University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Frank Lloyd Wright's textile block: the essential qualities, challenges and alternative methods

(USC Thesis Other)

Frank Lloyd Wright's textile block: the essential qualities, challenges and alternative methods

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Frank Lloyd Wright’s Textile Block: The Essential Qualities, Challenges and Alternative Methods Dissertation of Edward D Losch For the Degree Ph.D. in Architecture Conferred by The Faculty of the Graduate School University of Southern California EdLosch@Gmail.com (323)-592-3299 August, 2016 Conferral Date Dissertation Committee: Anders Carlson, SE, Chair andersca@usc.edu Kenneth Breisch breisch@usc.edu Douglas Noble, FAIA dnoble@usc.edu Gail Borden gpborden@gmail.com James Anderson jamesa@usc.edu © Copyright 2016 Edward D. Losch Acknowledgements First of all I wish to thank my Dissertation Committee for sticking with me for so long as I struggled to pin down what this dissertation should really accomplish. Some particularly memorable advice: “It’s not the architect’s job to solve problems, engineers do that.” “I can’t tell you what your hypothesis should be, I just know that that’s not it.” “You have plenty of narrative, but where’s the research?” I am grateful to the University of Southern California School of Architecture for the tuition support, and for giving me the chance to pursue this endeavor. Ruth Wallach and Tony Gonzalez at the USC Architecture Library were very helpful with the research phase. Ruth once offered on the spot to buy a $300 book when I couldn’t find it in the library’s collection. Thanks go to Facilities Coordinator Raul Lopez for taking me through the “power station” to view the broken textile blocks, molds, and other materials removed from the Freeman House. A big thank you goes to art historian and author Kathryn Smith for showing me the ins and outs of conducting research at the Getty Research Institute. Her suggestion to mark down the record number for each bit of correspondence saved me a lot of duplicate effort. She joins the list of outside experts who provided valuable feedback: Eric Lloyd Wright, Jeffrey Baker, Jeffrey Chusid, and Rex Donahey. Other experts who contributed their time and expertise include Peyton Hall, Prof. Marc Schiler and Benjamin McAlister. This work would not have been possible without the assistance of the librarians at the Getty Research Institute and the UCLA Library Special Collections Department. Margo Stipe at the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation was helpful in securing releases for the large number of drawings reproduced in this document, as was Nicole Richard for providing drawing scans from Columbia’s Avery Architectural & Fine Arts Library. Resort Historian Becky Blaine made my time researching the Arizona Biltmore Hotel especially memorable – I’ll never forget the dark chocolate textile block that was delivered to our room. Jeff Keenan and Paul Dreibelbis from Moonlight Molds were very helpful in describing the process they used to cast replacement blocks for the Ennis House. I am grateful to C. Curtis Smith and his wife for allowing me to experience their Wright-designed home first-hand (the Eric Brown House). Also to Norman Silk and Dale Morgan for a tour of the restored Turkel House. I’d like to thank my “band of brothers” (and sisters) in the Ph.D. program: Jae, Simon, Eve, Myo Boon, Yara, Andrea, Mic, Jeff and Lizzie. Last but not least, my patient wife, Nancy. I hope she’ll continue to wear her Frank Lloyd Wright earrings and cook from the Taliesin recipe book, even though she doesn’t have to any more. Ed Losch – February 22, 2016 0-3 Edward D. Losch, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Southern California Frank Lloyd Wright’s Textile Block: The Essential Qualities, Challenges and Alternative Methods Table of Contents Acknowledgements 0-3 Abstract 0-7 Abbreviations & Acronyms 0-9 Introduction 0-11 1. The Genesis, History and Context of Frank Lloyd Wright’s Textile Block System 1-1 2. The Essential Qualities 2-1 3. The Challenges, Problems and Barriers 3-1 4. The Variations and Alternative Methods 4-1 5. Relevant Projects and Built Examples 5-1 5.1 The Usonian Automatic Projects 5-151 6. An Analysis by Category 6-1 7. A Selection of Modern Textile Block Concepts 7-1 8. Summary and Conclusions 8-1 Appendix A: A Historical Timeline of Architectural Precast Concrete Masonry use A-3 Appendix B: A Comprehensive List of Constructed FLW Textile Block Buildings B-1 Appendix C: Frank Lloyd Wright: Aus Dem Lebenswerke Eines Architeckten, 1926 C-1 Appendix D: Textile Block Questionnaire for Inside and Outside Expert Critique D-1 Appendix E: Selected Database Reports E.1: Essential Qualities Reports E.1-1 E.2: Challenges, Problems and Barriers Reports E.2-1 E.3: Alternative Methods Reports E.3-1 E.4: Project Reports E.4-1 E.4.1: Project Estimated Cost versus Actual E.4-101 Appendix F: An Energy Analysis of the Freeman House F-1 Appendix G: An Annotated Bibliography G-1 0-5 Edward D. Losch, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Southern California Frank Lloyd Wright’s Textile Block: The Essential Qualities, Challenges and Alternative Methods Frank Lloyd Wright had a vision for an inexpensive and versatile concrete masonry system, locally produced and assembled without special skills in order to help solve the middle-income housing problem. Many of the buildings constructed with the blocks were highly acclaimed (and still are), but there were practical challenges with the system and his vision never took hold outside of his own work. THESIS STATEMENT: Wright's textile block system has been called a philosophical success but a practical failure. What would be required to make it a practical success as well? To answer that question, a comprehensive examination of the historical record has been undertaken to identify the essential qualities of the system as envisioned by Wright, document the main challenges, problems and barriers encountered, and finally, note any variations or alternative methods used or proposed to overcome those barriers. ABSTRACT: In the early 1920’s, Frank Lloyd Wright designed a series of homes in the Los Angeles area that incorporated a unique and untested modular precast concrete wall system that he dubbed the “textile block”. The design was based on his principles of organic architecture and what he termed “Usonian” principles. The system consisted of a dry-cast double masonry wall with an air gap between the outer and inner wythes. The outer wythe was stamped with a decorative pattern. The 16 in. square site-cast blocks were stacked and reinforced horizontally and vertically with a “fabric” or mesh of grouted reinforcing bars, 16 in. on center. Wright’s stated goal was to help solve the middle-income housing problem. He intended to provide a robust yet affordable concrete masonry system that embodied his organic design principles. The textile block was a product of the Modernist era but also a rebellion against it, with its handcrafted look and its use of local materials. Wright intended to humanize the industrial concrete block through an early use of mass customization. Unfortunately there have been serious problems over time with his experimental system with regard to durability, serviceability and structural stability in the high-risk seismic zone of Southern California. Only around 40 buildings constructed using this system over the span of Wright’s career. The concrete masonry industry went in another direction, toward mass-produced, standardized units with limited capacity for architectural expression. The first step in a critical examination of the textile block would be to define exactly what it is. What are its qualities? By scouring the complete historical record, 107 Essential Qualities of the system were identified, catalogued and ranked. References used included all of Wright’s written work and his recorded lectures. Also included were any relevant correspondence, documents, project drawings and specifications from the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation Archives. The multitude of books, journals and articles written about Wright were also examined. Known experts on Wright and his work were interviewed. Site visits of many of the existing textile block buildings were also undertaken, and owners interviewed. 0-7 The above references were used to document 86 problem types that were encountered with the system. These were ranked into three categories. “Challenges” are problems that could reasonably be overcome using modern materials and methods. “Problems” are more serious and may or may not be overcome with current technology. “Barriers” are problems that do not have a good solution and are likely not solvable in the near future. Any Variations or Alternative Methods that were used or proposed were documented. If any of these could overcome a listed Challenge, it was noted. 89 Alternative Methods have been recorded. Identified Barriers were found mainly in the categories of Assembly, Cost, Prefabrication, and Society. There were many Durability issues, but these were found to be, on the whole, fixable with current technology. Unfortunately, fixing these problems would add to the cost, which was already too high. The Assembly process was flawed by Wright’s insistence on using a “one-process” method that mimicked organic growth, but was not suited to standard construction practice. The Societal issues were the most problematic, as these cannot be solved by applying modern technology. 0-8 Abbreviations & Acronyms 3D Three Dimensional AAC Autoclaved Aerated Concrete ACI The American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA BTU British Thermal Unit – unit of measurement for energy CAD Computer Aided Design CBIS Concrete Block Insulating Systems (Korfil) CIP Cast in Place CMU Concrete Masonry Unit CNC Computerized Numerical Control CO2 Carbon dioxide COC Chain of Custody CRSI Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute, Schaumburg, IL DNA Deoxyribonucleic Acid – a molecule containing genetic instructions in living organisms EF5 Highest value on the Enhanced Fujita Scale for tornado wind speed (over 200 miles per hour) EIFS Exterior Insulation Finish System EPS Expanded Polystyrene FHA Federal Housing Authority, Washington, DC FLLW Frank Lloyd Wright FLLWF The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, Scottsdale, AZ FLW Frank Lloyd Wright (alternate abbreviation) FRP Fiber-Reinforced Polymer FSC Florida Southern College, Lakeland, FL FSC Forest Stewardship Council, Minneapolis, MN GFRC Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete GI Government Issue – refers to United States soldiers, sailors and Marines HEED Home Energy Efficient Design – software developed by UCLA HSE Health and Safety Executive, Merseyside, UK HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning IBC International Building Code – published by the International Code Council, Washington, DC ISBN International Standard Book Number – a unique commercial book identifier LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, U.S. Green Building Council, Washington, DC MBS Master of Building Science MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA NA Not Applicable NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health OSHA Occupational Safety & Health Administration, Washington, DC 0-9 Abbreviations & Acronyms (continued) PCA The Portland Cement Association, Skokie, IL PCI The Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL psf pounds per square foot PTFE Polytetrafluoroethylene PVA Poly-Vinyl Alcohol SCC Self-Consolidating Concrete SCLFC Self-Consolidating Lightweight Foam Concrete SF Square Foot SIP Structural Insulated Panel STC Sound Transmission Class UCLA The University of California, Los Angeles UHPC Ultra-High Performance Concrete UK United Kingdom UL Underwriters Laboratories, Northbrook, IL USC The University of Southern California, Los Angeles WMF World Monuments Fund, New York, NY 0-10 Frank Lloyd Wright’s Textile Block - Introduction In the early 1920’s, Frank Lloyd Wright designed a series of homes in the Los Angeles area that incorporated a unique and untested modular precast concrete wall system that he dubbed the “textile block”. The design was based on his principles of organic architecture and what he termed “Usonian” principles. The system consisted of a dry-cast double masonry wall with an air gap between the outer and inner wythes. The outer wythe was stamped with a decorative pattern. The 16 in. square site-cast blocks were stacked and reinforced horizontally and vertically with a “fabric” or mesh of grouted reinforcing bars, 16 in. on center. Wright’s stated goal was to help solve the middle-income housing problem. He intended to provide a robust yet affordable concrete masonry system that embodied his organic design principles. The textile block was a product of the Modernist era but also a rebellion against it, with its handcrafted look and its use of local materials. Wright intended to humanize the industrial concrete block through an early use of mass customization. Unfortunately there have been serious problems over time with his experimental system with regard to durability, serviceability and structural stability in the high-risk seismic zone of Southern California. Only 40-some buildings were constructed using this system over the span of Wright’s career. The concrete masonry industry went in another direction, toward mass-produced, standardized units with limited capacity for architectural expression. Strengths and weaknesses of the original textile block system The total number of textile block buildings actually constructed is small, only 43 buildings at 22 different sites, by the author’s count. Concrete masonry as a building system did sweep the nation, but not in the form that Wright had hoped. If his vision was sound, there must have been flaws with the execution. Was Wright limited by the technology of his day? He endeavored to re-invent concrete masonry and turn it into something else altogether. The first task was to overcome the limitations of traditional masonry. Some of these are: It’s labor-intensive: The process of constructing a masonry wall using mortared joints is slow, and requires specialized, skilled labor. The finished result is highly dependent on the skill of the craftsman. In fact, building codes require inspection of a wall before it can be used in a structural capacity. Wright tried to change that by devising a connection system for the blocks which eliminated mortar joints. The blocks were to be cast to precise dimensions so that they would fit tight. Alignment would not be necessary as long as the joints were snug. In actuality, the lack of tolerance made it difficult to correct for any errors in alignment – there was no fudge factor. Grout was also required to fill the channels which held the reinforcing bars that “knit” the units together. The blind nature of the connection made it hard to tell when a channel was fully grouted, and, in practice, many weren’t. (Fidler 2007, 25) In some cases, the only grout found in some joints were at the block corners (Chusid 1989, 177). Therefore, in practice, the walls did not go up any faster than with traditional masonry and may have been slower, based on the reports of construction delays with some of the Los Angeles textile block houses. (Sweeney 1994, 75) It’s non-insulating: Concrete is not a good insulator. The “R” value of concrete is only 0.08 per inch. Hollow concrete block performs a bit better, due to the air voids. Still, an 8” hollow block has an R of only 1.1. Lightweight concrete and 0-11 cinder block have a higher R than normal weight concrete. What works to concrete’s advantage however is its mass. It takes a long time for heat to be absorbed by the wall. This works well in warm dry climates, where the wall can absorb heat during the day and release it at night when it’s cool. Wright was probably aware of this beneficial thermal characteristic of concrete walls when he specified them for the four Los Angeles textile block houses. The main reason for using a double wall with a 2” air gap was not for the insulating value of the air gap, but to provide a path for infiltrated water, so that the inner wythe would remain dry -- which leads to the next point: Water and air infiltration is a problem: The blocks were porous. Untreated, they will absorb water. In cold climates, this is deleterious because absorbed water will expand as it freezes and potentially cause spalling. In addition, in any climate the water can bring salts (chlorides) with it that can corrode reinforcing. That can also cause spalling, as the corroded reinforcing expands. Deterioration due to air pollution and acid rain is also an issue in areas such as the Los Angeles Basin, where the first buildings were constructed. Wright’s solution for preventing water penetration was not new. He used an air gap between the walls. The intent was that any water that penetrated the outer wythe through capillary action would trickle harmlessly down the air gap and exit at the foundation. Unfortunately, metal wire ties were used to connect the wythes and keep them together. Water could travel along the wires to the inner wythe and enter the finished space, which it did frequently. (Chusid 1989) A vapor barrier or a sloped joint or a block that was moisture-resistant would have helped. It’s heavy: Block size was limited by what a person could lift. According to Wright: “A unit-mass of concrete, size and shape determined by the work intended to be done and what weight a man can be reasonably be expected to lift and set in a wall, is fixed upon. This in order to avoid the expensive larger molds—say, the slab block we make 16” x 16” x 2½” thick.” (Wright 1992a, 242) The smaller the block, the more joints and labor involved for installation. Assuming a unit weight of 140 pcf and an average thickness of 2¼”, a 16” square Freeman House block would have weighed around 45 lbs. A 16” width worked well within a 4 ft. module and resulted in a block size that a man could lift. Another important reason to keep the weight down was to reduce the load induced by a seismic event. The weight of a structure works against it in an earthquake. It’s best to use lighter materials and keep the weight close to the ground. Unreinforced masonry performs the poorest of any wall type, due to its weight and brittle structure. The California legislature outlawed unreinforced masonry construction after the 1933 Long Beach quake. Many unreinforced brick buildings collapsed, including some schools, while wood, steel and reinforced concrete structures suffered much less damage. Although state-wide code requirements for earthquake resistant construction did not exist until 1927, Wright was well aware of the danger by 1923, having just finished the Imperial Hotel in Tokyo. To “reinforce” the point, the hotel successfully weathered the Great Tokyo earthquake of 1923 just as construction was starting on his first textile block house, the Storer house in Hollywood. His idea for the system was to weave vertical and horizontal ¼” reinforcing bars every 16” on center. Grouted solid, he expected the walls to act as a monolithic reinforced concrete wall: 0-12 “Grooves are provided in the edges of the slab-blocks so a lacing of continuous steel rods may be laid in the vertical and horizontal joints of the block slabs for tensile strength. The grooves are as large as possible so they may be poured full of concrete after each course of blocks is set up, girding and locking the whole into one firm slab. Here ultimately we will have another monolith fabricated instead of poured into special wooden molds. The molds in this case are metal, good for many buildings, and take the impress of any detail in any scheme of pattern or texture imagination conceives. The whole building “precast” in a mold a man can lift.” (F. Wright 1992a, 242) The American Concrete Institute specifies a minimum reinforcing ratio for reinforced concrete walls of 0.002. This minimum is a serviceability requirement intended to control cracking and would not necessarily be adequate to resist applied loads. The textile block system has a reinforcing ratio of 0.0021, slightly better than the current minimum requirement. Unfortunately, the uneven coverage of the bars by grout weakened the system. In addition, the ravages of time, weathering, spalling and corrosion further weakened walls on the Freeman and Ennis houses to the point where they were significantly damaged by the 1994 Northridge quake. There were additional problems unique to the textile-block system: As noted earlier, Wright was taken by the romantic ideal that a building should be a part of its site. He meant this literally. He liked to think that one could build a house by bringing in bags of cement, rebar and a couple of molds in the back of a Ford pickup. (Wright 1992a, 243). The site would supply the sand and aggregate. To take it even further, for the Freeman and Ennis houses, earth from the site may have been added to the mix to give the blocks a buff color. (Chusid 1989, 224) A petrographic analysis of an Ennis House block adds credence to this speculation: “The aggregate used in the concrete might be partly responsible for the weakening of the textile blocks near to their surfaces. It includes two forms of clay that can cause micro-stresses by shrinking and expanding in response to changing moisture conditions, as well as feldspar which can decay and disintegrate in the presence of water.” (Fidler 2007, 25) According to a 2007 report on the condition of the Ennis House undertaken by Simpson Gumpertz & Heger: “The original site manufacturing conditions and processes associated with the textile blocks were apparently rudimentary with no effective batched mixing, no true compaction of the wet concrete, and limitations in site curing. Combined with the choice of aggregate, they are all contributing factors that may have resulted in poorly consolidated surfaces lacking cement paste, that have been further affected by carbonation, leaching and the dissolution of the binder. The surfaces thus act like a sponge and take up moisture with great rapidity.” (Fidler 2007, 25) These problems likely could have been avoided by commercially producing the concrete block. A commercial plant would have used aggregate and sand from approved sources and the ratio of cement and water would have been controlled by careful batching. In addition, the curing process would have been more consistent. 0-13 A visual survey of the Ennis House: The location: The historic Ennis House by Frank Lloyd Wright, 2607 Glendower Ave., Los Angeles (Los Feliz), built 1924. The questions: How well have the cast concrete “textile block” walls fared over the years with regard to durability, serviceability and structural stability? What remedial measures have been taken to correct any deficiencies? How successful were these measures? The survey: A visual survey of the above property was taken by the author on August 10, 2010. Both the interior and exterior of the historic dwelling were examined. Exterior photographs were taken as documentation. Problems observed: Cracking Weathering Weathering Spalling 0-14 Buckling Efflorescence Remedial measures: Paint or coating – Not successful—traps water. Probably was more damaging than leaving it alone. Monitoring – It doesn’t hurt but doesn’t solve the deterioration problem by itself Patching – Color and texture doesn’t match and patch doesn’t hold 0-15 Replacement block – Hard to match the original, but may be best long- term solution. Replacement wall – doesn’t have to match the original as closely as using individual replacement blocks. Not as desirable from a historic preservation standpoint however. Note the stepped blocks, which provide a place for water to sit and eventually enter the building. Copings – The coping does not extend far enough and weathering is evident where it stops. Comments: It appears that many of the repairs over the years have not helped preserve the blocks and often made things worse. Extending the coping would reduce the weathering of the block but would also change the appearance of the building. There is evidence of extensive replacement of the south retaining wall. This is confirmed by written reports. The south wall was damaged in the 1994 Northridge earthquake and collapsed in 2004 after a heavy rain. That section of the building has essentially been replaced. Conclusion: Repair and long-term maintenance of the exterior façade is going to be technically challenging and undoubtedly expensive. Benefits provided by the original textile block system: The question has to be asked: If there were so many problems with Wright’s original textile block system, what value would there be in resurrecting it? 0-16 It’s made from inexpensive, local materials: Around 80% of the dry volume of a textile block consists of sand and fine gravel. These materials are ubiquitous practically anywhere on the planet, even in the arctic. An “organic” building should certainly make use of the most abundant solid material on the face of the earth. Black slate sand beach, Arctic Bay, Canada: The second major ingredient is portland cement, consisting of around 20% of the dry volume of a mix. Cement is easily obtained locally. and is inexpensive. In fact, concrete is the single most widely used material in the world. One concern is that cement production is estimated to contribute 5% of total man-made carbon dioxide emissions. Currently about 800 lbs of CO2 is released for every 1000 lbs of cement produced. (Crow 2008, 64) Note that this statistic relates to cement, not concrete. The industry is working to reduce this number, and cement replacements are coming on the market which are carbon neutral. Even as-is, concrete has lower embodied energy than glass and steel. Precast concrete block production reduces waste, because very little material is wasted in the process. Water is also used—water cement ratios typically range from 0.4 to 0.55 by weight. Taking the weight of portland cement to be 94 pcf and the weight of water to be 62 pcf, the volume of water required per cubic foot of concrete would be around 0.15, or 15% of its total volume. Around half of that water permanently chemically binds to the concrete, and another 25% remains as moisture content, depending on the humidity. (Kosmatka, Kerkhoff, and Panarese 2008) The remaining 25% evaporates. The water used can be non-potable. That’s not a lot of water, when compared to the amount of fresh water required to make many other products. For example, according to the Water Footprint Network, 10 liters of water are required to make one sheet of letter paper. (WaterFootprint.org) Therefore, save some water and do not print this document! The last major ingredient to consider is the steel reinforcing. Quarter inch diameter bars were used at the perimeter of the 16” square blocks. Single bar area is 0.05 in 2 . For a single wythe wall, that works out to 1.6 in 3 per block. Block volume is estimated at 576 cubic inches, so the reinforcing accounts for less than 0.28 percent of the volume of material. 0.9 cubic inches of steel is used per square foot of wall area, or 4 ounces worth. Steel requires a lot of energy to fabricate, but very little of it is required for the textile block. Plus, steel is highly recyclable. According to CRSI, reinforcing steel typically contains at least 97% recycled content. As of 2008, around 70% of reinforcing steel is recycled. (www.Recycle-Steel.org) Based on the above qualities, the original textile block system would contribute toward LEED points for Construction Waste Management (MR-2), Recycled Content (MR-4) and Regional Materials (MR-5). It provides a thermal mass benefit: 0-17 In warm, dry climates, the mass of the blocks will tend to moderate indoor temperatures. Wright would have been aware of the tendency for concrete or masonry buildings to stay relatively cool during the day. The material acts as a heat sink, absorbing heat during the day, and releasing it at night when it is cooler. He exposed the concrete block walls to the interior partly to take advantage of this characteristic. “…a building permanent and safe, dry and cool in summer, dry and warm in winter.” (Wright 1992a, 243) Occupants might say he oversold the case regarding dryness — as many of these buildings eventually leaked. Below is a chart documenting the reduction in heating BTU’s required when the thermal mass of concrete is utilized. (Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute. 2010, 11-12): An energy simulation of the Freeman House reveals limitations to the thermal mass benefit if insulation is not added between the concrete wythes (see Appendix F). Without insulation, the warmth can radiate to the outside as well as the inside, so at least half of the stored energy is lost. In cool climates, solar orientation is very important. One needs south facing windows with overhangs and a concrete floor or mass wall to store the direct solar gain through the windows. On the Freeman House, Wright used south windows, overhangs (at least on the upper level), and earth sheltering for the lower level. With proper insulation and glazing, the energy savings would have been significant, according to the author’s HEED energy simulation (Appendix F). Fire resistance: The textile block would be suitable for use as a fire wall under current codes. The first textile block homes were built in the dry hills around Los Angeles. Forest fires were a concern. Concrete construction provides excellent resistance to heat transmission during a fire. (Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute. 2010, 10-9): Assuming a block thickness of 2” with two wythes separated by an air space, and applying the above formula gives an R 0.59 of 7.4 + 3.33 + 7.4 = 18.1. R then equals 135 minutes, which is the fire rating of the wall assembly. 0-18 (Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute. 2010, 10-8) Therefore, the textile block walls would have been rated at over two hours for heat transmission due to fire, according to current codes. A homeowner may be able to receive a lower insurance rate for using this type of construction. Insect / pest resistance: Termites and carpenter ants don’t like concrete and rodents would have a very hard time chewing through it. Durability – lasts longer than wood frame construction: Properly produced concrete can last for centuries. Wood needs to be protected or it deteriorates rapidly. Modern concrete can provide a zero-maintenance exterior and interior finish. Security: Reinforced concrete wall construction is preferred -- required, actually -- for secure facilities. It can’t be easily cut through or damaged by impact. That is why it is specified for prisons and other secure facilities. According to a Canadian study of the bullet-resistance of building materials, only the brick and concrete block walls were able to stop all but the largest 50 caliber rounds. (Kashuba 2001) (Kashuba 2001): Resistance to severe storms, such as hurricanes and tornados 0-19 has also been documented. On March 17, 2008, Jim Cantore from the Weather Channel tested a concrete sandwich wall with a thickness similar to the textile block live on national TV. Wood 2x4’s were shot out of an air cannon at EF-5 tornado speeds (240 mph) at various standard wall assemblies. The author was in attendance and witnessed the demonstration. The 2x4 easily penetrated the vinyl-clad wood frame and even a brick veneer wall, but was stopped by the precast concrete wall. A subdivision of concrete homes using this type of construction was built in Naperville, Illinois. A textile block wall should also perform well, although, to the best of the author’s knowledge, no tests have been performed specifically on a textile block wall. (PCA Concrete Homes Newsletter, May/June 2008) Blocks noise – sound transmission: The STC rating of two 2” thick concrete walls together is 49, which is very good (Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute. 2010, 11-25). STC stands for Sound Transmission Class, and higher numbers block more sound. The rating is based on the decibel scale, which is logarithmic to base 10. This means that an STC difference of 10 equates to either ½ or twice the sound energy level, depending on the reference. By comparison, a standard 2x4 wood stud wall with batt insulation has an STC rating of 34 to 39 (STCRatings.com). As this world becomes more crowded, and traffic and car alarms more prevalent, the ability to block exterior noise is certainly desirable. Due to its similarity with the precast wall, a textile block wall would also be expected to perform well. Can be assembled without the use of heavy equipment or formwork: Wright believed that concrete masonry—that is, concrete “units”—could supplant cast-in-place concrete, as was previously used to great effect for his design for the Unity Temple in Oak Park, IL (1904): “But at the present time there comes a less cumbersome and a cheaper because less wasteful method than the molds on a large scale that built Unity Temple. It was necessary then to build a rough building complete in wood as a “mold” into which the temple would be cast. Now, in this easier more plastic method, standardization enters as the ‘unit- system’.” (F. Wright 1992a, 242) 0-20 He goes on to describe the unit as based on the “mass of concrete” that a man can lift. It sounds like, if he had it to do over again, the Unity Temple would have been constructed out of concrete masonry. He has a point. Large, single-use formwork is more wasteful. Better to use a few small molds and use them over and over again. In modern times, precast concrete has made inroads against cast-in-place and standard masonry construction for many building types. Modules are factory-cast to a size as large as will fit on a truck for delivery to the job site. There, they are erected with the use of a crane. Precast masonry, as used by Wright, has similar advantages, only it doesn’t require the rental of an expensive crane or run on fossil fuel. Construction can proceed at its own pace, allowing other trades access as required, without worrying about multiple move-ins with the crane. This is most beneficial on residential projects where the budget is limited. It also has advantages for the third world, where mechanized equipment, and fossil fuel, is expensive or scarce. Arizona Biltmore cottage, built 1929: Minimal maintenance required: If cast and assembled properly, exposed precast concrete masonry walls require no regular maintenance other than an occasional coat of sealer. The normal variation in tone and coloration between units adds character and authenticity, as one would experience viewing a European cathedral or Mayan ruin. No VOC’s: Concrete is inert, and doesn’t off-gas like some other building materials that contain formaldehyde or other volatile organic compounds. 0-21 Dissertation of Edward D Losch for the Degree Ph.D. in Architecture Chapter 1 The Genesis, History and Context of Frank Lloyd Wright’s Textile Block System School of Architecture Department of Building Science University of Southern California 1-1 1.0 The genesis, history and context of Frank Lloyd Wright’s textile block system 1.1 Modular, Machine Age, Mono-Material: The genesis of the original textile block system It has been speculated that the genesis of the textile block system arose from Frank Lloyd Wright’s experience in Japan designing the Imperial Hotel, beginning in 1915. There, expert craftsman carved blocks out of oya stone, a process of intense manual labor too expensive for use in the U.S. The dentil pattern of blocks on the south wall of the Samuel Freeman House are re-used in general concept from the Imperial Hotel, as well as Chicago’s Midway Gardens, built in 1914. Of the three buildings, the Freeman House is the only one still standing: Midway Gardens (Kruty 1998, BB) Imperial Hotel, 1915 (James 1968, 5) Freeman House, built 1924-25 Wright, in his autobiography, postulated a vision of a “mono-material”, that is, a material that has integrity in both appearance and function. As such, he may have been dissatisfied with the cement-plaster veneer used on the Hollyhock House, located on Olive Hill in Los Angeles and completed in 1921. For Midway Gardens, he used precast concrete panels, but only as applied decorative elements. Wright typically used a module, or “unit-system”, to lay out his designs, and Midway Gardens was no exception. There, he used a 4’-6” plan module, one of his largest, corresponding to six 9” long brick joints. (Kruty 1998, 126). The precast panels were 17 ¾” wide by 20 ¾” tall, and 2 ¾” thick. With ¼” joints, they were equivalent to two brick widths wide. Eventually, he realized the potential for combining form and function using precast concrete units in more than an just an ornamental capacity. The textile block system he envisioned would combine the decorative patterns of the carved oya stone and the Midway Gardens cast panels in a mono-material that was the same inside and out. It would be a structure that appeared to grow out of the earth, and in fact, often did contain some sand and/or clay from the site. It would use machine-age mass- 1-3 production and modularity in order to be affordable to the middle class. The artist will have tamed the machine and controlled it to produce beauty instead of banal ugliness. Above and below: Midway Gardens precast concrete panels (Kruty 1998, 129) 1.2 A partial history of architectural precast concrete masonry (circa 1866-1923): In order to understand how Wright’s ideas took form, one must understand the state of the art of concrete masonry in the early 20 th Century. Concrete block construction first appeared around the middle of the 19 th century. At first, the blocks were solid, built in a single layer or “wythe”. Water intrusion was an issue, and as a result, double-wall construction was introduced. The wythes were connected by metal ties, which were vulnerable to rust. To address this defect, hollow, cavity block systems were introduced. The idea was to present a continuous air space, preventing water from reaching the inner wythe. Unfortunately, water could still pass via capillary action at the grout joints. Nevertheless, concrete block construction became popular as a low-cost alternative to brick and stone construction. Original patent for the first hollow concrete block: The Sears, Roebuck catalog featured a concrete block machine called the “Wizard”, available for around $50, starting in 1905. These could be set up in the backyard, and blocks produced cheaply using bags of portland cement delivered by rail and sand from the building site. It was not unusual for a block machine purchaser to go into the business of producing blocks for others after finishing their own building (Simpson 1999, 14-16). 1-4 1910 Sears, Roebuck Home Builder’s Catalog (Sears, Roebuck 1990, 156-157) 1-5 These early machines produced one block at a time, and could apply a pattern to the block face. The most popular pattern was an imitation stone-face. In fact, this type of pattern came standard with the Sears Wizard machine. One could have the look of a dressed stone foundation at a fraction of the cost. The architectural elite of the time weren’t too keen on this imitative feature: “The sight or mention of concrete block in its present crude form, especially in imitation of ‘cut’ and ‘rockfaced’ stone, has been sufficient to band the architectural profession together as a unit in protest and condemnation.” As a “cheap and vulgar imitation of stone, concrete will never be acceptable in any work of worth.” (Herring 1912, 52) Wright shared this opinion, yet could see potential for “that gutter rat”. He let his opinion be known in the August 1928 issue of Architectural Record: “There never was a more ‘inferior’ building material than was the old concrete block…The block was cheap imitation and abominable as material when not downright vicious. Every form it undertook it soon relegated to the backyard of aesthetic oblivion. Several of the illustrations show what that self-same degraded block may become with a little sympathy and interpretation, if scientifically treated. Herein the despised thing becomes at least a thoroughbred and a sound mechanical means to a rare and beautiful use as an architect’s medium, as the ‘block’ becomes a mere mechanical unit in a quiet plastic whole. And this mechanical use of concrete as a mechanical material has only just begun. In it, alone, is a medium for an ‘Architecture’—humble as it is before Imagination enters.” (Wright 1992a, 304) The subject of the above article is concrete, yet the referenced illustrations depict three of his Los Angeles block houses, the Millard, Freeman and Ennis. It appealed greatly to Wright, who was ever the romantic, that sand and aggregate from the building site could be combined with a cement paste to form a complete building in an organic fashion, with the blocks as cells in the resultant organism. He also appreciated the egalitarianism represented by the backyard block machine. He felt strongly that good, architecturally designed homes should be affordable to the masses. In addition, using materials (sand and aggregate) from the site meshed with his philosophy of organic architecture. The structure would be “of” the site, not imposed on it. In Wright’s words: “Several mechanical molds may be thrown into a Ford and taken where gravel and sand abound. Cement is all else needed, except a few tons of ¼” commercial steel bars, to complete a beautiful building. This—and an organization of workmen trained to do one thing well.” (Wright 1992a, 243) Wright’s efforts to provide affordable housing for ordinary people began around 1916 with his partnership with the Wisconsin developer, Arthur Richards, to develop a new wood-frame construction system for homes called the American System-Built Homes. It was meant to compete with Sears mail order homes as well as traditional construction. (Chusid 1-6 2011, 9) The textile block and later Usonian homes were continuing efforts in this direction, only using precast concrete masonry instead of wood. The possible uses for concrete block seemed endless. Starting in 1905, block systems were invented that used T or L shapes to further isolate the outer and inner wythes, in order to further reduce water infiltration through capillary action. “Plate X” below shows one such system (Rice 1906). Wright used a block design similar to the above for the Millard House in Pasadena: Millard House block design (Sweeney 1994, 21): 1-7 The Millard House, Pasadena, 1923 A Wright apprentice, Walter Burley Griffin, had previously invented a somewhat similar system, the “Knitlock”, in Australia in 1916 (below). The innovative Knitlock system consisted of vertebral-like corner spines with block infill between. Like the Millard House, there is an air gap between interior and exterior units. Like the textile-block, it was designed to be a mono-material, architecture and structure in one. It even incorporated concrete roof tiles. Walter Burley Griffin’s “Knitlock” precast concrete masonry wall and roof system: It is not known for sure if Wright was influenced by the Knitlock, but he was accused of copying another system, patented by William E. Nelson in 1925, called the Nel-Stone. The method of connecting the blocks together is indeed very similar to the textile block. Grouted, round channels at the perimeter of the blocks are “knitted” with horizontal and vertical rebar. There are differences, however. The Nel-Stone was used primarily for utilitarian structures or was covered with plaster. It was structural only, with no provision for ornamentation. Walls were of single-wythe construction without an air gap. 1-8 Nel-Stone original patent application It is more likely that Wright adopted and modified the system developed by his son, Lloyd Wright, which Lloyd coined the “Knit-block”: “I had already done the Bollman House (1922) ... in cast block similar to the Millard House, and in looking for some way to get it to hold together and coordinated I worked up this core system.” The blocks were cored, the steel run through vertically and horizontally, and the core filled with concrete. “Father saw it and saw that this concept could be worked into a total system, so he put me in charge of his first total- system block house, the Dr. Storer House.” (Sweeney 1994, 205) Lloyd Wright’s Henry Bollman House, Hollywood, California: The blocks used on the Bollman House are primarily ornamental, mainly used as accents to the wood frame and stucco exterior – they do not support the house. In any case, Lloyd acknowledges that the senior Wright should be credited with developing the “total system” of construction based on the textile block. 1-9 Sketch showing grouted channels with steel reinforcing rods for concrete block accents on the Henry Bollman House balcony (Lloyd Wright Archives, UCLA, Courtesy of Eric Lloyd Wright): Lloyd continued to use his Knitblock system on his own designs, again, primarily in a non-structural capacity. The most spectacular example of this is the Sowden House in Los Angeles, 1926. The entrance is framed by dramatically sculpted blocks which appear to defy gravity. The effect is incongruously both primitive and sci-fi. Lloyd Wright’s Sowden House, Los Feliz, California 1-10 Lloyd Wright’s Studio and Residence, built 1927, West Hollywood, California (Lloyd Wright Archives, UCLA, Courtesy of Eric Lloyd Wright) In 1929, Lloyd Wright experimented with a mono-material block system of his own devising that he dubbed the “Unit Block.” The Lloyd Wright Archives at UCLA contain details of the system and preliminary drawings for a house in the Hollywood Hills. It is not clear from the drawings whether there was an actual client or whether the design was speculative. In a letter to his father dated June 26, 1931, Lloyd Wright detailed the advantages of his Unit Block system. It did not require a grouted core around the perimeter, simplifying forming, “idea is to avoid grouting because of staining face of 1-11 blocks.” The blocks were mortared instead, for greater tolerance. Inner and outer walls would interlock mechanically, with a layer of “sound deadening asphaltum insulation” to control noise transmission. He claimed that there would be no need for metal ties between wythes. Lastly, he noted that his design would not conflict with the Nel-Stone patent, implying that Wright’s textile block system might infringe. Wright Senior criticized Lloyd’s system in a response dated July 7, 1931. He was critical of the need for a union mason to mortar the joints. The interlocked blocks created “too much heat, moisture and sound contact.” He went on: “Extreme accuracy in block-making is the only solution. And molds should have study put on them to that end.” 1-12 1.3 Frank Lloyd Wright’s Textile Block: 1.3.1 The Storer House - 1923 Wright Senior first used the textile-block system on the John Storer House in Hollywood in 1923, with Lloyd Wright supervising construction. According to the original specifications, the blocks were to be made from one part portland cement to four parts sand or decomposed granite. Consistency was to be such that the mix would hold its shape when squeezed by hand, and it was to be used within a half hour. Blocks were to be formed by pressure into machined metal molds, then removed immediately and kept moist for at least 10 days (Sweeney 1994, 59, 62). The actual block dimensions were exactly 16 in. by 16 in. with no tolerance, hence the need for precision-machined molds. Unlike the Millard House (photo, right), there was no mortar joint between the blocks. A formed reveal was used instead, which gave the appearance of a tooled joint. (According to Jeffrey Chusid, Wright could not use the textile block reinforcing on the Millard House because of resistance from the local Pasadena code officials.) Millard House with tooled mortar joints, 1923 Storer House textile block with formed reveals – note the tight joints 1-13 The Storer House, built 1923 (Lloyd Wright Archives, UCLA, Courtesy of Eric Lloyd Wright): Storer House in 2011: 1.3.2 The Freeman House - 1924 Later that year Wright was commissioned to design a home for Samuel and Harriet Freeman in the Hollywood Hills neighborhood. This was to be a relatively small house for a client of modest means. Wright undoubtedly felt that this would be a good test case for his new textile block system. It used inexpensive materials and could theoretically be assembled using unskilled labor. 1-14 Unfortunately, the cost of completion was almost two and one half times Wright’s original estimate. There are many possible reasons for this. It could have been due in part to excessive labor costs resulting from not having a cement mixer on site (Sweeney 1994, 73) or Wright’s penchant to embellish his designs and refuse compromise, or delayed communications with the contractor (Lloyd Wright) when Wright returned to Wisconsin, or a combination of the above. Wright’s original estimate assumed 9000 blocks would be required at a cost of 30 cents each, totaling $2700. The 11,000 blocks actually used cost 66 cents each, for a total of $7260. (Chusid 1989, 49) That represents a $4560 increase, just for the blocks. Harriet Freeman never forgave Wright for the cost overruns and continued to complain about it 60 years later (Freeman 1983). Regardless, the Freemans loved the house and remained the only owners and occupants until the house was bequeathed by Harriet Freeman to the University of Southern California School of Architecture in 1986. Freeman House, built 1924 1-15 Freeman House - street view The Freeman House living room, described as one of Wright’s finest small spaces -- with a stunning view of Highland Ave in Hollywood. The other end of the room axis holds the hearth—a contrast between public and familial. 1-16 Samuel Freeman & Esther McCoy (USC School of Architecture Archives) Back face of the textile blocks: Freeman House pierced block detail (Chusid 2011): 1-17 Freeman, section at clerestory (Chusid 2011): Freeman stair section (Chusid 1989, 247): Wright later adopted a rectangular block module, possibly because of stair layout issues on the Los Angeles block houses. That way, a different module could be used in section versus plan. (Chusid 1989, 90) Commercial stair risers are limited to 7” maximum height and 11” minimum tread. (International Code Council. 2006, 212) The Freeman stairs are outside of this range, which could be dangerous and also not very efficient, space wise. The later Usonian Automatics used a 12” by 24” module, which would allow a 6” by 12” rise to run, which is better, though still shallower than is optimal. Textile blocks extend to the floor as well as portions of the ceiling. (These are not original, but were installed sometime in the 1990’s): 1-18 There is a misconception that the Freeman House walls are 8” thick, with a 1” air gap. This would correspond to half of a 16” block module. By the author’s measurement, however, the west wall of the living room was found to be 9 ½” thick. There is a 2 ½” air gap encased by two 3 ½” thick textile block wythes. It also appears from the photo (above) of the northwest corner of the living room that the north wall is out an amount equivalent to the west wall, based on the floor tile remainder and the symmetrical joints at the wall corner. Richard Neutra sketch (FLLWF 2111.004): According to Jeffrey Chusid, a professor at Cornell University and an expert on the Freeman House, this discrepancy is significant, because it helps to explain a supposed “inaccuracy” in Neutra’s well-known drawing of the textile block system. (Author conversation, 1/02/2011) There, the air gap is shown visually as being wider than the blocks themselves, which are called out as 3 7/16” thick. Wright’s patent drawing shows a wide air gap as well. For an 8” wall, the air gap would be only 1” wide. “Reviewing the Wright drawings, he clearly meant the walls to be 8 in. Looking at the drawings for the 2000 rehab, of course they used appropriate practice, and did not dimension existing conditions, only new work. However, there it looks as if they might have different thicknesses on different walls. Looking at Nabih Youssef's report from 1995, the walls are identified as 9 in. thick, ‘typical… I think it is very likely that the walls have deformed a bit over time as well… Not having 8" walls probably doubled the cost of the project. It means that essentially every door and window was custom, and every block at an intersection likewise.’” (email, 1/05/2011 In actuality, the 9 ½” thickness is required in order to make the mitered corner details work. The clock face extends out ¾” from the flat of the edge joints. This can be seen in the construction drawing at right (FLLWF 2402.020). 3 grid lines equals 16.” The block face extends past the grid lines by ¾” front and back, for a total wall thickness of 9 ½”. 1.3.3 The Ennis House - 1924 Later in 1923, Wright had the opportunity to further test the limits of the textile block system when he received a commission from Charles and Mabel Ennis to build a home in the Los Feliz area of Los Angeles. The Ennis’ had the resources for a large house on a grand scale. Wright’s 1-19 budget would not be as constrained as it was with the Freeman House, and he took advantage of that fact to further flesh out his mono-material concept. Possibly inspired by Mayan ruins, He used offset blocks to form battered walls. Plus there was extensive use of textile block on floors and ceilings. The ceiling blocks served as stay-in-place forms for a reinforced concrete structural slab. Reinforced concrete posts and beams have textile block facings. Visually, the house is monumental in scale and posture – uncharacteristic for Wright. It’s no exaggeration to say that it dominates the hillside in an almost brutal fashion. Unfortunately, the Ennis’ were not of the same mind with Wright and made changes to the design that eventually led Wright to resign from the project (Sweeney 1994, 90-91). For instance, Wright specified stepped blocks over the openings instead of horizontal lintels. The windows themselves were to have a glass pattern that mimicked the block module. A delicate pattern was used instead. Marble was used instead of textile blocks for the floors, ceramic tile for the baths, and the addition of traditional chandeliers and furniture added to the mismatch. Even so, the Ennis House arguably stands as one of the most complete built examples of Wright’s modular, mono-material, machine-age vision. Ennis House, built 1924 Uxmal, House of the Governor (Alofsin 1993) The Ennis House courtyard, Los Angeles 1-20 Ennis living room (Access courtesy of the Ennis House Foundation) Ennis entrance stair Ennis hall 1-21 Ennis exterior with pool addition Ennis dining hall Ennis entry 1-22 1.3.4 The Arizona Biltmore Resort - 1928 Early in 1928, Wright received an inquiry from a former apprentice asking for details of his textile block construction method. The inquiry was from Albert Chase McArthur, whose family was developing a resort in the Arizona desert north of Phoenix. With no other significant commissions in the offing, Wright sent a wired reply and invited himself to Phoenix: “Should I come out to help you start perhaps?” (Biltmore Press 2009, 31) Arizona Biltmore front lawn: Right: Arizona Biltmore sunroom Middle: Biltmore Block, 18” by 13.5” Albert was familiar with Wright’s Los Angeles houses and wanted to adapt the textile block system for the resort, a million dollar project. He accepted Wright’s proposal – but with misgivings, having firsthand knowledge of Wright’s commanding ego. (Cheek 2006, 13) The collaboration was rocky and eventually Wright was disinvited from the project. Wright, never one to compromise, was not happy with the way his textile block system was used on the project. He recommended a 16” square dimension for the blocks, as was used for the Los Angeles houses, but was overruled in favor of an 18” by 13.5” profile. The engineers specified a steel and concrete frame, using the blocks as a “mere epidermis”. (Biltmore Press 2009, 32) It’s likely they didn’t trust this experimental system to support a four story hotel. Here are Wright’s own words on the matter: 1-23 “Albert McArthur, one of my boys in the Oak Park workshop, was commissioned to build the building. Albert, at the psychological moment, appealed to me for help to establish the block system in the plans for the project. A wanderer myself, I turned into quarters at Phoenix and worked six months with Albert. The plans were finally made, but Albert encountered the usual opposition to the unusual in design and construction; he was unable to stem the co-lateral tide of suggested changes in technique which soon robbed the system of all economic value and left it standing as a novel and beautiful outside for an unintelligent engineer inside, whereas great technical economy was first and foremost a feature of the system had it been naturally allowed to work. Having no authority myself beyond bullying or by way of “suggestion” I was powerless to prevent the tragic waste. In the building of the hotel cottages, however, the details of the system itself were better followed with better results.” (Wright 1992b, 327) Right: Biltmore cottage construction photo – Source: Arizona Biltmore History Room The cottages that Wright refers to are eleven outbuildings that originally served as quarters for the children of guests, their nannies and other household servants. According to historical photos of the cottages’ construction, it appears that the textile blocks did indeed serve as the structural support for the buildings. The blocks were placed as a single exterior wythe, while the interior wythe consists of wood studs, lath and stucco. (Author: site visit on 12/18/2010) An interior concrete block fireplace wall was incorporated, echoing the exterior façade. Unfortunately, the cottages underwent extensive remodeling to divide them into resort rooms. The visible interior blocks at the fireplace were painted over and some others may have been covered with gypsum wallboard. In the above construction photo, one can see wood sills and electrical boxes in preparation for interior wood lath and plaster walls. Most experts attribute the design of the cottages to Wright, based partially on Wright’s approval of how the block system was used on the cottages. Right – Biltmore cottage interior 1-24 The actual construction cost of the resort was over double the original estimate, a common trend with the textile block buildings of this period. Right – Biltmore cottage exteriors, built 1929 Biltmore cottage patterned wall 1-25 Biltmore Paradise wing, built 1975 Subsequent additions to the resort have exhibited decreasing degrees of fidelity to the original textile block system. The Paradise and Valley wings (1975 and 1979, respectively) appear to use the blocks as cladding only, as there is no grout visible in the block joints. Visually, the façade matches the original resort building fairly well, though the buildings themselves are bulkier than Wright would have allowed. Right - No grout present in the block joints of the Valley wing addition Additions completed in 1999 are even further removed from Wright’s textile block system. The Villas residential complex uses cement-plaster walls with tooled joints to mimic the block pattern. The Arizona Wing appears to have a lightweight polystyrene foam-backed exterior insulation finish system (EIFS) with molded joints. According to Jeffrey Chusid, actual historic blocks were ground up and used to color and texture the surface of the EIFS walls. Tooled joints on the Villas addition – is this fooling anyone? 1-26 The Arizona Wing has recently been renamed the “Ocatilla” wing. Ocatilla was the name of a temporary desert camp that Wright set up in Chandler to work on another resort project that was never completed (Some sources: “Ocatillo”). The camp was named after the Ocotillo flower, but apparently was misspelled. It’s an ironic name, considering how far removed this EIFS façade system is from Wright’s envisioned mono- material. Right - Formed joints (presumed EIFS) on the Ocatilla addition, built 1999 One would think, that of all places to resurrect and use the textile block system, an addition to an historic textile-block resort would be the ideal application. Yet this was not done. Are there issues with the system that preclude its use in modern construction? If so, can it be updated using current technology to become a viable system, fulfilling the original purpose envisioned by Frank Lloyd Wright almost 90 years ago? The following chapters will explore this possibility. 1-27 1.3.5 San Marcos in the Desert – 1928 While working on the Arizona Biltmore, Wright met Dr Alexander Chandler, a veterinarian by trade. Chandler was developing a resort 24 miles south of Phoenix in the town bearing his name. He followed the Biltmore construction closely and its textile block construction in particular. (Sweeney 1994, 140) Entranced by the possibilities, he contracted with Wright to design “San Marcos in the Desert”, as the project was called, using the textile-block as a mono-material as much as possible. San Marcos in the Desert, model by George Ranalli, photo by the Canadian Centre for Architecture Wright set to work, undoubtedly motivated to demonstrate what his textile block system was truly capable of. A desert camp was set up (called Ocatillo, as noted earlier) and an extensive set of plans and details were developed. Here one can see what the Biltmore would have looked like had Wright had his way on that project. Levels are stepped back and limited to three stories, so as avoid standing out above the landscape. The block system was to be tested beyond anything previously attempted. A floor system was developed that relied solely on textile blocks with channels for grouted reinforcing. As Sweeney states: “It was in San Marcos in the Desert that Wright came closest to achieving a building that was truly the result of his standardized-unit system of construction. The “ferro-block unit-slab system” was to be used to construct the hotel ‘so far as and wherever possible.’ For the first time, floors, walls, and ceilings were to be built of blocks, and there was a specific block design to address every circumstance. There was to be ‘no woodwork of any kind in this structure, -- nothing at all of what is ordinarily called trim.” (Sweeney 1994, 155) In Wright’s own words: “We worked out the ‘resort’ as a great block-system series of intercommunicating terraces facing to the sun of the south…a mono material building and the latest expression of the block-shell system started in La Miniatura (Millard House) and that miscarried partly at the Arizona Biltmore. The block system in this case is genuine reinforced masonry, the same within and without. The block shell here will be integral with structure. It is the structure itself.” (Wright 1998, 314) 1-28 San Marcos Floor / ceiling detail (FLLWF 2704.165) Wright likely wanted the textile block expressed on the ceilings at the Biltmore, or at least in the hall ceilings, (below, upper). He had done this five years earlier at the Ennis House. (below, lower). There, he intended the floors to be made of concrete tile as well, but was overruled by Mrs. Ennis, who wanted marble. One can see how the concrete tiles at the pool could have continued into the hall floor, for a nice effect. Arizona Biltmore 2 nd floor Hall with plaster ceiling, built 1929 – note the lights built into the columns Ennis House hall with textile block ceiling, built 1924 1-29 The floor module was 20” by 20” and the wall blocks were 15” tall by 20” across. For the first time specially engineered clips were introduced to hold the blocks and reinforcing in place prior to grouting: (FLLWF 270.116) As far as is known, these clips were not used on any built projects. Sweeney describes them as “Toncan” clips, but does not specify the origin of the term or whether they were supplied by a manufacturer or were to be custom- fabricated. In any case, it would have been a welcome innovation to the workmen assembling the blocks. 1-30 1-31 1-32 A structural analysis of the proposed floor system reveals inadequacies in the design. The pan joists are too shallow to support a floor span of more than 6 ft. They may have been suitable for a bathroom or hallway but not much else. If construction costs were estimated based on this scheme, then they would have risen quite a bit after the structural engineer modified the design and increased member sizes to support the required spans. Mockup of San Marcos blocks at the Ocatillo camp (FLLWF 2702.057): The Toncan clips assist in spacing as well as transferring wind loads between the wythes, but do not transfer shear. The wythes would continue to act non-compositely to out-of-plane loads. An analysis of the wall capacity in bending shows the wall to be adequate for load- bearing applications up to 8.5 ft in clear height. Non-bearing double-wythe walls can span a bit more than 11 ft. vertically. Single-wythe non- bearing walls would be limited to 8 ft. maximum clear height. These values would be less if there are significant openings in the wall. Some existing large textile block buildings violate these limits. The Ennis House living room, for example, has an 18’-8” clear height. The vertical piers at the windows and two-way slab action to the return walls help in this case. To the right are sketches of a pattern block as well as a pierced variation. The pierced design let in light or provided natural ventilation. Special blocks were designed to hold lights, as was done on the Biltmore. San Marcos patterned block above and pierced below (FLLWF 2704.141 and 2704.150) 1-33 Several houses were also designed for the project. The Young House (right – FLLWF 2707.001, 1929) is notable for turning the blocks on an angle to form diamonds. While this is technically possible using the textile block reinforcing system, the effect is disconcerting and calls too much attention to itself, in the author’s opinion. Another innovation is the use of windows sized to match the block. Fenestration is eliminated, further unifying the mono-material concept. Unfortunately, the stock market crashed in October 1929, followed by the Great Depression. Funds dried up for the project, and Wright received only a fraction of his design fee. 1.3.6 Richard Lloyd Jones House (Westhope) – 1929 Jones was publisher of the Tulsa Tribune and a cousin of Wright’s. He asked Wright to design a house suitable for entertaining large groups. Wright was anxious to use the textile block system on the project, and submitted a design based on an angular grid: Jones House (project), FLLWF 2901.002 The design uniquely featured alternating columns of block and glass. Wright told Jones that the block would appear as “vertical mullions”, and it would feel like having an unrestricted view of the outside – the walls would disappear. Unfortunately, the diagonals were too unusual for Jones’ taste and he asked Wright to rework the design on a rectangular grid. The result is a design that is the most “International Style” of Wright’s works: 1-34 Aerial view, Sweeney, 1994, page 194 The piers consist of 15” by 20” blocks with 10” returns, forming a 20” square pier in plan. 20” wide window units alternate with the piers. The San Marcos coffered ceilings and floor tiles are first used here on a 20” square module. By this point, Wright suspected that the dry-pack method of block production was responsible for water leakage. According to correspondence, he rejected using a wet-cast process, as the texture would be too smooth and pasty. Instead, the inner face of the outer blocks was coated with asphalt. The house was still prone to leakage due to poor roof drainage. A rose- colored pigment was also used – it was the first time colored concrete was used for a textile-block house. Unfortunately, the block has since been painted, so the original color is no longer visible. Jones House; Source: Peter Beers 1-35 1.3.7 Florida Southern College Campus – 1938-1954 This was Wright’s only college campus. A total of 10 textile block buildings were constructed over a 16 year period, connected by low-hung esplanades. According to restoration architect, Jeff Baker, "Frank Lloyd Wright described this campus, at one point, as a series of esplanades that occasionally become buildings”. Below is the original E.T. Roux library (now called the Thad Buckner Building) under construction using student labor. (Courtesy of the Florida Southern College Archives) The former Roux Library in 2011. 1-36 The Annie Pfeiffer Chapel is notable for it’s use of stained glass inserts in the block: Florida Southern College “Tapestry Blocks” (Patterson 1994, 118) 1-37 Annie Pfeiffer Chapel textile blocks This was the most elaborate use of patterns on the textile block system. The standard block was 36” wide by 9” high by 3.5” thick (field measurements by the author), with many different special conditions. These dimensions are a subset of the 6’-0” basic module used for the campus. A typical wall consisted of two wythes with a 2” air gap, for a 9” total thickness. Even the plain block is not plain but has dentils along the short edges. It is called a “tapestry block” locally. The college was on a very tight budget, so student labor was used to construct the first buildings. Wright had to wait years to receive his commission, as World War II took its toll on enrollment. The original Roux Library was constructed mainly by female students, as the men had gone off to war. The college went to extreme lengths to save money, including using sample blocks in the final construction. According to a newspaper report: “The blocks in the facade of the Carter, Walbridge, Hawkins Seminar Building vary from gray to pink to brown to yellow as Wright tried sand from several Florida locales to mix with cement until he found the pale hue he wanted for his buildings (it was too expensive to just throw out the mistakes).” (Kay 2010) Experimental blocks used on the Hawkins Center. Note the different hues: 1-38 It is said that Wright claimed the campus buildings would “be standing a 1000 years into the future.” (Gyure 2010, 191). It was prudent that he didn’t put that in writing. The “tapestry block” system has not fared well in the humid Florida climate. The upper level block walls on the Annie Pfeiffer Chapel were covered with stucco not long after construction to stop water leakage and protect the blocks. (MacDonald, Galbraith, and Rogers, Jr 2007, 19) Top: An original block form Right: Annie Pfeiffer Chapel as-built (MacDonald, Galbraith, and Rogers, Jr 2007, 18) Right: Chapel in 2011 showing upper level covered with stucco. The grouted channels for the reinforcing were susceptible to water penetration, causing rust and spalling of the block. The extra long horizontal channels must have been difficult to fill, especially for inexperienced student labor. Restoration work on the former Roux library was undertaken in 1981 to repair and replace blocks: 1-39 (Courtesy of the Florida Southern College Archives) The same section of the original Roux Library in 2011. The 1981 replacement blocks have not fared well. The work is not done. The World Monuments Fund (WMF) placed the campus on its list of the 100 most endangered sites in 2007. The WMF convened a conference at the college in 2008 to discuss Wright’s use of textile block construction. Eric Lloyd Wright, grandson and architect, was in attendance to advise and lend support. (Freitag 2009) 1-40 Distressed blocks Annie Pfeiffer Chapel in 2011 1-41 Annie Pfeiffer Chapel in 2011 Annie Pfeiffer Chapel 1-42 William H. Danforth Chapel in 2011 The Polk County Science Building in 2011. The exterior was altered in 2000 by the addition of air handling units to meet ventilation code requirements. 1-43 Polk County Science Building interior. Note the unique aluminum-clad column at left. Cylindrical ventilation ducts were added in 2000. Recently, the College commissioned a new textile block building for the campus. Wright had designed a series of small single-family Usonian houses for faculty use which were never built, due to budget restrictions. It is being touted by the College as the “first Wright structure constructed for the original client on the original site since 1966” (Florida Southern College News, June 23, 2011). The plans have been re-purposed for use as a “Tourism and Education Center”. Around $2,000,000 in donations have been received to fund the project, a 1700 square foot structure. Construction started in the Spring of 2011, with completion in late 2013. (Florida Southern College image) 1-44 This is how the site appeared in November, 2011: The architect has followed a fairly literal interpretation of the textile block system, although with modern improvements. No student laborers are used to cast blocks on-site. These blocks are cast 1300 miles away in Massachusetts by highly skilled precast concrete craftsmen. Around 2000 blocks in 47 different patterns will be required (Wayne Koehler, Florida Southern College). Unlike the original wooden molds, the new molds use Teflon ™ inserts fashioned with a CNC cutter to exact specifications. The inserts fit inside the mold and are removed after the block is released from the form, preventing cracking and preserving the fine detailing. Block mold with white Teflon inserts (Photo courtesy of Wayne Koehler, Florida Southern College) 1-45 Finished corner blocks: The concrete mix design has been reworked to increase durability while maintaining the same look as the original blocks. Stainless steel reinforcing has also been added, according to the chief Architect, M. Jeffrey Baker. The blocks appear to be assembled in a manner similar to the originals, only using better materials. Vertical bars consist of stainless steel threaded rods with couplers. Epoxy coated reinforcing bars are used horizontally. Custom-designed steel wythe connectors hold the wall together. The cavity is filled with a polyurethane foam instead of being left open, as was the case with the original design. A preliminary observation is that the system used for this building appears to be expensive and time-consuming, and requires highly-skilled labor - not quite what Wright had intended. Note the rusted wythe connectors in the preliminary mock-up. The installed walls use stainless steel connectors (above). 1-46 1.3.7.1 Notes from a December 12, 2011 interview with Florida Southern College architect, Jeff Baker What improvements were made to the original block for the new Tourism Center? Dry-casting was tried for the blocks, but they were susceptible to water penetration. So the blocks were wet-cast, setting for two hours in the form before removal, then acid etched to simulate the open-pore dry-cast look. Dry-casting also did not give the fine detail required – the perforations were a problem. In addition, the blocks will be pressure-washed on-site. What materials are used for the molds? The base mold is currently plywood with a smooth resin coating. Teflon inserts are added for the details and to ease form removal. There are some durability issues with the plywood, so Teflon-coated steel or aluminum is being considered for future base molds. Was sand from the site used? No, the site sand is contaminated with fertilizer. This was known at the time of original construction, so none of the campus buildings use site material. What changes were made to the reinforcing? 3/8” stainless steel threaded rod was used vertically for durability. To save costs, epoxy coated #3 bars were used horizontally. The reinforcing was designed by a structural engineer to resist hurricane loads, per the building code. The building is not tall, so strength was not an issue. How did you ensure that the grout covered the reinforcing thoroughly? The grout was injected under pressure. When it came out the other hole, you knew that the cavity was filled. Silicone caulk was used to set the blocks and prevent the grout from oozing out. The original buildings used clay for this purpose. Eric Wright pointed out some clay in a joint when he visited the campus. Is a vapor barrier used with this wall assembly? No. The intention is to allow the building to breath. The wet-cast block and silicone caulk prevents water penetration. A wall assembly was scientifically tested for wind-driven rain. What kind of insulation is used? A foam open cell insulation is foamed in place. It was found that the insulation adds a lot of strength to the wall, like a type of SIP panel. How did this particular house plan come about? In 1938, low-cost FHA loans first became available for single-family homes. The college wanted to take advantage of this, so they asked Wright to design a house for faculty, with the potential for building up to 20 more of these. The design was apparently too radical for the FHA, and the application was denied. The plans did not include any details for the block patterns, so the patterns were extrapolated based on the other campus buildings. Any comments on the cost of using this system? The costs were high because the team tooled up from scratch for one little building. Six generations of block designs were required before the right one was found. Once the system is in-place, the incremental cost to do additional buildings should be economical. It’s comparable to the Ford Model T. 1-47 1.3.8 The Parkwyn Village and Galesburg Country Homes subdivisions - 1948 These subdivisions in and around Kalamazoo, Michigan came about around the height of Wright’s “Usonian” period. Here, the block system was intended to be a way for home owners to save money by using “sweat-equity”. Less consideration is given to its use as a mono-material, as much wood is used for the ceilings and other components. Still, the block provides for the structure, the shelter, the finished surfaces and illumination through the perforations. The Eric Brown House is a well- preserved example of this pre “Automatic” system. The Brown House in 1949: (Courtesy of the Curtis-Smith’s) The Brown House in 2011: 1-48 Brown House living room 1-49 Brown House living room Spare 12”x16” blocks An original form for the Brown House 1-50 Block weathering observed at the Brown House The Browns and Mr. Wright (Courtesy of the Curtis-Smith’s) The Robert Levin House, 1948 (shown in 2011, Parkwyn Village, Kalamazoo, Michigan 1-51 Robert Levin House, steps with lights Robert Levin House, patterned and perforated blocks Robert Levin House, patterned and perforated blocks. Note caulking. David I. Weisblatt House, 1948, Galesburg, Michigan 1-52 David I. Weisblatt House Weisblatt House, patterned and perforated blocks 1-53 Samuel Eppstein House, 1949, Galesburg, Michigan Samuel Eppstein House Eric Pratt House, 1948, Galesburg, Michigan 1-54 1.3.9 The Usonian Automatic The Gerald Sussman House (project, 1955, FLLWF 5524.001) “We are often asked how a young couple, with a limited budget, can afford to build a house designed on the basic principles of organic architecture…This problem will probably always exist in one direction or another. But we have gone far in solving this generic problem by the natural concrete block house we call the ‘Usonian Automatic.’ This Usonian house incorporates innovations which reduce most of the heavier costs, labor in particular.” (Wright 1954, 197-198) This was to be Wright’s to the textile-block system as a mono-material. After some further experimentation in the late 1940s with rectangular block in a 3 to 4 aspect ratio, Wright settled on the 12” x 24” x 4” Usonian Automatic block. The system encompassed the roof and glazing as well. His intent was to find a manufacturer that could produce the system economically to the precision required for blocks with no dimensional tolerance. According to Eric Lloyd Wright: “Although steel forms were used to create the blocks for the Automatics, the blocks still could not be made with the precision necessary to lay them without shimming. It was my grandfather’s desire that, ultimately, these blocks could be picked up in any building supply yard and stacked up by individuals wanting to build their own houses…He realized that only if the blocks were machine made would it be possible to lay them out without shimming, but he was never able to interest anyone in taking on the manufacture of the blocks.” (Hess 2005, 459) Quotes from the author’s interview with Eric Lloyd Wright are found later in this chapter. Most of the Automatics were constructed with a single block wythe wall. The inside coffered face, which was hidden on previous textile-block houses, was either left exposed for decorative effect, or covered with an inch of rigid insulation and ¾” mahogany plywood panels. (Hess 2005, 459) 1-55 (Wright 1954, 200) The Automatics are also notable for replacing the wood roof with coffered concrete blocks. These 24” square coffered blocks were 6” deep. A plywood platform was constructed and the 240 lb blocks were hoisted and placed on the platform. When placed together, troughs were formed in the edges for reinforcing and poured concrete (per Eric Lloyd Wright interview). The roof was essentially a concrete waffle- slab with precast stay-in-place forms. This was apparently done to take the concept of a mono-material further than had been done previously. Whether it made economic or structural sense to place all that weight at the roof is a subject of debate. The Turkel House (1955) in 2011: 1.3.9.1 Usonian Automatic Retrospectives: In 1988 and 1989, a full-size mockup of the never-built Sussman House project was constructed and taken on tour across the country. Because the house had to be disassembled, trucked and reassembled repeatedly, the blocks were not made of concrete, but of polystyrene sandwiched between laminated board and covered with a cementitious coating. (Hurd 1988) Organizers touted the exhibition as an illustration of the potential of modular construction. Exhibit interior (Hurd 1988): In January, 2009, an exhibition at the University of Ontario featured Usonian Automatic cast blocks assembled into a wall. The exhibit demonstrates that there is still significant interest in Wright’s modular, mono-material, machine-age building system. 1-56 (HowarthWright.blogspot.com) University of Toronto School of Architecture exhibit, 2009 (HowarthWright.blogspot.com) 1-57 1.3.9.2 A visit to the Turkel House in Detroit Michigan The Turkel House in 2011: The Turkel House, built in 1955, is the only two-story Usonian Automatic house in existence. The two- story scheme reduces the house’s footprint on the lot. The plan further maximizes yard space by being tucked into a corner of the lot. The house has recently been carefully restored to its former glory by the current owners. Some enhancements to the original include the addition of thermal pane insulated glass for all the perforated blocks. The radiant heat system in the floor has been expanded to cover certain cold spots in the house. The master bath has been reconfigured, which originally generated controversy among Wright aficionados, but actually appears to work well. 1-58 The Turkel House in 2011: 1-59 The Turkel House in 2011: Ignoring the original owner’s wish to minimize the number of windows and doors, Wright’s design includes 19 exterior doors, none more than 24” wide, and over 400 windows. In Wright’s view, these weren’t windows as punched openings, but rather, they were perforated blocks which admitted light and views, as well as providing ventilation, support and shelter. This can be seen in these columns, which do all of the above, as well as acting as furniture and storage space. They look fragile, especially with the mitered glass corners, but actually support the heavy concrete balcony and roof. The columns on the Turkel House do everything 1-60 Coffered blocks are left exposed. At right is a “peek-a- boo” opening at the balcony for children’s amusement. The block channels are patched on the parapet to provide a finished edge. The double cantilevers tend to sag. This one has been shored. The car port has also been shored to prevent a possible collapse. 1-61 1.3.10 Quotes from an interview with Eric Lloyd Wright on May 14, 2011 Regarding the textile block concept: You can see that in every period of his career after Olive Hill (Hollyhock House), he never let it go. There is always some kind of concrete textile block system. But he couldn’t swing (the industry) over. I always thought it had great potential, but there was the issue with the forming, and with the accuracy of the block (dimensions), because you don’t have a mortar joint to make up differences. Those were two difficulties. Another issue is the energy required to make cement. I’ve always wondered why they couldn’t use the tremendous heat from cement production to generate electricity – a form of cogeneration The big problem with the tightly stacked blocks was that it was hard to cast the blocks precisely. That is why I believe they switched to aluminum forms from wood after casting the Millard House. Even so, it was hard to get the precise measurements required and the block joints gained as they went along. Also, unlike the standard Besser block, which can be pushed out of the form, forming the grooves along the edges necessitated a hinged form which could be pulled apart. My grandfather could never get any companies interested in developing machinery to make the block. (Conversely,) that takes it away from the handcraft. These blocks were handcrafted. The weakest part of the system was water penetration through the wall. One thing I was thinking of, and others as well, was making the blocks with foam insulation or insulating concrete. Regarding Parkwyn Village: He (FLLW) tried to eliminate the (face) pattern later on to get the cost down. Cost was the big factor. Q: Do you know why the later textile block houses went to 12” height instead of 16”? I don’t know, unless he was trying to reduce the weight of the block. One reason he used 16” was that it worked within a 4’ module. He always liked to work with threes rather than fours. Re: The Storer House restoration: We did use a siloxane sealer, a German product. You have to eventually reapply it, because (the pores) open up over time. We only replaced a few blocks, the rest were in pretty good shape. The front wall had some replacements, you can see that they’re slightly off-color. We had to make new blocks, because the wall on the driveway is all new, and the wall in front of the house, on Hollywood Boulevard, is all new. They were all cast on the job site. Pete Purens made them, with another mason. The mold face plates had to be remade, but we had the surround. Regarding grouting of the Ennis House replacement walls: We found that if you got the right grout mix you could get it into the channels. I wanted to put a vibrator on the rods but couldn’t get them to do that. They were afraid that (the grout) would come out the joints. We knew from experience that many times the grout did not go all the way through and the bar would be exposed in the middle. Re: The Tonkens House: The waffle-shaped roof blocks were 6” thick, with a one inch layer of concrete topping applied after grouting the channels which held the reinforcing (see sketch). The blocks were shored with wood 2x4s and the channels grouted. Where we had a lot of stress, the coffer was left out, leaving plain blocks, (near supports). Regarding the use of a concrete roof on the Usonian Automatics: That’s where my grandfather really wanted to go – to a mono- material. The material comes from the site and has a unifying form. By contrast, the Storer House had a wood roof. 1-62 Tonkens House roof section (sketch by Eric Lloyd Wright) Regarding the Arizona Biltmore Addition: At first I thought it was a good idea to do the lift panels, but after I saw it in place, it wasn’t quite the same. I thought they were very clever in casting the block patterns from individual fiberglass molds that were skewed slightly, so they weren’t lined up perfectly. It was fairly effective. John Rattenbury was the architect. Closing thoughts: The (textile block) idea hangs on, because there is something innate about it that strikes all of us as something worth pursuing. The whole thing is unified. 