CIBSE conference Preview
amount of water or air going through a particular pipe moves on and the Part L 2010 Building Regulations
or duct. come into force – but he doesn’t believe it will serve
‘And, if the constructor can demonstrate that, then to test the actual performance of a building, only the
he’s finished his work – that is ‘I have done what the existing codes. ‘You basically have to tick a box and
designer told me to do’ – that’s where it tends to stop. say “yes I’ve commissioned a building”. To me, that’s
But, of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the not enough.’
building works. If the designer didn’t get the design He also believes there is also an issue with the
quite right, and the occupiers are either too hot or too disjointed nature of the appointment process; quite
cold and so on, the phone calls start coming. And we often a number of different designers become involved
never really service our clients properly as a result.’ in a project, so ‘if there is an error in the design process,
Aston believes it’s time that services in all buildings you don’t know where it is’.
were put under the same sort of stringent testing as Aston believes the answer lies in strengthening
medical research labs, for example, where designers the codes to include an element of system testing Just proving
have to prove they can achieve a certain temperature, and proving of the building services and the overall
that you’ve
not just get a certain amount of water running through building performance, a process which he would like
a pipe. In fact, Aston believes that designers ought to be to see be made mandatory.
done what
testing aspects like temperature, humidity and energy He agrees that BSRIA’s Soft Landings programme is the designer
consumption, rather than measuring flow rates, as a complementary and goes some way to addressing the
told you is not
matter of course. issues, but still believes more can be done. But Aston
‘Just proving that you’ve done what the designer admits that change cannot be instigated by engineers
good enough
told you is not good enough to demonstrate that alone. ‘I think we are in a relatively limited position. to demonstrate
you’re getting the performance you need. These days If you imagine the carrot-and-stick scenario, we are
that you’re
it’s become even more important, because not only are trying to offer them a carrot. If you’ve got a client who’s
designers trying to get the right performance to keep a building owner, there’s definitely an incentive to do it
getting the
the right temperature and humidity in that space, we’re if they’re prepared to think about a slightly longer term performance
also, fundamentally, trying to limit carbon emissions. aspect of their facility. If they’re paying for the running
you need
‘And, if the designers had a whole load of really costs this should have the potential to improve it for
bright ideas about how they’re going to do that, and them. ‘The more difficult market may be the design
we don’t test the result is what he expected it to be, we and build let to a tenant-type situation, but again there
run the risk of not delivering the carbon savings we all would be some advantages.’
say we can do – and we also don’t learn anything for These advantages centre on display energy
the next job that we do.’ certificates (DECs), which show how buildings work. ‘A
Much of Aston’s career has been spent working lot of times you get a poor DEC and everyone wants to
in the pharmaceutical industry on projects for walk away from that building now. So if they properly
companies such as Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boots commission buildings, resulting in a better DEC, then
and GlaxoSmithKline, where testing and proving potentially that building’s more marketable.
practices are much tighter. But the biggest obstacle ‘But it is always more difficult to demonstrate to
facing the industry is that no one is yet ready to take a developer that he’s going to get the benefit,
responsibility. particularly if he’s not going to be responsible for the
‘If the design doesn’t work on site, there’s usually running costs.’ l
10 different ways for different people involved in
the process to try and wriggle out of it. The designer
will claim the contractor didn’t build it properly, the
Sign up for the conference
contractor will claim the design wasn’t right and the The CIBSE national conference, Resilience and
problem never gets solved.’ Building Services: How to Secure the Future, will be
He believes one way around the problem would be held on 27 and 28 April at the British Museum,
to engender ownership of responsibility all the way London. The event aims to cover all issues that are,
through the project in order to serve clients better, but or are set to become, major topics in the building
he concedes that there would probably be a fair amount services sector. Topics include possible scenarios
of resistance to designers taking responsibility, as well for the future, addressed by Rob Manning, CIBSE
as commercial and financial implications. president-elect and director at AECOM; threats
He believes there are a few reasons for this resistance. to the building services sector, tackled by Paddy
Firstly, he says, it’s not to everybody’s advantage Conaghan, a partner at Hoare Lea; opportunities
(financially and commercially) to take responsibility. in building services, with Professor David Fisk,
Secondly, in most projects the commissioning process Imperial College London; and how the current
is compressed because of delays on site, because economy is affecting contracts, with Richard Ward,
‘there’s always a good excuse for why you can shorten head of construction group at Eversheds.
the commissioning process but still finish on time’. To book a place, visit
And thirdly, no one is asking engineers to check – www.cibse.org/nationalconference
although Aston says this is likely to change as time
www.cibsejournal.com March 2010 CIBSE Journal 41
CIBSEmar10 pp40-41 Aston.indd 41 25/2/10 16:09:42
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72