Fault Tolerant MEP Infrastructure 2N or not 2N?

OCTOBER 2015www.hurleypalmerflatt.com
Also in this issue:
Case Study: AECC Energy Centre
Fault Tolerant MEP Infrastructure
Designing For Flexible Spaces
Energy
Savings
Opportunity
Scheme
Update

2 criticalthinking
In this issue of
hurleypalmerflatt Client Services
Director, Dr David Telford, discusses the
AECC Energy Centre project and how
it showcases the latest in renewable
technologies.
With only a few months to go, Client
Services Director Richard Whitaker,
gives us an update on the Energy
Savings Opportunity Scheme and
discusses the options open to
companies that have not yet taken
action.
Technical Board Director, Wyn Turnbull,
advises on the real difference between
resilience classifications, Tier III and
Tier IV, and how to apply these using a
more holistic approach.
Finally, Executive Director Adrian Gray
comments on the issue of shorter office
leases and how they have directly
affected designing for flexible spaces.
Paul Flatt, Group Chairman and CEO
hurleypalmerflatt
(c)HenryBootDevelopmentsLtd

www.hurleypalmerflatt.com criticalthinking 3
Contents
74
9 11
4 Case Study: AECC Energy Centre
7 Countdown To ESOS
9 Fault Tolerant MEP Infrastructure
11 Designing For Flexible Spaces
Editor: Dominique Varleigh
Contributors:
Dr David Telford Client Services Director
Richard Whitaker Client Services Director
Wyn Turnbull Technical Director
Adrian Gray Executive Director
Designer: Dominique Varleigh

4 criticalthinking
CASE STUDYAECC ENERGY CENTRE
Dr David Telford,
hurleypalmerflatt
Client Services
Director, discusses
the AECC Energy
Centre project and
how it showcases the
latest in renewable
technologies.
(c)HenryBootDevelopmentsLtd
CASE STUDY:
AECC Energy
Centre
hurleypalmerflatt have
been working with Henry
Boot Developments on the
energy solution for the
new Aberdeen Exhibition
and Conference Centre.
The energy centre will showcase renewable technologies to contribute
to Aberdeen’s position as Europe’s energy capital and will allow the new
AECC to be one of the most sustainable venues of its type in the UK.
The energy centre sits within the masterplan and is an integral part of
a fully integrated approach to sustainability and delivery of the vision.
Given the operational profile of the exhibition and conference venue, the
most sustainable solution is to develop a separate energy centre.
This will meet the annual demand of the AECC, together with the
remainder of the proposed masterplan development and will offer the
potential for additional off-site uses. By connecting the complementary
use profile of these other energy demands the energy centre will deliver
zero operational carbon energy to the AECC.
The energy centre will also be designed as an on-site demonstration
facility, providing a showcase for Aberdeen City and Shire as not only an
oil and gas leader, but a world class centre of excellence for the global
renewable energy industry.