1-63 1.4 Current and historical competitors to the textile block There are no known competitors to the textile block as a complete mono-material system. There have been several pre- cursors to the system, which were covered earlier in this chapter. Inventors have, however, since come up with systems which have some of the features of the textile-block, and those will be discussed here. 1.4.1 Alden B. Dow and the “Unit-Block” Alden Dow was born in 1904 to Herbert and Grace Dow in Midland Michigan. Herbert Dow was the founder of the Dow Chemical company. Alden studied chemical and mechanical engineering at the University of Michigan before bucking his father’s wishes and enrolling in the Columbia School of Architecture. (Maddex 2007, 36) After graduation, Dow signed on to become an apprentice at Frank Lloyd Wright’s newly established Taliesen Fellowship in Wisconsin. He stayed for 6 months and is noted for having documented Taliesen’s first year by taking movies. Dow and Wright maintained a warm friendship for many years, until Dow beat Wright out of a major commission to design the Phoenix Civic Center and Museum (Maddex 2007, 47). Wright’s design was deemed too expensive. Dow was aware of and admired the textile-block system developed by Wright. He set out to design a block system of his own that used waste cinder ash from the Dow Chemical incinerators. The advantage, in addition to reusing a waste product, was that the ash made the blocks significantly lighter than standard concrete. Another innovation was to cast the blocks in a rhomboid shape, so that while they overlapped in a running bond for increased wall strength, visually they appeared to be stacked. A saw-tooth effect was also possible. Conventional mortar joints held the block together This stack effect created a look similar to the textile block, only without any pattern on the face. The finish was limited as well to the grey cinder ash and cement, unless painted. The profile was 12” square, to fit the 4 ft. module that Alden used for his designs. Walls were constructed in a single layer, and the voids were left hollow for “insulation value”. The R-value would be similar to a standard hollow-block, which is quite low, only about 1.2 for a 10” thick block. The single layer must have made for a cold wall, considering the Midwestern climate where Dow’s projects were built. The cores could be filled with insulation to improve performance somewhat, but the thermal bridging provided by the shell webs limits the insulation’s effectiveness. An Isothermal Plane calculation done according to ASRAE 90.1 requirements, assuming core fill insulation with infinite R, only increases the wall R value to 4.75 for a 10” wall. (Holm 1996) By contrast, the double-wythe textile block system has a 3” gap, bridged only by metal ties. If insulated, the textile block had the potential for better thermal performance with less thermal bridging. 1-64 Above: The first Unit Block house, the Heath House, 1934. Below left: Lewis House hearth, 1933 (Maddex 2007, 51) On right, Alden B Dow residence and studio, 1937-1939 (Source: Sally Kuchar) In addition to better thermal performance, the textile block system had more versatility than the Dow unit Block. The textile block could be pierced to let in light or to inset glass or install a built-in lighting fixture. It could be offset, for a stair-step effect, and, last but not least, patterns and impressions could be cast on the face. 1-65 1.4.2 “Korfil” Hi-R Insulated Concrete Masonry System The webs on standard hollow concrete masonry units can be a conduit for water penetration, and short-circuit the thermal break between the block faces. In the 1980’s Korfil developed a masonry block and insulation insert designed to minimize the size of the webs and to block water penetration: Hi-R block system (W.R Grace Co., 16-17) Based on independent testing results, Block R value ranges from 8 to 12. (Howard 1996) Water wicking to the interior is still possible, so a water-repellent admixture is recommended for the block (W.R. Grace, “Dry-Block”). There are no differences visually and aesthetically from a standard 8” by 16” block. It cannot be made square or over- sized. The interior face will be quite plain and utilitarian. The outside can have a variety of finish treatments, but the grout joints give it away as standard block. Unlike the textile block, it cannot be “pierced” to let in light or be offset for effect. As an extruded shape, it also cannot be cast with a pattern. There can theoretically be a thermal mass benefit with the HI-R block, but the plain back face of the block would need to be exposed, which would be visually undesirable. The ribbed finish shown on the block above attempts to hide the actual block joints, which can backfire when the blocks vary in tone: Source: Christine Beall This same characteristic can add character and authenticity when block joints are revealed honestly, as is the case with the textile block system: 1-66 Arizona Biltmore Resort 1.4.3 “Sparlock” Dry-Stacked Masonry system This innovative alternating face shell system was developed in Canada and requires no mortar. It also uses a stack bond, like the textile block. The concept is similar to Walter Burley Griffin’s Knit-lock system, as well as the block used in the Millard House. In this case, however, there is no air gap, so the insulation value will be low. Setting the blocks without mortar allows unskilled laborers to assemble a wall quickly. In addition, the stack bond is more forgiving of dimensional tolerances than a running bond. It is claimed that the staggered horizontal joints prevent water from penetrating the wall. Source: Sparlock Technologies Wright’s textile block promised to be quick to assemble, but, by many accounts, did not deliver on that promise. It took hard work by skilled labor to make the blocks on-site, and it was difficult to grout the channels fully. It is likely that these were the main reasons why the textile block projects cost much more than Wright had budgeted. 1-67 By contrast, the Sparlock appears to be economical and fast to assemble. It is not meant to be exposed to view, however. Most of the applications to-date cover up the block, as it has a utilitarian, unfinished look. One exception is this retaining wall, which uses alternating bands of split-face block: It is touted as a solution for construction in the Third World, specifically South Africa. The company claims that a 900 sq. ft. house can be erected in a day. It is marketed to warm climates where air conditioning is not available and, therefore, insulation is not as much of a concern. Domestic applications include firewalls, which are not exposed to view and also have no need for insulation. Source: Sparlock Technologies 1-68 1.4.4 “Pentstar” One Step Concrete Form Masonry Unit Building System Masonry contractor John Spakousky developed this innovative concrete masonry system while in Alaska. He was looking for a masonry system that would provide superior performance in that harsh northern climate. The system consists of an interior masonry face unit, a large gap for receiving cast concrete, 2” of rigid insulation, a 1” air gap / weep cavity, and an exterior masonry unit. The assembly is connected together with a non-conductive injection molded polyester resin positioner. The masonry can be either brick or concrete in a variety of finishes. Source: Pentstar Corp. Despite the name, constructing a wall is actually a two or three step process. The units are assembled by masons using conventional mortar joints. Then, reinforcing is inserted in the cavity and concrete is placed, with the units serving as a stay-in-place form. The result is an 8” thick insulated reinforced concrete wall created without formwork that is faced with masonry on both sides, with a weep cavity. The concrete is on the inside of the wall so it can provide a thermal mass benefit to the interior space. Minneapolis Animal Shelter, Source: Pentstar Corp. Seward Middle School, Alaska, Source: Pentstar Corp. 4.1.4.1 Comparison to the textile block: Wright would have appreciated the do-it-yourself possibilities, but for the fact that skilled masons are needed to assemble it. If the system were modified to dry-stack, it would come closer to the Usonian ideal of inexpensive assembly using unskilled labor. The cast-in-place concrete allows the reinforcing to move to the interior of the wall, where it is better protected from the elements. This is one improvement over the textile block, which places the reinforcing at the joints, where it is more susceptible to water infiltration. 1-69 1.5 Current and near-future development of systems similar to the original textile block There are no other current systems similar to the textile block that the author has been able to identify. Current concrete masonry wall research has been concerned mainly with structural performance, durability, connections, and the like. Masonry architectural development has been focused on imitating other materials with surface treatments, a practice that Wright abhorred. The textile block was formed with a pattern – it was molded. It is in the nature of concrete to take the form of its mold. The surface finishes used for concrete masonry typically do violence to it. The rock-face look is back in style, in the form of split- face block. According to Wikipedia: “CMUs may…be scored, ribbed, sandblasted, polished, striated (raked or brushed), include decorative aggregates, be allowed to slump in a controlled fashion during curing, or include several of these techniques in their manufacture to provide a decorative appearance.” (CMU = Concrete Masonry Unit) With the exception of Wright and a few other past pioneers, concrete block has been relegated to the basement, architecturally speaking. There are no systems available which are modular, or combine with glass to make window units, or incorporate built-in lighting, or can be echoed on the floors and ceiling, or provide stamped patterns unique to the project. The textile block had these capabilities. The textile block system fits between categories, with concrete masonry at one end and architectural precast at the other. Concrete masonry is typically cheap and utilitarian, while architectural precast is used for more expensive, higher-end projects. The textile block combined features of both. It is telling that when the Ennis House required large quantities of replacement blocks for its renovation, an architectural precaster was called in to provide them. Is the textile block simply a different kind of architectural precast? One that has the discipline of the Module forced upon it? To call it masonry is to not tell the whole story – though it shares some features of masonry in its method of assembly. Is it closer to precast concrete by nature? One major difference is that the pieces are smaller than is typical with precast – they can be lifted by hand instead of requiring a crane. It is ironic that Wright intended the textile-block to be an inexpensive system that ordinary people of limited means could use to affordably build an architect-designed home. He developed it “for the GI’s”, he said. Nowadays, this type of structure would be considered high end, a status symbol. Even the luxurious Arizona Biltmore resort couldn’t afford it! The latest additions to the resort used stucco and Dryvit to mimic the textile block’s joint pattern. Is it possible to manufacture a modern textile block economically? This thesis will attempt to answer that question. 1-70 Dissertation of Edward D Losch for the Degree Ph.D. in Architecture Chapter 2 The Essential Qualities School of Architecture Department of Building Science University of Southern California 2-1 Introduction to Chapter 2 A comprehensive examination of the complete historical record was undertaken to identify the essential qualities, challenges, problems, barriers to acceptance, and alternative methods of Frank Lloyd Wright’s textile block system. A computerized searchable and relational database was created using Microsoft Access to log and organize the data. The sum of Wright’s collected writings were examined, and relevant passages were noted and catalogued. Taliesin correspondence was combed for all references to any of the built or un-built textile block projects. Letters from key Taliesin Associates were examined for relevance. Interviews were conducted of established Frank Lloyd Wright experts. Site visits were made to many of the textile block buildings and current owners were interviewed. Original drawings and specifications for the approximately 100 textile block projects were examined and catalogued. Existing publications formed another major source of information about the textile block. Even if the information or opinion presented was not accurate, it could give an indication of public sentiment or an impression of the time. These included books, journals, magazines, newspapers, web articles, and audio and video transcripts. The documents were found by methodically exploring Robert Sweeney’s Annotated Bibliography (covering 1886 to 1977), as well as Donald Langmead’s Bio-Bibliography (covering 1886 to 2002). More recent documents were found through an internet search, including Doug Steiner’s excellent online “Wright Library” (www.steinerag.com/flw/). Many of the references included bibliographies as well, so those were also followed, in “rabbit hole” fashion. The Qualities, Challenges, and Alternatives were not assigned before-hand, but were logged in the database when they were identified from a particular reference, and assigned to one of 12 categories. The intent was for the database to develop in an organic, self-organized fashion. A hierarchy for the Essential Qualities was also developed. This was accomplished by listing the other Qualities that each Quality supports, then selecting the one other Quality that is supported the most. This was done individually for each of the 107 Qualities, without any consideration (initially) for the overall organization. In this way a tree could be developed “organically”. The following “Essential Qualities Map” presents lower tier qualities on the left and higher tiers on the right. Most of the lower-tier Qualities (4 through 6) could be considered supporting “techniques” or “methods” subject to experimentation (Alternative Methods). The higher-tier Qualities (1-3) should be considered as truly essential to the system as Wright envisioned it. The one Quality that does not or cannot support any other Quality would then be the only member of Tier 1, at the top of the tree, or in this case, on the right. This Quality, “Lifting the Spirit,” is not something that can be analyzed using building science. Some of the Qualities could be considered unproven or unrealized. These are shown as greyed out in the second “Modified” Qualities map and have a checkbox for each database entry. One can see how certain Qualities were compromised due to the problems that were had with the system. A total of 107 Essential Qualities were found by the author. The following relationship diagram shows how the Essential Quality entries are linked to the other tables in the database. Factors that negatively affected the realization of a particular Essential Quality are listed. These were ranked into three categories. “Challenges” are problems that could reasonably be overcome using modern materials and methods. “Problems” are more serious and may or may not be overcome with current technology. “Barriers” are problems that do not have a good solution and are likely not solvable in the near future. These negative factors are 2-3 identified in this chapter and linked to the relevant Essential Qualities. They are explored and analyzed in detail in Chapter 3. This relationship diagram shows how the Essential Qualities table is related to the other tables in the database. The Essential Qualities are of differing concern to different entities, or interests. There are at least four interests involved with the design and construction of a building. The author has labeled these interests as Manufacturer, Builder, Owner, and Society. It is up to the architect to balance the needs of these separate, often-competing interests. Some Essential Qualities are relevant only to certain interests. The Manufacturer would be the entity responsible for casting and curing the blocks to the architect’s specification, and ensuring that they are delivered to the job-site in a timely manner. They are concerned with the Categories of Cost, Design, Durability, and Prefabrication. The Builder is responsible for erecting the building and coordinating all trades. They are concerned with the Categories of Cost, Design, Structure, and Utilities. The Owner, on the other hand, is concerned with Comfort, Cost, Design, Durability, Integrity, and Structure. Society also has a stake in the outcome. It is in Society’s interest that the project be sustainable, and not wasteful of resources. It should not negatively impact the neighbors. The project should be an asset to the community, beautiful, not ugly. It should be structurally sound. In Wright’s opinion, it should support Democratic ideals and the 2-4 Freedom of the Individual. Society is a Category in itself, but is also concerned with the other Categories of Cost, Design, Durability, Integrity, and Structure. Each Essential Quality listed in the database has a checklist marking which of the above four interests are concerned with a particular Quality. A note regarding references: Complete references to the quotes in the database entries for this chapter can be found in Appendix E. For example, under the Design Category of “MON – monolithic appearance”, there is a quote by Robert Twombly. In the table titled “Essential Qualities Found in Publications”, found in Appendix E, under “De: MON”, Twombly’s quote can be found listed alphabetically by Author with the date, the publication name, and page number. (The database itself contains the column and line number of the quote as well.) The author, date and publication name can then be used in Appendix G, an Annotated Bibliography, to look up the complete reference information, with ISBN, etc. 2-5 2-6 2-7 From FLW's 'The Natural House', 1954: "A house of this type could not be well built and achieve its design except as an architect oversees the building." Wright needed a "trained foreman" for the first textile block houses. In this case Lloyd Wright supervised a team of unskilled day laborers with mixed results. Many of the textile block projects had a trained Taliesin apprentice or trusted associate supervising on-site. In addition to Lloyd Wright, the list includes Eric Lloyd Wright, Aaron Green, Albert Chase McArthur, Arthur Pieper, Charles Montooth, Wesley Peters, Morton Delson, Jack Howe, Nils Schweizer and Paul Mueller. A: ARC - architect field supervision required This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Knowledgeable and experienced supervision required Actualized? ASSEMBLY - AS Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) Supports these other Qualities: Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Because the system was unusual, a trained apprentice was required on site to guide the work. This theoretically allowed for the use of unskilled labor, which was key to Wright's claim of affordability. The use of 3D CAD generated assembly drawings was useful for constructing the Florida Southern College Faculty House in 2011 (#3922). That is probably still not sufficient, however, to obviate the need for full-time knowledgeable supervision 2-9 Wright felt that the construction process was too complex, with too many phases that had to be coordinated between separate guilds or trade unions. In his book, "The Natural House", he proposed a one-step installation process where outer and inner surfaces, structure and finish are installed at the same time. Window sizes are to be standardized, plumbing pre-packaged and ready to install. He envisioned a system where all the complication and precision work was accomplished in the factory, leaving the site work to be completed by unskilled labor or the homeowners themselves. The Usonian Automatic was intended to be so simple to construct that "...the houses would practically build themselves ‐ with a little help from the homeowners." A: BUI - simple to build This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Contractor reticence, confusion, A: Complicated assembly, A: Dimensional tolerance / alignment issues, A: Highly skilled precision work, A: Knowledgeable and experienced supervision required Actualized? ASSEMBLY - AS Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Supports these other Qualities: Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Despite Wright's sincere attempt at pre-engineering the complexity out of the textile block projects, they were never simple to build, as claimed. The primary reason for making the system simple to build was to use unskilled field laborers as much as possible, whether they be clients or day laborers. By the1950s, most clients found standard CMU to be a simpler and cheaper option. Thus the textile block was replaced with CMU for many projects. 2-10 In 1927, Wright first articulated his vision for a "one-process" construction method: "...a livable building may be made of mono ‐material in one operation.” That is, floors and ceilings fabricated in the same way at the same time. In 1938: "And it would be ideal to complete the building in one operation as it goes along, inside and outside." At one point (in 1928 for San Marcos in the Desert) Wright explored the possibility of casting glass textile blocks that could be installed at the same time as the rest of the wall, obviating the need to come back and install windows later. "This building we contemplate [San Marcos] is a mono-material one-process building that is automatically the product of a new system of construction…" - FLW to A.J. Chandler, 7/24/1929. Wright contrasted his "one process" to what he called the typical "five process" method, where the various trades appeared at different times and tore down half of each other's work in order to complete their own. "In one operation a final finish was formed ‐ the system worked like giant children's building blocks. It could span openings, contain servicing, and incorporate glass" - John Sergeant. "Here is a process that makes of the mechanics of concrete building a mono-material and mono-method affair instead of the usual complex quarreling aggregation of processes and materials" - FLW, 1927. A: INS - simultaneous install - one process This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: "One-process" trade integration issues, A: "One-process" walls thwart code inspections Actualized? ASSEMBLY - AS I: SIM - Simplicity, A: STR - streamlined assembly, De: INN - inner echoes outer, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one, So: RAD - radical Supports these other Qualities: O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The most specific feature of Wright's "one-process" concept was a cellular growth analogy. All organs grow simultaneously within an embryo. It was not based on building science. The idea seems logical but there was no research presented to support it. At its heart, this was an organic principle - a building should "grow" uniformly and elegantly from its foundation. It was a philosophical, romantic ideal that was to be taken essentially on faith. 2-11 There was to be no "fudge factor" for dimensions. Wright's concept was that if the blocks could be manufactured with sufficient dimensional accuracy, they could be stacked tight with no space between them, which, in theory, would simplify the on-site building process. He stressed the importance of this in a 1928 telegram to Albert Chase McArthur regarding the Arizona Biltmore Hotel project: "PATTERN IDEAL FOR SYSTEM IF ACCURATE SIZE IN BLOCK UNIT CAN BE HAD ACCURATE SIZE NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE SUCCESS." A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Labor-intensive, A: Dimensional tolerance / alignment issues, A: Highly skilled precision work, A: Grout leakage, A: Slow construction pace, P: Precision molds required, A: Too many joints, A: Much field cutting and fitting required Actualized? ASSEMBLY - AS A: MOR - no mortar or mason, Du: VER - vermin resistant, Cm: AIR - air infiltration minimization, St: SPD - woven reinforcing, 'spidery', A: BUI - simple to build Supports these other Qualities: A: BUI - simple to build Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 6 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright could have added a mortar joint, but chose not to, believing that eliminating this skilled trade was key to simplifying the assembly process. In actuality, having tight joints with no tolerance did the opposite, needlessly complicating assembly by requiring a level of precision that was unrealistic for field work. A note for the Science and Cosmology Building [#5319] reads: "Dimensions for precast block shall be accurate to within 1/64 of an inch and shall not exceed given dimensions in any event." By contrast, current industry standards allow plus or minus 1/8" for units under 10' in size (PCI MNL 117, 1996, pg 162). 2-12 First articulated in print in 1927, Wright proposes the elimination of many skilled trades in the construction process, particularly masons: "Plastering? None. Carpenter work? None. Masonry? None. 'Form' work? None. Painting? None. Decorations? All integral, cast into the structure as designed with all the play of imagery known to Persian or Moor." He resurrected this idea in the 1950s with his Usonian Automatic system, predicting that one could build a house, using his concrete block system without mortar, for between $1,500 and $3,500. He stated that such a house "has been on the drafting boards at Taliesin since 1921. Now seems the propitious time for it." A: MOR - no mortar or mason This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Labor-intensive, A: Dimensional tolerance / alignment issues, So: Labor union opposition, A: Highly skilled precision work, A: Too many joints Actualized? ASSEMBLY - AS Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, So: RAD - radical Supports these other Qualities: Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright sought to minimize skilled field labor mainly by eliminating the union mason. 2-13 Key to Wright's need for a realistic assembly time was his specification of the dry-casting method for the blocks, where the molds could be turned over and quickly reused every two to three minutes. This was at the expense of durability, however. The concept is further explored in the Essential Qualities STR - Streamlined Assembly and FLD - The Factory goes to the House. Both of these qualities imply an increase in the speed of assembly. In practice, the construction process was anything but speedy, as evidenced by the lengthy list of associated Challenges, Problems and Barriers. Wright designed special steel wythe connectors for both the Lloyd Jones house (#2902) and the San Marcos in the Desert project (#2704) in an attempt to simplify assembly. A similar concept was used successfully by the team that constructed the Florida Southern College Faculty House (#3922) in 2011-2013. A: SPE - speed of assembly This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Contractor reticence, confusion, A: Labor-intensive, A: Heavy / block weight, P: Inexperienced labor, P: Complex and labor-intensive block casting, A: Complicated assembly, A: Highly skilled precision work, A: Slow construction pace Actualized? ASSEMBLY - AS P: FLD - the factory goes to the house Supports these other Qualities: P: FLD - the factory goes to the house Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Because the casting of blocks was usually performed on-site, this added significant critical-path time to the field construction period. 2-14 Wright believed that many benefits would accrue from streamlining the construction process in an organic fashion. This was first noted in 1927 as a 'mono-material and mono-method…in one operation.' This quality is related to INS - Simultaneous Install - One Process. In 1932, Wright proposed prefabricating baths and kitchens as mass-produced units (KIT) . He was not successful in convincing the industry to go this route. The elimination of mortared masonry, trim, plaster, paint and gutters (TRM) was also intended to streamline construction. This was articulated in 1927 in reference to the first textile block houses in Los Angeles, well before his Usonian period, which started in 1936 with the Jacobs house. He planned to use glass textile blocks for the San Marcos project (2704) in an attempt to further reduce complexity and eliminate the separate step of inserting windows into wall openings. A: STR - streamlined assembly This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Labor-intensive, A: Complicated assembly, A: Highly skilled precision work, P: Too many block types, A: Staging required for roof, A: Slow construction pace Actualized? ASSEMBLY - AS A: INS - simultaneous install - one process Supports these other Qualities: A: INS - simultaneous install - one process Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Streamlined assembly was required as a prerequisite to Wright's organic "one-process" method. 2-15 This quality is described in a letter from FLW to Lloyd Jones in 1928. Wright was attempting to convince Jones of the benefits of using the textile-block system for his new house (#2902): "We erect two thin shells of these precast unit blocks, both shells reinforced with steel,--vertically and horizontally,--and pour the interior joint grooves with water-resisting cement which makes every joint an air-tight joint,--water-tight too." There was limited success - the Freeman house (#2402) is drafty, due to the multitude of gaps in the wall system that have opened up over time. On the other hand, Morton Delson, a Taliesin Associate, claimed that the Usonian Automatic Kalil house (5506) was so air-tight when built that a window had to be cracked open in order for the fireplace to work properly. Cm: AIR - air infiltration minimization This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Complicated assembly, Cm: Insulation, lack of Actualized? COMFORT - CM Cm: VAP - vapor / low permeability, Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, Cm: SEV - severe weather Supports these other Qualities: Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: In the absence of any insulation it was critical to seal any air gaps and preserve a layer of dead air in the cavity between wythes. 2-16 This is one of the earliest claims by Wright, which he repeated often, starting in 1923: "Warm in winter and cool in summer." He maintained that the mass of the blocks combined with the air gap between wythes moderated temperatures and provided "excellent" insulating value. Originally developed for the warm, dry Southwest, Wright soon considered the system as suitable for any climate zone (see the Phi-Gamma-Delta project, #2504, Madison, Wisconsin, as an example). Later Usonian Automatic designs incorporated rigid insulation instead of an air gap, improving performance. He also realized the importance of minimizing thermal breaks so as to avoid short-circuiting the insulation. This was made clear in a 1931 letter to Lloyd Wright, criticizing the latter's proposed "Unit Block" system as having too much "heat, moisture and sound contact." Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Complicated assembly, Cm: Insulation, lack of Actualized? COMFORT - CM Cm: THE - thermal mass effect Supports these other Qualities: Cm: THE - thermal mass effect Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright could claim a thermal mass benefit for his system due to the air gap which slowed heat transmission between wythes. The air space allowed convection currents, however, which compromised performance significantly. Starting with the San Marcos project (#2704) and executed in the Lloyd Jones House (#2902), louver frames were installed behind perforated blocks as the walls were erected (INS - Simultaneous Install). Cm: LVR - ventilation / louvers, integrated This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? COMFORT - CM A: INS - simultaneous install - one process Supports these other Qualities: A: INS - simultaneous install - one process Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: With this technique, mechanical ventilation was provided in an integrated manner, supporting Wright's "one- process" cellular assembly idea. 2-17 Lloyd Wright criticized his father's textile block system as being a noise conductor, due to the many steel ties required between wythes. He was touting his own "improved" design at the time, which did not require wythe connectors (but actually had much more substantial bridging). Surprisingly, this author could find no claims by Wright regarding noise control. Even so, clients have testified that their houses were very quiet. It stands to reason that such a system with substantial mass and an isolating air gap would provide superior resistance to noise transmission. Cm: NOC - noise control This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? COMFORT - CM De: MON - monolithic appearance, sense of mass Supports these other Qualities: De: MON - monolithic appearance, sense of mass Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The interior quietness would support a sense of solidity and mass for the structure. 2-18 In 1927 Wright promised "a building permanent and safe" with the textile block system. By that he meant a construction that was substantial and resistant to earthquakes and severe weather, among other things. There was also the impression of security and strength derived from the concrete masses (which were in actuality often more delicate than they appeared.) A tenant in the Freeman House (#2402) once exclaimed "It seemed the solid wall of stone blocks was sufficient to discourage any intruder." By contrast, with typical modern residential construction, one can cut a passage through the vinyl siding, wood studs and wallboard with a reciprocating saw in a matter of minutes. Some clients wanted a fortress tough enough to withstand an atom bomb: Henry Turkel (5513): "reinforced concrete earthquake ‐proof ‐type building held up best…during the bomb tests. Can such provisions be incorporated?" Wright did not respond specifically to this request in his return letter, but did not dissuade the notion. Cm: SEC - secure This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? COMFORT - CM I: HON - honest expression, integrity, Du: PER - permanence, De: MON - monolithic appearance, sense of mass Supports these other Qualities: Du: PER - permanence Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: A feeling of security is imparted by the bank vault-like solidity of the walls. In many designs the home appears as a fortress from the street but opens up inside to private exterior areas. 2-19 Wright wanted to have it both ways, "protection against storm" when needed, but also an openness to the outside "towards the function of a screen." The mass of the walls and the woven reinforcing provided a substantial barrier against extreme wind speeds. Jenkin Lloyd Jones, son of Richard Lloyd Jones, related how the Jones House (2902) survived a direct hit by a tornado without damage: "Once it was struck directly by a tornado that half ‐emptied the swimming pool and hurled the yard furniture completely over the roof. We had to replace two panes of glass." Cm: SEV -severe weather This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? COMFORT - CM I: HON - honest expression, integrity, Cm: SEC - secure, Du: PER - permanence, De: MON - monolithic appearance, sense of mass Supports these other Qualities: Cm: SEC - secure Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The block's good protection in severe weather provides a sense of security (SEC) that matches the block's formidable appearance. 2-20 Wright remarked on the thermal mass benefit of concrete construction in 1907, when he stated that a concrete house would be "warmer than a wooden house in winter and cooler in summer." In 1923 he noted that his textile block system was "the cheapest possible…warm in winter and cool in summer and dry in both.” He repeated this claim publicly many times in the following years. It was developed originally for the dry Southwest climate to take advantage of daily temperature swings. Wright described his San Marcos project in Arizona as having "cool masonry caverns." Later He claimed a universal applicability for the system in any American climate zone. Cm: THE - thermal mass effect This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? COMFORT - CM O: NAT - inspired by Nature Supports these other Qualities: O: NAT - inspired by Nature Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: This concept was intended to be a natural way to control temperature swings, such as present in a cave or stone or adobe dwelling. 2-21 Wright claimed that his block system was "dry in both" summer and winter. He was counting on the air gap to stop moisture migration from the exterior. He does not address vapor transmission and humidity control directly, although his specifications for the Freeman House list a face sealer (Barlith) for the blocks, which would have reduced vapor transmission. Learning from the early houses, he specified an asphalt coating on the inside face of the outer blocks on the Jones House (#2902): "It would be possible to make the exterior blocks water- proof to a reasonable extent, but we have found that it is cheaper and leaves us free free to produce a more beautiful and colorful texture for the exterior if we coat the inside of the outside block with asphalt." Here he is choosing beauty over comfort and durability. He also relied on "water-resisting cement" for the grouted cores to stop moisture (and vapor) penetration. Cm: VAP - vapor / low permeability This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Complicated assembly, Du: Mix design too dry, Cm: Insulation, lack of Actualized? COMFORT - CM Cm: SEV -severe weather, Du: PER - permanence Supports these other Qualities: Du: PER - permanence Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright was aware that water or vapor penetration could compromise the longevity of the structure, and did take steps to combat it. He was generally unsuccessful due to the porous nature of the block. In this case the intent did not match the result. 2-22 A Usonian Automatic feature - some of the glass inserts set into the blocks are openable for ventilation. Wright's intention was that the block system would provide as many functions as possible, all in an integrated manner. Cm: VEN - ventilated block perforations This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? COMFORT - CM A: INS - simultaneous install - one process Supports these other Qualities: A: INS - simultaneous install - one process Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Integrating the ventilation system with the blocks was necessary to support Wright's "one-process" concept. 2-23 Wright had a strong interest in affordable housing throughout his career. "The house of moderate cost is not only America's major architectural problem but the problem most difficult for her major architects. As for me, I would rather solve it…than build anything I can think of at the moment…" With the textile block, he believed he had found something that would revolutionize the housing industry - if only the industry would listen! He enlisted clients with evangelical fervor to serve as guinea pigs for what amounted to experimental demonstration projects. He made outlandish claims in order to attract media attention. Quoting Robert Twombly: "In December 1951, he [Wright] announced that within a year he would be able to build a $5000 ‐$6000 residence better than anything on the market for twice the price. Using nonunion labor and partial prefabrication, he would pour 'a few teakettles of grout' over a stack of concrete blocks tied together by steel rods, and presto! ‐ instant beauty." In a Milwaukee Journal article from 1949, he proclaimed that a Usonian Automatic house would cost $1500 ‐$3500 and "could be built by a veteran." Low-cost without sacrificing beauty would be his mantra. The system turned out to be anything but low cost, although some industry pundits at the time were convinced that it was "easy and cheap" (or they were at least content to take Wright at his word). Cs: AFF - affordability This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Cs: Expensive to construct, Cs: Lack of bank financing Actualized? COST - CO So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Supports these other Qualities: So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The free-thinkers who were attracted to Wright's work were not all financially well off. He developed the Usonian Automatic for them. Unfortunately, even with owner labor, the system was not any less expensive than his non-concrete designs. 2-24 Wright hoped to lower the cost of labor primarily by eliminating skilled union field labor (See UNS - unskilled labor). Regarding the Usonian Automatic in 1954: "This Usonian house incorporates innovations which reduce most of the heavier building costs, labor in particular." Interestingly, in 1927 he attributed "all difficulties" with the first textile block houses to be "due to poor workmanship." Starting in 1947, Wright started seeking residential clients who were willing to do much of the work themselves (see SWT - sweat equity). Before that, in 1941, he enlisted college students to help construct the Roux Library at Florida Southern College (#4118). To sum up, in addition to attempting to reduce the total man-hours involved, Wright's plan was to substitute cheap unskilled labor and/or the owner's self-labor for skilled union labor. For this to have any hope of working, a knowledgeable supervisor was required to be on-site to guide the work, usually in the form of a Taliesin apprentice or trusted associate (ARC - architect field supervision required). Cs: LAC - lower labor cost This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Labor-intensive, P: Inexperienced labor, So: Labor union opposition Actualized? COST - CO Cs: AFF - affordability Supports these other Qualities: Cs: AFF - affordability Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The sole reason to lower the cost of labor was to make Wright's buildings more affordable. This was not successful, as much skilled and unskilled labor was required for casting and assembly. 2-25 Wright endeavored to reduce material and weight even when it made no economic or structural sense to do so. This was a key component of his organic design philosophy, which often drove his engineers crazy. With the textile block, this was accomplished by coffering the inside face of the blocks and experimenting with lighter weight concrete mixes. Cs: LES - less material, lighter This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: St: Deflection, buckling, St: Engineer resistance Actualized? COST - CO St: CNT - continuity, no posts or beams, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Supports these other Qualities: I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Structural capacity was maximized by taking advantage of "continuity", such as by tying individual elements together so that they can redistribute moments effectively (CNT - continuity, no posts or beams), or by eliminating the distinction between structure and cladding (CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one). This second type of continuity would have been more important to Wright, as it relates directly to his concept of Integrity. 2-26 A quote from Douglas Haskell in 1928 regarding the Ennis and Freeman houses (#2401, #2402): "There is no far ‐fetched transportation of special stones or brick or wood: steel and cement are as ubiquitous as bread." Wright regarded concrete as “a simple, cheap material everywhere available.” In a 1934 letter to Albert Bemis, Wright states that "Wherever cement, steel rods and sand or gravel abound it is the cheapest of all forms of construction and the most permanent." Cs: MAT - Inexpensive, local materials This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? COST - CO Cs: AFF - affordability, O: SIT - connected to the site Supports these other Qualities: O: SIT - connected to the site Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright's interest in the use of local materials was actually more about the organic concept of tying the building to the site than simply a way save money (SIT - connected to the site). In addition, displaying those local materials as the finished surface without paint or other covering satisfied an organic goal, as well as reducing the material cost (CLR - integral color). 2-27 "Imagine how the costs would come down were the technique a familiar matter or if many houses were executed at one time ‐ probably down to $4500, according to number built and location." - Wright, quoted in 1943. He was able to put this musing to the test in Kalamazoo, Michigan in 1948, when a group of professionals formed cooperatives to build several subdivisions modeled after Wright's Broadacre City concept. Unfortunately only eight houses in two subdivisions were designed by Wright and eventually constructed using textile blocks. The homeowners banded together to cast the blocks themselves and enlisted the help of college students over the summer. The effort, although time-consuming, was generally successful, and the homes are still in use today. Cs: SCA - economies of scale This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: So: Market issues Actualized? COST - CO Cs: AFF - affordability Supports these other Qualities: Cs: AFF - affordability Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Much of the success of the cooperatives can be attributed to a pioneering can-do spirit and a strong reverence for Wright and his organic design concepts. The blocks themselves can be mass-produced, but that still leaves a labor-intensive site assembly process, which is not as amenable to scaling. 2-28 "Plastering? None. Carpenter work? None. Masonry? None. 'Form' work? None. Painting? None. Decorations? All integral, cast into the structure as designed with all the play of imagery known to Persian or Moor." -Frank Lloyd Wright, 1927. The idea was to reduce the building assembly ideally to a single process. This could be accomplished in part by eliminating the coordination of skilled trades that need to enter the job site and perform their work at different times. Many of these trades have since been superceded by such innovations as gypsum wallboard, masonry veneer and tilt-up or precast concrete insulated sandwich panels, to name a few. Cs: TRM - no trim, plaster, paint or gutters This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: De: Aversion to concrete - too stark Actualized? COST - CO I: MOM - Mono-Material, A: STR - streamlined assembly, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, A: INS - simultaneous install - one process, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost Supports these other Qualities: A: INS - simultaneous install - one process Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright primarily sought to eliminate the processes that were tacked on to a building in favor of the organic process of integral assembly. 2-29 "Mr. Wright is absolutely right about his blocks ‐ 'women and children can lay them.' I've been having a wonderful time laying blocks…" - Dorothy Eppstein, 1951. If this is representative of the fawning quotes that Wright was receiving from clients and admirers than it is no wonder that he touted the ease of assembly and simplicity of the textile block system. The key to affordability in his mind was the elimination of the skilled mason. In reality, the houses were anything but simple to construct. Absolute precision was required to avoid running long. Grout tended to leak and shimming of each block was required. At one point his son, Lloyd Wright, suggested using a bed of mortar to solve these issues, with a scathing rebuttal by his father. The concept of the Usonian Automatic depended on unskilled field assembly to be practically "automatic," as all the precision work would have been accomplished in advance. Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Contractor reticence, confusion, A: Labor-intensive, P: Inexperienced labor, So: Labor union opposition, A: Highly skilled precision work Actualized? COST - CO So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), Cs: LAC - lower labor cost Supports these other Qualities: So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright was drawn to the romantic idea of the homeowner constructing their own house. Unskilled assembly was a key requirement to accomplishing that. 2-30 "My sense of "wall" was no longer the side of a box. It was enclosure of space affording protection against storm or heat only when needed. But it also to bring the outside world into the house and let the inside of the house go outside. In this sense I was working away at the wall as a wall and bringing it towards the function of a screen" "In some cases blocks have been made with patterned holes into which glass (sometimes colored) is set. When these glazed perforated units are assembled they form a translucent grill or screen of concrete, glass and steel." - Wright, 1954. Wright referred to this quality as "The vanished wall." In a 1931 letter to Lloyd Wright, he wrote that the Jones House (#2902) "is a house without walls…yet it is very strong and private, almost a fortress." He related that the sense of enclosure had disappeared, along with punched wall openings. De: 3RD - third Dimension This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE O: NAT - inspired by Nature, O: SIT - connected to the site Supports these other Qualities: O: SIT - connected to the site Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Using the Third Dimension unified the interior and exterior, which allowed the building to become integral with the site. 2-31 Here are some of the words used to describe the early textile block structures, constructed before 1942: "Medieval quality", "Mayan monumentality", permanence, power, security, solid, imposing, fortresslike (see MON - monolithic appearance), "Old World", aged feel, ancient, "a timeless universality". Compared to an Indian Mughal palace or a jungle temple. Wright articulated his desire to create "permanence" in appearance as well as in fact, variously claiming a life-span of 100, 300 or even a thousand years for his textile block buildings (see PER - permanence). Esther Dekker: "It seemed the solid wall of stone blocks was sufficient to discourage any intruder. The place had a magic, an ancient feeling, like a stone fortress that has withstood and sheltered and abides." De: ANC - ancient, timeless, permanent This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, O: SPR - lifts the spirit Supports these other Qualities: De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: This particular Essential Quality is concerned with an appearance of timelessness achieved through design, as opposed to durability. Of course, Wright's principle of Integrity would dictate that the actual durability be consistent with an appearance of permanence. 2-32 Early on (see the Johnson Desert Compound, #2306), Wright expected the textile block system to handle corners other than 90 degrees, particularly 30/60 triangles, in addition to obtuse angles. He believed that the system should be highly flexible (FLX - flexibility) and capable of handling curves as well (UCR - curved blocks). This refusal to limit the size, shape and configuration of the blocks no doubt complicated any plans to mass- produce them (FAC - factory mass production). Additional projects that utilized angled blocks include the Little Dipper Playhouse #2301, San Marcos in the Desert #2704, Cudney House #2706, Young House (45 deg.) #2707, the first Lloyd Jones House scheme # 2901, Margolis House #4714, Ward McCartney House #4912, and the Laurence Strong House #5120. Of the above projects, only the McCartney House was actually constructed. De: ANG - corners / obtuse angles This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: P: Complex and labor-intensive block casting, P: Too many block types, P: Complicated corners and edges Actualized? DESIGN - DE De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty Supports these other Qualities: De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety' Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright believed that his system had unlimited flexibility, which at the very least included the ability to handle a variety of different angles. 2-33 From the very beginning, Wright expected his block system to accommodate battering of the walls, including reverse battering and horizontal batters. This undoubtedly complicated forming, however, especially at corners where two battered walls met. In order to provide a continuous path for the grouted reinforcing, the perimeter channels needed to be cast at an angle. There were durability issues as well, because the top edge of the blocks provided an exposed shelf for water to sit and penetrate the horizontal joints. Projects with battering include the California Textile Block House sketch 2103, Doheny Ranch #2104, Block House #2110, Johnson Desert Compound #2306, Little Dipper Playhouse #2301, Ennis House #2401, Phi Gamma Delta #2504, House on the Mesa (reverse) #3102, Spivey House (reverse) #3911, and the Roux Library (reverse) #4118. The reverse battering may have been used to reduce water penetration, in addition to the architectural effect. Later, with the Usonian Automatic, batters and angled corners were eliminated to reduce cost. De: BAT - battering, offset blocks This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Du: Water leaks, penetration, Du: Face softness and friability, P: Complex and labor-intensive block casting, Du: Water absorption, porosity Actualized? DESIGN - DE De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Supports these other Qualities: O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Battering was one of the tools at Wright's disposal for giving variety to a building. It was arguably an analogy to natural layered growth. 2-34 Near the very top of the list of Essential Qualities has to be Architectural Quality and Beauty. Time and again Wright sacrificed other qualities to avoid compromising on aesthetics. His intent was to have the hand of the Artist always in firm control of the mechanical process. This is what makes the textile block system worthy of study. How can one harness mass-production to economically produce structures of infinite variety and architectural beauty? Many have testified to the artistry and charm present in the early textile block houses. These were prototypes however. Hardly mass-produced, their construction was cumbersome and costly. The challenge Wright leaves us with is how to preserve this "Alpha Quality" while taking advantage of machine-age methods (see FAC - factory mass production) in order to be affordable to the masses. De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE O: SPR - lifts the spirit Supports these other Qualities: O: SPR - lifts the spirit Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 2.3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Owners and visitors to many of Wright's textile block buildings have commented that the perceived beauty of the structures have affected them in a spiritual way. 2-35 A visual quality is intended that reflects the actuality of a structure composed of individual blocks. This effect is achieved through strong joint expression, for one. Tight joints have chamfers added to distinguish the discrete blocks as units "in a quiet, plastic whole." The individual blocks are often part of a larger box, for a recursive, fractal-like effect (REC - recursive, CEL - cellular). Wright resisted proposals to prefabricate and tilt up wall sections even though the finished look would be the same (1956, FLW to Green, K123A06). De: BLK - blockiness, unit form This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Supports these other Qualities: O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: This quality took precedence over other qualites, such as durability: "The Ennis House (1924) and other masonry buildings, for example, emphasize blocky unit form at the expense of system durability." - Terry Patterson. "Cast ‐cement blocks extend a modular grid over every surface, as if the house was constructed of LEGOs, and lend order and rationality to the design." - Timothy Street Porter. "There is a cellular growth process by which the formal structure of the house and its position on the site grows out of the building block from which it is made: a square concrete tile." - Jeffrey Chusid. 2-36 Wright experimented with circular forms later in his career, adding still greater complication to the textile block casting and assembly process. Curved forms would be required and special care needed to ensure that the concrete mix stayed where it was supposed to in the form. One project even used different radii, increasing the number of molds required (C.R. Pieper, #5515). The following constructed examples were simplified by using flat forms with beveled edges for a faceted face: Roux Library #4118, Winn House #4813, and Eppstein House #4905. The Ludd Spivey project (#3911) would have used a similar system, though with a hollow single-wythe block. Conventional concrete block was used for the curved walls in the Curtis Meyer House #5015, among others. De: CUR - curved block option This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: P: Mold fabrication cost too high, P: Inflexibility of factory production, P: Precision molds required Actualized? DESIGN - DE De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', O: NAT - inspired by Nature Supports these other Qualities: O: NAT - inspired by Nature Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: As most forms in nature are curved as opposed to angular, Wright attempted to adapt the textile block accordingly. 2-37 "Like a crystalline growth from a single molecule, or a fractal curve, the forms and character of the greater object are inherent within the individual component. The proportion, color, tecture, and mass of the house all derive from the block. A three ‐dimensional 16" grid determines the size and placement of every element." - Jeffrey Chusid. "…all my planning was devised on a properly proportioned unit system. I found this would keep all to scale…which thus became ‐ like tapestry ‐ a consistent fabric woven of interdependent, related units, however various." - FLW, 1957. By using this design grid, Wright was able to eliminate most dimensions on his working drawings. It became a matter of counting the number of units across and number of units high to determine placement. Most contractors were not familiar with or comfortable with this method. Regarding San Marcos (2704): "The plans need no figures if the unit system is understood. If it is not understood, then it would be impossible for any such contractor to build the building no matter how many figures were placed upon the plans…" - Wright to Chandler, 7/22/1929. De: DIM - 'Unit System,' no dimensions This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Contractor reticence, confusion, De: Module dimension limitations Actualized? DESIGN - DE I: HON - honest expression, integrity, I: SIM - Simplicity, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Supports these other Qualities: I: SIM - Simplicity Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Having the block itself match the unit measurement of Wright's grid satisfied the Quality of Simplicity. 2-38 Wright warned that standardization has the danger of monotony in application. With the textile block he felt that "mechanical means to infinite variety was no longer an impractical dream." "The Usonian Automatic system is capable of infinite modifications of form, pattern and application, and to any extent." - FLW 1954. "The dissimilarity of the block houses is remarkable since the same structural scheme is used for all." - Esther McCoy. The system had the capability "to form and modulate space and surface in a variety of ways." - Charles Calvo. "Although the system grid is rigid, it is nevertheless fine enough to accommodate a wide range of designs easily." - Leonard Morse-Fortier. While the system has been shown to be flexible, it has yet to be mass-produced to the point of being economical. De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety' This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: P: Too many block types Actualized? DESIGN - DE De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, So: UNL - universal application Supports these other Qualities: De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: A variety of expression is key to architectural quality. True variety is difficult to achieve with mass-produced, prefabricated construction. 2-39 "The new practice made all furnishings so far as possible (certainly the electric lighting and heating systems) integral parts of the architecture. So far as possible all furniture was to be designed in place as part of the building." - FLW 1954. "The furniture designs, labeled "Block Furniture," take their motif from the concrete block patterns prevalent throughout the house…" - Ennis House Remodel #4119 (Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer). Wright considered "as integral parts of the architectural scheme such elements as the furniture, the interior decoration, the system of illumination, and the like." - Biltmore Hotel #2710 (Albert Chase McArthur, 1929). For example, specifications for the Jones House 2901 state that cabinets are to fit within two block spaces. Usonian Automatic furniture likewise was designed to fit the block module. De: FUR - furnishings match block module This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE I: SIM - Simplicity Supports these other Qualities: I: SIM - Simplicity Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: As with the block size, match furnishings to the unit measurement of Wright's grid satisfied his Quality of Simplicity. 2-40 Wright wished to do away with windows as punched openings - "Walls themselves because of glass will become windows and windows as we used to know them as holes in walls will be seen no more." He "pushed the boundaries of concrete to create startling interior spaces with structural window walls, combining structure and light source in one." - Alan Hess. He came close to integrating a glass textile block into the San Marcos project, #2704, a process he wished to patent. "The patents as yet are only applied for. Whether they will be granted is another matter…I am sure there will be no difficulty in taking out a patent on a glass building constructed in this manner…" - FLW to R.M. Cochius, Leerdam Glass Works, Holland, 12/5/1928. "I would like to see developed in the glass industry a quality of glass suitable for building material. In some cases it would be necessary to have the glass clear so that it might be seen through, or at least let light through. In other cases, be opaque. In nearly every building both kinds would be required" - FLW to R.M. Cochius, 4/5/1929. The plan fell through when it was determined that the glass blocks could not be cast in the size that Wright wanted for the project. De: GLZ - integral glazing, modular This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE De: MOD - modular, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Supports these other Qualities: O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Light transmitting blocks contributed to the concept of organic, cellular growth. Just as different cells have different functions, so too with the textile block. 2-41 Starting with the Freeman House in 1924 (#2402), Wright endeavored to eliminate the corner by mitering two panes of window glass without an obstructing corner post. He apparently did not write about this technique specifically but it is evident in his buildings. It was perfected with the Usonian Automatic system. Tracy House (#5512) piers: "…perforated corner blocks with mitered glass inserts form u ‐shaped columns. This detail brings a quality of delicate lattice ‐like light into the room by day while the reverse is true at night as lights from inside appear jewel ‐like on the outside." - Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer. Turkel House (#5513): "At the corners of the rooms, mitered glass meets glass in the windows, a characteristic of Frank Lloyd Wright design." - Diane K. Bert. De: GMC - glazed mitered corners This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: P: Complicated corners and edges Actualized? DESIGN - DE De: 3RD - third Dimension Supports these other Qualities: De: 3RD - third Dimension Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright's intention was to make the "box" disappear by blurring the distinction between indoors and outdoors. Glazing corners helped him to accomplish that. 2-42 The discipline required to work within the block system and module guides the design expression. “In the precast ‐block building, the method of building wholly determines the form and style.” - FLW 1928. “I finally found simple mechanical means to produce a complete building that looks the way the Machine made it" - FLW 1929. "Form would come in time if a sensible, feasible system of building-construction would only come first." - FLW 1932. "The proportion, color, texture, and mass of the house all derive from the block. A three ‐ dimensional 16" grid determines the size and placement of every element." - Jeffrey Chusid. The planning and design of entire neighborhoods could be driven by the block system as well, as seen with the Doheny Ranch project (2104). The design could also be undesirably limited by the block, though. The Usonian Automatic had a more limited range of expression due to cost-saving measures introduced to simplify and reduce the cost of construction. Stair rise and run dimensions were often awkward and inefficient due to the need to fit within the module. De: GUI - guides design expression This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE I: HON - honest expression, integrity, I: SIM - Simplicity Supports these other Qualities: I: SIM - Simplicity Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Restricting options to only those that fit within the constraints of the block system promotes a simplicity of concept for the resulting design. 2-43 "The horizontal line is the life ‐line of humankind." - FLW 1943, "I had an idea…that the planes parallel to the earth in buildings identify themselves with the ground, do most to make the buildings belong to the ground." - FLW 1954. Wright's desire for a horizontal emphasis may have been the main reason why he used a rectangular block module for almost all of his projects after 1927. This came about after proposing a 16" square block for the Biltmore Hotel, initially objecting to the 13.5" by 18" block size chosen by Albert McArthur. This also ties to his organic concept of a connection to the earth, accomplished by using horizontal retaining walls and platforms constructed from the same textile blocks used on the building (SIT - connected to the site, RTW - retaining wall). Eric Pratt (Pratt House, #4827): "The outer faces of all the blocks had been molded with a quarter ‐inch bevel on the vertical edges, and a half ‐inch bevel on the horizontal edges. This produced a deeper shadow along all the horizontal joints, thus accentuating the horizontal lines of the house." De: HOR - horizontal emphasis This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE De: HUM - human scale, O: SIT - connected to the site Supports these other Qualities: O: SIT - connected to the site Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The rectangular blocks used for the later designs provided a horizontal emphasis. Wright's rationale was that the ground is a horizontal plane, so the building should echo that. 2-44 "In designing the Usonian house, as I have said, I have always proportioned it to the human figure in point of scale" - FLW 1954. Regarding the Tonkens House (#5510): "The house was scaled to the the average human figure, five feet eight and a half inches." - Rosalie Tonkens. This was a characteristic that Wright endeavored to achieve for all his buildings. De: HUM - human scale This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Supports these other Qualities: So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The individual block units provided a relatable scale, as Wright strove to avoid the appearance of monumentality. It was a democratic concept (DEM - Democratic). "I wanted to see, someday, a building continuously plastic from inside to outside" - FLW 1949. "The materials of the outside walls came inside just as appropriately and freely as those of the inside walls went outside." - FLW 1954. Wright used the same blocks for the inner surfaces as for the outer. De: INN - inner echoes outer This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE I: MOM - Mono-Material, I: PLS - plasticity, patterns, De: 3RD - third Dimension, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Supports these other Qualities: I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: This was a means of achieving continuity between inside and outside (CON - continuity) and bringing unity and harmony to the structure, so that "Wright's argument for the unification of interior and exterior space is inescapable" - Charles Calvo. 2-45 Wright's unit system and block module were intended in-part to allow factory production of doors, windows and prefabrication of complete kitchen and bath units (KIT - prefabricated bath and kitchen). There was never sufficient scale to make this a reality, so the built projects remained prototypes. In fact, the construction industry settled on certain standard dimensions, based on codes and other factors, that were often at odds with the sizes Wright specified. Clients begged Wright to change certain dimensions in order to allow much less expensive standard hardware, all to no avail. Exterior doors were to remain 24 in. wide despite the emerging code requirement of a minimum 36 in. width for exits, for example. Standards were to be encouraged, as long as they were Wright's standards. These standards would change from one project to another, however. Wright took advantage of the prototype status of his designs by experimenting with different modules for different projects. De: MOD - modular This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: De: Module dimension limitations Actualized? DESIGN - DE Cs: SCA - economies of scale Supports these other Qualities: Cs: SCA - economies of scale Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright realized that holding to a module was essential to achieving the economies of scale made possible by factory mass production. 2-46 Wright was searching for a way to make monolithic concrete construction more economical by eliminating the wooden forms, such as those used for his Unity Temple: "Concrete was just coming into use and Unity Temple became the first concrete monolith in the world, that is to say, the first building complete as monolithic architecture when the wooden forms in which it was cast were taken away." Regarding the first textile block houses: "Here ultimately we will have another monolith fabricated instead of poured into special wooden molds. The molds in this case are metal, good for many buildings…" "After pouring the joints, the building with its hollow walls, in fact, are monolithic." This was a means to achieving the Qualities of plasticity (PLS - plasticity) and continuity (CNT - continuity, CON - continuity), structurally and aesthetically, through the use of a mono-material (MOM - Mono-Material). As a result: "Expanding on the fortresslike, not the environment ‐embracing, qualites of Taliesin, the concrete block homes were less places to live than impregnable retreats from a hostile world" - Robert Twombly. "They do appear as formidable bastioned retreats, in part at least as a result of the sense of weight imparted by the material, which has led many critics to comment on their forbidding character" - Grant Hildebrand. De: MON - monolithic appearance, sense of mass This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE I: MOM - Mono-Material, I: PLS - plasticity, patterns, Cm: SEC - secure, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Supports these other Qualities: I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Combining aesthetic and structure results in a monolithic appearance, as opposed to the layered look of multiple materials. Allowing a monolithic appearance therefore supports the concept of combined aesthetics and structure. 2-47 "Florida Southern College was designed in the aftermath of Fallingwater and other projects where he took artistic delight in mixing materials for architectural effect. For example, the textile block at FSC is combined with structurally more plastic and diverse cast ‐in ‐place concrete. Like Fallingwater, where concrete terrace trays are visually supported and mixed with stacked stone piers, the block and concrete on the campus is combined to achieve a similar kind of expression. At the Usonian House, I believe Wright knew precisely what he was doing when he mixed textile block with a wood and steel roof. In the end, he did not allow even his own precepts and concept of “integrity” to bind his artistic spirit. If he had, the great and soaring spaces he created on the campus would look very different, and perhaps more like the Arizona Biltmore" - Jeffrey Baker (Interview 7/20/13). De: MUL - multi-material option This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety' Supports these other Qualities: De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety' Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright was willing to break his own rules if there was good reason. Sometimes it was a matter of practicality, as with the Usonian Automatic, where rigid insulation was sheathed with plywood for the inner wall face, subverting the one-process ideal (INS - simultaneous install). This also simplified the wiring installation. Allowing for multiple material types increased the system's flexibility. 2-48 "The first thing to do to get a Usonian house is to go to a Usonian architect! ...I doubt that this affair can be taught to anyone. It does not come from a university with some degree or other. You can not get it from books alone…" - FLW 1954. "When Taliesin apprentice Charles Montooth set up his private architectural practice in Scottsdale, Arizona, he and another former apprentice, Arthur Pieper, established at the same time a construction company called 'Horizon Builders.' Frank Lloyd Wright made a design for the newly ‐formed company's office building, and on the sign he specified 'Specialists in Usonian Concrete Block Construction" - Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer. Wright hoped that his Taliesin Associates would carry on his textile block idea on their own: "Taliesin apprentice Bob Beharka impressed Wright with his desert shelter made from 12" square textile blocks of his own design" - Myron A. Marty. De: ORG - designed by an organic architect This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: De: Needs a Champion, De: Not traditional / vernacular Actualized? DESIGN - DE So: CLB - collaboration of Art and the Machine, So: RAD - radical Supports these other Qualities: So: RAD - radical Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright's goal was to radically reshape society through organic design (RAD - radical). 2-49 The system needs to be capable of providing an imprinted patterned face with depth, which may be unique to a particular building. "The molds in this case are metal, good for many buildings, and take the impress of any detail in any scheme of pattern or texture imagination conceives. The whole building 'precast' in a mold a man can lift" - FLW, 1927. FLW letter to Russell Hitchcock, 2/26/1932: "The block houses are richly ornamented because it is a natural machine age resource to give life to an otherwise characterless surface." Regarding Calico Mills, #4508: "The intricate pattern and the exquisite quality of the blocks in the Biltmore Hotel compare favourably with the best Jali work of this country [India] reminiscent of the Great Mogul days" - Sherrif Moloobhoy, 1949. Regarding the Millard House, #2302: "Mayan monumentality and richness of surface mosaic" - Vincent Scully. The patterned blocks provide a variety which mitigates the otherwise overwhelming presence of the concrete blocks. They also introduced a relatable human scale to what risked becoming monumental (HUM - human scale). De: PAT - unique imprinted patterns with depth This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE I: PLS - plasticity, patterns, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, De: HUM - human scale Supports these other Qualities: I: PLS - plasticity, patterns Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Extruded blocks were not capable of holding cast patterns due to the highly automated process used for their production. This was unacceptable to Wright, who wanted to take advantage of the natural plasticity of concrete, which flowed and assumed the shape of any container that held it. 2-50 "in some cases blocks have been made with patterned holes into which glass (sometimes colored) is set. When these glazed perforated units are assembled they form a translucent grill or screen of concrete, glass and steel" - FLW, 1954. The ever-changing play of light, the patterns, and the glow provided by the perforated blocks have been uniformly praised, some even describing it as having a spiritual quality (SPR - lifts the spirit). Wright also used perforations to partially dematerialize the wall, blurring inside and outside (INN - inner echoes outer, 3RD - third Dimension). This beauty did not come without a price. Forming the perforations and hand-setting the glass pieces was a labor-intensive, almost medieval process. Builders were confused by and complained about it in correspondence to Wright. The contractor for the Florida Southern College Visitor Center had the additional challenge of finding a way to spray urethane foam insulation in the wythe gap without blocking the small perforations. Steel bars and tubes were temporarily inserted to preserve the light path. This meant that the colored glass had to be set in the blocks on-site after insulating. De: PRF - perforations for light and beauty This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Contractor reticence, confusion, P: Complex and labor-intensive block casting, A: Glass inserts difficult to install Actualized? DESIGN - DE De: 3RD - third Dimension, De: INN - inner echoes outer, De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, O: SPR - lifts the spirit Supports these other Qualities: De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: There was really no practical purpose for the small perforations Wright introduced in his blocks. Window units could let in light much more efficiently. He introduced this quality mainly for the architectural effect on the interior space, using the daily motion of the sun to provide distinctive moving patterns. 2-51 "Wright's residences demonstrate by original window outlines and perforated textile ‐blocks ways of eliminating the customary tedious checkerboard design of rectangular windows" - Francis Onderdonk, 1928. Wright decried the standard two dimensional façade with its discrete rectangular windows. The first textile block houses attempted to do away with punched openings thru the use of mitered glass corners and perforated blocks. The San Marco project specified glass textile blocks in place of windows. The Lloyd Jones house used alternating piers in an attempt to make the walls disappear. His block system had special promise in this regard. The Usonian Automatics used blocks with integral glazing, even in corners. Conventional windows were not to be found. De: PUN - minimize punched openings This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE I: MOM - Mono-Material, De: 3RD - third Dimension, De: GLZ - integral glazing, modular, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Supports these other Qualities: O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: At its heart, this is an organic concept, eliminating the façade with its framed windows in favor of a cellular matrix of solid and void. 2-52 The block face should show the sandy aggregate and natural color. Regarding the San Marcos site, #2704: "Here all is sculptured by wind and water, patterned in color and texture" - FLW 1940. From his very first work with concrete, Wright endeavored to expose the sandy constituents behind the surface paste. In 1907 he recommended acid-washing a concrete house to create a more natural-looking surface. In addition, for the Millard House (#2302) he varied the proportions of sand, gravel and cement so “that the blocks would not all be the same color.” The intent was for materials to be used so as "to bring out their natural beauty of character." Many owners praised the natural color and rich texture of the blocks. A dry mix was used to expose pores and aggregate even though Wright was fully aware that this would result in greater water absorption and be deleterious to long-term durability. It was especially important that, whenever the sand came from the actual site, that the sand be visible in the finished blocks. De: SAN - open pore block face, sandy, varied This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: De: Aversion to concrete - too stark Actualized? DESIGN - DE I: HON - honest expression, integrity, O: VAR - natural variations Supports these other Qualities: O: VAR - natural variations Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: It was important to let natural variations show, whether it be wood grain or sandy aggregate. 2-53 Wright did not specifically comment on his use of a stacked bond for his textile block projects, although they all use it. Some of the projects that used ordinary concrete block also had a stack bond, such as with the Wilbur Pierce House, #5114. As a design element, it can be seen how stacking the blocks emphasized their cube-like nature. De: STK - stack bond This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE De: BLK - blockiness, unit form, I: HON - honest expression, integrity, St: SPD - woven reinforcing, 'spidery', O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, De: WOV - woven character, A: BUI - simple to build Supports these other Qualities: De: WOV - woven character Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: As a structural element, stacking was required to provide a straight path for the vertical reinforcing in the joints. It also reinforced the woven character of the surface (WOV - woven character). 2-54 "The principle of the standard form, as it comes out of the machine is fully at work here ‐ the imagination is free to differentiate, to divide or to give the natural forms and precedents of building richer expressiveness." - FLW, 1926 (Translated from German by the author and Prof. Marc Schiler) “Standardization was the soul of the machine, and here the architect was taking it as a principle and ‘knitting’ with it. Yes, crocheting with a free masonry fabric capable of great variety in architectural beauty" - FLW, 1932. "A house that may be put to work in our society and give us an architecture for 'housing' which is becoming to a free society because, though standardized fully, it yet establishes the democratic ideal of variety ‐ the sovereignty of the individual" - FLW, 1954. Wright sought a unit size that would provide for the economy that should come with standardization, yet allow maximum freedom of architectural expression. His initial ideal block unit size was 24 by 24 inches, for the Millard House (#2302), but he had to cut that down to 16 inch square in order to make sure the block was light enough for "a man to lift." Later he was able to expand the basic unit size to 12 by 24 inches for the Usonian Automatic, with 24 inch square glazed units. Some early development sketches of the Automatic show a 24 inch square standard block. The 24 inch unit became standard for Wright, but not so for the rest of the construction industry. He insisted on 24 inch wide entry doors for the Automatics, even though building codes and industry standards required wider doors. Clients begged him in correspondence to adjust dimensions to allow for the use of standard manufactured doors and windows, all to no avail. De: STN - standardization This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: P: Non-standard parts, P: Too many block types Actualized? DESIGN - DE Cs: SCA - economies of scale Supports these other Qualities: Cs: SCA - economies of scale Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright realized that standardization was a prerequisite to the economy that could be achieved through the economies of scale. The standards had to be his standards, though, regardless of the current industry standards. 2-55 In 1954 Wright complained about mass produced housing "putting on some style or other, really having no integrity. Style is important. A style is not." Wright in 1946 exclaimed "Why plant more Oxford ‐gothic on the plains of Oklahoma? Let us mimic no more. If we build in the desert…[make] the house an extension of the desert." From this and myriad other statements it is clear that Wright did not intend for his textile block system to emulate any vernacular styles. The closest he came to "a style" was with the Mayanesque Ennis House (2401). De: STY - not a 'style' This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE I: HON - honest expression, integrity, I: SIM - Simplicity, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, De: ANC - ancient, timeless, permanent, So: RAD - radical Supports these other Qualities: De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: In Wright's view, affecting A style would be inorganic, dishonest, and could not achieve the architectural quality and beauty he sought. 2-56 “Standardization was the soul of the machine, and here the architect was taking it as a principle and ‘knitting’ with it. Yes, crocheting with a free masonry fabric capable of great variety in architectural beauty" - FLW 1932. "Building with textile blocks, furthermore, was a weaving together of myriads of lines, designs, and individual pieces ‐ the solving of a complicated puzzle. The emphasis was on parts and detail, on process, rather than on total conception…" - Robert Twombly. "With the Freeman house Wright realized a building which was truly 'textile', one in which each part of the fabric contributes to weave a refined tapestry of surface, form and space" - Charles Calvo. As opposed to simply a structural method, the woven reinforcing (SPD ‐ woven reinforcing) was but one aspect of "woven character" as a design quality. False joints emphasized the woven grid, making the tight joints appear much wider than they actually were, providing a texture and human scale (HUM - human scale) even to walls with only plain block. De: WOV - woven character This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DESIGN - DE O: NAT - inspired by Nature Supports these other Qualities: O: NAT - inspired by Nature Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Although weaving is a man-made process, it is associated with ancient handicraft and organic materials. As such, Wright considered it closer to nature than other mechanized processes. 