In theory, it is entirely possible to
design and construct a building made of totally independent
components. The separate pieces of such a building could be designed
in isolation, each part having an autonomous role to play.
Someone who proposes this idea may note
that a beam is a beam and a duct is a duct, after all, and there is
no need to confuse one for the other. For every function or role to
be performed in a building, there are a host of competing and
individualized products to choose from. As long as the final assembly
has already been worked out, the independent pieces can fulfill their
single-purpose roles simply by fitting in place and not interfering
with other pieces.
Most architects would quickly denounce
this isolationist approach to design. Where, they would ask, is the
harmony, the beauty, or even the practicality in such an absurdly
fragmented method? Surely there is some sympathy and order among the
parts that lead to a comprehensive whole?
Architects are, in fact, inherently
prone to take exactly the opposite approach: Starting with carefully
considered ideas about the complete and constructed building, they
would then explore inward, working through intricate relationships
between all the parts and functions. But how far does this concern
for relationships go, and how inclusive is the complete idea?
Equally important, what sort of
thinking is required to comprehend and resolve all the issues that
arise in the process? This is where the topic and discipline of
integration fits in—providing an explicit framework for selecting
and combining building components in purposeful and intentional ways.
Integration among the hardware
components of building systems is approached with three distinct
goals: Components have to share space, their arrangement has to be
aesthetically resolved, and at some level, they have to work together
or at least not defeat each other. These three goals are physical,
visual, and performance integration The following sections serve as
a brief overview of how these goals are attained.
PHYSICAL INTEGRATION
Building components have to fit. They
share space and volume in a building, and they connect in specific
ways. CAD drawing layers offer a useful way to think about how
complicated these networks of shared space and connected pieces can
become. Superimposing structure and HVAC (heating, ventilating, and
air-conditioning) layers provides an example: Are there problems
where large ducts pass under beams? Do the reflected ceiling plan and
furniture layouts put light fixtures where they belong?
Physical integration is fundamentally
about how components and systems share space, how they fit together.
In standard practice, for example, the floor-ceiling section of many
buildings is often subdivided into separate zones: recessed lighting
in the lowest zone, space for ducts next, and then a zone for the
depth of structure to support the floor above.
These segregated volumes prevent
“interference” between systems by providing adequate space for
each individually remote system. Meshing the systems together, say,
by running the ducts between light fixtures, requires careful
physical integration. Unifying the systems by using the ceiling
cavity as a return air plenum and extracting return air through the
light fixtures further compresses the depth of physical space
required. If the structure consists of open web joists, trusses, or a
space frame, then it is possible that all three systems may be
physically integrated into a single zone by carefully interspersing
ducts and light fixtures within the structure.
Connections between components and
among systems in general constitute another aspect of physical
integration. This is also where architectural details are generated.
The structural, thermal, and physical integrity of the joints between
different materials must be carefully considered. How they meet is
just as important as how they are separated in space.
VISUAL INTEGRATION
Exposed and formally expressive
components of a building combine to create its image. This is true of
the overall visual idea of the building as well as of the character
of rooms and of individual elements, down to the smallest details.
The manner in which components share in
a cumulative image is decided through acts of visual integration.
Color, size, shape, and placement are common factors that can be
manipulated in order to achieve the desired effect, so knowledge of
the various components’ visual character is essential to
integrating them.
Visual harmony among the many parts of
a building and their agreement with the intended visual effects of
design often provide some opportunities for combining technical
requirements with aesthetic goals. Light fixtures, air-conditioning,
plumbing fixtures, and a host of other elements are going to have a
presence in the building anyway.
Ignoring them or trying to cover them
with finishes or decoration is futile. Technical criteria and the
systems that satisfy those functional demands require large shares of
the resources that go into building. It follows that architects
should be able to select, configure, and deploy building elements in
ways that satisfy both visual and functional objectives.
PERFORMANCE INTEGRATION
If physical integration is “shared
space” and visual integration is “shared image,” then
performance integration must have something to dowith shared
functions. A load-bearing wall, for example, is both envelope and
structure, so it unifies two functions into one element by replacing
two columns, a beam, and the exterior wall. This approach can save
cost and reduce complexity if it is appropriate to the task at hand.
Performance integration is also served
by meshing or overlapping the functions of two components, even
without actually combining the pieces. This may be called “shared
mandates.” In a direct-gain passive solar heating system, for
example, the floor of the sunlit space is sharing in the thermal work
of the envelope and the mechanical heating system by providing
thermal storage in its massive heat capacity, which limits indoor
temperature swings from sunlit day to cold starry night. The
envelope, structure, interior, and services are integrated by the
shared thermal mandate of maintaining comfortable temperatures.
