Last week in our architecture community, discussions centered around sustainability practices and the integration of technology in design processes. Members shared varied opinions on the use of modern materials in traditional settings, which led to a lively debate about preserving architectural heritage. Additionally, there was a significant focus on the role of continuing education in enhancing participatory urbanism.
This Week’s Hot Topics
Please stop calling epoxy historic
There’s an engaging conversation about the use of epoxy in architecture and whether it should be considered a historic material. It’s sparking debate on materials preservation and authenticity. Read more here
My lobby glass render stole my kitchen
This thread humorously tackles the common mishaps in rendering software, illustrating how technology can sometimes have unintended effects on design projects. Read more here
CEUs that elevate participatory urbanism
A discussion focused on how continuing education units can be leveraged to promote more engaging and inclusive urban environments, reflecting a growing trend in community-centered design. Read more here
Automating room data sheets in Revit
This topic explores the efficiency gains from automating room data sheets using Revit, which is particularly useful for those looking to streamline their workflow in design documentation. Read more here
Air sealing done: HRV or windows next
Members are sharing insights on energy efficiency decisions post-air sealing, debating whether heat recovery ventilation or window upgrades should be prioritized. Read more here
Dialux evo or AGi32 for museum work
This technical discussion compares two lighting design tools, Dialux evo and AGi32, specifically for use in museum settings, offering practical advice for lighting professionals. Read more here
Wishing you a productive week ahead filled with insightful discussions and innovative ideas.
On epoxy as a “historic material,” I’d keep it to concealed consolidation and add to specs a small on‑site mock‑up with UV/thermal cycling and VOC limits; NPS Brief 9 backs targeted epoxy repairs: Technical Preservation Services (U.S. National Park Service). Would you try a quick 3D scan before/after to prove fabric retained, or am I just measuring twice to glue once?
Treating epoxy like it’s heritage-friendly makes me twitch, especially when we’re talking long-term maintenance budgets. Building on @Guide, one concrete step I push is a “retreat plan” in the specs: map every injection in the model, note product batch/VOC, and fund a 5‑year UV/thermal check — ties nicely to last week’s continuing‑ed theme; NPS Brief 9 helps, but I’d cap percent replacement and swap to B‑72 where reversibility matters (Technical Preservation Services (U.S. National Park Service)). Anyone logging these repairs in BIM/CMMS so future teams don’t get blindsided?
Quick example: I specify a small ‘witness coupon’ cast from the same epoxy batch, labeled and left on site, so future teams can do pull-off or hardness checks on the coupon instead of the historic fabric. If moisture or salts are active, I pause epoxy and use a breathable consolidant first, then revisit.
I pre-warm masonry with low‑temp heat blankets to about 28°C before epoxy pinning on cold sites; it drops viscosity and improves wet‑out, but I only do it after chloride strips and a 24‑hr in‑situ RH check come back clean. Building on @emerson_j55’s maintenance point, I log surface temp/RH with the batch ID — anyone else tracking that?