PDF | 8 MB - Australian Building Codes Board

BULLETIN 

AUSTRALIAN BUILDING REGULATION 

TECHNICAL SUPPORT FOR BUILDING CODE USERS 

SPRING 2010 

Energy Efficiency 

Provisions 

for Electricians 

and Plumbers 

2 0 1 0 

Handbook 

NON-MANDATORY DOCUMENT 

Performance Standard 

for Private Bushfire Shelters 

2 0 1 0 

PART 1 

BREAKING THROUGH THE BARRIERS TO URBAN DENSITY 

INDUSTRY DISCIPLINE FOR SOFTWARE SIMULATION 

AUSTRALIA’S FIRST ZERO-EMISSION HOME 

PREMISES STANDARDS SEMINARS

SPRING 2010 

CONTENTS 

The Australian Building Regulation Bulletin 

BULLETIN 

The Australian Building Regulation 

Bulletin (ABRB) 

The objective of the magazine is to provide 

industry with technically based information. 

The publisher reserves the right to alter or 

omit any article or advertisement submitted 

and requires indemnity from advertisers and 

contributors against damages or liabilities 

that may arise from material published. 

n Cover story 

12 Breaking Through The Barriers to Urban Density 

n Features 

EDITORIAL 

Publications Coordinator: 

Christian Rolfe 

ADVERTISING 

For advertising sales contact 

1300 134 631 

abcb.office@abcb.gov.au 

ARTWORK 

Typesetting and layout: 

Whalen Image Solutions 

CIRCULATION 

The ABRB has a national circulation 

amongst the building and construction 

industry reaching approximately 15,000 

subscribers and a readership 

of 45,000+. 

COPYRIGHT 

Material in the ABRB is protected under 

the Commonwealth Copyright Act 1968. 

No material may be reproduced in part 

or in whole without written consent 

from the Commonwealth and State 

and Territory Governments of Australia. 

Requests and inquiries concerning 

reproduction and rights should be 

addressed to: 

The General Manager 

Australian Building 

Codes Board 

GPO Box 9839 

Canberra ACT 2601 

A State Perspective 

10 Western Australia Building Commission 

Toward Smarter Building 

13 Green Stars All Round As Government Takes Up Green Building Agenda 

INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT 

15 Adequacy and Reliability Of Alternative Steel 

20 Toward Shock-Proof Infrastructure 

Energy Efficiency in The Built Environment 

22 Sustainable Window Alliance Releases New Findings – 

Glass Critical to Energy Efficiency 

Industry Perspective 

24 Industry Discipline for Software Simulation 

PRODUCT INNOVATION 

27 Doors Open on Australia’s First Zero-Emission Home 

28 Grocon’s Carbon Neutral Building 

30 Bosch Sets New Benchmark in Sustainable Water Heating 

n Regulars 

2 Chairman’s Address 

4 BCA and Industry News 

32 Conference & Events Calendar 

Disclaimer: The views in this 

magazine are not necessarily 

the views of the Australian 

Building Codes Board. 

Australian Building Regulation Bulletin 

• 1

ChAirmAn’S ADDreSS 

Mr Graham huxley AM 

Welcome to the Spring 2010 edition 

of the Australian Building Regulation 

Bulletin. 

In response to the 2009 Victorian 

Bushfires Royal Commission, ABCB has 

completed the development of a new 

national standard for the design and 

construction of bushfire shelters for 

personal use. The new performance 

standard has been released and is 

available for use by State and Territory 

regulators. The Bushfires Royal 

Commission has also released its final 

report and we are responding to the 

issues it has raised. 

The Building Ministers’ Forum (BMF) met 

early July to consider the ABCB annual 

business plan and several matters 

impacting on the building regulation 

reform agenda. BMF endorsed our 2010- 

11 business plan and were appraised 

of the considerable progress that has 

been made with the implementation of 

the National Construction Code reform, 

which incorporates on site plumbing 

requirements with the BCA. 

The Disability (Access to Premises – 

Buildings) Standards are expected to 

be introduced on 1 May 2011. They will 

lead to significant improvements in the 

level of access required in new buildings 

and existing buildings undergoing 

renovation. It is also anticipated that 

corresponding changes will be included 

in BCA 2011 at the same time. The ABCB 

is partnering with the Australian Human 

Rights Commission to deliver awareness 

seminars to all capital cities in August 

and September 2010. The seminars will 

provide industry, disability groups and 

other interested stakeholders with an 

overview of the Premises Standards and 

their effect when implemented. 

I encourage you to attend the Premises 

Standards Seminar Series commencing 

in August. Further information on the 

Seminars can be found in this edition, or 

on our website at www.abcb.gov.au 

Graham Huxley AM 

Chairman 

2 • Australian Building Regulation Bulletin

The tightest jams are no match for the unbreakable HiLux. It’s the hardest, most resilient ute there is, 

with earth-shattering power and handling that’ll help get you in and out of any nook or cranny. There’s 

heaps of room in the tray for your surfboard or motorbike and the crash-absorbing front chassis 

is mega strong. Own the legend, and you might just have a few legendary journeys of your own.

BCA & INDUSTRY NEWS 

Premises Standards Seminars 

An essential seminar on access 

changes in public buildings 

The Disability (Access to Premises 

– Buildings) Standards (Premises 

Standards) are due to come into force on 

1 May 2011. They will lead to significant 

improvements in the level of access 

required in new buildings and existing 

buildings undergoing renovation. It is 

also anticipated that corresponding 

changes will be made to the Building 

Code of Australia at the same time. 

This half day seminar will provide 

designers, builders, building owners, 

managers, access consultants, advocates 

and professionals in the building 

approvals area with an overview of the 

Premises Standards and their effect 

when they come into force. 

The seminar will also be an opportunity 

for participants to discuss questions 

of interpretation and contribute to the 

development of further resources. 

The seminar will cover: 

• The objectives behind the Premises 

Standards 

• Who is responsible for complying 

with the Premises Standards 

• Main features of the Premises 

Standards including exceptions and 

concessions 


• Areas of buildings and levels of access 

required. 

The seminar will be presented by the 

Australian Human Rights Commission 

and the Australian Building Codes Board. 

Both presenters have been closely 

involved in the development of the 

Premises Standards. 

Seminars location and cost: The 

Seminars will cost $100 for online 

registration and $115 for other forms 

of registration and will take place in 

all capital cities. For details see the 

registration form. Please note that 

dress codes may apply at some venues. 

Information about parking at and public 

transport to the venues will be included 

with the registration confirmation or 

visit the venue website. 

Seminar times: Sessions begin at 

9.30am and conclude at 1.00pm in all 

locations. The registration fee includes 

morning tea. On the day – registration 

and receipt of handouts commences at 

8:45am. 

Access requirements: All the venues 

are wheelchair accessible. If you want 

to register and have other access 

requirements in order to participate 

in the seminar, such as hearing loop 

requirements or sign language 

Location Date Venue Street 

Brisbane Option 1 12 August Rooms P1 + P2 

Brisbane Option 2 13 August 

Brisbane Convention & Exhibition Centre 

Canberra 17 August Swan Torrens Room 

National Convention Centre 

Sydney Option 1 24 August Banquet Hall 

Sydney Option 2 25 August 

Sydney Masonic Centre 

Darwin 27 August Meeting Rooms 3 + 4 

Darwin Convention Centre 

Perth Option 1 30 August Meeting Rooms 1 + 2 

Perth Option 2 

31 August 

Perth Convention Exhibition Centre 

Adelaide 2 September Riverbank Rooms 1 + 2 

Adelaide Convention Centre 

Melbourne Option 1 6 September Meeting Room 109 

Melbourne Option 2 7 September 

Melbourne Convention Exhibition Centre 

Hobart 9 September Auditorium 

Baha’i Centre of Learning 

requirements please ensure you record 

this on the registration form. 

Attendance certificates: Attendance 

certificates will only be available at 

the end of the seminar for delegates 

that have pre-registered and checked 

in upon arrival. Delegates that have 

not pre-registered will receive their 

certificate by email after the seminar 

series is completed. 

CPD points: The 

seminar qualifies 

for 3 CPD points 

for members of 

the Australian 

Institute of Building Surveyors, the Royal 

Institution of Chartered Surveyors, the 

Australian Institute of Architects and 

other accredited schemes. 

Registration: It is anticipated that 

demand for the seminars will be high so 

early registration is recommended. 

To register online go to https://www. 

secureregistrations.com/PSAS10/ 

Premises Standards seminar 

registrations Details on this form 

were correct at the time of printing. The 

Seminar organisers retain the right to alter 

any or all of the Seminar details. 

Merivale Street 

South Brisbane Qld 4101 

31 Constitution Avenue 

Canberra ACT 2601 

66 Goulburn Street 

Sydney NSW 2000 

Stokes Hill Road 

Darwin NT 0800 

21 Mounts Bay Road 

Perth WA 6000 

North Terrace 

Adelaide SA 5000 

1 Convention Centre Place 

South Wharf Melbourne Vic 3000 

1 Tasman Highway 

Hobart Tas 7000 


electricians_plumbers.indd 1-2 

27/7/10 8:19:44 AM 

neW ABCB hAnDBook For energY eFFiCienCY ProviSionS For 

eleCTriCiAnS AnD PlUmBerS 

The Building Code of Australia (BCA) 

has, for some time, contained many 

provisions that need to be complied 

with by designers and installers 

including electricians and plumbers. 

Most of the earlier provisions have 

been in place for many years and 

so practitioners are aware of the 

requirements. However, since 2003, 

the BCA has contained new energy 

efficiency provisions relating to 

electrical and plumbing work. In 

addition some of these provisions 

changed in successive years with BCA 

2010 introducing major changes. 

The electrical and plumbing provisions 

are for both residential and commercial 

buildings and so are contained in both 

Volume One and Volume Two of the 

BCA. 

As the electrical and plumbing 

industries are more directly regulated 

by their own legislation, the ABCB 

saw a need for a Handbook to inform 

electricians and plumbers about the 

energy efficiency provisions of the BCA 

and how these provisions may affect 

them. 

Aspects of particular concern to 

electricians that the Handbook covers 

include- 

• The amount of insulation on a ceiling, 

usually over electrical wiring 

• Implication for insulation when 

installing downlights 

• Switching and controls for lighting, 

fans, garage exhaust systems, pumps, 

space heaters, swimming pool 

heaters, and boiling and chilling 

water appliances 

• The maximum power capacity of 

lights, fans, pumps and other airconditioning 

plant 

• Energy monitoring and metering 

facilities 

• Restrictions on the use of electric 

heaters 

• Specifications for a range of control 

gear 

Depending upon the scope for 

plumbers in the particular State or 

Territory, aspects of particular concern 

to plumbers that the Handbook covers 

include- 

• The insulation and installation of 

ductwork 


heating water and cooling piping 


supply hot water piping (through AS/ 

NZS 3500) 

• The maximum power capacity of fans 

and pumps which has an impact on 

duct and pipe sizes 

• Restrictions on the use of electric 

supply water heaters and pool 

heaters 

• The use of solar heaters for domestic 

pools 

The Handbook is written in generic 

terms rather than specific clauses and 

so does not include all the requirements 

that may affect electricians and 

plumbers. It is also limited to those 

requirements that only address energy 

efficiency. The content of the Handbook 

addresses the national provisions of the 

BCA and does not include comments on 

individual State or Territory variations or 

additions. 

Other BCA requirements that may affect 

electricians and plumbers that are not 

covered in this Handbook, include- 

• Fire separation and construction 

of substations, conductors, 

switchboards and emergency 

equipment 

• Hearing augmentation systems and 

the location of lighting switches for 

people with disabilities 

• Fire fighting equipment including 

pumping systems, alarms, sprinkler 

systems, fire-control centres, fireservice 

controls, fire and smoke 

detection and warning systems, 

smoke exhaust systems, emergency 

lighting, exit and direction lighting 

and emergency warning and 

intercommunication systems 

• Lift installations 

• Artificial lighting for safe movement 

• Mechanical ventilation for health 

including Legionella control 

• Stormwater drainage 

• Provision of floor wastes 

• Construction of sanitary and other 

facilities 

• Water-proofing 

The Handbook is not intended to 

override or replace any legal rights, 

responsibilities or requirements or 

provide users with the specifics of the 

BCA. This Handbook is only intended to 

make users aware of provisions that may 

affect them, not exactly what is required 

by those provisions. If users determine 

that a provision may apply to them, the 

BCA should be read to determine the 

specifics of the provision. 

