![]() So, in the years following the birth of the field, the use of ‘envelope’ became widespread and remained so. Architectural Details for Insulated Buildings (1990), the $890.00 ‘Canadian’ book we previously reviewed, also uses ‘Envelope’ as the standard term when referring to the enclosure. In his 2012 article, Bailes makes a similar point when he says, “ …a lot of the mid-twentieth century building science work in Canada preferred the term envelope“. Historically, and understandably so, it seems that ‘envelope’ became the predominant term referring to the part of a building that contains the inside and separates the outside from the inside. Perhaps, in the future, we should consider using building integument, especially when discussing green architecture, biophilic architecture, and such… While I’ve heard the term ‘building wrapper’ used before, I agree that ‘building envelope’ is a better choice. In short, the word ‘envelope’ communicates the idea of something fully wrapped up, folded in, or contained in something else. Something that envelops, a wrapper, integument, or surrounding cover.That which envelops, wraps up, encases or surrounds, a wrapper, an enclosing cover.So, the founding fathers and mothers of the fledgling discipline decided on ‘envelope,’ and as the definition suggests, it made a lot of sense: I’m assuming they used ‘envelope’ since it adequately described the ‘thing’ that contains or ‘envelops’ the inside of a building, and building ‘wrapper’ or building ‘container’ just didn’t sound right. ( Email me or comment below, either is fine). Since I was not around either when North American Building Science was born, I would appreciate it if somebody can better explain why the term “Building Envelope” was originally used. 2006! That is quite a while, considering that many of the readers of this blog were barely walking in 2006! While trying to get to the bottom of this question, I found articles addressing this issue dating from 2006, 2012, 2017. So, can we agree that accuracy matters? Excellent. This article does a good job further elaborating on this point. While there is a tendency in Architecture to make up words to convey some concept or idea, we need to be more careful about the words we use when it comes to Building Science. the other? Yes, it does, and it seems that people much smarter than myself have the same position. Those familiar with the industry are surprised that there are not more of these debates.Īt the very least, we should ask ourselves, does it matter whether we use one vs. Those outside our industry might find it strange that highly educated and intelligent (presumably) individuals would debate (argue) about which term to use. This post looks at the history of this discussion and the current state of the ‘envelope’ vs. The discussion regarding whether to use ‘envelope’ or ‘enclosure’ has been ongoing for several years, and I suspect it will not stop soon. You might call it something else (skin, wrapper, facade, shell), but likely the building envelope. You are reading the ‘building enclosure’ blog, so it should come as no surprise that I call the thing surrounding the inside of a building the building enclosure. References, credits and, articles for further reading.Why we are convinced that enclosure is the right word.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |