Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Room for improvement on Working Details

  • Comment
Letters

Further to your call for comments on the AJ Working Details, I often wonder why more people do not write in. I remember how, as a student, Working Details were photocopied and regurgitated in coursework. Given the great influence which they have on architectural education, it is essential that they are subject to constant scrutiny. I can understand people's unwillingness to offer criticism of other architects' work, but surely those architects who are producing work of a high enough standard to be featured by the AJ should be sufficiently confident to welcome a little constructive criticism.

In recent details, it seemed to me that there was a thermal bridge at the Edgbaston commentary boxes' overhanging eaves (AJ 11.1.01) and the air flow up the face of the external boarding seemed to be blocked by the sill. There appears to be an inappropriately finished or positioned vapour control layer on Michael Wilford's house (AJ 21.12.00) and poor sill overhangs at the Scottish Seabird Centre, (AJ 2.10.00). Goodness knows how long Michael Wigginton's house will keep the water out. Maybe it would be useful to do Working Details updates, to see whether any have failed.

Name and address supplied

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.