This Handbook, and another to assist 

designers and modellers with Section 

J Alternative Solutions, should be 

available later this year. 

Energy Efficiency 

Provisions 

for Electricians 

and Plumbers 

2 0 1 0 

Handbook 

NON-MANDATORY DOCUMENT 

BCA + INDUSTRY iNDUSTRY NEWS 


• 5

3576_bushfire_shelter_cvr_v4.indd 1-2 

23/4/10 11:47:17 AM 


NEW NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE BUSHFIRE SHELTERS 

From the Minister for Planning 

The new national performance standard 

for private bushfire shelters is now in 

effect in Victoria, Planning Minister 

Justin Madden announced in May of this 

year. 

Mr Madden said the Victorian 

Government had supported the 

recommendations from the 2009 

Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission 

Interim Report 2 Priorities for Building 

in Bushfire Prone Areas that a national 

standard for private bushfire shelters be 

adopted by May 31 2010. 

“Private bushfire shelters cannot be 

guaranteed to save lives and the safest 

option is still to leave early,” Mr Madden 

said. 

“After the fires of February 7, 2009 our 

Government took action to establish 

an interim regulation and accreditation 

process for private bushfire shelters to 

provide clarity to Victorians ahead of the 

national standards. 

“Private bushfire shelters should only be 

considered as an option of last resort. 

People considering a private bushfire 

shelter should do so only as part or 

their overall bushfire management plan 

rather than the solution.” 

Mr Madden said the new national 

regulations replace interim regulations 

introduced in Victoria last year and 

amend the Building Regulations 2006 

to classify private bushfire shelters as 

a class 10c building under the BCA as 

applied in Victoria. 

“The Australian Building Codes Board 

(ABCB) has now completed the national 

standard, which I understand is the first 

such standard in the world,” Mr Madden 

said. 

“Through the Building Commission, 

Victoria has been working closely with 

the ABCB on the development of the 

national standard to ensure a smooth 

transition from our current interim 

regulations for construction of private 

bushfire shelters.” 

Mr Madden said the national standard 

determined that private bushfire 

shelters were required to be a separate 

construction and no longer could be 

included as part of a building. 

“The national standard did consider 

the merits of bushfire shelters below or 

within a building but concluded the risks 

of these sorts of shelters in the event of 

a bushfire are too great,” he said. 

“This means private bushfire shelters 

must now be a separate building and 

not part of a dwelling. 

“A building permit for a private bushfire 

shelter will be required as well as from 

a fire safety engineer that the shelter 

complies with the requirements as 

set out in the national performance 

standard.” 

Victorian Building Commissioner and 

board member of the ABCB Tony Arnel 

said adoption of the national standard 

represented an important step for the 

Victorian community. 

“I am certain the building industry 

stands ready to meet the challenge of 

delivering private bushfire shelters that 

will provide greater protection from 

bushfires in the future,” Mr Arnel said. 

The national interim regulations will 

be in place for 12 months pending a 

decision by the ABCB to adopt them 

into the 2011 Building Code of Australia, 

which would be adopted nationally on 

May 1, 2011. 

A copy of the performance standard is 

available free of charge on the ABCB’s 

website at www.abcb.gov.au 

For more information on being Fire 

Ready visit www.cfa.vic.gov.au. Further 

information on the new interim national 

regulations is available at 

http://www.buildingcommission.com.au 

Performance Standard 

for Private Bushfire Shelters 

2 0 1 0 

PART 1 


AUSTRALIAN BUILDING CODES BOARD 

2011 CADETSHIP 

Be part of the team working to support a safer, more 

sustainable and more socially inclusive built environment. 

The ABCB is a joint initiative of all three levels of Government in Australia and provides a vital link 

between the building industry and Government regulatory policy, through producing and maintaining 

the Building Code of Australia (BCA). Our mission is to oversee issues relating to health, safety, 

amenity and sustainability in the design and construction of buildings. 

Whether you are still studying or about to graduate, you could spend 12 months with us, in our 

Canberra office, earning a salary and acquiring the knowledge that could kick start your career in 

either government or the private sector. We are looking for motivated and adaptable applicants 

with good teamwork and communication skills and strong capabilities in research and analysis. 

Working knowledge or familiarity with the BCA is desirable. So, if you are studying or have 

completed studies in the following disciplines: 

 

 

 

 

then the ABCB Cadetship could be for you! 

APPLICATIONS CLOSE 15 SEPTEMBER 2010. 

We offer Cadets: 

* Relocation assistance if you’re moving from interstate to Canberra 

* A competitive salary of approx $50,000 + superannuation 

* Ongoing professional development opportunities 

* Flexible working conditions 

Interested? Then contact: 

Rebecca Hanrahan on 02 6276 1854 or email: Rebecca.Hanrahan@abcb.gov.au 

Visit the ABCB website at: www.abcb.gov.au 

HELPING TO BUILD YOUR FUTURE


ABCB Board Member Perspective 

Interview with Robin Fardoulys, ABCB Board Member 

Background 

The make-up of the Australian Building 

Codes Board includes a representative 

from all Federal, State and Territory 

Governments, together with five (5) 

building industry representatives, 

and one (1) Local Government 

representative. The position of chair 

is reserved for one of the industry 

representatives. 

Robin Fardoulys, Chairman of the 

Australian Construction Industry Forum 

(ACIF) is an industry representative who 

has recently been appointed to the 

Board and he provides an insight into 

his background, some of the industry– 

driven objectives within ACIF and his 

role as ABCB Board member. 

Robin Fardoulys 

I was born in Brisbane and educated at 

“Churchie” (Anglican Church Grammar 

School 1971-1977). 

My wife and I have three daughters and 

a son. My eldest daughter is a television 

journalist, the two other daughters are 

uni students and my son is at “Churchie”. 

My wife is a university science faculty 

lecturer. 

I joined my father’s construction 

business as a Construction Manager 

in 1981 after completing a Bachelor of 

Applied Science - Built Environment 

Degree and a Graduate Diploma in 

Building at the Queensland Institute of 

Technology (QIT). 

During my university holidays I worked 

on the sites labouring. It was a good 

income for a university student and 

it also exposed me to work methods, 

safety awareness processes, and just 

how physically hard trade work is. 

After graduating I undertook the 

construction of roadhouses for Mobil 

Oil in South East and South West 

Queensland. These were followed by 

roadhouses throughout Queensland for 

other Oil company brands including BP, 

Shell, Ampol and Caltex. Other projects 

included telephone exchanges, Defence 

Dept facilities at Amberley Air Force Base 

and Enoggera Army Base, Queensland 

State Government health, education 

and emergency services facilities, 

private sector schools, new works 

and refurbishments for the Hotel and 

Club industry, new Aged Care facilities 

and Child Care facilities as well as 

warehouses and commercial buildings. 

Since its commencement in 1976, 

Fardoulys Constructions has progressed 

into a prosperous and distinguished 

building and development practice. 

I believe that broad experience is 

important for everyone and I talk to my 

staff constantly about “growing” in their 

job and their personal development and 

career path, and involvement in industry 

groups is an important component of 

that growth. 

I have been fortunate to serve as the 

National President of the Australian 

Institute of Building, a member of 

the Queensland Master Builder’s 

Association’s Contracts Committee and 

appointed an Adjunct Professor in the 

School of Urban Development – Faculty 

of Built Environment and Engineering 

at the Queensland University of 

Technology (QUT). My role as Chair 

of the ACIF and the appointment as 

Industry Representative to the ABCB 

is a pleasing aspect of service to the 

industry. 

ACIF was established to provide 

leadership and facilitate change within 

the industry, and to promote discussion 

on productivity, efficiency, research 

and innovation. Membership is by way 

of member Associations, ranging from 

the Property Council, and Electrical 

and Air Conditioning associations, to 

other subcontractor organisations 

such as Fire Protection and Precast 

Contractor associations, along with 

design profession organisations such 

as Architect, Engineer and Building 

professional groups. 

As well as facilitating communication 

between the different interests that 

make up the construction sector, ACIF 

provides governments and other 

agencies with a central and efficient 

Robin Fardoulys 

industry liaison point. ACIF’s flagship 

Construction Forecasting Council 

produces the most reliable forecasts of 

activity in residential and non-residential 

building, and engineering construction, 

twice yearly. 

In my capacity as ACIF Chair, I am 

keen to react to the 2003 Cole Royal 

Commission findings that the Australian 

building and construction industry 

was underachieving and considerable 

improvements in quality and efficiency 

should be made. ACIF and the APCC 

have identified five critical areas of 

performance which deserve monitoring 

and improvement – health and safety, 

productivity and competitiveness, 

economic security, skills and training, 

and environmental sustainability. 

Of these identified areas of focus, as a 

builder I am strong on initiatives that 

involve the securing of adequate skill 

resources. ACIF is currently seeking 

both government and industry 

financial assistance to initiate a Skills 

Forecasting Council as a component 

of ACIF’s workforce capability focus. 

Tomorrow’s trade and professional 

skill requirements need to be forecast, 

so the output and curriculum of trade 


colleges, and university design and 

building professions degree courses are 

compatible with the future demands. 

Construction education programs need 

meaningful industry input to meet 

present and future workforce demands, 

and this issue is of great interest to me. 

There is a common view that many of 

the future jobs or careers for our young 

people have not yet been invented or 

exist. This is probably very true for the 

construction industry, not so much 

because of what we build, but more so 

about how we build, and the materials 

and methods to be used. 

A recent report into construction 

education in Australia reported that 

the construction academic workforce 

is aging and not being replenished 

sufficiently. The university and 

construction sectors need to work 

together to encourage graduates with 

today’s skill sets to enter academia. 

The Australian Institute of 

Building has established 

a College of Building 

to enable building 

professionals to “top up” 

their knowledge. 

Our future cities and 

communities will rely on 

technology to educate, 

design and drive economic 

and environmental 

initiatives such as metrics 

for building outputs, high 

energy efficiency designs 

and water conservation. 

Concepts such as Virtual 

Digital Modelling (also 

known as Digital Modelling 

or Building Information 

Modelling), which demands 

entire, complete and 

inter-related information 

management, will avoid 

inefficient and fragmented 

information gaps in 

documentation and design 

delivery, and will be more 

common in the near 

future. Clients, design team 

members and building 

contractors are joining as 

teams to deliver efficiency 

in design with an outcome 

of better time, cost and 

quality responses. 

Changes to concepts of project initiation 

and subsequent delivery are rapidly 

evolving. The challenge for the industry 

is to handle the mixture of finance, skills 

availability, urban design concepts, 

population growth, sustainability, 

affordability and regulatory 

requirements to deliver better outcomes 

for the industry, the community and the 

environment as a whole. 

My focus at the ABCB is not to 

necessarily influence technical matters, 

but to contribute to the practical 

implementation of the BCA. For 

example, the Board in recent times 

has done substantial work on bushfire 

shelters. I am a strong advocate for 

educating the general population who 

live in these bushfire-prone areas, as 

well as the industry practitioners who 

design, build or certify in those areas. 

The technical outcome as adopted 

needs to be a part of the knowledge and 

skill set of those living and working in 

those areas. As I mentioned earlier the 

skill and training of any Board initiative 

or update to the BCA has various 

avenues of adoption and understanding, 

and I believe that bushfire structure 

design or construction, is probably a 

whole new area of speciality, if not a 

whole new career path. 

The same is true of many or all of the 

numerous and constant changes to the 

BCA. The Board is educating the industry 

and it’s also up to the community and 

the industry participants to embrace 

the concept of change as brought on 

by the Board, and actively contribute 

towards its evolution in development, 

implementation and practice. 


• 9

A STATe PerSPeCTive 

WeSTern AUSTrAliA 

BUilDing CommiSSion 

The Building Commission was 

established in July 2009 to drive 

reforms associated with building 

related matters for the benefit 

of industry, consumers and the 

community. 