2-57 It's not that Wright didn't care about weatherproofing, it's simply that aesthetic considerations came first. Even so, he sought a solution which would allow him to have it all. He believed he'd found it with a type of natural cement he discovered in Holbrook, Arizona while working on the San Marcos project: “We wanted to investigate a new natural cement found in that region, as perhaps an ideal material for block ‐making...This material…was white, set quickly and hard, and was waterproof.” Unfortunately, testing would show that the cement lacked the required strength. For subsequent work, Wright specified a coat of asphalt on the inner face of the outer wythe of dry-cast blocks. "It would be possible to make the exterior blocks waterproof to a reasonable extent, but we have found that it is cheaper and leaves us free to produce a more beautiful and colorful texture for the exterior if we coat the inside of the outside block with asphalt." - FLW to Lloyd Wright, 12/18/1928. Du: ABS - water absorption minimized This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Du: Face softness and friability, P: Casting - molds too complex, Du: Mix design too dry Actualized? DURABILITY - DU Du: PER - permanence Supports these other Qualities: Du: PER - permanence Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright made many claims regarding the longevity of his textile block system, as well as calling it dry in both summer and winter. Through testing at the University of Southern California it was found that dry-cast textile blocks have very high water absorption. In this case, the claim did not match the reality. 2-58 Wright repeatedly claimed that his textile block buildings were "fireproof." The two reinforced concrete wythes separated by an air gap should actually provide a standard fire rating of over two hours, by the Author's calculation. Wright proposed this system as an ideal replacement for Tokyo's wood buildings destroyed in the 1923 earthquake and fire. Regarding the Millard House, #2302: "Instead of a fire ‐trap for her precious book collections and antiques she would have a house fire ‐proof." Regarding San Marcos, #2704: "No insurance need be carried on this building." Du: FIR - fire resistance This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? DURABILITY - DU Du: PER - permanence Supports these other Qualities: Du: PER - permanence Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Fire resistance was key to Wright's claim of permanence for his system. 2-59 “The house would be cool in summer, warm in winter, and dry always” - FLW 1932. Wright made this claim many times with reference to his block system. However, he admitted "some unnecessary trouble was experienced in making the buildings waterproof. All the difficulties met with were due to poor workmanship and not to the nature of the scheme." (Wright to Rebori 9/15/1927, with regard to the four Los Angeles textile block houses.) Wright believed that the dual wythe system with an air gap would be sufficient to keep water out of the house. The expectation was that moisture that penetrated the outer layer of blocks would run down the inside face within the air gap, then exit to the outside at the base. This was similar to the "rainscreen" or "drained wall" concept commonly used for traditional masonry wall construction. However, in practice, weep holes were usually not installed at the base. In addition, the wire ties between wythes provided a runway for moisture to migrate to the inner wythe. Architect Jeff Baker was able to show through physical testing, however, that a water resistant assembly was possible, by using a wet-cast block and silicone caulk at the joints - Author Interview, 12/12/2011. Sealers were allowed by Wright, but only so long as they had no effect on the color and texture of the block. (See "ABS - water absorption minimized" for further discussion.) Du: H2O - water penetration minimized This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Du: Water leaks, penetration, P: Casting - molds too complex, Du: Water absorption, porosity, Du: Mix design too dry Actualized? DURABILITY - DU Cm: SEC - secure, Cm: SEV -severe weather Supports these other Qualities: Cm: SEC - secure Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright made a selling feature out of his claim that the textile block was superior in limiting water penetration. In fact, these buildings were not any dryer than Wright's non-textile block buildings, and more leak-prone than conventional construction. Protection from the elements promotes a sense of security. 2-60 As with water absorption (ABS), Wright did care about the durability and hardness of the textile blocks, but was willing to let it go if it compromised the look of the block. Initially, he specified ungraded sand from the site, even though it was not the best choice for the strength of the block. Block quality improved with later projects. At Florida Southern College, local sand was rejected due to the presence of fertilizer. A blend of pigments and ground coquina shells provided the look he wanted. Eric Pratt observed "When we were making our blocks, we had calculated that there might be 10% breakage of blocks before the building was done...However, we found that they were so sturdy that hardly any broke at all." The specifications for the Turkel House called for a 2000 psi compression strength, which probably would have been adequate if actually achieved. Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Du: Face softness and friability, P: Casting - molds too complex, Du: Mix design too dry Actualized? DURABILITY - DU Du: PER - permanence Supports these other Qualities: Du: PER - permanence Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright himself observed that the quality of the early textile blocks could have been better. Hardness improved over the years, although not nearly up to the strength of a manufactured block. Wright used concrete, at least in part, due to his believe that the material was inert, like stone, and could last essentially forever, like the copper flashing and accents specified for his projects. 2-61 Regarding San Marcos: "Maintenance on such a structure as is figured here would be a negligible quantity. All surfaces being permanent and durable" - FLW 11/20/1929. Eric Pratt claimed that "Maintenance was very easy. With the colored cement floors and walls, there were no demands for redecorating, wallpapering, or repainting rooms." His son, Douglas Pratt also stated that the home was "easy to care for." This could not have been totally correct, as there was still a lot of woodwork, inside and out, to maintain. Wright experimented with block ceilings early on with the Ennis and Lloyd Jones houses in order to eliminate wood surfaces and more fully realize his mono-material concept (MOM). Later, with the Usonian Automatic system, 6 inch thick textile blocks were used as stay-in-place forms for second floor and roof cast reinforced concrete slabs. This effectively eliminated all exterior wood and the maintenance it represented. This Essential Quality goes hand-in-hand with "CLR - integral color, no coatings." Du: MAI - minimal maintenance This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Du: Water leaks, penetration, Du: Face softness and friability, St: Poor seismic performance, Du: Flashing / gutter issues, Du: Water absorption, porosity, St: Deflection, buckling, Du: Mix design too dry, Du: Repair is difficult and expensive, St: Cracking, Du: Cracking - non-structural, U: Repair - electrical & plumbing Actualized? DURABILITY - DU Du: PER - permanence Supports these other Qualities: Du: PER - permanence Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: There was significant maintenance required for many of the textile block homes, although this was mainly due to the failure to achieve many of the other Essential Qualities related to Durability. If these issues are fixed, then theoretically, Minimal Maintenance could be achieved, with the ultimate goal of high longevity for the structure. 2-62 Wright was very optimistic about the durability of his textile block buildings, variously claiming a life-span of 100, 300 or even a thousand years. "Three hundred years at least" for San Marcos #2704, 300 years for the Tonkens House #5510, "a hundred years or more" for the Ennis House #2401, and "hundreds of years" for the Usonian Automatic system #5612. In a letter to Lloyd Jones: "It [the textile block system] has been tried out. Not only is it durable, it is permanent." Further elaborating: "As for a house that is going to last,--my dear boy, the Richard Lloyd Jones branch of the Jones family will have probably disappeared from the earth,--thinned out by countless marriages,--before any disintegration of any kind touches this house of which we are talking." Du: PER - permanence This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Du: Water leaks, penetration, Du: Face softness and friability, St: Poor seismic performance, Du: Flashing / gutter issues, Du: Water absorption, porosity, St: Deflection, buckling, Du: Mix design too dry, Du: Repair is difficult and expensive, St: Cracking, Du: Cracking - non-structural, U: Repair - electrical & plumbing Actualized? DURABILITY - DU O: SPR - lifts the spirit, De: ANC - ancient, timeless, permanent Supports these other Qualities: O: SPR - lifts the spirit Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 2.4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Regarding Florida Southern College #3814: "The decorative concrete blocks used to construct the buildings, which Wright said would 'be standing a thousand years into the future,' failed to live up to that prediction. Many of the blocks are cracking and disintegrating" - Dale Gyure. This is the case with many of the early buildings, where actual durability did not quite live up to Wright's promise. The organic principles of Honesty and Integrity require that a building that appears to be timeless and permanent should at least be durable enough to achieve a long service life. Physical comfort and security derived from a sturdy, durable building sets the stage for appreciating the other Essential Qualities, with the ultimate aim of Lifting the Spirit (SPR). 2-63 FLW, 1954: "It [the textile block system] is a masonry house ‐ fireproof and vermin ‐proof." It is true that concrete cannot be consumed or gnawed through by termites or mice. For the textile block, though, the air gap within the walls provided an ideal highway for rodents, as noted by several owners and occupants. This could be remedied by filling the cavity with rigid insulation. Du: VER - vermin resistant This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Complicated assembly, A: Highly skilled precision work, Du: Cracking - non-structural Actualized? DURABILITY - DU Cm: SEC - secure Supports these other Qualities: Cm: SEC - secure Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Allowing intruders of any size compromises the Quality of Security. No paint, stain, or other coating is to be applied to the block. Desired coloring is achieved through pigments mixed with the cement and sand. "In organic architecture there is little or no room for applique of any kind…We use nothing applied which tends to eliminate the true character of what is beneath" - FLW 1954. "In constructing the concrete blocks used here and in his other Los Angeles ‐area textile block houses, Frank Lloyd Wright utilized local sand, often from the building site. He believed that this method would ensure that the color and texture of the blocks would blend in with the natural setting of each house" - Mark A. Wilson. Many owners appreciated and praised the natural color of the blocks. I: CLR - integral color, no coatings This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: De: Aversion to concrete - too stark Actualized? INTEGRITY - IN I: HON - honest expression, integrity, Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, O: SIT - connected to the site Supports these other Qualities: I: HON - honest expression, integrity Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Honest expression of material was achieved by exposing the integral color of the block matrix. 2-64 "But were the full import of continuity in architecture to be grasped, aesthetic and structure become completely one, it would continue to revolutionize the use and wont of our machine age architecture, making it superior in harmony and beauty to any architecture, Gothic or Greek" - FLW 1954. Here Wright is discussing continuity between the aesthetic and the structural, as opposed to the Structural Quality "CNT - continuity" which is concerned with eliminating the post and beam. "The use of the system thus allows the actual structure of the house to also become the inside and outside skin of the building, and its ornament as well: an organic whole" - Jeffrey Chusid. I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? INTEGRITY - IN I: PLS - plasticity, patterns, I: HON - honest expression, integrity, I: SIM - Simplicity, De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, I: ORN - integral ornament, O: NAT - inspired by Nature Supports these other Qualities: O: NAT - inspired by Nature Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Where possible, hidden structure was avoided, instead relying mainly on the load-bearing blocks. There was an Honesty of Expression (HON), in that exposed structure which appeared to support the building actually did do that. There was Simplicity as well (SIM), as structure was also shelter, finished surface, and ornament (ORN), in one step (INS - simultaneous install) instead of multiple overlaid processes. All of these Qualities are inspired by Nature (NAT). 2-65 Regarding San Marcos: "No necessary lie about it anywhere and yet, Machine ‐made, mechanically perfect" - FLW 1929. "Just as it is in a human being, so integrity is the deepest quality in a building" - FLW 1954. Honest Expression, or Integrity, had a spiritual aspect for Wright: "A house is therefore integral with the nature of the methods and materials used to build it...Integrity, once there, enables those who live in that house to take spiritual root and grow" (SPR- lifts the spirit). Wright decried mass produced housing "putting on some style or other, really having no integrity. Style is important. A style is not" (STY - not a 'style'). Some owners understood the concept: "The honesty and integrity of our building was lost on many Cincinnatti people, who, I think, felt threatened because our house did not conform to their mores" - Rosalie Tonkens. "The Usonian house aims to be a natural performance ‐ one that is integral to the site, to environment, to the life of the inhabitants, integral with the nature of materials…Once there, those who live in it will take root and grow" - Bette Pappas, quoting FLW. Sometimes, proposed construction shortcuts were shot down by Wright if he felt they reduced the integrity of the building, even though there would have been no apparent difference in the final result. For example, in January, 1956, Taliesin Fellow Aaron Green asked for Wright's approval to pre-assemble a glazed textile-block wall section flat on the floor, and then tilt it into place. Wright refused to allow it. (In this case it may have been better to simply proceed and ask for forgiveness rather than ask for permission.) I: HON - honest expression, integrity This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? INTEGRITY - IN O: NAT - inspired by Nature, O: SPR - lifts the spirit Supports these other Qualities: O: NAT - inspired by Nature Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Integrity is an essential characteristic of Nature, tested and refined through the millennia. 2-66 "The ferro ‐block unit slab system to be used in this construction is designed to produce a one ‐process, mono ‐ material building out of the materials of the site itself so far as and whenever possible." This romantic ideal was actually codified in the San Marcos Specifications (#2704). "The houses are literally created from the ground on which they stand. For the Californian soil is mainly nothing but sand, gravel or crushed granite" - FLW 1926. Wright believed that there would be cost benefits as well if the major constituents of the structure, by weight, could be had for the taking around the site: “a simple, cheap material everywhere available.” "There is no far ‐ fetched transportation of special stones or brick or wood: steel and cement are as ubiquitous as bread" - Douglas Haskell, 1928. Unfortunately, due to contamination, impurities, and other issues, most on-site aggregates were found to be unsuitable. Therefore, in most cases, Wright had to settle for off-site (but still local) aggregates and cement, and created a similar appearance using pigments. I: LOC - local / native materials This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? INTEGRITY - IN I: HON - honest expression, integrity, O: SIT - connected to the site Supports these other Qualities: O: SIT - connected to the site Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The main reason for using local materials was not specifically to be sustainable (although this Quality is amenable to that goal) but to appear to be a natural part or growth of the site (SIT - connected to the site). Beyond appearance, the Quality of HON - Honest Expression was best satisfied if actual site materials were used to the maximum extent. 2-67 "This building we contemplate [San Marcos] is a mono-material one-process building that is automatically the product of a new system of construction" - FLW to A.J. Chandler, 7/24/1929. “A livable building may be made of mono ‐material in one operation” - FLW 1927. “Eliminate combinations of different materials in favor of mono ‐ material so far as possible” - FLW 1931. Robert Sweeney referred to Wright's mono-material ideal as a synthesis of structure and form (see CON - continuity). Wright's first mono-material building was Unity Temple in Oak Park, IL, 1906. He was fairly satisfied with the result but sought an economical alternative to the expensive formwork required for that project. He described the process as constructing twice, first with wood, then with reinforced concrete. He believed he had found the solution in 1922 when observing his son, Lloyd's, use of cast concrete blocks secured by grouted, reinforced channels for Lloyd's Henry Bollman House. Here he discovered a possible method of constructing a mono-material building without formwork and with units light enough for a worker to lift. As such, mono-materiality is at the heart of Wright's textile block concept. He used it as a mono-material for many of his projects from 1922 to 1930. Then later relegated it to a wall system in combination with other materials from 1932 to 1951. At that point, mono-materiality came back with his Usonian Automatic system. Here, every part of the building is concrete, with the exception of some interior wood paneling to hide a layer of insulation. In 1956, when Dr. Toufic Kalil asked to substitute red slate tiles for the scored concrete floor, Wright had a one-word response: "No." It would have violated the Quality of mono-materiality. I: MOM - Mono-Material This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? INTEGRITY - IN I: SIM - Simplicity, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Supports these other Qualities: O: NAT - inspired by Nature Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: At its heart, using one material for the entire structure as Wright did mimicked and was inspired by natural processes. Just as a canyon is eroded over time by air and water, the textile block edifice appeared to be part of the hill, sculpted and patterned in its own way. "Here all is sculptured by wind and water, patterned in color and texture" - FLW, 1940. 2-68 "Nature never sticks ornament onto anything. She gets it all out from the inside of the thing the way it grows. It is always of the thing. Integral" - FLW, 1940. "integral ornament is simply structure-pattern made visibly articulate and seen in the building as it is seen articulate in the structure of the trees or a lily of the fields. It is the expression of inner ‐rhythm of Form" - FLW, 1954. "It was the incorporation of the patterned face as integral ornament that allowed Wright to create a system that was able to address all of the constructive, experiential, and symbolic requirements of dwelling. This was at once a structural system, a fabrication system, and an erection system, with the capacity to act as a planning device, and to form and modulate space and surface in a variety of ways" - Charles Calvo (see PAT - unique imprinted patterns). With this Quality, Wright defied the internationalists who sought to do away with all ornament. He rejected the starkness of the International Style in favor of ornament that appeared to flow naturally from the building's structure and environment. "It is clearly his development and use of integral ornament as a fundamental part of this system that provides the full range of expression demanded by human existance, and which creates great architecture" - Charles Calvo. Standard manufactured concrete block was limited in the patterns it could produce, leading Wright to champion his textile block as a better solution. I: ORN - integral ornament This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? INTEGRITY - IN I: PLS - plasticity, patterns, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Supports these other Qualities: O: NAT - inspired by Nature Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: It is clear from his writings that Wright believed integral ornamentation was a natural, organic principle. 2-69 "Here all is sculptured by wind and water, patterned in color and texture" - FLW, 1940. Wright sought a building system that mimicked Nature's plastic, eroded forms. "I wanted to see, someday, a building continuously plastic from inside to outside" - FLW, 1949. Plasticity is related to the design-related Quality of CON - continuity, as well as the Structural Quality of CNT - continuity. "And when I say Nature, I mean inherent structure seen always by the architect as a matter of complete design. It is in itself, always, nature-pattern" - FLW, 1954. He regarded his textile block system as a hybrid that brought machine-age economy to the plastic ideal. "They are plastic in design and construction, although made up of details which are adapted in their format to the strength of the individual worker" - FLW, 1926. In a letter to Russell Hitchcock in 1932: "The block houses are richly ornamented because it is a natural machine age resource to give life to an otherwise characterless surface. A principle is at work. No caprice." I: PLS - plasticity, patterns This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? INTEGRITY - IN I: ORN - integral ornament, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Supports these other Qualities: I: ORN - integral ornament Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Patterns were not sought for their own sake. They were essential to achieving the Quality of Integral Ornamentation that separated Wright's work from the European Modernists. 2-70 "One of the essential characteristics of organic architecture is a natural simplicity…Plainness, although simple, is not what I mean by simplicity. Simplicity is a clean, direct expression of that essential quality of the thing which is in the nature of the thing itself...Only as a feature or any part becomes harmonious element in the harmonious whole does it arrive at the state of simplicity." - FLW, 1954. What Wright meant by simplicity was different from the plain, stark geometry of the International Style. In this case, simplicity was achieved when the design details flowed logically from the over-arching organic concept. According to Turkel House owner Dale Morgan: "The longer you are in the house, the more you appreciate the simplicity and purity of Wright's design." The textile block system may have been simple in design concept, but it was not so simple in execution. Assembly was complicated, requiring highly skilled precision work. There were too many block types and special conditions. Even so, Wright felt that, if done right, his simple concept should also be simple to execute. "The system is simple, requiring no skilled labor except in design and superintendence" - FLW, letter to J.M. Hollister, 4/3/1929. "Wright's goal was to develop a building process that did not require skilled laborers, and therefore was less costly to implement" - Lisa Murtha. His "one-process" idea, likewise, was meant to simplify construction (INS - simultaneous install), theoretically resulting in greater economy. I: SIM - Simplicity This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: P: Non-standard parts, A: Complicated assembly, U: Utility integration issues, A: Highly skilled precision work, P: Too many block types, P: Mold fabrication cost too high Actualized? INTEGRITY - IN I: HON - honest expression, integrity, O: NAT - inspired by Nature Supports these other Qualities: I: HON - honest expression, integrity Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright believed that the quality of Simplicity applied to the textile block would expose the honest nature of the system. 2-71 "Like a crystalline growth from a single molecule, or a fractal curve, the forms and character of the greater object are inherent within the individual component." - Jeffrey Chusid. Millard House ‐ “Yes, the building would be made of the ‘blocks’ as a kind of tree Itself standing at home among the other trees in its own native land.” San Marcos – “It was to grow up out of the desert as the Sahuaro grew” - FLW, 1932 "Nature, driven to economize materials by hard conditions, develops in the Saguaro a system of economy by reinforcement of vertical rods, a plaiting of tendons that holds the structure bolt upright for six centuries or more" - FLW, 1940. "integral ornament is simply structure-pattern made visibly articulate and seen in the building as it is seen articulate in the structure of the trees or a lily of the fields. It is the expression of inner ‐rhythm of Form" - FLW, 1954. O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? ORGANIC - OR O: NAT - inspired by Nature Supports these other Qualities: O: NAT - inspired by Nature Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright made it clear that a growth analogy was at work with the textile block. He first looked to Nature for the structural concept, then allowed the design qualities to flow from that (NAT - inspired by Nature). He compared the steel reinforcing in the textile block to the tendons or strands in a plant. Therefore, the structural system was of great importance to him, and not something to simply be relegated to engineers or code officials (NST - structure follows Nature). "An architect is either on the winning side grasping the laws of nature or on the losing side, the side of dead data, the idee fixe, the rules of the Code...So Codes are the mental limitations of short men, short of experience, short of imagination, short of courage, short of common sense." - FLW, 1943 {Wright, 1993, pg 185). 2-72 Regarding the Millard House: “Yes, the building would be made of the ‘blocks’ as a kind of tree Itself standing at home among the other trees in its own native land...All we would have to do would be to educate the concrete block” - FLW, 1932. "Within the house patterned blocks are used with increasing frequency in the upper rooms creating textures which recall the tops of trees surrounding the house at this level" - Charles Calvo. "I used the surrounding giant growth, Sahuaro, as motive for the building [San Marcos]" - FLW, 1953. "integral ornament is simply structure-pattern made visibly articulate and seen in the building as it is seen articulate in the structure of the trees or a lily of the fields. It is the expression of inner ‐rhythm of Form." "And when I say Nature, I mean inherent structure seen always by the architect as a matter of complete design. It is in itself, always, nature ‐ pattern" - FLW, 1954. "It was Wright's intention to create an impression of the house being a man ‐made extension of landscape" - Mark A. Wilson. O: NAT - inspired by Nature This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? ORGANIC - OR O: SPR - lifts the spirit Supports these other Qualities: O: SPR - lifts the spirit Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 2.1 Unproven Claim? Analysis: There was a spiritual aim to be had by mimicking Nature (SPR - lifts the spirit): "Those who live in it [the Pappas House] will take root and grow" - Bette Pappas. "Look at this little beauty. (a sea shell) Such a sweet little individuality! Civilization comes in and says, 'Oh, hell, let's get an easy pattern out of this, so we can stamp them out, all just the same.'" It becomes a cliché, a style. Then the divine element in it goes out" - FLW, 1955. 2-73 The part reflects the whole and vice-versa, like a fractal pattern. Wright did not speak directly of the recursive nature of many of his textile block projects, but others noticed it. It is certainly evident in the Freeman House, # 2402: "One of the most important architectural ideas behind the design of the Freeman House is the development of the cubic forms of the house from the 16" square textile blocks from which it is built. Like a crystalline growth from a single molecule, the forms and character of the greater object are innate within the individual component: the proportion, color, texture and emotive power of the house itself can be found in each block. The obverse is also true, the pattern found on the block is a representation of the cubic house on it's triangular site within a grove of eucalyptus, and indeed, the main volume of the house is a perfect cube, 26'8" on a side" - Jeffrey Chusid. O: REC - recursive, parts reflect the whole This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? ORGANIC - OR O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Supports these other Qualities: O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: As fractal patterns are evident in natural growth, so too were they built in to the textile block system. 2-74 "It is in the nature of any building to grow from its site...the ground itself held always as a component basic part of the building itself" - FLW, 1954. Regarding the Doheny Ranch project, #2104: "The designs published here are intended to do the hill terrain justice, in which California is so rich. Some of the houses are intended for the canyons, which are neglected by the speculators, who habitually obstruct the hill summit and ridge lines" - FLW, 1926. Regarding the Freeman House, #2402: "Visually, the house becomes an extension of the hill, with the roof the new, final elevation. And because of the fact that the textile block was supposed to be made, adobe ‐like, from the very soil on which the house would sit, the building was physically part of the hill as well" - Jeffrey Chusid. Regarding the Ennis House, #2401: "Wright's concrete textile blocks pervade the structure, not only in the support walls, but in ceilings and other areas ‐ most impressively in the vast retaining wall embankments…the walls reach out far beyond the house, linking it figuratively to a larger Wrightian universe, as in the visionary Doheny drawings" - Thomas S. Hines. O: SIT - connected to the site This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? ORGANIC - OR O: NAT - inspired by Nature Supports these other Qualities: O: NAT - inspired by Nature Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The structure was designed to appear to rise from the ground naturally, itself made from on-site materials. This was a romantic ideal. 2-75 This "Alpha" Quality has to sit at the very top of the list of Essential Qualities. Most of the other Qualities appear to exist mainly to support this particular Quality. Wright's goal was to move the spirit of not only the structure's inhabitants, but society as a whole as well. "Conceive that here came a new sense of building on American soil that could grow building forms not only true to function but expressive far beyond mere function in the realm of the human spirit" - FLW, 1954. "In organic sense such building is an entity of the human spirit as that of any tree or flower is of the ground" - FLW, 1949. Wright believed that the manner in which mass-production had developed was actually soul-crushing: "It becomes a cliché, a style. Then the divine element in it goes out" - FLW, 1955. He also believed he had found an 'affordable' alternative: "How then, you may ask, can people with even more limited means experience the liberation, the sense of freedom that comes with true architecture?...we have gone far in solving this generic problem by the natural concrete block house we call the 'Usonian Automatic'" - FLW, 1954. “I believe in God, only I spell it N.A.T.U.R.E.” “Nature is the only body of God that we shall ever see” (Wright, 1987). “Study nature, love nature, stay close to nature. It will never fail you” (Lind, 1992). O: SPR - lifts the spirit This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? ORGANIC - OR Supports these other Qualities: Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 1 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Many have remarked on the spiritual character of Wright's work, the textile block structures included. Numerous examples are documented in this report. One gets the impression that, with Wright, if there was not a spiritual aspect to the project, it was not worth doing. Some quotes: "A beautiful living thing" "There is a spirit to the house that comes through. It speaks to you." "affirms our Individuality (Spirituality)...It has been a transcendental experience. "He elevated us to a more gracious way of living that includes peace, harmony and hope." "magical" "very Zen and calming" "I'm an atheist, but this is the closest to a God ‐like experience that I could ever imagine." "they serve the spirit" "spiritually enriching" "It's almost as if every detail is destined to capture, reflect, or direct light into the windows of every viewer's soul." 2-76 For the Millard House, #2302, Wright varied the proportions of sand, gravel and cement so “that the blocks would not all be the same color.” "Materials were now so used as to bring out their natural beauty of character...In organic architecture there is little or no room for applique of any kind…We use nothing applied which tends to eliminate the true character of what is beneath" - FLW, 1954. It goes with out saying that the blocks should never be painted. Even an integral color should have random variations, so as to not look mass- produced. Jeffrey Chusid stated, with reference to the Freeman House, #2402: "Being surrounded by concrete is far from the overwhelming sensation one might expect. This is due to the variety in patterns, colors and even quality which is introduced into the house by virtue of the hand ‐made nature of the blocks." With regard to the Millard House, he further remarked: "Wright exploited both the variety possible in the color and texture of concrete, and the impurities introduced through the handmade manufacturing process, to invest the seemingly repetitive nature of the house's construction with liveliness and rhythm." O: VAR - natural variations This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: De: Aversion to concrete - too stark Actualized? ORGANIC - OR O: NAT - inspired by Nature Supports these other Qualities: O: NAT - inspired by Nature Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright insisted that natural variations were essential to organic architecture. 2-77 The vast majority of textile block buildings use cast corners, as opposed to mitered corners. The main reason was, according to Eric Lloyd Wright: "The miter edge can be ragged and it negates the appearance of a monolithic block unit." Cast corners are more difficult to produce and handle, but provide a better appearance. Sometimes, half-width corner blocks were used to reduce weight and for ease of handling. P: CNR - cast corners, no miters This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: P: Complex and labor-intensive block casting, P: Too many block types, P: Mold fabrication cost too high, P: Complicated corners and edges Actualized? PREFABRICATION - PR I: SIM - Simplicity, De: ANG - corners / obtuse angles, Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, De: MON - monolithic appearance, sense of mass Supports these other Qualities: De: MON - monolithic appearance, sense of mass Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: As noted by Eric Lloyd Wright, the appearance of a monolith relies on having no visible seams, as could occur with mitered corners. 2-78 Wright was searching for a method of mass production that was more flexible and put the artist/architect in the driver's seat. "Machinery needs the creative force that can seize it, as it is…to get the work of the world done by it and gradually make that work no less an expression of the spontaneous human spirit than ever before" - FLW, 1932 "But the buildings themselves must be so designed that genuine variety in unity is to be had in good proportion without stultifying the economics of standardization" - FLW, 1936 "It is by utilizing mass production in the factory in this connection that some idea of the remarkable new economics possible to modern architecture may be seen approaching those realized in any well ‐built machine. If standardization can be humanized and made flexible in design and the economics brought to the home owner, the greatest service will be rendered to our modern way of life. It may really be born ‐ this democracy, I mean" - FLW, 1954 Commissioning patterned molds unique to a particular project was one way to customize the product of the assembly line. "In the broader sense, what he envisioned was the possibility of a client going to a lumber company, purchasing the molds for the concrete blocks and selecting from a 'library' of designs the one he could most easily foresee building for himself and his family. As the system was set up, the variety could be infinite" - Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer. Modern computer numerical controlled (CNC) milling and 3D printing techniques have promise as a method for economically producing unique molds, possibly fulfilling Wright's ideal of mass customization in manufacturing. P: CST - mass customization This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: St: Deflection, buckling, P: Too many block types, De: Adaptability - lack of, P: Mold fabrication cost too high Actualized? PREFABRICATION - PR I: PLS - plasticity, patterns, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Supports these other Qualities: So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The reason Wright embraced mass-customization was so that his designs could be afforded by anyone who really wanted them. It was a Democratic, egalitarian ideal that celebrated individual freedom of choice. 2-79 From early on, Wright was concerned that mass production could be dehumanizing. He advocated for a different kind of production. “Without the interest and cooperation of the manufacturers, the society can not begin to do its work…The machine is the metamorphosis of art and craft" - FLW, 1901. He believed that his textile block system served as an excellent prototype for an artist-led manufacturing revolution. Regarding the San Marcos project: “I finally found simple mechanical means to produce a complete building that looks the way the Machine made it – as much so at least as any woven fabric need look. Tough, light but not ‘thin,’ imperishable, plastic – no necessary lie about it anywhere and yet, Machine ‐made, mechanically perfect. Standardization as the soul of the Machine here, for the first time may be seen in the hand of the Architect” - FLW, 1929. Later, Wright became disillusioned with the path that manufacturing had taken, toward maximum efficiency and conformity at the expense of creativity. "No, no assembly line is the answer either for him, for you, or for me…Decentralization of our American cities…making natural resources more available to him, is his road…to any proper future as a Democracy" - FLW, 1947. At this point he believed the only way use mass production properly was to work outside the system. He would lobby for the formation of a new society, the Broadacre City, outside of the city and suburbs. Here, "the factory would go to the house (FLD)." Owners would build their own houses the way they wanted without government interference. Wright and his apprentices would provide the knowledge and support to make that happen. P: FAC - factory mass production This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Labor-intensive, P: Casting - molds too complex, P: Non-standard parts, So: Labor union opposition, P: Too many block types Actualized? PREFABRICATION - PR P: CST - mass customization, So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, P: PDM - Precision design and manufacture, Cs: SCA - economies of scale, So: RAD - radical Supports these other Qualities: So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright was not opposed to factory mass production of the textile block. He earnestly desired to make it happen, but could not find a manufacturer willing to produce the blocks on Wright's terms. In a 1927 letter to Paul Mueller, Wright shared the "possibility of the Nat. Cement Assoc. fostering a real cement product which would lend itself to mass production and…artistic development." In 1954, Wright stated "It is by utilizing mass production in the factory in this connection that some idea of the remarkable new economics possible to modern architecture may be seen approaching those realized in any well ‐built machine. If standardization can be humanized and made flexible in design and the economics brought to the home owner, the greatest service will be rendered to our modern way of life. It may really be born ‐ this democracy, I mean." In 1955, Wright solicited a proposal from the Carbon Dubbs Company to manufacture the Usonian Automatic block. The corner blocks were problematic, however. Automatic precision edge grinding could be incorporated to provide the precise fit that Wright specified but no one was able to achieve. Edge gaskets could also be used to cushion and provide resistance to water infiltration. 2-80 Wright promoted a concept for on-site manufacturing that he called "The factory goes to the house." (See FAC - factory mass production) The idea was to use mass-production techniques for casting textile blocks on-site under the control of the architect. "No 'assembly line' can be the right answer for laborer, G.I., you or me" - FLW, 1948. "And in this more natural order of human growth the house will not go to the factory for pre ‐ fabrication ‐ No, the factory will go to the house. And when it does go in the hand of the competent Architect great economics and fresh new beauty will be the beneficial result" - FLW, 1936. In actuality, the first textile block buildings were constructed this way out of necessity. It was neither efficient nor cost effective, and quality was poor. It cannot be said for sure whether promoting this concept was simply a marketing ploy for Wright, turning a disadvantage into a supposed advantage, or whether he truly believed he had solved all the earlier problems. A major issue was resistance by the trade unions to non-union labor performing work on-site. Another major issue that remained was the high cost of mold fabrication for each project. By the time an effective system for leasing molds from the architect's office was finally put in place, Wright had passed away. Without Wright's guiding hand, interest in the textile block system waned. P: FLD - the factory goes to the house This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Contractor reticence, confusion, Du: Face softness and friability, A: Labor-intensive, P: Casting - molds too complex, So: Code acceptance / permits, P: Inexperienced labor, P: Complex and labor-intensive block casting, Du: Technological limitations, A: Complicated assembly, Du: Mix design too dry, So: Labor union opposition, U: Utility integration issues, A: Highly skilled precision work, A: Grout leakage, A: Staging required for roof, A: Slow construction pace, Du: Grout gaps in channels, So: Conservative construction industry Actualized? PREFABRICATION - PR P: CST - mass customization, So: EXU - exurban, decentralization, So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, So: RAD - radical Supports these other Qualities: So: RAD - radical Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Sending the factory to the house was clearly a radical solution, born of necessity, which gave the hope of mass production efficiency while attempting to retain maximum flexibility for design (CST - mass-customization). 2-81 "All this fenestration can be made ready at the factory and set up as the walls. But there is no longer sense in speaking of doors and windows. These walls are largely a system of fenestration having its own part in the building scheme" - FLW, 1954. "'The artist is always 50 years ahead of the times,' Wright often said. 'Building materials will be pre ‐cut, and pre ‐cast in factories. Window sizes will be standardized. Light fixtures will be installed as one complete unit, with a screwdriver. Plumbing will be pre ‐packaged and ready for installation, pipes and all...Skilled labor will be eliminated'" - Rosalie Tonkens, quoting Wright. Wright sought to prefabricate as much as possible for his Usonian House concept. The idea was to minimize skilled, i.e. union, site labor (UNS - unskilled labor). Light fixtures were also integrated into the blocks. If integration was not possible, then the part should at least appear integrated. For the San Marco project, #2704, glass textile blocks were explored as an integrated solution for light and views. P: INT - complete building system, all Integrated This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? PREFABRICATION - PR I: SIM - Simplicity, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Supports these other Qualities: O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Integrating all components into the cellular matrix of the textile block was an organic principle - nothing was to look like it was tacked on. 2-82 "That 'privy' civilized is now a bathroom, manufactured complete and delivered to him as a single unit (his car or his refrigerator the same as the privy) all ready to use when connected to the city water system…The bathroom doesn't give the house much individuality. You can prefabricate it, take it on the job, make three connections" - FLW, 1958. Wright's idea didn't make much headway. The trade unions would likely have been opposed to it, for one thing. P: KIT - prefabricated bath and kitchen This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: P: Non-standard parts, Du: Technological limitations, U: Utility integration issues, De: Adaptability - lack of, So: Conservative construction industry Actualized? PREFABRICATION - PR De: MOD - modular, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, A: INS - simultaneous install - one process, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) Supports these other Qualities: Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: This was a continuation of the concept of minimizing skilled field labor (UNS). There is an undeniable logic and appeal in premanufacturing these core rooms, the kitchen and bath, like a refrigerator or automobile. 2-83 “When Machine ‐Standardizing enters, all must be accurate, precise, organized...The limitations of both process and material are here very severe” - FLW, 1927. In other words, there was no margin for error with the textile block system. The parts had to fit together perfectly. "It is by utilizing mass production in the factory in this connection that some idea of the remarkable new economics possible to modern architecture may be seen approaching those realized in any well ‐built machine. If standardization can be humanized and made flexible in design and the economics brought to the home owner, the greatest service will be rendered to our modern way of life. It may really be born ‐ this democracy, I mean" - FLW, 1954. The requirement for precision often had the opposite effect from what Wright intended. Foundations and walls had to be laid out with extreme precision in the field in order for the blocks to fit properly, and constant shimming of the blocks was required. "Although steel forms were used to create the blocks for the Automatics, the blocks still could not be made with the precision necessary to lay them without shimming" - Eric Lloyd Wright. This worked against the do-it-yourself concept intended by Wright. Regarding the FSC Faculty House, #3922: "Some very precise, high ‐tech fabrication is coupled with expert attention to detail and the fine tuning skill that can only come from years of experience" - Michael Maguire. P: PDM - Precision design and manufacture This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Contractor reticence, confusion, A: Labor-intensive, P: Casting - molds too complex, P: Inexperienced labor, P: Complex and labor-intensive block casting, A: Dimensional tolerance / alignment issues, A: Highly skilled precision work, P: Mold fabrication cost too high Actualized? PREFABRICATION - PR Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Supports these other Qualities: Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The intention was that this approach would minimize skilled field labor (UNS). That in turn would allow for the use of owner labor (sweat equity) which would ultimately foster the Quality of Democracy. 2-84 Repetition is required for economical mass production. “This is the beginning of a constructive effort to produce a type that would fully utilize standardization and the repetition of easily manhandled units” - FLW, 1925. Every difference in a block requires a different "mark", or piece number. By keeping these differences to a minimum, fewer molds are required, lowering the cost of production. "Standardization apprehended as a principle of order has the danger of monotony in application" - FLW, 1927. If there is too much repetition and not enough variety, the design can become monotonous. It's a balancing act. One method of increasing variety of the whole and repetition of the part at the same time is to reduce the basic module size (see SML - small module). This increases assembly cost however. "Imagine how the costs would come down were the technique a familiar matter or if many houses were to be executed at one time ‐ probably down to forty ‐five hundred dollars, according to number built and location" - FLW, 1954. If multiple buildings can be constructed at the same time at the same location, then repetition, with its subsequent economy of production, increases greatly. The Doheny Ranch, #2104, is the first Wright project to attempt to take advantage of this concept. Textile block walls were specified for the two collective subdivisions in Michigan for this same reason (#4806, #4828). P: REP - repetition This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: P: Too many block types, P: Mold fabrication cost too high Actualized? PREFABRICATION - PR De: STN - standardization, Cs: SCA - economies of scale Supports these other Qualities: Cs: SCA - economies of scale Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: There were too many "marks," or block variations to take advantage of the economy of repetition. Every special case required a new mold or mold variation. Fifty molds for one house is too expensive. Fifty mold types for fifty houses would take advantage of the economies of scale. 2-85 Wright resisted proposals to prefabricate and tilt up wall sections even though the finished look would be the same (1956, FLW to Green, K123A06). He was insistent that his textile block remained as discreet units, or cells. "A unit-mass of concrete, size and shape determined by the work intended to be done and what weight a man can reasonably be expected to lift and set in a wall, is fixed upon" - FLW, 1927. As discussed for "REP - repetition", one method of increasing variety of the whole and repetition of the part at the same time is to reduce the basic module size. The smallest practical unit size would be that of a brick. The size of a basic textile block is between that of a brick at one end and a prefabricated wall panel at the other. Wright wanted a unit large enough to allow some prefabrication but still preserve the variety and flexibility of masonry. In 1923, with the Millard House (#2302), he initially specified a unit size 24" by 24", but had to reduce it to 16" square so the blocks would be light enough to lift. Later, with the Usonian Automatic, he coffered the blocks substantially to lighten them, allowing for a 12" by 24" basic unit and 24" square glazed units. Some of Wright's concept drawings for the Automatic show a 24" square basic unit as well (#5612). P: SML - small module This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Labor-intensive, A: Slow construction pace, A: Too many joints Actualized? PREFABRICATION - PR De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', P: REP - repetition, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Supports these other Qualities: O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Most fundamentally, this was an organic concept. Wright would have been partial to the romantic idea of cellular units assembled into an organic whole. Tilting up prefabricated panels would be considered cheating, and inauthentic. 2-86 Regarding the Los Angeles block houses: "The windows and doors are sheet metal, prefabricated structures, carried out in the workshop with virtually no added work on the site" - FLW, 1926. Despite this claim, the windows for the Los Angeles houses actually used custom wood frames. It is clear though that prefabrication of windows and doors is something Wright wanted for his textile block projects from the first. Eric Lloyd Wright: "My grandfather had also hoped that that the Automatics could have exterior sash and doors, all prebuilt in various sizes for easy installation." By the 1950's standard prefabricated door and window sizes were emerging. Unfortunately, these sizes did not usually mesh with Wright's block module, and Wright wasn't about to change his system to suit the industry. With the Usonian Automatic, he did away with window units in favor of glazed blocks. Doors were still an issue though, as rough opening sizes did not correspond to the emerging industry standards, some code-mandated. P: WIN - premanufactured windows and doors, modular This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: So: Code acceptance / permits, P: Non-standard parts, P: Standard kept changing Actualized? PREFABRICATION - PR Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, A: BUI - simple to build Supports these other Qualities: Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Prefabricated window and door units would have eliminated or reduced the role of the skilled union carpenter on the job. 2-87 "Is it not more likely that the medium of artistic expression itself has broadened and changed until a new definition and new direction must be given the art-activity of the future, and that the Machine has finally made for the artist, whether he will yet own it or not, a splendid distinction between the Art of old and the Art to come? A distinction made by the tool which frees human labor, lengthens and broadens the life of the simplest man, thereby the basis of Democracy upon which we insist" - FLW, 1901. Wright believed that he had mastered this collaboration of Art and the Machine with his textile block invention: “I finally found simple mechanical means to produce a complete building that looks the way the Machine made it – as much so at least as any woven fabric need look. Tough, light but not ‘thin,’ imperishable, plastic – no necessary lie about it anywhere and yet, Machine ‐made, mechanically perfect" - FLW, 1929. A decade later, he was disillusioned by the path that industry had taken - faster and cheaper, with little regard for artistic merit. "The man is not using the machine! The machine is using the man and is using him so he is losing himself" "the only way man can use the machine ‐not let it use him ‐is to get it as a working principle into work by way of the great human force we used to call creative ‐artist." - FLW, 1939. It was at this point that he proposed working outside the system by "bringing the factory to the house (FLD)." His Broadacre City concept abandoned the city altogether for the unspoiled countryside (EXU - exurban). "The Machine can be nowhere a Creator except as it may be a good tool in the creative artist's tool box." "The proper use of the Machine should be to make life more beautiful, more livable. No, not necessarily easier and quicker just to feed this American voracity which we call speed" - FLW, 1951. So: CLB - collaboration of Art and the Machine This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? SOCIETY - SO So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Supports these other Qualities: So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: By the turn of the 20th century, Wright viewed mechanized factory mass-production as a tool that could promote Democracy, providing good things to all that were once only available only to the wealthy. He postulated that "the Machine" could be harnessed and tamed by the artist to provide new forms of art, affordable to all. 2-88 Cooperative communities were encouraged by Wright as part of his exurban Broadacre City concept (EXU). The idea was that homeowners banding together to manufacture textile blocks would provide an economy of scale (SCA). A group of chemists from Upjohn formed a cooperative in Kalamazoo, Michigan: "Seeking good housing at low cost, they formed a non-profit organization. They obtained the services of Wright to layout the master site plan and design some of the houses, brought masonry and lumber by the trainload, and then helped each other over the rough spots of construction" - Eugene R. Streich. "At Kalamazoo, Michigan, where a group of chemists, doctors, dentists, and other professional people have finally succeeded in financing a joint project, the ground around the first Wright house to go up is covered with colored concrete blocks, made on weekends and set out to cure, intended for this house and others to come" - American Landscape III, March, 1950. After completion of the homes, a community had been forged of like-minded individuals who were used to working together for a common cause. "We think that the concept of a cooperative community served us well…we helped one another with construction projects, and did many activities together in support of each other or the community" - Eric Pratt. So: COC - cooperative community This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Cs: Lack of bank financing, So: Code acceptance / permits, So: Political issues - review committees Actualized? SOCIETY - SO So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house, Cs: SCA - economies of scale, A: ARC - architect field supervision required, O: SIT - connected to the site, So: RAD - radical Supports these other Qualities: So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The textile block system theoretically had the following advantages when used for a cooperative project: It simplified ARC - architect field supervision, it enabled SCA - economies of scale and SIT - connection to the site, it allowed FLD - the factory to go to the house, it was a RAD - radical solution, it made use of SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), and, most of all, it was DEM - Democratic, allowing freedom of choice and individuality instead of conformity to rigid codes, restrictive financing and architectural review committees. 2-89 "So we see in the Machine the forerunner and ideal agent of Usonian Democracy such as it is" - FLW, 1927. "Our own ideal social state, Democracy, was originally conceived as some such organic unity - that is to say - the free growth of many individuals as units free in themselves, functioning together in a unity of their own making" - FLW, 1932. "I find myself standing now…to strike for an architecture for the individual" - FLW, 1932. "Democracy stood in my mind for the growth and protection of individuality" - FLW, 1943. Wright believed that his Usonian Automatic system was truly Democratic in the sense of promoting freedom of choice and individuality. This included the freedom to live in an organic home and to form an organic society away from the rigid building codes of the city. All that was needed was a do-it-yourself spirit, leading to self- sufficiency. "How then, you may ask, can people with even more limited means experience the liberation, the sense of freedom that comes with true architecture?...we have gone far in solving this generic problem by the natural concrete block house we call the 'Usonian Automatic'" - FLW, 1954. "Here then, within moderate means for the free man of our democracy, with some intelligence and by his own energy, comes a natural house designed in accordance with the principles of organic architecture...A house that may be put to work in our society and give us an architecture for 'housing' which is becoming to a free society because, though standardized fully, it yet establishes the democratic ideal of variety ‐ the sovereignty of the individual" - FLW, 1954. So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Cs: Lack of bank financing, So: Code acceptance / permits Actualized? SOCIETY - SO O: SPR - lifts the spirit, So: UNL - universal application, So: RAD - radical Supports these other Qualities: O: SPR - lifts the spirit Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 2.2 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright sought to lift the spiritual condition of mankind by enabling the freedom and "sovereignty of the individual." 2-90 "Integration as against centralization is the true corollary of the ideal 'Democracy' and decentralization and integration come in as architecture to go to work over the whole land to create a better basis and re-create the framework and background of a modern life run too far out of human scale" - FLW, 1932. "Broadacre City is no mere "Back ‐to ‐the ‐Land" idea but is, rather, a breaking down of the artificial divisions set up between urban and rural life. By a more intelligent use of our developed scientific powers we establish a practical way of life that will bring the Arts, Agriculture, and Industry into a harmonious whole" - FLW, 1940. The textile block system was an important part of Wright's vision for the "Broadacre City". After around 1932, He resisted designing a textile block house on less than an acre of land, and preferred to plan entire subdivisions. These were to be formed by enterprising individuals willing to be part of his grand experiment. Built examples include Parkwyn Village (#4806) and Galesburg Country Homes (#4828). The Usonian Automatic subdivision proposed for banker Walter Bimson was never built (#5740). So: EXU - exurban, decentralization This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? SOCIETY - SO So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, De: HOR - horizontal emphasis, O: SIT - connected to the site, So: COC - cooperative community, So: RAD - radical Supports these other Qualities: So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright felt it necessary to abandon the city and its stifling regulations and restrictions in order to better foster individual freedom of choice. 2-91 In 1940, Wright wrote that inventions were an "inherent right of man...His social right to the ideas by which and for which he lives: that is to say public ownership of invention and scientific discoveries that concern the life of the people." His textile block system was never patented, so it did satisfy this Essential Quality, although use of the system was tightly controlled. Wright falsely referred to his Usonian Automatic system as a "patented block construction" and sought to assert ownership and control of the molds for each project. It is likely that Wright was attempting to prevent unauthorized use of his designs. He was also concerned about his invention being stolen and possibly patented by someone else: "The cement people…are getting on to the work done already in Los Angeles and I am pretty sure to be robbed of the benefit of my work" - FLW to A.N. Rebori, 9/13/1927. So: FRE - not patented, free for all This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? SOCIETY - SO Cs: AFF - affordability, So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, So: UNL - universal application Supports these other Qualities: Cs: AFF - affordability Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The main reason for public ownership of patents (in effect invalidating them) would be to make innovative housing more affordable. 2-92 "They are plastic in design and construction, although made up of details which are adapted in their format to the strength of the individual worker" - FLW, 1926. "A unit-mass of concrete, size and shape determined by the work intended to be done and what weight a man can reasonably be expected to lift and set in a wall, is fixed upon" - FLW, 1927. "If the block were fashioned in such a way that it took two men to lift it, the system would be defeated from the start" - FLW. Unit weight was clearly the limiting factor for the size of the textile block. Wright explored the use of lightweight concrete, starting with a consideration of using "Aerocrete" for blocks in 1930. The Tonkens House, #5510, successfully used a block with "Haydite" lightweight aggregate, according to correspondence dated August 10, 1956. Haydite is a brand name for expanded shale, clay and slate, ESCS. Block weight could have been reduced up to 35% using this type of aggregate in the mix. R-value would have increased as well. So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Heavy / block weight Actualized? SOCIETY - SO P: SML - small module, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, A: BUI - simple to build, So: RAD - radical Supports these other Qualities: So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: This Quality supports Wright's Democratic (DEM) ideal that anyone could assemble the blocks (SWT - sweat equity). He claimed that "women and children can lay them", according to Dorothy Eppstein in a letter dated September 2, 1951. 2-93 Wright prefered radical solutions - he felt a need to shake up the status-quo. This Quality is related to DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, and EXU - Exurban. "The building codes…embody, of course, only what the previous generation knew or thought about building, and the ensuing generation finds the code a stumbling block" - FLW, 1939. "Because they are not essential, but mostly the routine habit of mind of small ‐minded experts for fools, codes will die or drastic revisions be made in them by Nature herself" - FLW, 1949. "Wright's belief in the sovereignty of the individual and the importance of the single family home was a major premise of Broadacre City. Each person and every family should have the right to live as they choose in their own way" - Margo Stipes. Wright's Broadacre City proposal included an acre of land for every family. He claimed that the entire U.S. could fit within the State of Texas even with an acre per family. He wanted to throw out the building codes and abandon the cities entirely, starting over in the country. The textile block was a way to do this, by "bringing the factory to the house" (FLD). So: RAD - radical This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? SOCIETY - SO So: EXU - exurban, decentralization, So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Supports these other Qualities: So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: In Wright's view, only a radical solution could achieve individual freedom of choice for the common man. He saw the construction industry as traditional and hide-bound. In his view, it needed to be replaced with something entirely new, not dependent on the trade unions. Modern architecture required radically new construction methods, in his opinion. 2-94 "They can be made and also set up with small steel horizontal and vertical reinforcing rods in the joints, by the owners themselves, each course being grouted (poured) as it is laid upon the one beneath...Here then, within moderate means for the free man of our democracy, with some intelligence and by his own energy, comes a natural house designed in accordance with the principles of organic architecture" - FLW, 1954. "The owners acted as contractors and part ‐time labor during construction of foundations and walls, retained General Contractor Corning for the more complicated roof framing and wood ‐finish work" - House and Home Magazine, March, 1953, regarding the Eric Brown House, #5003. In an address to the AIA on May 27, 1954, in response to the question "What do you have to offer those people who...have only $15,000 to invest and who believe in you and need you?" Wright stated "I have given it to him and he doesn't know it...in what I call the Usonian Automatic, where the union has been eliminated; where masonry at $29.00 a day is out; where there are no plasterers at the same rate; where there are no carpenters at all. It is a block house. I did it for the G.I.'s. The G.I. can go in his back road...he's got sand there...get himself some steel rods and cement, make the blocks, and put the blocks together...you can build your own house!" In actuality "there was nothing automatic about the blocks. Bill and Elizabeth [Tracy] made each wooden form and every concrete block, nearly 1700, by hand, working about a year" - Donald Leslie Johnson. It was a common experience, spending years casting the blocks, as recounted by the owners. They did not seem to regret it though, considering it to be a labor of love. "Hooray! The basic house was finally completed! We had spent a full four years doing very little else with our spare waking hours than constructing this house. It took another couple of years of finishing details before we were ready to call the job finished" - Eric Pratt. So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Labor-intensive, P: Casting - molds too complex, A: Heavy / block weight, P: Complex and labor-intensive block casting, Du: Mix design too dry, A: Highly skilled precision work, P: Too many block types, P: Mold fabrication cost too high, A: Staging required for roof Actualized? SOCIETY - SO Cs: AFF - affordability, So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost, So: COC - cooperative community, So: RAD - radical Supports these other Qualities: So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Enabling owners the opportunity to construct their own home celebrated the American do-it-yourself, pioneering spirit. It also tapped into the satisfaction that comes from enjoying the fruit of one’s own labor. The owner develops an intimate connection to the house and the site. In this case, assembling the blocks was a complicated and labor-intensive process, requiring a high level of precision and skill. 2-95 Wright intended his textile block system to be suitable for all areas of the United States and a wide variety of building types. He does limit its use to three stories or less, however, apparently for structural reasons. Regarding the Phi Gamma Delta project, #2504: "Obviously the architect considered the textile block system ‐ seemingly so appropriate to the dry hill country around Los Angeles where he developed it ‐ suitable for use in any part of the United States" - Paul E. Sprague. "The dissimilarity of the block houses is remarkable since the same structural scheme is used for all. Wright proved that the system of double walls, with hollow space between, forming thin but solid reinforced slabs, 'would yield to any desire for form imaginable... mechanical means to infinite variety was no longer an impractical dream'" - Esther McCoy. "The block form introduces an order to a land [California] where none existed, and implies that that order may be extended to cover entire developments" - Charles Calvo. "Now the system was feasible anywhere in the nation, with ‐ as the architect continually emphasized ‐ infinite varieties of variations" - Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer. So: UNL - universal application This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Cm: Insulation, lack of Actualized? SOCIETY - SO De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', P: REP - repetition, De: STN - standardization, Cs: SCA - economies of scale, P: WIN - premanufactured windows and doors, modular Supports these other Qualities: Cs: SCA - economies of scale Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: It was not usually possible to develop a textile block subdivision from scratch. Universal application (UNL) allowed for an alternative means of achieving economy of scale (SCA). Usonian Automatic molds and a hydraulic press were to be leased to individual clients for each project. The standard system, therefore, had to be appropriate for every region of the country. 2-96 From the very beginning, textile blocks were used as stay-in-place forms for reinforced concrete beams, walls, pilasters and columns. A precedent can be found with Wright's Imperial Hotel in Tokyo (#1509). Wright described it as a “self ‐formed building, deposited in strata, gradually rising uniformly.” Outer and inner brick walls with a hollow gap between were used as stay-in-place forms for a poured concrete wall. Wright was taken by the concept of self-forming, considering temporary wood forms and shoring as wasteful and inorganic. He believed a structure should grow uniformly from the ground as would a saguaro cactus or a mountain. St: CIP - form for reinforced concrete members This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? STRUCTURE - ST I: MOM - Mono-Material, I: HON - honest expression, integrity, St: FLR - horizontal use, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Supports these other Qualities: I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The textile block forms for the CIP structural member remain in place and become the finished surface, combining aesthetics and structure. 2-97 In 1927 Wright sent a letter to A.N. Rebori for an upcoming Architectural Record article on the the L.A. textile block houses: "The blocks might well have been of better quality...all the difficulties met with were due to poor workmanship and not to the nature of the scheme." It's clear that the lack of strength of the blocks was a concern for him. His claims of superior durability (IMP), low maintenance (MAI) and permanence (PER) depended on it. He commissioned extensive compression tests of an experimental natural cement mix design for the San Marcos Project (#2704). Test results showed an unconfined 28 day compressive strength of around 500 psi. Not good at all, but not totally unexpected, as natural cement can take a long time to gain strength. Surprisingly, a mix of 1/2 portland cement and 1/2 natural cement did not perform any better. In a letter dated 10/24/1929 (Black Thursday), Wright discusses the natural cement he planned to use for San Marcos: "I have a report regarding the chemical analysis of the natural cement. First, it is a natural cement. Second, it makes an admirable mortar. The samples received are, however, too small to make a cube of full size to test the material for crushing strength. It takes but one hour and fifteen minutes for it to achieve its final set. It has a pretty good tensile strength, --255 lbs. in seven days; 180 lbs, in twenty-four hours. It sets very qickly and will be extremely useful for our purpose." St: CMP - compressive strength This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Du: Face softness and friability, P: Casting - molds too complex, P: Complex and labor-intensive block casting, Du: Mix design too dry, Du: Cracking - non-structural Actualized? STRUCTURE - ST St: GRV - gravity load capacity, Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: PER - permanence Supports these other Qualities: Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Gravity loads applied to the textile block walls were usually limited to a half-span of floor and roof. Anything above that would require the addition of CIP piers (CIP - form for reinforced concrete members). Compressive stresses on the blocks were, therefore, fairly low. The main reason to have adequate compressive strength would be to ensure face durability. 2-98 "I found that in the effort to actually eliminate the post and beam in favor of structural continuity, that is to say, making the two things one thing instead of two separate things, I could get no help at all from regular engineers." "It appears that aesthetic 'continuity' at work in the practice of physical structure is concrete proof of the practical usefulness of the aesthetic ideal in designing architectural forms and, I hope, may soon be available as structural formula in some handbook" - FLW, 1954. St: CNT - continuity, no posts or beams This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? STRUCTURE - ST I: PLS - plasticity, patterns, St: ELA - flexibility, elasticity, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Supports these other Qualities: I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright sought a structural continuity to match the aesthetic continuity (CON) of his buildings. "Here today this element of continuity may cut structural substance nearly in two. It may cut the one half in two again by elimination of needless features, such elimination being entirely due to the simplification I have been calling 'plasticity'" - FLW, 1954. This meant that the system should be able to be span horizontally (FLR) as well as vertically, typically by using the blocks as stay-in-place forms for CIP concrete beams or slabs. For the Biltmore Hotel, #2710: "Floors and roofs are of reinforced concrete tiles and joist ‐knitted to exterior and interior walls, forming a continuous construction" - Albert Chase McArthur, 1929. 2-99 In 1923 Wright wrote that concrete block with steel rods in poured joints make for “a really flexible wall… [that] is less liable to damage from flexure or torsion and…would show no cracks.” It would have the "tenuous flexibility" required to resist an earthquake, such as the one that had just hit Tokyo. "They are earthquake ‐proof because they are flexible in their composition of comparatively small units, which are held together by the reinforcing bars" - FLW, 1926. "Why not extreme lightness combined with the tenuity and flexibility that are a property of steel instead of the great weight necessary to the usually excessive rigidity" "A building made flexible…yielding to movement yet resilient to return to position when force…ceased" - FLW, 1937. Here Wright is claiming an elasticity that would make for a structure that was self-righting after a seismic event. This is as opposed to ductility, which is the basis for modern seismic structural design. His concept could be considered as equivalent to blocks held together with very stiff rubber bands. "Eric Wright maintained that the inherent flexibility of the textile block system would help protect the houses...The textile blocks, Eric Wright said, should be free to rotate slightly around the grout tubes, with the steel reinforcing providing a flexible mesh to hold the system in place" - Jeffrey Chusid. St: ELA - flexibility, elasticity This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Du: Grout gaps in channels Actualized? STRUCTURE - ST St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance, St: CNT - continuity, no posts or beams Supports these other Qualities: St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright stated that the claimed elasticity and flexibility of the textile block would provide superior resistance to earthquakes. This theory does not appear to have borne out in the field. The Ennis House (#2401) and Freeman House (# 2402) both suffered severe damage from the 1994 Northridge earthquake, with little evidence of elastic or even inelastic (ductile) behavior. Failure was brittle, as the stiff grout tubes pushed against the soft textile blocks, fracturing them. "The block membrane of the [Freeman House] walls stretched and bent, opening numerous cracks between individual blocks as well as separations between major building components" - Jeffrey Chusid. 2-100 "The upright and horizontal may now be made to work together as one. A new world of form opens inevitably." "For ceilings the same block units have been employed to cast horizontal ceiling and roof slabs" - FLW, 1954. The Usonian Automatic was a mono-material (MOM) design. Textile blocks formed second floors, ceilings, overhangs and soffits in addition to the exterior and interior walls. The horizontal elements were assembled differently from the vertical, however. The horizontal blocks were deeper (6 in.) and heavier, weighing 200 lbs. or more each. A shored wood platform was erected first, then the blocks hoisted up and arranged on the platform. (For the Pappas House, #5516, a ramp was built and blocks rolled up via wheelbarrow.) A reinforcing grid was placed around the edges of the ceiling blocks, similar to the woven wall reinforcing (SPD, WOV). Hidden reinforced concrete beams were spaced out for the larger spans (CIP). Lighting fixture boxes and conduit were embedded. At that point a lightweight concrete slab was poured, tying the blocks together into a monolithic slab (MON). Two types of continuity were established by this roof system. Aesthetic and structure appeared to have merged, in that the concrete block structure was also an exposed architectural feature (CON). In this case, however, the reinforced concrete slab actually carried the loads while the blocks served mainly as a form until the slab had set. Structural continuity was achieved by cantilevering the roof slab over the exterior wall. This generated negative moment at the wall support, which reduced the positive moment at mid-span, reducing the reinforcing required and lessening the deflection. St: FLR - horizontal use This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Heavy / block weight, A: Highly skilled precision work, A: Staging required for roof Actualized? STRUCTURE - ST I: MOM - Mono-Material, De: MON - monolithic appearance, sense of mass, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, St: CNT - continuity, no posts or beams, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Supports these other Qualities: I: MOM - Mono-Material Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright had long desired to extend the mono-materiality of the textile block to the floor and roof assemblies. This was first attempted for the Ennis House hallway (#2401) and later for the San Marcos project (#2704), before coming to fruition with the Usonian Automatic. 2-101 From the very beginning, Wright intended the textile block system to be load-bearing. His son Lloyd actually developed the initial concept of a concrete block with reinforced and grouted edge channels, but used it mainly in an ornamental fashion. Wright used this concept to honor the principle of continuity (CON), aesthetic and structure as one. It also allowed the use of a mono-material (MON), in this case, concrete block. He had hoped there would be cost benefits as well, by eliminating interior finishes (TRM). There were limitations to its load-bearing capacity. Wright "insisted that three stories were the limit for the textile ‐block slab system" - Warren McArthur, Jr. Hidden cast concrete piers and beams were incorporated as required, with the blocks serving as stay-in-place forms (CIP). St: GRV - gravity load capacity This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? STRUCTURE - ST I: MOM - Mono-Material, I: SIM - Simplicity, Cs: TRM - no trim, plaster, paint or gutters, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Supports these other Qualities: I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: By combining the finished surface with the load-bearing structure into one mono-material unit, Wright satisfied his organic principle of Continuity (CON). 2-102 “Lightly fabricated, complete, of mono ‐material" - FLW, 1927. “The walls would thus become thin but solid reinforced slabs" “Lightness and strength” "Floors, ceilings, walls all the same ‐all to be hollow" - FLW, 1932. "Why not extreme lightness combined with the tenuity and flexibility that are a property of steel instead of the great weight necessary to the usually excessive rigidity" - FLW, 1937. Regarding earthquakes: "The heavier the masonry the greater the wreck" - FLW, 1937. "With one outside face (which may be patterned), and one rear or inside face, generally coffered, for lightness" - FLW, 1954. According to Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer, "Mr. Wright was a great believer in making materials work to their 'hilt,' getting the most out of them by employing them in ways suitable to their nature and at the same time finding ways to conserve the amount of material used." Wright considered over ‐use of materials as a waste, and something that could weaken a structure instead of contribute to it. The problem with this theory is that the result could be catastrophic if design forces are underestimated. St: HOL - lightweight system, hollow shells This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? STRUCTURE - ST Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, Cs: LES - less material, lighter Supports these other Qualities: O: NAT - inspired by Nature Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The textile block buildings may appear monolithic and massive, but Wright went to great lengths to make the system as light as practical. This is primarily an organic principle, that Nature provides just enough structural mass to carry the load, no more, no less (NAT). With natural structures, hollow spaces are used to great effect, maximizing strength while minimizing material. Following this principle, the block interior faces are coffered to reduce weight and material (LES), while maintaining full structural capacity. This also has the benefit of ensuring that the blocks are light enough for one person to lift (LBS). 