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
| Feb 28, 2012
Salem State University Library & Learning Commons topped off
When it opens to students in the fall of 2013, the $60 million facility will offer new archival space; circulation and reference areas; collections; reading spaces; study rooms; instruction labs and a Dean’s suite.
| Feb 28, 2012
More than 1,000 have earned EDAC certification since 2009
Milestone achieved as evidence-based design becomes a top 2012 strategy for healthcare organizations.
| Feb 28, 2012
McCarthy completes second phase of San Diego’s Scripps Hospital
Representing the second phase of a four-phased, $41.3 million expansion and remodeling project, the new addition doubles the size of the existing emergency department and trauma center to encompass a combined 27,000 square feet of space.
| Feb 28, 2012
LUMEnergi names Weinbaum president and CEO
Weinbaum’s experience spans communications, nanotechnology, electronics components, consumer products, semiconductors, software, wireless and lighting.
| Feb 28, 2012
Griffin Electric completes Medical University of South Carolina project
The 210,000-sf complex is comprised of two buildings, and houses research, teaching and office areas, plus conference spaces for the University.
| Feb 27, 2012
Consigli complete first building for Bigelow Ocean Sciences Campus
Designed by WBRC Architects Engineers in association with Perkins + Will.
| Feb 27, 2012
Hollister completes fit-out of 41,500-sf office space in Princeton, N.J.
Intricate interior project involved construction of more than 80 offices.
| Feb 27, 2012
Research Institute at Texas Children’s Hospital building receives LEED Gold
Innovative and sustainable design reflects best environmental building practices.
| Feb 26, 2012
Milwaukee U-Haul facility receives LEED-CI Silver
The new elements of the facility now include: efficient lighting with day-lighting controls and occupancy sensors, a high-efficiency HVAC system used in conjunction with a newly constructed thermal envelope to help reduce energy consumption, and the installation of low-flow fixtures to reduce water consumption.