Today during our usual hour we sweep through standards action in building glazing, entrances and means of egress. The word fenestration (Latin: fenestra) has become a term of art for the design, construction, and placement of openings in a building, including windows, doors, skylights, and other glazed elements. While the word has sparse use in the International Code Council and National Fire Protection Association catalog it is widely used by the Construction Specifications Institute in its MasterFormat system for organizing construction standards, guidelines and building contracts.
The percentage of a building envelope “skin” that is comprised of doors and windows varies depending on the specific building design, function, and location. However, a commonly cited range is between 15% to 25% of the total building envelope. The actual percentage will depend on several factors such as the building’s purpose, orientation, local climate, and energy performance goals. Buildings that require more natural light or ventilation, such as schools, hospitals, and offices, may have a higher percentage of windows and doors in their envelope. In contrast, buildings with lower lighting and ventilation requirements, such as warehouses, may have a smaller percentage of windows and doors.
Fenestration presents elevated risk to facility managers. The education facility industry is a large target and a pattern of settling out of court. For example:
In 2013, a former student at Yale University sued the school over a broken window in her dorm room. The student alleged that the university was negligent in failing to repair the window, which allowed a burglar to enter her room and sexually assault her. The case was settled out of court in 2015 for an undisclosed amount.
In 2019, a student at the University of California, Los Angeles sued the school over a broken window in her apartment. The student alleged that the university was negligent in failing to repair the window, which allowed a swarm of bees to enter her apartment and sting her. The case was settled out of court for $4.5 million.
In 2020, a group of students at Harvard University sued the school over its decision to require them to move out of their dorms due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The students alleged that the university breached its contract with them by failing to provide suitable alternative housing, including functioning windows and doors. (The case is ongoing; best we can tell as of the date of this post).
These cases illustrate that colleges and universities can face legal action related to doors and windows, either due to alleged negligence in maintaining or repairing them, or due to issues related to student housing and accommodations.
Our inquiry breaks down into two modules at the moment:
Scope: Standardization in the field of doors, doorsets, windows, and curtain wall including hardware, manufactured from any suitable material covering the specific performance requirements, terminology, manufacturing sizes and dimensions, and methods of test. The Japanese Engineering Standards Committee is the Global Secretariat.
Multinational manufacturing and trade in the door manufacturing industry involve the production, distribution, and sale of doors across international borders. This industry encompasses a wide range of door types, including residential, commercial, industrial, and specialty doors. Here are some of the key fine points to consider in multinational manufacturing and trade within the door manufacturing sector:
Global Supply Chains:
Multinational door manufacturers often have complex global supply chains. Raw materials, components, and finished products may be sourced from various countries to optimize costs and quality.
Regulatory Compliance:
Compliance with international trade regulations and standards is crucial. This includes adhering to import/export laws, product safety regulations, and quality standards, such as ISO certifications.
Market Segmentation:
Different regions and countries may have varying preferences for door types, materials, and styles. Multinational manufacturers need to adapt their product offerings to meet local market demands.
Distribution Networks:
Establishing efficient distribution networks is essential. This involves selecting appropriate distribution channels, including wholesalers, retailers, and e-commerce platforms, in different countries.
Tariffs and Trade Barriers:
Import tariffs and trade barriers can significantly impact the cost of doing business across borders. Understanding and navigating these trade policies is essential for multinational door manufacturers.
Localization:
Multinational manufacturers often localize their products to suit the preferences and requirements of specific markets. This may involve language translation, customization of door designs, or adjustments to product dimensions.
Quality Control:
Ensuring consistent product quality across borders is critical for maintaining brand reputation. Implementing quality control processes and standards at all manufacturing locations is essential.
Cultural Considerations:
Understanding cultural nuances and local customs can help multinational manufacturers market their products effectively and build strong customer relationships.
Logistics and Transportation:
Efficient logistics and transportation management are essential for timely delivery of doors to international markets. This includes selecting appropriate shipping methods and managing inventory efficiently.