2-103 From 1923 until his death in 1959, Wright maintained that his textile-block system would deliver superior seismic performance. He pointed to his design for the Imperial Hotel in Tokyo, which survived the Great Kanto Earthquake of 1923 as evidence of his credentials as a seismic expert. He theorized that the web of reinforcing in the grouted block channels, combined with the relatively light weight of the coffered blocks would act monolithically yet have flexibility in a seismic event. He called it a "tenuous flexibility" and proposed that Tokyo should be rebuilt using his block system. "I started this back in 1921 ‐ this system of construction. We called it the textile block system and it is earthquake ‐proof" - FLW, 1954. Wright, regarding the Walton House, #5623: "Dr. Walton, I build scientific houses out of concrete block and steel reinforcement, so I know that they are safe." According to Jeffrey Chusid in 1990: "Wright also theorized that this flexible construction system was actually more earthquake resistant than monolithic concrete might be, since it could move without catastrophic cracking and failure. This theory has yet to be significantly tested." The Freeman house (#2402) survived the San Fernando (1971) and Long Beach (1933) earthquakes apparently undamaged. Four years after Chusid's comment it was tested in the Northridge quake and did not perform as well. Angela Vargas stated in her Building Science Master's Thesis that the existing reinforcing was inadequate for seismic resistance. She proposed that the wall cavities be reinforced and filled with grout. St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Heavy / block weight, St: Poor seismic performance, St: Deflection, buckling, St: Cracking Actualized? STRUCTURE - ST Du: PER - permanence, So: UNL - universal application Supports these other Qualities: Du: PER - permanence Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Seismic performance has been mixed, at best, with the textile block system. The Storer House was relatively undamaged from the Northridge quake, but the Freeman and Ennis houses suffered significant damage. Any building with a claim of Permanence in a high-seismic zone needs to be seismic resistant. 2-104 "Of the ground, not on it" - FLW, 1949. Wright sought to engineer a seamless transition from earth to retaining wall to building wall. This was to fulfill the Organic Quality of "SIT - Connected to the site," and the Design Qualities of "HOR - Horizontal emphasis" and "3RD - Third dimension." "Nevertheless the sense of depth which we are here calling the third dimension ‐ a spiritual quality that cannot be forced but must be wooed ‐ marries the building to human life and weds both to the ground" - FLW, 1949. "It is in the nature of any building to grow from its site…the ground itself held always as a component basic part of the building itself" - FLW, 1954. Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer stated that, with the Doheny Ranch Project, #2104, "the drama of the retaining walls is complemented by the intricate geometry of the house that grows up and out of them." Wright designed textile block culverts for the Doheny project as well. He used double block walls for the Ennis House (#2401) retaining wall, anchored by deadmen. It was much lighter than standard retaining wall construction (see HOL). Unfortunately it did not hold up well over time and had to be eventually replaced by a much more substantial structure. St: RTW - retaining wall, ground transition This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Du: Water leaks, penetration, Du: Face softness and friability, Du: Flashing / gutter issues, St: Deflection, buckling, St: Cracking Actualized? STRUCTURE - ST De: 3RD - third Dimension, De: HOR - horizontal emphasis, O: SIT - connected to the site Supports these other Qualities: O: SIT - connected to the site Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The textile block retaining wall was an essential feature from the very beginning, tying the ground to the building. 2-105 Starting with the Biltmore Cottages, #2710, Wright developed a single layer option for the textile block system. The inner face could be furred with wood and covered with plaster or paneling (MUL - Multi-material option). The Usonian Automatic hid rigid insulation behind the paneling. Interior single-wythe walls were typically left exposed. This meant that the coffered back face of the blocks had to be cast without defects. It simplified the integral glazing required for the Usonian Automatic, however, as only one pane of glass was required. Light and views would have been greatly restricted with a double layer glazed wall. Wright clearly believed that a single layer, 3.5 in. thick, was sufficient for a two-story load-bearing application (see HOL - lightweight system). The Turkel House (#5513) takes this to perhaps its greatest extreme with a 14 ft. clear vertical span in the living room using 4 in. thick glazed blocks. This very thin wall violates all code- prescribed width-thickness ratios while supporting a heavy concrete block and cast concrete roof structure. Wright got away with this by adding returns or corners to buttress the thin walls as needed. "The walls are a single shell of reinforced concrete blocks inset at each opening to strengthen the thin wall" - FLW, 1932, describing the Conventional House Project, #3201. For the Usonian Automatic, "walls may be either single (one layer of blocks), the coffered back ‐face forming the interior wall surface, or double with two layers of blocks, with an interior insulating air space between" - FLW, 1954. St: SGL - single layer option This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Cm: Insulation, lack of, En: Not energy efficient, A: Wall bracing required Actualized? STRUCTURE - ST De: MUL - multi-material option, De: GLZ - integral glazing, modular, St: HOL - lightweight system, hollow shells, Cs: LES - less material, lighter, De: GMC - glazed mitered corners, De: PUN - minimize punched openings Supports these other Qualities: De: GLZ - integral glazing, modular Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The main advantage of a single-layer system was the ability to integrate exterior glazing into the block unit itself. 2-106 Wright considered this Quality to be a key component of his system. The "woven" reinforcing made it unique, differentiating it from standard masonry in a fundamental way. Here we are describing the structural Quality of Woven Reinforcing, as opposed to the design feature: "WOV - Woven character." "Concrete is poured into the holes through which the rods extend, forming a complete, weatherproof, structural bond of spidery steel reinforcement between the various units making up the general system of design" - A.N. Rebori, 1927. "Lloyd Wright worked out a technique of internally reinforcing the blocks with vertical and horizontal rods of steel, thus allowing for a reinforced ascension of Cubist forms multiplying upwards along a vertical plane like growing crystals or numbers in a Pythagorean progression" - Kevin Starr. “Why not weave a kind of building?...Shells with with steel inlaid in them...manhandled units weighing 40 to 50 pounds...steel-wound and steel-bound. Floors, ceilings, walls all the same-all to be hollow" - FLW, 1932. "Nature, driven to economize materials by hard conditions, develops in the Saguaro a system of economy by reinforcement of vertical rods, a plaiting of tendons that holds the structure bolt upright for six centuries or more" FLW, 1940. "All my planning was devised on a properly proportioned unit system. I found this would keep all to scale…which thus became ‐ like tapestry ‐ a consistent fabric woven of interdependent, related units, however various" - FLW, 1957. Structurally, the textile block reinforcing was intended to provide a monolithic wall, yet perform like a flexible mesh under extreme loads: "The textile blocks, Eric Wright said, should be free to rotate slightly around the grout tubes, with the steel reinforcing providing a flexible mesh to hold the system in place" - Jeffrey Chusid. St: SPD - woven reinforcing, 'spidery' This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Labor-intensive, P: Complex and labor-intensive block casting, A: Complicated assembly, A: Grout leakage, Du: Corrosion of reinforcing, P: Precision molds required, A: Grout blocked, bars exposed, St: Grout tubes too hard/ block too soft Actualized? STRUCTURE - ST De: DIM - 'Unit System,' no dimensions, De: STK - stack bond, St: ELA - flexibility, elasticity, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, St: CNT - continuity, no posts or beams, De: WOV - woven character Supports these other Qualities: O: NAT - inspired by Nature Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 3 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The tendons in natural structures were claimed by Wright to be the inspiration for the woven reinforcing in the textile block. He believed that Nature's structural systems were superior to those devised by the engineers of his day. 2-107 "In this 'Usonian Automatic' we have eliminated the need for skilled labor by prefabricating all plumbing, heating and wiring, so each appurtenance system may come into the building in a factory ‐made package, easily installed by making several simple connections provided during block construction." "I had to devise electrical lighting for that house that could go into it ready made, where the owner could turn up a connection and that would be all because the union wouldn't work on it" - FLW, 1954. This may have been the plan, but it was not accomplished for the built Usonian Automatic houses. Electrical conduit and outlets were usually installed in the wall gaps by a trained electrician in the conventional manner. Wright did, however, develop track lighting for the Usonian Houses that was meant to be installed easily without special skills (TRK - Track lighting). Openings in the blocks for electrical outlets and switch plates were often cut in the field. Owner Dorothy Eppstein recalls "drilling holes into concrete blocks to create a rough rectangle, which would then be knocked out and used for light switches and outlets" - Michigan Modern Magazine. This could have been avoided by careful pre-planning and precasting the electrical openings into the blocks, as was done for the ceiling lighting fixture boxes in the Usonian Automatic roof tiles. U: ELE - electrical prefabricated This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: A: Labor-intensive, So: Labor union opposition, U: Utility integration issues, A: Much field cutting and fitting required Actualized? UTILITIES - UT P: INT - complete building system, all Integrated, A: STR - streamlined assembly, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), 94, U: TRK - track lighting, A: BUI - simple to build Supports these other Qualities: Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: One way to eliminate the skilled union electrician on the job site would be to prefabricate the electrical components. This was not accomplished in reality, so it is not known how well it would have worked. 2-108 "The new practice made all furnishings so far as possible (certainly the electric lighting and heating systems) integral parts of the architecture...Lighting fixtures should (as should all others) be absorbed in the structure, so that their office is of the structure" - FLW, 1954. "The lighting system in the Biltmore Hotel [#2710] likewise was considered as an integral part of the architectural design, the architect deliberately seeking to avoid the after ‐ thought effect of the usual methods of illumination. In the main the lighting scheme consists of substituting for the concrete blocks a number of pressed glass blocks set in frames of sheet copper and flush with the walls" - Albert Chase MacArthur, 1929. "In one operation a final finish was formed ‐ the system worked like giant children's building blocks. It could span openings, contain servicing, and incorporate glass" - John Sergeant. U: LGT - lighting integrated into the blocks This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? UTILITIES - UT P: INT - complete building system, all Integrated, De: MOD - modular, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Supports these other Qualities: O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 4 Unproven Claim? Analysis: This Quality was in keeping with Wright's organic concept. Ideally, like an organism, the building would consist of a collection of specialized cells that differed in function but all fit together harmoniously. Some cells let in light, some ventilated, others allowed access to views, or splashed varied patterns about the interior with the movement of the sun. In this case, certain blocks glowed, providing electric light to the occupants. 2-109 "Piping? Cut to the standard unit-length in the shop and set into the hollow spaces" - FLW, 1927. Here, Wright envisions plumbing standardized and precut to match multiples of the textile block basic unit. "[It is] necessary to eliminate, so far as possible, field labor which is always expensive: it is necessary to consolidate and simplify the three appurtenance systems - heating, lighting, and sanitation" - FLW, 1954. He expanded on the concept for his Usonian houses: "The poor man...buys the modern, civilized, standardized privy (it is a bathroom) manufactured and delivered complete in a single unit, even as his car or bathtub is manufactured, ready to use when connected to a septic tank or cesspool. He plants this first unit on his ground as a center unit to which a standardized complete kitchen unit similarly cheap and beneficial may be added" - FLW, 1932. Wright was apparently willing to cede the design of kitchens and baths to industry in order to make his Usonian homes more affordable (see KIT - prefabricated bath and kitchen). "In this 'Usonian Automatic' we have eliminated the need for skilled labor by prefabricating all plumbing, heating and wiring, so each appurtenance system may come into the building in a factory ‐made package, easily installed by making several simple connections provided during block construction" - FLW, 1954. It was more difficult to install the plumbing with the earlier dual-wythe textile block designs. Pre-planning was required to ensure that plumbing was installed correctly in the wall cavities, since both exterior and interior wythes were installed at the same time. U: PLU - prefabricated plumbing core This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: So: Labor union opposition, U: Utility integration issues, A: "One-process" trade integration issues Actualized? UTILITIES - UT Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, A: INS - simultaneous install - one process, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), P: KIT - prefabricated bath and kitchen Supports these other Qualities: Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: The main intent in prefabricating the plumbing core was to minimize expensive, skilled union field labor. As far as is known, plumbing was actually installed in a conventional manner for the built Usonian Automatic projects. "In fact, these factory ‐made appurtenance systems were not available, and pipes and wires were poured into floor and roof slabs ‐ occasionally resulting in problems" - Leonard J. Morse-Fortier. 2-110 "The new practice made all furnishings so far as possible (certainly the electric lighting and heating systems) integral parts of the architecture" - FLW, 1954. Radiant heat was typically installed in the cast concrete floor for the Usonian houses. A such it did not impact the textile block walls and roof directly. Wright's opinion was that if the floor was warm, then wall insulation was not necessary for comfort. For him it was more important to preserve the integrity and simplicity of his design, albeit at the expense of a bit more heating oil. Later, for the Usonian Automatics, rigid insulation was added under the interior wood paneling (MUL - multi-material option). U: RAH - radiant heat integrated This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? UTILITIES - UT P: INT - complete building system, all Integrated, I: SIM - Simplicity, Cm: THE - thermal mass effect, De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty Supports these other Qualities: P: INT - complete building system, all Integrated Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Embedded radiant heating eliminated unsightly radiators, ductwork and registers, for a clean, integrated appearance. 2-111 "Light fixtures will be installed as one complete unit, with a screwdriver" - Rosalie Tonkens, quoting Wright. "I had to devise electrical lighting for that house that could go into it ready made, where the owner could turn up a connection and that would be all because the union wouldn't work on it" - FLW, 1954. Eric Lloyd Wright: "My grandfather had also hoped that that the Automatics could have exterior sash and doors, all prebuilt in various sizes for easy installation. This would also apply to a track lighting system." U: TRK - track lighting This quality affects: Block Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Identified Barriers / Problems / Challenges: Actualized? UTILITIES - UT A: STR - streamlined assembly, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, P: FAC - factory mass production, U: ELE - electrical prefabricated, De: FUR - furnishings match block module, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), P: PDM - Precision design and manufacture, A: BUI - simple to build Supports these other Qualities: Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor Main supported Quality: Importance Tier: 5 Unproven Claim? Analysis: Wright invented a track lighting system for the Jacobs House in 1936. The intention was to eliminate electrical boxes and concealed wiring in favor of a manufactured solution that reduced skilled on-site union labor (UNS - minimize skilled field labor). 2-112 Dissertation of Edward D Losch, for the Degree Ph.D. in Architecture Chapter 3 The Challenges, Problems and Barriers School of Architecture Department of Building Science University of Southern California 3-1 Introduction to Chapter 3 A comprehensive examination of the complete historical record was undertaken to identify the challenges, problems, and barriers to acceptance encountered with Frank Lloyd Wright’s textile block system. A computerized searchable and relational database was created using Microsoft Access to log and organize the data. Sources used include Wright’s collected writings, Taliesin correspondence, interviews with established Wright experts, site visits to many of the textile block buildings, and original drawings and specifications. Publications formed another major source of information about the textile block. These included books, journals, magazines, newspapers, web articles, and audio and video transcripts. Some of the Essential Qualities listed in Chapter 2 could be considered unproven or unrealized. These are shown as greyed out in the “Modified” Qualities map. One can see how certain Qualities were compromised due to the problems that were had with the system: 3-3 3-4 A total of 86 Challenges, Problems, or Barriers were found by the author. The following relationship diagram shows how the “Barriers to Acceptance” entries are linked to the other tables in the database: This relationship diagram shows how the Barriers to Acceptance table is related to the other tables in the database. The listed references were used to document the problem types that were encountered with the system. These were ranked into three categories. “Challenges” are problems that could reasonably be overcome using modern materials and methods. “Problems” are more serious and may or may not be overcome with current technology. “Barriers” are problems that do not have a good solution and are likely not solvable in the near future. In addition, a problem for the builder may not be an issue for the owner. There are at least four interests involved with the design and construction of a building. The author has labeled these interests as Manufacturer, Builder, Owner, and Society. It is up to the architect to balance the needs of these separate, often-competing interests. The Manufacturer would be the entity responsible for casting and curing the blocks to the architect’s specification, and ensuring that they are delivered to the job-site in a timely manner. They are concerned with the Categories of Cost, Design, Durability, and Prefabrication. The Builder is responsible for erecting the building and coordinating all trades. They are concerned with the Categories of Cost, Design, Structure, and Utilities. The Owner, on the other hand, is concerned with Comfort, Cost, Design, Durability, Integrity, and Structure. 3-5 Society also has a stake in the outcome. It is in Society’s interest that the project be sustainable, and not wasteful of resources. It should not negatively impact the neighbors. The project should be an asset to the community, beautiful, not ugly. It should be structurally sound. In Wright’s opinion, it should support Democratic ideals and the Freedom of the Individual. Society is a Category in itself, but is also concerned with the other Categories of Cost, Design, Durability, Integrity, and Structure. Each Challenge, Problem, or Barrier listed in the database has a checklist marking which of the above four interests are affected by a particular issue. Lastly, any Variations or Alternative Methods that were used or proposed in an attempt to overcome each Barrier are noted. These Variations are listed and analyzed in Chapter 4. A note regarding references: Complete references to the quotes in the database entries for this chapter can be found in Appendix E. For example, under the Design Category of “Not traditional/vernacular”, there is a quote by Charles Lockwood. In the table titled “Identified Challenges, Problems and Barriers Found in Publications and Interviews”, found in Appendix E, under “De: Not traditional/vernacular”, Lockwood’s quote can be found listed alphabetically by Author with the date, the publication name, and page number. (The database itself contains the column and line number of the quote as well.) The author, date and publication name can then be used in Appendix G, an Annotated Bibliography, to look up the complete reference information, with ISBN, etc. 3-6 A: "One-process" trade integration issues As noted in INS - simultaneous install: "Here is a process that makes of the mechanics of concrete building a mono ‐material and mono ‐method affair instead of the usual complex quarreling aggregation of processes and materials" ‐ FLW, 1927. At it's heart, this was an organic principle - a building should "grow" uniformly and elegantly from its foundation. "The wreck here at the Arizona ‐Biltmore is due directly to the lack of the architect's central and final authority in matters of construction. And the plumbing, heating and lighting systems in that building were independent elements that could interfere with and wreck the building wherever and whenever they pleased ‐ instead of being worked into it as an integral part of the architect's design ‐ And they did wreck it with consuming waste as may be seen." - FLW to A. J. Chandler, 9/27/1928. In reality, "textile blocks do not comfortably accommodate utilities. Each problem had to be worked out individually, sometimes at the drawing stage, sometimes during construction." - Edgar Tafel, Taliesin Associate. "Wright's concept of integrating and unifying trades to save money ran counter to the ultimate direction that American building was to take...The development of modern construction has encouraged the development of independent systems and trades." - Edward R. Ford. The construction industry has moved away from anything resembling "one-process." This trend cannot be easily worked around or solved with new technology. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly A: "One-process" walls thwart code inspections Installing both the inner and outer concrete wythes at the same time greatly complicated code inspections. There was no practical way to inspect plumbing and electrical work, as such needed to be installed while the wall was erected. Standard practice was to inspect the utility runs before the inner face of the wall was installed. Wright's "One Process" ideal was touted as an advantage, but in reality, it made the construction process less efficient. The architect has little control over the code inspection process. The only alternative is to build where codes are lax or non-existent. This would greatly limit the usefulness of the system. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly 3-7 A: Blocks must be chipped to accommodate ties "If double walls are planned, galvanized U ‐shaped wall tie ‐rods are set at each joint to anchor outer and inner block ‐walls to each other." - FLW, 1954. These ties were the source of much trouble. For the Freeman House, #2402, block corners were purposefully broken to accommodate the metal ties. Jeffrey Chusid estimated that only 10% of the specified ties were actually installed, due to these difficulties: "The ties across the wythes did not turn down into the cavity, but looped around the verticals; and required chipping away the inside corners of the block. Both these conditions made grouting the cavities much more difficult." Grout could then leak through the chipped corners into the wall cavity. This problem was effectively solved in 2011 for the FSC Faculty House, #3922. Recesses were formed in the block inner edges to fit specially designed stainless steel clips. A further improvement would be to use non- thermally conductive material for the clips. A: Eliminate metal ties, A: Custom wythe connectors Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly A: Complicated assembly "In actuality, the textile block system was less simple and less easy to put together than Mr. Wright had imagined…each house required more than thirty different molds for blocks…the system needed special corners, jambs, caps, bases, plain blocks, textured ones,…stained glass inserts, spandrels, half blocks…and column blocks." - Edgar Tafel, Taliesin Associate. "The diagrams belie the system's complexity. The construction of the Samuel and Harriett Freeman House, for instance, required seventy ‐six block types and nearly 10,000 blocks manufactured on ‐site with hand tools. Myriad details had to be resolved in their positioning, reinforcement, and weather sealing." - Richard Cleary. "In its simplest form the textile block system used by Wright was still very complex and efforts to make variations in the system adds yet another level of complexity." - Jeffrey M. Baker. "By careful examination of the [Freeman] house, seventy four variants have been identified ‐ seventy four different sizes, shapes, and designs of a unit intended to be a simple, easily replicable alternative to the complexities of traditional construction" "Because making and curing the blocks was a lengthy process, a crew member who encountered a condition that required a block type not found in the pile of blocks accumulating around the site couldn't just make one up on the spot and install it. Work would have to halt in that area and proceed somewhere else until the required blocks were ready. Complicating this process was the constant revision and modification taking place: the blocks being installed were not necessarily those shown on the drawings."- Jeffrey Chusid. Wright attempted to simplfy the system with his Usonian Automatic concept. He was still left with a level of complexity that was daunting. P: Block - one piece, P: Larger block size, A: Interlock joints - tongue and groove Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly 3-8 A: Contractor reticence, confusion Contractors had much trouble interpreting the plans due to the "unit system" and its lack of dimensions. "A letter from Lloyd says you are up against, primarily I think, the usual inability to grasp the block system…unless the block system is once grasped, no drawings would ever enable a builder to estimate the plans for the first time." - FLW to A. J. Chandler, 7/22/1929, regarding the San Marcos Project, #2704. "We are having difficulty in finding a contractor ‐ the ones we have approached have refused." - Dr. Toufic Kalil, 9/24/1955. "But Frank [FLW] had objected to any local contractors. 'They wouldn't even be able to read my plans,' he said." - Jenkin Lloyd Jones. "Contractors used to wish that Mr. Wright would put in regular dimensions like everybody else. Each time the men measured something, they had to go back to the beginning and start counting up grid units." - Edgar Tafel. Clients "Stood by later, aghast, as workmen took frequent and unconscionably long periods of time to study the blueprints." - Eugene R. Streich. "Our friends thought we were crazy…several carpenters actually walked off the job because they didn't like the look of it." - Samuel Freeman. "The logic of the textile block system, perfectly clear in Wright's own mind, was not readily embraced by local contractors." - Richard Cleary. "The reasons for its lack of success have less to do with its shortcomings than with the steady resistance of the building industry to anything other than the platform frame" - Edward R. Ford. Wright's radical system would still be difficult to understand by contractors. The industry has not embraced his modular approach and dimensionless drawings, although computer modeling could provide the detailed drawings that were too labor-intensive to produce individually. A: Apprentice on-site to guide the work, De: 3D CAD isometric drawings for each block course Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly A: Curved walls were difficult to assemble The Meyer House used standard concrete block for this reason: The house "was built of commercially ‐made cement blocks that could be laid out on a curve, which Mr. Wright's blocks could not do." Wright had developed curved textile block designs before and since, but could not convince any clients to build them. One project even used different radii, increasing the number of molds required (C.R. Pieper, 5515). The following constructed examples were simplified by using flat forms with beveled edges for a faceted face: Roux Library 4118, Winn House 4813, and Eppstein House 4905. The Ludd Spivey project (3911) would have used a similar system, though with a hollow single ‐wythe block. It is possible to cast blocks in a curved form. Such forms could be generated by CNC or 3D printing to different radii as well. They would more costly than orthagonal blocks. The horizontal reinforcing would have to be bent on a curve also. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly 3-9 A: Difficult to ship without damage One advantage of "bringing the factory to the house" (FLD) is eliminating the potential for damage during shipping. "Getting the blocks to Florida was another 'nightmare,' according to Uracius. The idea that concrete blocks could be fragile might not occur to most of us at first, but these blocks have sharp lines and angles" - Michael Maguire, regarding the FSC Faculty House, #3922. This problem should be solvable using modern packaging techniques. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly A: Dimensional tolerance / alignment issues "The big problem with the tightly stacked blocks was that it was hard to cast the blocks precisely. That is why I believe they switched to aluminum forms from wood after casting the Millard house. Even so, it was hard to get the precise measurements required and the block joints gained as they went along." Eric Lloyd Wright, Author interview on 5/14/2011. This issue hounded all the textile block projects, even the "do-it-yourself" Usonian Automatics: "When the concrete foundation for the Turkel house was built, the grade had to be accurate, within 3/16 inch in 138 feet. This tight precision works against the do-it-yourself construction that Wright had envisaged." - 1988, The Aberdeen Group. The Pratt's recalled laboriously "grinding off the high corners with a carborundum wheel" as there was "only 1/16 in. tolerance in 100 ft." Douglas M. Pratt: "I remember getting bored pretty quickly watching him [Eric Pratt] lay up walls, because he had to spend a lot of time carefully hand fitting each block. Trial fitting, then sanding a bit off or inserting a tiny sliver of toothpick to raise it. With no actual grout layer between the block edges, they had to be perfect." "Principal among these shortcomings were the many construction difficulties, of which most were attributable to the tight construction tolerances required by laying the blocks dry...Inevitably the resulting gaps between the blocks became drains through which the fluid grout leaked, staining the blocks and, possibly worse, leaving open pockets where there was no grout left to tie reinforcement and blocks together." - Leonard J. Morse- Fortier. Wright's solution to this problem was to use ever more precisely constructed molds. Even with theoretically perfect molds, there would still remain the problem of uneven concrete shrinkage, which is affected by many variables. A note for the Science and Cosmology Building [#5319] reads: "Dimensions for precast block shall be accurate to within 1/64 of an inch and shall not exceed given dimensions in any event. Block shall be cast from 1 part white cement to 3 parts fine, washed building sand." By contrast, current industry standards allow plus or minus 1/8" for units under 10' in size (PCI MNL 117, 1996, pg 162). A thin mortar or mastic could be used with 1/8" or 3/32" joints to provide sufficient tolerance. P: Casting - lease molds to clients, A: Grinding wheel, P: Casting - factory cast, A: Mortar bed - thin, A: Interlock joints - tongue and groove Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly 3-10 A: Glass inserts difficult to install "Tolerances for the [glass] inserts, nearly three ‐quarters of an inch thick, were very tight, and required specialized equipment...Installing the glass pieces is a laborious hand procedure." - Michael Maguire, regarding the FSC Faculty House, #3922. "It's really difficult on these bottom rows ‐ the way I've had to lie on the floor and constantly change positions so my hand could get in there" - Ken Berman. "There are no details included as to how the perforated blocks are installed. We believe glass is used, but how and where?" - Eric Pratt, 4/19/1949. "Replacements were made for some of the colored ‐glass pieces that had fallen out or been removed by souvenir hunters." - Randall M. MacDonald, regarding the Roux Library, #4118. The glass pieces could be inserted at the factory where the perforations are more accessible. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly A: Grout blocked, bars exposed "The grout was supposed to fill both the vertical and the horizontal channels, encapsulating the reinforcing rod. In practice, however, the grout did not flow throughout the network of channels. The grout stopped about one ‐ third of the way in many of the horizontal sections, leaving the center third unfilled. The flow may have been retarded by the build ‐up of trapped air. In addition, the horizontal rods positioned at the bottom of the channel were not uniformly encapsulated. The reinforcement in the vertical channels often lacked coverage due to overlapping rod and inter ‐wythe ties." - Terry S. Kreilick, regarding the Freeman House, #2402. "The wet grout typically failed to flow down the grooves between courses or the narrow cores within the blocks, resulting in pockets where the rebar remained exposed. As time passed, water found its way in, sometimes by soaking directly through the porous block. As the rebar rusted, it expanded. Because the grooves were so narrow, this was enough to dislodge the grout and crack the block, exploding the walls from within." - Aaron Hoover, regarding Florida Southern College, #3814. "Principal among these shortcomings were the many construction difficulties, of which most were attributable to the tight construction tolerances required by laying the blocks dry...Inevitably the resulting gaps between the blocks became drains through which the fluid grout leaked, staining the blocks and, possibly worse, leaving open pockets where there was no grout left to tie reinforcement and blocks together." - Leonard J. Morse-Fortier, regarding the Usonian Automatic system, # 5612. The problems involved with grouting the block channels have been well documented. It has been claimed that the early Los Angeles houses are now held together mainly by the creeping vines which have entered the crevices. That would be an organic solution, but not exactly what Wright intended. This problem is fixable and was solved in 2011 for the FSC Faculty House, #3922. Sufficient water, additives to improve flowability, and a grout pump would ensure that the grout fills all the cavities. Silicone caulk at the block joints would minimize grout leakage, even under pressure. A: Grout admixtures Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly 3-11 A: Grout leakage "Principal among these shortcomings were the many construction difficulties, of which most were attributable to the tight construction tolerances required by laying the blocks dry...Inevitably the resulting gaps between the blocks became drains through which the fluid grout leaked, staining the blocks and, possibly worse, leaving open pockets where there was no grout left to tie reinforcement and blocks together...Wright argued against using mortar as it required skilled labor, but in fact considerable skill was required to lay the blocks dry, especially to do so with enough precision to prevent leaking grout." - Leonard J. Morse-Fortier. Lloyd Wright was keenly aware of this problem with his father's block system. In a letter dated 6/26/1931, he argued that even a 1/32" gap in the textile block joint allowed significant grout to leak, staining the face of the blocks. He went on to propose an alternative design that he dubbed the "Unit Block." Lloyd's Unit Block had mortared joints, and it simplified casting by not requiring formed grout channels. The senior Wright shot down Lloyd's proposed system, pointing out that it would have significant thermal bridging. The block joints could be sealed with silicone caulk to minimize grout leakage. A: Seal joints with mud or clay, A: Interlock joints - tongue and groove, A: Sealant strip - flexible Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly A: Heavy / block weight Wright's designs were limited by the maximum weight of individual blocks. An important Essential Quality was that the blocks be light enough "for a man to reasonably lift" (LBS - unit weight). He used coffers and lightweight concrete for the Usonian Automatics in order to increase the basic block size to 12" by 24." Such a block would have weighed around 40 lbs. There is evidence that he would have preferred a 24" by 24' basic size, but was held back by the weight considerations. Usonian Automatic ceiling blocks were 24" square, but weighed from 200 to 240 lbs. This limitation was undoubtedly one of the reasons why Associate Arthur Pieper asked Wright for permission to substitute a wood framed roof for his own Usonian Automatic house (Pieper to FLW, 8/02/1952). The blocks used for the Kalamazoo area cooperative communities were smaller, 12" by 16." Each block weighed around 30 pounds. "Eric calculated at one time that we picked up and moved each of our 5,500 blocks at least five times before finally setting them into their places in the walls." - Pat Pratt, #4827. For the Usonian Automatic Tracy House, #5512, "the Tracys spent nearly a year, working five days a week, casting the eleven different types of blocks needed for their twelve ‐hundred ‐squarefoot house…Each backbreaking block weighed between 150 and 180 pounds." They were cast off ‐site and trucked to the construction site. Standard structural lightweight concrete is only around 25% lighter than normal weight concrete. Trying to go much lighter than that results in a significant reduction in strength and durability. The state of the art is still trying to catch up to Wright's vision. A: Concrete - lightweight, Du: Concrete - aerated Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly 3-12 A: Highly skilled precision work "Great care had to be taken in construction to ensure that block joints occurred on module, otherwise an incremental error soon built up, and the necessary fine tolerance was difficult to achieve in homemade blocks." - John Sergeant. "Wright argued against using mortar as it required skilled labor, but in fact considerable skill was required to lay the blocks dry, especially to do so with enough precision to prevent leaking grout." - Leonard J. Morse-Fortier. "The method, in other words, was impractical for the novice, and that meant skilled help and the costs shot up once again." - Brendan Gill, regarding the Benjamin Adelman House, #5101. "All aspects of the manufacturing process, from mold making to mixing to casting to curing to cleaning the surface of the finished block, required precision, skill, and consistency." - Jeffrey Chusid. "Although Wright had intended his Usonian Automatics to offer a way for a wide range of clients to build their own houses, construction with this technique is actually quite demanding...The system...depends on meeting very tight tolerances; each hand- made block must be the correct shape and size, and the assembly must be precise such that the whole system will properly bond together. As a result, relatively few Usonian Automatics were actually built." - Jeffrey Karl Ochsner. Regarding the Pratt House, #4827: "I remember getting bored pretty quickly watching him lay up walls, because he had to spend a lot of time carefully hand fitting each block. Trial fitting, then sanding a bit off or inserting a tiny sliver of toothpick to raise it. With no actual grout layer between the block edges, they had to be perfect." - Douglas M. Pratt. For the FSC Faculty House, #3922: "Some very precise, high ‐tech fabrication is coupled with expert attention to detail and the fine tuning skill that can only come from years of experience." Wright claimed that his textile block houses were so simple that "women and children" could build them. The concept may have been elegant and simple, but the execution turned out to be exceedingly complex. There is no evidence to suggest that fabricating and installing the textile block system has ever been fast or easy. The latest construction, that of the FSC Faculty House, #3922, in 2011 required highly skilled craftsmen to complete. P: Block - one piece, P: Larger block size, A: Grinding wheel, P: Casting - factory cast, A: Mortar bed - thin, A: Sealant strip - flexible Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly 3-13 A: Knowledgeable and experienced supervision required "The construction phase posed problems for almost all the owners. Sometimes the search for a sympathetic and competent contractor was difficult. Wright's foundation specifications and some of his roof support arrangements were considered dubious by authorities, delaying or denying the issuance of building permits. Mortgage sources were few and far between. Wright's organization helped where possible with advice on bids, or costs for special millwork. A senior staff apprentice was designated to superintend construction at the site." - Eugene R. Streich. "For the construction of each house, one of his apprentices would live at the site and would subcontract and coordinate the work." - Edward R. Ford. This was an issue for most of Wright's work, but especially so for the textile block system. These concerns were relayed to Wright in a 1954 letter from William Tracy (#5512): "Ray Brandes was quite concerned about 'ways and means.' He asked, 'How do you run wiring in walls like that; etc.?...Since no one in this area has had any experience with Usonian Concrete Blocks, we would very much appreciate information regarding their manufacture and erection." Wright was aware of this characteristic of his Usonian designs, proclaiming in 1954 that "this is true because a house of this type could not be well built and achieve its design except as an architect oversees the building." Not just any architect, but an "organic architect" (ORG - designed by an organic architect). The number of people who have experience installing the textile block system can probably be counted in the single digits. For a mass-produced, economical system, there need to be many qualified supervisors available. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly 3-14 A: Labor-intensive "In fact, Wright's tendency to sacrifice practical considerations to aesthetic ones led him to admit that the labor needed for his singular concrete block system made it too expensive for affordable housing." - Victoria Newhouse. "The ingenuity of Wright's block system conceals serious faults. First of all since the blocks were made individually at the site, construction became a time ‐consuming, demanding exercise." - Jim Tice. "Nothing could have been less mechanized or less technically efficient than the making and installation of blocks, of double ‐walled tiles, especially as the process was not under shop supervision but handled by unskilled labor in the field: it was an ancient process...Like laying a brick wall, the process was indeed a continuation of medieval labor using ancient construction methods." - Donald Leslie Johnson. It is telling that the textile block system was not used for additions to the Arizona Biltmore hotel, even though there was every reason to do so, as it was imperative to match the look of the historic building. For the Biltmore 1975 Paradise Wing addition "The panels would be erected in large sections at obvious savings in both time and labor compared with hand manufacture and laying of individual block units." - 1979, The Aberdeen Group. Wright Associate Aaron Green proposed something similar for the Kundert Medical Clinic, #5614. He asked for permission to cast the single-wythe glazed walls flat, then tilt them into place: "[I] believe that we can do that much more economically and efficiently if the 'grid' of glass units can be cast in large panels…and raised into place…Would such a technique be satisfactory with you?" Wright had a one-word response, "No." A possible reason for the refusal was that a tilt-up process would not have been as organic as assembling the blocks individually in-place, growing the wall from the base. He may also have been concerned about visible seams giving away the construction shortcut, violating the Quality of Integrity (HON - honest expression). Radical changes would be required to significantly reduce labor. So much so, that the system would probably not be recognizable as "textile block" and would no longer satisfy many of the Essential Qualities. P: Casting - factory cast Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly A: Much field cutting and fitting required There were two aspects to this problem. One was the precision trimming and fitting required to keep the block spacing on the unit module and also to minimize grout leakage. The other was the laborious field cutting necessary to fit blocks around steel beams and posts, as well as piping and electrical boxes. "Stacking the blocks up from the floor required expert precision of course, but it might seem easy compared to the complex cutting and fitting needed now to 'wrap' them around all of the steel beams." - Michael Maguire, regarding the FSC Faculty House, #3922. Advance planning and adequate lead time would minimize the field cutting. Adding a mortar joint would increase tolerance and greatly reduce trimming to fit. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly 3-15 A: Slow construction pace "2 years to build Pappas hs." It was a typical comment, expressed by owners and builders, that the construction process was much too slow. These buildings typically took from two to four years to complete. Noted, part of this can be attributed to encouraging owners to attempt to "do it yourself." The Pappas' had their loan pulled due to lack of progress on construction. A second contractor quit due to the slow pace. Regarding the Tracy House, #5512: "They were often neither low ‐cost nor particularly easy to build. Time consuming and complicated, they frequently strained the stamina and patience of their owners." - Dixie Legler. The Usonian Automatics had a machine-made look to them, but were actually painstakingly hand-crafted prototypes. The "automatic" part had yet to be fulfilled. The process was also slow when owners did not contribute their own labor. According to Tonkens House owner Beverly Tonkens Vangrov, Wright claimed that "All I need is inexpensive labor, a ball of twine, and a cement mixer...[Suddenly it's] 17 months later, the cost overruns, and you could not build it yourself." "The ingenuity of Wright's block system conceals serious faults. First of all since the blocks were made individually at the site, construction became a time ‐consuming, demanding exercise." - Jim Tice. Wright acknowledges as such in a letter to Charles Ennis (#2401): "The work is slower than I anticipated; the city has interfered in points wholly unnecessarily, arbitrarily adding some to costs." "It is doubful that Wright sincerely believed his textile block/tile system could compete with industry…Nonetheless Wright's words in promotion of his system always conveyed the impression that it was not only cheaper but more quickly built...Like laying a brick wall, the process was indeed a continuation of medieval labor using ancient construction methods." - Donald Leslie Johnson. The organic nature of the block and its assembly process made for slow progress compared to conventional construction. Du: Mix design - admixtures, P: Block - one piece, P: Larger block size, P: Casting - factory cast, A: Sealant strip - flexible, De: Computerized Usonian design language Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly A: Staging required for roof The Usonian Automatic required staging or shoring to assemble the blocks used for the ceiling. These blocks weighed around 200 lbs. each, which is much greater than "a man can lift." (See LBS - unit weight.) It did not seem practical to cart these up to the roof level, but it was essential to achieving Wright's mono-material vision (MOM - Mono-Material). Precasting pretensioned concrete planks that can span from wall to wall will eliminate shoring. This process has become an industry standard. St: Precast-pretensioned floor planks, St: Post-tensioned reinforcing Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly 3-16 A: Too many joints Donald Leslie Johnson compares Wright's textile block system to a modestly sized precast concrete wall, 4' by 8': “It is useful to compare Wright’s technology with Atterbury’s rather than Morrill’s. If we assume an Atterbury prefabricated wall panel is, say, four by eight feet, it has four edges. If we assume Wright’s textile block to be one foot square, then 64 (32 each side of a wall) are required to match one of Atterbury’s panels. Each of Wright’s blocks need to be cast and has four edges. With 64 blocks, there are 256 construction joints, therefore thousands of joints for each building, each joint a serious technical, constructional and installation problem.” The small module, with its multitude of joints, was an essential organic feature of the system. Wright refused to allow the precasting of full wall units, which would have greatly reduced field labor as well as the number of joints. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly A: Wall bracing required "A single withe could carry only its dead load, no live or bending or point bearing load, and had to be laid vertically with great care. The length to width ratio for columns can generally apply to walls. These limitations were surely obvious to people who like the Wrights loved brick wall construction." - Donald Leslie Johnson. Construction photos of many projects show wood bracing stabilizing walls as they are being constructed. This was especially important for the single wythe walls, which were exceedingly slender. The wall did not have any stability until the joints were grouted and the grout had set. This worked against "doing it yourself," without an experienced foreman on-site to guide every step of the work. A wider, single-piece sandwich block with integral insulation would be more stable and reduce or eliminate bracing. P: Block - one piece, A: Make blocks thicker Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Assembly 3-17 Cm: Insulation, lack of The thermal performance of the textile block houses was compromised by a lack of insulation. Jenkin Lloyd Jones complained about the Lloyd Jones House, #2902, that "in the hot summer the stones soaked up the heat all day and radiated it at night, a veritable fireless cooker." Jeffrey Chusid compared staying in the Freeman House, #2402, on hot days to living in a brick oven. Even the Usonian Automatic "falls short, too, of meeting the energy conservation standards of today’s home ‐building industry. Furring strips and insulation could be applied to the interior side of the walls, but this would cover the decorative block surfaces." - The Aberdeen Group, 1988. The expansive windows walls of the Usonian Automatics had no thermal break and used single pane glass. It took a lot of heating oil to keep these walls from frosting up in the winter. "Only one thickness of block was used for the walls [of the Arthur Pieper House]. With no insulation in either the roof or the walls, the house became easily overheated in the blazing Arizona sun" - Dixie Legler. The air cavity will not insulate as Wright claimed if convection currents develop within the cavity. The currents will actually accelerate heat loss. No flashing or weep holes were provided to drain water in the cavity. The exposed reinforcing in the cavity is then unprotected from rust. "We learned that these spaces between the walls were not true dead air spaces, because they were large enough to allow air to circulate inside them, thus cooling the inner walls. Eric [Pratt] found it necessary to back and fill all the spaces between the double walls with granulated styrofoam…This improved the insulation of the walls and kept it warmer inside." - Pat Pratt. According to a University of Southern California study of the Freeman House, #2402: "The high mass walls do not make up for the complete lack of insulation (the air gap is simply not sufficient) and the single pane windows lose more heat than they gain. The computer simulations imply that the buildings could be kept comfortable with less than half the energy if there were insulation in the air gap and double pane low ‐E windows." It would not be difficult to add insulation between the block wythes. The resulting wall would have superior thermal and noise blocking properties. P: Insulation - integral with block, Cm: Insulation - foamed-in-place, P: Block - one piece, Cm: Insulation - granulated styrofoam fill, Cm: Insulation - Single wythe block with insulated inner face, Cm: Insulation - rigid foam sandwich, Cm: Insulation - insulating concrete between wythes Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Comfort Cm: Noise transmission In 1931, Lloyd Wright wrote a letter critical of his father's textile block system, claiming it was a potential noise conductor, due to the many steel ties required between wythes. There is no record that this author could find of any complaints regarding noise transmission. Several owners have commented on how quiet their house was. Noise transmission does not appear to have been an issue with the textile block, despite Lloyd Wright's concern. Adding insulation would only improve its performance in this regard. P: Insulation - integral with block, Cm: Insulation - foamed-in-place Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Comfort 3-18 Cm: Vermin in block cavities Regarding the Freeman House, #2402: "In fact it turned out to be an ideal system for transporting subterranean termites to every piece of wood in a house, providing dark, dank, continuous cavities as built." - Jeffrey Chusid. Regarding the Pratt House, #4827: "We also always had mice in the walls of the house. It was very common to hear mice running back and forth between the blocks, or to see one run through the decorative windows in the kitchen while washing dishes." - Lise K. Pratt. Regarding Florida Southenr College, #3814: "Squirrels zip in and out of buildings through crumbling textile block walls." - Amy Keller. Filling the wall cavities with foamed rigid insulation would do much to eliminate these vermin highways. P: Insulation - integral with block, Cm: Insulation - foamed-in-place, P: Block - one piece, A: Sealant strip - flexible Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Comfort 3-19 Cs: Expensive to construct Wright's projects typically cost at least twice the budgeted amount to construct, and the textile block buildings were no exception. (See the Project Cost table for a comparison of the budgeted price versus the actual cost for selected projects.) Costs would have been even higher if short-cuts had not been taken which deleteriously affected long-term durability. The Florida Southern College Faculty House, #3922, is a good example of a textile block building constructed properly, to modern codes. The college has not released construction cost figures, but over two million dollars was raised in 2011 to construct this 1800 sq. ft. building and to remodel a house next door. According to architect Jeff Baker: "The costs were high because the team tooled up from scratch for one little building. Six generations of block designs were required before the right one was found. Once the system is in-place, the incremental cost to do additional buildings should be economical. It can be compared to the Ford Model T." Wright never got beyond the prototype stage either. According to Eric Lloyd Wright: "Grouting the joints between blocks (as opposed to filling them with mortar) drove the costs above a competitive level...the actual number of block types required in a single building vastly exceeded the concept of a mass ‐produced standard unit." "Wright was as unrealistic about price as he was in blaming unions for inflated construction costs, for the Adelman residence came in at $25,000, four to five times higher than he had hoped in 1951. Subsequent Automatics were even more expensive if more attractive; and although the hollow block system held potential for self ‐builders and cost reduction, it was beyond the reach of most of the middle class." - Robert C. Twombly. It is unlikely that textile block construction could ever be considered to be cheap. Even with the theoretical benefit of efficient factory mass production, the field assembly process would still be labor intensive, highly- skilled, precision work. Using modern methods and materials would not help with cost either, as these usually involve additional steps and pricier materials than used with the historical method. The building would be more durable, but it would be even more expensive to construct. P: Casting - lease molds to clients, P: Casting - factory cast, St: Fill joints with mortar, De: Use blocks as accents only Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Cost 3-20 Cs: Lack of bank financing Overly restrictive federal government mortgage lending rules for banks prevented many of Wright's clients from getting loans. FHA evaluators rejected modern designs. For the 1938 FSC Faculty houses, #3922: "Correspondence between FHA administrators reveals that they were more concerned with the proposed wall system…The FHA administrators also disliked the houses' proposed 'extreme modernistic architecture'…Encouraged to build "a more conventional type of house that will be more in keeping with the surroundings of the neighborhood." - Dale Allen Gyure. FLW to Howard Myers, 1/10/1938: "Where is a better small house to come from while Government housing itself is only perpetuating the old stupidities?" "Wright's efforts to develop prefabricated 'Usonian' houses for a moderate ‐income community did not win FHA approval." - Gwendolyn Wright. Wright wrote a letter of protest to the FHA commissioner on January 25, 1950. It consisted of a single sentence: "What can be said to a 'bureau' with too many rules and no independent judgement?" The Winn's (#4813) Could not get financing for their block house due to "the general nature of the house." - 6/08/1950, R. D. Winn to FLW. According to Bette Pappas, #5516, "Mr Wright had told us that his name on a set of plans would never be an asset to any lending institution." Their loan was pulled due to lack of progress on construction. The Pratt's (#4827) complained that "Local banks were afraid to lend money for Mr. Wright's unusual construction methods." This is less of a barrier now, as building codes have become more of a barrier. Financing has become less of a barrier for unconventional designs. P: Casting - lease molds to clients Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Cost De: Adaptability - lack of "Because making and curing the blocks was a lengthy process, a crew member who encountered a condition that required a block type not found in the pile of blocks accumulating around the site couldn't just make one up on the spot and install it. Work would have to halt in that area and proceed somewhere else until the required blocks were ready. Complicating this process was the constant revision and modification taking place: the blocks being installed were not necessarily those shown on the drawings." - Jeffrey Chusid, regarding the Freeman House, #2402. It is only natural for there to be revisions and late-stage design changes on a project. Because of the long lead time required to cast and cure the concrete blocks, it was difficult to accommodate these changes in a timely fashion. It is very costly to stop work while waiting for the required blocks to be made. The precast concrete industry has similar issues. The design has to be locked down early to allow sufficient time for casting. It is inherently difficult to adapt to last-minute changes with this type of system. Pre-planning is essential. 3D modeling could be used to identify conflicts, interferences, and missing pieces prior to erection. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Design 3-21 De: Aversion to concrete - too stark Some felt that the Usonian Automatic system was "too odd or too bold." "Construction was simple and comparatively cheap, but unless relieved by trim or plantings, the Automatic was rather stark and mechanical, not unlike Bauhaus work on the exterior." - Robert C. Twombly. "Oh, no, not concrete block." - Bette Pappas (# 5516). Many Automatic designs were converted to other materials at the client's request - at least nine, by this author's count. Wright tried to convince clients that the Usonian concrete block would be cheaper, but often ran up against a brick wall, literally. The famous Los Angeles houses were not universally appreciated either: Quoting Charles Lockwood: "To most Angelenos, the textile block houses simply seemed strange." Lloyd Wright confided to his father in a letter dated 4/29/1940 that the wife of the new owner of the Ennis House (#2401) "is frightened by the place." It is difficult to sway public opinion and popular taste. Mass production requires mass demand - something that is not likely, at least initially, with the textile block. De: Computerized Usonian design language Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Design De: Fortress-like, forbidding appearance "They do appear as formidable bastioned retreats, in part at least as a result of the sense of weight imparted by the material, which has led many critics to comment on their forbidding character." - Grant Hildebrand. The monolithic appearance can be softened with landscaping. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Design 3-22 De: Module dimension limitations Trying to fit certain components to the unit system module can result in a less than optimal result - awkward rise and run dimensions for stair treads, for example. The Freeman House, #2402, has an 8" rise and 16" run to fit the 16 x 16 block module. This is too shallow, and not optimal ‐ a 7" rise by 10" run is the industry standard. The result is that the stair tower is larger and more expensive than it would otherwise need to be. This problem could be solved by cheating on the module where required (at the expense of the MOD - modular Quality). Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Design De: Needs a Champion After 1959, without Wright's guiding hand and promotional efforts, demand for the Usonian Automatic dried up. His last Automatic design was converted to conventional block after Wright's passing. A system such as this needs a "champion" to promote it. The benefits would not be immediately obvious to a potential client. "The first thing to do to get a Usonian house is to go to a Usonian architect!" "I doubt that this affair can be taught to anyone. It does not come from a university with some degree or other. You can not get it from books alone" - FLW, 1954. The client needed to be educated about its benefits (aside from Wright's unproven claims about affordability). Regarding Florida Southern College, #3814: "Even when, as in this case, owners are proud of their Wright legacy, they may not fully understand the essential qualities that make that heritage so significant" ‐ Richard Longstreth. "By 1960, after Spivey retired and Wright died, approximately three ‐quarters of the master plan had been completed. But with the project's original champions no longer available to push for its continued implementation, their great architectural experiment abruptly ended" ‐ Dale Allen Gyure. A Champion needs to have charisma, a following, and an evangelical fervor for the system. The benefits of the system were not immediately obvious, as it was not faster, better, or cheaper by standard metrics. De: Computerized Usonian design language Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Design 3-23 De: Not traditional / vernacular One needed to accept the distinctive appearance of a textile block building. To mimic vernacular styles would have been a great perversion of the system. It would not be good at that anyway, probably Wright's intention. This satisfied the Quality of RAD - radicality, but limited the system's appeal to the masses - something that was required to fuel mass production in the 1950's (an era where there was only one flavor of Coca-Cola). Wright ran into this brick wall quite a bit: "Wright's original plan called for concrete block construction, but local building codes required him to switch to brick, which is more in keeping with the facades of other commercial buildings in the area." - Mark A. Wilson, regarding the Kundert Medical Clinic, #5614. "Beaux Arts ‐trained architects laughed at such a common material being used for the facades and interior walls of costly houses...To most Angelenos, the textile block houses simply seemed strange." - Charles Lockwood. Regarding the Pratt House, #4827: "Once we started construction, word spread about 'those crazy people building crazy houses,' and every weekend a constant stream of cars drove up and down our road." - Pat Pratt. "When I was growing up, our houses seemed equal parts oddity or art, depending on the viewer." - Douglas M. Pratt. This is still a significant barrier to acceptance, possibly more than ever. See "Political issues - review committees." Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Design De: Technically and artistically challenging The guidance of a talented artist with a high level of organizational and technical skills is needed for the system to reach its full potential. "The skill of organization, technical and artistic, that is required of the architect, is extreme." - Douglas Haskell, 1928. "In its simplest form the textile block system used by Wright was still very complex and efforts to make variations in the system adds yet another level of complexity." - Jeffrey Baker. It is possible that talented individuals would be drawn to the challenge of designing within the constraints of the textile block. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Design 3-24 Du: Corrosion of reinforcing The Ennis House, #2401: "...severely damaged areas of the surface fabric typically indicate serious rusting of rebar in the block cores, made vulnerable by incomplete coverage by grout..." - Taliesin Fellows Newsletter, 4/15/2003. According to Jeffrey Chusid, The sledgehammering of the block forms for the Freeman House, # 2402, introduced hairline cracks, moisture entered blocks at the joints, corroding reinforcing (rust ‐jacking), which expanded and caused "ring fractures." Florida Southern College: "Over the years water has seeped into the wall cavities and caused the steel bars to rust, which in turn loosens the steel from the concrete block. As a result, the blocks have cracked." - Dale Allen Gyure. There are fewer instances recorded of reinforcing corrosion for the buildings constructed after around 1950. This could be either because these buildings are newer or because a more flowable grout mix was used, or both. The grout specification for the Turkel House, #5513: "Cement Grout to fill joints shall consist of a mixture of 1 part Portland Cement ASTM Spec. C150 Type 1 and 2 parts of clean sharp sand. Sufficient water shall be added so that mixture of cement and sand will flow readily through horizontal and vertical joints without separation of cement and aggregate." Using clay to seal the joints helped reduce leakage from a wetter grout. Nevertheless, there are numerous reports of the need for laborious cleaning of blocks with acid to remove grout stains. As with most of the durability issues, modern techniques can mitigate the potential for corrosion of the reinforcing. A: Seal joints with mud or clay, A: Sealant strip - flexible, 35, A: Grout pumped under pressure, A: Grout admixtures, A: Silicone seal at joints, Du: Stainless steel reinforcing, Du: Epoxy-coated reinforcing, Du: Reinforcing - move away from exterior joints, A: Grout vibrated Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability 3-25 Du: Cracking - non-structural Florida Southern College, #3814: "The decorative concrete blocks used to construct the buildings, which Wright said would 'be standing a thousand years into the future,' failed to live up to that prediction. Many of the blocks are cracking and disintegrating." - Dale Allen Gyure. "Over the years, some blocks have suffered deterioration, cracking, crumbling, spalling, and rusting reinforcement. John Figg listed the following causes: an environment with extreme temperature and humidity fluctuations, lack of course aggregate (5mm ‐20mm) in the mix, inadequate grading of the sand, less than optimum cement content, poor hand ‐compaction, insufficient curing, and chloride contamination. These have resulted in a porous, highly permeable, weak concrete lacking stability to withstand the climatic stresses." - Michael Ball. The later Usonian Automatics were also subject to cracking and spalling: "Numerous concrete blocks on the exterior of the [Turkel] house needed repair or replacement." - Jane King Hession. For the Florida Southern College Faculty House, #3922, completed in 2014, the blocks were wet-cast, setting in the form for two hours before removal. This ensured a more durable, crack-resistant block. Wet-casting requires more forms and a significantly longer lead time, however. Du: Mix design - more water, Du: Sealer - face, Du: Mix design - admixtures, P: Casting - factory cast, A: Sealant strip - flexible, Du: Mix design - more cement Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability Du: Deterioration from acid fog/rain The Freeman House, #2402: "The blocks on the south and east exterior elevations have weathered the most...Exposure to sun, acid rain, and smog have eroded much of the detail on the patterned textile blocks." - Terry Scott Kreilick. "Also important was the impact that acid rain and fog had on the blocks in Los Angeles; helping to create fully carbonated blocks with a compressive strength of as little as 50 psi. But losing the hydraulic press from the job (along with inadequate curing on site) was a big part of that problem, as well as the dry ‐tamp method." - Jeffrey Chusid. The Ennis House, #2401: "This problem [wall buckling] was due in large part to impurities in the crushed granite that was mixed to make the concrete, and partly due to air pollution, which was bad in Los Angeles even in the 1920s. A protective coating was applied to the walls in an attempt to solve this problem, which slowed down the decay of the textile blocks but did not stop it." - Mark A. Wilson. The dry cast blocks were extremely porous, absorbing moisture like a sponge. Acid rain therefore was able to penetrate and eat away at the tenuous bonds between cement and aggregate. More water and cement, a hydraulic press, or wet-casting would provide for a more durable block that would be better at standing up to an acidic environment. Du: Mix design - more water, Du: Sealer - face, Du: Casting - Dry face/wet backup, Du: Mix design - more cement Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability 3-26 Du: Efflorescence / streaks Staining due to efflorescence was a common problem. The dry-cast blocks allowed moisture penetration, which eventually caused the matrix to dissolve. Minerals could then leach out and stain the face of the block. "The blocks were affected by the weather…After a while, the exposed suface streaked like any concrete surface." - Edgar Tafel. Another source of staining was the use of contaminated water or aggregates. For the Jones House, #2902: "The dry ‐tamped blocks were another disappointment. Alkali from the Arkansas River sands began to appear in white streaks, and for several years the exterior had to be repeatedly washed with a weak solution of nitric acid before the discoloration ended." - Jenkin Lloyd Jones. For the Pratt House, #4827: "in retrospect it was a mistake to use the mineral ‐laden lake water, which later left a heavy white deposit on the blocks. In our case, after the walls were built, Eric [Pratt} spent countless hours of odious and dangerous work scrubbing each block with hydrochloric acid." - Pat Pratt. Owner Dorothy Eppstein (#4905) recalls scrubbing the blocks with a sponge and concentrated sulfuric acid to remove lime deposits left by the local lake water used for casting. Controlling the source of the water and aggregates would have solved this problem. Du: Import aggregate, P: Casting - wet cast, Du: Mix design - use demineralized water, Du: Wash sand, remove impurities Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability 3-27 Du: Face softness and friability "The blocks on the south and east exterior elevations [of the Ennis House] have weathered the most...Exposure to sun, acid rain, and smog have eroded much of the detail on the patterned textile blocks...The lean 1:4 ratio of cement to sand yielded extremely weak and porous blocks. The cement content was insufficient to bond all of the aggregate. The blocks are, therefore, more susceptible to deterioration due to weathering, water infiltration, and accelerated carbonation." - Terry Scott Kreilick. "Erosion of [Freeman House] block patterns and corners has occurred on nearly all of the exterior blocks in varying degrees due to the friable nature of the concrete mixture." - Benjamin McAlister. According to Jeffrey Chusid, Wright's specified 4:1 sand ‐cement ratio was too lean. 2:1 would be closer to the correct mix. "With low amounts of both water and cement, there is not enough paste to make a strong, durable block." Florida Southern College did not fare any better: "Over the years, some blocks have suffered deterioration, cracking, crumbling, spalling, and rusting reinforcement. John Figg listed the following causes: an environment with extreme temperature and humidity fluctuations, lack of course aggregate (5mm ‐20mm) in the mix, inadequate grading of the sand, less than optimum cement content, poor hand ‐compaction, insufficient curing, and chloride contamination. These have resulted in a porous, highly permeable, weak concrete lacking stability to withstand the climatic stresses." - Michael Ball. "Wright declared that the walls would 'be standing a thousand years into the future.' But according to Daniel Fowler, principal with LPF, they began to crumble within a few decades." - Dave Barista. More water and cement, a hydraulic press, or wet-casting would have provided for a more durable block. Du: Mix design - more water, Du: Mix design - admixtures, P: Casting - factory cast, Du: Mix design - more cement, Du: Curing - misting, Du: Curing - plastic sheet Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability 3-28 Du: Flashing / gutter issues Regarding gutters and downspouts: "Wright’s desire to hide those has been especially damaging to the life of the block houses." - Interview: Chusid, Jeffrey 2013 ‐07 ‐22. Wright specified flashing for the Freeman House, # 2402, but "none had been drawn or detailed and none was installed." - Jeffrey Chusid. As a consequence, leaks damaged floors and wall throughout the building. "'One day, Wright made a brief surprise inspection,' says Harriet Freeman. 'He was angry and started shouting, 'What have you done to my house?' We hadn't done anything, except to fix the leaking roof, and he had seen the narrow band of new metal flashing at the roofline.'" - Charles Lockwood. The Ennis House, #2401, suffered from Wright's battered wall detail. Each block was stepped slightly back from the one below it. This provided a shelf every 16" for water to sit and eventually penetrate the wall. "It subsequently was found that our builder had lied to me about the flashing under and within the coping walls" - FLW, regarding the Millard House, #2302. At Florida Southern College: "Numerous leaks in the roof forced the university to abandon part of the building. The cause, says Fowler, was failure in the old roof flashings where the roof intersects the block walls. 'The water would absorb through cracks in the block and then run down air space in between the walls,' says Fowler." - Dave Barista. Wright took great pains to hide or eliminate flashing, as a visible metal strip would have violated the Quality of mono-materiality (MOM). This Quality is in a higher tier (Tier 3) than "H2O - water penetration minimized" (Tier 6) and so would take precedence. There are ways to hide flashing, such as by sawcutting a groove at the top of the block wall for the flashing edge. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability 3-29 Du: Grout gaps in channels The grout didn't always flow sufficiently to horizontal joints or it leaked out, exposing reinforcing to the elements. If the grout is too wet, it leaks out of small gaps in the block joints, if it is too dry, it doesn't flow completely. This had serious consequences for the Los Angeles block houses: "Severely damaged areas of the surface fabric [of the Ennis House] typically indicate serious rusting of rebar in the block cores, made vulnerable by incomplete coverage by grout" - Taliesin Fellows Newsletter, 2003-04-15. The reinforcing was often inadequately covered with mortar or became easily exposed with uneven earth settlement. Today some [Freeman House] walls lack reinforcing altogether because of prolonged oxidation of the steel; they are held in place only by the binding strength of creeping vines which have entered the crevices." - Jim Tice. Later projects used a wetter grout combined with clay to seal the joints and prevent the grout from leaking. This was not totally successful, as much cleanup was often required after. This problem is fixable. As noted under "A: Grout blocked," the grout mix and grouting technique can be improved, minimizing gaps. Reinforcing can be epoxy-coated to further guard against corrosion. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability Du: Mix design too dry Wright specified a moisture content for the block concrete mix that was to be "no wetter than necessary to keep shape when squeezed by the hand." (San Marcos Specification, #2704) The reason was that it was necessary to turn the molds around every 90 seconds or so for economy, and the block had to hold its shape after form removal. As such, there was insufficient moisture for complete cement hydration. The partial hydration made for a weak, friable, porous block. According to Jeffrey Chusid, "With low amounts of both water and cement, there is not enough paste to make a strong, durable block...No amount of tamping will produce density in a concrete lacking sufficient water." This was not desirable for durability, but it looked aesthetically pleasing. Even so, "the intricate patterns of the blocks, cast in a dry, porous concrete, did not usually come out cleanly on the first pass through the mold. As many as four stampings might be necessary before the results could be called satisfactory." - Meryle Secrest. Too make the block durable, more water and cement could have been used, and the blocks left in the forms from several hours to overnight. This would have had two undesirable results however. First, the economy of the system, such as it was, depended on a quick mold turn-around. Many more molds would be required and progress would slow dramatically. Second, the resulting wet-cast block would have a smooth cement paste finish - not the natural, sandy look that Wright wanted. This could be remedied by an acid wash to remove the cement paste, but that would slow progress even further. Du: Mix design - more water, Du: Mix design - admixtures, P: Casting - factory cast, Du: Casting - Dry face/wet backup, Du: Mix design - more cement Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability 3-30 Du: Mix impurities, chlorides Deleterious material can be introduced when using local site materials. This was used by Wright to satisfy the Qualites of CLR - integral color, LOC - local / native materials, and VAR - natural variations. "Wright exploited both the variety possible in the color and texture of concrete, and the impurities introduced through the hand- made manufacturing process, to invest the seemingly repetitive nature of the house's construction with liveliness, and rhythm." - Jeffrey Chusid. "Wright insisted that sand from the actual [Millard House] site be used for the concrete mix, his argument being that the color and texture of the concrete would be indigenous to the site. However, this 'organic' approach had a major drawback: it was impossible to remove the impurities from the local sand, so the blocks proved unstable over time." - Marie Clayton. Chloride contamination of local aggregate contributed to the corrosion of reinforcing. Pigments can come close to matching the desired color without using contaminated site material. Wright used pigments for many of the later projects. Du: Wash sand, remove impurities Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability Du: No coarse aggregate According to researcher John Figg, coarse aggregate varying in size from 5mm-20mm was needed at Florida Southern College to provide a sufficiently dense block. The coarse particles interlock with the fines to ensure proper hydration and bonding of the cement. A variety of aggregate grain sizes should be specified. Du: Mix design - graded sand, Du: Mix design - add coarse aggregate Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability 3-31 Du: No expansion joints Typical masonry construction provides for expansion joints every 60 to 90 ft. along a wall. These are intended to relieve thermal stresses from temperature variations. Wright's textile block designs did not call for expansion joints, the absence of which could cause distress at corners and discontinuities for larger buildings. Judicious use of expansion joints should ameliorate this problem. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability Du: No weep holes "No flashing or weep holes were provided to drain water in the cavity. The exposed reinforcing in the cavity is then unprotected from rust." - Edward R. Ford. Adding rigid insulation and converting the wall from a cavity wall to a barrier wall would obviate the need for weep holes. Silicon caulk at the joints would relied on to block water infiltration, providing the required barrier. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability 3-32 Du: Not enough cement The early specifications for the grout used in the channels, such as for the San Marcos Project, #2704, called for a 1:3 ratio of cement to sand. The later Usonian Automatic Specification, #5612, Called for a 1:2 ratio. As such, the Automatics have fared better, with fewer grout gaps and less corrosion of the reinforcing. The San Marcos blocks were even worse, "1 cement to 5 desert sand with gravel up to 3/8" diameter." Experiments conducted by Benjamin McAlister at the University of Southern California determined that a 1:2 cement/sand ratio was necessary for the dry-cast blocks. A report by Wank Adams Slavin Associates in 1991 reported that the mixture of the block material for the Freeman House, #2402, “does not contain enough cement to coat and bond together the aggregate particles without leaving a substantial volume of interconnected voids.” Add more water and cement to the mix. Acid wash the face to remove the cement paste, which will expose some aggregate and provide the desired "grainy" look. Du: Mix design - more cement Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability Du: Repair is difficult and expensive "Due to the interwoven steel rods between the blocks, it will be quite difficult to replace blocks in the center of a wall without dismantling the entire wall." "Blocks are not able to be replaced because they are locked in on all four sides by the grouting and steel reinforcement that fills their channels. Blocks that were removed from the house had to be cut away, destroying the channel." Benjamin McAlister, regarding the Freeman House, #2402. The Usonian Automatics also had this problem: "Numerous concrete blocks on the exterior of the [Turkel] house needed repair or replacement." - Jane King Hession. Ideally, a highly modular system such as this should be repairable by swapping out the damaged module with a new one. Reinforcing could be post-tensioned and/or the block channel modified to allow block removal. This problem must be overcome to fully satisfy the Essential Quality of PER - permanence. St: Post-tensioned reinforcing, Du: Replace individual blocks easily, Du: Reinforcing - move away from exterior joints Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability 3-33 Du: Spalling / fractures "The Northridge earthquake of 1994 was extremely hard on the 70 ‐year ‐old, Frank Lloyd Wright designed Ennis ‐ Brown house in Los Angeles...Damage was severe to a visually significant portion of the exterior fabric of the house: almost 200 concrete textile blocks above the living room doors lost their faces, while significant portions of the entrance courtyard retaining wall block fell away and earth poured out through the exposed rusting warp and weft of two ‐way rebar. Cracks, bulges, and spalling had been plaguing the walls for years" - Taliesin Fellows Newsletter, 4/15/2003. "'In theory, the grout would flow down the vertical cells and when it hit the horizontal cells, it would fill them because it was so viscous,' says Fowler. 'There were quite a few areas where it did not cover the rebar, and moisture that absorbed through the porous block caused the rebar to rust and expand, which caused the block to spall.'" - Dave Barista, regarding Florida Southern College. Spalling is a serious life-safety issue, in that falling chunks of concrete can cause injury. The mix design specifications for the textile block buildings resulted in strong grout channels and weak blocks. That made it possible for pieces of the block to break away due to pressure from the grouted channels. Sometimes an entire face popped off, as noted above. Fiber reinforcing or other methods of reinforcing the block could greatly reduce the chance of spalling. 53, Du: Reinforcing - embed / encase in blocks Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability Du: Technological limitations Wright liked to use materials to the hilt. He sometimes seemed not to care if what he was asking was beyond the state of the art. He knew what he wanted and he expected industry to catch up. For example, for the Freeman House, "The on ‐site curing process was likely not sufficient and the blocks might have been better served by a steam curing process." - Benjamin McAlister. In 1929, correspondence flew back and forth between Wright and a Dutch glass manufacturer regarding casting glass textile blocks for the San Marcos Project, #2704. Also, for san Marcos, he proposed natural cement for the blocks. Actually an ancient material, it has seen increased use lately due to its fast setting time. He experimented with lightweight concrete, using it more or less successfully for the Usonian Automatic. Technology still has to catch up to Wright's vision in some areas, such as: Dry-cast durability, durable lightweight concrete, fast and economical casting, insulating concrete, natural cement for a faster set-time, and structural glass blocks. