MANY CHANCES CREATED “The positive is that we created that many chances and it is something we can work on. Creating the chances and having persons in the position to score is a good sign, and we want to continue building on that,” he added. The Boyz started shakily but came into their own after 15 minutes and had excellent chances, the best of which fell to Treyvonne Reid, Nickque Daley, and Kaheem Parris. Cuba also had a couple good opportunities, but good defending kept them at bay. Early in the second half, a mix-up in defence resulted in a Cuban player being brought down in the box, and Rodan netted the spot kick to put the Cubans in front. However, after wasting a number of great opportunities in the second half, they eventually got the equaliser when the ball fell to McIntosh, who calmly slotted past the excellent Danny Eduardo in goal. “We expected a tough game. Both teams had control of the ball at different intervals. They both got chances, so the 1-1 score is a good result for both teams,” said Cuba coach Rufino Sotolongo. Jamaica’s under-17 men’s football team had to settle for a 1-1 draw with Cuba in the first of their two friendlies at Winchester Park yesterday. Ribaldo Roldan put Cuba ahead from the penalty spot eight minutes into the second half, but Ricardo McIntosh cancelled that effort with a composed finish on 70 minutes. In what was a fairly competitive contest, the young Boyz were clearly the better team over the 90 minutes and had more and better chances to win the game. Coach Andrew Edwards was pleased with the number of chances the team created but thought their decision making and finishing needs more work if they are to advance from their group of death, which consists of USA, Mexico, and El Salvador in the CONCACAF final round. “I have mixed feelings about the game,” Edwards said. “In the first period, we had problems coming out of the back. We were not smooth and fluid as the defenders were not having good connection with the midfielders to ensure a smooth transition into the attacking third. “But we created nine chances in the first period and put away zero, and that is a major cause for concern. It doesn’t matter how good an opponent is, if you are creating chances and put away these chances, you are going to increase your confidence. But our decision making was not at the level we expect,” he continued. However, he says that creating chances is a positive, and they will have to improve on that for the next game on Tuesday.
South Africa is currently hosting the Federation of International Hockey (FIH) World League Semi-Finals, featuring the world’s best men’s and women’s teams, including South Africa.CD AndersonThis important qualifying tournament that will determine which teams compete at the World Cup and the Olympics, is being held at the University of Witwatersrand (Wits) until 23 July 2017.Brand South Africa/Play Your Part (PYP) is an event partner of the tournament, with the country’s men’s national side selected as PYP ambassadors.The South African teams will be looking to use their home team advantage to qualify for the 2018 World Cup; the women’s tournament will be held in London and the men’s in India.South African women’s hockey teamThe women’s team opened their tournament on 8 July against formidable India – ranked 12th to South Africa’s 13th in the FIH world rankings. The match ended in a tenacious 0 – 0 draw, with both teams giving as good as they got. However, the opening game featured stellar performances from South African forwards Tarryn Glasby and Sulette Damons.A third-quarter goal by Stephanie Baxter would have put South Africa ahead, but was ultimately disallowed because of interference.The women’s team will meet reigning Hockey Champions Trophy champions Argentina next, on 12 July, and then Chile and USA, on 14 and 16 July respectively, with hopes to reach the quarter-finals, starting on 18 July.Captain Nicolene Terblanche told SuperSport that while the team was confident of reaching the quarter-finals, she admitted competition was tough. “We played three warm-up matches against England and Japan and there are a lot of positives we can take out of those games… [We’re] looking ahead with this tournament and it is important for South Africa’s hockey’s future.”South African men’s hockey teamOn 9 July, the South African men’s team played Ireland, with both teams evenly poised throughout the game. Ultimately, though, following some handling errors and ill-discipline, the home team lost 2 – 0 to the Irish.Stand-out South African players in the game included Austin Smith’s hard work off the penalty corners that had the Irish defence on the backfoot during the second quarter.The men will hope to improve their performance in their remaining group games against Germany on 13 July, Egypt on 15 July and Belgium on 17 July. The quarter-finals begin on 19 July.Men’s coach Fabian Gregory reiterated the team’s strengths going forward in the tournament, saying fans could expect great things from the team. He singled out South African players Smith and Matthew Guise-Brown as two world-class flickers who had the ability to turn the tide of a game.Other highlights from the tournament so farRanked fifth in the world, Belgium’s men’s team went on an epic scoring run against Egypt in the opening match on 9 July. The final score was 10 – 0 to Belgium, with two goals by striker Tom Boon. The Belgians continued their blazing streak with another high-scoring game against the Irish on 11 July, scoring six goals to Ireland’s two.The sixth-ranked American women’s team beat India 4 – 1 on 10 July, while a riveting 2-all draw between the women’s German and Irish teams was the tightest contest of the tournament so far.All games will be broadcast on SuperSport, and fans can catch all the highlights and match reports on the FIH website.Follow the action on social media, including @Brand_SA, @PlayYourPartSA, @SA_Hockey and @FIH_Hockey, using the hashtags #SAHockeyRevolution and #HWL2017. Source: SuperSport, FIH, Brand South AfricaWould you like to use this article in your publication or on your website? See Using Brand South Africa material.
