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

MFPRO+ News | Dec 5, 2023

DOE's Zero Energy Ready Home Multifamily Version 2 released

The U.S. Department of Energy has released Zero Energy Ready Home Multifamily Version 2. The latest version of the certification program increases energy efficiency and performance levels, adds electric readiness, and makes compliance pathways and the certification process more consistent with the ENERGY STAR Multifamily New Construction (ESMFNC) program.

Architects | Dec 5, 2023

Populous celebrates its 40th anniversary with a photo exhibit of its works

The firm partnered with Getty Images to assemble more than 60 images, many capturing fan ardor.

Office Buildings | Dec 1, 2023

Amazon office building doubles as emergency housing for Seattle families

The unusual location for services of this kind serves over 300 people per day. Mary's Place spreads across eight of the office's floors—all designed by Graphite—testing the status quo for its experimental approach to homelessness support.

Mixed-Use | Nov 29, 2023

Mixed-use community benefits from city amenities and ‘micro units’

Salt Lake City, Utah, is home to a new mixed-use residential community that benefits from transit-oriented zoning and cleverly designed multifamily units.

Giants 400 | Nov 28, 2023

Top 100 Laboratory Design Firms for 2023

HDR, Flad Architects, DGA, Elkus Manfredi Architects, and Gensler top BD+C's ranking of the nation's largest laboratory architecture and architecture/engineering (AE) firms for 2023, as reported in Building Design+Construction's 2023 Giants 400 Report.

Engineers | Nov 27, 2023

Kimley-Horn eliminates the guesswork of electric vehicle charger site selection

Private businesses and governments can now choose their new electric vehicle (EV) charger locations with data-driven precision. Kimley-Horn, the national engineering, planning, and design consulting firm, today launched TREDLite EV, a cloud-based tool that helps organizations develop and optimize their EV charger deployment strategies based on the organization’s unique priorities.

Market Data | Nov 27, 2023

Number of employees returning to the office varies significantly by city

While the return-to-the-office trend is felt across the country, the percentage of employees moving back to their offices varies significantly according to geography, according to Eptura’s Q3 Workplace Index.

Resiliency | Nov 27, 2023

All levels of government need to act to cope with climate-driven flooding and sea level rise

The latest National Climate Assessment highlights the need for local, state, and federal governments to adopt policies to mitigate the effects of climate-driven flooding and sea level rise, according to a policy expert with the National Resources Defense Council.

Data Centers | Nov 22, 2023

How is artificial intelligence impacting data center design?

As AI is reshaping how we interact with machines and the world around us, the design of data centers needs to adapt to this fast-changing landscape. So, Page pairs expert thinking with high-performing solutions to meet the needs of rapidly advancing technologies.

Cultural Facilities | Nov 21, 2023

Arizona’s Water Education Center will teach visitors about water conservation and reuse strategies

Phoenix-based architecture firm Jones Studio will design the Water Education Center for Central Arizona Project (CAP)—a 336-mile aqueduct system that delivers Colorado River water to almost 6 million people, more than 80% of the state’s population. The Center will allow the public to explore CAP’s history, operations, and impact on Arizona.

boombox1
boombox2
native1

More In Category




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