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability 3-34 Du: Ungraded sand Ungraded or evenly graded sand creates bigger air pockets and greater vapor permeability. "Wright used a sand mix that was evenly graded, allowing for bigger air pockets and greater vapor permeability. We learned 50 years later the importance of sand gradation. When sand includes more grain sizes, smaller grains fill in the interstices between larger ones. The new mix [for the FSC Faculty House, #3922] includes a wide range of sizes and a higher percentage of cement." - Ken Uracius. Use graded sand. Du: Mix design - graded sand Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability Du: Water absorption, porosity The dry-cast process provided a pleasing rough texture but the resulting surface was very pervious to moisture. Benjamin McAlister performed water absorption tests on the Freeman House (#2402) blocks at the University of Southern California: “It took 35 seconds for water to reach the inner face of the channel and 2 minutes for the water to reach the back side of the original block.” "Early product was dry cast, but exhibited susceptibility to water penetration and lacked fine detail. Stone & Lime switched to a wet cast process in which blocks were set for two hours in the forms before removal, and then acid ‐etched for an open ‐pore, dry ‐cast appearance." - Josephine Smith, regarding the FSC Faculty House, #3922. Use wet-casting and acid etch for a less pervious block surface. This will slow the casting process and greatly increase the number of molds required, however. Regular application of a penetrating siloxane sealer can also be effective. Du: Mix design - more water, Du: Sealer - face, Du: Mix design - admixtures, P: Casting - factory cast, Du: Casting - Dry face/wet backup, Du: Mix design - more cement Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability 3-35 Du: Water leaks, penetration There were roof flashing problems with the textile block houses, because Wright tried to hide the flashing with complicated details and builders sometimes left it out. "If double walls are planned, galvanized U ‐shaped wall tie ‐rods are set at each joint to anchor outer and inner block ‐walls to each other." - FLW, 1954. These metal ties provided a path for moisture migration to the interior wythe of the blocks. In the earlier houses, the ties were not galvanized and tended to rust. FLW in 1927: "Some unnecessary trouble was experienced in making the buildings waterproof. All the difficulties met with were due to poor workmanship and not to the nature of the scheme." Regarding FSC, #3814: "Over the years water has seeped into the wall cavities and caused the steel bars to rust, which in turn loosens the steel from the concrete block. As a result, the blocks have cracked." - Dale Allen Gyure. Regarding the FSC, Polk County Science and Cosmology Building, #5319: "Numerous leaks in the roof forced the university to abandon part of the building. The cause, says Fowler, was failure in the old roof flashings where the roof intersects the block walls. 'The water would absorb through cracks in the block and then run down air space in between the walls'" - Dave Barista. "The weakest part of the system was water penetration through the wall. One thing I was thinking of, and others as well, was making the blocks with foam insulation or insulating concrete." - Eric Lloyd Wright Interview, 2011-05-14. Foamed rigid insulation would do much to block moisture intrusion. A vapor barrier between the wythes would also help. Cm: Insulation - foamed-in-place, Du: Mix design - more water, Du: Sealer - face, Du: Mix design - admixtures, P: Larger block size, A: Seal joints with mud or clay, P: Casting - factory cast, A: Interlock joints - tongue and groove, A: Sealant strip - flexible, Du: Casting - Dry face/wet backup, Du: Mix design - more cement, Du: Curing - misting, Du: Curing - plastic sheet Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Durability 3-36 En: Not energy efficient "It is unfortunately clear that, although the Freeman House [#2402] is a beautiful building on a fantastic site, it is not an energy efficient or environmentally sustainable building, as designed and executed by Frank Lloyd Wright...The high mass walls do not make up for the complete lack of insulation (the air gap is simply not sufficient) and the single pane windows lose more heat than they gain. The computer simulations imply that the buildings could be kept comfortable with less than half the energy if there were insulation in the air gap and double pane low-e windows." - Marc Shiler, USC. One characteristic of Wright's Usonian house designs was that they took more energy to heat. This was partly because of the premium Wright put on blurring the distinction between indoors and out. That meant large uninsulated glazed areas were the norm. In an era of plentiful and cheap fossil fuels, he justified the cost of extra heating oil as a small price to pay for the beauty and harmony of his designs. It would not be hard to make the textile block energy efficient by adding insulation and double-glazing. There would then be the added significant benefit of the high thermal mass of the system. P: Insulation - integral with block, Cm: Insulation - foamed-in-place, Cm: Glass - double glazing, low-E Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Environment P: Casting - binding during form stripping "Mold edges were tapered 2.5 degrees to augment stripping." - Josephine Smith, regarding the FSC Faculty House, #3922. A draft is required on all raised areas for successful block removal from the mold. A drawback is that shadows and relief are not as crisp. P: Casting - Teflon composite plastic inserts, P: Casting - Taper mold edges Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication 3-37 P: Casting - cracks and stress fractures during cure Using natural cement can result in too fast of a set time, which can create stress fractures in the block. Additives were added to slow down the set time for Project 3922. A retarder can be added to the natural cement mix to slow set time, reducing stress fractures. Use controlled curing, submerged under water to further minimize the risk of cracking. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication P: Casting - inconsistent results "In practice, this system [using local sand] created a number of problems. The color and texture of the blocks did not always end up matching that of the sand at the site, and impurities in the local sand led to deterioration of some of the concrete blocks over time." - Mark A. Wilson, regarding the Millard House. It was difficult to achieve a desired color or texture consistently, especially if attempting to use site material. For the Florida Southern College Seminar Buildings, #4031, many sample blocks were cast before an acceptable mix was found. Due to the time and expense involved in creating the rejected samples, they were actually incorporated in the building. Modern materials and methods have not made this much easier. According to Architect Jeffrey Baker, "Six generations of block designs were required before the right one was found [for the 2012 FSC Faculty Center, # 3922]." With time, it is expected that the trial-and-error process would give way to more desirable and consistent results in the areas of color and texture. Currently this is more of an art than a science. P: Casting - factory cast Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication 3-38 P: Casting - lack of fine face detail The face of dry cast blocks often are lacking in fine detail. Edges would not always be sharp, and it was difficult to press the stiff mix into every nook and cranny. Wet casting the blocks and then acid etching the face works as a means of preserving detail while maintaining a grainy, stone-like texture. This adds significantly to the cost and schedule compared to the dry-casting method, however. P: Casting - wet cast Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication P: Casting - molds too complex The grout channels, perforations and corners greatly complicated block casting. The dry-cast mix made it very difficult to fill the mold completely. "His [Wright's] various concrete block designs…required in their production a considerable amount of handwork applied to a complex assortment of steps and movements beyond the capability of mechanization of the period." - Terry L. Patterson. "Technical demands began to dominate form; the ornamental patterns of the blocks became limited by the constraints of manufacturing on the site" - Anthony Alofsin. Regarding the Tonkens House, #5510: "The weakest point of the 'Usonian Automatics' is the block manufacturing. Controlling the mix, small aggregate, and especially making the form smaller than the intended size of the block are very important to the making of good block…We should have the molds made of cast aluminum, tested to make sure the blocks are the right size, and then lease the molds to the client...Especially bad is the corner perforated form. It is made up of fourteen pieces and takes seven operations to put the mold together and seven operations to break it down. We construct ten blocks of this type a day and I have to reject about half of them." - Eric Lloyd Wright, 1955-10-02. "Also, unlike the standard Besser block, which can be pushed out of the form, forming the grooves along the edges necessitated a hinged form which could be pulled apart." - Eric Lloyd Wright, 2011-05-14. A combination of improvements is needed to simplify block casting. Constructing molds from scratch for each house was not economical. Each metal mold cost $1200 in 1950's dollars to fabricate. Leasing the molds is an option. The corners needed to be simplified by using flat mitered blocks or even site- casting corners in-place. The formed grout channels remain a significant obstacle to the economical forming of the blocks. P: Casting - vibration table, P: Casting - factory cast, P: Casting - use cast metal molds, P: Casting - cast corner blocks in place Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication 3-39 P: Casting - Poor hand compaction Compaction of the dry-cast blocks by hand using a sledge hammer resulted in poor quality blocks. They had low compressive strength, were extremely porous, lacked fine detail and were subject to surface friability. Better results were achieved by using a mechanical press to compact the blocks. A press is heavy and expensive, better suited for use in a factory. Simplifying the mold pattern and adding drafts could help to reduce casting defects as well. P: Casting - pneumatic press Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication P: Casting - Slow pace, large lead time Significant lead time is required to cast the blocks prior to construction start, often a year or more. "There was nothing automatic about the blocks. Bill and Elizabeth [Tracy] made each wooden form and every concrete block, nearly 1700, by hand, working about a year." - Donald Leslie Johnson. "Because making and curing the blocks was a lengthy process, a crew member who encountered a condition that required a block type not found in the pile of blocks accumulating around the site couldn't just make one up on the spot and install it. Work would have to halt in that area and proceed somewhere else until the required blocks were ready. Complicating this process was the constant revision and modification taking place: the blocks being installed were not necessarily those shown on the drawings." - Jeffrey Chusid, regarding the Freeman House, #2402. Standardized molds, factory casting, and stocking standard blocks at building supply stores is necessary to significantly reduce project lead times. P: Casting - lease molds to clients, P: Casting - factory cast Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication 3-40 P: Casting - slow set time The mold turn-around time was too slow with the wet-cast process: "The molds, a combination of Teflon, ordinary wood, and mold ‐pouring plywood which is made for that purpose, were very expensive to make, and he needed a lot of blocks. So he would either have to make a lot of expensive molds or figure out a way to make the blocks quicker. The typical formula using Portland cement would require a full 24 hours to set, so at the rate of one block a day, it would have taken more than four years to make them all...This challenge was met with a natural cement product from France called Prompt, that sets in less than four hours compared to a day with Portland. It had all the properties they were looking for except that rather than setting too slowly, it was setting too fast, and additives were needed to slow it down and avoid stress fractures." - Michael Maguire, regarding the FSC Faculty House, #3922. The use of a fast-setting natural cement from France has promise, although the process would still be much slower than dry-casting. Du: Mix design - natural cement, P: Casting - use natural cement for faster set time Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication P: Complex and labor-intensive block casting "Several large houses can be considered impressive demonstrations of the techniques of the system; but in the smaller houses, some homeowners found the complex and time ‐consuming fabrication was anything but 'automatic.'" - Kathryn Smith. "The complex profiles of the textile block as well as face patterns where they occurred made mechanized production of the units difficult. Consequently, the units were handmade involving a complex process of assembly and disassembly of the molds, tamping, vibration, curing, and stacking." - Terry L. Patterson. "Labor intensive, the idea [client labor] was more honored in the breach than the observance: most clients hired others to make the blocks and build the house." - Margo Stipe. "The Biltmore's first addition, completed in February, 1976, avoided the inflationary labor costs of hand ‐casting and hand ‐laying Wright's custom designed blocks by using site ‐cast precast panels." Factory mass-production of the blocks in all their variety is essential to achieving any economy with the system. Alternately, the block patterns could be set into factory cast panels and trucked to the site, as was done for the Arizona Biltmore additions. Wright specifically rejected this option, however, considering the process to be inorganic and inauthentic. P: Casting - pneumatic press, P: Casting - factory cast, A: Precast or tilt-up panels Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication 3-41 P: Complicated corners and edges "Especially bad is the corner perforated form. It is made up of fourteen pieces and takes seven operations to put the mold together and seven operations to break it down. We construct ten blocks of this type a day and I have to reject about half of them." - Eric Lloyd Wright, 1955-10-02. "Wright still had to confront the conventional architectural problems of terminations, joints, and turning corners with building elements…when it came to an edge ‐ at floors, ceilings, and windows ‐ special blocks were needed. This required difficult design decisions of a technical nature, added to the number of molds and units required, and thus increased the cost of building and complexity of construction" - Anthony Alofsin. Corner and edge blocks were usually cast without coffers to simplify forming, although this made them heavier. Mitered corners were used on the Freeman House, #2402. According to Jeffrey Chusid, "The perimeter reinforcing channels for corner and field blocks do not align ‐ a construction challenge." The corners could be simplified by using flat mitered blocks or even site-casting corners in-place. Casting corners in place would not be easy and mitering has its own issues. Wright abandoned mitered blocks in favor of one-piece corner blocks after 1924's Freeman House. CNC milling or 3D printing holds promise for economically forming molds for the myriad special corner and edge conditions required. P: Miter corners Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication P: Inexperienced labor "the reality…is that it took more skill and effort to make perfect blocks than would be necessary with traditional construction materials and methods" - Benjamin McAlister. "None of the advantages, which the system was designed to have were had in the construction of these models. We had no organization. Prepared the moulds experimentally. Picked up 'Moyana' men in the Los Angeles street, and started them making and setting blocks ‐ the work consequently was roughly done and wasteful." FLW to A.N. Rebori, 1927-09-15. Regarding Florida Southern College, #3814: "He [Dr. Spivey] employs large groups of students who wish to earn their way through college for ramming the blocks, etc. This is all right and sound in principle I guess, except that these boys have not had adequate and competent supervision, having a tendency to pass imperfect blocks, to ram up imperfectly, etc." - Wesley Peters to FLW, 1939-11-01. Inexperienced labor would not be as much of an issue if the system was easy to build with, as Wright claimed. Unfortunately it took a high level of experience and skill to do it right. That, combined with the labor-intensive nature of the textile block casting and assembly process, makes it uneconomical wherever the cost of labor is high. P: Casting - factory cast Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication 3-42 P: Inflexibility of factory production "His [Wright's] various concrete block designs…required in their production a considerable amount of handwork applied to a complex assortment of steps and movements beyond the capability of mechanization of the period...The variety in pattern and volumetric composition in the Los Angeles block houses, at the Florida Southern College campus, and in the Usonian Automatic block house of the 1950s were achieved at some sacrifice of standardization…This indicates that at least one component of material essence (the repetitive nature of production) was compromised for artistic goals…the units as installed look far more repetitive than they actually are...the complex profiles of the textile block as well as face patterns where they occurred made mechanized production of the units difficult. Consequently, the units were handmade involving a complex process of assembly and disassembly of the molds, tamping, vibration, curing, and stacking." - Terry L. Patterson. "My grandfather could never get any companies interested in developing machinery to make the block. [Conversely,] that takes it away from the handcraft. These blocks were handcrafted." - Interview with Eric Lloyd Wright, 2011-05-14. "The four families involved tried to find commercial block makers to produce these blocks for us, but were unsuccessful in locating anyone who would tool up for a job involving only four houses…Unfortunately, Mr. Wright supplied us with no information on making the blocks, assuming that a block ‐ maker would do this." - Pat Pratt. Around the late 1940's, Wright became disillusioned about the direction factory production had taken. The "Artist" had been left out of the process, in his opinion. In response, he promoted the Usonian Automatic system as a way to "bring the factory to the house." This ran counter to the trend of minimizing expensive field work. A trend which continues to the present day. The complicated nature of textile block casting would require a significant investment in machinery to automate. This could only work if there is sufficient demand for the product - that is, a mass market. There is little indication that such a market can develop at the present time. P: Casting - lease molds to clients Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication 3-43 P: Mold fabrication cost too high Regarding the FSC Faculty House, #3922: "The molds, a combination of Teflon, ordinary wood, and mold ‐ pouring plywood which is made for that purpose, were very expensive to make, and he needed a lot of blocks. So he would either have to make a lot of expensive molds or figure out a way to make the blocks quicker. The typical formula using Portland cement would require a full 24 hours to set, so at the rate of one block a day, it would have taken more than four years to make them all." - Michael Maguire. "The requirement for large numbers of molds for Wright's various custom block systems...reveals that maximizing repetition was not a priority for him." - Terry L. Patterson. "Wright still had to confront the conventional architectural problems of terminations, joints, and turning corners with building elements…when it came to an edge ‐ at floors, ceilings, and windows ‐ special blocks were needed. This required difficult design decisions of a technical nature, added to the number of molds and units required, and thus increased the cost of building and complexity of construction." - Anthony Alofsin. Constructing molds from scratch for each house was not economical. Each metal mold cost $1200 in 1950's dollars to fabricate. Wright did not put a high priority on minimizing molds, in favor of design considerations. Clients complained about the high cost of the molds. It was only toward the end of Wright's life that molds became available for lease to clients. After Wright's passing in 1959, no one was able to take up the mantle and successfully champion his textile block system. That said, CNC milling or 3D printing holds promise for economically forming the molds required. P: Casting - lease molds to clients, P: Casting - factory cast, P: Casting - use natural cement for faster set time Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication 3-44 P: Non-standard parts Standard size windows and doors were not allowed by Wright if they violated his module. In a letter to Wright dated 2015-02-15, R.D Winn asks: "Twenty five hundred dollars could be saved in building costs of the house, if your techinician [sic] and yourself would be willing to revise to the extent of standard sizes for doors and windows." In a response dated 7/14/1952, Wright stated that they "cannot use standard size window and door frames…without spoiling the house." In January, 1955, Louis Frederick questioned the use of 2' wide doors for his Usonian Automatic house: "Doors shown appear to be two feet wide or are we reading plans wrong?" In May, 1955, Dorothy Turkel requests "standard size" windows and doors to save cost. Her house ended up with 19 non-standard doors that fit Wright's 2' module. Wright responded that "the standard fenestration for use with the Usonian Automatic construction is designed on the same unit system as the blocks themselves." The problem was that, although factory units could be had on a 24" module, adding the frame dimensions made the rough opening size a few inches greater than 24", which was outside the block module. One can see how that would be difficult to accomodate, requiring special block sizes - and the result wouldn't look right. In addition, returns on the blocks reduced the rough opening width by up to 1.5 inches. The returns went past the joint centerline because of the raised face of the block. Wright expected industry to conform to his standards, not vice-versa. Without mass appeal, the construction industry was not about to revise standards to fit Wright's experimental proposals. This meant that less- expensive factory-made windows and doors could not be used on the textile block houses. It became a barrier to affordability. P: Standard manufactured window and door sizes Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication 3-45 P: Precision molds required There was to be no "fudge factor" for dimensions. Wright's concept was that if the blocks could be manufactured with sufficient dimensional accuracy, they could be stacked tight with no space between them, which, in theory, would simplify the on-site building process. He stressed the importance of this in a 1928 telegram to Albert Chase McArthur regarding the Arizona Biltmore Hotel project: "PATTERN IDEAL FOR SYSTEM IF ACCURATE SIZE IN BLOCK UNIT CAN BE HAD ACCURATE SIZE NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE SUCCESS." In practice it was impossible to cast blocks with the required accuracy. Even if the molds were of the highest quality, variations in curing, humidity, temperature and age all caused the block sizes to alter or warp slightly in an unpredictable way. Even with a tight, factory controlled process, there will still be some size variations due to the very nature of concrete casting and curing. "The big problem with the tightly stacked blocks was that it was hard to cast the blocks precisely. That is why I believe they switched to aluminum forms from wood after casting the Millard house. Even so, it was hard to get the precise measurements required and the block joints gained as they went along." - Eric Lloyd Wright, 2011-05-14. The Usonian Automatic block had a tolerance of 1/64 in. (for the Kalil House, #5506). There is a way out of this problem, but only if Wright's requirement for precise placement of the blocks without any tolerance is abandoned (A: JTS - tight joints). Adding a small mortar or caulk joint would solve it. Good molds would still be required, but the laborious block trimming and shimming could be eliminated. A: Seal joints with mud or clay, P: Casting - factory cast, A: Mortar bed - thin, A: Sealant strip - flexible Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication P: Standard kept changing Before Wright developed the 12" by 24" Usonian Automatic, the standards for his textile block system would change from one project to the next. He was likely taking advantage of the prototype status of the system to experiment with different dimensions and shapes. Even after the Automatic he still felt the need to experiment. In 1955 he designed a house for C. R. Pieper (#5515) that had curved textile blocks with different radii. If the owner had proceeded, It would have been a difficult project to form, cast and assemble. The David Hunt Project, #5601, specified 18 inch square blocks. The first design for the Robert G. Walton House was to use 16" by 32" blocks. The problem with standardizion is that future innovation then becomes limited - and Wright did not like to limit himself. It may be that the optimal block size and aspect ratio (if there is one) has yet to be found. Precision molds were very expensive to fabricate. It was not feasible to cast new molds for every project. Leasing molds to clients would have helped make the projects more affordable, as long as the block specifications did not change from one project to the next. P: Casting - lease molds to clients Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication 3-46 P: Too many block types "In actuality, the textile block system was less simple and less easy to put together than Mr. Wright had imagined…each house required more than thirty different molds for blocks…the system needed special corners, jambs, caps, bases, plain blocks, textured ones,…stained glass inserts, spandrels, half blocks…and column blocks" - Edgar Tafel. "The variety in pattern and volumetric composition in the Los Angeles block houses, at the Florida Southern College campus, and in the Usonian Automatic block house of the 1950s were achieved at some sacrifice of standardization…This indicates that at least one component of material essence (the repetitive nature of production) was compromised for artistic goals...The requirement for large numbers of molds for Wright's various custom block systems...reveals that maximizing repetition was not a priority for him." - Terry L. Patterson. "Wright still had to confront the conventional architectural problems of terminations, joints, and turning corners with building elements…when it came to an edge ‐ at floors, ceilings, and windows ‐ special blocks were needed. This required difficult design decisions of a technical nature, added to the number of molds and units required, and thus increased the cost of building and complexity of construction." - Anthony Alofsin. "The actual number of block types required in a single building vastly exceeded the concept of a mass ‐produced standard unit" - Eric Lloyd Wright. "On the weekends, we made all of the specially ‐shaped blocks from molds that we built ourselves from hardwood. Eric spent countless hours at home studying the blueprints to determine how many of each kind of block we would need for our house. He arrived at a total of about 5,500." - Pat Pratt, regarding the Pratt House, #4827. Regarding the Usonian Automatic: "Standardization again proved to be elusive. In 'The Natural House', Wright claimed that nine different blocks would suffice, but the Pappas House required 25, and the Turkel House 37. Most of the houses also turned out to be just as expensive, if not more so, than comparable structures in timber or brick" - Edward R. Ford. Wright was not successful in reducing the number ot types of blocks, or "marks" required, even though that was a specific goal for his Usonian Automatic system. There is a minimum amount of complexity with any house, not even considering the special features Wright considered essential for his Usonian designs. Going to a smaller unit would reduce the textile block to a brick, so that was not an option. Going larger, to the size of precast wall units, would not have reduced the number of marks but may not have increased them by much either. In that case, one would then have a precast panel building - no longer textile block. P: Casting - lease molds to clients, De: Computerized Usonian design language, P: Miter corners, P: Casting - 3D printed molds, A: Precast or tilt-up panels Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication 3-47 P: Uneven curing "The blocks were made of various combinations of the decayed granite and sand and gravel of the sites. The mixture was not rich. Nor was it possible to cure the blocks in sufficient moisture. The blocks might well have been of better quality" - FLW, 1927. Inadequate curing made for a weak block that was susceptible to water absorption and friability. It was difficult to cure the blocks adequately and consistently when they were cast and cured at the building site. Factory casting is required to produce a durable block. The factory cannot "go to the house." P: Casting - factory cast Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication P: Warping / dimension changes during cure In a letter written on June 26, 1931, Lloyd Wright criticized his father's system as impossible to be produced with the precision required to prevent grout leakage, due to unpredictable dimensional changes during the curing process, no matter "how accurate and true the form." On March 16, 1950, David Weisblat wrote to Wright, complaining that "corner blocks have been warping during curing." He requests the option of using 45 deg. mitered blocks in lieu of one-piece corner blocks. Uneven curing can cause blocks to warp and no longer be square. This is a significant issue for the textile block assembly process, because no tolerance is provided. Block edges then need to be ground down or shimmed as required, a labor-intensive process. It is relatively easy to cast flat. Much more difficult to cast pieces with returns. In the precast industry, these are usually produced in two stages, which takes twice as much time. In any case, factory casting would reduce warping. Adding tolerance to the joints and allowing a thin mortar bed or a silicon caulk joint would mitigate the effect of dimensional variations. P: Casting - factory cast, A: Mortar bed - thin, P: Miter corners, A: Silicone seal at joints Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Prefabrication 3-48 So: Code acceptance / permits "The building codes…embody, of course, only what the previous generation knew or thought about building, and the ensuing generation finds the code a stumbling block" - FLW, 1939. "An architect is either on the winning side grasping the laws of nature or on the losing side, the side of dead data, the idee fixe, the rules of the Code...So Codes are the mental limitations of short men, short of experience, short of imagination, short of courage, short of common sense" - FLW, 1943. Wright believed that building codes stood in the way of humanized and flexible mass production: "The codes so far as I can see will have to die on the vine with the men who made them." They were "stubborn impediments to great work." Regarding the Arizona Biltmore, #2710: "The building authorities in Phoenix were skeptical of the structural soundness of the blocks and insisted upon far heavier steel framing of the entire building than Wright's specifications called for" - Brendan Gill. "Wright's original plan [for the Kundert Medical Clinic, #5614] called for concrete block construction, but local building codes required him to switch to brick, which is more in keeping with the facades of other commercial buildings in the area" - Mark A. Wilson. Regarding the Millard House, # 2302: "An earthquake ‐proof light construction but no permit could be issued because concrete got too big a preference" - FLW, 1953. It would be very difficult to satisfy structural code requirements in a high-seismic zone. Extensive destructive testing of full assemblies would be required. It is not apparent that the system as designed would pass such tests. Otherwise, the textile blocks would have to be demoted to a non-structural role. It is unfortunate that the San Marcos Project (#2704) was cancelled before any of the planned structural wall tests were performed. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Society 3-49 So: Conservative construction industry "Sometimes the search for a sympathetic and competent contractor was difficult. Wright's foundation specifications and some of his roof support arrangements were considered dubious by authorities, delaying or denying the issuance of building permits" - Eugene R. Streich. "Since Mr. Sunday owned a lumber ‐building supply business…he convinced Mr. Wright that he could build his house more economically if he used conventional materials such as brick and wood. Accordingly, Mr. Wright revised the working drawings, disregarding the Usonian Automatic drawings" - Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer. "Several carpenters actually walked off the job, because they didn't like the look of it. No one understood what Wright was trying to do." - Samuel Freeman, regarding the Freeman House, #2402. "The lack of success of this system, however, may have less to do with any inherent deficiencies than with the resistance of the American building industry to the use of anything other than the wood platform frame. The disparity between concept and performance in the textile block systems is symptomatic of a broader disparity between Wright's ideas and the conventions of American building ‐ and the conventions of American society." "Wright's concept of integrating and unifying trades to save money ran counter to the ultimate direction that American building was to take...The development of modern construction has encouraged the development of independent systems and trades" - Edward R. Ford. The direction that the construction industry has taken has run counter to the direction Wright intended for it. Wright insisted that his organic "one-process" idea was the way to go, while the industry has instead evolved into separate trades and systems that performed their work at different times. It is not possible to integrate the textile block into this format. It has to reside outside of it (see So: RAD - radical). Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Society So: Fossil fuels required for cement production The high temperatures required for cement production necessitates the use of fossil fuels, which is not sustainable and generates carbon dioxide emissions. "Another issue is the energy required to make cement. I’ve always wondered why they couldn’t use the tremendous heat from cement production to generate electricity – a form of cogeneration." - Eric Lloyd Wright, in an interview on 2011-05-14. It is possible to mitigate the effect of carbon dioxide production from the cement industry. The use of fly ash to reduce the quantity of cement has become a common method. Cogeneration is one idea. Sequestering is another. Natural cement holds promise due to the lower temperatures used to process it. That means renewable energy could be used to heat the clinker instead of fossil fuel. P: Casting - use natural cement for faster set time Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Society 3-50 So: Labor union opposition "If, owing to the false doctrines of artificial controls or of economic scarcity ‐ making and maintaining black markets now, they [the G.I.'s] are unable to build, why not throw natural roads open to immigration from countries where the skills have not been cut back by ignorant labor unions emulating still more ignorant employers?...[There is a] natural working law of supply and demand" - FLW, 1947. Wright believed that circumventing the labor unions was the key to housing affordability. His "factory goes to the house" concept relied on non-union field labor, while the construction industry trend was to use non-union labor in the factory in an attempt to minimize union field work. Wright still needed carpenters, cement masons and electricians to complete the textile block houses. The on- site casting and assembly of the textile blocks would have been considered to be under the purview of the cement mason's union, so there would have been conflict there. "Wright was as unrealistic about price as he was in blaming unions for inflated construction costs, for the Adelman residence [#5101] came in at $25,000, four to five times higher than he had hoped in 1951. Subsequent Automatics were even more expensive if more attractive; and although the hollow block system held potential for self ‐builders and cost reduction, it was beyond the reach of most of the middle class" - Robert C. Twombly. The trade unions were Wright's favorite scapegoats when costs inevitably soared for many of his projects. If he had been successful in attracting a manufacturer for the textile blocks, then the issue with the unions would have been manageable. P: Casting - factory cast Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Society So: Litigation - patent issues Wright repeated led clients to believe that his textile block system was patented. In actuality, the patent was not pursued for financial reasons. In fact, there was a patent granted to William E. Nelson on April 21, 1925 for a similar system, called the "Nel-Stone." Lloyd Wright had received a letter from Nelson's company in 1929 claiming patent infringement by Wright. Wright reassured him in a letter that it, and an earlier patent, would not be a problem. "Don't worry about the 'poured joint' patent.--As you know it has expired. Original patent granted in April 1915." Wright then goes on to point out that Nelson's Nelstone patent was granted in 1925, after the Los Angeles houses were constructed. More of concern, in 1930 Albert Chase McArthur received an infringement letter from Nelson regarding the textile block use for the Arizona Biltmore hotel, #2710. It was then revealed that Wright did not, in fact, have a patent on his system. Later Wright would argue "that patents were anathema in support of profiteers." - Donald Leslie Johnson. Any patent issues have long-since ceased being of concern. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Society 3-51 So: Market issues "There remain political and market ‐related issues that fall outside the scope of this work, and which raise doubts about the likelihood that the UABS [Usonian Automatic Building System] could be resurrected to solve the problem of affordable housing." - Leonard J. Morse-Fortier. "The disparity between concept and performance in the textile block systems is symptomatic of a broader disparity between Wright's ideas and the conventions of American building ‐ and the conventions of American society." - Edward R. Ford. "Life itself demands of Modern Architecture that the house of a man who knows what home is should have his own home his own way if we have any men left in that connection after F.H.A. is done trying to put them, all of them it can, into the case of a man who builds a home only to sell it. Our government forces the home ‐maker into the real ‐estate business if he wants a home at all." - FLW, 1954. Mortgage lenders were concerned about resale value. Wright custom-designed homes for the original owner's needs, whatever they might be. He rejected the concept of designing for resale. He would have particularly disdained speculative development, where the owner has not yet been determined. The textile block system was radical and expensive. Nowadays, most owners and lenders are very concerned about resale. The system can not achieve the size of market required for factory production without mass acceptance and adoption, and without mass production, it is too expensive to be adopted. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Society So: Political issues - review committees "The honesty and integrity of our building was lost on many Cincinnatti people, who, I think, felt threatened because our house did not conform to their mores" - Rosalie Tonkens, 1972-02-06. The rise of neighborhood architectural review committees can be an obstacle to innovative residential design. Often these "style police" are mainly interested in ensuring that a particular phony vernacular style be represented, to the exclusion of anything non-traditional. This attitude runs counter to Wright's Essential Quality of "DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice." Wright encouraged his clients to build well outside of the city and suburbs, in part to avoid such political interference (see EXU - exurban). It is not environmentally sound to build new detached housing out in the hinterlands. That means one has to deal with urban and suburban areas as they are. Most new development will be infill or adaptive re-use. The idyllic Doheny Ranch Project, #2104, will no longer fit in the Beverly Hills area site it was designed for, as that area has since been built up in a mish-mash of styles. In such an environment the organic, site-sensitive textile block would appear out of place, when in fact the opposite should be true. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Society 3-52 St: Cracking "Cracks, bulges, and spalling had been plaguing the [Ennis House] walls for years" - Taliesin Fellows Newsletter, 2003-04-15. "A regular pattern of cracking (ring fractures) could be seen in each block" - Jeffrey Chusid, regarding the Freeman House, #2402. The Usonian Automatics, which were built 30 years later, were plagued by cracking as well. In April, 1991, Leonard J. Morse-Fortier observed significant cracking in the roof and walls of the Kalil House, #5506, which caused leaks, efflorescence, corrosion and electrical problems. Prestressing the concrete roof will reduce the potential for cracking and sagging. Reinforcing the blocks, either through placing a mesh in the form, or adding fiber reinforcing to the concrete mix, will increase crack resistance and durability. P: Block - one piece, St: Precast-pretensioned floor planks, St: Post-tensioned reinforcing, P: Casting - fiber reinforcing Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Structure St: Deflection, buckling There were two types of deflection issues with the textile block buildings. One was buckling of walls due to earth pressure or even their own weight. The other was sagging of the concrete block roof used for the Usonian Automatics in the 1950's. A retaining wall built of textile blocks on the Ennis House, #2401, buckled before construction was even completed. "Despite its huge retaining wall, the house had serious structural problems even before construction was complete. Some of the concrete blocks cracked, and the lower sections of the walls buckled from the stress of the weight above them" - Mark A. Wilson. Other walls failed and fell away after the Northridge Earthquake in 1994. At the Freeman House, #2402, "the east wall of the garage bowed away from the rest of the structure" - Jeffrey Chusid. Single wythe walls were too slender for structural use: "A single withe could carry only its dead load, no live or bending or point bearing load, and had to be laid vertically with great care. The length to width ratio for columns can generally apply to walls." - Donald Leslie Johnson. For the Usonian Automatics, textile blocks were used as stay-in-place forms for a cast-in-place concrete roof. The falsework had to be set level so that the blocks would join properly without gaps for grout to leak through. That meant that the roof would sag when the falsework was removed, which could cause ponding and resultant further sag. Concrete's tendency to creep would cause this deflection to worsen over the years. This type of sag was observed by the author during a visit to the Turkel House, #5513, on November 17, 2011. Wall buckling could be prevented by using two wythes, or by using a one-piece textile block, where both wythes are combined with insulation in a sandwich. Adding returns can also strengthen the wall. For retaining earth, the block could provide facing for a conventional reinforced concrete retaining wall. Roof sag could be prevented or remedied by using post-tensioning. Precast, prestressed floor planks could also be used effectively. St: Precast-pretensioned floor planks, St: Post-tensioned reinforcing, St: Returns at openings, A: Make blocks thicker, A: Precast or tilt-up panels Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Structure 3-53 St: Engineer resistance "I found that in the effort to actually eliminate the post and beam in favor of structural continuity, that is to say, making the two things one thing instead of two separate things, I could get no help at all from regular engineers" - FLW, 1954. In the age of the slide rule, it was difficult for engineers to analyze Wright's unconventional structures. As a result, additional structure (post and beam) was often hidden within the textile block walls. Nowadays, computer-based structural analysis and design tools give the engineer significantly more freedom to experiment. On the other hand, building codes have become stricter and much more complicated. It would be extremely difficult to justify using the textile block for a load-bearing application in a high-seismic area. Wright had no problem with this in 1924 or even in 1955. So it can be said that this problem has gotten worse, not better. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Structure St: Grout tubes too hard/ block too soft The grout tubes are harder and denser than the blocks, causing blocks to fracture with movement. "The California block was considerably softer than the grout. In fact, if the grout and steel system had been continuous, that would have been the major structure for the houses, with the blocks acting as spacers, and taking some of the vertical loads. For the sake of the blocks, it was probably a good thing that the grout was not continuous, because where it was, it often broke through the block as the walls moved, or experienced differential thermal expansion." - Interview, Jeffrey Chusid, July 22, 2013. The blocks are not "sacrificial", so the block compressive strength should at least equal that of the grouted tubes. This can be accomplished by factory casting with controlled curing. P: Casting - factory cast, P: Casting - wet cast, A: Precast or tilt-up panels Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Structure 3-54 St: Low block compressive strength "A concrete block produced in a commercial plant typically can resist compressive stresses of 5,000 pounds per square inch. One block from the Freeman House [#2402] crushed at 50 pounds." - Jeffrey Chusid. This was an issue for Florida Southern College as well: "The blocks failed the strength tests, and the process reached a standstill despite Spivey's protests." - Dale Allen Gyure. It took eight months of experimentation to find a mix with the proper strength. It was used as backup with a colored face mix. Factory casting with controlled curing can insure sufficient compressive strength. Du: Mix design - more water, P: Casting - factory cast, Du: Mix design - more cement, Du: Curing - misting, Du: Curing - plastic sheet Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Structure St: Poor seismic performance Wright touted the textile block system as being "earthquake-proof." "Frank Lloyd Wright called this 'Textile block construction' because of the use of steel rods, horizontal and vertical, throughout the entire wall as a sort of weaving to give strength and at the same time flexibility in an earthquake ‐prone area of the nation." - Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer. Its actual performance was mixed when tested by the California Northridge Earthquake in 1994: "About 100 concrete blocks fell from the Ennis House, some of which smashed into a concrete lintel or crashed to a terrace below…The textile block Freeman house lost six concrete blocks around the chimney massing and the wooden floor in the living room dropped one ‐half inch. The Storer house, which has been recently restored, suffered no damage. The Millard House..'stood up like a champ'" - Frank Lloyd Wright Quarterly, Spring, 1994. "The Northridge earthquake nearly destroyed the Freeman house" - Jeffrey Chusid. The system's heavy weight in comparison to wood stud construction puts it at a significant disadvantage. The historical textile block system would not be approved as-is for load-bearing use in high-seismic areas. Extensive full-scale testing would be required, with no expectation that its performance would be acceptable. Possible variations could be considered, such as using larger reinforcing bars in the grouted channels, a bond breaker between the grout and the block so one could slide or rotate past the other, and/or using unbonded post-tensioned reinforcing. Such a design could be considered to be a type of buckling restrained braced A: Concrete - lightweight, St: Precast-pretensioned floor planks, St: Post-tensioned reinforcing, St: Composite action between wythes, St: Larger reinforcing bars Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Structure 3-55 U: Repair - electrical & plumbing It was difficult to repair buried pipes and conduit in floor or roof: "Plumbing for radiant slab heating and wiring for lights were cast into the floor and roof slabs, making them vulnerable to corrosion as well. Cracks which occurred over time could have weakened wire insulation (and plumbing joints as well), and the inveitable migration of water vapor would have promoted corrosion. Worse still, if a severe crack resulted in a ruptured pipe, repair would have been impossible without tearing up the floor or roof." - Leonard J. Morse-Fortier. The nature of the textile block makes repair difficult, because access to conduit and piping is very difficult or not even possible. If the system was modified to allow block removal and replacement without damaging adjacent blocks, then this problem could be solved. Du: Replace individual blocks easily, Du: Reinforcing - move away from exterior joints Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Utilities U: Utility integration issues In a letter to A. J. Chandler in 1928, Wright complained about the lack of utility integration at the Arizona Biltmore, #2710: "The wreck here at the Arizona ‐Biltmore is due directly to the lack of the architect's central and final authority in matters of construction. And the plumbing, heating and lighting systems in that building were independent elements that could interfere with and wreck the building wherever and whenever they pleased ‐ instead of being worked into it as an integral part of the architect's design ‐ And they did wreck it with consuming waste as may be seen." Wright's own work was not much better at utility integration, however. Owner Dorothy Eppstein recalled "drilling holes into concrete blocks to create a rough rectangle, which would then be knocked out and used for light switches and outlets." W. B. Tracy wrote to Wright in 1954 regarding the Tracy House, #5512: The contractor was concerned about "ways and means," asking "How do you run wiring in walls like that; etc.?" Wright did design track lighting in order to simplify wiring, but that was about the extent of integration. Wright's "one-process" ideal made utility integration difficult, as the utilities had to be installed as the wall was going up, not later, as is standard in the industry. He justified this approach by maintaining that the same unskilled labor laying the blocks could install the pre-sized piping and wiring as they went along. Such coordination would take an exquisite amount of pre-planning but is theoretically possible. It did not occur with any of the built textile block projects, to this author's knowledge, with the possible exception of the FSC Faculty House, #3922, built in 2011.. Analysis: Alternative Methods: Challenge Problem Barrier Manufacturer Builder Owner Society Utilities 3-56 Dissertation of Edward D Losch for the Degree Ph.D. in Architecture Chapter 4 The Variations and Alternative Methods School of Architecture Department of Building Science University of Southern California 4-1 Introduction to Chapter 4 A comprehensive examination of the complete historical record was undertaken to identify the different variations and alternative methods used or proposed to fabricate and install Frank Lloyd Wright’s textile block system. A computerized searchable and relational database was created using Microsoft Access to log and organize the data. Sources used include Wright’s collected writings, Taliesin correspondence, interviews with established Frank Lloyd Wright experts, site visits to many of the textile block buildings, and original drawings and specifications. Publications formed another major source of information about the textile block. These included books, journals, magazines, newspapers, web articles, and audio and video transcripts. The Alternative Methods were not assigned before-hand, but were logged in the database when they were identified from a particular reference, and assigned to one of 12 categories. The intent was for the database to develop in an organic, self-organized fashion. Variations or alternative methods were used or proposed in an attempt to solve the numerous problems encountered with the system. Chapter 3 lists these problems in detail and notes whether they were overcome or not and which of the alternatives from this Chapter were tried. The computerized database links the problems listed in Chapter 3 with the proposed solutions in Chapter 4 (see the “Relationship” diagram below). Wright himself rarely proposed solutions, preferring to assign the blame elsewhere. This left it up to his apprentices, the contractors, or owner- builders to come up with fixes. Appendix E lists 19 pages of documented variations – only a 1/2 page of which can be attributed to Wright. This relationship diagram shows how the Alternative Methods table is related to the other tables in the database. 4-3 Some of the Essential Qualities could be considered unproven or unrealized. These are shown as greyed out in the “Modified” Qualities map. These Qualities were often compromised due to the problems that were had with the system. Using a particular Alternative Method could help restore some Qualities but could also hinder others. For example, wet-casting the blocks would greatly improve durability, but would also significantly increase costs (P: Casting – wet-cast). These Qualities are listed for each Alternative Method database entry under “Enables” or “Hinders”. A total of 90 Alternative Methods were found. A multitude of reports were generated from the database. They can be found in Appendix E. These reports were used to document and analyze each listed Alternative Method in this Chapter. The Alternative Methods are of differing concern to different entities, or interests. There are at least four interests involved with the design and construction of a building. The author has labeled these interests as Manufacturer, Builder, Owner, and Society. It is up to the architect to balance the needs of these separate, often-competing interests. The Manufacturer would be the entity responsible for casting and curing the blocks to the architect’s specification, and ensuring that they are delivered to the job-site in a timely manner. They are concerned with the Categories of Cost, Design, Durability, and Prefabrication. The Builder is responsible for erecting the building and coordinating all trades. They are concerned with the Categories of Cost, Design, Structure, and Utilities. The Owner, on the other hand, is concerned with Comfort, Cost, Design, Durability, Integrity, and Structure. Society also has a stake in the outcome. It is in Society’s interest that the project be sustainable, and not wasteful of resources. It should not negatively impact the neighbors. The project should be an asset to the community, beautiful, not ugly. It should be structurally sound. In Wright’s opinion, it should support Democratic ideals and the Freedom of the Individual. Society is a Category in itself, but is also concerned with the other Categories of Cost, Design, Durability, Integrity, and Structure. Each Alternative Method listed in the database has a checklist marking which of the above four interests are affected by a particular Method. A note regarding references: Complete references to the quotes in the database entries for this chapter can be found in Appendix E. For example, under the Comfort Category of “Glass – double glazing”, there is a quote by Professor Marc Schiler. In the table titled “Alternative Methods in Publications and Interviews”, found in Appendix E, under “Cm: Glass – double glazing”, Schiler’s quote can be found listed alphabetically by Author with the date, the publication name, and page number. (The database itself contains the column and line number of the quote as well.) The author, date and publication name can then be used in Appendix G, an Annotated Bibliography, to look up the complete reference information, with ISBN, etc. 4-4 4-5 A: Acid etch exterior face Assembly An acid-etch gives a more natural appearance. It is used with wet-casting to provide a pleasing open pore finish similar to a dry cast block but with finer detail and much better durability. It can also used on-site to remove stains. In 1907, in a "Ladies' Home Journal" article, Wright proposed acid washing the exterior of a prototype "fireproof" concrete house: "When the forms are removed the outside is washed with a solution of hydrochloric acid, which cuts the cement from the outer face of the pebbles…" This process was used with wet-casting in 2011 for the FSC Faculty House, #3922. It was also used on the Freeman (#2402) and Eppstein (#4905) houses to remove lime deposits and cement scum. It is a time-consuming process, taking up to 10 minutes per block, according to Dorothy Eppstein. The advantage is that it allows wet-casting, which provides a much more durable block. De: SAN - open pore block face, sandy, varied, Du: PER - permanence, I: CLR - integral color, no coatings, O: VAR - natural variations P: FAC - factory mass production, Cs: AFF - affordability A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: A: Apprentice on-site to guide the work Assembly "The development of modern construction has encouraged the development of independent systems and trades. Wright got around these problems at the time by becoming his own contractor. For the construction of each house, one of his apprentices would live at the site and would subcontract and coordinate the work" - Edward R. Ford. Wright's unique "One-Process" approach to construction was unfamiliar to contractors, requiring hand-holding by an apprentice on-site. This was especially true if the owner was building the house by themself. Eric Brown requested four times in writing that an apprentice be provided to supervise (#5003). Eventually Associate Jack Howe was assigned to the project (B142B08 6/19/50). Having a knowledgeable Apprentice on-site was an important factor in the success of the construction project. A: ARC - architect field supervision required A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-7 A: Concrete - lightweight Assembly The Usonian Automatic used thinner, coffered blocks to make them lighter. The Tonkens House (#5510) also used a lightweight aggregate in the block mix to reduce the block weight further. This also had the beneficial effect of increasing the insulation value of the blocks. If the block size (width x height) can be made larger through weight reduction, then there would be fewer units to set, reducing labor cost. Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, St: HOL - lightweight system, hollow shells, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: A: Custom wythe connectors Assembly Custom-designed wythe connectors were used for the FSC Faculty House, #3922 as both a wythe spacing device and support for the horizontal reinforcing bars. According to Principal Architect Jeffrey Baker, "SS [stainless steel] clips did not require precision matching. We cast notches into the blocks. It is also possible to provide ties with thermal breaks and it may be possible to make ties from ABS or another similar material." Replacing metal wythe ties with non-conductive ABS or fiberglass ties would eliminate thermal breaks, thereby improving the thermal performance of the wall. The standard wythe ties had many problems. For the Freeman House (#2402), "The ties across the wythes did not turn down into the cavity, but looped around the verticals; and required chipping away the inside corners of the block. Both these conditions made grouting the cavities much more difficult. The straps used by Jeff at Florida Southern eliminates the problem, while also providing a chair for the horizontal reinforcing. That is a clever but modest change to the system that should make a huge difference in performance; but I don’t think it was beyond what was available at the time, as shown in the use of woven ‐wire mesh in the horizontal joints of the block system at the Millard House." - Jeffrey Chusid. Casting notches in the blocks would make the block forms a bit more complicated. On the whole this is a welcome enhancement to the system, improving Assembly as well as Comfort (with non-conductive ties). A: STR - streamlined assembly, A: INS - simultaneous install - one process, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost, A: BUI - simple to build P: FAC - factory mass production A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-8 A: Eliminate metal ties Assembly Lloyd Wright made this suggestion in a letter to Wright dated 6/26/1931. His reasoning was that it would stop noise from travelling along the wires. He proposes interlocked blocks instead. He claimed that it would also aid in waterproofing between the wythes. Interlocking the blocks would make it impossible to sandwich insulation between the wythes. Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Du: PER - permanence Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: A: Grinding wheel Assembly A grinding wheel was used to restore dimensional tolerances on the Pappas House (#5516). It also smoothed block edges on the Pratt House (#4827). It was made necessary by Wright's insistance that there be no tolerance for the block joints - they had to fit together perfectly. This was not a realistic expectation in practice. According to Bette Pappas, there was "only 1/16 in. tolerance in 100 ft." Douglas M. Pratt stated "I remember getting bored pretty quickly watching him [Eric Pratt] lay up walls, because he had to spend a lot of time carefully hand fitting each block. Trial fitting, then sanding a bit off or inserting a tiny sliver of toothpick to raise it. With no actual grout layer between the block edges, they had to be perfect." This time-consuming procedure became necessary in order to make an unrealistic concept (no tolerance) workable. Du: VER - vermin resistant, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, Cm: AIR - air infiltration minimization A: STR - streamlined assembly, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-9 A: Grout admixtures Assembly Tom Casey, a Taliesin Associate, stated in 1988 that admixtures could be used to improve flowability of the grout, ensuring that there would not be gaps in the channels. Using a super-plasticizer is one way to accomplish this. A super-plasticizing admixture for the channel grout would be standard practice nowadays. Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, A: SPE - speed of assembly A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: A: Grout pumped under pressure Assembly According to Jeffrey Baker, for the FSC Faculty House, #3922, "the grout was injected under pressure. When it came out the other hole, you knew that the cavity was filled. Silicone caulk was used to set the blocks and prevent the grout from oozing out." This would take some skill to perform, but was successful on the FSC Faculty House, #3922. Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cm: AIR - air infiltration minimization, Du: PER - permanence Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: A: Grout vibrated Assembly Interview with Eric Lloyd Wright regarding grouting of the Ennis House (#2401) replacement walls: "We found that if you got the right grout mix you could get it into the channels. I wanted to put a vibrator on the rods but couldn’t get them to do that. They were afraid that [the grout] would come out the joints. We knew from experience that many times the grout did not go all the way through and the bar would be exposed in the middle." This process takes skill. Using a super-plasticizing admixture would obviate the need for vibration. Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cm: AIR - air infiltration minimization, Du: PER - permanence Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-10 A: Interlock joints - tongue and groove Assembly Leonard J. Morse Fortier suggested in 1994 that the "blocks could be made to interlock (tongue and groove)." This would reduce the need for precision while laying the blocks, but increases the complexity of the block forms, complicating the block production process. A: MOR - no mortar or mason, A: SPE - speed of assembly, A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance, A: BUI - simple to build P: FAC - factory mass production, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: A: Make blocks thicker Assembly In 1928, Lloyd Wright suggested that the blocks should be thickened to 4" or even 6" to prevent rocking, eliminate bracing and allow for a larger grouted core. In 1994, Leonard J. Morse Fortier suggested that the two block faces could be combined, either by sandwiching rigid foam insulation between two concrete faces or using lightweight foamed cement to create variable density blocks in a single manufacturing process. The "two-faced" block would be heavier, and also more complicated to mass produce. A: STR - streamlined assembly, St: GRV - gravity load capacity, St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance, A: INS - simultaneous install - one process, A: SPE - speed of assembly, A: BUI - simple to build P: FAC - factory mass production, So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: A: Mortar bed - thin Assembly Leonard J. Morse Fortier suggested in 1994 that to ease alignment problems due to a lack of tolerance, "instead of laying blocks dry, a thin mortar bed could be used and the blocks laid more conventionally." In 2013, Donald Leslie Johnson maintained that the lack of a mortar joint allowed water to easily invade. Adding a mortar bed would be beyond the skills of the average homeowner, requiring the use of a mason. Du: VER - vermin resistant, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, A: SPE - speed of assembly, A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance A: MOR - no mortar or mason, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-11 A: Precast or tilt-up panels Assembly In a 1955 letter to Wright, Taliesin Associate Aaron Green proposed a "grid" of glass units cast into large panels, "raised into place" for the Kundert Medical Clinic, #5614. One structural unit to support the roof. "[I] believe that we can do that much more economically and efficiently if the 'grid' of glass units can be cast in large panels…and raised into place…Would such a technique be satisfactory with you?" Wright shot back a one word answer: "No." The project was later converted to brick. The first addition to the Biltmore Hotel, #2710, in 1976, used tilt-up panels. Eric Lloyd Wright described the process in 2011 in an interview: "At first I thought it was a good idea to do the lift panels, but after I saw it in place, it wasn’t quite the same. I thought they were very clever in casting the block patterns from individual fiberglass molds that were skewed slightly, so they weren’t lined up perfectly. It was fairly effective. John Rattenbury was the architect." An industry publication also commented on the technique: "The panels would be erected in large sections at obvious savings in both time and labor compared with hand manufacture and laying of individual block units." Although labor-saving, this technique compromised many of Wright's Essential Qualities for the textile block. St: GRV - gravity load capacity, St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance, Du: FIR - fire resistance, Du: VER - vermin resistant, P: FAC - factory mass production, Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Du: PER - permanence, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost P: SML - small module, I: HON - honest expression, integrity, St: SPD - woven reinforcing, 'spidery', So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), P: REP - repetition, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, O: VAR - natural variations, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, O: REC - recursive, parts reflect the whole, De: WOV - woven character A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: A: Seal joints with mud or clay Assembly Since the blocks could not be made with the precision required to prevent grout leaks, clay was often used to plug the gaps. This method has been documented for the Freeman House (#2402), Florida Southern College (#3814), and the Pappas House (#5516), among others. For the FSC Faculty House (#3922), constructed in 2013, silicone caulk was used instead of clay to seal the grout joints. This was a labor-intensive process, with a lot of cleanup after. Not the best solution, but was all that was available at the time. A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance A: STR - streamlined assembly, A: SPE - speed of assembly, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), Cs: LAC - lower labor cost A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-12 A: Sealant strip - flexible Assembly According to Leonard J. Morse-Fortier, "a flexible sealant strip (e.g. foam tape) could be placed between the blocks as they were laid up (dry)." This would be a preferred alternative to using clay or mud to seal the grout joints. Care would need to be taken that the strip is not visible. Has not been tried in practice but has potential. A: STR - streamlined assembly, A: SPE - speed of assembly, A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: A: Set blocks with a forklift Assembly For the FSC Faculty House, #3922: "Wright envisioned a process that would allow unskilled labor to create and position the blocks, which were sized at 36 x 9 x 3 and weigh about 80 pounds. However, for some special applications, like corners on the highest course or components of the small planter, the design calls for larger and heavier blocks which will be positioned with a forklift." - Michael Maguire. This would no longer be a do-it-yourself project, as the owner would have to be good with a forklift or "Bobcat." A: SPE - speed of assembly, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-13 A: Shim blocks Assembly Per Eric Lloyd Wright: "Unfortunately, the narrow width of the blocks (three ‐and ‐a ‐half inches) made it difficult to keep them properly aligned. Even though the forms for making the blocks were aluminum, the production of the blocks in the field resulted in a small variance in size and alignment, with no mortar to make up the differences. After laying twelve blocks or so, there could be a one ‐inch alignment discrepancy. This required constant shimming of the blocks, which took more time than anticipated, and the houses ultimately cost more than that originally agreed upon." Eric Pratt stated that "round toothpicks were a valuable tool" for aligning the blocks." Using toothpicks for shimming gives one an idea about how precise the block positioning had to be for the system to work. It was a very tedious process. A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance A: STR - streamlined assembly, Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: A: Short blocks used as needed Assembly Some blocks could be cast slightly smaller to counteract dimension creep. For the FSC Faculty House, #3922: "No matter how carefully made or carefully laid, as the blocks are put into position, small ‐ albeit really, really small ‐ gaps creep into the overall length and height, pushing their joints off the grid...Enter the 'short.' A 'short' block is just what it seems, one that measures a little less that the 'standard', and can be used to counteract the 'growth.'" - Michael Maguire. This would make mass production more difficult as additional marks and mold variations would be required. Some skill would also be needed in placing the short blocks correctly. A: SPE - speed of assembly, A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance P: FAC - factory mass production, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), P: REP - repetition A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-14 A: Silicone seal at joints Assembly This technique was used successfully for the FSC Faculty House, #3922. From an interview with Architect Jeffrey Baker: "The grout was injected under pressure. When it came out the other hole, you knew that the cavity was filled. Silicone caulk was used to set the blocks and prevent the grout from oozing out. The original buildings used clay for this purpose." Used successfully, and a much better solution than clay, with many additional advantages. Du: VER - vermin resistant, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, Cm: AIR - air infiltration minimization, Cm: SEV -severe weather, A: SPE - speed of assembly, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Cm: Glass - double glazing, low-E Comfort Wright was not opposed to double glazing. In 1954, he wrote "It is true however that no man can have the liberation one of these houses affords with liberal outside views on three sides becoming a part of the interior, without incurring extra fuel ‐ say twenty percent more. Double windows cut this down ‐ but also cost money." Robert Sunday proposed using double glazing for the Usonian Automatic Project #5522 in a 1958 letter to Wright. Wright did not advise it "in manner shown." It was difficult enough to add single glazing within the blocks. Glazed mitered corners would be doubly difficult. USC Prof. Marc Shiler maintained, that for the Freeman House, #2402: "The high mass walls do not make up for the complete lack of insulation (the air gap is simply not sufficient) and the single pane windows lose more heat than they gain. The computer simulations imply that the buildings could be kept comfortable with less than half the energy if there were insulation in the air gap and double pane low ‐e windows." The glazing would have to fit within a 12 x 24 in. concrete block, and hundreds would be required for a typical house, which would be very expensive. Also, the block itself would not have a thermal break so the thermal benefit of double-glazing would be compromised. Cm: VAP - vapor / low permeability, Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value De: GLZ - integral glazing, modular, Cs: AFF - affordability, De: GMC - glazed mitered corners, A: BUI - simple to build A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-15 Cm: Insulation - foamed-in-place Comfort Benjamin McAlister suggested using a sprayed-on foam insulation on the Freeman House, #2402, to "seal the openings between the blocks and act as a continuous insulation barrier." According to researcher Terry Kreilick, "The gap between the two wythes of concrete block was designed to provide an insulating air space. Additional benefits can be gained if the air space is filled with a poured urethane foam or a lightweight insulating concrete. A urethane foam would be impermeable to water, provide a high insulation value, increase the rigidity of the walls, and provide a slight positive tension on the cross ties. An impermeable barrier may, however, trap moisture. This can be alleviated with the addition of well ‐placed drains." Foamed polyurethane insulation was sprayed in-place between block wythes for the FSC Faculty House, # 3922. It was difficult to keep the insulation clear of all the small stained glass perforations in the block. This technique has been used successfully for a new textile block building in Florida and would be suitable for restoration use as well. It adds field labor and expense to an already time-consuming and costly assembly process, however. St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance, Cm: THE - thermal mass effect, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cm: VAP - vapor / low permeability, Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, Cm: AIR - air infiltration minimization I: MOM - Mono-Material, A: STR - streamlined assembly, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, A: SPE - speed of assembly, A: BUI - simple to build A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Cm: Insulation - granulated styrofoam fill Comfort Granulated styrofoam fill was used for the Pratt House as a retrofit when it was discovered that the air space between the blocks was ineffective at keeping out the cold. It does not have the vapor resistance of foamed-in-place insulation, but could be well suited for restoration use. Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-16 Cm: Insulation - Hadite in block concrete Comfort According to Rosalie Tonkens (Tonkens House, #5510), lightweight "hadite" aggregate was mixed into the block concrete for added insulation value, and to reduce the weight of the ceiling blocks. There would have been about a 25% reduction in compressive strength from using the lighter aggregate. That would have a negative effect on durability and impact resistance, which may or may not be significant for this use. It's use on the Tonkens House could be considered successful. Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Cm: Insulation - insulating concrete between wythes Comfort Insulating concrete could be poured into the gap between block wythes, according to researcher Terry Kreilick. Eric Lloyd Wright postulated that it could be incorporated into a one-piece block: "One thing I was thinking of, and others as well, was making the blocks with foam insulation or insulating concrete." He stated that a lightweight insulating concrete block had possibilities. He believed that it honored the idea of a mono ‐material, i.e., the same inside and outside. When a block is set, the entire wall, inner and outer, is completed at the same time. He further mused that it also had potential for automated production if the blocks are manufactured in a one ‐step process using a single casting. Researcher Leonard J. Morse Fortier proposed just that in 1994: "Use lightweight foamed cement to create variable density blocks in a single manufacturing process." There would be improved stability with a wider, one-piece block, although the manufacturing process would be more complex. A one-piece block is also heavier. Overall, it has many advantages for a do-it-yourself project. I: MOM - Mono-Material, St: GRV - gravity load capacity, St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance, A: INS - simultaneous install - one process, Cm: THE - thermal mass effect, Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost, A: BUI - simple to build P: FAC - factory mass production, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-17 Cm: Insulation - rigid foam sandwich Comfort Researcher Leonard J. Morse Fortier proposed sandwiching rigid foam insulation between the two concrete block faces, either in the field or as an integral one piece block. In his proposed scheme, the one-piece block would have steel ties to hold the sandwich together. A one piece block with foam insulation sandwiched would technically no longer be a mono-material, but would still look like it when installed. There are Assembly benefits, but factory fabrication becomes more complicated and likely more expensive. Utility runs can be accomplished by cutting out the insulation as required. The block becomes heavier, which means the face has to get smaller to be liftable, compromising design flexibility. P: INT - complete building system, all Integrated, A: INS - simultaneous install - one process, Cm: HOT - hot- cold / insulation value, A: SPE - speed of assembly, A: BUI - simple to build I: MOM - Mono-Material, P: FAC - factory mass production, Cs: AFF - affordability, So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety' A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Cm: Insulation - Single wythe block with insulated inner face Comfort This technique is a variation developed for the Usonian Automatic. A single outer layer of concrete blocks was set, then rigid insulation applied on the inside. Wood paneling then covered the insulation for the finished inner face. Although the wall assembly was no longer a full one-process method, the wood inner layer allowed for the added insulation to be sandwiched between. It also made for easier code inspections and utility integration. Accomodating building inspectors and providing insulation have both Owner and Societal benefits. The flexibility and adaptability of the textile block concept is on display with this variation. Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, Cm: AIR - air infiltration minimization, U: ELE - electrical prefabricated, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', So: UNL - universal application A: INS - simultaneous install - one process A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-18 Cm: Insulation - type unspecified Comfort Incorporating insulation between the concrete block wythes was proposed by Wright as early as 1925, in this case for the Phi Gamma Delta Fraternity Project in Madison, WI (#2504). Many researchers found that there was a need for insulation within the block wall, but did not specify any certain type. The ability to incorporate insulation is a requirement for use in colder climates. Enlarging the heating system (instead of insulating) is no longer an acceptable option. Adding insulation in the field would, of course, complicate the Assembly process. So: UNL - universal application A: STR - streamlined assembly, Cs: AFF - affordability A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: De: 3D CAD isometric drawings for each block course Design CAD generated assembly drawings aided the block installers for the FSC Faculty House, #3922. According to Project Architect, Jeffrey Baker "there is a separate isometric for each course of block...There are actually 16 isometric drawings for just the block...they are 30 x 42 and not to scale because they are simply diagrams. These were created in 3D ACAD, just as the rest of the house was similarly modeled...This has worked out remarkably well since this house is like building a large swiss watch." Clients routinely complained to Wright that his drawings were insufficient to build the house. They did not understand his dimensionless “unit system,” for one thing. 