Advertisement

Life Cycle Cost Assessment and the Optimum Design of Timber Roofs for Sustainable Construction

  • Kamil Krzywiński
  • Łukasz SadowskiEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Advanced Structured Materials book series (STRUCTMAT, volume 98)

Abstract

This paper describes the optimum design and life cycle cost (LCC) assessment of timber roofs for sustainable construction. For this purpose, collar beam roof construction in a typical single-family house was analyzed. Special focus was placed on the impact of the patch cross-section position for different rafter spacing. The calculations were performed for four roof angles (15°, 30°, 45°, 60°). The main goal was to find the optimum LCC for each angle. It was found that smaller rafter spacing generates a higher assembly cost and takes more time to construct. On the other hand, the wood cost for these elements is lower. The implications of LCC were evaluated to find out which patch and rafter cross-section, as well as rafter spacing for each roof angle is the most economical solution.

Keywords

Life cycle cost Collar beam roof Patch Rafter Optimum design Sustainable construction 

Nomenclature

Latin Upper Case Letters

\( A \)

Cross-sectional area \( \left( {{\text{m}}^{2} } \right), \)

\( E_{mean} \)

Mean value of modulus of elasticity \( \left( {\text{GPa}} \right), \)

\( E_{mean, fin} \)

Final mean value of modulus of elasticity \( \left( {\text{GPa}} \right), \)

\( F \)

Force \( \left( {\text{kN}} \right), \)

\( F_{d} \)

Design force \( \left( {\text{kN}} \right), \)

\( F_{x,Ed} \)

Design value of a force in capacity in x-direction \( \left( {\text{kN}} \right), \)

\( F_{y,Ed} \)

Design value of a force in capacity in y-direction \( \left( {\text{kN}} \right), \)

\( H \)

Overall rise of collar beam \( \left( {\text{m}} \right), \)

\( I_{y} \)

First moment of area about the strong axis \( \left( {{\text{m}}^{4} } \right), \)

\( I_{z} \)

Second moment of area about the weak axis \( \left( {{\text{m}}^{4} } \right), \)

\( L \)

Length \( \left( {\text{m}} \right), \)

\( M_{d} \)

Design moment \( \left( {\text{kNm}} \right), \)

\( M_{y} \)

Moment of y axis \( \left( {\text{kNm}} \right), \)

\( M_{z} \)

Moment of z axis \( \left( {\text{kNm}} \right), \)

\( N \)

Axial force \( \left( {\text{kN}} \right), \)

\( N_{c} \)

Compression force \( \left( {\text{kN}} \right), \)

\( P \)

Human force \( \left( {\text{kN}} \right), \)

\( V \)

Volume \( \left( {{\text{m}}^{3} } \right), \)

\( V_{t} \)

Shear force \( \left( {\text{kN}} \right), \)

\( W_{y} \)

Section modulus about axis y \( \left( {{\text{m}}^{3} } \right). \)

Latin Lower Case Letters

\( a \)

Distance \( \left( {\text{m}} \right), \)

\( b \)

Width \( \left( {\text{m}} \right), \)

\( f_{c,0,d} \)

Design compressive strength along the grain \( \left( {\text{MPa}} \right), \)

\( f_{c,w,d} \)

Design compressive strength of web \( \left( {\text{MPa}} \right), \)

\( f_{m,k} \)

Characteristic bending strength \( \left( {\text{MPa}} \right), \)

\( f_{m,y,d} \)

Design bending strength about principal y-axis \( \left( {\text{MPa}} \right), \)

\( f_{m,z,d} \)

Design bending strength about principal z-axis \( \left( {\text{MPa}} \right), \)

\( g \)

Weight load \( \left( {{\text{kN}}/{\text{m}}} \right), \)

\( h \)

Height of element; house height \( \left( {\text{m}} \right), \)

\( k_{crit} \)

Factor used for lateral buckling \( \left( - \right), \)

\( k_{m} \)

Factor considering re-distribution of bending stresses in a cross-section \( \left( - \right), \)

\( k_{mod} \)

Modification factor for duration of load and moisture content \( \left( - \right), \)

\( m \)

Mass per unit area \( \left( {{\text{kg}}/{\text{m}}^{2} } \right), \)

\( q_{p} \)

Peak velocity pressure \( \left( {{\text{kN}}/{\text{m}}^{2} } \right), \)

\( s \)

Snow load \( \left( {{\text{kN}}/{\text{m}}} \right), \)

\( s_{k} \)

Characteristic value of snow on the ground at the relevant site \( \left( {{\text{kN}}/{\text{m}}^{2} } \right), \)

\( u_{fin} \)

Final deformation \( \left( {\text{mm}} \right), \)

\( u_{inst} \)

Instantaneous deformation,

\( l_{eff} \)

Rafter spacing distance \( \left( {\text{m}} \right), \)

\( w \)

Wind load \( \left( {{\text{kN}}/{\text{m}}} \right). \)