A Division of the Department of 

Commerce, it is made up of the Builder’s 

& Painter’s Registration Boards, the 

Plumber’s Licensing Board and the 

Building Industry Development 

directorate from the Department of 

Housing & Works. In combining these 

entities, the Government has generated 

efficiencies in the delivery of its services 

and will improve the framework industry 

operates within. 

The Commission runs a suite of reforms 

associated with building control, 

complaint resolution, practitioner 

registration and necessary auditing 

programs. It is to undertake an 

extensive implementation program of 

these reforms as its underlying role is 

to provide education and training for 

building related matters. 

The Commission provides information 

and advice to industry and the 

community on the development of 

building reforms, regulations, codes and 

standards. 

Reform of WA’s 

Building Laws 

Western Australia is in the final stages of 

drafting the most significant reforms to 

the laws governing the building industry 

in this State for over 7 decades. The 

reforms will: 

• streamline the building approval 

process by providing for private 

sector certification of compliance 

with building standards and to 

provide greater flexibility and 

certainty in the issue of building 

permits; 

• improve building standards through 

the mandatory inspection and 

certification of completed buildings; 

• replace the Builders’ Registration Act 

1939 and the Painters’ Registration 

Act 1961 with a modern and flexible 

scheme for regulating builders, 

painters and building surveyors; 

• introduce a new and improved 

dispute handling process with the 

Building Commission dealing with 

complaints at the front end and the 

State Administrative Tribunal dealing 

with intractable disputes, thereby 

abolishing the Building Disputes 

Tribunal; 

• provide for a new owner-builder 

approval process with improved 

controls; 

• create the position of Building 

Commissioner as a statutory office 

holder within the Department 

of Commerce, with improved 

compliance powers; and 

• replace the Builders’ Registration 

Board and the Painters’ Registration 

Board with a Building Services Board 

The Government intends to introduce 

the reforms into Parliament in the 

second half of this year. The new laws 

are expected to commence some time 

in the first half of 2011. 

The Building Commission is located 

at Level 1 31 Troode Street West Perth 

Western Australia – Telephone 1300 489 

099, email info@buildingcommission. 

wa.gov.au and website www. 

buildingcommission.wa.gov.au 


A STATE PERSPECTIVE 

If you think the one in 

two who gets cancer 

is one too many... 

...then please, buy a 

daffodil for Daffodil Day. 

Friday 27 August www.daffodilday.com.au 

*1 IN 2 PEOPLE WILL BE DIAGNOSED WITH CANCER BY AGE 85 


• 11

COVER STORY 

Breaking through 

the barriers to 

urban density 

Romilly Madew 

Written by Romilly Madew, Chief Executive, Green Building Council of Australia 

Our cities are in transition. The 

frameworks of the past are no 

longer working and we are 

facing a future of environmental 

destruction, climate change, 

pollution, traffic gridlock, 

declining health, rising obesity 

and worsening standards of 

living. 

That’s the picture painted at the recent 

Built Environment Meets Parliament 

Summit (BEMP) in Canberra. 

KPMG’s Spotlight on Australian Cities 

report, released in conjunction with 

BEMP clearly pointed to federal and 

state planning systems that cannot 

cope. If that’s the case, how will they 

function with a population of 35 million? 

A selection of speakers was asked to 

provide their ‘breakthrough strategies’ 

for a big Australia. 

And guess what? 

Their visions are 

overwhelmingly 

optimistic. The 

auditorium full 

of property and 

construction 

professionals, 

policy makers 

and politicians 

were clearly 

inspired by the 

possibilities for 

Australia’s future. 

It’s clear 

that we can 

address traffic 

congestion, rising 

greenhouse 

gas emissions, the obesity epidemic, 

social isolation and climate change by 

changing the way we live, work and play 

in our cities. 

Rather than lowering our standard of 

living, higher levels of urban density can 

deliver more liveable cities. What we 

must do is to take the community on the 

journey with us, and demonstrate clearly 

the benefits of urban density to both 

Australia’s natural environment and its 

people. 

Many people are already recognising 

the value of sustainable, higher density 

environments to their quality of life. 

Apartments are outselling houses in a 

number of Australian cities as demand 

for smaller and more affordable housing 

transforms the real-estate market. The 

West Australian reported last week that 

almost half the apartments at Australia’s 

first Green Star residential building, The 

Summer in South Fremantle, have been 

sold off the plan. 

“We had no idea just how significant 

sustainable living is to the lives of many 

people and we are definitely looking 

to increase the bar on all our future 

projects,” Lloyd Clark, the Managing 

Director of developer Match told The 

West Australian. 

While the future residents of Match 

won’t have access to the traditional 

quarter acre block, what they will have 

is open-plan apartments with large 

balconies, high ceilings, energy efficient 

appliances and good passive design 

features. 

That doesn’t mean that the Great 

Australian Dream of a house and land 

package is dead. But the BEMP Summit 

did foreshadow a future where there 

will be more choice for people who are 

prepared to forgo the garden and sell 

the car in exchange for a home closer 

to work, entertainment precincts and 

parks. 


Towards smarTer building 

Green stars all round as 

government takes up green 

building 

agenda 

After a slow start, all levels of 

government around Australia 

have taken up the green building 

agenda, a new study by the Green 

Building Council of Australia 

(GBCA) has found. 

The GBCA’s 2010 update to the Green 

Guide to Government Policy has found 

that all levels of government now 

have programs and policies to support 

sustainable building. 

“When we conducted our first 

comparative study of governments’ 

policies on energy efficiency in 

buildings in 2007, many jurisdictions did 

not have comprehensive or cohesive 

policies,” says GBCA Chief Executive, 

Romilly Madew. 

“Indeed, we found that it was not 

uncommon for one agency to be 

unaware of another’s activities, 

despite the potential for collaboration 

to improve both the efficiency and 

effectiveness of both agencies’ 

programs. 

“In the past two years, most jurisdictions 

have developed well-defined policies 

that guide whole-of-government 

strategies to encourage sustainable 

building, covering efficient use of 

energy, water and materials,” Ms Madew 

says. 

The Australian Government’s National 

Strategy on Energy Efficiency (NSEE), 

the first nationally consistent roadmap 

to reduce the carbon footprint of 

businesses and households across 

Australia, places a strong emphasis on 

the role of buildings in climate change 

mitigation. 

“State governments are also recognising 

the importance of strong leadership in 

the area of sustainable building, and 

have ‘put their houses in order’ in the 

last two years to demonstrate how to 

capture the benefits of sustainable 

buildings,” Ms Madew adds. 

Policy frameworks specific to green 

building include: 

• FEDERAL: Energy Efficiency in 

Government Operations (2006) aims 

to improve energy efficiency, and 

consequently reduce the whole of 

life cost and environmental impact 

of government operations, including 

the buildings it owns and leases. 

• NSW: The NSW Government 

Sustainability Policy (2008) commits 

to state government operations 

and activities being carbon-neutral 

by 2020. The policy includes statewide 

targets 

for government 

buildings: 

to return to 

greenhouse 

gas emissions 

from building 

energy use to 

2000 levels of 1.5 

million tonnes by 

2019-2020, with 

interim targets 

of 1.74 million 

tonnes by 2016- 

2017. 

• QLD: Cleaner Greener Buildings lifts 

the environmental standards for all 

new homes, offices and government 

buildings in Queensland. Among the 

key requirements is electricity submetering 

in new office buildings and 

multi unit dwellings, giving tenants 

an incentive to reduce their power 

bills. 

• VIC: The Greener Government 

Buildings Program allocates $60 

million to upgrade government 

office buildings, schools, hospitals 

and community buildings to reduce 

greenhouse gas emissions, energy 

costs and water use. By 2018, 

sites accounting for 90 per cent 

of the Government’s total energy 

consumption will undertake Greener 

Government Buildings projects. 

The Program is the first key action 

under Jobs for the Future Economy, 

a new strategy to facilitate green 

investment across the Victorian 

economy. 


• 13

ToWArDS SmArTer BUilDing 

• SA: Tackling Climate Change includes 

a Government Action Plan which 

guides the activities of government 

agencies to meet SA’s commitment 

to achieve the Kyoto emissions 

reduction target for 2008-2012. A key 

measure is to improve the energy 

efficiency of government buildings 

by 25 per cent on 2000/2001 levels by 

2014. 

• WA: The Energy Smart Government 

policy requires government agencies 

to report their total energy costs, 

consumption, greenhouse gas 

emissions and key performance 

indicator data each year. The policy 

covers all stationary energy used in 

buildings, plant and equipment in 

public sector agencies with 25 or 

more staff. 

• ACT: A priority action under Action 

Plan 1 of Weathering the Change 

(2007-2011) is to pursue carbon 

neutrality in ACT Government 

buildings (including schools, 

hospitals, shopfronts and other 

government facilities). Agencies are 

required to undertake projects to 

offset their remaining emissions, as 

well as report annually. 

• NT: The Energy Smart Building Policy 

sets a 10 per cent energy intensity 

and greenhouse gas reduction 

targets for all Northern Territory 

Government agencies by 2010-11. 

This target is set against a baseline 

established in 2004-05. 

On the local government front, the 

study examined the policies and 

programs of five major cities: Brisbane, 

Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and 

Perth. All the city councils have policies 

in place to reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions from council buildings. 

“Buildings represent both the largest 

single source of greenhouse emissions 

We help builders succeed in business and the best with opportunity 24/7 access to reduce to free 

continuing professional development. emissions, while sustaining economic 

growth. That’s why governments at 

all levels are starting to offer a range 

of incentives and support programs 

to encourage awareness of the 

opportunities to reduce emissions at low 

cost and with fast paybacks,” Ms Madew 

concludes. 

ABOUT ThE GREEN GUIDE FOR 

GOVERNMENT POLICY 

The Green Guide to Government Policy 

is available to subscribers and covers 

green building policies, incentives and 

subsidies across all federal, state and 

capital cities in Australia. The website is 

an invaluable resource for any business 

looking to maximise support and 

funding for its green building initiatives, 

and for governments looking for 

comparative analysis. 

Further information can be found at 

http://www.gbca.org.au 

The ultimate professional 

development tool 

We help builders succeed in business with 24/7 access to free continuing professional development 

No cost 

Listen on your way to work 

Earn CPD points 

Easy to use & time efficient 

Broadcast Builder Audio is a free radio-style program for the home building industry that 

connects you with leading experts when and where you choose. 

Listen to our interviews and learn about changes to codes and regulations, innovations and 

solutions to common building and business dilemmas. 

L icensed to build homes in NSW, Victoria or Tasmania? Do our online quiz and earn 1 CPD point per edition. 

Subscribe Now 

www.broadcastbuilder.com.au 

info@broadcastbuilder.com.au 

1300 635 909 

1300 635 909 

1300 6 

1300 635 909 

1300 635 909 


INTERNATIONAL Regulatory Development 

ADEQUACY AND RELIABILITY 

OF ALTERNATIVE STEEL 

Written by Thanabal Kaliannan, Building Engineering Division, Building and 

Construction Authority of Singapore 

Thanabal Kaliannan 

BACKGROUND 

Singapore’s building and construction 

industry has witnessed a huge surge 

in demand since 2006. However, a 

shortage of manpower, coupled with 

an overdependence on sand and 

granite for concrete construction has 

signalled an urgent need to enhance the 

sustainability of this industry. Promoting 

steel construction has been one key 

measure to cope with this. 

Steel construction’s potential of offering 

fast-track solutions for early return of 

capital investments and significantly 

reducing the manpower requirement 

has long been recognized. However, it 

has failed to gain widespread popularity 

locally and it is often used only where 

there are no viable alternatives such 

as long-span roof and super high-rise 

building frame construction. There 

may be a number of reasons for this. 

From the material point of view, there 

are issues involving cost and quality as 

well as technical ones. There seems to 

be a longstanding trade-off between 

cost and quality – steel materials 

manufactured in more developed 

Western countries are notorious for their 

price while those from the developing 

countries within this region, on the other 

hand, are often reportedly for a lack of 

proper production control and quality 

assurance. From a technical perspective, 

the BS5950 design code only provides 

guidance and design parameters for 

steel materials manufactured to their 

national standards, in this case, it would 

be the British Standards (BS or BS EN) 

and this has seriously narrowed down 

the choices of steel materials which can 

be sourced from the region. 

