flexiblefullpage
billboard
interstitial1
catfish1
Currently Reading

How AEC Professionals Choose Windows and Doors

How AEC Professionals Choose Windows and Doors


By By Jay W. Schneider, Editor | April 14, 2011
This article first appeared in the April 2011 issue of BD+C.

Window and door systems need to perform. Period. Over and over again, respondents to Building Design+Construction’s annual window and door survey overwhelmingly
reported that performance, weather resistance, durability, and quality were key reasons a particular window or door was specified.

Respondents also offered opinions on materials choices (aluminum is tops for windows, wood for doors), glazing options (no clear favorites), daylighting (somewhat
of a concern), and use of BIM in window and door selection (not a concern). 

Here’s what a representative sample of your peers told us about why and how they choose the windows and doors they use.

(Download a PDF of the full survey report below)

What Factors Influence Selection?

•  Respondents overwhelmingly said the top factors influencing their window/window system choices are energy/thermal performance (87%), durability/reliability (73%), and weather resistance (70%). Aesthetics ranked high as well, with 62% of respondents listing it as an important factor. Tax credits, rebates, and other incentives proved not to be significant purchasing factors.

•  Performance is also a significant factor for door/door system choices. The top factors influencing door/door system choices—energy/thermal performance (76%), durability/reliability (75%), and weather resistance (65%)—are the same ones respondents cited as influencing their window decisions. Here, aesthetics ranked slightly higher than it did for windows, with 64% of respondents saying it’s a significant influencer. The majority of respondents (58%) choose the door hardware for most projects.

•  When it comes to interior door selection, aesthetics ranked highest, with 72% of respondents saying it was their main influence. Other top factors in selection: performance (67%), initial costs (54%), and acoustical performance (43%).

•  When asked about specific concerns with window and door products overall, quality/performance was at the top, with 58% of respondents voting it their gravest concern. Second on their list: leaks or failures—very closely related to quality and performance—with 51% expressing concern. Forty-four percent of respondents listed government requirements as their least important concern with window and door projects.

•  Several respondents who provided written feedback noted concern about proper installation and the skill levels of contractors who install windows or doors. However, when ranking concerns, only 28% listed installation problems as a major concern.

•  The types of projects our respondents undertook greatly influenced window and door selection. Office buildings (56%) and multifamily housing (46%) were most often cited as the project types respondents undertook during the past couple of years. Retail/entertainment (32%) and government/military (29%) projects also ranked high.

Product Selection: A Mix of Materials

•  Aluminum (51%) and wood (40%) are the window framing materials most often specified by respondents. Aluminum-clad wood (35%) and vinyl-clad wood (33%) also ranked high as framing materials.

•  Wood doors are a favorite for 72% of respondents, while steel doors are also popular, with 58% of respondents specifying them. Aluminum doors and glass doors also fared well, with 39% of respondents specifying aluminum and 38% specifying glass. 

•  Standard window and door products are an overwhelming favorite of respondents, with 73% saying they specify standard units compared with only 27% who specify custom units.

•  Daylighting does play a role in our respondents’ window selections, with 59% saying it was an important or significant factor, while 41% said daylighting was only an average-rated factor to not being a factor at all.

•  Although code requirements are a factor in any product decision, when it comes to daylighting, 68% of respondents said code requirements are an important or very important factor. Only 13% said that codes almost never or never factor into daylighting decisions.

Product Types

•  When it came to glazing types used in projects during the last couple of years, no particular type stood out above others. Respondents indicated that each specialty type—fire-rated/safety, impact-resistant, laminated, and tinted—were used equally, and in each case in just a few projects.

•  One relatively new glazing type, electrochromic glass, was used extensively by only 1% of respondents; 83% reported no use of the technology. Similarly, only 2% reported extensive use of movable glass wall systems, while 72% reported never having used them. Clearly, new technologies like these take some time to gain adoption by AEC professionals.

•  Operable windows were used in a significant number of projects, according to respondents who used them extensively (47%), in at least half their projects (21%), or in a few projects (22%). Only 10% reported no use of operable windows.

•  Half the respondents reported using skylights and roof windows in just a few projects; 25% reported never having used them. Only 10% reported using them extensively, and 15% reported using them in an average number of projects.