CASE STUDYAECC ENERGY CENTRE
The Energy Centre Concept – A Biogas Based Ecosystem
The energy centre is based on a modular solution to address the changes in seasonal
demand and to provide flexibility for expansion and also to provide a platform for
demonstration plants. The energy ecosystem comprises the two main components.
An on-site Anaerobic Digestion Plant (AD) will take in Aberdeen City food waste,
agricultural waste and purpose grown crops to produce on-site renewable biogas. The
biogas is upgraded to pure Biomethane (equivalent to natural gas).
The gas output from the AD plant will be injected into the main gas grid and will also
feed parts of the on-site Combined Cooling Heat and Power (CCHP). The CCHP facility
will utilise various technologies to produce power, heat, and cooling to the AECC and
the remainder of the buildings on the masterplan site. Combined heat and power
will be generated using Spark Ignition (SI) gas engines coupled to alternators, heat
recovery boilers and static Molten Carbonate Hydrogen fuel cells.
The SI gas engines and Hydrogen fuel cells are capable of running off both
Biomethane and mains grid gas. Excess Biomethane will be reformed to Hydrogen for
transport. Surplus electrical power (generated at night) will be used within an on-site
electrolyser to produce an additional high grade Hydrogen stream for Aberdeen fuel
cell buses.
The annual electrical demand for the AECC is met by the Hydrogen fuel cells. Static
fuel cell technology provides base load power and heat and does not modulate well to
changes in demand.
Molten Carbonate has been selected as these are the most robust for variable
gas quality and can operate at high CO2
carry over. To meet the sharp peaks in
demand for heat, power and cooling associated with an exhibition, the performance
and conference venue additional CHP, in the form of more conventional gas fired
generators, will be provided.
In addition, support for diurnal variation will use both heat and cool stores. These will
be charged up overnight and available to support the power generation plant output
at times of high peak demand. In addition, technologies for storing excess overnight
electricity will be demonstrated on-site. Both high grade Hydrogen production and
power batteries (in the1-2MWhr scale) may be used.
The Hydrogen and Internal Combustion (IC) IC CHP units will be modular and capable
of running on either grid gas or Biomethane to provide flexibility and resilience. While
the thermal and electricity storage technologies will allow the site to use more of the
renewable energy directly.
When sizing CHP plants, it is fundamental to ensure that 100 percent of its outputs
(both electrical and thermal) are used. A detailed analysis of the outline design using
advanced thermal modelling will be carried out to accurately predict the thermal and
electrical load profiles of each building over annual, monthly and daily periods.
A demand side response model will be constructed to optimise the modular plant
sizes. A particular feature of the proposed development is that the district heating and
cooling systems need to be more efficient, intelligent and cheaper.
It is necessary to develop and deploy intelligent systems using smart metering and
control solutions for optimisation and consumer empowerment and exploiting multiple
energy resources. This includes waste heat recovery, heat pumps, thermal storage,
cogeneration and renewable energy integration, and to roll-out solutions for the
integration of intelligent thermal network with smart electricity grids.
The plant mix will balance the heat and power demands across the wider development
at the scale required. As the individual building designs develop with the aim of
minimising primary energy demand, plant selection and sizing will be an iterative
process as building designs are finalised. Additional modules can be added at a later
date to provide energy for the wider area, if required.

6 criticalthinking
Anaerobic Digestion. AD is a process in which
micro-organisms break down biodegradable material in
the absence of Oxygen. It takes place in sealed vessels,
which exclude air and is quite a different process to
composting, which needs air fed through it. The primary
purpose of AD is to produce the Methane rich biogas.
This can be utilised directly or purified and upgraded to
Biomethane as a renewable replacement for natural gas.
Gas upgrading technology. The raw biogas which is
produced in the AD process contains 60 percent Methane
and approximately 40 percent CO2
. In order to inject the
Biomethane into the grid, the CO2
must be removed. CO2
capture technology will be used to harness this for use in
the Commercial/Industrial market.
A typical use for this type of bottled CO2
is in fire
extinguishers. The net effect of installing the CO2
capture
facility on overall emissions is that the energy centre will
become Carbon negative making the AECC one of the first
Carbon negative conference facilities in the world.
AD plant logistics. A particular challenge here is to
separate the logistics so that the clean odour free
operations are conducted on-site with off-site support
for the fuel preparation and transport. Loading the plant
will entail taking prepared waste materials and energy
crops from off-site to the sealed on-site reception hall for
loading into the AD plant. This is done in the negative
pressure reception building. Delivery of feedstock will be
from either tankers or bulk haulage lorries. Digestate will
be removed by tankers as organic fertiliser and returned
to the farms. All feedstock will be stored and handled in a
controlled environment. There will be no open air storage
at the AECC site.
Digestate storage and treatment digestate. This is the
material remaining after the anaerobic digestion of a
biodegradable feedstock. The primary use of digestate
is as a soil conditioner and organic fertiliser. Most of the
nutrients in the original feedstock remain in the digestate
as does the fibrous matrerial. Digestate contains Nitrogen,
Phosphate and Potassium in a form that is readily
available for crop uptake and the fibre is a valuable soil
conditioner. This reduces reliance on other industrially
produced fertilisers. Growth trials on digestate, originating
from mixed waste, have shown healthy growth results for
crops.
While digestate is technically not compost, it is similar
in physical and chemical characteristics. Digestate will
be removed by tanker and spread on the land which the
feedstock has come from. Use of crops co-digested with
food waste is sustainable from a land-use perspective and
can be shown to be a prudent use of resources.
AECC ENERGY CENTRE OVERVIEW
AECC FOUR PIPE DISTRICT
HEATING & COOLING NETWORK
ELECTRICITY TO &
FROM GRID
GRID GAS
CONNECTION
FERTILISER
AGRI &
FOOD WASTE
BIOMETHANE
PRODUCTION
CCHP POWER GENERATION
BUILDING
POWER
HEAT
COOLING
ANAEROBIC (AD)
BUILDING
EXCESS HYDROGEN
FOR TRANSPORT
Inside the Combined Cooling
Heating and Power (CCHP)
Building CHP Bulk
Gas Fired CHP Units
Hydrogen Fuel Cells
Absorption Chillers
Electric Chillers
Gas Boilers
Back-Up Diesel Generation
Hot Water Store
Ice Store
AECC ENERGY CENTRE CASE STUDY
(c) Henry Boot Developments Ltd