To address some of these issues 

and to promote wider use of steel 

in construction, the Building and 

Construction Authority (BCA) of 

Singapore released a new design guide, 

BC1: 2008 in April 2008 on the use of 

alternative steel materials to design 

building structural steelworks to BS5950 

in Singapore. The use of alternative 

steel materials, other than BS and BS 

EN is now permitted; offering more 

material sourcing options in the hope 

that this will achieve greater economy 

and affordability. However, in opening 

up the sources and allowing different 

steel grades which are manufactured to 

a wide variety of material standards to 

be used, it is also important that quality 

and safety are not compromised. In this 

connection, it is imperative for BCA to 

put in place proper design requirements 

and framework within BC1 to ensure 

that the alternative steel that are used 

in the industry is adequate and reliable 

for various structural applications. It is 

also an opportunity to impose uniform 

requirements and provide a level 

playing field for all steel, regardless 

of where it comes from and including 

those manufactured to the BS or BS EN 

material standards. 

Essentially, BC1 provides a design 

framework to guide engineers and 

designers to classify steel materials into 

three different classes. This classification 

approach comprises mainly the 

adequacy and reliability assessments. 

Consequently, by classifying the steel, 

it will determine whether or not the 

materials concerned are fit for design to 

BS5950, with or without restriction and 

accordingly, appropriate prescriptive 

design recommendations and values are 

given. 

ADEQUACY OF STEEL MATERIALS 

The two major concerns over the use 

of steel materials are their adequacy 

and reliability. Adequacy refers to the 

ability of steel materials to meet the 

material performance requirements 

which are the essential requirements 

for the mechanical, physical, chemical, 

dimensional tolerances and/or other 

relevant properties of steel materials. In 

BC1, the material performance indicators 

are derived, with reasonable and 

appropriate adjustments, based on the 

relevant clauses given in several parts of 

BS5950. 

In reality, the need to impose 

requirements on mechanical properties 

such as yield strength, tensile strength, 

ductility and toughness on the steel 

requires little explanation as these are 

the obvious performance indicators 

from the structural perspectives. 

However it is worth mentioning 

that BC1 has also listed additional 

requirements on carbon content, 

carbon equivalent value (CEV), impact 

value, impurities level (sulphur and 

phosphorus), manufacturing process 

and manufacturing tolerances to ensure 

optimal structural performance. Carbon 

equivalent value (CEV) is an empirical 

measure of hardening tendency 

of heat-affected zone (HAZ) which 

promotes crack formation. It is also a 

significant indicator of the weldability 

of steel products. Since steelmaking 

is based on recycling of scrapped 

steel over many times, the level of 

non-metallic impurities, especially 

sulphur and phosphorous, need to 

be observed as they are the source of 

brittleness in structural steel which 

may lead to lamellar tearing and low 


• 15


Factory Production 

Control System 

formability. Metallurgical behaviour and 

performance of steel materials are also 

highly dependent on the manufacturing 

process like de-oxidation method, 

and quenching and tempering. For 

instance, rimming steel associated with 

internal voids shall not be allowed for 

structural use whereas application of 

quenched and tempered steel with low 

ductility and formability shall only be 

restricted to steel plates and hot rolled 

sections. Lastly, deviations from nominal 

dimensions and mass shall be well 

within the manufacturing tolerances 

to assure member resistance and 

structural safety, and constructability. 

Manufacturing tolerances are therefore 

important to prevent manufacturers 

from under-sizing and taking advantage 

of the liberal requirements. 

Due to differences in technical 

requirements ranging from 

manufacturing process to structural 

performance, BC1 has to adopt a more 

realistic and reasonable approach to 

make these requirements materialspecific. 

Different sets of requirements 

are imposed on each of the nine 

different categories of steel materials, 

namely steel plates, hot rolled sections, 

hollow sections, steel for cold forming, 

non-preloaded bolting assemblies, 

preloaded bolting assemblies, welding 

Integrated Resort at Marina Bay - roof top skypark with 60m cantilever 

consumables, profiled steel sheets 

and stud shear connectors, which are 

commonly used in the construction 

industry. 

RELIABILITY OF STEEL MATERIALS 

Another critical aspect is the reliability 

of steel materials which is the ability 

to meet the quality assurance 

requirements; for steel manufacturers 

to provide adequate assurance to 

ensure the compliance of the actual 

performance of their products with the 

nominal specifications stipulated. 

The utmost importance of material 

reliability is understandable as the 

so-called ‘adequate’ materials are 

theoretically sound on paper only 

and their ability to perform up to their 

nominal specifications in reality needs 

some form of guarantee or assurance, 

if not justification. In view of this, BC1 

requires manufacturers, as a minimum, 

to establish an approved factory 

production control (FPC) system and to 

provide assurance to their products in 

the form of authenticated manufacturer 

or mill test certificates (MTC). The core 

objective this requirement is driven by a 

desire to use only ‘quality products from 

quality mills’ in Singapore’s building and 

construction industry. 

In fact, it is indisputable that only 

‘quality mills’ are able to produce 

‘quality products’. A thorough factory 

production control system is a 

necessary evidence to substantiate the 

status of ‘quality mills’. According to 

BC1, manufacturers of steel materials 

must maintain an FPC system which 

consists of quality procedures, written 

instructions, regular inspection 

and test plans to control feedstock 

materials, equipment, personnel and 

production process which can affect 

product quality in anyway. Therefore, 

proper documentation of feedstock 

materials, inspection, calibration and 

maintenance history of equipment, 

personnel background and qualification, 

organisational charts defining 

responsibility of individual personnel 

and their inter-relationship, results of 

product testing, as well as procedures 

on product marking and nonconforming 

products, are required to 

facilitate audit and attestation by thirdparty 

accredited certification agencies. 

To attain the ‘quality mills’ status under 

the BC1 framework, manufacturers 

need to have their FPC system ‘audited’ 

and attested by an independent thirdparty 

accredited certification agency 

acceptable to or recognized by BCA 

– for instance, Bureau Veritas, TUV 

Rheinland, Det Norske Veritas, Lloyd’s 

Register, Germanischer Lloyd, etc. A FPC 

certificate from one of these agencies, 

on the basis of initial inspection as 

well as continuous surveillance and 

assessment through annual inspection, 

shall form the acceptable indicator for 

an attested FPC system. 

It shall also be noted that compliance 

with ISO9001 is merely complimentary 

but insufficient to justify the reliability of 

a manufacturer’s reliability in producing 

structural steel materials. Meanwhile, 

FPC certificates to manufacture EN 

steel materials under the European 

Union Construction Product Directives/ 

Regulations or API Monograms, both 

are already widely recognised in the 

European markets and the oil and gas 

industry respectively, are considered 

‘acceptable in lieu’, under the provision 

of BC1. 


Manufacturer Test Certificate 

As an additional layer of guarantee 

and assurance of quality in their steel 

products, audited mills should issue 

authenticated test certificates to 

substantiate the compliance of every 

batch of products delivered with their 

nominal specifications. Such certificates 

are not only evidences of product 

conformity, but more importantly, they 

are also useful tools to provide sufficient 

information for qualified persons (QPs) 

to assess and control steel materials 

during fabrication, and to help the QPs 

or their site representatives to decide 

whether it is necessary to carry out 

further material checks on the batch of 

steel being delivered. 

Generally, two types of testing should 

be conducted by the manufacturer 

– firstly, routine testing which is 

carried out in accordance with the 

manufacturer’s written procedures; 

and secondly, specific testing which is 

carried out upon request of purchasers 

at the time of order. To certify such 

testing, the manufacturer shall 

provide an authenticated certificate 

of compliance. The documents shall 

also be validated by, if necessary, third 

party inspection agency authorised by 

the purchaser or BCA. An acceptable 

manufacturer test certificate (MTC) shall 

be authenticated by the manufacturer’s 

company stamp, and shall contain 

information of the manufacturer, 

reference details, material specifications, 

information for traceability, as well as 

test results. 

materials and not the finished products 

are permitted in the MTC by BC1, it 

should be clearly indicated in the 

certificate so that there is no confusion. 

DESIGN IMPLEMENTATION 

BC1 provides guidance for engineers 

to follow during the design stage. The 

design procedure is essentially based 

on the classification approach which 

consists of both adequacy assessment 

and reliability assessment of the steel 

materials to be used in design to BS5950, 

and eventually to categorise these 

materials into three categories, from 

superior to inferior – Class 1, Class 2 and 

Class 3. 

Adequacy Assessment 

The first step in the classification 

approach involves the adequacy 

assessment, i.e. verification of material 

adequacy against the material 

performance requirements. Adequacy 

assessment is only meant to evaluate the 

adequacy of steel materials of particular 

specifications and its result is therefore 

independent of the source of materials. 

Two possible modes of adequacy 

assessment are certification and material 

testing. 

Certification is the rigorous evaluation 

of the specifications of steel materials 

commonly available in Singapore 

– namely British/European (BS/EN), 

American (ASTM/API/AWS), Japanese 

(JIS), Australian/New Zealand (AS/NZS) 

and Chinese (GB) steel materials, against 

the essential material performance 

requirements of BC1. A list of certified 

steel materials which only contains steel 

materials complying with the relevant 

material performance requirements, 

has been derived for the convenience of 

the design engineers. Most commonly 

available materials in Singapore are BS/ 

EN, ASTM/API/AWS, JIS, AS/NZS and 

GB steel materials are adequate and 

therefore included in this list. Use of any 

steel material from this certified list is 

considered having met and passed the 

adequacy assessment. 

Material testing, on the other hand, 

is the process of demonstrating 

the adequacy of non-certified steel 

materials outside BS/EN, ASTM/API/ 

AWS, JIS, AS/NZS and GB steel materials 

such as the use of Indian, Korean or 

Russian steel during the design stage 

through appropriate sample testing 

and test method. Such testing for the 

purpose of adequacy assessment during 

the design stage shall not exempt 

the purchasers from performing the 

obligatory inspection and testing 

in accordance with appropriate 

regulations during contract execution 

stage. To prove the compliance of such 

materials with all the relevant material 

performance requirements, test reports 

from accredited laboratory under the 

Singapore Accreditation Council’s 

Singapore Laboratory Accreditation 

INTERNATIONAL REGULARTORY DEVELOPMENT 

In Singapore, steel materials for building 

construction are mostly supplied by 

stockholders and traders, unless the 

projects are very sizeable and there 

is magnitude of scale and financial 

benefits to purchase directly from the 

steel mills. Under such circumstance, 

a validated copy of the authenticated 

MTC shall be given to the end purchaser 

by the stockholder. To prevent any 

fraud and tempering of the MTC, exact 

quantity, batch and heat number of 

the steel materials delivered to the end 

purchaser, together with the purchase 

and delivery orders should be clearly 

indicated in the MTC. Finally, although 

mechanical test results and chemical 

analysis based on the feedstock 

Gardens by the Bay under construction 


• 17


Scheme (SINGLAS) or other laboratory 

accredited under a mutual recognition 

agreement with SINGLAS are required. 

Reliability Assessment 

The second step in the classification 

approach involves the reliability 

assessment, i.e. verification of material 

reliability against the quality assurance 

requirements. Reliability assessment 

to ensure the steel materials are 

manufactured under stringent quality 

assurance system shall meet the quality 

assurance requirements. Failure in the 

reliability assessment shall result in the 

downgrading of material class to Class 

3. A complete reliability assessment 

consists of two compulsory evaluation 

processes, namely FPC certification and 

manufacturer test certification. 

Manufacturers of steel materials shall 

have an FPC system already attested by 

an independent third-party certification 

agency acceptable to or recognised by 

BCA. Valid FPC certificates issued by the 

certification agency upon successful 

first and annual inspections shall be 

produced by the manufacturers as an 

indicator of an FPC system acceptable 

to BCA. In FPC certification, QPs shall 

evaluate the validated copy of the valid 

FPC certificate, obtained either directly 

from the manufacturer or through the 

stockholder or trader. The document 

mentioned shall also be made 

available for subsequent inspection 

by BCA, if required. It shall be pointed 

out that ISO9001 certificate is only 

complimentary, while European Union 

FPC certificates and API Monograms can 

be considered ‘acceptable in lieu’. 