Project teams pursuing Passive House certification frequently ask, “Where do we locate the heat- or energy-recovery ventilator?” When the Passive House concept is scaled to a multifamily program, the answer is complex. While there are two primary arrangements for HRV/ERV systems. As multifamily Passive House projects begin to scale, the trade-off between the two arrangements is dynamic and needs to be carefully considered. A low-volume unit ventilating an individual apartment is called a “unitized HRV/ERV.” A high-volume unit ventilating multiple apartments, and often servicing several floors, is referred to as a “centralized HRV/ERV.” Trade-offs As Passive House consultants, we can attempt to address the system arrangement question with building science. However, in New York City, rentable floor space is very valuable, so considering the floor area trade-off is of particular interest to project teams.RELATED ARTICLESMisconceptions About HRVs and ERVsCommissioning ERVsCornell-Technion Green Campus Gets NYC NodCompartmentalization in Multifamily BuildingsResidential Commissioning When a unitized system cannot be located in a dropped ceiling due to low floor-to-floor height, it is placed in a dedicated mechanical closet. This closet is typically no smaller than 10 square feet and includes the necessary ductwork connections. The alternative solution is to increase the floor-to-floor height to accommodate the unit and horizontal duct runs in the ceiling. While centralized HRV/ERV systems allow short horizontal duct runs, they require floor space to accommodate vertical shafts. With supply and exhaust ducts coupled together, the required floor area is between 8 and 12 square feet. As a result, a centralized HRV/ERV system may actually require more floor area than a unitized system. In the case of of the Cornell Tech building in New York City, vertical supply and exhaust ductwork for the centralized HRV/ERV system required 222.5 square feet per floor, or 13 square feet per apartment (see image below). Unitized HRV/ERV mechanical closets would have required an estimated 170 square feet per floor, or 10 square feet per unit (on right). In the case of the Cornell Tech tower in New York City, a centralized HRV/ERV system required 13 square feet per apartment. A unitized system would have required 10 square feet per unit. Factoring in operating costs When determining cost effectiveness, building operating cost is of equal importance to floor area. Placing unitized HRV/ERV systems in apartments allows owners to include ventilation electricity on the residential electric meter, so the tenant pays for ventilation. In contrast, a central HRV/ERV’s electricity cost is absorbed by the building owner. Billing the tenants for ventilation may be attractive, but the trade-off is higher maintenance costs. All HRV/ERV units require routine filter changes, usually two or three times per year, as well as regular cleaning of exterior exhaust and intake vents. Building maintenance must be performed by the building management team. Multiply this by the number of apartments in the building for a unitized HRV/ERV system and the additional maintenance costs are likely to exceed any reduction to the owner’s utility bills. For a multifamily building, regular filter changes and exterior vent cleaning quickly becomes impractical. With the first cost of the unitized and centralized system types being comparable, teams must consider costs related to floor area and maintenance. Airtightness is a key consideration Now let’s discuss building science. One of the biggest challenges for a project team pursuing Passive House certification is complying with the stringent building envelope air leakage rate of 0.6 air changes per hour (ach50). To meet this requirement, the air barrier system must be detailed carefully and installed continuously, so penetrations for the HRV/ERV exhaust and intake vents must be carefully incorporated into the air barrier system. For a unitized HRV/ERV system, two penetrations per apartment are required: one for exhaust, one for intake. For a centralized system, only two to six penetrations may be required for the entire building. The Cornell Tech building, for example, has 352 apartments. With a unitized ERV system, this would amount to 698 additional penetrations through the air barrier to accommodate the exterior exhaust and intake vents. With a centralized ERV system, only six penetrations through the air barrier were required to accommodate the three ERV units. According to code, these intake and exhaust vents must be separated by a minimum of 10 feet and should be 2 feet from any window openings. Properly locating vents in a dense floor plan with a limited amount of exterior wall area per apartment is a challenge. With a unitized HRV/ERV system, any failure to correctly design or install the exhaust and intake vent detail impacts air leakage for the whole building. The installation of these small penetrations can be challenging, and repetitive deficiencies have a large impact on an otherwise airtight building. Passive House International requires a whole building air leakage rate of 0.6 ach50. Cornell Tech was tested with a whole building air leakage rate of 0.14 ach50. If we assume 4 cubic feet per minute of additional air leakage per apartment from two poorly detailed