EXTERNAL ENVELOPE Form follows function
Making an entrance better by design is a process of consideration and elimination, as GEZE UK’s Richard Richardson-Derry explains
‘F
orm follows function’ may be a basic tenet of modern architecture, but when it comes to designing
entrances, aesthetics are inevitably a determining factor. They must contribute to the design concept, blend with other building materials, flow effectively into interiors and above all, make an impact. But behind every grand entrance, is a myriad of decisions based on function: the purpose of the building itself, expected footfall, user requirements, accessibility, ventilation, heat loss, safety and security. Match that with thousands of products on the market, all possessing subtle differences, and it can make identifying the right solution a complex process. It’s said that ‘people do business with people’ and ‘good relationships open doors’; that’s certainly true of the specification process. Specifiers and architects build a relationship where trust is garnered through advice, guidance and sometimes, compromise to identify the best solution for a project.
Early liaison is helpful – consideration needs be given to the product type and application from the outset. Design based on assumption will only result in major reworking at a later stage, which is never desirable for architect or client. When apprised of an architect’s ‘wish list’, I advise on the best possible options and try to drill down to a level of detail they may not have considered. For example, with a retail project, consideration will be given to maximising frontage for window display, levels of anticipated footfall and funnelling of traffic across the threshold and around the retail floor plan. In most cases, an automatic sliding door system would be an appropriate choice, and although this may seem an obvious selection, this is where we need to need to look further at its intended application and operation. A sliding door operation is usually triggered by movement sensors with side sensors for safety, but if baskets or
ADF AUGUST 2018
displays are put too near to where the doors open, they may cause them to operate ineffectively.
Doors may be better installed with pocket screens – glass panels that the automatic doors slide in to – which are protective and also use available space without any hindrance.
Pocket screens are also an essential safety feature in a hospital environment as they minimise the risk of serious injury occurring by reducing the possibility of contact with the moving door leaves and eliminating potential entrapment zones. Within healthcare, there are a range of specific needs that may be required – reduced contact mechanisms, hermetically sealed doors for laboratories, different levels of security access and safety requirements for particular groups of patients classed as ‘vulnerable traffic’. All automatic door suppliers are required to provide solutions in accordance with BS EN 16005 European Standard for safety in the use of automatic doors for pedestrian use. Under BS EN16005, automatic doors are classed as ‘machines,’ so within the design users must be protected from risk of injury.
Sometimes, a design aesthetic must give way to practicalities. For example, the desire to see an automatic swing door put in place where leaf size has to battle environmental factors may result in ‘sail effect’ where the wind speed makes the operator less effective, so users become frustrated by the slowness of the door opening or in extreme conditions, not opening at all.
Where there is such an obvious conflict, I would prefer to provide alternative design solutions for a system that will consistently operate in the conditions in which it is installed.
When it comes to specifying requirements for heritage and listed buildings, the partnership between specifier and architect really comes into its own. Products can be adapted to provide a tailor-made solution
WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK
59
Behind every grand entrance is a myriad of decisions based on function
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 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76