Manufacturers shall issue an 

authenticated test certificate for every 

batch of steel materials delivered as a 

form of quality assurance on the steel 

materials. Actual quantity of steel 

materials delivered shall be clearly 

indicated by the stockholders. In 

manufacturer test certification, QPs 

shall inspect and confirm that all the 

mandatory information is indicated on 

the actual certificate. The document 

shall also be made available for 

inspection by BCA, if required. 

Classification of Steel Materials 

The classification procedure will end 

with the class of steel materials being 

determined. Three classes, namely Class 

1, Class 2 and Class 3, are the possible 

outcome. Class 1 status can only be 

achieved by certified steel materials, 

i.e. those materials which meet 


through rigorous certification process, 

if and only if quality assurance given 

by the manufacturers also satisfies 

the respective requirements. These 

materials can be used as per normal 

to BS5950. No material factor will be 

applied on the design strength of 

the steel. In other words, full nominal 

strength given by the material standard 

of Class 1 structural steel is employed 

for design calculation. On the other 

hand, design parameters for bolts and 

welds are those recommended by the 

respective national standards. 

Similarly, non-certified steel materials 

outside BS/EN, ASTM/API/AWS, JIS, 

AS/NZS and GB steel materials which 

are proven to be reliable can also be 

used as per normal to BS5950, if they 

can demonstrate compliance with 

the essential material performance 

requirements through material testing. 

These materials are considered as Class 

2 materials under the classification 

framework of BC1. However, a lack of 

local experience and rigorous study, 

and hence understanding on the local 

use of such materials necessitates a 

material factor of 1.1 to be imposed on 

Arts and Science Museum at Marina Bay Integrated Resorts under construction 

the design strength of Class 2 structural 

steel. Likewise, Class 2 connection 

components like bolts, welds and stud 

shear connectors, shall be designed to 

lower strength parameters as compared 

to their Class 1 counterparts. 

All other steel materials which fall 

outside Class 1 and Class 2 are regarded 

as Class 3 materials which fail to satisfy 


and/or quality assurance requirements. 

This type of materials which are really 

‘commercial-grade’ steel shall be 

restricted to non-structural use only. The 

design strength for Class 3 steel shall be 

limited to not more than 170 N/mm2. 

However, use of Class 3 bolts, welds and 

stud shear connectors to BS5950 is not 

permitted. 

SPECIAL CASE 

While BC1 is in the early phase of 

implementation, interim measures 

are necessary to ensure a smoother 

transition for key industry players 

to adjust and switch to the new 

requirements, as well as to cater for 

existing on-going projects and current 

stockpiles of steel materials which meet 

adequacy requirements but obviously 

do not come with FPC certificates from 

audited mills. For the above reasons, a 

material performance-based assessment 

in lieu of the adequacy and reliability 


assessments, based on material testing 

per heat or batch and control might 

be appropriate under the alternative 

route provided for under Clause 4.4 of 

BC1. Subject to case-by-case approval 

from BCA, the steel materials concerned 

may be treated as Class 2 materials if 

their adequacy and reliability can be 

guaranteed through testing and control 

plans of the materials delivery to site. 

As this special provision is meant to 

be an interim measure to cope with 

the transition stage, it should not be 

seen as an escape route to by-pass 

the new requirements for quality 

requirements. QPs who resort to using 

this alternative path because of material 

non-compliance with quality assurance 

requirements, not only have to monitor 

and propose a very rigorous material 

control plan, but also have to review 

and redo the design because of the 

change in the material classification. In 

addition, QPs will still have to continue 

to shoulder the quality problem caused 

by lesser manufacturers. 

USE OF ALTERNATIVE 

STEEL MATERIALS 

The main objective of introducing these 

new requirements on both adequacy 

and reliability of the steel materials is to 

improve the resilience and sustainability 

of Singapore’s steel construction 

industry. The enforcement and full 

implementation of such requirements 

will bring about some tangible and 

positive improvements in the long run 

as few will argue on the need for quality. 

In the short term, some re-adjustments 

will be necessary amongst all the key 

industry stakeholders while some will 

be affected more and others will view 

the new requirements as restrictive. 

The long term objective should not be 

clouded by the short term difficulties 

which are usually driven by commercial 

consideration. Such issues are best 

addressed separately. 

In the local context, the need to 

look into the use of alternative steel 

materials is also understandable from 

the availability point of view. The 

presence of Chinese steel materials 

in this region is a case in point. Under 

the new provision of BC1, as long as 

the steel materials can be proven to 

be adequate and reliable, their use to 

BS5950 will be allowed irrespective 

of where the materials originate from 

and what production standards they 

are manufactured to. By widening the 

option to source these materials from, 

it is hoped that more economical and 

sustainable steel construction will 

eventually result in Singapore. 

Equal Platform for all 

Steel Materials 

The mandatory requirement on material 

adequacy and reliability implies that 

only adequate and reliable materials 

can be used under the provision of BC1. 

Therefore, the approach is consistent 

and fair, and all steel materials, 

including those manufactured to BS 

and BS EN standards are treated equally 

without any preference when design 

recommendations are given. In addition, 

BC1 is fair to all Class 1 steel materials 

by allowing the use of the full material 

strength as its design strength. Design 

strengths recommended by their 

respective national steel design codes 

might not be appropriate because of 

the fundamental difference in design 

philosophy compared to BS5950. 

Quality Culture 

BC1 took the opportunity to address the 

long-standing material problems where 

non-certified materials which are readily 

available have been used in the past and 

are still being used today. The notion 

that material adequacy and reliability 

can be assured by testing a few tensile 

coupons is a fallacy which really needs 

to be debunked. Material production 

standards are serious documents 

with complicated processes in which 

manufacturers have to follow through 

strictly. There are in-line production 

tests in place which would not be 

possible to duplicate off-line once the 

material is produced. The manufacturer 

test certificates are only meaningful if 

manufacturers adhere to and follow the 

production standards closely and report 

the information faithfully. The mere 

existence of a certificate is not sufficient 

proof because such information 

can be easily copied over from the 

feedstock materials without having to 

do a single production test. The need 

for consistently reliable and quality 

materials, and to single out, reward and 

encourage manufacturers who practiced 

quality assurance and took the trouble 

to put in place a stringent production 

control system and product certification 

is clear. With such a framework in 

place, the manufacturers will be more 

responsible and forthcoming. Moving 

forward, the Authority will be more 

vigilant on the use of non-certified 

materials such as JIS G3101 SS400, ASTM 

A500 and BS4360 Grade 43A which are 

still readily available. Key stakeholders 

(traders, stockholders, fabricators 

and QPs) should well take note of this 

development. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Adequacy and reliability of steel 

materials are the two major concerns 

in promoting alternative use of steel 

materials to pave a way towards a more 

sustainable construction industry in 

Singapore. With BC1 in place, adequacy 

and reliability of all steel materials 

are checked against the material 

performance and quality assurance 

requirements. Their adequacy can be 

evaluated through either certification or 

material testing; whereas their reliability 

must be substantiated by factory 

production control (FPC) certificate 

and mill test certificate (MTC) from the 

manufacturers. The steel materials are 

categorised into three classes, each with 

different scope for use with and without 

restriction, in design to BS5950. 

BC1 will bring several positive benefits 

to the steel construction industry in 

the long run. In the short term, it is 

recognised that some re-adjustments 

will be necessary and some stakeholders 

will be affected more than others. The 

use of alternative steel will open up 

the availability and widen the source 

of materials which will result in greater 

economy and affordability. All steel 

materials, including BS and BS EN 

materials, regardless of country of origin, 

are treated equally in the same manner. 

Finally, BC1 addresses some quality 

issues head-on in the hope it will lead to 

a healthy quality culture on steel usage 

which will set a new standard for others 

in the region to follow. 



• 19


Toward shock-proof 

infrastructure 

Written by the National Research Council Canada 

The devastation caused by recent 

earthquakes in Haiti and Chile, as well 

as by terrorist activities around the 

world, underscores the need for better 

construction materials and designs to 

protect critical public infrastructure 

against such extreme shocks. 

Canada’s core public infrastructure 

includes transport systems (roads, 

bridges and transit), public buildings 

that provide essential services, 

and municipal systems that deliver 

potable water and remove wastes. The 

foundation of our public infrastructure 

is a common building material: concrete. 

“Traditionally, we’ve designed our 

infrastructure to withstand natural 

disasters, not man-made events,” says 

Dr. Zoubir Lounis, leader of the concrete 

structures group at the NRC Institute for 

Research in Construction (NRC-IRC) in 

Ottawa. 

In collaboration with the University 

of Ottawa, NRC is combining high 

performance concrete and advanced 

composite materials — consisting of 

fibre-reinforced polymers — to help 

make critical structures 

more shock-resistant. 

By adding a shock 

absorber, the new 

construction materials 

could improve the 

safety of critical 

infrastructure in 

Canada and around the 

world. 

“Since it would be 

too expensive to 

protect all our public 

infrastructure, we’re 

developing new 

technology as well 

as a risk management approach,” says 

Dr. Lounis. This approach involves 

identifying public infrastructure that is 

critical both from a public safety and an 

economic standpoint. The goal would 

then be to incorporate shock-resistant 

materials into key structures at critical 

stress points — such as the load-bearing 

columns holding up a highway overpass 

— in order to provide adequate strength 

and safety margins, and extend their 

service life. 

University of Ottawa shock-tube facility for conducting impact and blast tests. (Photo: 

University of Ottawa) 

Did you 

know? 

Concrete structures testing facility at NRC Institute for Research in Construction. 

Statistics Canada 

has estimated the 

value of Canada’s 

core public 

infrastructure 

— including 

roads, bridges, 

drinking water, 

waste water and 

sewage treatment 

systems — at 

more than $286 

billion. 

The state of our roads, bridges, buildings 

and water/waste water systems is closely 

linked to our economy, safety and 

security, and quality of life. Consider the 

potential impact of disrupting traffic 

across an important trade route like the 

Ambassador Bridge, which links Windsor 

and Detroit, for even one day. 

“The idea is not so much to protect 

these structures but to enhance public 

safety by ensuring that if an accidental 

or intentional shock does occur, the 

structure doesn’t crumble but is 

only damaged — in other words, a 

‘controlled and more ductile’ failure,” 

says Dr. Husham Almansour, the NRC 

project leader. “Our goal is to give 

people enough time to evacuate — 

depending on the size of the shock and 

the importance of the infrastructure.” 

“When we design a retrofit to resist 

extreme shocks, we want to make the 

structure more robust,” adds Dr. Lounis. 

“Robustness means the structure has 

built-in redundancies, so external 

stresses are distributed between the 

different load-bearing elements and any 

damage that results is proportional to 

the shock or load.” 


NRC’s new building materials and 

systems will undergo thorough 

testing that simulates the effects of 

blast or heavy impacts. “This is a huge 

undertaking with many private and 

public partners,” says Dr. Lounis. After 

the shock-resistant materials and 

systems have been fully evaluated, they 

will be made available to Canadian 

companies and public infrastructure 

owners, giving them a competitive edge 

in world markets. 

Toward a hundred 

year bridge 

Much of Canada’s public infrastructure 

was built after the Second World War 

and is now approaching the end of its 

design life. “Instead of using the same 

conventional materials and doing the 

usual repairs, we’re thinking about how 

to replace existing structures with new 

structures that will last twice as long,” 

says Dr. Zoubir Lounis. 

For example, most current bridges were 

meant to have a design life of about fifty 

years. High and ultra-high performance 

concrete (UHPC) could double their life 

span because it contains steel fibres and 

more cementing materials than normal 

concrete. “It is also more resistant to 

corrosive agents,” says Dr. Lounis. “It will 

take up to 70-80 years for salt and water 

to reach the steel and corrosion to start, 

whereas with normal concrete, the salt 

could reach the steel after 15 years.” 


“UHPC can be three, four or five times 

more expensive than normal concrete,” 

he adds. “But the entire life-cycle 

costs of a bridge made with UHPC 

will be much lower. Over a hundred 

years, the bridge will require very little 

maintenance, so you won’t need to 

close it as often to repair or replace a 

component.” 

Enquiries: NRC 

For further information contact the 

National Research Council Canada: 

http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca 

Steel can start to corrode after just 15 years of service in normal concrete. 