Sustainability:
Sustainability concerns, such as environmental impact and responsible sourcing of materials, are becoming increasingly important in the door manufacturing industry. Multinational manufacturers may need to comply with different environmental regulations in various countries.
Intellectual Property:
Protecting intellectual property, including patents and trademarks, is crucial in a global market. Manufacturers must be vigilant against counterfeiting and IP infringement.
Market Research:
Conducting thorough market research in each target country is essential. This includes understanding local competition, pricing dynamics, and consumer preferences.
Risk Management:
Multinational manufacturing and trade involve various risks, including currency fluctuations, political instability, and supply chain disruptions. Implementing risk mitigation strategies is vital for long-term success.
In summary, multinational manufacturing and trade in the door manufacturing industry require a comprehensive understanding of global markets, regulatory compliance, cultural differences, and logistics. Successfully navigating these complexities can help manufacturers expand their reach and compete effectively in a globalized world.
Relevant agencies:
ASTM International: ASTM develops and publishes voluntary consensus standards used in various industries, including construction. ASTM standards cover materials, testing procedures, and specifications related to doors, windows, and associated components.
National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC): NFRC is a U.S.-based organization that focuses on rating and certifying the energy performance of windows, doors, and skylights. They provide performance ratings and labels used by manufacturers to communicate product energy efficiency to consumers.
American Architectural Manufacturers Association (AAMA): AAMA is a U.S.-based organization that develops standards and specifications for windows, doors, and curtain walls. Their standards cover performance, design, and testing.
National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS): NIBS is involved in research, education, and the development of standards for the building and construction industry in the United States.
BOMA International sets the standard for measuring buildings. In 1915, BOMA published its first office standard, Standard Method of Floor Measurement. Throughout the years, the standard has been revised to reflect the changing needs of the real estate market and the evolution of office building design.
BOMA International is the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) secretariat for a suite of area measurement standards.
The BOMA catalog remains active, with recent revisions reflecting changes in building use, energy accounting and increasingly complicated mixed-use occupancies.
Government capital aid for schools is usually capped by classified building type and measured area. States sort facilities by grade band (elementary, middle, high school) and program (special education, CTE), then apply published gross-square-foot-per-student allowances.
.
Eligible size is typically gross area to the exterior walls; circulation, walls, and mechanical space are included via net-to-gross markups. Only that baseline is state-funded; extra square footage is a local cost. Misclassification or a different measurement method (net vs. gross, interior vs. exterior) changes the funded envelope and can cut or inflate aid.
.
Higher-education inventories often use FICM assignable-versus-gross rules for similar reporting and reimbursement. K-12 inventories take into account stairs, voids, mechanical rooms, portables, and renovations. So classification plus the chosen measurement method can change what is eligible for public money.
At the moment all titles in this catalog seem to be stabilized. Largely because a sizeable portion of square footage in every school district, college, university and university-affiliated healthcare research and clinical delivery system derives at least part of its funding from governments at all levels there are workgroups devoted to measuring square footage and documenting its use. For example:
Getting square-footage right is essential for securing an organization’s sustainability and “green” claims for example. The links in previous posts provide for information about future public consultations.
We maintain the BOMA catalog on the agenda of our Space Planning, Hammurabi and Architectural colloquia, hosted 6 to 8 times annually. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting, open to everyone.
