests would be required to demonstrate the weathertightness of a rainscreen wall in accordance with the CWCT Standard?

· What are the benefits and limitations of carrying out a weathertightness test in accordance with the CWCT Standard on a rainscreen system?

· If a test is carried out on the rainscreen system what can be done to minimize the limitations?

· What alternative procedures could be adopted to demonstrate that any wall constructed using the rainscreen system will be weathertight?

Your answer should refer to air permeability, watertightness and wind load resistance.

Part 2 Use of curtain wall test results

You have specified a curtain wall which is to comply with the CWCT Standard and provide the following performance:

· Air permeability A4 (600Pa)

· Watertightness R7 (600Pa)

· Design Wind Load 1900Pa

The curtain wall will contain opening lights.

This is for a small project and it is expected that a standard stick curtain wall system that has been tested by the system company will be used.

What information (about the system /testing/ proposed use of system) would you require from the contractor before accepting that the proposed use of the system will satisfy the requirements of the specification for weathertightness. Your answer should include comments on the window.

Explain the relevance of this information.

Note: the question says you are the specifier so if you require additional information from the specification you can make it up provided it does not conflict with anything in the question. Your answer will be marked against any assumptions you make.

Your answer should be limited to consideration of weathertightness of the curtain wall system.

2.0: Date of Submission of assignment:

Sunday 10th February at 22:00 through Blackboard

3.0: Weight: 75% of the total mark for the module

4.0: Submission Documents and Format:

Format: *.pdf

Words: 2500

5.0: Assessment Criteria:

You will receive unconfirmed marks and written feedback individually. The period for providing feedback will not normally exceed 20 working days (excluding University closure days) following the deadline for submission of the assessment concerned. This period may be shorter or longer for some forms of assessment. Where the period is greater than 20 working days, students will be informed of the deadline and the rationale for the extension. Outcomes (marks) which have not been confirmed by an examining board shall be considered as unconfirmed.

Check the criteria table included in the next page to understand how you will be marked, that will help you to get better marks.

Postgraduate Modular Programme Assessment Feedback Form
Module Name:	Weathertightness MH5-15-M	Assessment:	B – Report
Student:		Total Mark	% (over 100%)
First marker:		Second marker:

Report (100%):

Demonstration of a theoretical and practical understanding and completeness of the issues involved and the level of analytical and critical thinking. (90% weighting) [60% for part a) + 30% for part b)]	Outstanding theoretical background and technical judgement on key issues. Outstanding, in-depth analysis and highly sophisticated synthesis of learning resources and key issues. All arguments, ideas, recommendations and conclusions within the submission are substantiated in an exceptionally convincing manner.		90-75%
	Good theoretical background and technical judgement on key issues. Good analysis and synthesis of learning resources. Logical approach and argumentation is good throughout. Most arguments, ideas, recommendations and conclusions are substantiated convincingly.		75-60%
	Sufficient theoretical background and technical judgement on key issues, demonstrating good enough theoretical background and technical judgement on key issues.		60-45%
	Poor theoretical background and technical judgement on key issues to support the proposed solution, demonstrating lack theoretical background and technical judgement on key issues.		45-20%
	Very weak theoretical background and technical judgement on key issues.		20-0%
Presentation: Structure, consistency and conciseness. Use of headings, paragraphs, illustrations, vocabulary, use of references etc… (10%)	Excellent (10%)		Fair (6%)		Weak (0%)	✓		10-0%
Total mark (100%) Note that mark is provisional, subject to approval by award board	%

Feedback