Greek Lower Case Letters

\( \alpha \)

Angle between the direction of the load and the loaded edge; Angle between horizontal axis and rafter \( \left(^\circ \right), \)

\( \gamma_{M} \)

Partial factor for material properties, also accounting for model uncertainties and dimensional variations \( \left( - \right), \)

\( \sigma_{c,0,d} \)

Design compressive stress along the grain \( \left( {\text{MPa}} \right), \)

\( \sigma_{m,y,d} \)

Design bending stress about the principal y-axis \( \left( {\text{MPa}} \right), \)

\( \sigma_{m,z,d} \)

Design bending stress about the principal z-axis \( \left( {\text{MPa}} \right), \)

\( \tau_{d} \)

Design shear stress \( \left( {\text{MPa}} \right). \)

References

  1. 1.
    Barthelemy, J.F., Haftka, R.T.: Approximation concepts for optimum structural design—a review. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 5(3), 129–144 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bribián, I.Z., Capilla, A.V., Usón, A.A.: Life cycle assessment of building materials: Comparative analysis of energy and environmental impacts and evaluation of the eco-efficiency improvement potential. Build. Environ. 46(5), 1133–1140 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cabeza, L.F., Rincón, L., Vilariño, V., Pérez, G., Castell, A.: Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 29, 394–416 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chau, C.K., Leung, T.M., Ng, W.Y.: A review on life cycle assessment, life cycle energy assessment and life cycle carbon emissions assessment on buildings. Appl. Energy 143, 395–413 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    EN 1991-1-1:2002. Eurocode: 1 Actions on Structures. Part 1–1: General Actions—Densities, Self-Weight, Imposed Loads for Buildings, European StandardGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    EN 1991-1-3:2003. Eurocode: 1 Actions on Structures. Part 1–3: General Actions—Snow Loads, European StandardGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    EN 1991-1-4:2005+A1:2010. Eurocode: 1 Actions on Structures. Part 1–4: General Actions—Wind Actions, European StandardGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    EN 1995-1-1:2004+A1:2008. Eurocode 5: Design of Timber Structures. Part 1–1: General—Common Rules and Rules for Buildings, European StandardGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Evins, R.: A review of computational optimisation methods applied to sustainable building design. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 22, 230–245 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gluch, P., Baumann, H.: The life cycle costing (LCC) approach: a conceptual discussion of its usefulness for environmental decision-making. Build. Environ. 39(5), 571–580 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Islam, H., Jollands, M., Setunge, S., Ahmed, I., Haque, N.: Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost implications of wall assemblages designs. Energy Build. 84, 33–45 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Islam, H., Jollands, M., Setunge, S., Haqu, N., Bhuiyan, M.A.: Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost implications for roofing and floor designs in residential buildings. Energy Build. 104, 250–263 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    ISO, B.: 15686-5: 2017. Buildings and constructed assets. Service life planning. Life-cycle costing. BSI (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Khasreen, M.M., Banfill, P.F., Menzies, G.F.: Life-cycle assessment and the environmental impact of buildings: a review. Sustainability 1(3), 674–701 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Langston, C.: Life-cost approach to building evaluation, 2nd edn. University of New South Wales Press, NSW, Australia (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    McKenzie, W.M., Zhang, B.: Design of Structural Timber: To Eurocode 5, 2nd edn. Macmillan International Higher Education, Basingstoke, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mithraratne, N., Vale, B.: Life cycle analysis model for New Zealand houses. Build. Environ. 39(4), 483–492 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Noone, M.J., Woellner, W.C.: Roofing tile, roof and method of assembling. US Patent 6,178,703, Jan 30 2001 (1993)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mora, E.P.: Life cycle, sustainability and the transcendent quality of building materials. Build. Environ. 42(3), 1329–1334 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Porteous, J., Kermani, A.: Structural Timber Design to Eurocode 5, pp. 104–115. Blackwell, London (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Singh, A., Berghor, G., Joshi, S., Syal, M.: Review of life-cycle assessment applications in building construction. J. Archit. Eng. 17(1), 15–23 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sonmez, F.O.: Optimum design of composite structures: A literature survey (1969-2009). J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 36(1), 3–39 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Southerland, R., Canition, J.: Rafter assembly and fixtures. US Patent 4,335,555, 22 June 1982 (1980)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stalnaker, J., Harris, E.: Structural Design in Wood. Springer Science & Business Media, Dordrecht (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Statistics Poland—Główny Urząd Statystyczny, Warsaw. http://stat.gov.pl (2018). Accessed 5 May 2018
  26. 26.
    Worth, Z., Boyle, C., McDowall, R.: Combined life-cycle cost assessment of roof construction. Proc. Inst. Civil Eng.—Eng. Sustain. 160(4), 189–198 (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wrightman, R.: Roof construction. US Patent 7,581,358, 1 Sept 2009 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wroclaw University of Science and TechnologyWroclawPoland

Personalised recommendations