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