DUNESIDE CLIMATE CENTRE
C
07.06 d e t a i l i n g j o i n t s .
JOINT
by
means
B JOINT CHOSEN JOINT A.2
design
for
dissassembly
JOINT C
CHOSEN A JOINT
JOINT B.1
CHOSEN
JOINT A.1
of
JOINT D.1
JOINT A JOINT B
JOINT D
JOINT B.2
JOINT D.2
JOINT
D
FIG. 65- Chosen structure
NUMBERS
CHOSEN
KEY
COLUMN
SCENARIO
1:
Type of wood: C30
Type of wood: C30
Cross section: 100x200mm
Cross section: 100x225mm
Load-carrying ratio: 0,40
Load-carrying ratio: 0,59
COLUMN
SCENARIO
2:
Type of wood: C30 Cross section: 63x125mm x2 JOINT A.3
JOINT C.1
Load-carrying ratio: 0,82
JOINT E.1
EXPRESSING DESIGN FOR DISSASSEMBLY THROUGH JOINTS
JOINT A.4
JOINT C.2
JOINT E.2
FIG. 64- Various joints
132
DESIGN PROCESS
BEAM:
Simultaneously with the joint studies, the load-bearing beams and columns was calculated with the aim to determine their dimensions. The full calculation can be found in appendix 09.01 and key numbers from the calculation are listed above. The calculation participated in an overall reflection of using only organic building materials down to timber dowels as opposed to metal screws in connections. It is important to note, that the calculations have not taken this into account, however a study argues that decreased stiffness using dowels should be expected, but not to an extent that would require a different calculation (Rumlová and Fojtík, 2015). Therefore, two types of column scenarios were tested, one prioritizing using as little material as possible with only one column, another prioritizing to not use
Buckling: Permanent loads: 1mm<42mm Variable loads: 23mm<26,25mm
any metal, however increasing the usage of material by having two columns on each side of the beam, acting as one column. Scenario one would visually require coherence between the width of beam and column which limits the choices in size of the column resulting in a rather low load carrying ratio and a column that is over dimensioned. On the contrary scenario two can be optimized to an optimal ratio, limiting the amount of unnecessary material. In extension, the area of the cross section of scenario two is smaller than in scenario one meaning that the amount of material is smaller despite having two columns compared to just one. Finally, the joint principle makes an only wood joint possible, following the initial vision to build using only organic materials.
DESIGN PROCESS
133