ENERGY SAVINGS OPPORTUNITY SCHEME ESOS
Company obligations for compliance with ESOS have
been very well publicised this year, but with the deadline
date of the 5 December looming, the Environment
Agency (EA) have made the decision to provide some
saving grace to companies that are at risk of missing this
deadline.
The EA have announced that companies have until the
29 January 2016 to make their ESOS submittals without
penalty.
This is as long as organisations advise the EA of their
participation by the 5 December, along with the reasons
why they are unable to comply. Any company that should
be part of ESOS and fail to do this will risk the penalties
imposed by the EA.
For organisations committing to achieving compliance
through ISO 50001 certification, enforcement action will
not normally be taken as long as notification is received
by 30 June 2016.
It may be the case that some are underestimating its
significance and putting it off; though with the risk of
critically misjudging how strictly the EA will impose
penalties for not undertaking the necessary energy audits
in time.
There is no doubt that the EA is taking this very seriously,
and the agency knows exactly who the 6,000 or so
affected companies are.
As a general principle, it is reasonable to assume that
the fines will outweigh the fees, though the burden of
fines will only be the tip of the iceberg when it comes
to the reputational risks involved with non-compliant
organisations being listed on the EA website.
Non-compliant organisations who have adopted ISO
14001 will also be in breach of this. Businesses which
fail to comply with ESOS could be fined up to £50,000,
plus an additional £500 a day, every day the audit
remains outstanding.
As we count down towards the deadline, what
are the options open to companies that have
not yet taken action?
There are several routes to ensuring compliance, though
each applies a different life cycle cost model accounting
for varying timescales and budgets.
Every option requires a calculation of total energy
consumption by an organisation, including buildings,
transport and industrial processes (if applicable), then
the need to identify the areas where there is significant
energy consumption, and the best route to take may be
different in each case.
The three main options open to most organisations
currently include the recommended ESOS Energy audit,
the DEC (Display Energy Certificates) path, as well as
the ISO 50001 approach, although companies already
covered by the latter will not need to carry out an ESOS
assessment.
Countdown To ESOS
With a few months to go,
what options are left?
The UK’s Energy Savings
Opportunity Scheme (ESOS) is
a mandatory energy assessment
and energy saving identification
scheme for large undertakings
(and their corporate groups).
The scheme applies throughout
the UK.
Richard Whitaker,
hurleypalmerflatt
Client Services
Director, gives
us an update
on ESOS and
identifies the
options left with
only three months
to go.