We drill into the specifics commonly found in education communities: sub-lease of space to private industry in publicly-owned facilities. The Building Owners and Managers Association International is an ANSI-accredited consensus standard developer and revised its standard — BOMA Z65.5 Retail Properties: Standard Method of Measurement. Measuring the area of a retail building can quickly become complex when variables must be considered such as ancillary space, mezzanines and storefront lease lines. Many large research universities have long since leased space within many of their building envelopes for private industry to service their communities — student unions, hospitals, dormitories and athletic venues, for example. From the project prospectus:
Z65.5 is intended exclusively for retail properties and their associated structures and may be applied to single-tenant, multi-tenant or multi-building configurations. It features a single method of measurement, with two levels of measurement data, known as Partial Measurement and Overall Measurement for retail properties. It does not measure sidewalks, surface parking, drainage structures, or other ancillary site improvements. This standard is chiefly designed to generate Gross Leasable Area figures, a key metric in retail leasing; however, it also produces area figures which may be of interest to those examining space utilization, valuation, benchmarking, and the allocation of building expenses to various cost centers. The scope of this standard is not intended to be submitted for consideration as an ISO, IEC, or ISO/IEC JTC-1 standard.
Public consultation is open until February 8th.
You may obtain an electronic copy from: floorstandards@boma.org. Send comments (with optional copy to psa@ansi.org) to: floorstandards@boma.org. We encourage user-interest subject matter experts in education facility management to participate directly in the BOMA standards development process by communicating directly with Tanner Johnson at BOMA (tjohnston@boma.org) or 202-326-6357 for more information.
We keep the BOMA catalog on the standing agenda of our colloquia devoted to building construction best practice. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
– To promote an unambiguous framework for determining the areas of Industrial Buildings with a strong focus on Rentable Area calculations;
– To facilitate transparency and clear communication of building measurement concepts among all participants in the commercial real estate
industry;
– To allow a comparison of values on the basis of a clearly understood and generally agreed upon method of measurement; and
– To align concepts and measurement methodologies with the International Property Measurement Standards: Industrial Buildings (January 2018)
document.
Send comments (with optional copy to psa@ansi.org) to: tjohnston@boma.org
Standards Michigan follows, but d0es not advocate in most of the BOMA standards suite for the following reasons:
Educational facility occupancies are fairly well accounted for in existing federal and state regulations
Advocacy in energy-related best practice titles are a better use of resources at the moment.
We encourage user-interest subject matter experts in education facility management to participate directly in the BOMA standards development process by communicating directly with Tanner Johnson at BOMA (tjohnston@boma.org) or 202-326-6357 for more information.
We maintain the entire BOMA suite on our periodic Model Building Code colloquia. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
Issue: [15-200]
Category: Architectural, Space Plaaning, Facility Asset Management
We collect a sample of cameras that follow construction from start to finish. Fixed on rooftops, poles, or nearby buildings, they record the work as it unfolds—foundations poured, steel raised, façades closed in, interiors finished. They do not interrupt the site. They simply keep a clear, continuous record.
.
Their role is practical: project teams check daily conditions, facilities staff document milestones, and the campus community can see a building take shape over months that would otherwise pass unseen. Time-lapse footage turns a long construction schedule into a fun, brief story of how a new building joins the campus.
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.
Two redlines that run close coupled with the International Building Code are open for public consultation until September 14 and October 15, respectively:
Our engagement with ASCE standards dates to the founding of Standards Michigan, when we challenged legacy live-load requirements for university armories whose contemporary use no longer resembled the military occupancy from which the requirements arose.
Important 2024 IEBC Changes Affecting College & University Facilities
Code Change
Campus Impact
1. Occupiable Roofs
New provisions coordinate rooftop occupancy requirements with the 2024 IBC. Universities converting roofs into terraces, student gathering areas, dining spaces, green roofs, or observation decks must evaluate structural capacity, means of egress, accessibility, guardrails, and fire protection.
2. Risk Category Clarification for Additions
Provides clearer guidance when additions have a different occupancy than the existing building. This is particularly important for laboratory expansions, medical research buildings, student health facilities, and emergency operations centers.
3. Storm Shelter Coordination
Storm shelter provisions now coordinate directly with IBC Section 423 and ICC 500. Campus projects in tornado-prone regions should verify shelter requirements early during planning.
4. Smoke Compartment Requirements
Certain renovations involving healthcare occupancies, student medical clinics, and assisted-living facilities may require additional smoke compartmentation during major alterations.