• 21

BCA energY & INDUSTRY eFFiCienCY NEWS in The BUilT environmenT 

SUSTAinABle WinDoW 

AlliAnCe releASe neW 

FinDingS – glASS CriTiCAl 

To energY eFFiCienCY 

Nigel Carpenter 

An 18-month independent study 

has concluded that in many areas 

of Australia typical Australian 

homes can achieve an increase of 

2-2.5 stars of energy efficiency by 

simply changing from the worstperforming 

windows to the bestperforming 

windows. 

The study, conducted by the Sustainable 

Windows Alliance (SWA), follows lengthy 

and in-depth research into the impact 

windows have on residential energy 

efficiency. Launched mid-2008, the 

SWA is a joint initiative of the Australian 

Glass and Glazing Association and the 

Australian Window Association, working 

in partnership with Sustainability 

Victoria. 

The project was initiated to investigate 

the economic and scientific basis for 

high performance windows. Now, the 

industry, armed with these facts, aims 

to raise community awareness, both 

within the building industry and the 

general public. The SWA hopes to create 

more informed end-consumers, able to 

make more considered decisions about 

the construction or renovation of their 

homes, supported by a local industry 

capable of serving their needs. 

The technical study was conducted by 

building physicist and energy expert 

Dr Peter Lyons using a methodology 

developed and agreed by a panel of 

leading buildings scientists within 

Australia and from abroad. The results 

provide the first collaborative resource 

of its kind and clearly demonstrate the 

impact of glazing and framing options 

on building energy 

efficiency across a range 

of house designs and 

climate zones throughout 

Australia. 

“Currently there is a very 

low level of awareness 

of the role windows and 

glass play in building 

energy efficiency. That 

knowledge which does 

exist in the building 

industry and broader 

community often 

ranges from inconsistent 

to outright misleading, 

but this study provides a common 

reference point to assist architects, 

builders, and consumers alike to make 

better-informed decisions on the most 

appropriate window for their needs,” 

says Lachlan Austin from the SWA 

steering committee. 

KEY FINDINGS FROM ThE STUDY 

• Moving from the worst-performing 

windows to the best performing 

windows can give a home an 

AccuRate star increase of 2-2.5 stars; 

• Applying passive solar design 

principles can provide further 

improvement by up to 1 star; and 

• Different locations within Australia 

require different glazing solutions, 

and within that, even different 

orientations of the building benefit 

from different window solutions. 

Nigel Carpenter, Executive Director 

of the AGGA, says the study clearly 

shows that better performing 

windows significantly reduce energy 

Photo provided by G. James 

consumption for home-owners, and 

therefore provides the opportunity for 

substantial savings on the household 

budget, and reduction in household 

carbon footprint. Windows have a 

long lifespan, working 24 hours a day, 

year in year out, without the need for 

any great human intervention. As an 

investment for the comfort and value 

of a home, they should rate far ahead 

of some discretionary spends beloved 

by consumers such as benchtops, and 

door handles. Nigel proposes, “Viewed 

against improved windows, these 

are dead assets, which serve only to 

date depreciate in value. In contrast, 

windows should be better categorised 

as investments in occupant comfort, 

operating cost reduction and a higher 

property value at resale”. 

Copies of the study are now available 

through Nigel Carpenter at the AGGA. 

To obtain your copy, contact the AGGA 

on 03 99413130. 

For further media information please 

contact Jill Johnson on 0409 217 624 


CONTACT DETAILS FOR STATE AND TERRITORY 

BUILDING CONTROL ADMINISTRATIONS 

WESTERN AUSTRALIA 

Building Commission 

Dept of Commerce 

31 Troode St, West Perth, WA 6005 

PO Box 6039, East Perth, WA 6892 

Telephone: 1300 489 099 

E-mail: buildingcontrol@bmw.wa.gov.au 

Hours: 8.30am-5.00pm 

Web site: www.bmw.wa.gov.au 

NORTHERN TERRITORY 

Department of Lands and Planning 

Building Advisory Services Branch 

Cavenagh House, 38 Cavenagh Street, 

Darwin NT 0800 

GPO Box 1680, Darwin, NT 0801 

Telephone: 08 8999 8960 

E-mail: bas.lpe@nt.gov.au 


Web site: www.nt.gov.au 

QUEENSLAND 

Department of Infrastructure and Planning 

Building Codes Queensland Division 

Level 3, 63 George Street, Brisbane, QLD 4000 

PO Box 15009, City East, QLD 4002 

Telephone: 07 3239 6369 

E-mail: buildingcodes@dip.qld.gov.au 


Web site: www.dip.qld.gov.au 

SUSTAINABILITY 

SOUTH AUSTRALIA 

Department of Planning and Local Government, Building Policy 

Roma Mitchell House 

136 North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5000 

GPO Box 1815, Adelaide, SA 5001 

Telephone: 08 8303 0602 

E-mail: plnsa.building@saugov.sa.gov.au 


Web site: www.planning.sa.gov.au 

VICTORIA 

Building Commission Victoria 

733 Bourke Street, Docklands, VIC 3008 

PO Box 536, Melbourne, VIC 3001 

Telephone: 1300 815 127 

E-mail: technicalenquiry@buildingcommission.com.au 


Web site: www.buildingcommission.com.au 

TASMANIA 

Department of Justice, 

Workplace Standards Tasmania 

Building Control Branch 

30 Gordons Hill Road, Rosny Park, TAS 7018 

PO Box 56, Rosny Park, TAS 7018 

Telephone: 03 6233 7657 

E-mail: wstinfo@justice.tas.gov.au 


Web site: www.wst.tas.gov.au 

NEW SOUTH WALES 

Dept of Planning, 

Lands Department Building 

23-33 Bridge Street, Sydney NSW 2000 

GPO Box 39 Sydney NSW 2001 

Telephone: 02 9228 6111 

E-mail: information@planning.nsw.gov.au 

Hours: 9.00am-5.00pm Mon – Fri, 

however BCA technical questions will be 

answered 9.30 – 11.30 Tue-Thu 

on 02 9228 6529 

Web site: www.planning.nsw.gov.au 

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY 

ACT Planning and Land Authority 

Ground Floor South, 

Dame Pattie Menzies House 

16 Challis Street, Dickson ACT 2602 

GPO Box 1908, Canberra City, ACT 2601 

Telephone: 02 6207 1923 

E-mail: actpla.customer.services@act.gov.au 


Web site: www.actpla.act.gov.au 


• 23

INDUSTRY Perspective 

INDUSTRY DISCIPLINE FOR 

SOFTWARE SIMULATION 

Interview with Phil Wilkinson, CEO, Australian Institute of Refrigeration, 

Air Conditioning and Heating 

Phil Wilkinson 

Q: How important is the use of energy 

analysis software in demonstrating a 

building’s compliance with Section J 

of the Building Code of Australia? 

PW: In short, the use of energyanalysis 

software in performancebased 

solutions is very important in 

demonstrating a building’s compliance. 

And the best way to show that 

compliance with the Code is being 

achieved is by meeting targeted annual 

energy use. 

This requires the use of modelling with 

sophisticated software that calculates 

the annual energy consumption hourby-hour 

and system-by-system. 

The use of BCA verification method JV3 

allows engineers and designers to be 

flexible in their approach to achieving 

the BCA’s performance outcomes. For 

example, a particular part of a building 

may not comply with the deemedto-satisfy 

solution. Yet by increasing 

the stringency of another part of the 

building, overall compliance with the 

intent can be reached. 

The analysis process is a complex one 

requiring a great deal of engineering 

judgement in developing the energy 

analysis, and this is where one of the big 

market failures occurs. 

Energy analysis software is a tool. And 

like any tool it requires a certain level 

of expertise to be used effectively. If 

software users don’t know exactly what 

they’re doing then getting the desired 

results will prove difficult indeed, if not 

impossible. 

To be able to effectively use the tool 

a designer/engineer must have a 

thorough understanding of building 

services - predominantly mechanical 

– and a building’s thermal properties, 

and how the two integrate as an overall 

system. 

Performance measurement is something 

those in the built environment are 

yet to fully embrace, much to its own 

detriment. Very rarely do we hear of 

designers assessing the building to test 

the accuracy of assumptions applied, 

and then learning in an iterative manner 

how to improve the modelling process. 

This must change, and it will. 

Q: I understand that there has been 

an ongoing debate as to whether 

the compliance criteria in Section 

J of the building code should be 

expressed in terms of absolute values 

such as Mega Joule/annum or star 

ratings as against an approach that 

compares the proposed building 

with a hypothetical building model 

that is prescriptively described as 

complying. Which do you prefer? 

PW: Although there is some debate 

about whether the output should be in 

MJ/m2/annum or in greenhouse CO2 

equivalent or stars, from a technical 

point of view this is a minor issue. A 

simple conversion factor allows a design 

engineer to easily punch out results in 

the desired metrics. 

The more pressing issue is a set of 

industry-standardised input guidelines. 

There are three main drivers for the 

use of energy-analysis software: BCA, 

NABERS and Green Star. All three have 

differing input parameters, which is 

cumbersome to say the least. Some 

of the protocols require the use of USbased 

parameters, while others require 

the use of Australian based parameters, 

such as the metabolic rates of 

occupants. I also understand parameters 

around occupancy rates vary. 

It would make a lot more sense if the 

industry could come together to agree on 

a set of common parameters. This would 

greatly reduce remodelling to meet 

each rating criteria.” See an extract from 

Ecolibrium on page 26 for more on this. 

I don’t believe there is a pressing 

requirement for another building 

analysis software package; there are 

several available that are more than 

adequate. What we do need, however, 

is industry agreement and alignment of 

modelling procedures and parameters 

used in Australia. 

If there were to be one software 

program it would require considerable 

investment to develop it, and substantial 

continuing maintenance costs. 

The various software packages currently 

in use vary to some degree in their 

calculations, their inputs and their 

results, so the comparative approach in 

JV3 is a more practical one if a market 

featuring different software is to 

continue. 

So that the various available systems 

can be better modelled, there needs 

to be improved communication and 

sharing between software developers 

and mechanical services equipment 

manufacturers. It would be of 

tremendous assistance for manufactures 

to measure their equipment’s 

performance and then share the results. 

The end result will be much more 

accurate and realistic system modelling. 

And isn’t that what everybody wants? 

Q. Do you see a need for the current 

energy analysis software to be 

accredited or for practitioners to be 

accredited as users? 

PW: Yes, accreditation is definitely 

needed. 

There is a perception in the marketplace 

that anyone, including ESD engineers 

with no real knowledge of building 

services systems, and home energy 

raters wanting to branch into a new 

market, can use this software and 

achieve the desired output. 


The reality, however, is that commercial 

energy analysis is a complex topic 

and needs a substantial amount of 

engineering judgement to ensure 

maximum accuracy. Commercial 

building software models the 

interactions of the building services 

systems with the physics of the building, 

whereas home energy rating software 

doesn’t have anywhere near this level of 

complexity. 

Only competent engineers and building 

services engineers should be using this 

type of software. 

Software that can be used in BCA 

performance modelling is already 

‘accredited’ against ‘best-test’, as I 

understand it. 

Two steps to user accreditation and 

capability are desperately required. The 

first is an accreditation to demonstrate 

competency in applying the modelling 

process and engineering principles 

–irrespective of which software is used. 

The next level of training should be a 

tool-specific scheme, aimed at those 

who have passed the first level, who 

can then learn how to use individual 

software packages. 

AIRAH is well placed to develop 

and administer such a system, in 

collaboration with the eight building 

control administrations, and with 

funding from the government. 

Many countries are grappling with these 

issues, and given its strong international 

links, AIRAH is well placed to learn from 

overseas experience. 

Q: Do you see the modellers who 

using energy analysis software being 

specialists in building sustainability/ 

energy analysis, or is there a need 

for them to first have gained HVAC 

experience as designers or installers? 

PW: The programs used for building 

energy analysis are very complicated, 

and users need a very good level of 

understanding of HVAC systems. 

The software is considerably more 

complex than that designed to measure 

house energy rating, which most 

building practitioners can master quite 

quickly. 

It’s easy to select totally inappropriate 

systems or other inputs from the various 

menus, delivering a result that would 

look impressive and creditable to 

somebody not trained in HVAC system 

design. 