8 criticalthinking
However, bluntly speaking, the requirements for an ISO 50001 energy management system probably means
it is now off the table for most organisations, unless this can be fully implemented prior to the 30 June 2016
deadline. This may be achievable for smaller organisations, but for larger corporates, this time scale may present
a challenge.
As such, the two main qualifying assessments open to organisations are either a full ESOS audit or the lower cost
and lower detail DEC option.
The completion of a full ESOS assessment is perhaps the most comprehensive and involved option, providing
detailed information on energy efficiency initiatives and investment grade proposals for their implementation.
This route to compliance will also allow sampling of buildings within an estate, allowing companies the
opportunity to target critical buildings in their portfolio. A lead assessor then needs to be appointed – and
organisations should be cautious about who is selected for this role, ensuring they fully meet the requirements of
ESOS and the EA (including being a member of an approved register).
Although the notification of compliance has now been extended to 29 January 2016, subject to informing the EA
of participation by the 5 December 2015. The same submission requirements are in place with the requirements
for the production of an evidence pack and an online submission underwritten by a board director and lead ESOS
assessor.
This may seem straightforward, but it involves a significant investment in time and resource in order to complete
it accurately, and companies really should be commencing this process as soon as possible.
Finally, the DEC route to compliance is perhaps the lower cost option, replying on less detailed energy
certification. No sampling is allowed on this route and all buildings in a portfolio will need to have a DEC
certificate to achieve compliance. DEC certificates have been approved to count towards ESOS compliance.
However, only buildings holding a valid DEC certificate (and accompanying recommendation report) can be
regarded as compliant with ESOS.
The most important thing is that companies begin to take action now. Failure to comply will result in all manner
of actions, and least of all will be the often significant fines. The potential loss of ISO accreditation and the
much publicised public naming and shaming will be an even bigger concern. No large organisation will want to
be associated with not complying with such an important
environmental matter.
hurleypalmerflatt have developed a specialist ESOS service to provide a structured approach
to compliance. To find out more, please contact Richard Whitaker at richard.whitaker@
hurleypalmerflatt.com
I am a large undertaking
and
I am in ESOS
I am a large undertaking
and
I am in ESOS
I am in ESOS
Do I employ 250 or
more employees
Am I part of a group of
undertakings?
Does the group of
undertakings include
one or more large
undertakings/
establishments in the
UK?
Is my turnover in
excess of
€50m/£38,937,777?
AND
Is my balance sheet total
in excess of
€43m/£33,486,489?
Am I registered/based in the UK or a UK establishment?
ENERGY SAVINGS OPPORTUNITY SCHEME
ESOS

As a means of determining the resilience of engineering
infrastructure that supports Information and
Communications Technology (ICT), the mission critical
engineering services industry, to a greater degree, makes
reference to the Uptime Institute’s (UTI) Tier classification.
The commonly used terms for the UTI Tier III and Tier IV
classifications are ‘concurrently maintainable’ and ‘fault
tolerant’, respectively. The former term, ‘concurrently
maintainable’, tends to be more widely understood, though
detailed examination by the UTI during accreditation
exercises reveal nuances that are relatively easy to
comprehend. The latter term, ‘fault tolerant’, is not always
so well understood, for which this article explores and will
attempt to remove some of the myths.
UTI Tier classification development.
The terms ‘concurrently maintainable’ and ‘fault tolerant’
originate from within the ICT industry. They were adopted
by the UTI during the development of its Tier classification
which dates back to 1995, and even further back to IBM’s
classifications of levels one to four in the 1980s.
Interestingly, performing a Google search using the words
‘fault tolerant’ provides results that are solely ICT related
and do not refer to the Uptime Institute for at least the first
five pages. Whether this changes after the first five pages
was not investigated.
Most practitioners within the engineering aspect of the ICT
mission critical environment will be familiar with the UTI’s
publication: ‘Tier Classifications Define Site Infrastructure
Performance.’, originally issued as a white paper in 1996
with revisions in 2001 and 2006. This document was
eventually withdrawn and superseded by ‘Data Center Site
Infrastructure Tier Standard: Topology.’ in 2010; with a
subsequent revision in 2012.
Other similar, possibly competing documents include
the American organisation TIA with their TIA 942 which
was first published in 2005, originally concentrating on
ICT principles for resilience. Also included is the more
recent European based specification BS EN 50600
entitled, ‘Information Technology - Data centre facilities
and infrastructures.’, again with a starting point of
looking at ICT systems and progressing to MEP systems.
2N OR NOT 2N? THAT IS THE QUESTIONFAULT TOLERANT MEP INFRASTRUCTURE
Wyn Turnbull,
Technical Director,
advises on the
real difference
between resilience
classifications,
Tier III and Tier IV,
and how to apply
these using a more
holistic approach.
Fault Tolerant MEP
Infrastructure
2N or not 2N?
That is the question.