or installed HRV/ERV vent penetrations, the whole building air leakage rate increases to 0.19 ach50, an 8% increase in total air leakage. This demonstrates the impact that multiple deficient penetrations have on whole building air leakage rates for a multifamily project, and a possible margin of certification failure for some Passive House projects. Comparing condensation and other factors HRV/ERVs have two ducts that penetrate the exterior walls. These ducts have cold surfaces that present condensation risks for each unit. Isolating the ducts between the HRV/ERV and the exterior walls requires careful installation of duct insulation and a vapor barrier. Simply put, the risk of additional air leakage, condensation, and poor installation scales with the number of HRV/ERV units installed in a unitized system. Centralized HRV/ERV systems require their fair share of penetrations and additional detailing. There may be fewer air barrier penetrations, but each floor slab will be penetrated multiple times, requiring large fire-rated shafts and duct sealing. Vertical distribution for centralized HRV/ERV systems increases the length of duct runs from the HRV/ERV fan to the apartment registers. With long vertical duct runs, stack effect is increased, which makes balancing more challenging. Long duct runs also increase static pressure, which results in higher fan energy than for unitized systems. Any duct leakage in the system only exacerbates this problem. Addressing duct leakage Aerosealing ducts is critical to combat the stack effect, duct leakage, and to balance flow rates. This is an additional process where the ducts are sealed from the inside with a blown-in polymer. Furthering the installation complexity of large, centralized HRV/ERV systems is the addition of control sequencing and dampering to balance flows. In contrast, unitized HRV/ERVs are easier to commission, as they may be controlled and balanced at the unit or the register. Considering systems control and commissioning is a key decision because maintaining balanced ventilation is critical in an airtight Passive House. As the Passive House market grows and larger projects are constructed, project teams must consider HRV/ERV system arrangement. There is not a simple answer. However, the operating costs and long-term maintenance of centralized systems for a large multifamily building offer substantial benefits over a unitized system. Each project is unique and examining the pros and cons of both systems is an effective exercise to evaluate this design challenge. The chart below sums up the pros and cons of each type of system; keep in mind that first costs are similar. Unitized Pros Centralized Pros Tenant pays for ventilation. Maintains apartment comparmentalization. No floor penetrations. Lower fan power. Lower maintenance costs. Accessible for maintenance. Minimal penetrations. Reduced envelope leakage. Insulated ductwork not required. Reduced horizontal ductworks. Supply air temperature and relative humidity easily controlled. Unitized Cons Centralized Cons Increased maintenance costs. Access to apartments required for maintenance. Two penetrations per apartment, with additional envelope air leakage at each penetration. Difficult to properly insulate and air seal ductwork, resulting in a higher risk of condensation. Increased floor-to-floor height for horizontal duct runs. Reduced floor area. Reduced floor area. Owner pays for ventilation. Numerous floor penetrations. Fire-rated shafts and dampers. Stack effect. Aerosealing to reduce duct leakage. More difficult to balance. Higher fan power. Here is a link to the second article in this two-part series: “Ventilation for Passive House Multifamily Projects, Part 2.” Thomas Moore is a certified Passive House consultant and a building systems analyst with Steven Winter Associates, Inc. The second part of this post will compare HRVs and ERVs.
As we highlight Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) awareness month for March, there may be a few things that might surprise you about the injury that you didn’t know.TBI occurs when there is a sudden trauma causing damage to the brain. This can be from the head suddenly or violently hitting an object, or when an object pierces the skull – entering the brain tissue. TBI is known as the “signature wound” during the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts and between 2000 and 2012, more than 266,000 service members sustained a TBI (BrainLine Military). If you are caring for someone who is experiencing a TBI learn how to help and cope during this journey. According to the article, Caring for Those with Traumatic Brain Injury, it is important to:Identify inappropriate behaviors and outbursts.Educate children in the home about potential behavior changes.Avoid activities that could lead to another brain injury.Be patient.Join a support group for caregivers in similar caring situations.For more facts and resources for TBI visit brainline.org. Also, contact your state affiliated Brain Injury Association of America and the Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center to learn more about caring for those with a TBI. Subscribe to our mailing list for monthly eNewslettersEmail Address First Name Last Name This MFLN-Military Caregiving concentration blog post was published March 11, 2016.