Q: It would seem that the current 

software programs need to make 

certain assumptions, such as 

whether the systems have been 

properly commissioned, or whether 

the building is well constructed to 

reduce infiltration, or whether or 

not the building is likely to be well 

maintained. How realistic are the 

assumptions being made? 

PW: These are aspects where building 

and HVAC design and construction 

experience is essential. Good 

engineering judgement is crucial in 

estimating what the inputs should be. 

The detailing of facades or roof-to-wall 

interfaces as well as air-locks and other 

seals give a good indication of the likely 

infiltration that needs to be an input 

and not a hypothetical ‘ideal’ value. 

We are starting to see some buildings 

pressure tested and gaps in the building 

envelope sealed to prevent uncontrolled 

infiltration. 

Commissioning and good maintenance 

are extremely important in 

achieving the assumed ongoing 

energy consumption. No one is held 

accountable for this currently, and until 

they are there will be continuing market 

failures in this space. Both of these issues 

have been talked about for years, and 

unless they are regulated or energy 

prices skyrocket, I don’t believe they will 

be genuinely addressed. Perhaps the 

introduction of mandatory disclosure 

will start to drive some good outcomes. 

We certainly hope so. 

What I’ve said here is my opinion, but 

it’s based on discussions I’ve had with 

– and input from - stakeholders across 

our industry. This includes several 

prominent AIRAH members, who are 

daily working with building simulation 

software at the vanguard of measuring 

the built environment’s performance. 

These are professionals helping to shape 

the future of our cityscapes by making 

sure our buildings perform as they 

should in the present. 

INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE 


• 25

INDUSTRY Perspective 

HVAC&R THE • the BRIEFING 

built environment • sustainable design 

Extract from Ecolibrium, March 2010 Edition. 

OPINION 

Where’s the consistency? 

AIRAH life member 

Murray Mason believes 

there is an avoidable lack 

of commonality between 

Australia’s various building 

schemes and codes. 

For a number of years now my company 

has being working on developing a 

building energy estimation program 

(BEAVER) that incorporates several 

enhancements. These include features 

to assist users in gaining compliance 

with the BCA, and to achieve ratings 

with NABERS and Green Star. 

A number of the program’s users 

have indicated they are frustrated 

at the lack of consistency between these 

codes, rating schemes and the relevant 

Australian standards. On many items 

there is a lack of commonality that 

is unnecessary, leading to extra costs 

being imposed on design consultants, 

contractors and software developers. 

My company, ACADS-BSG, is 

involved in continuing consultation 

with the Australian Building Code 

Board through the normal process 

of public review and comment. We 

have also been, albeit less formally, 

commenting on certain aspects of the 

Green Building Council of Australia, 

making suggestions and comments. 

Many of these comments are in relation 

to the practical application of some of 

the requirements for compliance. There 

are also some unnecessary variations 

between the rating schemes/codes. 

A few examples of this are listed here: 

• Why do each of the rating/codes 

schemes have different profiles for 

people, lights, equipment and plant 

operation for the same building type? 

• Why do they use different 

metabolic rates for people? 

• Why are the metabolic rates different 

to those used in normal design? 

• Why are the lighting and 

equipment levels different? 

• Why does Green Star have, within 

each building type, different room 

functions, while NABERS and BCA 

have only a building type? 

For example BCA has Schools 

while Green Star have Schools and 

Universities and within each of these 

different functions – classrooms, dry 

labs, wet labs, gymnasiums – with 

different profiles and metabolic rates. 

• Similarly, why do the building types 

and functions differ from those listed 

in AS1668? 

• Why does the BCA use Table D1.13 

(which is for fire egress) for people 

occupancy rather than AS1668, to 

which Green Star refers? 

The list goes on. 

Murray Mason 

In addition, however, there are 

provisions, particularly with Green Star, 

that make us wonder about the quality of 

technical advice these organisations are 

receiving. It shows a lack of experience 

and understanding in the use and 

application of simulation software 

and in the design process itself. 

For example, with some of the Green 

Star guideline documents, profiles for 

metabolic rates are listed, rather than those 

for occupancy – no energy simulation 

program inputs data in this way. 

Another example is the selection of the 

climatic data to be used with the Green 

Star guideline documents. They all state 

that when there is a lack of an available 

local TRY year, an actual year of recorded 

weather data from a location within 

50km of the building location is to be 

used. If that is not available an average 

is to be taken from the three nearest 

locations within 250km. 

Hence, if a Green Star Rating for a 

building in Tewantin in Queensland is 

required (this is a case in point where 

one of our users sought our advice) then 

climatic data from Brisbane, Amberley 

and Oakey should be averaged. 

Getting hourly solar and ground-recorded 

data from the Met Bureau is difficult 

enough. To “average” three locations is 

just ridiculous and totally impractical. 

Because we supply simulation software to 

the industry, we are continually asked by 

our users for advice on particular aspects 

of the rating schemes and the BCA. 

We are also confronted with providing 

means of inputting different data into our 

energy program as a function of which 

rating scheme is being used when there 

is no practical reason why the data 

should be different. 

Because of the company’s collective 

years of experience in the industry, we 

have devoted a lot of time attempting to 

convince those responsible for these rating 

schemes and codes to make changes. 

However, our business is developing and 

supporting software. Because of this 

we do have a good appreciation of the 

requirements, but we are a single voice 

and our opinions and concerns are not 

necessarily representative of the industry. 

It is not our role to convince the code 

makers to adopt a consistent approach. 

It is an industry responsibility. 

I believe, therefore, that it would 

be appropriate for AIRAH to set up 

an advisory technical committee 

representing the industry (with 

support from government and with 

some influence) to provide advice and 

guidance to the three organisations that 

are developing the BCA, NABERS and 

Green Star, and to ensure that there 

is compatibility with design practice. 

This committee could also review the 

appropriateness of having three separate 

protocols to achieve reductions in 

greenhouse gas emissions. 

Murray Mason, L.AIRAH, F.IEAust, 

F.AIE, is the principal engineer and 

director of ACADS-BSG, an Australian 

building services software company. 

Care to comment? 

Ecolibrium welcomes feedback. 

To comment, please send 

correspondence to matt@airah.org.au 

16 

ECOLIBRIUM • MARCH 2010 


Client Feature 

Doors open on Australia’s first zero-emission home 

Designed to fit the Australian climate 

– and the lifestyle of a typical middleincome 

family – Australia’s first Zero 

Emission House (AusZEH) was officially 

opened in Melbourne in April. 

Working with industry partners Delfin- 

Lend Lease and the Henley Property 

Group, and supported by the AusZEH 

consortium, CSIRO designed and built 

the demonstration house 30 kilometres 

north of Melbourne’s CBD, in the 

community of Laurimar in Doreen, 

Victoria. 

The eight-star energy-efficiency rated 

AusZEH showcases off-the-shelf building 

and renewable energy-generation 

technologies, and new future-ready 

energy management systems. 

Nearly 13 per cent of Australia’s 

greenhouse gas emissions are due to 

home energy use. 

The AusZEH is designed to produce 

enough ‘zero-emission’ electricity 

from 6kW solar panels to supply all 

the operating energy needs of the 

household so that its net total CO2 or 

other greenhouse gas emissions is zero. 

The Director of CSIRO’s Energy 

Transformed Flagship, Dr Alex 

Wonhas, says the uptake of zeroemission 

housing in Australia could 

have a significant impact 

on reducing emissions 

nationwide. 

“CSIRO scientists estimate 

that if all the new housing 

built in Australia between 

2011 and 2020 were zeroemission 

houses, 63 million 

tons of greenhouse gas (GHG) 

emissions would be saved,” 

Dr Wonhas said. 

“This would be equivalent to 

taking all of Australia’s private 

cars off the road for two years 

and 237 days, or closing all 

Australia’s power stations for 

up to 100 days.” 

CSIRO’s Energy Transformed Flagship 

initiated the AusZEH project to 

demonstrate and evaluate how lowcarbon 

housing can be achieved in 

Australia to reduce GHG emissions and 

create a more sustainable future for the 

nation. 

For 12 months, the AusZEH 

demonstration house will become a 

home for an Australian family and a 

laboratory for CSIRO. 

The house has been fitted with a unique 

energy management system developed 

by La Trobe University in partnership 

with CSIRO, which tracks energy use 

The first AusZEH demonstration house is open for inspection at Laurimar in Doreen, Victoria. The eight-star energy 

efficiency rated house, which features a state-of-the-art energy management system, will produce enough zero 

emission, renewable electricity from roof-top solar panels to supply all its electricity needs. 

The AusZEH demonstration house is equipped with a unique homeenergy 

management system. 

in the house and provides feedback 

via customised reports to household 

members. 

This information on the performance of 

the ‘living’ house will be used to identify 

ways to improve the design of future 

zero and low-emission houses. 

“Our greatest impact comes through 

partnerships with others,” Dr Wonhas 

said. 

“Through the AusZEH consortium, 

expertise from CSIRO, industry, 

university and government partners 

have been combined to create a 

demonstration house which provides an 

example of how Australians can achieve 

a more sustainable future living in their 

homes.” 

The AusZEH consortium membership 

includes: CSIRO, Delfin Lend Lease, Henley 

Property Group, La Trobe University, 

Sustainability Victoria, SP AusNet, Telstra 

and the Victorian Department of Human 

Services. 

CSIRO initiated the National Research 

Flagships to provide science-based 

solutions in response to Australia’s major 

research challenges and opportunities. 

The 10 Flagships form multidisciplinary 

teams with industry and the research 

community to deliver impact and benefits 

for Australia. 

For more information visit: http:// 

www.csiro.au/science/australian-zeroemission-house.html 

BCA PRODUCT + iNDUSTRY INNOVATION NEWS 


• 27


PRODUCT Innovation 


Grocon’s carbon neutral Pixel Building 

Grocon has developed the Pixel building 

in a manner that is so environmentally 

advanced, there’s nothing presently like 

it in the world. Pixel is Grocon’s “Future 

Office” – a prototype of the buildings 

that will emerge when a carbon 

constrained environment demands a 

greater focus on energy efficiency. 

Existing environmental rating tools do 

not yet place a significant importance 

on the issue of carbon pollution. 

Grocon’s Pixel building is an insight into 

the way buildings of the future will be 

designed, built and managed in order to 

tackle the carbon cost issue head on. 

Pixel is aiming to achieve the highest 

environmental rating ever for buildings 

using the US LEED, UK BREEAM and 

Australian Greenstar environmental 

rating schemes. To put that into context, 

there are approximately 740,000 

buildings registered worldwide under 

those three rating schemes, 

and Pixel would be at the 

forefront of all of them. 

In anticipation of the 

worldwide move to carbon 

neutral buildings, Pixel has 

been designed to generate 

more energy on site than it 

uses, thus off-setting carbon 

generated to run the building. 

But Pixel goes further by 

generating more energy in 

order to offset the carbon 

used to build it and so the 

building becomes carbon 

positive, giving the energy it 

generates back to the grid. 

In addition to tackling the 

carbon issue head on, Grocon 

has designed Pixel to be water 

balanced. That means that if 

Melbourne maintains the 10 


year average rainfall levels from 1999- 

2009, then Pixel will be self sustainable 

for water supply. The building could 

theoretically be disconnected from the 

grid and continue to safely operate. 

Through Grocon’s work at Pixel, new 

technologies have been developed, new 

systems have been brought to Australia 

and there has been significant “green” 

upskilling of both Grocon’s workforce 

and their sub-contractors. 

More information is available at 

http://www.pixelbuilding.com.au 

Pixel’s innovative features: 

• Carbon Neutral 

• Water Balanced 

• 100% Fresh Air Syystem 

• Ammonia Refrigeration 

• Chilled Structure 

• Green Roof 

• Photovoltaic & Wind Power 

Generation 

• Reed Bed Water Treatment 

• Reliance on Natural Daylight 

• Green Concrete 

• Gas Fired Absorption Chillers 

• Extensive Recycling 

• Free Night Cooling 

• Bio-Gas Energy 

• High Performance Facade 



• 29


PRODUCT Innovation 


Bosch sets new benchmark in sustainable water heating 

Creating a new benchmark in 

sustainable, energy efficient water 

heating, is the new ‘Bosch 32C 

Commercial Condensing’ gas hot water 

system, positioned as the only one of its 

kind in Australia. 