10 criticalthinking
Unsurprisingly, these documents do not always align
and their scope varies depending upon interest – regular
revision every couple of years serve to confuse the
practitioner and the market!
While the UTI did not include cooling system block
schematics within their publications, the electrical block
schematics that existed within the original white paper
were removed when this document was superseded by the
new standard in 2010.
It may be considered that omission of the electrical block
schematics removed clarification of the Tier Classification
requirements. In fact, the opposite is true. Designers
and reviewers would often make reference to the block
schematics on the assumption that provided the design
followed the principles of the UTI electrical block
schematics, the system design must therefore be UTI Tier
compliant. Closer examination of the other tier criteria
shows that this is not necessarily a safe assumption.
One of the subtle, but nevertheless important, differences
between the UTI’s original white paper and the 2010 and
2012 standards, is that the latter removed the need for
Tier III infrastructure to have segregated components or
systems; leaving this criterion as a requirement solely for
the Tier IV classification.
The definition of a fault.
The electrical engineering discipline tends to have a
narrow definition of what constitutes a fault. In generic
terms an electrical fault may be considered as being an
event that results in the tripping of a functional device
(e.g. circuit breaker), with the subsequent isolation and
loss of power to part or parts of the electrical system.
In the UTI’s ‘fault tolerant’ term, the word fault has a
much broader meaning. It refers to an abnormal event
within the facility or the failure, and the associated
consequences, of any component or system.
The difference between the restricted electrical definition
and the wider UTI use of the term may be illustrated
in the following example. Consider two electrical
switchboards, which by the nature of their construction,
are within adjacent but separate rooms (fire rated or
not). They each independently form part of two separate
power streams that may not be fault tolerant. From the
electrical aspect, a breaker tripping on one switchboard
may only affect one of the two switchrooms and the
associated power stream. However, the failure of a water
line that passes externally to the two switchrooms may
result in both rooms flooding possibly affecting both
power streams. From an electrical consideration the
arrangement would be considered to be fault tolerant but
the physical adjacency to a common abnormal event may
fail a fault tolerant examination.
Form of segregation.
When Tier IV fault tolerant compliance is assessed the
extent of the component and system segregation becomes
significant in addition to the attributes provided by the
system schematics.
When considering the role of segregation within the UTI
Tier classification, it is important to note that no mention
of the extent of, or lack of, fire segregation is contained
within the UTI Tier documents. The principal reasoning
behind this is to make the UTI documents totally
independent of, and non-reliant upon, the fire codes
across the world.
To satisfy the fault tolerant criteria the method and
form of segregation needs to be able to prevent a fault
(abnormal event) associated with one service stream
affecting the alternative service stream.
The provision of fire suppression is an example of
where the fabric forming a compartmental approach to
segregation need not, from the fault tolerant aspect, have
a specific fire rating.
In the example of abnormal water release the method or
form of segregation has to be sufficient to prevent the
incident affecting the continuance of service.
Commercial considerations.
It is not unusual for the focus to be centred on system
redundancy rather than identifying if the separation of
system components can meet the fault tolerant criteria.
Following the principles of the original UTI block
schematics without consideration of the advantages that
segregation can offer, may not always provide the most
commercially beneficial fault tolerant solution.
As an example, the provision of 2N or even 2 x (N+1)
generation is not an absolute necessity if each generator
set is located within its own compartment; and the
alternator connections to the electrical network are
appropriately arranged. It is therefore feasible for a fault
tolerant generator system to be limited to N+1. This
arrangement becomes a cost benefit analysis between
the cost and space required for the generator sets against
the provision of additional switchgear and the space to
accommodate the required electrical reticulation.
Back to the origins of a fault tolerant system.
With the increasing application of control systems to data
centre engineering infrastructure, there is a need for the
industry to more closely examine how the ICT industry
approaches the question of fault tolerance.
Sometimes the simpler approach may offer a better
solution. This counters the trend towards larger integrated
DCIM systems resulting in centralised rather than
distributed and independent standalone components
or sub-systems. This poses the question of whether two
mirrored Tier I or Tier II data centres will, as a pair, be
fault tolerant and commercially more attractive than one
Tier IV site.
2N OR NOT 2N? THAT IS THE QUESTIONFAULT TOLERANT MEP INFRASTRUCTURE