5. Adult Changing Stations
Projects adding toilet facilities may now require adult changing stations in certain accessible family or assisted-use restrooms. This primarily affects stadiums, arenas, student unions, libraries, and performing arts centers.
6. Exterior Wall Renovations on High-Rise Buildings
Installation of combustible exterior wall coverings or envelope systems on existing high-rise buildings may trigger automatic sprinkler requirements. This should be evaluated during residence hall and research tower renovations.
7. Existing Automatic Sprinkler Systems
New provisions establish conditions under which certain non-required sprinkler systems may be removed following occupancy changes. Campus owners should review this carefully before renovation projects.
8. Temporary Emergency Building Uses
New Appendix E provides guidance for temporary emergency use of existing buildings. Universities can incorporate these concepts into emergency operations planning during natural disasters or public health emergencies.
9. Construction Site Safety Planning
New owner responsibilities emphasize development of site safety plans and designation of responsible personnel during construction. This is especially valuable on occupied campuses where construction occurs adjacent to classrooms, residence halls, hospitals, and pedestrian routes.
10. Better Coordination with the 2024 IBC
Many provisions have been reorganized or updated to improve consistency between the IEBC and the current International Building Code. Campus design teams can expect fewer conflicts between existing-building and new-construction requirements during modernization projects.
Facilities Most Likely to be Affected
Research laboratories
Residence halls
Athletic stadiums and arenas
Libraries
Student unions
Classroom buildings
Central utility plants
Medical schools and student health clinics
Performing arts centers
High-rise academic buildings
“`
November 30, 2021
Every month we direct our colleagues in the education industry to the US Census Department’s monthly construction report to make a point: at an average annual clip of about $75 billion, the education industry is the largest non-residential building construction market in the United States. A large part of that construction involves infrastructure upgrades of existing buildings that contribute to sustainability goals but may not make flashy architectural statements for philanthropists.
The International Existing Building Code (IEBC) is a model code in the International Code Council family of codes intended to provide requirements for repair and alternative approaches for alterations and additions to existing buildings (LEARN MORE). A large number of existing buildings and structures do not comply with the current building code requirements for new construction. Although many of these buildings are potentially salvageable, rehabilitation is often cost-prohibitive because compliance with all the new requirements for new construction could require extensive changes that go well beyond the value of building or the original scope of the alteration.
Education facility planners, architects and managers: Sound familiar?
ICC administered workgroups have been convening with considerable frequency over the past several months to pull together a number of relevant concepts for the next (2019 Group B) revision. For the purpose of providing some perspective on the complexity and subtlety of the issues in play, a partial overview of working group activity is available in the links below. Keep in mind that there are many other proposals being developed by our ICC working group and others.
It is a large document — 2919 pages — so keep that in mind when accessing it. There are many issues affecting #TotalCostofOwnership of the education facility industry so we will get cracking on it again next week. See our CALENDAR for the next online teleconference. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
Finally, we persist in encouraging education industry facility managers (especially those with operations and maintenance data) to participate in the ICC code development process. You may do so by CLICKING HERE. Real asset managers for school districts, colleges, universities and technical schools in the Albuquerque region should take advantage of the opportunity to observe the ICC code-development process. The Group B Hearings are usually webcast — and we will signal the link to the 10-day webcast when it becomes available — but the experience of seeing how building codes are determined is enlightening when you can watch it live and on site.
Issue: [16-169]
Category: Architectural, Facility Asset Management, Space Planning
Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jack Janveja, Richard Robben
New update alert! The 2022 update to the Trademark Assignment Dataset is now available online. Find 1.29 million trademark assignments, involving 2.28 million unique trademark properties issued by the USPTO between March 1952 and January 2023: https://t.co/njrDAbSpwBpic.twitter.com/GkAXrHoQ9T
_Mauritshuis_171.jpg)