Suitable for both commercial and 

domestic use, where there is demand 

for large volumes of hot water, the 

Bosch 32C boasts a 6-star energy rating, 

making it the most efficient commercial 

gas hot water unit on the market. 

The product’s edge is its unique 

‘condensing technology’, which creates 

a superior level of energy efficiency – 

more than 94%. 

Unlike traditional hot water systems, 

Bosch’s condensing technology captures 

waste heat from exhaust gas and uses 

it to preheat incoming cold water. The 

effect is an energy saving of more 

than 15.5%, compared to a standard 

continuous flow commercial system. 

Bosch National Commercial Manager, 

James Smith, said the environmental 

benefits of the Bosch 32C made it far 

superior to any other commercial model 

available, setting a new benchmark for 

the industry. 

“Choosing this system for a commercial 

project is the equivalent of taking one 

and half cars off the road for an entire 

year, saving tonnes of greenhouse gas 

emissions and major dollars in terms of 

running costs*.” 

He said the new product gave builders, 

architects, hydraulic consultants 

and plumbers the opportunity to 

meet and exceed the Australian 

Building Code Board’s latest energy 

efficiency provisions, while reducing 

environmental impact and energy costs 

for their clients. 

Designed specifically for commercial 

developments and large homes, the 

Bosch 32C (along with the 32 standard 

model) is the only true commercial unit 

on the market and the only continuous 

flow system able to be installed 

internally or externally. 

“The unit has dual heat exchangers, 

one for primary heating and one for 

secondary heating. A 100% stainless 

steel exchanger uses residual heat from 

exhaust gases to help preheat incoming 

water prior to it entering a primary 

copper heat exchanger,” Mr Smith said. 

“The copper heat exchanger is coated to 

prevent corrosion and deterioration, and 

the internal copper piping is 25% thicker 

than any other model,” he said. 

Features & Benefits 

• 6-star energy efficiency rating – the 

most efficient commercial gas hot 

water appliance on the market, with 

94% energy efficiency. 

• 217 MJ/hr gas consumption, 

producing a flow rate of 32 litres per 

minute. 

• Designed to run up to 16 to 20 hours 

per day. 

• Only commercial continuous flow 

unit on the market that can be 

installed internally or externally. 

• 25% thicker commercial-grade 

copper heat exchanger, fused with 

100% stainless steel corrosionresistant 

heat exchanger. 

• Commercial-grade components 

throughout, including heavy duty 

resin-coated printed circuit board, 

increases durability and protection 

from the elements. 

• Can be installed as a single unit, 

manifolded or in combination, with 

storage. Self-diagnostic electronic 

staging and rotation system (in 

manifold). 

• In-built neutraliser for the safe 

release of condensate (pH-neutral 

condensate). 

• Optional temperature controllers 

(up to three), offering fingertip water 

temperature control. 

• Available in 37°C to 85°C temperature 

range (without temperature 

controllers), 37°C to 80°C temperature 

range (with temperature controllers), 

or 50°C locked. 

• Compatible with solar hot water and 

warm water return systems**. 

• Premium warranty – two years on 

parts and labour and five years on the 

heat exchanger (or three and 10 years 

when used in domestic applications). 

The Bosch 32C was developed in line 

with Australia’s Ecologically Sustainable 

Development (ESD) standards, and to 

complement Bosch’s existing range of 

energy efficient products. 

The domestic condensing model, 

the Bosch 26eco+, with a 6.9-star 

energy rating, was recently named the 

GreenPlumbers ‘Product of the Year’ 

(2009), demonstrating the superior 

ecological benefits of the Bosch 

condensing range. 

The Bosch 32C is available from local 

plumbing suppliers or by contacting 

the Bosch Customer Service Hotline 

on 1300 30 70 37. 

For more about Bosch’s energy 

efficient gas hot water range, visit 

www.bosch.com.au/hotwater 

* Calculation based on carbon emissions in 

Victoria, where the average car produces 

four tonnes of greenhouse gas per year. 

Averages may vary in other regions. 

Source : Sustainability Victoria. 

** Reduced condensing efficiency due to 

warm water input. 


Philips Innovation: the MASTER TL5 Eco 

Philips most recent energy saving 

innovation is the MASTER TL5 Eco. 

This unique range reduces energy 

consumption by 10% without reducing 

lighting quality. These savings are 

made possible by the unique mix 

of filling gases and new phosphor 

technology which improves lighting 

output while reducing energy 

consumption. The MASTER TL5 Eco 25W 

lamps are a direct replacement for a 

regular TL5 28W and in the application 

provides the same light output - 2900 

lumens. 

The benefit of a true retrofit solution 

is the ease of use. MASTER TL5 Eco 

lamps are designed to work in all the 

applications that currently use the 

conventional TL5 lamps and therefore 

make them perfect for relamping 

existing TL5 luminaires as well as new 

buildings and renovations. 

But energy saving isn’t the only 

benefit of MASTER TL5 Eco. All of 

the existing specifications that have 

made Philips TL5 a popular choice 

have been included in this new 

technology : low mercury, (1.4mg), 

long lifetime, high CRI and ability to 

be dimmed, mean that this unique 

range can be included in almost all 

applications where TL5 is specified. 

Philips now offers a range of TL5 

Eco lamps that will offer energy 

saving options for most current TL5 

applications. We see this as a major step 

towards making energy saving easy to 

experience for all customers, while not 

compromising on lighting quality. 

For information contact Philips on 

1300 304 404 or 

www.philips.com.au/lighting 


Windows Fit For Purpose 

The BCA calls up windows that comply 

with AS 2047. Are you using products 

that comply? 

It is your responsibility to ensure your 

window manufacturer has compliance 

to AS 2047 or it will end up costing the 

builder or the owner a lot of money. 

Don’t take any chances! All AWA 

members undergo performance tests to 

verify performance claims. 

What is AS 2047? 

It is the mandatory minimum 

specification for windows and doors 

used in Australia it includes compliance 

to the Glass Standard AS 1288. 

The following performance tests 

are undertaken to verify product 

performance claims. 

1. AS 4420.2 Deflection Test – positive 

and negative wind pressures are 

applied to the face of the window to 

test the maximum deflection under 

wind load. 

2. AS 4420.3 Operating Force Test – to 

verify that an opening sash is capable 

of opening and closing without 

undue effort. 

3. AS 4420.4 Air Infiltration Test – the 

air leakage of a window is tested 

to ensure energy and acoustic 

efficiency. 

4. AS 4420.5 Water Penetration 

Resistance Test – this test is 

designed to ensure no water leaks 

through the window into the 

building. 

5. AS 4420.6 Ultimate Strength Test – 

negative and positive wind pressures 

are applied to the window to at least 

1.5 times the design wind pressure to 

ensure it does not fail in unusual wind 

conditions. 

All windows and doors for homes 

must have a Performance Label which 

confirms that they are certified to 

comply with Australian Standard AS 

2047. If you purchase windows from an 

accredited AWA member, you can also 

receive a Certificate of Compliance that 

supports a 7 year warranty. 

Example: Window label which should 

be affixed to window and door products 

to ensure compliance to AS 2047. 

All AWA 

members have 

products tested 

to AS 2047 and 

are a part of 

a third party 

NATA accredited 

program. This 

accreditation 

program is a proven and nationally 

recognised method of achieving 

compliance to assist builders, specifiers 

and homeowners to select products that 

comply with Australian Standards. 

Look for these logos when purchasing 

your windows to be 

confidant you are 

purchasing compliant 

products. 

Please visit www. 

awa.org.au for more 

information 


• 31

ConFerenCe + events Calendar 

ConFerenCe AnD evenTS 

CAlenDAr For 2010 

August 2010 

24-26 August WA Safety Show. Perth Convention Exhibition Centre. 

www.wasafetyshow.com 

24-25 August Premises Standards Seminars: Access Changes in Public Buildings, Sydney. 

www.humanrights.gov.au or www.abcb.gov.au 

27 August Premises Standards Seminars: Access Changes in Public Buildings, Darwin. 


30-31 August Premises Standards Seminars: Access Changes in Public Buildings, Perth. 


September 2010 

2 September Premises Standards Seminars: Access Changes in Public Buildings, Adelaide. 


2-3 September Victorian State Planning Conference. VIC. 

www.planning.org.au 

6-7 September Premises Standards Seminars: Access Changes in Public Buildings, Melbourne. 


9 September Premises Standards Seminars: Access Changes in Public Buildings, Hobart. 


16-17 September AIRAH Achieving the Green Dream Conference, Melbourne VIC. 

www.airah.org.au 

October 2010 

16-19 October AIBS 2010 International Conference, Gold Coast QLD. 

www.aibs.com.au 

26-28 October The Safety Show. Sydney Showground, Sydney Olympic Park. 

www.safetyinaction.net.au 

November 2010 

10-12 November Fire Australia 2010 Conference and Exhibition, Gold Coast QLD. 

www.fpaa.com.au 


3311_ABRB_Spring09_v8.indd 1 

REGISTER NOW 

www.abcb.gov.au 

18/8/09 11:43:24 AM 

 

Bulletin (ABR) now provides you with the 

opportunity to advertise your business, 

 

 

and Builders who are at the cutting edge of the 

 

ABRB readership and distribution is continuing 

 

also provided free of charge via the Australian Building 

Codes Board’s (ABCB) web site, as well as being distributed 

 

 

 

 

 

available through the distribution and readership 

 

 

and booking details can all be provided 

 

 

 

 

Present YOUR business 

to 45,000+ people within 

the construction 

industry! 

 

 

 

BCA 2010 

INFORMATION SEMINARS 

CLIMATE Building for CHANGE the Energy ADAPTATION Efficient CHALLENGES Future FOR 

THE Latest BUILT Developments ENVIRONMENT in South Australia’s Planning System 

GLAZING Compliance: SYSTEMS Buyer COMPARED Beware - Reduce FOR BCA the 2010 Risk and VOLUME be Confident TWO 

DRAFT that Building STANDARD Products FOR meet PRIVATE their BUSHFIRE Performance SHELTERS Claims 

BUILDING The Green AUSTRALIA’S Building Fund FUTURE - the second 2009 CONFERENCE year.... OVERVIEW 

 

 

 

 

 

Digital TV switch over in buildings 

A sustainable built environment–a Singapore perspective 

Industry perspective–HIA: Measuring the cost of Regulation 

Improving NSW Planning 

 

CONFERENCE + EVENT CALENDAR 

✁ 

Feedback 

helping the ABCB help you 

This magazine is the primary information support element of your subscription to the Building 

Code of Australia (BCA). Please take a few minutes to provide us with your feedback on this 

edition to assist the ABCB in ensuring that your Bulletin remains relevant. 

Have you found the coverage of topics presented to date: 

❏ very informative ❏ informative ❏ of some interest ❏ poor 

How would you assess the general presentation of the Magazine: 

❏ excellent ❏ above average ❏ acceptable ❏ below average ❏ poor 

Which articles most interest you: .................................................................................................... 

............................................................................................................................................................ 

What would you like to see included: ............................................................................................... 

............................................................................................................................................................ 

Comments: ........................................................................................................................................ 

............................................................................................................................................................ 

........................................................................................................................................................... 

@ 

 


• 33

Do your windows & doors 

comply to the BCA? 

? 

Members manufacture window and door products in compliance with all relevant 

Australian Standards 

Members verify their window's design performance using a NATA accredited 

testing laboratory 

Members performance label their windows to the required 'wind pressure' and 

'water penetration' requirements of AS2047 

Members provide windows that will make you home more comfortable, reduce 

energy costs and conforms to the solution paths for energy efficiency within the 

Building Code of Australia 

It is your responsibility to ensure your window manufacturer has compliance to AS2047. 

® 

Don’t take any chances! All AWA & WERS members undergo testing and auditing to verify 

performance claims of products. 

Choose AWA & WERS Members 

www.awa.org.au 

www.awa.org.au 

Photo courtesy of DLG Aluminium m & Glazing 

www.wers.net

PDF | 8 MB - Australian Building Codes Board

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?