IMPLICATIONS OF SHORTER LEASESDESIGNING FOR FLEXIBLE SPACES
Traditionally commercial offices in the UK, and
particularly in London, have been designed to be
let on a 25 year basis. Long leases have long been
considered attractive by landlords as it allows the
asset to yield a consistent return over a fixed term,
which makes the building easy to value and trade.
Incentives, such as initial rent free periods have been
used to encourage tenants to sign up long-term.
However, the 25 year lease is peculiar to the UK.
Elsewhere in the world, offices are often let on much
shorter terms, typically closer to ten years in the USA
and Australia and even shorter in Singapore and the
Far East.
In recent years, London has become even more
international and many occupiers are now
questioning the wisdom of committing to long leases.
This has generated some downward pressure on the
market reducing the average length of office leases.
Recent surveys by CBRE and the British Property
Federation have shown that since 2012, the average
lease length has been shortening. Leases over ten
years are now a rare event and make up only six
percent of new leases.
Designing For
Flexible Spaces
Implications of
shorter leases.
Adrian Gray,
hurleypalmerflatt
Executive Director,
comments on the
issue of shorter
office leases and
how they have
directly affected
designing for
flexible spaces.

12 criticalthinking
The distribution of lease lengths shows how rare leases
over ten years have become in recent years.
Less than six percent of leases are over ten years in
length now, compared to twice that only five years ago
and more than 20 percent ten years ago.
Managed and serviced offices
Both managed offices and serviced offices are flexible
office space solutions that can be convenient for
companies who do not want or cannot commit to
long-term leases. Serviced offices differ from managed
offices in two main aspects. First of all, serviced offices
have been built to specification, keeping the needs of
modern businesses in mind. Secondly, rental fees for
serviced offices are fully inclusive.
On the other hand, managed offices often consist of
vacant space rented out by the company or by the
individual that owns the space. Since the space will
not have been necessarily built to be occupied as an
office, tenants may have to invest in things like office
furniture and telecommunications. Most managed
offices are fitted with basic amenities like workstation
partitions and cabling, and their fees may include
office cleaning, but they do not offer clerical support,
dedicated meeting rooms, reception services, and the
full range of facilities offered by serviced offices.
How does this affect how a building is designed?
Shorter leases mean that buildings will be fitted-out
more often, whilst staggered leases with multiple
tenants can mean that there are often some tenants
fit-out work being undertaken somewhere in a building.
To take account of this, office buildings now have to be
more flexible and many developers are now taking this
into consideration when setting a brief for the design
team.
In terms of general arrangement, to facilitate more
frequent fit-out work, there should also be adequate
access to the goods lift at ground floor level with a
separate route that avoids the reception. The goods
lift should also be adequately sized to allow the
transportation of fit-out materials.
This also affects our work as building services
engineers as there are many aspects of a buildings
flexibility that depend on the correct approach to the
design of services. This generally means that services
should be adaptable and easily modified to suit
different room layouts in the least amount of time and
with as little disruption as possible.
Risers and plant rooms.
Careful consideration needs to be given to
commissioning and how this can be achieved with
minimum disruption in an occupied building.
This can be as simple as ensuring that equipment
and valves are easily accessible but can be taken
further by specifying addressable controllers and
electronic measuring devices. This allows the flow of
air and water to be adjusted remotely with little or
no disruption – other than the periodic calibration of
equipment.
Mechanical air services.
Fresh air systems should be designed to be flexible
and this can be achieved by including variable volume
boxes to control the flow of fresh air to floors and even
parts of floors. Even more control could be afforded
by introducing VAV boxes to control the flow to zones
or batches of fan coil units. These control devices can
be individually addressable and linked to the BMS to
enable adjustment without the disruption of accessing
tenant’s space.
The central air system should also be capable of
providing a variable volume of air by using a variable
speed drive that is controlled by a pressure sensor in
the fresh air riser.
On the secondary side of the ductwork system,
flexibility can be introduced by using multi-fan fan coil
units, where the individual fans within the unit each
provide air to just one grille. This provides the ability
to vary the amount of air to each grille by adjusting fan
speeds individually to suit requirements. It is possible
to do this remotely using the BMS – Individual fans
can also be turned off if necessary.
With careful design it is possible to allow for multiple
configurations of offices and meeting rooms within
the same space and to make adaptations without
disturbing the ceiling grid.