BIM Usage Not Quite a Factor  

•  Building information modeling doesn’t currently play a major role in our respondents’ window- and door-related projects, with 64% saying they haven’t used BIM in this capacity. Only 11% report extensive use of BIM in making window and door selections. It might be a few more years before BIM usage cranks up for window and door projects because only 15% of respondents expect to use BIM in this capacity in the next couple years. Almost half (48%) said they don’t expect to use BIM in this capacity at all over the next couple years.

SURVEY METHODOLGY

The survey was emailed to a representative sample of BD+C’s subscriber list. No incentive was offered; 451 qualified returns were obtained. The majority of responses (45%) came from architects and designers, a group that represents half of BD+C’s subscriber base. However, respondents were spread across the professions, and included 22% from contractors and 12% from the engineering fields. 

Related Stories

| May 18, 2011

Former Bronx railyard redeveloped as shared education campus

Four schools find strength in numbers at the new 2,310-student Mott Haven Campus in New York City. The schools—three high schools and a K-4 elementary school—coexist on the 6.5-acre South Bronx campus, which was once a railyard.

| May 18, 2011

Eco-friendly San Antonio school combines history and sustainability

The 113,000-sf Rolling Meadows Elementary School in San Antonio is the Judson Independent School District’s first sustainable facility, with green features such as vented roofs for rainwater collection and regionally sourced materials.

| May 18, 2011

New Reform Jewish Independent school opens outside Boston

The Rashi School, one of only 17 Reform Jewish independent schools in North American and Israel, opened a new $30 million facility on a 166-acre campus shared with the Hebrew SeniorLife community on the Charles River in Dedham, Mass.

| May 18, 2011

Design diversity celebrated at Orange County club

The Orange County, Calif., firm NKDDI designed the 22,000-sf Luna Lounge & Nightclub in Pomona, Calif., to be a high-end multipurpose event space that can transition from restaurant to lounge to nightclub to music venue.

| May 18, 2011

Lab personnel find comfort in former Winchester gun factory

The former Winchester Repeating Arms Factory in New Haven, Conn., is the new home of PepsiCo’s Biology Innovation Research Laboratory.

| May 18, 2011

Addition provides new school for pre-K and special-needs kids outside Chicago

Perkins+Will, Chicago, designed the Early Learning Center, a $9 million, 37,000-sf addition to Barrington Middle School in Barrington, Ill., to create an easily accessible and safe learning environment for pre-kindergarten and special-needs students.

| May 18, 2011

Raphael Viñoly’s serpentine-shaped building snakes up San Francisco hillside

The hillside location for the Ray and Dagmar Dolby Regeneration Medicine building at the University of California, San Francisco, presented a challenge to the Building Team of Raphael Viñoly, SmithGroup, DPR Construction, and Forell/Elsesser Engineers. The 660-foot-long serpentine-shaped building sits on a structural framework 40 to 70 feet off the ground to accommodate the hillside’s steep 60-degree slope.

| May 18, 2011

New center provides home to medical specialties

Construction has begun on the 150,000-sf Medical Arts Pavilion at the University Medical Center in Princeton, N.J.

| May 18, 2011

Improvements add to Detroit convention center’s appeal

Interior and exterior renovations and updates will make the Detroit Cobo Center more appealing to conventioneers. A new 40,000-sf ballroom will take advantage of the center’s riverfront location, with views of the river and downtown.

boombox1
boombox2
native1

More In Category


Urban Planning

Bridging the gap: How early architect involvement can revolutionize a city’s capital improvement plans

Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) typically span three to five years and outline future city projects and their costs. While they set the stage, the design and construction of these projects often extend beyond the CIP window, leading to a disconnect between the initial budget and evolving project scope. This can result in financial shortfalls, forcing cities to cut back on critical project features.



Libraries

Reasons to reinvent the Midcentury academic library

DLR Group's Interior Design Leader Gretchen Holy, Assoc. IIDA, shares the idea that a designer's responsibility to embrace a library’s history, respect its past, and create an environment that will serve student populations for the next 100 years.

halfpage1

Most Popular Content

  1. 2021 Giants 400 Report
  2. Top 150 Architecture Firms for 2019
  3. 13 projects that represent the future of affordable housing
  4. Sagrada Familia completion date pushed back due to coronavirus
  5. Top 160 Architecture Firms 2021