Mechanical water systems.
The main cooling system should be designed and selected to operate efficiently at lower loads as in a flexible
space building, the requirements will be subject to constant change and part load operation will be more of a
frequent occurrence.
Primary circulation pumps should be capable of providing variable flow so that the flow can be adjusted to meet
the demands of secondary systems.
Tenants secondary water circuits should be separated from landlords systems by a heat exchanger. This will
allow draining, flushing and cleaning of the tenant’s water systems to take place without the disruption of the
landlord’s primary circuits.
Mechanical services above a false ceiling have to be modified to accommodate changes to partition layouts; the
most disruptive part of this work is the cutting of pipe work which requires isolating and draining.
Where offices are designed to be very flexible, it is advisable to fit additional connection points so that further fan
coil units can be added quickly and without too much disruption.
Other important factors are metering and the ability to control systems on a floor by floor basis with the possibility
of further sub-division.
Tenants place space.
The provision of external space for tenants to use and locate plant and equipment also becomes more important.
It is important to carefully consider the potential usage of the building during the design stage; this should form
part of the concept and strategic briefing exercise.
Most occupiers will require resilient cooling for computer rooms.
Electrical systems.
Whenever a tenancy change occurs the building design needs to allow flexibility for a change in layout and this
will occur more often with shorter tenancies. As with the mechanical systems it is important to consider how
equipment can be adjusted and commissioned whilst keeping disruption to a minimum.
The use of intelligent lighting control systems and fittings, including dimming control, allows flexibility for a
change of layout. The use of addressable dimming adds even more flexibility and control.
Fire alarm systems and smoke detectors should be designed to allow the maximum amount of flexibility with
sufficient spare capacity to allow for the incorporation of additional meeting rooms or cellular offices.
Frequent changes of use on floors may lead to a variation in the small power requirements. An efficient way to
provide flexibility for this is to incorporate additional capacity in the electrical risers to allow for varying amounts
to be taken at each floor during the lifetime of the building.
Electrical and water services metering should be installed on a floor by floor basis to allow for future split
tenancy’s.

Building Services Engineering | Energy and Sustainability | Building Structures and Surveying | IT and Security Consultancy
LONDON CITY | WEST END | PURLEY | MANCHESTER | GLASGOW
NEW YORK | DUBAI | MUMBAI | SINGAPORE | SYDNEY
www.hurleypalmerflatt.com
* Associate offices
London City
Broken Wharf House
2 Broken Wharf
London
EC4V 3DT
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7429 3333
Glasgow
204 West George Street
Glasgow
G2 2PQ
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 141 572 1324
London West End
York House
45 Seymour Street
London
W1H 7JT
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7535 3100
New York*
rda | hurleypalmerflatt
19 West 44th Street
New York
NY 10036
Tel: +44 20 7429 3360
Tel: +00 1 212 764 7272
Sydney
Level 11
50 Pitt Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Australia
Tel: +61 2 9112 9900
Purley
NWS House
1E High Street
Purley, Surrey
CR8 2AF
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 8763 5900
Dubai *
PO Box 333370
Dubai
Tel: +971 50 585 5666
Manchester*
Hannan | hurleypalmerflatt
Beta House
Alphagate Drive
Manchester Road, Denton
M34 3SH
Tel: +44 (0)161 337 2200
Mumbai
L2, 294 CST Rd,
Off Bandra-Kurla Complex Kalina,
Santacruz (E)
Mumbai 400098
India
Tel: +91 80 6792 0873
Singapore
545 Orchard Road
#13-06
Singapore 238882
Tel: +65 6736 7394

Fault Tolerant MEP Infrastructure 2N or not 2N?

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (10)

Similar to Fault Tolerant MEP Infrastructure 2N or not 2N? (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Fault Tolerant MEP Infrastructure 2N or not 2N?