3D assembly drawings would be very useful, necessary even. They could be generated without too much trouble from the 3D CAD model developed by the architect in the course of designing the building. The 3D model must be extremely accurate to ensure that all the parts fit together - it needs to be much more than just a graphic representation. A: STR - streamlined assembly, A: ARC - architect field supervision required, A: BUI - simple to build A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-19 De: Add plantings to relieve starkness Design According to Robert Twombly, "Construction was simple and comparatively cheap, but unless relieved by trim or plantings, the [Usonian] Automatic was rather stark and mechanical, not unlike Bauhaus work on the exterior." In simplifying the textile block system to make it more economical, much of the richness of the early designs was lost. Landscaping is one way to make a plain or harsh-looking building more appealing. Mature landscaping also gives the building a more human scale, as well as a sense of place, of permanence. De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, De: HUM - human scale, De: ANC - ancient, timeless, permanent A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: De: Computerized Usonian design language Design "There is evidence that Wright's Usonian principles can be taught and learned" - Leonard J. Morse-Fortier. In 1986, a computer ‐based Usonian 'design language' was developed at Cornell by Arch MacKenzie. Student solutions were found to be very similar to one another and each closely resembled Wright's own work, according to MacKenzie. This is in contrast to Wright's admonition in 1954: "The first thing to do to get a Usonian house is to go to a Usonian architect!...I doubt that this affair can be taught to anyone. It does not come from a university with some degree or other. You can not get it from books alone." In part, like the Cornell research, this dissertation has become an attempt to codify Wright's Usonian design language. The identified Essential Qualities and their hierarchy have been entered into a searchable and relational database (Microsoft Access). The data entries can be parsed through the use of forms, queries and reports. So: CLB - collaboration of Art and the Machine, So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, A: ARC - architect field supervision required, De: ORG - designed by an organic architect A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-20 De: Substitute standard CMUs Design Sometimes standard 8x16" concrete masonry units were substituted for the textile blocks. Standard CMU worked better for curved walls, such as for the Meyer House, #5015. The second Arizona Biltmore addition used CMU walls as structural backup for hung face tiles. This was done to eliminate the complicated channeled molds and the site labor involved in setting the blocks and grouting the channels. This begs the question - Why use the textile block when less expensive standard manufactured blocks have become readily available? One reason put forward was to allow for assembly by unskilled labor, or by the homeowner, eliminating the expensive union mason. There is no evidence to suggest that Usonian homes constructed with standard CMUs were more expensive than textile block Usonian dwellings. If the homeowner was not supplying the labor, it appeared that the opposite was true. In its favor, the textile block was significantly more expressive and flexible. Much was lost, design-wise, when ordinary CMU was substituted. P: SML - small module, Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, P: REP - repetition P: INT - complete building system, all Integrated, De: GUI - guides design expression, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, De: PRF - perforations for light and beauty, De: GLZ - integral glazing, modular, I: LOC - local / native materials, P: CST - mass customization, St: SPD - woven reinforcing, 'spidery', De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), St: ELA - flexibility, elasticity, So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, O: VAR - natural variations, I: ORN - integral ornament, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, De: PAT - unique imprinted patterns with depth, O: SIT - connected to the site, O: REC - recursive, parts reflect the whole, De: WOV - woven character, P: CNR - cast corners, no miters, So: RAD - radical A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-21 De: Use a traditional style Design This was a recommendation made by the Federal Housing Administration in order to qualify for mortgage funding. According to Dale Allen Gyure, for the FSC Faculty Houses, #3922, "Correspondence between FHA administrators reveals that they were more concerned with the proposed wall system…The FHA administrators also disliked the houses' proposed 'extreme modernistic architecture'…encouraged to build "a more conventional type of house that will be more in keeping with the surroundings of the neighborhood." At the time, making this Devil's bargain would have made it easier to obtain government financing. "Whenever architecture was great, it was MODERN." This quote by Wright is printed on mugs at the Taliesin West gift shop. What he maintained was that one could never create something great by copying a traditional style. Cs: AFF - affordability I: MOM - Mono-Material, I: PLS - plasticity, patterns, De: GUI - guides design expression, De: 3RD - third Dimension, De: SAN - open pore block face, sandy, varied, I: HON - honest expression, integrity, I: SIM - Simplicity, De: INN - inner echoes outer, De: PRF - perforations for light and beauty, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, I: CLR - integral color, no coatings, So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, De: MON - monolithic appearance, sense of mass, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, O: VAR - natural variations, De: STY - not a 'style', De: HOR - horizontal emphasis, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, De: HUM - human scale, De: ORG - designed by an organic architect, De: PAT - unique imprinted patterns with depth, O: SIT - connected to the site, De: PUN - minimize punched openings, O: REC - recursive, parts reflect the whole, De: WOV - woven character, So: RAD - radical A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-22 De: Use blocks as accents only Design Lloyd Wright used the textile blocks as accents on frame and stucco buildings to control costs. "Concrete construction for houses and other small structures was simply too expensive when compared with conventional wood frame construction. When Lloyd used concrete blocks in the 30s…it followed the decorative use he made of the blocks in his own studio ‐house and in other of his designs of the 20s" - David Gebhard. Wright Senior, on the other hand, insisted that the blocks be the primary support structure, even for large buildings: For the Arizona Biltmore, #2710: "He [FLW] was furious that McArthur had turned the textile block into a mere decorative epidermis ‐ behind the block walls a conventional steel and concrete frame held sway" - Biltmore Press. There is evidence that Wright did specify textile blocks as decorative elements only, similar to many of his son Lloyd's designs. In 1929, his "Chandler Block House" project, #2708, used decorative blocks as accents over openings. (Here, the term "block" is used to denote a city block, as opposed to the construction material.) The drawings suggest that the remainder of the construction consisted of stucco over wood framing. The "Block House" was meant to be affordable. Other larger, more expensive home designs for Chandler's development, such as the Cudney (#2706) and Young (#2707) houses used the textile block for the entire structure. This would imply that Wright considered wood and stucco to be less expensive than the textile block at the time. Later, with the Usonian Automatic, Wright attempted to simplify the textile block system to make it more competitive. Cs: AFF - affordability I: MOM - Mono-Material, De: BLK - blockiness, unit form, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, Cs: TRM - no trim, plaster, paint or gutters, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one, De: WOV - woven character A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Casting - Dry face/wet backup Durability At USC, researcher Benjamin McAlister experimented with a textile block design that consisted of a dry face mix with a wet backup mix. It successfully preserved the look of the original with significantly better resistance to water penetration, due to the full hydration achieved with the backup mix. This technique was used for Florida Southern College, #3814, but for a different reason. According to Jeffrey Chusid, the face pigments were so expensive that only the first inch of the block used the pigmented face mix. This is a good technique for restoration work to match the blocks on a historic building, but not recommended for new construction. The dry-cast face would weather and deteriorate quickly, as the originals did. It is also a time-consuming process with long set times. De: SAN - open pore block face, sandy, varied, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, I: CLR - integral color, no coatings P: FAC - factory mass production, Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, Du: PER - permanence, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-23 Du: Concrete - aerated Durability Entrained air is often used to improve freeze-thaw resistance. Leonard J. Morse-Fortier proposed using a foaming agent to create variable density blocks in a single manufacturing operation. The foamed concrete would be lighter and have insulating value. (See also papers from MIT by T. Tonyan and P. Zackin.) It would be similar to Autoclave Aerated Concrete (AAC), although AAC is too soft for use as a finished surface - it needs a facing. Research is needed regarding the feasibility of casting variable density aerated blocks. It would build on the acceptance of AAC by the industry with the added advantage of an integral durable finished face. AAC blocks have tight joints, similar to the textile block. A thin mastic is spread on the top of each course, so the skills of a mason are not required to set the blocks. It would not be suitable for field casting (FLD - the factory goes to the house), as it would require a factory- controlled process. Utility integration between the walls would be more difficult, as the aerated concrete would need to be drilled or cut to accommodate conduit or pipe. Walls would need to be at least 12 in. thick to achieve an R-13 insulation resistance value with current technology. This means that the face size would have to be smaller to keep weight down, limiting the design expression. I: MOM - Mono-Material, A: MOR - no mortar or mason, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, Cs: MAT - Inexpensive, local materials, Cm: THE - thermal mass effect, Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, A: SPE - speed of assembly, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), Cs: LAC - lower labor cost, A: BUI - simple to build U: ELE - electrical prefabricated, So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Curing - misting Durability An automated misting system for improved curing of the blocks was used at USC by Benjamin McAlister. Constant moisture during curing is important for ensuring the production of consistently strong, durable blocks. Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, St: CMP - compressive strength, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: PER - permanence A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-24 Du: Curing - plastic sheet Durability Benjamin McAlister covered cast replacement blocks for the Freeman House, #3922, with a clear plastic "food wrap" sheet to retain moisture for better curing. Provides for better hydration, resulting in a stronger block. Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, St: CMP - compressive strength, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: PER - permanence A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Epoxy-coated reinforcing Durability Epoxy-coated reinforcing was used for the FSC Faculty House, #3922. It is an economical solution to the corrosion issue, according to researcher Terry Kreilick. Factory-coating bar reinforcing with epoxy adds minimal cost, yet greatly increases corrosion resistance. This is important for the long-term durability of the woven reinforcing in the grouted channels. St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance, St: SPD - woven reinforcing, 'spidery', Du: PER - permanence, St: ELA - flexibility, elasticity A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Import aggregate Durability Sometimes, aggregate for the block mix needed to be imported from commercial sources off-site because there were deleterious contaminants in the site material. This was the case at Florida Southern College. If the aggregate comes from a non-local source, then the block color may not match the site. In this case, pigments are required in the mix to achieve the desired color or shade that would best tie the blocks to the site, visually. Du: PER - permanence Cs: MAT - Inexpensive, local materials, I: LOC - local / native materials, O: SIT - connected to the site A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-25 Du: Mix design - add coarse aggregate Durability Researcher John Figg called out the lack of coarse aggregate in the Florida Southern College blocks as one reason for the premature deterioration of the blocks over the years. He recommended 5-20mm aggregate sizes to provide a tight matrix. Aggregate sizes need to be varied in order to produce a dense, fully hydrated block. Factory production would ensure that this is done. St: CMP - compressive strength, Du: PER - permanence P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Mix design - admixtures Durability Commercial admixtures can be useful for block casting. USC researcher Benjamin McAlister experimented with a variety of them while casting replacement blocks for the Freeman House (#2402). Plasticizers reduce water in the mix and increase flowability. Accelerators reduce the set time, allowing the block to be stripped from its mold sooner. An efflorescence reducer is used to reduce staining of the blocks over time from minerals leaching out of the face when wet. Whether for site casting or plant production, commercial admixtures are generally beneficial if used appropriately. Plasticizers and accelerators benefit the block Manufacturer/producer. Other additives benefit the Owner through long-term durability and better appearance over time. Fly ash benefits Society by reducing the cement content and resulting carbon dioxide emissions. P: FAC - factory mass production, Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: PER - permanence, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-26 Du: Mix design - graded sand Durability Using ungraded sand for the blocks, as Wright did (it was common practice at the time), would result in a weaker block. Commercial sand for concrete use is specially graded to include more grain sizes. Smaller grains can then fill in the interstitial spaces between larger ones, for a denser matrix, resulting in a stronger, more durable block. This precludes the use of sand from the site, unless it is carted off, cleaned, sifted, sorted and returned, which would not be practical. P: FAC - factory mass production, Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, St: CMP - compressive strength, Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Du: PER - permanence Cs: MAT - Inexpensive, local materials, I: LOC - local / native materials, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house, O: SIT - connected to the site A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Mix design - more cement Durability According to Jeffrey Chusid, a 4:1 sand ‐cement ratio is too lean. 2:1 is closer to "the correct mix." "With low amounts of both water and cement, there is not enough paste to make a strong, durable block." It was determined through petrographic analysis that the actual ratio of sand to cement for the Freeman House blocks was around to 2:1. The 4:1 ratio Wright specified was not nearly sufficient. Later, the specified sand- cement ratio was modified to 3:1 for the Parkwyn Village subdividision (Winn House drawing #4813.008) and the Usonian Automatic (see Turkel House Specification Section 4-2). If there is not enough cement, then the sand aggregate will not be fully bonded. It is not known why Wright specified such a lean mix. Many of the blocks for Florida Southern College suffered premature deterioration due to insufficient cement content. Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, St: CMP - compressive strength, Du: PER - permanence Cs: AFF - affordability A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-27 Du: Mix design - more water Durability According to Jeffrey Chusid, "With low amounts of both water and cement, there is not enough paste to make a strong, durable block...No amount of tamping will produce density in a concrete lacking sufficient water." Without sufficient water, the cement paste is not hydrated fully, producing a weak, porous block that will not be durable. More water means the block has to stay in the form much longer before it can be safely removed, so more forms and production space is required. This makes it less suitable to on-site casting. There'll also be a longer lead time before enough blocks are cast for assembly. In addition, the finished surface will mainly consist of cement paste instead of aggregate, which means the Essential Qualities of VAR - natural variations and CLR - integral color will be negatively affected. The face will then need to be treated by acid etch or other means to achieve a pleasing, more natural appearance, which further adds to the time and cost. P: FAC - factory mass production, Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: PER - permanence Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, I: CLR - integral color, no coatings, O: VAR - natural variations, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Mix design - natural cement Durability In 1929, Wright found a rock formation near Holbrook, Arizona that he hoped would provide a source of natural cement for his San Marcos Project (#2704). – “We wanted to investigate a new natural cement found in that region, as perhaps an ideal material for block ‐making...This material…was white, set quickly and hard, and was waterproof.” Natural cement provides a faster set for quicker form removal but has a slower cure rate, compared to Portland cement. Lab tests were discouraging, however. In 2011, natural cement was used for the FSC Faculty House, #3922, since the originally specified mix was not durable. "Project principals experimented with more than 50 mixes for the new blocks, creating hundreds of samples before arriving at the final composition: Fine and coarse aggregate from Pennsylvania and an earth tone binder based on a natural cement from France, Prompt, sourced from Vicat S.A. ‐ parent of Birmingham, Ala. ‐based National Cement Co" - Josephine Smith. "Natural cement was chosen over the more commonly used Portland cement for several reasons, but one of the most important is its rapid set ‐up time: two hours, versus 24" - Michael Maguire. It could be that Wright was onto something when he explored the use of natural cement for casting the blocks. It gained strength slowly compared to Portland cement, but set much faster, allowing a faster turn-around for the molds. This would save time and money in the casting process, while providing a more durable block than could be achieved with dry-casting. Currently, the available sources for natural cement are limited, so it would not be a local material. Ironically, Wright first proposed its use in order to provide a local source of cement for San Marcos (#2704). P: FAC - factory mass production, Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Du: PER - permanence, So: RAD - radical Cs: MAT - Inexpensive, local materials, I: LOC - local / native materials A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-28 Du: Mix design - use demineralized water Durability "in retrospect it was a mistake to use the mineral ‐laden lake water, which later left a heavy white deposit on the blocks. In our case, after the walls were built, Eric [Pratt] spent countless hours of odious and dangerous work scrubbing each block with hydrochloric acid" - Pat Pratt. A suitable water source for block casting is important to avoid or at least minimize face efflorescence. Du: MAI - minimal maintenance Cs: MAT - Inexpensive, local materials, I: LOC - local / native materials A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Reinforcing - embed / encase in blocks Durability Steel reinforcing bars were added to the wide 36" blocks used for the FSC Faculty House, #3922: "If you are using a long, thin perforated block of the kind we are using at FSC, reinforcing bars are necessary within the blocks themselves" - Jeffrey Baker. Welded wire fabric could also be embedded in the blocks to prevent cracking. This is an added step, however, adding to the cost of block production. Alternately, embedding polypropylene fibers in the mix would not only prevent non-structural cracking but would be non-corrosive as well. Block casting would need to be done at a plant, since the fiber reinforcing process is too complicated for on-site casting. Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: PER - permanence Cs: AFF - affordability, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Reinforcing - galvanized ties Durability A note on the Winn House drawings (#4813.008) states that block "layers shall be anchored together with 1/4" diameter galvanized iron ties, hooked around reinforcing in walls, not more than 24" apart vertically or 16" apart horizontally." Galvanizing the wythe ties was a step in the right direction, as the ties in the early block houses corroded from moisture in the air gap between wythes. There was still the difficult process of chipping the block corners to accommodate the ties. (See Assembly - Custom Wythe Connectors for a possible solution.) There would be additional cost and lead time to send the ties to a shop for galvanizing. Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: PER - permanence Cs: MAT - Inexpensive, local materials A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-29 Du: Reinforcing - move away from exterior joints Durability Moving the woven reinforcement away from the block joints would provide more protection from corrosion due to water penetration, according to Jeffrey Baker. The problem is that, with Wright's design, the grouted reinforcing is located along the block joints, which are the weakest point for water penetration. This would be a radical change to the system, involving the elimination of the channel grooves around the block perimeter in favor of some other method of reinforcing. Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Du: PER - permanence St: SPD - woven reinforcing, 'spidery', De: WOV - woven character A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Replace individual blocks easily Durability It is currently an expensive, messy process to replace individual textile blocks on an existing building. The old face needs to be chiseled away, then a new cast face is mortared in place, probably with wire anchors as well. With the original system, replacement of an entire wall might be required, since the individual blocks were interlocked with the woven reinforcing. A redesign of the system should include a way to replace individual blocks. This would further the organic analogy of the wall surface as a skin where cells are replaced as needed. Blocks could be field-cast from site materials if they don't need to last forever. Alternately, there could be layers of wearing surfaces that would be peeled or scraped off as needed, exposing a fresh wearing surface beneath. Paradoxically, permanence could be fostered by making the blocks more ephemeral. Cs: MAT - Inexpensive, local materials, I: LOC - local / native materials, Du: PER - permanence, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, O: SIT - connected to the site A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-30 Du: Sealer - face Durability After its restoration in 1984, Storer House (#2304) blocks have been sealed every five to seven years to maintain water resistance. The original specifications for the Freeman House called for a sealer to be applied. It is not known if that was done. A silane/siloxane based sealer would reduce water absorption through the block face without altering the appearance of the concrete surface or trapping vapor as a coating would. Volatile organic compounds (VOC) present in many sealers are an environmental concern. Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: PER - permanence Du: MAI - minimal maintenance A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Stainless steel reinforcing Durability Threaded stainless steel rod was used for the vertical grouted reinforcing for the FSC Faculty House, #3922. The threaded rod could be easily coupled together after a few wall courses were completed. Stainless steel rod is expensive, but should provide superior protection against corrosion. Using threaded couplers would simplifiy and speed up the assembly process to a degree. A: STR - streamlined assembly, Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Du: PER - permanence, A: BUI - simple to build Cs: MAT - Inexpensive, local materials A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Wash sand, remove impurities Durability To prevent chloride contamination which can rust reinforcing, and efflorescense which will stain the face of the blocks. Washing the sand used for the blocks is not enough. It needs to be graded into different grain sizes in order to create a dense, durable block. Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-31 Du: Waterproof membrane Durability In a letter to his father dated 2/28/1928, Lloyd Wright conceded that the blocks were not impervious to moisture. He concluded that the only way to keep water out was to use a waterproof membrane or a complete separation of the wythes. Wright senior later specified an asphaltic coating for the inside face of the outer blocks on the Lloyd Jones House, #2902 (letter to R. Lloyd Jones dated 12/14/1928). The asphaltic coating was an extra step which slowed down assembly, but was made necessary by the porous nature of the dry-cast blocks. Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cm: VAP - vapor / low permeability A: SPE - speed of assembly A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: Du: Weep holes for drainage Durability With a traditional masonry cavity wall, the outer layer of the wall acts as a screen. Any water that penetrates is expected to run down the inside face of the outer wythe and exit through weep holes at the base, instead of entering the building. Wright typically specified weep holes for the textile block walls, but these instructions were often ignored by the builder. The industry has gotten away from screen walls for moisture control in favor of barrier walls. A barrier wall is expected to stop water penetration at the outer face. This is important for insulated walls as it keeps the insulation dry. Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cm: VAP - vapor / low permeability A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-32 O: Glass textile block Organic A glass block replaces a standard block, and has grooves for reinforcing. It is a cellular concept. Wright came close to integrating a glass textile block into the San Marcos project, #2704, a process he wished to patent. "The patents as yet are only applied for. Whether they will be granted is another matter…I am sure there will be no difficulty in taking out a patent on a glass building constructed in this manner…" - FLW to R.M. Cochius, Leerdam Glass Works, Holland, 12/5/1928. "I would like to see developed in the glass industry a quality of glass suitable for building material. In some cases it would be necessary to have the glass clear so that it might be seen through, or at least let light through. In other cases, be opaque. In nearly every building both kinds would be required" - FLW to R.M. Cochius, 4/5/1929. The plan fell through when it was determined that the glass blocks could not be cast in the size that Wright wanted for the project. Glass blocks are ubiquitous now, but they did not come into their own as a viable building product until the mid-1930s. At that time Pittsburgh Corning developed a machine process for glass block production that is still used today. Glass textile blocks would have simplified the assembly process by eliminating the details required to incorporate window frames. Thermal performance would have been better than with the single pane glazing that was standard at the time. P: INT - complete building system, all Integrated, A: STR - streamlined assembly, A: INS - simultaneous install - one process, De: GLZ - integral glazing, modular, P: FAC - factory mass production, Cm: HOT - hot- cold / insulation value, Cs: TRM - no trim, plaster, paint or gutters, De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, De: MON - monolithic appearance, sense of mass, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one, De: PUN - minimize punched openings, De: WOV - woven character, A: BUI - simple to build A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: P: Block - one piece Prefabrication A one -piece block would combine the Inner and outer wythes together in one block. Laurence Strong (#5120) proposed using a one-piece corner block for easier forming (no response from Wright was found): "Would you consider a corner block combining both inside and outside block in one solid piece? This would make it simpler to cast a solid corner block." Eric Lloyd Wright believes that a lightweight insulating concrete block has possibilities. It comes close to the idea of a mono ‐material, i.e., the same inside and outside. When a block is set, the entire wall, inner and outer, is completed at the same time. Like Leonard J. Morse-Fortier, he also believes it has potential for automated production if the blocks are manufactured in a one ‐step process using a single casting. A one-piece corner block would be too heavy for one man to lift, and the insulating air gap would be lost. It has possibilities if produced using insulating concrete. P: FAC - factory mass production, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost, P: CNR - cast corners, no miters Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-33 P: Casting - 3D printed molds Prefabrication 3D printed molds were used for replacement blocks on FSC Pfeiffer Chapel, #3816: "The project resulted in an innovative use of 3 ‐D printers to assist in creating molds for the blocks Wright used to build the chapel. The process replaces the painstakingly hand ‐crafted molds previously used to make the blocks, significantly reducing the cost" - Cary McMullen. 3D printing techniques could foster the mass-customization that Wright was striving for. Factory mass production could be combined with 3D printed molds to provide uniquely patterned blocks economically. P: CST - mass customization, Cs: AFF - affordability, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, I: ORN - integral ornament, De: PAT - unique imprinted patterns with depth A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: P: Casting - cast corner blocks in place Prefabrication Corner blocks were cast in place successfully for the Arthur Pieper residence, #5218. Corners were a problem. Wright generally forbade mitered corners in favor of integrally cast corner blocks. This was to avoid a seam or gap at the corner which would destroy the illusion of a monolithic block. It was difficult to precast corners besause the mold was complicated and the concrete mix had to turn the corner without slumping. Most problematic was stripping the piece from the mold without damage. A: MOR - no mortar or mason, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house, P: CNR - cast corners, no miters De: SAN - open pore block face, sandy, varied, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, A: SPE - speed of assembly, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: P: Casting - cast slightly smaller Prefabrication In a 1955 letter to his grandfather, Eric Lloyd Wright suggested the following to prevent block courses from running long: "Controlling the mix, small aggregate, and especially making the form smaller than the intended size of the block are very important to the making of good block." If the forms are slightly undersized, then the gaps will have to be closed somehow, either with silicone caulk or a flexible bearing strip that can act as a shim. It is probably a good idea, but one that has yet to be applied in practice. A: STR - streamlined assembly, A: SPE - speed of assembly, A: BUI - simple to build A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-34 P: Casting - CNC multi-axis form milling Prefabrication CNC milling was used in 2011 for #3922, the Florida Southern College Faculty House: "After encountering some durability issues with plywood forms, Castonguay and crews moved to resin ‐coated formwork. They also switched to Teflon ‐coated plastic inserts, fabricated with a CNC cutter to exact specifications. To prevent cracking and preserve detailing, the inserts fit inside the mold and were removed after the block was released...The Teflon ‐coated plastic made the forms last longer and increased accuracy. It's cut to one ‐ thousandth of an inch" - Josephine Smith. For the Freeman House, #2402, a multi ‐access milling machine (CNC) was used successfully to create an aluminum form from a CAD/CAM data file. The Florida Southern College mold patterns were especially complicated and deep, with subtle drafts required for form removal. Computerized cutting techniques were essential to accurate mold production. The FSC project was wet-cast, which meant that the mix had to set for at least two hours before removal from the form. Many molds were therefore required. The result was a dense block with sharp, well defined features. I: PLS - plasticity, patterns, De: ANG - corners / obtuse angles, P: FAC - factory mass production, P: CST - mass customization, De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, P: PDM - Precision design and manufacture, De: PAT - unique imprinted patterns with depth, P: CNR - cast corners, no miters Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: P: Casting - Cure submerged in water Prefabrication For the FSC Faculty House, #3922: "The molds are filled on a vibrating table to ensure quick and complete settling, and newly finished blocks are submerged in water for controlled curing that prevents cracks and checks." A natural cement was used which had a quick, two hour set time. Water submersion is better suited to plant production as opposed to casting at the site (The Factory Goes to the House). It would also better control warping and differential shrinkage - important for the textile block concept which required precision and had no built-in tolerance. If the block dimensions were more accurate, then less shimming and trimming would be required in the field, saving skilled field labor. There would be a bit more skilled labor involved at the production plant with this process. Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Du: PER - permanence, P: PDM - Precision design and manufacture Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-35 P: Casting - Electric or pneumatic hammer Prefabrication An electric hammer was used for tamping the blocks on the Galesburg Country Homes cooperative project, # 4828: "When the mold was filled with this mixture, a top steel plate was laid over the mold, and an electric hammer was used to tamp the mixture firmly into place" - Eric Pratt. This allowed the mold to be released right away. The coffered top plate was reused after 24 hours. The blocks use for the two Michigan cooperatives were historically the smallest of the textile block designs, only 12" by 16" in height and width. Most were plain, and any patterns were kept simple and shallow. This made the block amenable to a dry-cast process, where the blocks were pressed and removed from the mold every minute or two, then set aside to cure. Without an electric hammer or pneumatic press, the dry-cast blocks were subject to all sorts of defects. When the mechanical press disappeared from the Freeman House (#2402) site, block quality deteriorated. Blocks were less dense, with face defects and cracking (ring fractures) due to the use of a sledge hammer. De: SAN - open pore block face, sandy, varied, De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), P: FLD - the factory goes to the house, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-36 P: Casting - factory cast Prefabrication "My grandfather could never get any companies interested in developing machinery to make the block. [Conversely,] that takes it away from the handcraft. These blocks were handcrafted" - Eric Lloyd Wright. "Many problems could be nearly eliminated if the blocks were manufactured to close tolerances in a factory" - Leonard J. Morse-Fortier. A few of the historical homes used factory casting for the blocks, at least in-part. The Eric Brown House (# 5003) was one: "The big (12" x 16", 35 lb.) bevel ‐edged blocks were cast under pressure at a local foundry in special aluminum forms and laid up in a two ‐way grid of steel and liquid grout to make a cavity wall...Cost: $500 for the forms, 35 cents each for the basic blocks, up to $1.10 each for the seven types of odd blocks (corners, ends, electrical outlets, etc,)" - from a March 1953 "House and Home" article. The Arthur Pieper House (#5218) also used off-site casting: "About half of the blocks were made on ‐site; the rest were cast in nearby Mesa and brought to the site where they were assembled into the house." The Ennis House (#2401) replacement blocks were cast at a local precast plant. The FSC Faculty House blocks (#3922) were cast at a precast plant in Massachusetts. The replacement blocks were typically costly and labor-intensive to cast. It was more of an art, and not an assembly line process. The goal was to match the original blocks as much as possible, but with significantly better durability. When used for the 1950s homes, a press would be set up at a shop and the blocks would be made similar to the "factory goes to the house" field process, only with better quality control. There was not much automation applied there either. Nothing like one would find at a modern concrete block plant. Mass production requires mass demand in order for the benefits of economy of scale to kick in. The textile block was not a mass-market product. There would have to be a demand-driver that would justify the investment in a plant to produce them. Design flexibility would suffer due to the limitations of the factory process. Patterns would have to be shallower or used more sparingly. Block dimensions would be limited. Block materials might be non-local, though of higher quality. Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cs: AFF - affordability, Du: PER - permanence, P: PDM - Precision design and manufacture, De: STN - standardization, Cs: SCA - economies of scale, So: UNL - universal application, A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance I: LOC - local / native materials, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, O: SIT - connected to the site A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: P: Casting - fiber reinforcing Prefabrication Non-metallic fibers, usually polypropylene, can be added to the block concrete mix. Embedding polypropylene fibers in the mix would not only prevent non-structural cracking but would be non- corrosive as well, increasing block durability. Block casting would need to be done at a plant, since the fiber reinforcing process is too complicated for on-site casting. Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: PER - permanence Cs: AFF - affordability, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-37 P: Casting - lease molds to clients Prefabrication In a 1955 letter from Eric Lloyd Wright to his grandfather, he proposed the idea of leasing molds to clients. The main reason was that high quality metal molds were required, and these were too expensive to fabricate for use on just one house. Later that year, under supervision by Taliesin Associate Morton Delson, metal molds were fabricated for the Kalil House, #5506. Those, together with the piston driven block press, cost $7500 at a time when a decent-sized house could be built for $15,000. The dies and press were then sold to the Turkels for casting their house, #5513. In a 1957 letter to Wright, Associate Robert Pond asked Wright about trading them in lieu of final payment for architectural services. Wright responded "No, we cannot tell at this time." They apparently were loaned to the Tracys for use on the Tracy House, #5512, then finally acquired by the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation in 1958 in lieu of final payment for the Turkel House architectural fees. In 1961, the Foundation leased the molds and block press to the Pappas' for construction of the Pappas House, #5516. Molds were not available for lease to clients until after Wright's passing. At that point, demand had dried up, since Wright was no longer around to advocate for the system. In addition, with only one set of molds, only one house could be constructed at a time. A possible solution would have been to look for a way to produce durable, accurate molds more economically. Alternately, blocks could be factory-cast and stockpiled, ready for purchase. Cs: AFF - affordability, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house, Cs: SCA - economies of scale, A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance A: SPE - speed of assembly A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: P: Casting - pneumatic press Prefabrication A pneumatic press was preferable for tamping the blocks in order to ensure that the concrete mix filled every corner of the mold and to minimize any air pockets. A machine with 7000 lb. head pressure was used for several of the Usonian Automatic houses. In 2011, a pneumatic ram was used for casting blocks for the Florida Southern College Faculty House, #3922. A press was used for a while at the Freeman House, #2402, but later disappeared from the job site. A sledgehammer was then used instead, with poor results. According to Jeffrey Chusid, cracks caused by use of the hammer eventually led to "ring fractures" of the blocks. Without an electric hammer or pneumatic press, the dry-cast blocks were subject to all sorts of defects. A press was expensive to buy or lease. It was necessary to have, however, for the dry-casting process to be successful. Otherwise, many blocks could be rejected due to poor consolidation. The Freeman House blocks absorb a lot of water partially for this reason. A press would not work for corner blocks unless a two step process is used. One face could be cast with wire reinforcing exposed at the corner joint. The block would then be turned 90 degrees and jigged in place while the other face was cast. De: SAN - open pore block face, sandy, varied, Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house Cs: AFF - affordability A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-38 P: Casting - resin-coated plywood forms Prefabrication According to Ken Uracius, for #3922, the FSC Faculty House: "The plywood...is made for the concrete form industry and has a resin on both sides to protect the plywood and make the surface slick. The inserts are a teflon composite material that can be machined and is very slick. After it is machined to a taper on all 4 sides it will slip out of the setting concrete without hanging up." He noted that the teflon blanks were very expensive. The plywood is much less expensive than metal, allowing more molds to be created, and a greater variety of molds. More blocks can be cast in a day, reducing lead time. Patterned blocks would be more expensive, since the machined, teflon-coated plastic inserts are costly. P: FAC - factory mass production, P: CST - mass customization, Cs: AFF - affordability I: ORN - integral ornament, De: PAT - unique imprinted patterns with depth A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: P: Casting - Steam cure Prefabrication The ceiling blocks for the Tonkens House [#5510] were factory steam-cured in order to facilitate faster curing and form removal, according to Eric Lloyd Wright. Steam-curing makes for a stronger and denser block but is not practical in the field, which subverts Wright's "Factory goes to the House" idea. P: FAC - factory mass production, Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, St: CMP - compressive strength, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: PER - permanence P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-39 P: Casting - Taper mold edges Prefabrication Blocks for #3922, the FSC Faculty House, were tapered 2.5 degrees "to augment stripping." Adding a draft facilitates removal of the block from the mold and helps minimize imperfections. The original blocks for Florida Southern College had a 1/8 in. draft added to facilitate mold removal, according to Associate Wesley Peters in a 1939 letter. Previously, "inasmuch as there is no draft on the inside of the 5/8 inch groove we found it impossible to make a perfect concrete block" - C.W. Palmore to Wesley Peters, 5/17/1939. It is standard practice in the precast concrete industry to taper surfaces slightly for easier form removal. Otherwise, the set concrete could bind with the form, breaking either the block or the form. Wright tried to minimize tapers, sometimes unrealistically. He did so to sharpen the definition and shadow line of the pattern. The formed grout channels were a big problem, since that required a wrap-around, hinged, break-away form. If not for the channels, blocks could be lifted straight out of the form. Channel inserts could be used for this, along with a form with tapered sides. The back face of the block would then be slightly larger than the front, however, which is an assembly issue. I: PLS - plasticity, patterns, De: PAT - unique imprinted patterns with depth A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: P: Casting - Teflon composite plastic inserts Prefabrication For #3922, the Florida Southern College Faculty House: "After a fair amount of trial and error, Teflon was eventually selected for use in the molds to create the shapes and perforations. Many of the standard design parts were machined at the nearby shop of Advanced Manufacturing Technologies, and the chief mold maker, Eugene "Geno" Castonguay, assembled the parts with demanding accuracy." Using plastic inserts for block features allowed the use of flat resin-coated plywood molds instead of costly metal ones. A slight taper and a teflon coating aided in removal of the inserts after casting. CNC techniques were used to fabricate the inserts to precise dimensions. This was a costly process requiring a high level of skill. The Florida Southern College block pattern was particularly complicated. De: PRF - perforations for light and beauty, P: FAC - factory mass production, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, P: PDM - Precision design and manufacture, De: PAT - unique imprinted patterns with depth Cs: AFF - affordability, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-40 P: Casting - use cast metal molds Prefabrication Metal molds were first used on the Storer House, #2304. "We should have the molds made of cast aluminum, tested to make sure the blocks are the right size, and then lease the molds to the client" - Eric Lloyd Wright in 1955. Better results were had when metal molds were used instead of wood, as precision tolerances were required for the blocks to fit together. "The big problem with the tightly stacked blocks was that it was hard to cast the blocks precisely. That is why I believe they switched to aluminum forms from wood after casting the Millard house. Even so, it was hard to get the precise measurements required and the block joints gained as they went along. Also, unlike the standard Besser block, which can be pushed out of the form, forming the grooves along the edges necessitated a hinged form which could be pulled apart" - Eric Lloyd Wright in 2011. Aluminum molds were the rule for textile block production, although wood forms were used for Florida Southern College, apparently to keep costs down. Students were employed to "ram" the blocks in exchange for tuition credit: "He [Dr. Spivey] employs large groups of students who wish to earn their way through college for ramming the blocks, etc. This is all right and sound in principle I guess, except that these boys have not had adequate and competent supervision, having a tendency to pass imperfect blocks, to ram up imperfectly, etc" - Wesley Peters to Frank Lloyd Wright, 1939. P: PDM - Precision design and manufacture, A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance Cs: AFF - affordability A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: P: Casting - use natural cement for faster set time Prefabrication The set time for Portland cement was too slow for wet-casting: "This challenge was met with a natural cement product from France called 'Prompt,' that sets in less than four hours compared to a day with Portland [cement]. It had all the properties they were looking for except that rather than setting too slowly, it was setting too fast, and additives were needed to slow it down and avoid stress fractures" - Michael Maguire, regarding the Florida Southern College Faculty House, #3922. Wright explored the use of natural cement in 1929 for the San Marcos project, #2704: “We wanted to investigate a new natural cement found in that region [Holbrook, AZ], as perhaps an ideal material for block ‐ making...This material…was white, set quickly and hard, and was waterproof.” Certain natural cements have the potential to speed up the casting process significantly, which saves on the project lead time. It would likely not be a local material. It is a specialized product that is more expensive than Portland cement. Natural cement makes wet-casting more feasible, which can provide a durable, dense block with sharper pattern edges. Acid etch would be required for a pleasing, open pore appearance, adding to the cost and skill level. For this reason, plant casting would be required. Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Du: PER - permanence, De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, De: PAT - unique imprinted patterns with depth Cs: MAT - Inexpensive, local materials, Cs: AFF - affordability, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-41 P: Casting - vibration table Prefabrication Some of the houses built in the 1950s used a vibration table along with tamping in order to consolidate the blocks. This would be used instead of a press, and is best suited for wet-casting. This technique is better suited to use in a plant. It would be cumbersome to take on-site. Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: PER - permanence P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: P: Casting - wet cast Prefabrication Wet-casting was used for the Florida Southern College Faculty House, #3922, as well as for replacement blocks on other FSC campus buildings. It was also used to produce Ennis House (#2401) replacement blocks. Acid etching of the face simulated a dry-cast open pore finish. All other textile block buildings used dry-cast blocks. The main reason to use wet-casting is for it's superior strength and durability. The open pores on a dry-cast block tend to absorb water and can leach minerals, staining the face - an appearance and maintenance issue. Du: IMP - face durability, impact resistance, St: CMP - compressive strength, Du: ABS - water absorption minimized, Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: PER - permanence, De: PAT - unique imprinted patterns with depth De: SAN - open pore block face, sandy, varied, Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-42 P: Insulation - integral with block Prefabrication Leonard J. Morse Fortier proposed sandwiching rigid foam insulation between two concrete faces. Alternately lightweight foamed cement could be used to create variable density blocks in a single manufacturing process, adding composite action between wythes. According to Eric Lloyd Wright: "A lightweight insulating concrete block has possibilities. Of the options presented, it comes closest to the idea of a mono ‐material, i.e., the same inside and outside. When a block is set, the entire wall, inner and outer, is completed at the same time. It also has potential for automated production if the blocks are manufactured in a one ‐step process using a single casting." This technique supports the "one-process" idea, as inner and outer faces are installed at once. It would be simpler to install, as it is stable without bracing. The insulating concrete version is also a "mono-material." Factory production is necessary. The block would be thicker but the face would need to be smaller, in order to keep the weight down. There would be no need for field-installed ties to hold the wythes together. A: STR - streamlined assembly, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance, A: INS - simultaneous install - one process, Cm: THE - thermal mass effect, Cm: HOT - hot-cold / insulation value, A: BUI - simple to build So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: P: Larger block size Prefabrication Wright preferred a larger block size but was limited by weight. 24" square blocks were originally proposed for the Millard house (#2302), but the size was later reduced to 16" square. The largest block size considered was 48" square. That was to be used on the Lenkurt Electric project (#5520), a large manufacturing plant and headquarters building. The largest built examples were the 24" square glazed blocks used for the Turkel House, #5513. The Usonian Automatics had 24" square by 6" thick roof blocks as well. These weighed over 200 lbs., and were difficult to install. Florida Southern College (#3814) used 36" wide blocks, but these were only 9" tall. A proposal for a dpeartment store in India (Calico Mills, #4508) used 36" square blocks. A larger block has many advantages, such as fewer joints and less labor involved in casting and assembly. Design flexibility appears to be maintained with up to 48" blocks. De: GLZ - integral glazing, modular, P: FAC - factory mass production, Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost, P: WIN - premanufactured windows and doors, modular, De: PUN - minimize punched openings So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-43 P: Miter corners Prefabrication It simplifies corner block casting to use two flat, mitered pieces. There is a seam or joint, however, which may be noticeable. There was a mitered corner issue on the Freeman House (#2402): "Perimeter reinforcing channels for corner and field blocks do not align - a construction challenge." Each mitered corner is also one more highly exposed joint subject to moisture penetration. These issues led Wright to abandon miters in favor of cast corner pieces. Clients and builders complained that casting corner pieces as one-piece was too involved and the blocks were too heavy. Eric Lloyd Wright had to reject half of the corner pieces cast for the Tonkens House, #5510. If the corner joint and grout tube alignment issues could be solved, then mitered corners would be a preferred method. A: STR - streamlined assembly, P: FAC - factory mass production, Cs: AFF - affordability, P: REP - repetition, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost De: BLK - blockiness, unit form, I: HON - honest expression, integrity, I: SIM - Simplicity, A: STR - streamlined assembly, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, De: MON - monolithic appearance, sense of mass, A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: P: Standard manufactured window and door sizes Prefabrication This alternative would accommodate standard opening sizes to allow use of mass-produced doors and windows. It was not allowed by Wright. In a letter dated 2/15/1952, R.D. Winn (Winn House, #4813) asked Wright for permission to use standard sizes and stock sash for doors and windows to save money: "Twenty five hundred dollars could be saved in building costs of the house, if your techinician [sic] and yourself would be willing to revise to the extent of standard sizes for doors and windows." Wright was blunt in his response: "No can do...Who are these official fools who do not understand the house?" Rough opening sizes were tied to the block size and could not be varied easily. In this regard, it was not true that the system had "infinite flexibility." All hardware and sash had to fit within the module. If the system had become popular, then manufactured units would possibly have become available. P: INT - complete building system, all Integrated, Cs: AFF - affordability, De: STN - standardization, Cs: SCA - economies of scale, P: WIN - premanufactured windows and doors, modular De: MOD - modular, De: GLZ - integral glazing, modular, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety' A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-44 P: Use less concrete in blocks Prefabrication In a 1928 letter from Lloyd Wright to his father, he suggested using less concrete in the blocks to reduce weight. This would allow for a larger face module while still being liftable by one person. Wright used this suggestion for the Usonian Automatic blocks, coffering the back face significantly to reduce the block volume. It allowed him to expand the block face to 12 by 24 inches. Weight could be reduced further by embedding foam inserts in the block. These would also add some insulation value. Ultra high performance concrete (UHPC) could be used to thin the blocks to a 3/4 in. thickness or less, allowing a face of up to 24 in. square in size. A larger face means fewer joints, which has positive implications for installation cost as well as long term durability. De: GLZ - integral glazing, modular, P: FAC - factory mass production, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', Cs: LES - less material, lighter, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost, De: PUN - minimize punched openings A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: So: Import skilled non-union labor Society This was Wright's proposal to bypass the labor unions: "Neither the men nor we are able to build houses for ourselves, why not open our doors to immigration from all countries where skills have not been cut back by ignorant labor unions emulating penny‐wise employers" - FLW, 1948. Wright believed that the high cost of skilled labor made decent housing unaffordable for many. The textile block system, in particular, required a lot of skilled labor to cast and assemble, regardless of the claims made by Wright to the contrary. Since that time, unskilled labor has become expensive as well. Any system that requires a large amount of labor, whether skilled or not, has become cost prohibitve. Cs: AFF - affordability, So: DEM - Democratic, freedom of choice, individuality, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost, So: RAD - radical Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-45 St: Cavity fill - reinforced concrete Structure A cast-in-place cavity fill between the block wythes could be used to create a monolithic reinforced concrete wall. Angela Vargas (University of Southern California Building Science Thesis, 2009) proposed filling the cavity between wythes in the Freeman House, #2402, with reinforced concrete to provide seismic resistance. This is similar to the method Wright used to construct the walls on the Imperial Hotel in Tokyo, #1509. There, two masonry walls were erected and concrete was poured between them to provide a monolithic wall. Wright considered formwork to be wasteful and this was his way of getting around that. The Annie Pfeiffer Chapel, #3816, used just such a scheme, with CIP reinforced concrete sandwiched between two textile block wythes. This can be seen clearly in the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation Archive drawings 3816.025-026. The insulating air gap is lost with this technique. Insulating value can be restored - and improved by placing a rigid insulating board inside the outer wythe before pouring. The woven reinforcing in the block channels then becomes redundant. It is also a durability concern due to the possibility of water penetration through the joints and resultant corrosion of the grouted reinforcing. It is more labor-intensive, as reinforcing needs to be secured in the gap and concrete poured. Perforations also need to be formed around. It is analogous to constructing two walls, one nested inside the other. St: GRV - gravity load capacity, St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance, St: RTW - retaining wall, ground transition, Cm: THE - thermal mass effect, St: CMP - compressive strength, Cm: VAP - vapor / low permeability, St: CIP - form for reinforced concrete members A: STR - streamlined assembly, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety', So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), Cs: LAC - lower labor cost, A: BUI - simple to build A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: St: Composite action between wythes Structure Leonard J. Morse-Fortier proposed using metal trusses or other means to create composite action between the inner and outer block wythes. This would dramatically increase the flexural strength of the wall, which could eliminate the need for cast piers, returns and most hidden structure. It could also make the wall suitable for use as a structural retaining wall. Jeffrey Baker claimed that the sprayed urethane foam insulation used for the FSC Faculty House, #3922, created composite action similar to a structural insulated panel (SIP), strengthening the wall. An 8" thick composite wall is 10 times stiffer and 3.5 times as strong as a double 3" wall with a 2" non- composite gap. The precast concrete sandwich wall industry has developed many options for introducing composite action between two concrete wythes. Spraying or casting an insulating material that has structural value has promise for either restoration work or new construction. It is an additional step, unless the blocks are redesigned as one-piece with a single layer of woven reinforcing in the center. St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance, St: RTW - retaining wall, ground transition, St: ELA - flexibility, elasticity, St: HOL - lightweight system, hollow shells A: INS - simultaneous install - one process, De: FLX - flexibility / 'infinite variety' A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-46 St: Fasten veneer tiles to a structural backing Structure According to Donald Leslie Johnson, ornamental tiles glued to a structural backing surface would have the same visual effect as the textile block. This was first done by Wright for Midway Gardens in Chicago (#1401). Textile block tiles were fastened to a CMU backup for the 2nd Biltmore (#2710) addition in 1981. A steel stud backup was later used for the Biltmore Conference Center. Although there can be significantly reduced labor costs, many of Wright's Essential Qualities would be compromised, as listed below. St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance, St: RTW - retaining wall, ground transition, Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, P: REP - repetition, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost I: MOM - Mono-Material, I: HON - honest expression, integrity, I: SIM - Simplicity, A: INS - simultaneous install - one process, St: SPD - woven reinforcing, 'spidery', St: HOL - lightweight system, hollow shells, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, I: ORN - integral ornament, O: NAT - inspired by Nature, St: CNT - continuity, no posts or beams, I: CON - continuity, aesthetic and structure as one A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: St: Fill joints with mortar Structure In 1931, Lloyd Wright proposed eliminating the grouted channels in favor of a plastic mortar that would be sealed at the edges by "hemp soaked in waterproof cement" or by plaster. This would simplify the molds as no grout core need be formed. He claimed that its looser tolerances would also "avoid the splash and dribble of grouting." Eric Lloyd Wright once commented that using conventional mortar for the joints would have been less expensive than grouted channels. (He was not necessarily recommending that. He was simply making an observation.) If skilled craftsmen were required to assemble the textile block, which, despite Wright's claims, it appeared that they were, then conventional mortar beds could have been less expensive and faster than the grouted channels. Both Lloyd Wright and Eric Lloyd Wright seemed to think so. Horizontal reinforcing could consist of stock welded wire trusses as are typically used for concrete masonry. Vertical reinforcing could be run through a formed grouted core at the center of the block, away from the joints and better protected from water infiltration. It would be more difficult to use glazed blocks with vertical reinforcing running throught the center of the block. A: STR - streamlined assembly, De: GLZ - integral glazing, modular, P: FAC - factory mass production, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost, A: BUI - simple to build A: MOR - no mortar or mason, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor) A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-47 St: Larger reinforcing bars Structure 3/8" to 1/2" diameter rebar has been recommended by engineers for increased wall capacity in bending / flexure. 1/4" square plain rods were typically specified by Wright for the grouted channels. It would double the amount of steel used in the structure, but, as the amount of steel used is quite small to begin with, that should not be a significant expense. St: LAT - lateral loads, seismic resistance, St: RTW - retaining wall, ground transition, St: SGL - single layer option, St: ELA - flexibility, elasticity Cs: MAT - Inexpensive, local materials, Cs: AFF - affordability, Cs: LES - less material, lighter A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: St: Post-tensioned reinforcing Structure Regarding the Usonian Automatic roof slab: "Suggestions for improvements in the roof (or second floor) slab construction were less obvious...post ‐tensioning might well reduce sagging and cracking" - Leonard J. Morse- Fortier. The owners of the Turkel House (#5513) are considering an expert recommendation to shore up the sagging carport by using post-tensioning. Precambering is not practical for the Usonian Automatic roof slabs due to the lack of tolerance in the block dimensions. That leaves one option to prevent sagging, and that is prestressing, either through post- tensioning or pretensioning. Post-tensioning is closer to the original concept, as individual blocks can be set with the post-tensioning ducts placed in the channels. It adds an additional step, and requires special expertise. Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, St: FLR - horizontal use, Du: PER - permanence, St: ELA - flexibility, elasticity A: STR - streamlined assembly, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-48 St: Precast-pretensioned floor planks Structure Regarding the Usonian Automatic roof slab: "Prestressed ‐ precast concrete plank technology might well be adapted to produce long but standard width roof planks with a coffered bottom and smooth top" - Leonard J. Morse-Fortier. Using prestressed concrete planks that span the width of the space would likely be faster, cheaper and better than the historical method. A truck-mounted hoist would be required to set the planks. The original blocks weighed over 200 lbs. each, so they could not have been easy to set regardless. It would not as authentic in the respect that there would be actual joints in one direction and false joints transverse. There could also be camber variations from plank to plank which might be noticeable. The intentional natural variations that occur from block to block would be gone as well. It is closer to the "one-process" ideal, as once the planks are set, the roof is finished except for the waterproof membrane. Electrical conduit and lighting fixtures could be pre-installed in the plank at the plant. A: STR - streamlined assembly, A: INS - simultaneous install - one process, P: FAC - factory mass production, Du: MAI - minimal maintenance, Du: H2O - water penetration minimized, U: ELE - electrical prefabricated, U: LGT - lighting integrated into the blocks, St: FLR - horizontal use, Cs: AFF - affordability, A: SPE - speed of assembly, Du: PER - permanence, So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), St: ELA - flexibility, elasticity, Cs: LAC - lower labor cost, A: JTS - tight joints, no dimensional tolerance P: SML - small module, I: HON - honest expression, integrity, I: SIM - Simplicity, So: LBS - unit weight, one person can lift, So: SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like, O: VAR - natural variations, P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: St: Returns at openings Structure Returns at openings stiffen thin, single wythe walls. For The Conventional House (#3201), Wright described the walls as "a single shell of reinforced concrete blocks inset at each opening to strengthen the thin wall." The Conventional House was a pre-Usonian prototype, meant to be affordable. This was to be accomplished by narrowing the outer wall to a single thin wythe of blocks, with lath and plaster inside. It is similar in design to the Arizona Biltmore Cottages (#2710). Wright's designs emphasized the "Third Dimension," with a lot of ins and outs. This provided ample opportunity for buttressing the thin, loadbearing wall by using corners as braces. It meshed with his philosophy of using the least amount of structure necessary. Eliminating the inner textile block wythe compromised some of the Essential Qualities, apparently with the goal of cost reduction in mind. De: GUI - guides design expression, De: 3RD - third Dimension, De: MUL - multi-material option, De: ANG - corners / obtuse angles, De: BEA - architectural quality / beauty, St: HOL - lightweight system, hollow shells, Cs: LES - less material, lighter I: MOM - Mono-Material, I: HON - honest expression, integrity, I: SIM - Simplicity, Cs: TRM - no trim, plaster, paint or gutters, O: CEL - cellular, crystalline, tree-like A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-49 U: Precast openings Utilities Owner Dorothy Eppstein (#4905) recalls "drilling holes into concrete blocks to create a rough rectangle, which would then be knocked out and used for light switches and outlets." Field cutting holes for electrical and plumbing integration was labor intensive and could have been avoided by precasting the blocks with formed holes. This takes advance planning, however, with advance coordination with the electrical and plumbing trades. 3D CAD could be used for interference checking. A: STR - streamlined assembly, Cs: UNS - minimize skilled field labor, U: ELE - electrical prefabricated, U: LGT - lighting integrated into the blocks, U: PLU - prefabricated plumbing core, A: SPE - speed of assembly, A: BUI - simple to build P: FLD - the factory goes to the house A naly sis: Used? Manufacturer Builder Owne r Society Enables: Hinders: 4-50 Dissertation of Edward D Losch for the Degree Ph.D. in Architecture Chapter 5 Relevant Projects and Built Examples School of Architecture Department of Building Science University of Southern California 5-1 Introduction to Chapter 5 A comprehensive examination of the complete historical record was undertaken to identify the essential qualities, challenges, problems, barriers to acceptance, and alternative methods of Frank Lloyd Wright’s textile block system. Part of this research involved cataloging and examining the relevant buildings and un-built projects that used the system. A computerized searchable and relational database was created using Microsoft Access to log and organize the data. Sources used include Wright’s collected writings, Taliesin correspondence, interviews with established Wright experts, site visits to many of the textile block buildings, and original drawings and specifications. Publications formed another major source of information about the textile block. These included books, journals, magazines, newspapers, web articles, and audio and video transcripts. The projects are numbered using a system developed by former Taliesin apprentice and the long-time Director of the Archives at the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer. These four digit opus numbers, despite a few anomalies, have become widely adopted by Wright scholars. Pfeiffer’s 12 volume Frank Lloyd Wright Monograph series (1985-1988) has become a key reference for the over 1000 projects that Wright designed over the course of his career. As such, it was a major source for this chapter. The first two digits roughly correspond to the year that the project’s design work was started in earnest. The last two denote the project’s chronological order for that year. Four digits were sufficient because Wright did not design more than 99 projects in any given year. By project count, Wright’s most prolific year was 1957, at age 90, when he had 59 projects on the boards. What follows builds and expands on Pfeiffer’s work for the 116 identified textile block projects. The sources listed above were used to uncover specific details about the block system used on each project. There were many variations, as Wright experimented with different block sizes and configurations throughout his career. This was true even for the apparently standardized Usonian Automatic designs. These buildings were prototypes to the very end. Not all of the 116 included projects were of textile block construction. A few were precursors (0623, 1401, 1509). Project 2111 consists of patent drawings for the original textile block system and is not tied to a particular building or project. Some had textile blocks in the early sketches, but not in the later ones, or vice-versa. Many projects from the Usonian period started out as a textile block design but were later converted to conventional masonry or stone. The fact that these conversions back and forth were made fairly easily demonstrated the versatility of the textile block system. Other brick or CMU Usonian designs used perforated textile blocks as accents. A note regarding references: Complete references to the quotes in the database entries for this chapter can be found in Appendix E. For example, under Project No. 5510, the Gerald Tonkens House, there is a quote by Rosalie Tonkens: "Wright predicted that the house would stand 300 years, and perhaps it will." In the table titled “Projects in Publications and Interviews”, found in Appendix E, Tonken’s quote can be found listed alphabetically by author with the date, the publication name, and page number, column and line. The author, date and publication name can then be used in Appendix G, an Annotated Bibliography, to look up the complete reference information, with ISBN, etc. 5-3 This relationship diagram shows how the Projects table is related to the other tables in the database. 5-4 0623 Harry E. Brown House 1906 Genesco IL Built? Notes: The Harry Brown House proposal was Wright's first design that utilized concrete block for its structure and facade. The Prairie Style design appears to use blocks as would be cast by a Sears, Roebuck 'Wizard' type block machine. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 0623.001 FLLWF 0623.002 5-5 1401 Midway Gardens 1913 Chicago IL Built? Notes: Wright used ornamental precast concrete tiles fastened to a structural backing for this complex of buildings. Joints were 1/4" wide. This open-air beer garden was demolished in 1929 after business dried up with the onset of Prohibition. "I had used the block in some such textured way in the Midway Garden upper walls. If I could eliminate the mortar joint I could make the whole fabric mechanical. I could do away with skilled labor" - FLW, 1932. Block Width, in: 17.75 Block Height, in: 20.75 Block Thickness, in: 2.75 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 368.3125 Year: Midway Gardens tile displayed at the Art Institute of Chicago FLLWF 1401.057 photo FLLWF 1401.081 railing detail FLLWF 1401.002 railing photo 5-6 1509 Imperial Hotel, Tokyo, Japan 1915 Tokyo Jap an Built? Notes: Hand-carved oya stone provided a percursor to the face-patterned textile block. Structural walls consisting of two layers , or wythes, of brick were used as stay-in-place forms and filled with concrete. Wright used this technique later, in combination with his textile block invention, to provide strong, monolithic reinforced concrete walls when required. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: Imperial Hotel postcard Source: Chusid, Concrete in California, 1990 5-7 2009 Aline Barnsdall Beverly Hills House 1922 Beverly Hills CA Built? Notes: Drawings for this project were discovered by Art Historian Kathryn Smith while examining documents at the Los Angeles City Hall Planning Department. It shows one of Wright's first proposed uses of concrete block as a mono-material. It was to be an expansive home, larger than Barnsdall's Hollyhock House. It featured a concrete block dome complete with oculus. The blocks were interlocking, similar to the Millard House, #2302. See the patent drawing, Project #2111, for comparison. It has an interesting modification from the Millard House in that there are textile block-like channels at the vertical joints. The sketch appears to show a vertical bar in each channel, presumably grouted. This would place the design in mid-1923. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2009.015 FLLWF 2009.015 detail Courtesy of Kathryn Smith Courtesy of Kathryn Smith 5-8 2103 California Textile Block House 1921 Los Angeles CA Built? Notes: This was an early study and another precursor to the textile block system. According to Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer, "The blocks are gradually emerging now as the total structure of the building, for both the interior and the exterior...The horizontal mullions of the glass doors conform to the same lines in the blocks, thereby creating an overall quiet harmony throughout the entire building." Actually, this appears to be a wood lath and stucco building with concrete block accents, very similar to Lloyd Wright's Henry Bollman House (built 1922). The concrete blocks are not yet "the total structure." That would come later with #2106 and #2108. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2103.001 FLLWF 2103.007 5-9 2104 Doheny Ranch 1923 Los Angeles CA Built? Notes: Wright designed this Textile block subdivision in early 1923 as a speculative study and set it at the base of the Santa Monica Mountains above Beverly Hills. "The block form introduces an order to a land [California] where none existed, and implies that that order may be extended to cover entire developments" - Charles Calvo. The project was to incorporate decomposed granite in the blocks, "easy and inexpensive," according to Wright. "The whole becomes a terraced garden suitable to the region...An attempt to preserve the native beauty of the Hollywood hills by preserving all natural contours and growth ‐embroidering the hills with architecture, the road itself becoming architecture as a part of the houses themselves" ‐FLW. This is one of the few textile block projects which incorporated the economies of scale necessary for economical mass production. It is also one of the first to use oblique angles. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2104.006 FLLWF 2104.004 FLLWF 2104.005 5-10 2106 Block House over L.A. Ravine 1921 Los Angeles CA Built? Notes: A single sketch shows a concrete block house in elevation, situated within and spanning a ravine. This and #2108, "Block House, 2 Story," are Wright's first designs that use concrete block for the entire structure (with the exception of #0623, the Prairie Style Harry E. Brown House). Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2106.001 5-11 2107 Desert Dwelling for FLLW 1921 Los Angeles CA Built? Notes: This is a study marked as a "Desert Dwelling for FLLW / 1921 - Los Angeles." It appears to be of concrete block construction with battering and reverse battering. The date was added decades later by Wright and is probably incorrect, as his concrete block experiments did not start in earnest until early 1923. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2107.002 FLLWF 2107.001 FLLWF 2107.001 detail 5-12 2108 Block House, Two Story 1921 Los Angeles CA Built? Notes: Wright claimed that he came up with his idea for the textile block in 1921.* If so, it would have started with these sketches for a cubic concrete block house using square, stacked blocks. It has been speculated that this design was for the studio Wright intended to build for himself in the flatlands of Beverly Hills. The woven reinforcing idea that would hold it all together came later, in the summer of 1923. This design has similarities to the Millard House, #2302. *Historian Robert Sweeney is rightly skeptical of this early date, and would place the design instead in early 1923. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2108.003 FLLWF 2108.002 5-13 2110 Block House 1921 Los Angeles CA Built? Notes: Another study for a small block house with battering, similar to #2107. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2110.001 5-14 2111 Patent Drawing 1923 Built? Notes: In a letter to Lloyd Wright in 1930: "Don't worry about the 'poured joint' patent. ‐‐As you know it has expired. Original patent granted in April 1915." Wright states that William E. Nelson's Nelstone patent was granted in 1925, after the Los Angeles houses were constructed. Attorney Litzenberg was later let go ‐ either Wright had no money to pursue the textile block patent or was concerned about the Nelstone patent, which was very similar to the textile block concept. There are problems with these drawings in that they show two different types of systems on the same sheet, a no- no for patent submission. In addition to the reinforced channel textile block, there are sketches of the unreinforced interlocking system used for the Millard House, #2302 (Fig. 6 and 7). Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2111.002 FLLWF 2111.002 Detail FLLWF 2111.004 5-15 2112 Block House for L.A. Hillside 1923 Los Angeles CA Built? Notes: According to Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer, "This drawing is incomplete, and therefore it is not possible to determine exactly what Wright had in mind for this project." (Frank Lloyd Wright, 1917-1942, The Complete Works, Vol. 2) Here there are textile block channels used in a structural capacity, which would place this drawing no earlier than mid-1923. Interestingly, there are 4" thick textile blocks for the outer wythe and Millard-style [#2302] interlocking blocks on the inner wythe, a combination that is found nowhere else. It appears that Wright had not yet developed the concept of two identical textile block wythes with an air gap between. The interlocking block idea was likely borrowed or adapted from Walter Burley Griffin's work. Scaling off of the drawing gives a 12 in. square block size, with an 8 in. wall thickness and 1.5 in. diameter grout cores. Block Width, in: 12 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 144 Year: FLLWF 2112.001 FLLWF 2112.001 Detail 5-16 2301 Community Playhouse, Little Dipper 1923 Los Angeles CA Built? Notes: The blocks are singly or doubly battered, offset 1 3/4" each course, and there are 30/60/135 degree angles in plan. There is also a battered semi-circular retaining wall. A note on one drawing calls for a 16" block grid x 3 = 4' module x 5 = 20' module grid. 3/16" steel rods are specified, smaller than the 1/4" standard that came after. The total wall thickness is 9.5", with a 2.5" gap between wythes. This still can be considered to fit the module, as there are 3/4" deep reveals around the block perimeter (FLLW Fdn 2301.015). The wall thickness at the joint is 8", which is 1/2 of the 16" block module. The 3/4" thick projecting portion of the block is allowed to extend past the grid. This is necessary in order to stay within the grid when turning corners. The three Los Angeles textile block houses share these dimensions (#2304, 2401, 2402). This project was cancelled mid-construction when the owner, Aline Barnsdall, grew concerned about cost over- runs. The curved west retaining wall remains, although it was constructed without the battering shown in the plans. An inspection of the wall by the author noted a 4" gap between wythes that was filled with reinforced concrete. Many ring fractures were present, where the face of the block has fallen completely off. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 16 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 256 Barnsdall Park, 4800 Hollywood Blvd 90027 Year: FLLWF 2301.009 Remains of the circular retaining wall, October 3, 2015 5-17 FLLWF 2301.014 Courtesy of Kathryn Smith 5-18 2302 Alice Millard House, La Miniatura 1923 Pasadena CA Built? Notes: This house got a lot of attention when it went up, and Wright was pleased with how it turned out. "As built it remains one of Wright's most magical houses…the south elevation resembles a temple lost in the jungle" - Timothy Street-Porter. “Yes, the building would be made of the ‘blocks’ as a kind of tree Itself standing at home among the other trees in its own native land...All we would have to do would be to educate the concrete block...The walls would thus become thin but solid reinforced slabs…And common labor could do it all…The house would be cool in summer, warm in winter, and dry always...permanent…fire-proof, and…beautiful, for $10,000” - FLW, 1932. The original design called for 24" square blocks, but this was later reduced to 16" square, for weight reduction. Unlike the textile block system, the blocks were not reinforced and had conventional mortar joints. According to Jeffrey Chusid, this may have been due to resistance from the Pasadena building department to Wright's woven reinforcing idea. At least that was the reason that Wright put forward: "An earthquake ‐proof light construction but no permit could be issued because concrete got too big a preference." Wright varied the proportions of sand, gravel and cement so “that the blocks would not all be the same color.” The molds were of wood construction, unlike for later projects which used aluminum, for greater precision. The 1/2" mortar joints were mostly able to accommodate the dimensional variations. See Project #2111 for a patent drawing with the block configuration (Fig. 6 and 7). Block Width, in: 15.5 Block Height, in: 15.5 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 240.25 645 Prospect Circle 91103 Year: FLLWF 2302.014 8/20/2010 5-19 8/20/2010 8/20/2010 5-20 2304 John Storer House 1923 Los Angeles CA Built? Notes: "The second in Wright's series of textile block residences, designed for Dr. John Storer, rises fortresslike on a series of lateral terraces set into a Hollywood hillside" - Timothy Street-Porter. "Even before the Storer House was completed, at least two things were clear. The system did not yield low ‐cost construction: the project budgets were 2 to 3 times the original estimates. And Wright was not destined to become a California architect" - Jeffrey Chusid. "The blocks were formed under pressure in machine ‐made metal molds, which were more precise" - Marie Clayton. "One might have expected grey concrete to be unacceptable in a residence; however, the decomposed granite used as an aggregate adds a warm yellow cast and, combined with a red-hued wood, the concrete becomes perfectly suitable" - Thomas A. Heinz. "An interesting picture of a pre-fabricated mono-material house eliminating skilled labor in its construction is illustrated herewith…[knit together by steel strands]...requires no skill, being practically automatic…In this case the "factory" is easily transferable from site to site. The factory goes to the house instead of the house going to the factory" - FLW describing the Storer House in 1936. The Storer House is the best preserved of the Los Angeles block houses. It was carefully restored in the 1980s and the blocks have been sealed every 5 to 7 years since. According to Eric Lloyd Wright: "We did use a siloxane sealer, a German product. You have to eventually reapply it, because [the pores[ open up over time." "Where blocks could not be brought back through sculpting or staining, face blocks were manufactured and carefully grafted onto the coffers of damaged ones" - Kathryn Smith. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 16 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2.5 Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 256 8161 Hollywood Blvd 90069 Year: December, 2010 FLLWF 2304.001 5-21 FLLWF 2304.005 FLLWF 2304.017 5-22 2306 A.M. Johnson Desert Compound 1921 Mohave CA Built? Notes: The Johnson Desert Compound project was notable for its reliance on 30/60 degree angles. It also made extensive use of battered walls. "Richard Neutra, then in residence at Taliesin, commented to his mother-in-law, that Wright wanted the house to look like a sprouting cactus" - Robert L. Sweeney. The battering effect was apparently an analogy to natural layered growth. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2306.021 FLLWF 2306.017 5-23 2401 Charles Ennis House 1923 Los Angeles CA Built? Notes: “The Ennis house was fifth of the block ‐shell group” - FLW, 1932. By this author's count, the first was the Millard House (#2302), the second, Little Dipper (#2301), the third, Storer House (#2304), the fourth, Freeman House (#2402). The sixth was the Arizona Biltmore Hotel (#2710), the seventh, San Marcos (#2704), eighth, R.L. Jones House (#2902), and the ninth refers to the House on the Mesa exhibition project (#3102). Each building was considered a separate "type" and a step in the evolution of his textile block concept. FLW to Ennis: "The work is slower than I anticipated; the city has interfered in points wholly unnecessarily, arbitrarily adding some to costs…You see, the final result is going to stand on that hill a hundred years or more. Long after we are all gone, it will be pointed out as the Ennis house and pilgrimages will be made to it by lovers of the beautiful..." "Sadly, the large earthquakes which have wracked Los Angeles in the past several years have taken their toll on the Ennis House and, already weakened in earlier tremors, large sections of the surfaces of the blocks have become loose" - Thomas A. Heinz, 2001. "While he used sand from the site of the Ennis House to fabricate concrete textile blocks, the organic compounds in the sand proved unstable over the years, requiring a major reconstruction" - Alan Hess. "All three houses have successfully replaced block...The Ennis House has done this to the greatest extent, replacing entire planes of block that had experienced ring fracturing (200 in total), as well as inserting new structure in retaining walls and the motor court" - Jeffrey Chusid. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 16 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 256 2655 Glendower Ave 90027 Year: May 14, 2014 The Ennis House is "Type 5" 5-24 FLLWF 2401.003 FLLWF 2401.04 5-25 2402 Samuel and Harriett Freeman House 1923 Los Angeles CA Built? Notes: The Freeman House has been referred to as a "Modernist gem" and the "First Usonian House." It is the smallest of the Los Angeles houses, built for a married couple of modest means. Harriet Freeman wrote to Wright in 1956: "In case you don't know it, I love every minute I spend in our home and after so many years too." The design had recursive elements: "This self ‐referential ornament makes sense since the key to the building's shape is the 16" square block. The house consists of 11,000 of the cells, or blocks, in 52 variations. Clearly, some principles of proportioning had to be developed which would provide an order for these blocks, and, almost like a fractal curve, we find the individual blocks forming progressively larger squares of façade openings, rooms, even pieces of the house" - Jeffrey Chusid. Mitered corner blocks were attempted for the first time at the Freeman House. Miters were rarely used after that. Wright typically specified one-piece cast corners. The mitered blocks caused problems - the grout channels did not line up and the corner joint was ragged and visible. Like the other L.A. houses, the dry-cast blocks were of poor quality - "it is clear that the most rapid way for water to enter the structure is through the very porous, sponge ‐like blocks" - Alice O. Beltran. Seismic performance was mixed. The house survived the San Fernando (1971) and Long Beach (1933) earthquakes apparently without damage. According to Jeffrey Chusid: "Eric Wright maintained that the inherent flexibility of the textile block system would help protect the houses...The textile blocks, Eric Wright said, should be free to rotate slightly around the grout tubes, with the steel reinforcing providing a flexible mesh to hold the system in place." Although, according to Chusid, "The Northridge earthquake nearly destroyed the Freeman house...The block membrane of the walls stretched and bent, opening numerous cracks between individual blocks as well as separations between major building components." Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 16 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 256 1962 Glencoe Way 90028 Year: Sept. 18, 2010 Jan. 30, 2010 5-26 FLLWF 2402.002 FLLWF 2402.020 5-27 2503 Alice Millard Gallery 1929 Pasadena CA Built? Notes: This unrealized project was an extention of the Millard House Gallery. Wright used the same block design/system as used on the existing house so as to "satisfy the [building] department." Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 645 Prospect Circle 90069 Year: FLLWF 2503.005 FLLWF 2503.002 5-28 2504 Phi Gamma Delta 1924 Madison WI Built? Notes: This is the first textile block project sited outside of California, in the cold upper Midwest no less. Here, Wright intended to demonstrate the universality of the system. "Obviously the architect considered the textile block system ‐ seemingly so appropriate to the dry hill country around Los Angeles where he developed it ‐ suitable for use in any part of the United States" - Paul E. Sprague. Block walls are here designed to be double thickness with insulation as needed in southern Wisconsin to protect against extreme cold in the winter as well as humid heat in the summer" - Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer. As with the Little Dipper, #2301, blocks are battered in two directions. The construction bids were too expensive for the fraternity board, who ended up selecting another architect. Stone was used instead of concrete block, and a Gothic Tudor style instead of Wright's Mayan-Modern. In the end, the second architect's design was also too expensive, but it was eventually built with the aid of a second mortgage. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 16 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 256 Year: FLLWF 2504.001 FLLWF 2504.041 5-29 2702 San Marcos Block Wall Mockup 1929 Chandler AZ Built? Notes: This wall section mockup for the San Marcos project was constructed out of plaster with wire-reinforced grouted tubes to hold it together. "The block faces designed for San Marcos [#2704] (and the related Cudney House [#2706]) had deeply cut surfaces which, when collectively set in a vertical position, gave the impression of the outer structural ribs so obvious on the stately saguaro cactus" - Donald Leslie Johnson. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Ocatilla Camp Year: FLLWF 2702.026 Grouted cores from mockup, courtesy Kathryn Smith 5-30 2704 San Marcos in the Desert 1929 Chandler AZ Built? Notes: “I finally found simple mechanical means to produce a complete building that looks the way the Machine made it – as much so at least as any woven fabric need look. Tough, light but not ‘thin,’ imperishable, plastic – no necessary lie about it anywhere and yet, Machine ‐made, mechanically perfect. Standardization as the soul of the Machine here, for the first time may be seen in the hand of the Architect” - FLW, 1929. “It was to grow up out of the desert as the Sahuaro grew...A mono ‐material building and the latest expression of the block ‐shell system. Reinforced masonry within and without” - FLW, 1932. Several major innovations were proposed for San Marcos. The first was the use of a natural cement made from local rock. “We wanted to investigate a new natural cement found in that region, as perhaps an ideal material for block ‐making...This material …was white, set quickly and hard, and was waterproof” - FLW, 1932. "I have a report regarding the chemical analysis of the natural cement. First, it is a natural cement. Second, it makes an admirable mortar. The samples received are, however, too small to make a cube of full size to test the material for crushing strength. It takes but one hour and fifteen minutes for it to achieve its final set. It has a pretty good tensile strength, ‐‐255 lbs. in seven days; 180 lbs, in twenty ‐four hours. It sets very qickly and will be extremely useful for our purpose" - FLW to A.J. Chandler, 10/24/1929. Lab tests showed that the cement had potential if calcined (heated to a high temperature). The second proposed innovation was to cast glass textile blocks, complete with perimeter channels for reinforcing, for use throughout the complex in place of light fixtures and conventionally-framed windows. Wright corresponded with a Dutch glass manufacturer: "Here's hoping that out of this 'marriage of true minds' will grow something of immense benefit to the glass industry, to architecture, and therefore inevitably to ourselves." There were to be electric lights in the glass blocks, 500 ‐600 required, "internal joints with cement and steel reinforcement". Wright made it clear that it could be patented. "I would like to see developed in the glass industry a quality of glass suitable for building material. In some cases it would be necessary to have the glass clear so that it might be seen through, or at least let light through. In other cases, be opaque. In nearly every building both kinds would be required." "These glass blocks are to occur in the wall naturally in place of the concrete blocks" - FLW to R.M. Cochius, 11/23/1928 to 6/17/1929. The plan was put on hold when it was found that the plant could not produce blocks greater than 15" by 5", and that a minimum order of 10,000 pieces was required. Lastly, a specially-designed steel clip was devised to hold the block wythes together and act as a spacer (FLLW Fdn, 2704.116, "Toncan clip"). This was not used by Wright on any subsequent projects, although a similar device was fabricated in 2011 for the Florida Southern College Faculty House, #3922. Builders did not understand the plans, and especially the lack of dimensions: "A letter from Lloyd says you are up against, primarily I think, the usual inability to grasp the block system…unless the block system is once grasped, no drawings would ever enable a builder to estimate the plans for the first time" - FLW to Chandler, 7/22/1929. This all became moot later in the year when funding dried up after the October 1929 stock market crash. Block Width, in: 20 Block Height, in: 15 Block Thickness, in: 3.375 Air Space, Gap, in: 3.25 Core Diameter, in: 2.25 Block Area, in²: 300 Year: 5-31 FLLWF 2704.199 FLLWF 2704.062 FLLWF 2704.106 FLLWF 2704.116 5-32 2705 San Marcos Water Gardens 1929 Chandler AZ Built? Notes: This add-on project for San Marcos, #2704, consisted of a series of cabins. According to a sketch from Henry- Russell Hitchcock's "In the Nature of Materials" the walls were to be constructed of 4" thick concrete blocks. Block height scales to about 8" high for each course. The roofs were canvas, similar to the Ocatilla cabins and also, later, to Taliesin West in Scottsdale, AZ. The limited technology of the time prevented more wide-spread adoption of Wright's fabric roof structure concept. The lightness of the fabric overhead would have provided a nice contrast to the heaviness of the concrete blocks below. Wright was not satisfied with the wood roofs used on many of his textile block buildings. They were not fire-resistant, for one thing. In the 1950s, he specified a concrete textile block roof system for his Usonian Automatic designs [#5612]. Although it visually unified the building with a mono-material concrete construction, it was expensive and troublesome to put all that weight at the roof level, especially for what was meant to be low-cost housing. A roof fabric structure that uses modern technology for thermal, weather, and fire-resistance is now a viable option (Pedersen, 2014). The concept appears here first, with Wright's unbuilt San Marcos Water Gardens cabin project. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: 8 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2705.002 FLLWF 2705.015 5-33 FLLWF 2705.044 5-34 2706 Ralph Cudney House 1929 Chandler AZ Built? Notes: The Cudney House project was to be part of the San Marcos complex, #2704. It had a hexagonal layout, emulating a vertical crystalline growth. There were no windows as such, only alternating areas of solid and void formed by the concrete and glass blocks. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2706.007 5-35 2707 Owen Young House 1929 Chandler AZ Built? Notes: The Young House, another unbuilt project for San Marcos (#2704), was unique in that it featured square blocks turned at a 45 degree angle to form a grid of diamonds. Openable glass panes were integrated into the wall surfaces, similar to what was eventually used for the Turkel House, #5513. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2707.001 FLLWF 2707.005 5-36 2708 Chandler Block House 1929 Chandler AZ Built? Notes: There seems to be disagreement among experts as to the extent of textile block use on this prototype design. According to Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer, this project uses stucco and wood construction with textile block accents over openings. In this case, the term "Block House" would refer to a city block, as opposed to the construction method. Robert Sweeney maintained that the project specified single shell block construction, similar to The Conventional House, #3201, and as first tested in 1923 in Alice Millard's Garage. It is the earliest project to use 12" by 24" blocks. Most blocks are plain, with patterned blocks over openings. It could be said that this was the first Usonian Automatic design. It was a simplification meant to reduce cost, making the textile block more affordable to a middle-upper income family. There are similarities to the Benjamin Adelman House, #5101, the Arthur Pieper House, #5218, and the Conventional House, #3201. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 288 Year: FLLWF 2708.011 FLLWF 2708.001 FLLWF 2708.011 Detail FLLWF 2708.011 Detail 5-37 2710 Arizona Biltmore Hotel and Cottages 1927 Phoenix AZ Built? Notes: As a consultant, and not the lead architect, Wright was overruled on many aspects of this project. A 16" square block was originally proposed by Wright, but rectangular dimensions were eventually selected. He seemed to have accepted that, and, in fact, used rectangular blocks himself on almost all of his subsequent textile block projects. He objected to the height of the building, believing it to be one story too tall, which diminished the horizontal emphasis. Also, the added height put it beyond the structural capacity of the textile blocks to serve as loadbearing walls. Hidden reinforced concrete beams, columns and slabs did the heavy lifting. "The wreck here at the Arizona ‐Biltmore is due directly to the lack of the architect's central and final authority in matters of construction. And the plumbing, heating and lighting systems in that building were independent elements that could interfere with and wreck the building wherever and whenever they pleased ‐ instead of being worked into it as an integral part of the architect's design ‐ And they did wreck it with consuming waste as may be seen" - FLW to A.J. Chandler, 9/27/1928. He was more pleased with the 11 cottages, which used an outer layer of textile blocks as the structure, with a lath and plaster finish inside. "In the building of the hotel cottages, however, the details of the system itself were better followed with better results" - FLW, 1932. Block Width, in: 18 Block Height, in: 13.5 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 243 Year: Biltmore Hotel Exterior, 12/19/2010 Biltmore Hotel Interior, 12/19/2010 5-38 FLLWF 2710.035 Biltmore Cottage Exterior 12/19/2010 5-39 2901 Richard Lloyd Jones House - First Version 1929 Tulsa OK Built? Notes: This initial version of the Lloyd Jones House used a 30/60 diagonal grid in plan. It was arguably more dynamic and interesting than the squared-off built version (#2902). In a letter to Richard Lloyd Jones dated 12/14/1928, Wright listed many of the benefits he claimed for the textile block system, in an attempt to reassure his cousin. The blocks consisted of "water ‐resisting cement," and would be "water and air tight." He covered all the major bases: Mono ‐material, one process, cheaper, permanent, fireproof, and used local materials. He acknowledged that the dry-cast blocks were porous: "It would be possible to make the exterior blocks waterproof to a reasonable extent, but we have found that it is cheaper and leaves us free to produce a more beautiful and colorful texture for the exterior if we coat the inside of the outside block with asphalt." Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 3704 S Birmingham Ave 74105 Year: FLLWF 2901.007 FLLWF 2901.002 5-40 2902 Richard Lloyd Jones House 1929 Tulsa OK Built? Notes: Jones was not happy with the first sketches (#2901) produced by Wright for his house. He was particularly concerned about the diagonal piers disrupting the view of the outdoors. In response, Wright squared off the building but kept the alternating piers of glass and block. The piers were meant to eliminate punched openings and foster what he termed the "Third Dimension." "[The Jones House] is a house without walls…yet it is very strong and private, almost a fortress" - FLW, 7/7/1931. Wright felt that his critics missed the point with the house. In a letter to Russell Hitchcock, dated 2/26/1932, he stated "The true value of the Jones house, as the vanished wall and the significant freedom that may accompany standardization in the Machine age, you throw entirely away." There were issues with irregular surfaces, alignment and efflorescence on the block faces, documented in correspondence between Wright and Job Superintendent Paul Mueller. "Alkali from the Arkansas River sands began to appear in white streaks, and for several years the exterior had to be repeatedly washed with a weak solution of nitric acid before the discoloration ended" - Jenkin Lloyd Jones. In a letter dated 4/8/1935, R.L. Jones complained that "the walls absorb water like a sponge." Earlier, he complained that the roof tiles were not even - he called them "toe stubbers." Mrs. R.L. Jones, was quoted regarding the many roof leaks: "This is what we get for leaving a work of art out in the rain." According to Meryle Secrest, Mrs. Jones "wanted a wood house and got a concrete one." There was a limit to the thermal mass benefit: "In the hot summer the stones soaked up the heat all day and radiated it at night, a veritable fireless cooker" - Jenkin Lloyd Jones. The solid high-mass construction had its pluses for a house located in "tornado alley": "Once [the house] was struck directly by a tornado that half ‐emptied the swimming pool and hurled the yard furniture completely over the roof. We had to replace two panes of glass" - Jenkin Lloyd Jones. Block Width, in: 20 Block Height, in: 15 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 3 Core Diameter, in: 2.5 Block Area, in²: 300 3704 S Birmingham Ave 74105 Year: FLLWF 2902.0051 FLLWF 2902.018 5-41 FLLWF 2902.029 FLLWF 2902.036 5-42 2905 St. Mark's in the Bouwerie 1929 New York NY Built? Notes: This was to be an 18 and 14 story four-tower project for New York City. There is evidence that Wright planned to use "glass bricks," possibly in the form of glass textile blocks for the curtain wall system. R.M. Cochius had corresponded with Wright previously about fabricating structural glass textile blocks for the San Marcos project (#2704). In a letter dated 10/29/1929, Cochius writes: "In 'The New York Herald', Paris, from Saturday October 26, 1929, we have read that you are going to build in New York 4 very big 18-story inverted cones and that you intend to use glass bricks." Wright responded, "We are now working on the problem of glass for buildings. We have several schemes concerning which we shall no doubt consult you soon." Drawings of the project show a glass grid with rectangular panes that would fit within the textile block range. Mullions appear to be steel, however. In any case, the project was interrupted by the Great Depression and was never built. A variation of this design was resurrected for the Price Tower in Bartlesville, Oklahoma, #5215. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 2905.002 FLLWF 2905.031 FLLWF 2905.049 FLLWF 2905.049 detail 5-43 2907 Alice Millard House Addition 1929 Pasadena CA Built? Notes: This unrealized proposed two-story addition to the Millard House, #2302, appears to use the same type of interlocking blocks as were used on the original house. No elevations have been found for this project. Later, in 1934, five designs for the site were prepared by Wright's Taliesin Fellowship apprentices. These utilized a single outer textile block wythe with a plastered interior face, similar to the Arizona Biltmore Cottages, #2710. According to Robert Sweeney, all five were rejected by Alice Millard, calling them "workmen's cottages." Block Width, in: 15.5 Block Height, in: 15.5 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 240.25 645 Prospect Circle 90069 Year: FLLWF 2907.001 FLLWF 2907.002 5-44 3102 House on the Mesa 1931 Denver CO Built? Notes: Wright designed this house for a 1932 exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art. It reflects a turn away from the concrete block as a mono-material. It elegates the blocks to the walls only. The house is cryptically referred to as "The Ninth General Type" in the drawing titles. At the time, Wright called his Ennis House, #2401, the "fifth of the block ‐shell group.” By this author's count, the first was the Millard House (#2302), the second, Little Dipper (#2301), the third, Storer House (#2304), the fourth, Freeman House (#2402). The sixth was the Arizona Biltmore Hotel (#2710), the seventh, San Marcos (#2704), the eighth, the R.L. Jones House (#2902), and House on the Mesa (#3102) makes nine. Each building was considered a separate "type" and a step in the evolution of Wright's textile block concept. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 3102.005-016 FLLWF 3102.036 "Structural Basis for the Grammar of Type Nine" FLLWF 3102.005 FLLWF 3102.020 5-45 3201 Conventional House 1931 Built? Notes: Exhibition Model: "The walls are a single shell of reinforced concrete blocks inset at each opening to strengthen the thin wall." In a 1932 letter to Fortune Magazine, Wright stated: "The Conventional House [#3201] is about what the middle of the road citizen of U.S.A. does afford." In a 1933 letter to the Metropolitan Museum, the Conventional House is described as "single shell concrete block, copper and glass. Roof and floor slabs concrete. A house for the average well to do American." Like the Arizona Biltmore Cottages, #2710, and, possibly, the Chandler Block House, #2708, the house is of single shell block construction with lath and plaster inside. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 288 Year: FLLWF 3201.003 FLLWF 3201.005 FLLWF 3201.005 FLLWF 3201.002 5-46 3402 Broadacre City, Master Plan 1934 Built? Notes: The textile block system was an important part of Wright's radical urban planning vision. Textile block essential qualities that are part of Broadacre City include a prefabricated kitchen and bath, not patented - free for all to use, one-process construction, and freedom of choice. The attached illustration is from Pfeiffer, 2010. "Wright's belief in the sovereignty of the individual and the importance of the single family home was a major premise of Broadacre City. Each person and every family should have the right to live as they choose in their own way" (Stipe, 2014). Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 5825.005 FLLWF 5825.001 FLLWF 5825.011 5-47 3606 Little San Marcos Resort Inn 1935 Chandler AZ Built? Notes: It is not known whether the textile block would have been used for this scaled-down version of San Marcos in the Desert [#2704]. The vertical striations on Elevation 3606.001 suggest that this could have been Wright's intention (see #2702). Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 3606.001 FLLWF 3606.001 Detail 5-48 3814 Florida Southern College (Florida Southern College) 1938 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: The textile blocks for the Florida Southern Campus were cast using student labor, at least for the first few buildings. Local sand (from the orange groves) was contaminated with fertilizer, so aggregate needed to be trucked in from elsewhere in Florida. It was mized with coquina, a soft limestone formed from seashells, obtained from the St. Augustine area. After many months of experiments that failed to achieve the proper strength, color and texture, white cement was added, and Wright was finally satisfied with the result. The white cement and ground coquina was expensive, however, so it was placed first in the mold as the face mix. A backup mix using sand and grey cement was then added on top. The process was slow, and quality was inconsistent. Insufficient compaction by the student labor would result in the block falling apart when removed from the form. Wesley Peters to FLW, 11/1/1939: "He [Dr. Spivey] employs large groups of students who wish to earn their way through college for ramming the blocks, etc. This is all right and sound in principle I guess, except that these boys have not had adequate and competent supervision, having a tendency to pass imperfect blocks, to ram up imperfectly, etc." Most forms were made of wood. Later, a 1/8" taper, or "draft," was added around the mold edges to ease form removal. C.W. Palmore to Wesley Peters, 5/17/1939: "Inasmuch as there is no draft on the inside of the 5/8 inch groove we found it impossible to make a perfect concrete block." Long term durability has not been good, and the Florida Southern College structures built with textile block are now on the World Monuments Fund's endangered list. "The decorative concrete blocks used to construct the buildings, which Wright said would 'be standing a thousand years into the future,' failed to live up to that prediction. Many of the blocks are cracking and disintegrating" - Dale Allen Gyure, 2010. Block Width, in: 36 Block Height, in: 9 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 324 Year: FLLWF 3814.016 FLLWF 3814.017 perforated block 5-49 FLLWF 3814.018 block types 5-50 3816 Florida Southern College, Annie Pfeiffer Chapel 1938 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: This was the first major textile block structure completed on the Florida Southern College campus. The 60 ft. high chapel walls were strengthened by filling the cavity between the block wythes with reinforced concrete. 3/4" diameter reinforcing bars were used in the cavity and 1/2" diameter bars for the grouted channels. Progress was slow: "By January 1940 the chapel's block walls were constructed to about twelve feet, but Spivey was not pleased. 'I stay 'sore' practically the whole time because the chapel goes along so slowly,' he told Wright. 'I have never seen, in all my life, a building go along so slowly'" - Dale Allan Gyure The result was spectacular: "Most of the blocks on the lowest level contained colored glass - more than 50,000 cubes of red, amber, blue, green and white glass inserted, by hand, into the freshly molded blocks. These colored jewels were intended to sparkle in the light and add to the church's ethereal quality" - Dale Allan Gyure. In 1944, the second story blocks were covered with stucco to stop water leaks that were occurring through the blocks (MacDonald, 2007). Many of the blocks have been disintegrating over time. A campaign is underway to replace some of them: "The project resulted in an innovative use of 3-D printers to assist in creating molds for the blocks Wright used to build the chapel. The process replaces the painstakingly hand-crafted molds previously used to make the blocks, significantly reducing the cost." "Most of the blocks on this [west] wall are showing the effects of weather and time" - Cary McMullen, 2014. Block Width, in: 36 Block Height, in: 9 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 324 Year: FLLWF 3816.039 photo FLLWF 3816.025 detail 5-51 Annie Pfeiffer Chapel in November, 2011 Annie Pfeiffer Chapel in November, 2011 5-52 3817 Florida Southern College, Theatre 1938 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: The sketches for this building proposed for Florida Southern College show smooth, rounded surfaces with no trace of the concrete textile blocks used for the rest of the campus. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 3817.001 5-53 3911 Ludd Spivey House 1939 Fort Lauderdale FL Built? Notes: The blocks invented for this house design differ from the standard textile block in significant ways. They are one piece and hollow, similar to a standard manufactured, extruded block, except that the hollow space runs horizontal instead of vertical. Since the block is curved that would seem to be very difficult to form. The curves follow different radii in different areas, also a major complication for forming. The 10" thickness would make them more stable for setting. Since the blocks were battered as well as curved, the vertical joints would not line up, making it impossible to run continuous vertical reinforcing. There were perforated blocks for ventilation and light penetration through colored glass, similar to the Florida Southern Campus blocks. This plan was modified and reused for the Alfred Bergman House, #4708, which also was never built. Aside from that, Wright did not attempt to use this type of block configuration again. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 10 Air Space, Gap, in: 6 Core Diameter, in: 6 Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 3911.008 FLLWF 3911.008 Source: sdrdesign.com/SpiveyPlan.jpg 5-54 3922 Florida Southern College, Faculty House 1939 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: This project was built in 2013 on the original site for the original client: "I want you to design in this faculty project at least twelve houses. Six of them with two bedrooms and six with three bedrooms and also a study in each house. As soon as you can prepare these plans I can secure the money from the government to build them" - Dr Ludd Spivey to FLW, 8/1/1939. The FHA refused to back mortgages for the homes, stating that the designs were too radical, and the homes could not be built. In 2010, Florida Southern College dusted off the plans and held fund-raisers which raised at least two million dollars. They then commissioned Architect M. Jeffrey Baker to build one of the houses on its original site. The 1700 sq. ft. house was originally designed to use the same textile block system as the rest of the campus. The estimated 12 month construction period stretched to 32 months, and the project was eventually completed in late 2013. The process was invaluable in exploring what modern materials and methods could be used to update the textile block to today's standards. Much lead time was spent experimenting with different mixes and casting procedures in an attempt to match the original look but with much improved strength and durability. One notable finding was that natural cement has promise for use in the block, instead of Portland cement. Natural cement set much faster, allowing form turn-around in a couple hours instead of a full day. Other innovations included using CNC techniques to craft teflon-coated plastic mold inserts, fabrication of special clips to bridge the block wythes and act as spacers, and the use of sprayed urethane foam insulation between the wythes. The building has been repurposed as the Sharp Family Tourism and Education Center. Block Width, in: 36 Block Height, in: 9 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 324 750 Frank Lloyd Wright Way 33803 Year: Construction photo, Fall 2011 FLLWF 3922.003 5-55 Construction sign, Fall 2011 Corner block 5-56 4031 Florida Southern College, Seminar Buildings 1940 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: Three small classroom buildings were built out of textile blocks, the Carter, Hawkins, and Walbridge buildings. Two piers at the entrance to the Hawkins building contain test blocks of various colors. Apparently no blocks were allowed to go to waste. There are no windows, all natural illumination comes from block perforations which hold colored glass. Block Width, in: 36 Block Height, in: 9 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 324 Year: Entrance piers showing varied color blocks, Fall 2011 Fall, 2011 Fall, 2011 5-57 4118 Florida Southern College, Roux Library 1941 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: Much of the Florida Southern College E.T. Roux Library was constructed by students. "According to Prof. Donna Stoddard, "The student workers molded 14,000 blocks by special patterns and laid more than 4,600 of them." - MacDonald, 2007. The Reading Room walls are curved, but the radius if sufficiently large for rectangular blocks to be used. A block replacement program was initiated in 1981: "Structurally, the buildings remained sound, but deterioration extended to the steel reinforcement rods buried in the mortar. Replacements were made for some of the colored- glass pieces that had fallen out or been removed by souvenir hunters" - Randall M. MacDonald, 2007. Some of these replacement blocks have also deteriorated (Author site visit, 11/19/2011). Block Width, in: 36 Block Height, in: 9 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 324 Year: FLLWF 4118.016 Student laborers construct the E.T. Roux Library (Courtesy of Florida Southern College) Restoration work was undertaken in 1981 (Courtesy of Florida Southern College) Detail - the Roux library in 2011 5-58 4119 John Nesbitt, Ennis House Remodel, "Sijistan" 1940 Los Angeles CA Built? Notes: Radio and film personality John Nesbitt purchased the Ennis House in 1940 and owned it until 1942. In a letter dated April 29, 1940, Lloyd Wright predicted that Nesbitt would not stay there long and stated that Nesbitt's wife was "frightened by the place." Nesbitt commissioned Wright to make renovations to the house. Improvements included a pool, billiard room and a new heating system. "The furniture designs, labeled "Block Furniture," take their motif from the concrete block patterns prevalent throughout the house" - Pfeiffer, 2010. None of the furniture was built, although several chairs were later produced for an owner of the Storer House, #2304 (Jeffrey Head, LA Times, 1/22/2011). Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 2655 Glendower Ave 90027 Year: FLLWF 4119.002 5-59 4211 Florida Southern College, Music Building #1 1943 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: Project - appears to be cast concrete or stucco, not concrete block. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 4211.016 FLLWF 4211.001 FLLWF 4211.002 FLLWF 4211.010 5-60 4212 Florida Southern College, Ordway Industrial Arts Building 1942 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: Wright was quoted regarding this building: "I don't think I've ever done any building that is so completely strong and adapted to its purpose" (MacDonald, 2007). It forgoes the patterned, perforated and stained glass blocks in favor of a plainer treatment. Textile blocks are used as infill walls. The main structure is an exposed reinforced concrete frame. Block Width, in: 36 Block Height, in: 9 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 324 Year: Ordway Building in Fall, 2011 FLLWF Opus 4212, Source: Pfeiffer, 2010, Vol 2, Pg 469 FLLWF 4212.013 5-61 4405 Whitney Memorial 1944 Built? Notes: This memorial building was intended to serve as an arts and crafts center for Florida Southern College. It incorporated the "Little Dipper" plans for Aline Barnsdall (#2301) on one end. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 4405.003 5-62 4508 Calico Mills 1946 Amedabad Indi Built? Notes: This proposed high rise department store for the Calico Mills company in India was to have a textile block curtain wall. The large blocks have integral glazing, and span three floor levels without lateral support. At least some of the glazing is openable for ventilation. A variation of the design has the block screen spanning 5 floors. Grouted channel textile block reinforcing rods are called out in FLLWF drawing 4508.027. No doubt Wright saw the analogy of woven reinforcing being used for a building owned by a cotton mill. This is the first time that the system is specified with units much too large for a person to lift. The concept reappears later with the Lenkurt Electric project, #5520. "As to India I think the concrete block system I have used is desirable...The general construction is scientific and economical" - FLW to G. Sarabhai, 1946. According to structural calculations made for the project, block walls are a non-loadbearing screen supported by the cantilevered floor. "Slab is designed as a continuous cantilever carrying outer parapet and…the portion of wall between floors. Assume block walls 5" thick and 9'-0" high…Note that the block walls in addition to being carried by floor cantilevers designed for that purpose, are further strengthened by the horizontal reinforcement in the block joints brought around to anchorage in piers IX and XII. This forms a horizontal cantilever which, as a whole, is capable of supporting itself as a projection from the piers IX and XII…(note: vertical bars in block joints act as shear reinf.)" 1" diameter bars were specified for block joint reinforcing. Block Width, in: 36 Block Height, in: 36 Block Thickness, in: 5 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 1296 Year: FLLWF 4508.001 FLLWF 4508.011 5-63 FLLWF 4508.027 FLLWF 4508.034 Detail - 1" diameter bars specified for grouted woven block reinforcing 5-64 4515 Florida Southern College, Watson & Fine Administration Buildings 1945 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: These two buildings were budgeted at $60,000 - $70,000 total for both. Actual construction cost was around $200,000, with a 1948 completion, at least a year behind schedule. This project marked a transition away from student labor and toward Lakeland contractor B.E. Fulghum (MacDonald, 2007). "The next building on the Wright campus to be finished was the administration building, which was notable for its far greater cost and length of construction in spite of its seemingly uncomplicated design" (Gyure, 2010). Architect M. Jeffrey Baker was hired to supervise repairs to the textile block walls. "More than 50 different mixes were tested during the restoration of the President's Terrace at Frank Lloyd Wright's Florida Southern College. In order to avoid historic failures, the final mix featured natural cement, a material discovered and used since the late 18th century...The restoration team substituted mild steel reinforcing with stainless steel and epoxy-coated reinforcing bars during the restoration of the 'textile blocks' at the President's Terrace at Florida Southern College" (Baker, 2014). Block Width, in: 36 Block Height, in: 9 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 324 Year: FLLWF 4515.008 construction photo FLLWF 4515.005 perspective FLLWF 4515.025 floor plan 5-65 4601 Erling Brauner House 1948 Okemos MI Built? Notes: The Brauners were part of a cooperative community called Usonia I. This is a conventional concrete block house with perforated blocks as accents. The blocks use a stack bond. There are no grout channels, all blocks are set with conventional mortar joints. Block Width, in: 15.625 Block Height, in: 7.625 Block Thickness, in: 3.625 Air Space, Gap, in: 1.75 Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 119.140625 2527 Arrow Head Rd 48864 Year: FLLWF 4601.007 perspective FLLWF 4601.011 elevation FLLWF 4601.012 perforated block detail 5-66 4609 Gifford Concrete Block Plant 1951 Middleton WI Built? Notes: This project shows standard concrete masonry units, presumably of the type manufactured by this plant. The first five block courses above grade are reverse-battered. The outer wythe is 6, 9 or 12" thick, with a 4" cavity and a 4" thick inner block wythe. The wall cavity thickness tapers down to 1" at the base of the battered portion of wall. Copper wire ties are used every other course to hold the wythes together, two ties per block. Six inch thick precast concrete "Flexicore" slabs are specified for the floor and roof spans. 24" deep steel I beams carry the precast slabs and span to wall pilasters. Block Width, in: 15.625 Block Height, in: 7.625 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: 4 Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 119.140625 Year: FLLWF 4609.002 FLLWF 4609.016 section 5-67 4611 Florida Southern College, Music Building #2 1946 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: Project - The second iteration of the Music Building for Florida Southern College appears to show textile block on the lower level, with reinforced concrete or stucco above. Block Width, in: 36 Block Height, in: 9 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 324 Year: FLLWF 4611.001 elevation FLLWF 4611.001 blowup detail FLLWF 4611.002 section FLLWF 4611.003 plan 5-68 4708 Dr. Alfred Bergman House 1948 St. Petersburg FL Built? Notes: Wright dusted off his plans for the Spivey House (#3911) and modified them to fit the requirements of this new client. As with the Spivey House, the walls are circular. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 10 Air Space, Gap, in: 6 Core Diameter, in: 6 Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 4708.001 FLLWF 4708.003 5-69 4714 Frederick Margolis House 1948 Kalamazoo MI Built? Notes: $40,000 was budgeted for this large four bedroom home in the Parkwyn Village cooperative subdivision (#4806). FLLWF drawing no. 4714.007 calls for "one part approved Portland cement to three parts clean sharp coarse sand." The channel grout was to have a ratio of one part cement to two parts sand. 1/4" diameter steel bars were specified for the vertical and horizontal joints. The proposed building had a flat, wood roof with generous overhangs. 30/60 degree angles were used in plan. Perforated block courses were shown for a clerestory above. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.25 Air Space, Gap, in: 1.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 192 Year: FLLWF 4714.003 FLLWF 4714.007 FLLWF 4714.009 FLLWF 4714.009 5-70 4733 Parkwyn Village (PV) Community Center 1947 Kalamazoo MI Built? Notes: The Community Center for the Parkwyn Village cooperative was not commissioned and only a plan view was found. Wright typically included a community center as part of the planned Usonian cooperative communities he was involved with. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 4733.003 5-71 4806 Parkwyn Village Homes 1947 Kalamazoo MI Built? Notes: Master plans and details were drawn for this cooperative community. The textile block was redesigned and pressed into service for the wall assemblies. Interestingly, early drawings show a 1/4" joint between blocks, with a 3" block thickness (FLLWF 4806.008). In the final configuration, the horizontal reveals were 1" wide, while the vertical were 1/2" wide, in order to give a horizontal emphasis. The face patterns were simplified and limited to use as accents, to keep costs down. Financing was a problem. The conservative Federal Housing Administration would not sponsor loans for Wright's designs, considering them to be too radical. "What can be said to a 'bureau' with too many rules and no independent judgement?" - FLW to FHA, 1/25/1950. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.25 Air Space, Gap, in: 1.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 192 Year: An early Parkwyn Village block design showing 1/4" joints (FLLWF 4806.008) FLLWF 4806.006 elevation FLLWF 4806.012 FLLWF 4806.012 blowup detail 5-72 4813 Robert Winn House 1950 Kalamazoo MI Built? Notes: The owner's budget for this house was a modest $12,000. Wright proposed a budget price of $15,000. Actual construction cost was around $30,000. In addition, they had trouble getting financing due to "the general nature of the house." At one point, Robert Wynn proposed limestone as an alternative to the textile block if the homeowners don't "get together on the block." He also requested single wall construction: "Using the fine strong Wright block would you let us use SINGLE WALL CONSTRUCTION? If so, could you recommend an insulating board on inside that can be plastered or wallpapered or painted, or otherwise decorated?" His request was not granted, although the Usonian Automatic system (#5612), which came later, used this configuration. In correspondence, Winn asked to use standard sizes for doors and windows to save money: "Twenty five hundred dollars could be saved in building costs of the house, if your techinician [sic] and yourself would be willing to revise to the extent of standard sizes for doors and windows." Stock window sash was not allowed by Wright: "Who are these official fools who do not understand the house?" Later, he emphasized in another letter that standard door and window frame sizes "cannot be done without spoiling the house." Wright also did not allow wood picture frames. His cryptic comment was "No frames. In walls." Winn later complained that "the man making the blocks has bumped his price upwards two or three times." As with the other Parkwyn Village homes, galvanized iron ties were specified (FLLWF 4813.008a). The blocks for the terrace wall were laid out on an arc. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.25 Air Space, Gap, in: 1.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 192 2822 Taliesin Dr 49008 Year: FLLWF 4813.005 FLLWF 4813.008 5-73 FLLWF 4813.014 5-74 4827 Eric Pratt House 1948 Galesburg MI Built? Notes: The Pratts planned to do much of the construction work themselves, taking Wright at his word that this was possible. They had a budget of $8000. "By using your cement blocks and doing as much of the work ourselves as is practicable, we feel this can be done" - letter from Eric Pratt dated 4/8/1948. Wright came back with an estimate of $18,000 in order to set his customary 10 percent fee. They found Wright's drawings incomplete: "There are no details included as to how the perforated blocks are installed. We believe glass is used, but how and where?" - 4/19/1949. "The four families involved tried to find commercial block makers to produce these blocks for us, but were unsuccessful in locating anyone who would tool up for a job involving only four houses…Unfortunately, Mr. Wright supplied us with no information on making the blocks, assuming that a block- maker would do this...considerable experimental work was necessary to determine how molds should be made and blocks formed, the proper cement mixture for the blocks, as well as proportions of oxides that each family wanted to use to add color to its blocks...When the mold was filled with this mixture, a top steel plate was laid over the mold, and an electric hammer was used to tamp the mixture firmly into place" - Eric Pratt, 2004. This allowed the mold to be released right away. The bottom plate was reused after 24 hours. There were other problems: "In retrospect it was a mistake to use the mineral-laden lake water, which later left a heavy white deposit on the blocks. In our case, after the walls were built, Eric spent countless hours of odious and dangerous work scrubbing each block with hydrochloric acid." To speed up block production "we hired three high school students [over the summer] to work every weekday making these standard blocks. They could produce about 200 in a day" - (Pratt, 2004). "We think that the concept of a cooperative community served us well…we helped one another with construction projects, and did many activities together in support of each other or the community" - (Pratt, 2004). Drawing 4827.003 shows the exterior walls with a reverse batter. The battering was eliminated in the constructed version. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.25 Air Space, Gap, in: 1.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 192 11036 Hawthorne Dr 49053 Year: FLLWF 4827.002 FLLWF 4827.003 5-75 FLLWF 4827.009 The Pratt House in March, 2011 5-76 4828 Galesburg Country Homes, 'The Acres' 1947 Galesburg MI Built? Notes: Lillian Meyer wrote to Wright in 1946 regarding the Galesburg Cooperative: "We shall all want moderately priced houses. You talked of the possibility of houses for about $12,500 when building conditions are improved." In 1947, Curtis Meyer wrote: "Both by inclination as well as because of financial reasons, we desire to do much of the physical work of development ourselves, and consequently the completion of the entire work will spread over an indefinite number of years." See The Pratt House, #4827, regarding the experience of building a house within the cooperative. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 4828.001 FLLWF 4828.001 blowup detail 5-77 4828a Gunther and Anne Fonken House 1959 Galesburg MI Built? Notes: This house was designed after Wright's passing by Taliesin Fellow Francis "Will" Willsey, and used standard CMU. Apparently, without Wright to champion the textile block system, even the Taliesin Fellows were not able to convince clients to use it. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 11069 Hawthorne Dr 49053 Year: Source: Modernwestmichigan.com 5-78 4834 Albert Adelman House 1948 Fox Point WI Built? Notes: This was a conventional concrete block house that cost $90,000 to build. Blocks were buff-colored and stepped out (reverse-battered) 3/4" every second course (16"). "Blocks were stepped out 3/4 in. every two courses (16 in.), providing not only a protected horizontal joint but a delicate tapering line on both exterior and interior" (Wright, Jan. 1951, Architectural Forum). Block Width, in: 15.625 Block Height, in: 7.625 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 119.140625 7111 N Barnett 53217 Year: FLLWF 4834.011 plan Photo Source: TKWA.com Photo Source: TKWA.com 5-79 4838 Paul Palmer House 1947 Phoenix AZ Built? Notes: This project no. pertains to the second scheme. Scheme 1 is #4304, with stone walls. In a letter dated 6/04/1948, Patsy Palmer complained that precast floor tiles would be too expensive. 12x12x8" blocks are also mentioned in the letter. It is not clear from the plan whether the curved walls were to use textile blocks like #3911 and #4708 or, if they did, what their dimensions were. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 4304.009 FLLWF 4304.008 FLLWF 4838.004 FLLWF 4838.002 5-80 4905 Samuel Eppstein House 1948 Galesburg MI Built? Notes: One of the Galesburg cooperative houses, this home is currently undergoing a restoration - see projecteppstein.blogspot.com. Drawing 4905.007 shows a standard CMU option with reverse battering. The initial budget for this house was $10,000, later increased to $15,000 for purposes of determining Wright's 10% fee. According to correspondence, Mr. Eppstein wanted to use the textile block for its appearance and "structural benefits" and because he planned do most of the work himself. They planned to use a shaking table with wrap-around molds, and no block "machine". They were prepared to cast blocks over the winter. Initially, the Eppsteins cast the blocks themselves, but later relegated the task to college students on summer break. Four and a half years after the initial correspondence, assembly was underway. In a letter dated 9/02/1951, Dorothy Eppstein remarked, "Mr. Wright is absolutely right about his blocks - 'women and children can lay them.' I've been having a wonderful time laying blocks." This was certainly music to Wright's ears, as such fawning comments supported his sometimes unrealistic claims regarding the textile block system. A year later, it was not so much fun for Mrs. Eppstein. Due to the use of local lake water that was high in mineral salts, the blocks started showing white streaks (efflorescence). In a letter dated 8/1/1952, She described taking efflorescence off blocks with muriatic acid. It took up to 10 minutes per block. A block schedule lists a count of 2793 blocks (FLLWF 4905.038). At 10 minutes per block, that would be 465 man-hours, or 58 full-time days worth of tedious work. (FLLWF photo 4911.009 shows many streaky blocks on the Robert Levin House as well.) She also recalled "drilling holes into concrete blocks to create a rough rectangle, which would then be knocked out and used for light switches and outlets." Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.25 Air Space, Gap, in: 1.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 192 11098 Hawthorne Dr 49053 Year: The Eppstein House in March, 2011 The Eppstein House in March, 2011 5-81 FLLWF 4905.010 FLLWF 4905.038 5-82 4911 Robert Levin House 1948 Kalamazoo MI Built? Notes: Construction photos of the Robert Levin House show workmen casting blocks on a table outside a shed (FLLWF 4911.016 and 4911.020). The blocks were cast face-down and a pneumatic hammer was used on the coffered back plate to "ram" the blocks. Two ropes and a spreader bar were rigged to allow two men to carefully carry the freshly cast face-down block off to be cured. In the initial correspondence, dated 8/29/1947, R. Levin asks Wright for a sample of the proposed concrete block. "We would also like to know what the status is of the plan to have these blocks machine-made [for Parkwyn Village]." Later, when it was determined that the blocks would have to be made on-site, Mr. Levin asked "We would like to know whether you use the face plate as a pallet, or whether the block is transferred to something else after it is formed?" As shown in photo 4911.020, the face plate appears to have been used as a pallet. Many face plates would thus have been required. The early Los Angeles houses, by contrast, used the back coffered face mold as a pallet, requiring the block to be flipped over after casting. This was because many, if not all of those blocks had face patterns. Using a patterned face mold as a pallet would have been cost- prohibitive. According to Taliesin Associate Jack Howe, "four young boys" were making the blocks. He also noted that the owners could not get an FHA loan due to the round lots. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.25 Air Space, Gap, in: 1.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 192 2816 Taliesin Dr 49008 Year: FLLWF 4911.016 FLLWF 4911.018 5-83 FLLWF 4911.019 FLLWF 4911.020 5-84 4912 Ward McCartney House 1949 Kalamazoo MI Built? Notes: In a letter dated 12/8/1949, the McCartneys wrote, "The Browns and we are experimenting with pigments, and have discovered a foundryman who will make our blocks for us this winter at less expense than we dared hope…For the corner blocks, we are going to attempt having shoes made which will be bolted into the A mold, thus eliminating a series of separate molds." The corners had obtuse, right and acute angles, a difficult forming challenge. According to Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer, "The plan for the Ward McCartney House is composed of two 60- 30-degree triangles, a form Wright would frequently employ from this time on." Apparently the foundryman didn't work out, as McCartney later wrote, "We have put up most of the blocks ourselves with the help of two college boys, and have made very good progress considering that we work only two days a week." Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.25 Air Space, Gap, in: 1.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 192 2662 Taliesin Dr 49008 Year: Photo by Balthazar Korab, 1988 The McCartney House in March, 2011 FLLWF 4912.011 blowup detail FLLWF 4912.011 blowup detail 5-85 4913 Charles Dabney House 1949 Chicago IL Built? Notes: This is a brick house with a band of glazed, perforated concrete blocks under the eaves. The perforated blocks would not be considered textile blocks as there are no grouted channels. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 24 Block Thickness, in: 5 Air Space, Gap, in: 0 Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 576 Year: FLLWF 4913.004 FLLWF 4913.007 FLLWF 4913.009 5-86 4918 David Weisblatt House 1948 Galesburg MI Built? Notes: The Weisblatt house was the first of the Galesburg cooperative to be constructed (Heinz, 2005). Wright's cost estimate was $20,000 (W187D01, 9/9/1948). There were problems with the cast corner blocks: "Could two 45 deg. mitered 'A' blocks be substituted for the 'B' outside corner blocks? The joint would be a typical reinforced vertical grout joint. We would retain the 1/4"x1/4"x45 deg. bevel, or possibly increase it to a 1/2"x1/2"x45 deg. bevel if permissible. The seam would be sealed with color-matching caulking. Such a change would facilitate both corner block production and subsequent construction work. Corner blocks have been warping during curing" - David Weisblatt to FLW, 3/16/1950. The 'A' forms were used for flat, typical blocks. Wright gave permission to use the 'A' form with a miter for the outside corners but insisted on the tighter 1/4" beveled edge. The sharper corner would have been harder to cast and risked a ragged edge. This was evident on the Freeman House, #2402, which used similar mitered corner blocks. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.25 Air Space, Gap, in: 1.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 192 11185 Hawthorne Dr 49053 Year: FLLWF 4918.003 The Weisblatt House in March, 2011 5-87 The Weisblatt House in March, 2011 The Weisblatt House in March, 2011 5-88 5003 Eric Brown House 1949 Kalamazoo MI Built? Notes: The original owners lived in this house for over 50 years, so it has been well-preserved with most of the original furnishings. The house is 130 ft. long, with 2800 sq. ft. of living space. In a letter dated 4/28/1950, Eric Brown stated that using a hydraulic foundry machine would be less expensive and produce more precisely dimensioned and square blocks. He would prefer to produce the blocks at a foundry, and estimated the total cost at less than $0.15 per block. "The big (12" x 16", 35 lb.) bevel-edged blocks were cast under pressure at a local foundry in special aluminum forms and laid up in a two-way grid of steel and liquid grout to make a cavity wall...Cost: $500 for the forms, 35 cents each for the basic blocks, up to $1.10 each for the seven types of odd blocks (corners, ends, electrical outlets, etc,)...The owners acted as contractors and part-time labor during construction of foundations and walls, retained General Contractor Corning for the more complicated roof framing and wood-finish work" - House and Home, March, 1953. Ann Brown washed the block surfaces to remove excess grout from around the joints before it set up. She also installed the electrical herself, but had trouble getting the 3-way switches to work. She was supervised by an amateur electrician (Glaser, 2002). She also wished to incorporate three Florida Southern College blocks that they had acquired into the retaining wall (3/20/1951, Anne Brown to FLW). One block was 9x18 in. and the other two 9x36 in. These dimensions would not have worked well with the other blocks, which are 12x16 in., but they were actually incorporated as a pier cap at the street end of the wall. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.25 Air Space, Gap, in: 1.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 192 2806 Taliesin Dr 49008 Year: The Brown House in March, 2011 Courtesy of Curtis Curtis-Smith 5-89 The Brown House in March, 2011 The Brown House in March, 2011 5-90 5007 Ward Greiner House 1948 Kalamazoo MI Built? Notes: Ward Greiner stated that it was essential that "The design be simple and as free as possible of details requiring highly skilled craftsmanship" - G092C10, 3/2/1948. His maximum budget was $10,000. Wright may have been concerned that his textile block would actually prove to be too economical, since his fee was based on 10% of the construction cost. When owner labor was used, the cost could, theoretically, be significantly lower than it would have otherwise. He responded with a budget of $25,000. Greiner complained that that was too high. They settled on a $20,000 estimate. In a letter to Wright dated 6/17/1949, Greiner revealed what fueled him and the others in the cooperative community to take on the task of block casting and assembly themselves: "We are head over heels in block- making. I am working evenings and Saturdays and Sundays in my garage (converted to a shop) designing and making the block molds for the corner blocks, end blocks, cornice blocks, etc. The other boys (Levin, Weisblat, Pratt, and Eppstein) are sweating out the last kinks before really rapid production of the 'A' blocks but have already made several hundred. These textile blocks are beautiful and will open a lot of eyes around here as to what creative architecture can do…It is odd how strong has become my determination to build my house with my own hands and thus have a greater share and pleasure in helping to bring to life a house designed by your hand. There is even a mystic quality somewhat like taking part in history when one feels that the object of his sweat is bound to be truly a unique piece of art and a thing of joy and beauty." Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.25 Air Space, Gap, in: 1.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 192 Year: FLLWF 5007.002 FLLWF 5007.025 5-91 5014 John O. Carr House 1950 Glenview IL Built? Notes: This is a brick house with perforated concrete blocks as accents. The perforated blocks would not be considered textile blocks as there are no grouted channels. The bricks may be colored concrete, "Brick-Crete," a product Wright used for the demonstration Usonian House erected on the Guggenheim lot in New York City [#5314]. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 1544 Portage Run 60025 Year: FLLWF 5014.008 FLLWF 5014.013 Source: Chicago Real Estate Daily 5-92 5015 Curtis Meyer House 1948 Galesburg MI Built? Notes: This house used standard concrete masonry units (CMU), and had curved walls. It "was built of commercially- made cement blocks that could be laid out on a curve, which Mr. Wright's blocks could not do" - Eric Pratt, 2004. In the end, the Meyers were not satisfied with the commercial concrete block, stating in 1951, "the block work is not all that could be desired." Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 8 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 128 11108 Hawthorne Dr 49053 Year: FLLWF 5015.003 FLLWF 5015.004 5-93 5021 William B. Palmer House 1950 Ann Arbor MI Built? Notes: "Striking features of the house are the specially cast concrete blocks with glass inserts" (Pfeiffer, 2010). These would not be considered textile blocks as there are no grouted channels. Block Width, in: 13.625 Block Height, in: 12.625 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: 1 Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 172.015625 227 Orchard Hills Dr 48104 Year: FLLWF 5021.003 FLLWF 5021.012 Section though block showing 1/4" plate glass FLLWF 5021.017 Standard Block FLLWF 5021.018 Corner Blocks 5-94 5030 David Wright House 1950 Phoenix AZ Built? Notes: "The lower course of concrete blocks on the upper level is made of Wright's specially designed blocks in contrast to the standard ones." (Pfeiffer, 2010) They served as stay-in-place forms for the cast in place concrete floor slab. These are not textile blocks as there are no grouted channels. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 8.875 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 142 5212 Exeter Blvd 85018 Year: Decorative edge blocks are at left, serving as a stay-in-place form (David & Gladys Wright Family S#0831.37.0614-10) Edge blocks follow the concrete slab edge (DavidWrightHouse.org). FLLWF 5030.037 Edge block detail 5-95 5032 Anderton Court Shops 1952 Beverly Hills CA Built? Notes: The first design scheme used perforated, glazed textile blocks, eliminated later. 3/8" mortar joint. Battering and reverse battering (FLLWF 5032.001). 5032.033 calls for four 5/8" diameter vertical bars at each joint with 1/2" diameter horizontal bars, "laid with internal poured (grouted) joints." Vertical bars had 1/4" diameter ties at 8" on center. Later, the textile blocks were replaced by "gunite" - a dry concrete mix sprayed on a reinforcing mesh. Cement-plaster (stucco) was then applied over the gunite as the finished surface. A Landmark Assessment document for the City of Beverly Hills, dated 10/03/2012, notes: "Incorporated in the early stages of design, but later eliminated, were Wright's signature concrete blocks with perforations and inlaid with translucent glass inserts, which were to finish off the northwestern comer of the building and create the lower portion of the southeastern facade." It is not known why the blocks were eliminated. It could be that the battering of the walls was found to be too complicated and costly, or that the seismic resistance of the blocks was suspect. Block Width, in: 29.625 Block Height, in: 13.625 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 403.640625 332 N Rodeo Dr 90210 Year: FLLWF 5032.001 FLLWF 5032.003 FLLWF 5032.019 FLLWF 5032.021 5-96 5101 Benjamin Adelman House 1951 Phoenix AZ Built? Notes: This house was the first Usonian Automatic designed for a client. Concrete beams and a flat reinforced concrete slab were used instead of the coffered waffle-like ceiling blocks employed on later designs (FLLWF 5101.013). "Wright believed these houses could be easily self-built, eliminating the expense of skilled union labor, particularly for the financially pressed GIs" (Legler, 1999). However, according to Robert Twombly, "Wright was as unrealistic about price as he was in blaming unions for inflated construction costs, for the Adelman residence came in at $25,000, four to five times higher than he had hoped in 1951. Subsequent Automatics were even more expensive if more attractive; and although the hollow block system held potential for self-builders and cost reduction, it was beyond the reach of most of the middle class" (Twombly, 1979). Usonian Automatic: Cost was a problem. "The method, in other words, was impractical for the novice, and that meant skilled help and the costs shot up once again. Wright had optimistically assessed the cost of the house at $5000; the Adelman residence cost $25,000." Associate Arthur Pieper supervised construction, having experience from the previous construction of his own Usonian Automatic house from a Wright design, #5218. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 288 5802 N 30th St 85016 Year: FLLWF 5101.003 FLLWF 5101.007 5-97 FLLWF 5101.010 FLLWF 5101.013 5-98 5109 Dr. G. Kenneth Hargrove House 1950 Orinda CA Built? Notes: The wall construction is brick, with a double band of glazed, perforated concrete blocks along a curved wall. There are no edge channels for grout - conventional mortar joints are used. Block Width, in: 18 Block Height, in: 15.625 Block Thickness, in: 4.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 0 Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 281.25 Year: FLLWF 5109.002 FLLWF 5109.009 FLLWF 5109.012 5-99 5114 Wilbur Pearce House 1951 Bradbury CA Built? Notes: Standard concrete block with a stack bond was used for this residence. Drawing 5114.004 shows a 7-5/8" square block as the basic unit, unique in all of Wright's projects (Type A - "Main Block"). Drawing 5114.005 shows how it was to be used in a stack bond. The look would have been similar to a square textile block, only at a finer scale. This was later changed to a standard 16" by 8" block for construction, but the stack bond was retained. Taliesin Associate Aaron Green was the supervising architect on the project and Wesley Peters supervised the engineering. Completed cost came in at double the initial $15,000 estimate (Wilson, 2014). Block Width, in: 7.625 Block Height, in: 7.625 Block Thickness, in: 7.625 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 58.140625 5 Bradbury Hills Rd 91010 Year: FLLWF 5114.004 FLLWF 5114.004 blowup detail FLLWF 5114.005 A contemporary example of an 8" square block, in this case simulated by a false joint on a 16" block. 5-100 5120 Laurence Strong House 1950 Kalamazoo MI Built? Notes: A Parkwyn Village house, the Strongs moved away before completion and the final design strayed significantly from Wright's plans. In a 1951 letter, Laurence Strong proposed a solid corner block for easier forming: "Would you consider a corner block combining both inside and outside block in one solid piece? This would make it simpler to cast a solid corner block." No response from Wright was found, although Strong's proposal is similar to that used by Taliesin Associate Arthur Pieper for his house, #5218. Pieper cast the corners in place, avoiding the special forms that would otherwise be required. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.25 Air Space, Gap, in: 1.5 Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 192 2820 Taliesin Drive 49008 Year: FLLWF 5120.004 FLLWF 5120.014 FLLWF 5120.014 - Detail The Laurence Strong House in March, 2011 5-101 5125 Victor Stracke House, Scheme 1 1951 Appleton WI Built? Notes: A "one room" Usonian Automatic design? Taliesin Associate Jack Howe prepared the preliminary drawings and another Associate, Milton Stricker, prepared the presentation drawings for this project (MiltonStricker.com). Wright and his client could not come to agreement on the design and the project was eventually terminated. "My dear Strache: As a result of overcolaboration [sic] between client and architect the present house is no good from my standpoint. I think the better thing could be done either by yourself or ourself. The present plan is not so bad if turned over. If this and the elimination of several of your cherished features will suffice, we will do it. Otherwise it is all up to you" -FLW, 9/18/1951. Stracke to Wright, 11/08/1951: "In regard to my plans for the house we had definitely decided that same should not be done in cement block, but in stone. In your own expression, 'cement is the guttersnipe of all building materials.' It is therefore impossible for me to understand why this was not carried out." It is clear from this correspondence that Stracke did not want concrete block, but Wright seemed to have selective amnesia regarding that request, although eventually acquiescing (see note on 5125.008 "Stone or Block"). Textile block height was 12". The block width in one proposal appears to have been around 16", similar to the Parkwyn Village blocks [#4806] (see drawing 5125.005). The sloped roof is also similar to Parkwyn Village (see drawings 5125.005 and 5125.008). Another proposal used 12x24" Usonian Automatic blocks (drawing 5125.004). Other clients who resisted Wright's push to use the Usonian Automatic system include Frederick [#5426], Lovness [#5507], Sunday [#5522], Cooke [#5525], Jankowski [#5538], Kundert Medical Clinic [#5614], Walton [#5623], and Trier [#5724]. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 288 Year: FLLWF 5125.005 FLLWF 5125.004 5-102 FLLWF 5125.003 FLLWF 5125.008 5-103 5127 J.J. Vallarino Jr, House, Scheme 3 1955 Panama City Pan ama Built? Notes: The glazed textile blocks on this project provide a floor to ceiling screen similar to the Turkel House [#5513], only along a curve. It is not a Usonian Automatic like Terkel, as standard concrete blocks are used elsewhere. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 24 Block Thickness, in: 8 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 4 Block Area, in²: 576 Year: FLLWF 5127.007 FLLWF 5127.009 Detail 5-104 5218 Arthur Pieper House 1952 Paradise Valley AZ Built? Notes: Usonian Auto, wood roof. Taliesin Associate Arthur Pieper, along with fellow Associate, Charles Montooth, built this house themselves. It is the first constructed example of the "do-it-yourself" Usonian Automatic system. It was a small house, and for further economy, only one layer of blocks was used, the coffered backs exposed to the inside. This made them hot to the touch on the inside as there was no insulation to keep out the desert heat. "With no insulation in either the roof or the walls, the house became easily overheated in the blazing Arizona sun" (Legler, 1999). A wood roof was also used instead of concrete to reduce cost. In August, 1952, Pieper wrote to Wright and asked to use wood framing with plaster soffits and ceilings. "We had hoped to use a concrete roof, but from the experience of others here who have had them, they are leaky and expensive. Reinforcing steel is also hard to get." Wright would have preferred a concrete roof, as was used on the Benjamin Adelman House, #5101, (and which did leak), but he responded that it was "O.K. to use wood framed construction, plastered underside." Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 1.75 Block Area, in²: 288 6442 E Cheney Dr 85253 Year: FLLWF 5218.001 FLLWF 5218.005 FLLWF 5218.006 Corner window in 1996 (Courtesy of Dan Nichols) 5-105 5219 Andrew Cooke House 1953 Virginia Beach VA Built? Notes: Wright proposed converting the Cooke House to standard concrete block from brick to reduce cost. According to Leonard J. Morse-Fortier, there was also a proposal from Wright to convert the project to a Usonian Automatic (#5525). The brick version was eventually built. Its hemicycle plan would have been difficult to achieve with the textile block. Other clients who resisted Wright's push to use the Usonian Automatic system include Stracke [#5125], Frederick [#5426], Lovness [#5507], Sunday [#5522], Jankowski [#5538], Kundert Medical Clinic [#5614], Walton [#5623], and Trier [#5724]. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 320 51st St 23455 Year: FLLWF 5219.003 FLLWF 5219.006 FLLWF 5219.001 5-106 5311 Pieper-Montooth Office 1953 Scottsdale AZ Built? Notes: Taliesin Associates Arthur Pieper and Charles Montooth worked together to supervise the construction of both the Pieper and Adelman residences in the Phoenix area (#5218 and #5101). They also started a company called "Horizon Builders" to design and build homes using Wright's Usonian Automatic system. Wright, naturally, encouraged this endeavor and designed this small office building for the company. The drawing title reads "Pieper and Montooth - Builders: Specialists in Usonian Concrete Block Construction." The project never got past the preliminary stages, however. The idea was kept alive through 1955, apparently. In a letter dated 9/19/1955, Wright states: "Dear Charles [Montooth]: Arthur is on the way back and we will form a group to do many block houses, Usonia Style. Arthur's fathers [sic] house [#5515] will be a good one. Then Bimson's group [#5740], etc." Interestingly, it appears that Montooth did not use the textile block in his own work. He used standard concrete block instead for his own residence as well as for many clients' homes. There was a robust and competitive concrete block industry in the Phoenix area in the 1950s, which likely made it tough for the custom textile block to get a foothold. The Warner Residence in North Phoenix, for example, was built in 1958 and used pinkish 8x16 in. standard block. It had integral lighting in the walls as well as perforated blocks. Montooth's Sharp residence (1958) used standard concrete blocks for its curved walls. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: 2 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 288 Year: FLLWF 5311.002 FLLWF 5311.005 5-107 5319 Florida Southern College, Polk County Science and Cosmology Building 1953 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: Apparently student labor was still being used at this time on the Florida Southern Campus to cut costs: "I'm still struggling with the same work crew, 7 out of 10 who are students and who spend part of the day going to school" - Taliesin Associate Nils Schweizer to Wright, 07/16/1954. Textile block construction was used throughout for this building, although the second floor blocks were covered with stucco. For the first time, Wright was able to use a larger size block, one too heavy to lift by hand, in a completed building. The windows on the first floor were formed by 36" square glazed, perforated precast concrete units, similar to those proposed for the Music Building #3 [#5320], and Calico Mills [#4508]. Shiny, aluminum-clad tapered interior columns provided a dynamic counterpoint to the rectangular textured blocks. (Cylindrical ventilation ducts were added in 2000.) A note on sheet 5319.039 reads: "Dimensions for precast block shall be accurate to within 1/64 of an inch and shall not exceed given dimensions in any event. Block shall be cast from 1 part white cement to 3 parts fine, washed building sand." By contrast, current industry standards allow plus or minus 1/8" for units under 10' in size (PCI MNL 117, 1996, pg 162). Block Width, in: 36 Block Height, in: 9 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 324 Year: FLLWF 5319.039 Exterior view, 2011 5-108 36" square precast concrete windows Interior view, 2011 5-109 5320 Florida Southern College, Music Building #3 1957 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: The third iteration of this design harmonized with the nearby Roux Library (#4118) with its circular form and textile block construction. Notable was the use of 36" square textile block window frames on the first level (see FLLWF 5320.003 and 5319.039), similar to that employed for the Science and Cosmology Building [#5319]. The project stalled, most likely due to College President Ludd Spivey's retirement in 1957. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: FLLWF 5320.005 FLLWF 5320.013 FLLWF 5320.003 5-110 5404 Florida Southern College, Danforth Chapel 1954 Lakeland FL Built? Notes: The Danforth Chapel used the textile block at both sharp and obtuse angles. In 1955, Wright stated "it is charming in the little what the Industrial Arts Building [#4212] is in the large" (Gyure, 2010). Block Width, in: 36 Block Height, in: 9 Block Thickness, in: 3.5 Air Space, Gap, in: 2 Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 324 Year: The Danforth Chapel in November, 2011 The Danforth Chapel in November, 2011 5-111 5426 Louis Frederick House 1954 Barrington Hills IL Built? Notes: The Frederick House was converted from Usonian Automatic to brick at the client's request. In a letter to Wright dated 1/9/1955, Mr. Frederick states, "Now,-- we come to the item that has kept us pondering since our visit to Spring Green when you told us our design is for concrete blocks. The very [word] CONCRETE scares the daylights out of us. What color? Could we have a sample of it? Mr. Zari, the builder of the Glore house in Lake Forest, was very discouraging about the concrete blocks. What other material would you suggest?" He also questioned the 2 ft. wide doors that were designed to fit the block module: "Doors shown appear to be two feet wide or are we reading plans wrong?" Wright responded on January 18, "Doors shown are two feet wide...Ceilings: concrete block. Plywood paneling on walls with adequate insulation on interior face of concrete block walls…Cornice will be patterned concrete." In a 2/1/1955 letter, Frederick reiterated, "We have been unhappy about the concrete blocks. Last week we visited your concrete houses on Taliesin drive in Kalamazoo - the Browns [#5003], the McCartneys [#4912], the Levins [#4911]. We are now sure that we do not want to use concrete blocks. We would be much happier with brick, wood and brick combination or even a limited amount of stone with wood." Other clients who resisted Wright's push to use the Usonian Automatic system include Stracke [#5125], Lovness [#5507], Sunday [#5522], Cooke [#5525], Jankowski [#5538], Kundert Medical Clinic [#5614], Walton [#5623], and Trier [#5724]. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 288 28W248 County Line Rd 60010 Year: FLLWF 5426.001 FLLWF 5426.002 5-112 5502 Mel Blumberg House, 2nd Scheme 1955 Clinton IA Built? Notes: For this "one-room" Usonian Automatic, 24 in. square glazed and ventilated blocks appear for the first time. These were later used to great effect on the Turkel House, #5513. The Blumbergs liked the design but determined that they could not afford to build it. Wright expressed his disappointment in a letter: "I guess I am to blame. I remember telling you that the only thing we could do for you was the "one room" (so-called) Usonian Automatic which we can show you if you come to see it. Sincerely, Frank Lloyd Wright, October 4th, 1955." Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: Year: Source: "The Wright Library" http://www.steinerag.com/flw/Artifact%20Pages/PhRtBlumber g.htm Source: "The Wright Library" http://www.steinerag.com/flw/Artifact%20Pages/PhRtBlumber g.htm Source: "The Wright Library" http://www.steinerag.com/flw/Artifact%20Pages/PhRtBlumber g.htm 5-113 5505 Leonard Jankowski House #1 1955 Oakland County MI Built? Notes: Based on correspondence, this project appears to have been first designed to use the Usonian Automatic system. Two very different versions are in the FLLWF Archives, one with Usonian Auto block (5505.004) and one with brick or standard concrete block (5505.006). None are dated. Drawings for the Automatic design are also filed as project #5538. It may be that the project numbers should be reversed, if in fact the Usonian Automatic design came first. Mr. Jankowski preferred brick not concrete block. Also, he claimed that "local restrictions" prohibited concrete block. "I wonder if you recall our conversation last August in which you mentioned the Usonian Automatic block. At that time we said that we preferred brick as a building material" - Jankowski to FLW, 1/14/1955. Other clients who resisted Wright's push to use the Usonian Automatic system include Stracke [#5125], Frederick [#5426], Lovness [#5507], Sunday [#5522], Cooke [#5525], Kundert Medical Clinic [#5614], Walton [#5623], and Trier [#5724]. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 288 Year: FLLWF 5505.004 FLLWF 5505.006 FLLWF 5505.001 5-114 5506 Toufic Kalil House 1955 Manchester NH Built? Notes: Under supervision by Taliesin Associate Morton Delson, metal molds were fabricated for the Kalil House, #5506. Those, together with the piston driven block press, cost $7500 at a time when a decent-sized house could be built for $15,000. The dies and press were then sold to the Turkels for casting their house, #5513. The initial budget for the house was $25,000, but completed cost was between $70,000 to $80,000. Presentation drawings were prepared by Jack Howe and working drawings by Curtis Besinger (Komanecky, 1994). This was the first project to be constructed using 2' square coffered ceiling blocks. These blocks weighed 240 lbs. each! Scaffolds were required to set them. Likely as a result of this experience, the Tonkens House [#5510] used lightweight concrete for the blocks to reduce the weight. Delson understood the need for extreme dimensional accuracy with the system, claiming to have achieved a tolerance of 1/64" for each course (Komanecky, 1994). It was not problem-free. Leonard J. Morse-Fortier found cracking and efflorescence in the clerestory area in 1991 (Morse-Fortier, 1994). Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 288 117 Heather St 03104 Year: FLLWF 5506.001 FLLWF 5506.003 5-115 FLLWF 5506.007 5-116 5507 Don Lovness House 1955 Stillwater MN Built? Notes: "Wright first proposed a Usonian Automatic for the Don Lovness House, but the client elected to build with stone and wood (Pfeiffer, 2010)." This is not surprising as Don Lovness was adept at stonework, according to correspondence. His wife noted that he was hauling and stockpiling limestone before they even had the drawings. Other clients who resisted Wright's push to use the Usonian Automatic system include Stracke [#5125], Frederick [#5426], Sunday [#5522], Cooke [#5525], Jankowski [#5538], Kundert Medical Clinic [#5614], Walton [#5623], and Trier [#5724]. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 10121 83rd St N 55082 Year: FLLWF 5507.002 5-117 5510 Gerald Tonkens House 1954 Amberley Village OH Built? Notes: Wright called this Usonian Automatic design a Series "G" Usonian (Pfeiffer, 2010). The Tonkens House is notable for its use of lightweight concrete for the blocks. This was done mainly to reduce the weight of the coffered ceiling blocks, which otherwise would have weighed around 240 lbs. Drawings show 3/8" diameter reinforcing rods for the grouted channels, instead of the thinner 1/4" rods that had been specified up to this point. Gerald Tonkens was in favor of a concrete house - he noted in a letter that there were termite problems in Cincinnati. 12x24 in. blocks with glazed insets are mixed with 24x24" metal-framed ventilated windows. The visual effect of this mix of materials could be better. The Turkel house [#5513] improved on the concept by using 24x24" glazed blocks interspersed with the same size blocks with ventilated window insets. The budget was $35,000, with a finished cost of around $50,000, which was not bad for a Wright-designed house. The Tonkens did not contribute any "sweat equity," hiring Taliesin Associate Eric Lloyd Wright to supervise construction. Construction did not go smoothly: "Unfortunately, the blocks were handmade, so they didn't come out exactly equal...So at the end of a course of 20 or 30 blocks, you could be a quarter-inch off in elevation. You had to keep shimming them" - Eric Lloyd Wright. According to Frank Lloyd Wright, "All I need is inexpensive labor, a ball of twine, and a cement mixer." Tonkens Vangrov disagreed: "[Suddenly it's] 17 months later, the cost overruns, and you could not build it yourself" (Murtha, 2013). Rosalie Tonkens stated in 1972: "Wright predicted that the house would stand 300 years, and perhaps it will." In a letter to his grandfather, Eric Lloyd Wright noted that: "The weakest point of the 'Usonian Automatics' is the block manufacturing. Controlling the mix, small aggregate, and especially making the form smaller than the intended size of the block are very important to the making of good block…We should have the molds made of cast aluminum, tested to make sure the blocks are the right size, and then lease the molds to the client." The corner perforated mold was too complicated: "Especially bad is the corner perforated form. It is made up of fourteen pieces and takes seven operations to put the mold together and seven operations to break it down. We construct ten blocks of this type a day and I have to reject about half of them." Later correspondence revealed that there was water penetration through the block joints. Eric Lloyd Wright (interview on 11/10/2015): "They [the blocks] were all cast at a concrete block factory, although cast by hand. For the roof, the factory was able to put them under steam heat. My grandfather wanted a smooth surface on the ceiling blocks and he wanted a textured surface on the wall blocks. The smooth surface was very difficult to do because the smooth part kept breaking away from the mold when they were pulled apart. What we used [for compressing the wall blocks] was a small, hand-held pneumatic hammer. The mix was put in by hand and we kept tamping it with this hammer." Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 2 Block Area, in²: 288 6980 Knoll Rd 45237 Year: 5-118 FLLWF 5510.001 FLLWF 5510.005 FLLWF 5510.011 FLLWF 5510.032 5-119 5512 William B. Tracy House 1954 Normandy Park WA Built? Notes: Unlike with the Tonkens House {#5510], the owners of the 1200 S.F. Usonian Automatic Tracy House did contribute their own labor. "There was nothing automatic about the blocks. Bill and Elizabeth made each wooden form and every concrete block, nearly 1700, by hand, working about a year" (Johnson, 1996). It is notable for its perforated glazed piers: "Perforated corner blocks with mitered glass inserts form u-shaped columns. This detail brings a quality of delicate lattice-like light into the room by day while the reverse is true at night as lights from inside appear jewel-like on the outside" (Pfeiffer, 2010). Bill Tracy was pleased with the result: "We got everything we had hoped for and more. We had...not realized that this Place would affirm our Individuality (Spirituality) and our relation to Nature. We are of the opinion that this House is a work of art and that works of art are by nature mysteries. It has been a transcendental experience" (Johnson, 1996). "Although constructed of blocks the Tracys made themselves, the house proved to be quite sturdy; there have been several earthquakes in the region – the last in 2001 – but the house shows no evidence of cracking" (Ochsner, 2012). Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 2 Block Area, in²: 288 18971 Edgecliff Dr SW 98166 Year: FLLWF 5512.001 FLLWF 5512.008 5-120 FLLWF 5512.009 FLLWF 5512.010 5-121 5513 Dorothy Turkel House 1955 Detroit MI Built? Notes: The Turkel House was the largest Usonian Automatic, and the only one sporting two stories, due to the narrow lot. The cost estimate was $60,000, actual cost was $150,000. The house was complicated as well as expensive: "Standardization again proved to be elusive. In 'The Natural House', Wright claimed that nine different blocks would suffice, but the Pappas House required 25, and the Turkel House 37. Most of the houses also turned out to be just as expensive, if not more so, than comparable structures in timber or brick" (Ford, 2003). The Turkels asked for "standard size" windows and doors to save cost. That was a no-go for Wright: "The standard fenestration for use with the Usonian Automatic construction is designed on the same unit system as the blocks themselves." Henry Turkel liked the idea of a reinforced concrete house, as this was the cold war era: "Reinforced concrete earthquake-proof-type building held up best…during the bomb tests. Can such provisions be incorporated?" (Turkel to Wright, 5/24/1955). The Turkels bought the dies and a machine for making the blocks from Dr. Kalil [#5506] for $7000. They tried to sell them after completion, with no takers, "although they are the basis for a good house." The contractor (Robert Pond) suggested a purchase by the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation to lease out to clients. He maintained that it would make for better buildings "closer to the cost you intended." Wright's response: "No, we cannot tell at this time" (T080D05, 9/23/1957). Eventually the Foundation accepted the Usonian block making equipment in lieu of final payment for architectural services. The block making machinery was shipped to the Foundation, c/o Ben Graves with $1000 final payment for architectural services (T086E06, 11/25/1958). "At the corners of the rooms, mitered glass meets glass in the windows, a characteristic of Frank Lloyd Wright design. Viewed from the exterior at night, the light shining through the windows creates the look of an ocean liner. Wright did not want his clients to have window coverings and there are none in the Turkel house. The square windows made of concrete have an opening about nine inches square for glass" {Bert, 2014). The house was restored in 2010. "The last major project is the repair of the sagging carport roof, which has been temporarily shored up with steel beams and support posts to prevent further damage" (Hession, 2010). Post- Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 2 Block Area, in²: 288 2760 W Seven Mile Rd 48221 Year: Turkel House in 2011 Turkel House in 2011 5-122 Turkel House in 2011 FLLWF 5513.010 5-123 5515 C.R. Pieper House 1955 Paradise Valley AZ Built? Notes: This project used curved textile blocks on different radii, which would have been expensive to form. The curved reinforcing would also have been an issue. "I have started on all equipment for the blocks, facia and wall caps. We should be able to get excellent results. These items lend themselves well to efficient production and good craftsmanship" - C.R. Pieper to FLW, 1/13/1956. Pieper was an accomplished engineer and inventor with over 50 patents to his name (Pratt, 1974). Arthur Pieper, a former Wright apprentice, was his son (see #5218). Pieper Senior was apparently eager to put the textile block through its paces. Correspondence records do not reveal why the project was halted. Block Width, in: 48 Block Height, in: 8 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 1.5 Block Area, in²: 384 Year: FLLWF 5515.003 FLLWF 5515.004 FLLWF 5515.011 FLLWF 5515.019 5-124 5516 Theodore A. Pappas House 1955 St. Louis MO Built? Notes: The Pappas House was the last Usonian Automatic constructed. It was completed in 1964. According to Bette Pappas (Pappas, 1985), there were 25 different block types and the house took four years to construct. A local handyman cast the blocks initially, with not the best results. There were variations in size that required much grinding to fix. Progress was very slow. Eventually, in 1961, the metal forms used on the Turkel House [#5513] were secured for use on the Pappas House. Most of the assembly was performed by Theodore Pappas, working part-time. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 2 Block Area, in²: 288 8654 Masonridge Rd 63141 Year: FLLWF 5516.001 FLLWF 5516.003 FLLWF 5516.018 FLLWF 5516.022 5-125 5520 Lenkurt Electric 1955 San Mateo CA Built? Notes: The Lenkurt Electric Company contracted with Wright to design a large headquarters and light manufacturing building. Large perforated blocks formed the perimeter walls of the building. Curved blocks were used as interior office partitions. Office doors appeared to be constructed ot textile blocks as well. The design progressed quite far before being cancelled. An estimated 112,809 SF of precast concrete masonry was to be installed at a cost of $0.40 per SF (letter, 7/22/1957). Taliesin Associate Aaron Green was the West Coast advisor for the project. As with the Kundert Medical Clinic, #5614, Green pushed for prefabrication of entire floor-to-ceiling wall sections that could be lifted into place. "[I] believe that we can do that much more economically and efficiently if the 'grid' of glass units can be cast in large panels…and raised into place. It would then be one structural unit to support the roof. Would such a technique be satisfactory with you?" What he is describing is, essentially, a precast concrete wall panel, erected by crane - a technique that has since become commonplace. Block Width, in: 48 Block Height, in: 36 Block Thickness, in: 6 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 3.25 Block Area, in²: 1728 Year: FLLWF 5520.001 FLLWF 5520.063 FLLWF 5520.069 FLLWF 5520.069 blowup detail 5-126 5522 Robert Sunday House #1 1955 Marshalltown IA Built? Notes: The client owned a lumber company, and so requested a conversion from Usonian Automatic to conventional wood and brick construction (Pfeiffer, 1988). This was accomplished without significant change to the layout, substituting brick piers alternating with glass for the glazed block grid, for example. "It is our wish to manufacture the blocks this winter in preparation for building in the Spring" - Robert Sunday, 9/25/1957. In correspondence date 3/29/1958, it is clear that the Usonian Automatic version was still intended: "The perforated opening in the block increased to allow a greater glass area….Permission to eliminate the coffer in the standard A blocks to facilitate their manufacture." It is likely that bids came in too high, facilitating the eventual change to brick and wood - as those materials could be attained at wholesale cost. Other clients who resisted Wright's push to use the Usonian Automatic system include Stracke [#5125], Frederick [#5426], Lovness [#5507], Cooke [#5525], Jankowski [#5538], Kundert Medical Clinic [#5614], Walton [#5623], and Trier [#5724]. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 2 Block Area, in²: 288 1701 Woodfield Dr 50158 Year: FLLWF 5522.001 FLLWF 5522.008 5-127 FLLWF 5522.014 5-128 5524 Gerald Sussman House 1955 Rye NY Built? Notes: Wright called this design a Usonian Series "C" (Pfeiffer, 2010). This Usonian Automatic project was the basis for the 1987 traveling exhibit, "Frank Lloyd Wright: In the Realm of Ideas." It was a full-size demountable model home that was trucked to eight locations. A lightweight foam was used for the block material. As for the Sussmans, the design was budgeted at $25,000 but priced out at $60,000. "The preliminary drawings of the Usonia Automatic were breathtaking. Anyone with a feeling for your art would be proud to own it; however, its $60,000 estimate is far beyond our means. It seems our salvation lies in having a house which is primarily of wood construction and prehaps the necessary masonry portions could be of standard concrete block" - Helen Sussman, 11/14/1955. Wright's notes state that they "will not do work them selves" and "would definitely prefer ordinary concrete block." Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 2 Block Area, in²: 288 Year: FLLWF 5524.001 FLLWF 5524.002 FLLWF 5524.006 5-129 5525 Andrew B Cooke House #2 1956 Virginia Beach VA Built? Notes: This project was first designed as a brick building [#5219]. In order to save cost, it was redesigned as a Usonian Automatic. The owner eventually built the brick version. Other clients who resisted Wright's push to use the Usonian Automatic system include Stracke [#5125], Frederick [#5426], Lovness [#5507], Sunday [#5522], Jankowski [#5538], Kundert Medical Clinic [#5614], Walton [#5623], and Trier [#5724]. Block Width, in: Block Height, in: Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 320 51st St 23455 Year: FLLWF 5525.004 FLLWF 5525.003 FLLWF 5525.006 FLLWF 5525.008 5-130 5538 Leonard Jankowski House #2 1955 Oakland County MI Built? Notes: Based on correspondence, this project appears to have been first designed to use the Usonian Automatic system, not brick or standard block [#5505], which would make this Scheme 1, not 2. It may be that the project numbers should be reversed, if in fact the Usonian Automatic design came first. Mr. Jankowski preferred brick not concrete block. Also, he claimed that "local restrictions" prohibited concrete block. "I wonder if you recall our conversation last August in which you mentioned the Usonian Automatic block. At that time we said that we preferred brick as a building material" - Jankowski to FLW, 1/14/1955. Other clients who resisted Wright's push to use the Usonian Automatic system include Stracke [#5125], Frederick [#5426], Lovness [#5507], Sunday, [#5522], Cooke [#5525], Kundert Medical Clinic [#5614], Walton [#5623], and Trier [#5724]. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 2 Block Area, in²: 288 Year: FLLWF 5538.007 FLLWF 5538.008 FLLWF 5538.010 5-131 5601 David Hunt House 1956 Scottsdale AZ Built? Notes: This Usonian Automatic project was unique in that it used 18" square blocks (see FLLWF 5601.017). The corner blocks were mitered, similar to the Freeman House, constructed many years before [#2402]. There are many square columns composed of flat, mitered blocks, forming a loggia, also similar to the Freeman entrance court. Unlike the Freeman, the corner blocks are made longer in the horizontal direction so that the grout channels will line up when intersecting non-corner blocks at soffit areas. This then requires longer forms for both single corners and double corners, although a 20.5" x 18" form with inserts could serve for all cases. The block detail shows a radius edge instead of the more-usual chamfer. There are no coffered blocks, even on the ceiling. The ceiling blocks are the same thickness as the wall blocks (4 inches). The wall is composed of a single layer of blocks, without insulation, like the Arthur Pieper House [#5218], also in Arizona. A letter from David Hunt date 6/19/1957 noted that corners of blocks as then detailed "will have a tendency to break off, especially when taking them out of the mold." A two-piece block design by Taliesin Fellow Charles Montooth was approved by FLLW and several two-piece block samples were made. It therefore appears that the mitered corner piece and radius edge ideas were proposed by Montooth. There appears to be an evolution with this design to a simpler form of Usonian Automatic. It is clearly an attempt to reduce the number of block types required. It's unfortunate that the project was not executed, as it could have come in at a reduced cost. On the other hand, the single layer of blocks would have radiated insufferable heat to the interior during the Arizona summer. A thicker block that used an insulating concrete has possibilities. Block Width, in: 18 Block Height, in: 18 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 2 Block Area, in²: 324 Year: FLLWF 5601.009 FLLWF 5601.013 5-132 FLLWF 5601.016 FLLWF 5601.017 5-133 5602 Oscar Miller House 1956 Milford MN Built? Notes: This Usonian Automatic project is notable for the floor to ceiling perforated, glazed blocks in the dining alcove - some are operable for ventilation. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 2 Block Area, in²: 288 Year: FLLWF 5602.004 FLLWF 5602.008 FLLWF 5602.011 5-134 5603 Dr. Arthur O'Keeffe House 1956 Santa Barbara CA Built? Notes: There are glazed perforated concrete blocks along the north side of the of the living room and bedroom gallery. The perforated blocks scale to about 24" square. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 24 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 576 Year: FLLWF 5603.002 FLLWF 5603.002 blowup detail 5-135 5606 J.L. Smith House 1954 Kane County IL Built? Notes: This project was meant to be a low-cost building. FLLWF drawing 5606.006 is marked "$5000 Cottage." FLLWF 5606.005 states "One Room House...980 Square Feet." In another attempt to simplify and economize the Usonian Automatic, coffers are eliminated on the wall blocks (see #5601). Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 2 Block Area, in²: 288 Year: FLLWF 5606.002 FLLWF 5606.006 FLLWF 5606.014 FLLWF 5606.020 5-136 5612 Usonian Automatic Details 1949 Built? Notes: This project number does not denote a specific project but is a catch-all for Wright's Usonian Automatic development sketches. Variations include a 24x24" block, 16.5x33" hollow-core blocks (5612.057) and a mitered corner option. 5612.050 shows tongue and groove joints. The initial block unit was 2'-9" according to notes on FLLWF drawing 5612.001: "The factory goes to the house. The "Usonian" goes on the assembly line. Standardized Usonian Automatic (no skilled labor). Metal reinforced block shell 2'-9 units. 1 3/4" thick grooved edges. 1/2" rod reinforcement walls and ceiling. 1/2 blocks at corners w/ reinforcing with hooks at vertical intervals of 2'-9" - Entire house formed by two pattern blocks. 1. Foundation trenches 16" below grade broken stone filling 2. Floor heat - 5" broken stone below floors like ____ as coals 3. Ceiling same slabs as walls and floor and prestressed concrete beams 12" deep 4. Projection slabs cantilevered on beams upturned as standard. 5. Windows ____ factory sash (steel) set on reinforcing rods. 6. Stairs to work with unit both ways. 7. Furniture built in - variants - 48 8. Interior corner blocks thicker by 1/2 than exterior corner blocks. All exterior walls face unit line inside. All partition blocks center on unit line. Outside blocks/ inside on unit lines. Partitions centering on same - FLW July 12/49" Block Width, in: 36 Block Height, in: 36 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 1296 Year: FLLWF 5612.001 FLLWF 5612.021 5-137 FLLWF 5612.033 FLLWF 5612.077 5-138 5614 Kundert Medical Clinic #1 1955 San Luis Obispo CA Built? Notes: This Usonian Automatic project was executed in brick due to cost and labor issues. A 1955 letter from the Carbon Dubbs Company contained a proposal for manufacturing the Usonian Automatic block, although there was an issue with the corner blocks: "I am sure the blocks can be made substantially as you show them, but I would like to propose an alternate for your inside and outside corner blocks, as these will require special machines and rather expensive pallets...Doctors' Kundert and Fogel of San Luis Obispo requested and received a price from us for the blocks required in their Medical Building. Since presently we have no machine for the manufacture of your blocks, our price had to be based on hand molded units and was, accordingly, quite high." Other clients who resisted Wright's push to use the Usonian Automatic system include Stracke [#5125], Frederick [#5426], Lovness [#5507], Sunday, [#5522], Cooke [#5525], Jankowski [#5538], Walton [#5623], and Trier [#5724]. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 288 1106 Pacific St 93401 Year: FLLWF 5614.002 FLLWF 5614.008 5-139 5621 Office of Hamilton Small Loans for G.B. Tonkens 1957 Hamilton OH Built? Notes: A band of large perforated blocks ring this building at the clerestory/mezzanine level. No grout channels are shown in the block detail, so it is not clear how structural continuity would have been achieved for the wall. Block Width, in: 48 Block Height, in: 48 Block Thickness, in: 9 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 2304 Year: FLLWF 5621.003 FLLWF 5621.009 FLLWF 5621.013 Detail FLLWF 5621.013 Section 5-140 5623 Robert G.Walton House 1957 Modesto CA Built? Notes: Wright to Dr. Walton: “I build scientific houses out of concrete block and steel reinforcement, so I know that they are safe" (Wilson, 2014-07-24, Kindle Locations 1679-1680). Originally a Usonian Automatic design with 16x32" blocks, it was later converted to standard 8x16" manufactured block to save money (Pfeiffer, 2010). The cost estimate for the project was $60,000, and the final cost was actually close to that number (Wilson, 2014). 32" square ceiling tiles and 16x32x7-5/8" decorative perforated blocks were used. Other clients who resisted Wright's push to use the Usonian Automatic system include Stracke [#5125], Frederick [#5426], Lovness [#5507], Sunday, [#5522], Cooke [#5525], Jankowski [#5538], Kundert Medical Clinic [#5614], and Trier [#5724]. Block Width, in: 32 Block Height, in: 16 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 2 Block Area, in²: 512 417 Hogue Rd 95350 Year: FLLWF 5623.001 FLLWF 5623.003 FLLWF 5623.015 FLLWF 5623.019 5-141 5633 Arthur J. Levin House 1954 Palo Alto CA Built? Notes: Not much is known about this project - a Usonian Automatic design. It is possible that arranging financing for an unconventional house like this was too difficult. "Under the law in order to obtain a G.I. loan and mortgage for the construction of our house it is necessary to have all our plans completed, our contracts signed and application for the loan made by November 30th" - Arthur Levin, 9/8/1954. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 288 Year: FLLWF 5633.003 FLLWF 5633.002 5-142 5637 Calvin Stillman House, Scheme 2 1957 Cornwall-on-Hudson NY Built? Notes: Glazed perforated textile blocks are used as banded accents, with standard concrete blocks used everywhere else. The textile block edges are beveled 3/4" to fit the curved wall. Block Width, in: 23.625 Block Height, in: 23.625 Block Thickness, in: 7.625 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 3 Block Area, in²: 558.140625 Year: FLLWF 5637.006 FLLWF 5637.010 5-143 5715 Kaufmann, Falling Water Gate Lodge 1956 Mill Run PA Built? Notes: Edgar Kaufmann Jr commissioned Wright to design three buildings to serve as guest houses and a caretaker residence for the entrance to Fallingwater. In a telegram dated 12/13/1956, Wright stated: "DEAR EDGAR: LAST TIME WE TALKED OF BUILDINGS AT BEAR RUN YOU THOUGHT A GROUP OF THREE OF MY FAVORITE ONE ROOM USONIANS CONNECTED TO MAKE GUEST HOUSE ACCOMODATIONS BETWEEN WOULD BE A FASCINATING EXPERIMENT AND PROFITABLE." The next day, another telegram was sent: "DEAR EDGAR: FORGOT TO MENTION THAT THE CHAMPION USONIAN IS ALREADY [sic] TO BUILD ACCORDING TO A GROUPING YOU AND I MAY DEVISE. WHERE ARE YOU?" "I've enjoyed studying the drawings of those delightful little houses more than I can say. They are small jewels all right." In the revised layout will you please consider the importance of keeping out moisture…" - Edgar Kaufmann, Jr to Wright, 2/13/1957. The drawings show three "One-Room" Usonian Automatic houses. FLLWF 5715.001 appears to show 24x24 in. blocks, although later drawings reverted to the standard 12x24 in. size. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 288 Year: FLLWF 5715.001 FLLWF 5715.005 5-144 5724 Dr. Paul J. Trier House 1956 Johnston IA Built? Notes: The Trier house design was converted at some point from Usonian Automatic to brick. The Trier's budget was $30,000 for an 1800 to 2000 sq. ft. house. Wright's proposal: "Dear Doctor - A Usonian Automatic might come in under your limitations." Based on correspondence, a 1956 date is appropriate for the Usonian Automatic version. Preliminary plans reached Dr. Trier on Sept. 24, 1956. The Trier's wanted a brick design, but Wright encouraged them to price out both brick and Usonian block versions. The best estimate came in at $50,000. This may have been for the brick version. It is not likely that the block version was less expensive, since the brick design was eventually built. Other clients who resisted Wright's push to use the Usonian Automatic system include Stracke [#5125], Frederick [#5426], Lovness [#5507], Sunday [#5522], Cooke [#5525], Jankowski [#5538], Kundert Medical Clinic [#5614], and Walton [#5623]. This project shows that Wright was willing to design Usonian Automatic versions of his designs at no extra charge in the hope that they would be built. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 288 6880 NW Beaver Dr 50131 Year: FLLWF 5724.001 FLLWF 5724.003 5-145 5740 Walter Bimson, Subdivision 1957 Phoenix AZ Built? Notes: This Usonian Automatic subdivision project places 27 houses on an "L" shaped plot. Two designs were developed, called "Usonian A" and "Usonian D" (Pfeiffer, 2010). Early sketches show a 24" square standard wall block, later changed to the typical 12 x 24" size. The ceiling blocks do not have coffers, which is unusual (see the David Hunt House, #5601). Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 12 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 288 Year: FLLWF 5740.026 FLLWF 5740.027 FLLWF 5740.029 FLLWF 5740.030 5-146 5801 Nezam Amery House 1957 Tehran Iran Built? Notes: Nezan Amery was a Taliesin Apprentice from 1953 to 1957, returning to Tehran, Iran in 1958 (Pfeiffer, 2010, Vol 3, Pg 521). He specifically asked Wright for a design that was similar to the Millard House, "La Miniatura" [#2302]. The design was simplified from that 1923 house, using a single layer of textile blocks. The blocks are coffered and some are perforated, as used for the Usonian Automatics. The 16" square block size matches the Millard House, which was Wright's first built textile block house. And so with this, his last textile block house design, Wright has come full-circle. Block Width, in: 16 Block Height, in: 16 Block Thickness, in: 4 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 2 Block Area, in²: 256 Year: FLLWF 5801.007 FLLWF 5801.020 5-147 5812 Dr. George Ablin House 1958 Bakersfield CA Built? Notes: Wright designed this home two months before his death in 1959. The working drawings were signed by Taliesin Associate Wesley Peters in May, 1959 (Wilson, 2014). The kitchen displays an impressive wall of perforated blocks to admit light and create patterns. These are interspersed with standard blocks. The blocks are shown internally reinforced with 2 - #2 reinforcing bars. 1/8" thick clear plastic provides the glazing within the perforation. The grout channels are rectangular and have a #4 bar in in the center, much larger than the #2 bar typically used in previous projects. Block Width, in: 15.625 Block Height, in: 15.625 Block Thickness, in: 7.625 Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: 4 Block Area, in²: 244.140625 4260 Country Club Rd 93306 Year: FLLWF 5812.001 FLLWF 5812.0004 FLLWF 5812.0009 FLLWF 5812.012 5-148 5814 Dr. Jarvis Luechauer Clinic 1959 Fresno CA Built? Notes: Large, perforated concrete blocks at the soffit level form the fenestration for this proposed building. The blocks scale to about 24" square. Block Width, in: 24 Block Height, in: 24 Block Thickness, in: Air Space, Gap, in: Core Diameter, in: Block Area, in²: 576 Year: FLLWF 5814.001 FLLWF 5814.001 blowup detail FLLWF 5814.002 FLLWF 5814.002 blowup detail 5-149 5.1 The Usonian Automatic Projects Project No Project Name ‐Year‐ Built? 5101 Benjamin Adelman House 1951 5125 Victor Stracke House, Scheme 1 1951 5218 Arthur Pieper House 1952 5311 Pieper‐ Montooth Office 1953 5426 Louis Frederick House 1954 5502 Mel Blumberg House, 2nd Scheme 1955 5506 Toufic Kalil House 1955 5507 Don Lovness House 1955 5510 Gerald Tonkens House 1954 5512 William B. Tracy House 1954 5513 Dorothy Turkel House 1955 5516 Theodore A. Pappas House 1955 5522 Robert Sunday House #1 1955 5524 Gerald Sussman House 1955 5525 Andrew B Cooke House #2 1956 5538 Leonard Jankowski House #2 1955 5601 David Hunt House 1956 5602 Oscar Miller House 1956 5606 J.L. Smith House 1954 5614 Kundert Medical Clinic #1 1955 5623 Robert G.Walton House 1957 5633 Arthur J. Levin House 1954 5715 Kaufmann, Falling Water Gate Lodge 1956 5724 Dr. Paul J. Trier House 1956 5740 Walter Bimson, Subdivision 1957 5 -1 51 Dissertation of Edward D Losch for the Degree Ph.D. in Architecture Chapter 6 An Analysis by Category School of Architecture Department of Building Science University of Southern California 6-1 6.1 An analysis of the Essential Qualities, Challenges, and Alternative Methods by category What follows is a critical analysis of the database records by category from a building science perspective. The notes and analyses presented in Chapters 2, 3, and 4 were examined for significance to this thesis. Any particular issues, trends or insights discovered have been noted and analyzed below. 6.1.1 Assembly Most of the Essential Qualities related to assembly of the structure were achieved to varying degrees in practice. There were two exceptions. The requirement for tight joints with no dimensional tolerance had the opposite effect to that desired, making the site construction process significantly more labor and skill intensive. Second, the requirement that it be simple to build was therefore also not achieved. What is simple in concept does not necessarily make for simple execution. Because the assembly process for the textile block system was fairly unique, a trained apprentice was required on site to guide the work. This theoretically allowed for the use of unskilled labor, which was key to Wright's claim of affordability. Despite Wright's sincere attempt at pre-engineering the complexity out of the textile block projects, they were never simple to build, as claimed. A primary reason for making the system simple to build was to use unskilled field laborers as much as possible, whether they be clients or day laborers. The most distinctive feature of Wright's "one-process" concept to speed and streamline assembly was a cellular growth analogy. It was not based on building science. The idea seems logical but there was no research presented to support it. At its heart, this was an organic principle - a building should "grow" uniformly and elegantly from its foundation. It was a philosophical, romantic ideal that was to be taken essentially on faith. Because the casting of blocks was usually performed on-site, this added significant critical-path time to the field construction period. Wright could have added a mortar joint for tolerance, but chose not to, believing that eliminating this skilled trade was key to simplifying the assembly process. He sought to minimize skilled field labor mainly by eliminating the union mason. In actuality, having tight joints with no tolerance did the opposite, needlessly complicating assembly by requiring a level of precision that was unrealistic for field work. A note for the Science and Cosmology Building [#5319] reads: "Dimensions for precast block shall be accurate to within 1/64 of an inch and shall not exceed given dimensions in any event. Block shall be cast from 1 part white cement to 3 parts fine, washed building sand." By contrast, current industry standards allow plus or minus 1/8" for units under 10' in size (PCI MNL 117, 1996, pg 162). The construction industry has moved away from anything resembling "one-process." This trend cannot be easily worked around or solved with new technology. Wright's "One Process" ideal was touted as an advantage, but in reality, it made the construction process less efficient. It complicated code inspections. The architect has little control over that requirement. The only alternative was to build where codes are lax or non-existent. This would have greatly limited the usefulness of the system. Wright's radical system would still be difficult to understand by contractors. The industry has not embraced his modular approach and dimensionless drawings, although computer modeling could provide the detailed drawings that were too labor-intensive to produce individually. 6-3 Wright believed that if all the complexity and required precision could be worked out in advance on the drawing board and factory, then assembly would be simple. This precision was rarely achieved in practice, however. Wright's solution was to use ever more precisely constructed molds. Even with theoretically perfect molds, there would still remain the problem of uneven concrete shrinkage, which is affected by many variables. A possible solution would be to use a thin mortar or mastic with 1/8" or 3/32" joints to provide sufficient tolerance. There is no evidence to suggest that fabricating and installing the textile block system has ever been fast or easy. The latest construction, that of the FSC Faculty House, #3922, in 2011 required highly skilled craftsmen to complete. Wright sought to use the largest unit size for the blocks that would be light enough “for a man to reasonably lift.” This reduced the labor involved, as well as the number of joints. Lightweight concrete was occasionally specified to achieve this goal. Unfortunately, standard structural lightweight concrete is only around 25% lighter than normal weight concrete. Trying to go much lighter than that results in a significant reduction in strength and durability. The state of the art is still trying to catch up to Wright's vision in this regard. One cannot get around the fact that assembling the textile blocks was labor-intensive. Even if factory mass-casting were able to provide low-cost, high-quality blocks, there was still a lot of field labor required to assemble them. The organic nature of the block and its assembly process made for slow progress compared to conventional construction. Radical changes in the system would be required to significantly reduce labor. So much so, that the system would probably not be recognizable as "textile block" and would no longer satisfy many of the Essential Qualities. The small module, with its multitude of joints, was an essential organic feature of the system. Wright refused to allow the precasting of full wall units, which would have greatly reduced field labor as well as the number of joints. What could be done to speed assembly? The use of lightweight concrete was mentioned. Custom engineered wythe connectors have helped in positioning the blocks. Grout admixtures would improve flowability. Using thicker blocks or a one-layer block that provided both the inner and outer finished surface would reduce the need for temporary wall bracing. A thin mortar bed or manufactured sealant strip would solve the tolerance issue. A more radical approach would have been to do what several Taliesin Fellows suggested and precast a floor to ceiling wall assembly and tilt that in place. Wright opposed that idea for reasons that will be explored in other sections of this document. 6.1.2 Comfort Most of Wright’s Essential Qualities related to physical comfort were achieved to some degree. Most of these qualities are also generally present in precast, site-cast concrete or concrete masonry buildings, and so are not unique to the textile block system. The lack of insulation in the wall cavity severely compromised thermal comfort, however. The single wythe option was particularly prone to heat transmission if not covered with insulation and plywood paneling. Lightweight insulating concrete was used on the Tonkens House [#5510], mainly to reduce weight, but it could also moderate the desert heat as well. 6-4 Wright claimed a thermal mass benefit for his system due to the air gap which slowed heat transmission between wythes. In 1923 he noted that his textile block system was "warm in winter and cool in summer and dry in both.” He repeated this claim publicly many times in the following years. The system was developed originally for the dry Southwest climate to take advantage of daily temperature swings. Wright described his San Marcos project in Arizona as having "cool masonry caverns." This concept was intended to be a natural way to control temperature swings, such as present in a cave or stone or adobe dwelling. Later He claimed a universal applicability for the system in any American climate zone. The air space allowed convection currents, however, which compromised performance significantly. In the absence of any insulation it was critical to seal any air gaps and preserve a layer of dead air in the cavity between wythes. Actual performance in this regard was mixed. The later buildings were better than the earlier ones in preventing drafts. For mechanical ventilation, vent louvers were often integrated into the blocks. With this technique, ventilation was provided in an integrated manner, supporting Wright's "one-process" cellular assembly idea. In addition, for the Usonian Automatic system, some of the glass inserts set into the blocks are openable for ventilation. Wright's intention was that the block system would provide as many functions as possible, all in an integrated manner. The apparent mass and solidity of the system had many beneficial qualities related to occupant comfort. For one, it stands to reason that such a system, with substantial mass and an isolating air gap, would provide superior resistance to noise transmission. In addition, a feeling of security is imparted by the bank vault-like solidity of the walls. In many designs the home appears as a fortress from the street but opens up inside to private exterior areas. The block's good protection in severe weather also provides a sense of security that matches the block's formidable appearance. Most of the Comfort issues can be solved with modern methods, particularly by adding insulation of some sort. Using a structural insulation for the block material itself has positive ramifications for other categories beyond comfort as well. 6.1.3 Cost Wright once stated that, next to designing a theatre for live performance, solving the middle income housing problem was the issue closest to his heart. (Wright 1954, 68) He had hoped that his precast concrete modular block system would do just that, taking advantage of the following characteristics: Mass production (machine age) - Use mass production techniques as developed for the concrete block industry to control the cost of the wall assembly. At the same time, retaining artistic control – not letting the production process determine the form. Unskilled labor - If the inexpensive, mass-produced blocks could be assembled by relatively unskilled labor, then the higher cost of a skilled mason could be avoided. This was more of an ideal than a reality, as the precise tolerances specified for Wright’s designs usually required the services of a master craftsman. Construction sequence – Wright’s idea was that constructing the inner and outer wall at the same time, in one operation would save time and money. “And it would be ideal to complete the building in one operation as it goes along. 6-5 Inside and outside should be complete in one operation, the house finished inside as it is completed outside.” (Wright 1954, 71) Inexpensive materials – A common Usonian characteristic was the use of inexpensive, local materials. This was not just to save money. Wright felt that it was important to incorporate materials from the region or even the actual site in order to tie the home to its location “organically”. This was an Arts and Crafts principle adopted by Wright and wasn’t necessarily done to save money or be more sustainable. The Ennis House blocks incorporated decomposed granite from the site as aggregate. It provided a unique rose tint, but turned out to be an unsuitable choice for long-term durability. (Fidler 2007) 2010 photo of excessive weathering of Ennis House blocks (built 1924): Life cycle cost – The materials were to be viewed in their natural state, not coated or painted. This would save the cost of painting as well as reducing maintenance cost. Unfortunately, the site cast methods used compromised the long-term durability of the block. Unproven claims - Most of the claimed Essential Qualities within the category of Cost were not achieved in practice. There were savings to be had by eliminating trim, plaster and paint, but these were more than offset by other areas where costs increased. Hollowing out the blocks may have saved a bit of material, but forming costs increased due to the greater mold complexity. Wright endeavored to reduce material and weight even when it made no economic or structural sense to do so. This was not primarily to reduce cost, as he claimed, but was actually a key component of his organic design philosophy. Natural structures tend to evolve with just enough strength to meet their needs, no more, no less. With the textile block, this was accomplished by thinning out and coffering the inside face of the blocks and experimenting with lighter weight concrete mixes. Attempts to reduce the cost of labor were not successful. Wright was often able to substitute unskilled or owner labor for a good part of the construction process, but a lot more man-hours were required. Requiring zero tolerance for the blocks only made things worse, as much fussing and fitting was necessary. Wright’s “one-process” ideal stretched things out further, as trades had to do their work piecemeal as the walls went up instead of adding their contribution at the end, more efficiently and all at once. Wright was drawn to the romantic idea of the homeowner constructing their own house. Unskilled assembly was a key requirement to accomplishing that. There was a method to the madness – there is a satisfaction that comes from enjoying the fruit of one’s own labor. The free-thinkers who were attracted to Wright's work were not all financially well off. He developed the Usonian Automatic system for them. Unfortunately, even with owner labor, the system was not any less expensive than his non- textile block designs, which also typically ran over twice the budgeted amount (see “Project Estimated Cost versus Actual” in Appendix E). 6-6 Wright's interest in the use of local materials was actually more about the organic concept of tying the building to the site than simply a way save money (SIT - connected to the site). In addition, displaying those local materials as the finished surface without paint or other covering satisfied an organic goal, as well as reducing the material cost (CLR - integral color). Economies of scale were achieved somewhat with the cooperative developments in Michigan in the late 1940s. Much of the success of the cooperatives can be attributed to a pioneering can-do spirit and a strong reverence for Wright and his organic design concepts. There was a limit to the overall economy, however. The blocks themselves can be mass- produced, but that still leaves a labor-intensive site assembly process, which is not as amenable to scaling. 6.1.4 Design Wright believed that by using small prefabricated units, on the order of three feet or less in size, he could preserve near- total design flexibility while also realizing the economies of mass production. To achieve this design flexibility, the block units had to accommodate various obtuse and acute angles, curves, patterns, perforations, integral glazing, and batters in multiple directions at the same time. It was also required to handle a variety of textures and colors. At the same time, Wright was keen to express the “blockiness” of form that the blocks represented. The blocks were to guide the design expression. This can be seen most clearly in the later Usonian Automatic designs, which have a very distinctive vocabulary. One recognizes a distinct “look” to these designs, yet there is considerable flexibility in plan and elevation. Wright was able to routinely convert his residential designs from brick and stone to Usonian Automatic textile block and back again with apparent ease. There was a price to pay for this design flexibility. The early block buildings had the greatest flexibility, but also the greatest number of block types and more expensive forms and molds. However, they are also the most celebrated of the textile block buildings, routinely praised for their beauty. Later, Wright attempted to bring costs down by eliminating patterns, batters and the like. This resulted in less variety of form. These later buildings were not as universally well- received as the earlier ones – according to one critic they had a tendency to be “stark, mechanical, and rather ugly” (Twombly, 1973, pg 255). A somewhat hidden purpose was to mimic cellular growth. This extended to the method of assembly as well. Wright insisted that the blocks be put in place one at a time, so the building would appear to grow out of the ground as construction progressed, the process achieving a form of performance art. Having the owners assemble the blocks themselves further reinforced the performance aspect of the design. As such, like a musical composition, there is a timeline and a life-cycle to Wright’s design concept. At the far end of the life-cycle, he expected “permanence.” An appearance of permanence achieved through the choice of materials and design, as well as an actual durability. The building was to look as if it had always been there and always would be, available to serve successive generations of inhabitants. Another design purpose was to visually unify the exterior and interior. This was accomplished by duplicating the blocks for the inner surface as well as the outer. Some interior partitions also used textile blocks when a paneled wall would have otherwise sufficed. 6-7 Wright designed within a module from early-on in his career. The base module varied in dimension according to the particular project, but once set, all dimensions within a project were tied to it. It was a design governor in addition to an organic principle. A plan could be laid out quickly on gridded paper without dimensions. The module was a regimental system. It helped facilitate a variety of goals: Providing an intrinsically unified appearance; a regimented simplicity, and affordability through standardized prefabrication and associated ease of construction. The basic module dimension [whether 4 ft. as used for the Usonian houses, or 6 ft., for the Florida Southern College campus] was struck into the base concrete floor slab. Note that the 24 in. module joints struck into the concrete floor slab on the Turkel House extend to the outdoor patio (right). These joints were left visible as an extension of the organization of the building units into a unified whole. This is evident in the block pattern of the Freeman House. Its composition is believed to be a stylized representation of the house itself, next to a eucalyptus tree. If so, the house becomes recursive in a way, as the unit reflects the whole, like the DNA in a cell which provides a blueprint for the entire organism. The Freeman House with patterned blocks as recursive elements (right): Through a survey of the historical record it appears that Wright’s Essential Qualities related to Design were by and large achieved. Design quality and architectural beauty were of great importance to him. The only significant failing that this author could find was in the quality of Standardization. Standards were routinely winked at by Wright if they in any way limited his design creativity. It was up to his Taliesin Associates, who were often put in charge of construction, to propose ways to standardize and economize. Eric Lloyd Wright, Aaron Green, Arthur Pieper, and Charles Montooth in particular were not shy about proposing ways to simplify and standardize particular designs. Sometimes their suggestions were overruled, but most were accepted, as Wright surely realized that these former apprentices were responsible for making his designs a reality. There were however, significant issues related to design that greatly impacted the acceptance of the textile block system. Some people felt that the buildings had a forbidding, fortress-like appearance. Many clients had an aversion to concrete for use as the finished surface and requested a brick or stone alternate. The designs were not traditional or vernacular. Wright’s starkly modern designs appealed to a small demographic, which also made financing difficult, as there was concern about resale value. The system itself was technically and artistically challenging, limiting its use to 6-8 only the most proficient designers. Last but not least, a “champion” was needed to promote the system. After Wright passed away in 1959, there was no one around of his stature to step up and educate the client on the system’s benefits. Of the modern methods that could be applied to textile block design, one stands out. For the Florida Southern College Faculty House [#3922], built in 2011, 3D-CAD generated isometric drawings were generated of the building assembly phase for each block course. This aided in planning as well as assembly. Contractors routinely complained to Wright that his drawings were insufficient to build the house. They did not understand his dimensionless “unit system,” for one thing. 3D assembly drawings would be very useful, necessary even. They could be generated without too much trouble from the 3D CAD model developed by the architect in the course of designing the building. The 3D model must be extremely accurate to ensure that all the parts fit together - it needs to be much more than just a graphic representation. 6.1.5 Durability Wright claimed that his textile block buildings would stand for 100, 300 or even 1000 years. To do that, they needed to be durable. In addition, maintenance was to be minimal. The reality was much different. The method of casting and assembly sowed the seeds for their eventual deterioration. Moisture penetration - one common complaint regarding the Freeman House [#2402] is that water penetrates the walls, entering the finished space. “Standing puddles” have been commonly observed in the living room of the Freeman House (Beltran 2006, 11-12). The roof on the Freeman House was replaced in 2002, but the water penetration continued. Alice Beltran, while an MBS student at USC, studied the problem and found that the dry-cast blocks were extremely porous, soaking up water like a sponge (Beltran 2006, 71). Despite this, the air cavity between the block wythes should have stopped any water that penetrated the outer wythe from entering the finished space. Beltran identified two likely mechanisms for infiltration. One route would be through beam penetrations. The beams bore on the outer wythe, so water could travel along the beams to the inner wythe. Secondly, areas were identified that had solid grouting between the wythes. Water could travel through cracks in the grout via capillary action to the inside. Jeffrey Chusid noted that the Freeman House is the only completed textile block building with mitered corners. The miters have been identified as a route for water infiltration, causing rusting and expansion of the steel (Chusid 1989, 222). The other built examples used U and/or L-shaped corners. The author has identified several other likely routes of water entry into the Freeman House. According to Neutra’s detailed sketch of the textile block system (see Part 1), metal ties were used to tie the wythes together every 16” on center (or 32”, according to Eric Lloyd Wright). Water could travel along the ties or condensation could form on the metal. Furthermore, if the foundation wall was built at or above floor level, which it likely would have been at the north wall, then water could travel down the inside of the wall cavity to the top of the foundation wall and weep to the inside 6-9 instead of the outside. Furthermore, Wright did not put a cap flashing on the roof parapets, since that would disturb the look of the façade. Without a flashing, water could enter the wall at the top and travel along the inside wythe. What can be done to make the textile block system water resistant? As discussed above, proper detailing to minimize water infiltration is one thing, but that should be standard practice. The remaining issue is the porosity of the block. The porosity of the dry-cast blocks and the gaps within the grouted channels allowed water vapor to penetrate. Wright was aware that water or vapor penetration could compromise the longevity of the structure, and did take steps to combat it. He was generally unsuccessful due to the porous nature of the block. In this case the intent did not match the result. Mice and termites have also been known to enter the block wall and use the cavities as vermin highways. These problems could be solved by adding insulation and a vapor barrier to the air gap between wythes, albeit at an added cost. In order to be somewhat economical, corners were cut in the casting and assembly process. Blocks were dry-cast so they could be removed from the molds every 90 seconds. This also provided the textured surface that Wright wanted. The dry-cast blocks were porous and friable, since there was insufficient cement paste to bind the aggregates. Site-cast blocks sometimes had impurities due to the purposeful use of sand or dirt from the site. Water from local sources sometimes contained chlorides which leached out of the blocks, staining them. The design of the grout tubes and the stiffness of the grout mix resulted in gaps in the tubes, exposing reinforcing. The reinforcing was located, by design, too close to the outer face, where water could penetrate and cause rusting. The concrete mix - concrete masonry is typically dry-cast. This means that a very stiff mix is used, with as little added water as possible. This is done so the block can be formed and the form removed within minutes, while the block holds its shape. That way, the same form can be used over and over to make up to 100 blocks a day. The economy of concrete block construction is dependent on this method. The drawback with dry-cast blocks is that, if not produced under tightly controlled conditions, they can be porous. There is not enough water available to send the cement paste into every nook and cranny. The comparison to a sponge is apt. One possible solution is to leave the blocks in the form overnight. The problem with this is that now up to 100 times as many forms are required. This was done for the Ennis House restoration. Thirty urethane rubber and fiberglass forms for each block type were used (author conversation with Paul Dreibelbis and Jeff Keenan of Moonlight Molds, 8/24/2010). The mix used was still a dry mix, since the blocks needed to match the existing blocks as much as possible. By contrast, a wet-cast block has a much smoother surface, and is not as appealing to look at. Wet cast surfaces are typically treated after casting by water wash (with retarder), sandblast, acid-etch or stain to provide a more pleasing appearance. 6-10 Original dry-cast Ennis blocks Replacement Ennis block, 2004 (Photo Nov. 2010) Original dry-cast Freeman block, 1924 A wet-cast Freeman block (McAlister 2009, 123) Although these problems are serious, they have been found to be generally solvable using modern methods. The drawback is, to cast and assemble the blocks properly adds labor and expense. For example, replacement blocks for the Ennis House [#2401] were wet-cast for durability, then acid-etched to match (somewhat) the texture of the original dry-cast blocks. The process was time-consuming, requiring that the blocks set in the molds overnight. Some of these modern, or alternative methods are mundane, such as washing the sand before using it, but still essential. Admixtures - in addition to leaving the Ennis replacement blocks overnight in the form, an acrylic thermoplastic co- polymer emulsion admixture was used (Forton VF-774). According to the manufacturer, this admixture speeds up curing (cover overnight instead of 7 days) and improves workability at low water cement ratios, providing a denser product that is more resistant to moisture absorption and vapor permeability (Ball Consulting Ltd). A Type III, or high-early strength cement can also be used to speed up form removal. Sealers - An applied sealer can provide another, supplemental means of protection against water penetration. A 6-11 silane/siloxane-based sealer will penetrate the block but does not affect the color or surface texture of the masonry. It shouldn’t form a film and should leave the surface breathable, so vapor can escape. This could be at least a partial solution to the water penetration problems on the historic Los Angeles textile-block houses. The specifications for the Freeman House called for a waterproofing compound to be applied to the concrete blocks upon completion (Chusid 1989, 198). The manufacturer of the compound, trade name “Barlith”, claimed that Barlith “does not alter the appearance of even the most delicately tinted building stones… It does not seal the pores, flake off with time, and is not affected by extremes of heat and cold.” (Arts & Architecture, 1922, 39) The Barlith Company was headquartered in San Francisco, with a factory in West Sacramento and a distributor in Los Angeles in 1922. It is not known if the compound was ever applied as was specified. Sealers versus coatings: Below is a graph of water uptake by concrete coated with a silane sealer, and/or a coating. According to this study, the silane sealer alone provided the best performance. Additionally, unlike coatings, silane sealers are not known to alter the appearance of the concrete surface or trap water vapor. (Shi and Mo 2008, 335, 347) Insulation - The textile block houses were not insulated, except by an air gap between wythes of from 1” to 2-½” wide. The R value can be calculated as follows: Outside surface: 0.25 2” concrete 0.20 3” average air gap 1.00 2” concrete 0.20 Inside surface 0.68 ------- Total R: 2.33 Not very high! It’s about the same as a double pane window. Adding insulation is highly recommended. The system was already labor-intensive to begin with, to do it properly puts it well out of the range of affordability. This was likely why Wright sought to find a manufacturer to mass-produce the blocks. His artistic sensibilities would not allow him to simplify the system sufficiently to meet the restrictions of a machine-made process, however. By the mid-1950s, standard concrete block was substituted for Wright’s textile block more and more, in order to save cost. Wright was aware that the block quality could be better. At one point he explored the use of natural cement for casting the blocks. He first proposed its use in order to provide a local source of cement for San Marcos (#2704). It gained 6-12 strength slowly compared to Portland cement, but set much faster, allowing a faster turn-around for the molds. This would save time and money in the casting process, while providing a more durable block than could be achieved with dry-casting. It was successfully used in 2011 for the Florida Southern College Faculty House [#3922]. Currently, the available sources for natural cement are limited, so it would not be a local material. Block replacement was difficult. If replacement was made easier, then block durability becomes less of an issue. With the original system, replacement of an entire wall might be required, since the individual blocks were interlocked with the woven reinforcing. A redesign of the system should include a way to replace individual blocks. Replaceable blocks would further the organic analogy of the wall surface as a skin where cells are replaced as needed. Blocks could be field-cast from site materials if they don't need to last forever. Alternately, there could be layers of wearing surfaces that would be peeled or scraped off as needed, exposing a fresh wearing surface beneath. Paradoxically, permanence could be fostered by making the blocks more ephemeral. 6.1.6 Environment Wright approached the environment holistically, considering spiritual well-being as the top consideration. Organic design, by definition, should harmonize with nature. That said, one characteristic of Wright's Usonian house designs was that they took more energy to heat. This was partly because of the premium Wright put on blurring the distinction between indoors and out. That meant large uninsulated glazed areas were the norm. In an era of plentiful and cheap fossil fuels, he justified the cost of extra heating oil as a small price to pay for the beauty and harmony of his designs. Warm and dry climates - The textile block system was first developed for a warm and dry climate. Lloyd Wright first used it in Los Angeles in an ornamental fashion. The senior Wright then adopted and modified it to fit his mono-material vision. He recognized the advantages that a heavy concrete mass wall has in a warm, dry climate, probably through studying Native American structures built of adobe, brick or stone in the American Southwest and Mexico. In this type of climate, the mass wall absorbs heat during the day when it’s hot and releases it to the living space at night when it’s cool. It functions as a heat battery. With the Ennis House, Wright takes the homage to Native American design further by creating a Mayan-influenced building shell, complete with battered walls. Unfortunately, the textile block system did not weather well when exposed at the top, as was done to create the batter effect. 6-13 The Ennis House, built 1924: The relative lack of rain in a dry climate worked to the original system’s advantage. The woven network of grouted reinforcing bars was often exposed to the elements if the joints weren’t filled completely with grout, which they often weren’t due to the difficulty of application. Moisture could then penetrate and corrode the exposed reinforcing. Although still a major problem in Los Angeles, despite the dry climate, it is a much greater issue in hot and humid Lakeland, Florida, site of the Florida Southern College buildings. Warm and humid climates – At Florida Southern College, in the heart of central Florida, the textile block system was used for ten campus buildings built from 1938 to 1954, and one built in 2013. Here the effects of rain, moisture and humidity have caused dramatic deterioration of the blocks over time. Even replacement blocks dating from 1981 have not fared well. Restoration work on the Roux Library in 1981: Whatever logic made the textile block suitable for the American Southwest falls apart for the humid Southeast. Summer temperatures don’t fall as much overnight as compared to a drier climate, so the heat storage effect provides little benefit. There is certainly a benefit in coastal areas subject to wind storms however. According to Jeff Baker [architect for Florida Southern’s new Usonian House] spraying foam insulation between the wall wythes increased the strength of the wall significantly (Baker 2011). The combination of strength, mass and foundation anchorage provides what is needed to resist hurricane-force winds. The same section of the Roux Library as it appeared in 2011: Cold climates - There are eleven textile block homes located in the Midwest and one in the Northeast. Thermal mass is utilized in a different way with each of these homes. Many have plywood interior walls. Only the exterior wythe is concrete, which negates any thermal mass benefit from night-flushing the interior. There is often no insulation in the walls. As expected, the homes can be hard to heat in the winter. Thermal mass does help a bit by slowing the transfer of heat through the exterior walls. 6-14 Wright apparently used this system in this climate for other reasons. As noted earlier, he believed that the textile block system could save the homeowner money in construction cost and maintenance. Based on the author’s interviews with some of the homeowners, neither of these goals were realized. The blocks were susceptible to water penetration, which required maintenance, and their assembly took a high level of skill, due to the lack of tolerance with the blocks. There is potential for good thermal performance, however, if the wall is insulated between the wythes. Precast concrete sandwich wall panels are very popular in the Midwest. This wall type is similar to the textile block system in that there are two layers of concrete with a layer of rigid insulation in-between. It has been shown that the thermal mass of the concrete increases the effective R rating of the panel (ref). This effect has been incorporated into the latest ASHRAE 90.1 standard (ASHRAE, 2013). There is no reason why an insulated textile block wall should not behave similarly. Embodied energy: Heavy wall systems typically have a higher initial embodied energy than light walls, although concrete walls can score better when operational energy is considered in addition to the embodied energy. Thermal mass effect can provide a significant reduction in both heating and cooling loads. Below is a graph from a study performed by Arup + Development titled “A Lifecycle Analysis Examining the role of Thermal Mass.” (Arup + Development 2006) For the benefit of those viewing the graph in black and white: “Light” construction starts as the lowest line, having the lowest embodied energy. As operational energy is added, all construction types reach energy parity around 2035, then the “Light” construction type becomes the highest line, as higher operational energy overcomes the lower initial value. The study assumed continuous occupation during the day—results could differ if the home was unoccupied during working hours. 6-15 6.1.7 Integrity From a comprehensive examination of the historical record, the author has identified certain “Usonian ideals”, which have been followed with various degrees of fidelity in Wright’s designs. As noted previously, the textile block system arose from Wright’s desire to wed machine-age production techniques with organic architecture, so as to make his designs affordable to middle class Americans. This discussion will explore how well this objective was achieved over the span of Wright’s work. It can be seen how the textile block building system was derived from Wright’s Usonian ideals. It appears that he had thought through many, if not most of these concepts by the time he constructed the first examples in 1923, well before he coined the terms “Usonia” and “Usonian”. The system changed little over the years, as Wright fleshed out and put into print his ideas regarding middle-income housing. Whether this is because he felt he got it right initially, or some other reason is not known. By the 1950s, certainly, the flaws with the original system had to have been known. One thing that did change was the block shape, starting at 16 by 16 inches square and evolving to the Usonian Automatic’s 12 by 24 inch block. The horizontal profile was apparently better suited to the horizontal Usonian ranch as compared to the blocky earlier Mayan-influenced designs. Face patterns were limited, they were only used for the crenellated roof edges. The lack of pattern was possibly a nod to the mid-century era, when Modernism was in full force. This was unfortunate, in the author’s opinion, as the blocks could accommodate patterns quite well – something that is nearly impossible for conventional concrete masonry units (CMU). CMU’s are typically extruded, not molded, which makes the application of pattern very difficult. Around 1950 Wright used his textile block invention to take the mono-material aspect to new levels. With the Usonian Automatic design a concrete block roof system makes its first appearance, seemingly defying gravity. Block ceiling tiles were used in a hallway on the Ennis House back in 1923, but nothing on this scale other than the un-built 1928 San Marcos in the Desert project (see section 1.3.5). The main purpose was apparently to unify the house organically with a mono-material top to bottom. It was to appear as if the edifice was naturally formed, as from crystals or cells sprouting from the earth. According to Wright’s organic theory, all components of the building should appear unified, as though they belong together. Nothing should be attached to it without considering the effect on the whole. This applies to ornament, for one. “Integral ornament is the developed sense of the building as a whole, or the manifest abstract pattern of structure itself. Interpreted. Integral ornament is simply structure pattern made visibly articulate and seen in the building as it is seen articulate in the structure of the trees or a lily of the fields.” (Wright 1954, 56) Here daylight, views, ventilation, structural support and protection from weather are all integrated into a 24” square precast concrete block module (Turkel House): Wright had his own definition for the Quality of Simplicity. “I believe that no one thing in itself is ever 6-16 (simple), but must achieve simplicity—as an artist would use the term—as a perfectly realized part of some organic whole.” (Wright 1954, 36) For Wright, everything must fit within an organic concept. To eliminate features arbitrarily is just as bad as embellishing. Both actions would subvert the building’s “integrity”. Wright’s mono-material textile block was intended to provide these qualities of simplicity and integrity. What is seen on the outside is true to what is inside. Integrity in a person can be described as “who you are when no one’s looking”. So it is with a building. Is the structure supported in the manner that it appears to be supported? Are the walls really made of stone or is it just a veneer? An organic house does not pretend to be something it is not. Wright maintained that “An irresponsible, flashy, pretentious or dishonest individual would never be happy in such a house as we now call organic because of this quality of integrity.” (Wright 1954, 122) In this way, by not “putting on airs”, his architecture was subversive and counter-cultural. It also had aspects of a religion, in that, if taken to an extreme, there was an absolute right and wrong way to design, personal taste be damned. “Integrity is a quality within and of the man himself. So it is in a building. It cannot be changed by any other person either nor by the exterior pressures of any outward circumstance.” (Wright 1954, 121) For a specific site and a specific client, there was a best–fit design to be discovered. Anything less would be imposed on the site and would not have the same integrity. An architect’s success could be measured in how close he/she had come to achieving this ideal. Of course, design involves compromise and Wright had to balance this value against other considerations. Wright also emphasized the importance of “plasticity”, or as he preferred to call it, “continuity.” ”I called it continuity…Continuity in this aesthetic sense appeared to me as the natural means to achieve truly organic architecture by machine technique or by any other natural technique…Were the full import of continuity in architecture to be grasped, aesthetic and structure become completely one, it would continue to revolutionize the use and wont of our machine-age architecture, making it superior in harmony and beauty to any architecture, Gothic or Greek. …Where principle is put to work, not as a recipe or as formula, there will always be style and no need to bury it as ‘a style’.” (Wright 1954, 18) The Usonian Automatic came closest to this ideal, with the block system used as the roof structure as well as the walls. Wright envisioned such a system many years before he developed it, as this quote from 1936 attests: “The folded plane enters here with the merging lines, walls and ceilings made one. Let walls, ceilings, floors, now become not only party to each other but part of each other, reacting upon and within one another; continuity in all, eliminating any merely constructed features as such, or any fixture or appliance whatsoever as such.” (Wright 1954, 19) “I wanted to realize genuine new forms true to the spirit of great tradition and found I should have to make them; not only make forms appropriate to the old (natural) and to new (synthetic) materials, but I should have to so design them that the machine (or process) that must make them could and would make them better than anything could possibly be made by hand.” (Wright 1954, 23–24) “Conceive now that an entire building might grow up out of conditions as a plant grows up out of soil and yet be free to be itself, to ‘live its own life according to man’s Nature.’…I now propose an ideal for the architecture of the machine age, for the ideal American building. Let it grow up in that image. The tree.” (Wright 1954, 39) 6-17 He was frustrated by the structural engineers of the time, who he felt had a “post and beam” mentality. “I found that in the effort to actually eliminate the post and beam in favor of structural continuity, that is to say, making the two things one thing instead of two separate things, I could get no help at all from regular engineers.” (Wright 1954, 40) The textile block system as used in the Usonian Automatic houses was intended to fulfill this ideal. Local materials (sand, gravel and cement) were used to form the structure from the earth itself. All components of the house, as much as possible, were made subservient to this block matrix. That said, it was usually necessary to incorporate the post and beam to achieve a particular goal. The latest Usonian house constructed at Florida Southern College in 2013 reveals much hidden steel to support the impressive double- cantilevers that were Wright’s signature. The “post and beam” makes an appearance on the Florida Southern College Visitor Center, built 2013. There was a hierarchy to the ideals, and, of course, practical considerations came into play as well. It may be that he felt that his engineers were letting him down, or that they sometimes provided convenient scapegoats when his designs could not be fully- accomplished organically. It’s clear that he was frustrated by the limitations of building technology in his time. As shown on the chart in Chapter 2, all of the Essential Qualities related to Integrity were achieved to some degree. They were given high priority by Wright. 6.1.8 Organic Wright made it clear that a growth analogy was at work with the textile block. He first looked to Nature for the structural concept, then allowed the design qualities to flow from that (NAT - inspired by Nature). He compared the steel reinforcing in the textile block to the tendons or strands in a plant. Therefore, the structural system was of great importance to him, and not something to simply be relegated to engineers or code officials (NST - structure follows Nature). "An architect is either on the winning side grasping the laws of nature or on the losing side, the side of dead data, the idee fixe, the rules of the Code...So Codes are the mental limitations of short men, short of experience, short of imagination, short of courage, short of common sense." {Wright, 1993, pg 185) There was a spiritual aim to be had by mimicking Nature (SPR - lifts the spirit): "Those who live in it [the Pappas House] will take root and grow" – (Pappas, 1997, pg 18). "Look at this little beauty. (a sea shell) Such a sweet little individuality! Civilization comes in and says, 'Oh, hell, let's get an easy pattern out of this, so we can stamp them out, all just the same.'" It becomes a cliché, a style. Then the divine element in it goes out." – (Wright, 1993, pg 133) 6-18 The structure was designed to appear to rise from the ground naturally, itself made from on-site materials. This was a romantic ideal. In addition, as fractal patterns are evident in natural growth, so too were they built in to the textile block system. Variations were specified for the block finish and color so that they would appear to be of natural origin. Many have remarked on the spiritual character of Wright's work, the textile block structures included. Numerous examples are documented in this report. One gets the impression that, with Wright, if there was not a spiritual aspect to the project, it was not worth doing. Here are some quotes from admirers of the textile block buildings: "A beautiful living thing" "There is a spirit to the house that comes through. It speaks to you." "affirms our Individuality (Spirituality)...It has been a transcendental experience.” "He elevated us to a more gracious way of living that includes peace, harmony and hope." "magical" "very Zen and calming" "I'm an atheist, but this is the closest to a God‐ like experience that I could ever imagine." "they serve the spirit" "spiritually enriching" "It's almost as if every detail is destined to capture, reflect, or direct light into the windows of every viewer's soul." 6.1.9 Prefabrication Mass-customization - Wright was searching for a method of mass production that was more flexible and put the artist/architect in the driver's seat. "Machinery needs the creative force that can seize it, as it is…to get the work of the world done by it and gradually make that work no less an expression of the spontaneous human spirit than ever before." (Wright, 1993, 114) The reason Wright embraced mass-customization was so that his designs could be afforded by anyone who really wanted them. It was a Democratic, egalitarian ideal that celebrated individual freedom of choice. Modern computer numerical controlled (CNC) milling and 3D printing techniques have promise as a method for economically producing unique molds, possibly fulfilling Wright's ideal of mass customization in manufacturing. The Factory goes to the House - Around the late 1940's, Wright became disillusioned about the direction factory production had taken. The "Artist" had been left out of the process, in his opinion. In response, he promoted the Usonian Automatic system as a way to "bring the factory to the house." This ran counter to the trend of minimizing expensive field work. (A trend which continues to the present day.) Wright promoted a concept for on-site manufacturing that he called "The factory goes to the house." The idea was to use mass-production techniques for casting textile blocks on-site under the control of the architect. "No 'assembly line' can be the right answer for laborer, G.I., you or me." – (Wright, 1994, 323) "And in this more natural order of human growth the house will not go to the factory for pre‐ fabrication ‐ No, the factory will go to the house. And when it does go in the hand of the competent Architect great economics and fresh new beauty will be the beneficial result." (Wright, 1993, 194) In actuality, the first textile block buildings were constructed this way out of necessity. It was neither efficient nor cost effective, and quality was poor. It cannot be said for sure whether promoting this concept was simply a marketing ploy for Wright, turning a disadvantage into a supposed advantage, or whether he truly believed he had solved all the earlier problems. A major issue was resistance by the trade unions to non-union labor performing work on-site. Another significant issue was the high cost of mold fabrication for each project. By the time an effective system for leasing molds from the architect's office was finally put in place, Wright had passed away. Without Wright's guiding hand, interest in the textile block system waned. 6-19 Sending the factory to the house was clearly a radical solution, born of necessity, which gave the hope of mass production efficiency while attempting to retain maximum flexibility for design (CST - mass-customization). Factory mass production - Wright was not opposed to factory mass production of the textile block. He earnestly desired to make it happen, but could not find a manufacturer willing to produce the blocks on his terms. In a 1927 letter to Paul Mueller, Wright shared the "possibility of the Nat. Cement Assoc. fostering a real cement product which would lend itself to mass production and…artistic development." In 1954, Wright stated "It is by utilizing mass production in the factory in this connection that some idea of the remarkable new economics possible to modern architecture may be seen approaching those realized in any well‐ built machine. If standardization can be humanized and made flexible in design and the economics brought to the home owner, the greatest service will be rendered to our modern way of life. It may really be born ‐ this democracy, I mean." In 1955, Wright solicited a proposal from the Carbon Dubbs Company to manufacture the Usonian Automatic block. "My grandfather could never get any companies interested in developing machinery to make the block. [Conversely,] that takes it away from the handcraft. These blocks were handcrafted." - Interview with Eric Lloyd Wright, 2011-05-14. "The four families involved tried to find commercial block makers to produce these blocks for us, but were unsuccessful in locating anyone who would tool up for a job involving only four houses…Unfortunately, Mr. Wright supplied us with no information on making the blocks, assuming that a block‐ maker would do this." (Pratt, 2004, 25) Factory casting makes possible a host of methods for improving the block. Embedding polypropylene fibers in the mix would not only prevent non-structural cracking but would be non-corrosive as well, increasing block durability. A pneumatic press could be used to better consolidate dry-cast blocks. Steam-curing makes for a stronger and denser block. (It is not practical to use steam curing in the field.) A vibration table would aid consolidation and minimize entrapped air. It too is not suited to field use. Automatic precision edge grinding could be incorporated to provide the precise fit that Wright specified but was never able to achieve. Edge gaskets could also be used to form the grout channels, cushion the joint, and provide resistance to water infiltration. Precision design and manufacture - The intention was that this approach would minimize skilled field labor (UNS). That in turn would allow for the use of owner labor (sweat equity) which would ultimately foster the Quality of Democracy. “When Machine‐ Standardizing enters, all must be accurate, precise, organized...The limitations of both process and material are here very severe.” (Wright Vol 1, 1992, 243) In other words, there was no margin for error with the textile block system. The parts had to fit together perfectly. The requirement for precision had the opposite effect from what Wright intended. Foundations and walls had to be laid out with extreme precision in the field in order for the blocks to fit properly, and constant shimming of the blocks was required. "Although steel forms were used to create the blocks for the Automatics, the blocks still could not be made with the precision necessary to lay them without shimming" - Eric Lloyd Wright. This worked against the do-it-yourself concept intended by Wright. Repetition - Repetition is required for economical mass production. “This is the beginning of a constructive effort to produce a type that would fully utilize standardization and the repetition of easily manhandled units.” (Wright Vol 1, 1992, 213) Every difference in a block requires a different "mark", or piece number. By keeping these differences to a minimum, fewer molds are required, lowering the cost of production. If there is too much repetition and not enough variety, the design can become monotonous. It's a balancing act. One method of increasing variety of the whole and 6-20 repetition of the part at the same time is to reduce the basic module size (see SML - small module). This increases assembly cost however. "Imagine how the costs would come down were the technique a familiar matter or if many houses were to be executed at one time ‐ probably down to forty‐ five hundred dollars, according to number built and location." (Wright, 1995, 105) If multiple buildings can be constructed at the same time at the same location, then repetition, with its subsequent economy of production, increases greatly. The Doheny Ranch, #2104, is the first Wright project to attempt to take advantage of this concept. Textile block walls were specified for the two collective subdivisions in Michigan for this same reason (#4806, #4828). With the built examples, there were usually too many "marks," or block variations to take advantage of the economy of repetition. Every special case required a new mold or mold variation. Fifty molds for one house is too expensive. Fifty mold types for fifty houses would take advantage of the economies of scale. Small module – Wright resisted proposals to prefabricate and tilt up wall sections even though the finished look would be the same (1956, FLW to Green, K123A06). He was insistent that his textile block remained as discreet units, or cells. "A unit-mass of concrete, size and shape determined by the work intended to be done and what weight a man can reasonably be expected to lift and set in a wall, is fixed upon." (Wright Vol 1, 1992, 242) Most fundamentally, this was an organic concept. Wright was taken by the romantic idea of cellular units assembled into an organic whole (see “One- Process”, under the Assembly Category). Tilting up prefabricated panels would be considered cheating, and inauthentic. As discussed for "REP - repetition", one method of increasing variety of the whole and repetition of the part at the same time is to reduce the basic module size. The smallest practical unit size would be that of a brick. The size of a basic textile block is between that of a brick at one end and a prefabricated wall panel at the other. Wright wanted a unit large enough to allow some prefabrication but still preserve the variety and flexibility of masonry. In 1923, with the Millard House (#2302), he initially specified a unit size 24" by 24", but had to reduce it to 16" square so the blocks would be light enough to lift. Later, with the Usonian Automatic, he coffered the blocks substantially to lighten them, allowing for a 12" by 24" basic unit and 24" square glazed units. Some of Wright's concept drawings for the Automatic show a 24" square basic unit as well (see Project #5612). 6.1.10 Society Freedom of the individual -- Wright was a Libertarian with regard to building codes. In his view, the more that government got out of the way, the better. “The codes so far as I can see will have to die on the vine with the men who made them.” (Wright 1954, 51) These are strong words! This was probably another reason why he preferred that his clients build in the middle of nowhere – fewer regulations. To be free, not to build in a substandard fashion, but to be free to innovate and not be constricted by prescriptive codes. Even a government program designed to help the housing industry became an obstacle. In 1938, Florida Southern College commissioned Wright to design a series of single-family homes for faculty. The college attempted to take advantage of a new Federal Housing Authority (FHA) program that provided affordable mortgage loans. The college’s application was rejected, apparently because Wright’s designs were considered too radical. (Baker 2011) Here are 6-21 Wright’s own words on the matter: “Life itself demands of modern architecture that the house of a man who knows what home is should have his own home his own way if we have any man left in that connection after F.H.A. is done trying to put them, all of them it can, into the case of a man who builds a home only to sell it. Our government forces the homemaker into the real-estate business if he wants a home at all.” (Wright 1954, 54) Thus, according to Wright, government became a barrier to affordability with regard to organic architecture and achieving the Usonian ideals. Decentralization / cooperative community - Wright had strong convictions with regard to the urban plan. He was very much enthralled with the automobile and the possibilities it afforded. There was also the significance of the horizontal line: “It is reasonable to believe that life in our country will be lived in full enjoyment of this new freedom of the extended horizontal line because the horizontal line now becomes the great architectural highway. The flat plane becomes the regional field. And integral pattern becomes ‘the sound of the Usonian heart’” (Wright 1954, 58). Wright felt it necessary to abandon the city and its stifling regulations and restrictions in order to better foster individual freedom of choice. Regarding the selection of a suitable house site: “The best thing to do is to go as far out as you can get. Avoid the suburbs—dormitory towns—by all means. Go way out into the country—what you regard as ‘too far’—and when others follow, as they will (if procreation keeps up), move on…Of course it all depends on how much time you have to get there and how much time you can afford to lose, going and coming. But decentralization is underway. You may see it everywhere. Los Angeles is a conspicuous example of it. There the powers that be are trying to hold it downtown.” (Wright 1954, 134) “But don’t buy the huge American car with protruding corners; buy the smaller one…and go thirty to forty miles to the gallon…The cost of transportation has been greatly decreased by way of the smaller car. In this way, decentralization has found aid, and the easier the means of egress gets to be, the further you can go out from the city.” (Wright 1954, 135) To be fair, Wright was a product of his era. This was written well before oil shortages, smog and global warming. He was striving for a quality of life for his clients that he felt could best be achieved by placing a significant distance between neighbors, as well as the city. His proposed replacement for the city was the utopian “Mile-High Illinois” skyscraper. The idea was to concentrate all business functions in the tower to leave the pastoral landscape available for residential use. The planned textile block subdivisions in and around Kalamazoo, Michigan in the late 1940s best exemplify Wright’s plan for the residential community (see Chapter 1). The original plats showed circular one acre lots, until the county forced the lots into trapezoids. The Galesburg community is still, to this day, far from any encroachment by the city. "We think that the concept of a cooperative community served us well…we helped one another with construction projects, and did many activities together in support of each other or the community" (Pratt, 2004, 55). The textile block system theoretically had the following advantages when used for a cooperative project: It simplified ARC - architect field supervision, it enabled SCA - economies of scale and SIT - connection to the site, it allowed FLD - the factory to go to the house, it was a RAD - radical solution, it made use of SWT - sweat equity (owner labor), and, most of all, it was DEM - Democratic, allowing freedom of choice and individuality instead of conformity to rigid codes, restrictive financing and architectural review committees. 6-22 Unit weight - Unit weight was clearly the limiting factor for the size of the textile block. Wright explored the use of lightweight concrete, starting with a consideration of using "Aerocrete" for blocks in 1930. The Tonkens House, #5510, successfully used a block with "Haydite" lightweight aggregate, according to correspondence dated August 10, 1956. Haydite is a brand name for expanded shale, clay and slate, ESCS. Block weight could have been reduced up to 35% using this type of aggregate in the mix. R-value would have increased as well. Limiting unit weight supports Wright's Democratic (DEM) ideal that anyone could assemble the blocks (SWT - sweat equity). He claimed that "women and children can lay them", according to Dorothy Eppstein in a letter dated September 2, 1951. Radical - In Wright's view, only a radical solution could achieve individual freedom of choice for the common man. He saw the construction industry as traditional and hide-bound. In his view, it needed to be replaced with something entirely new, not dependent on the trade unions. Modern architecture required radically new construction methods, in his opinion. Sweat equity - Enabling owners the opportunity to construct their own home celebrated the American do-it-yourself, pioneering spirit. It also tapped into the satisfaction that comes from enjoying the fruit of one’s own labor. The owner develops an intimate connection to the house and the site. In this case, assembling the blocks was a complicated and labor-intensive process, requiring a high level of precision and skill. "There was nothing automatic about the blocks. Bill and Elizabeth [Tracy] made each wooden form and every concrete block, nearly 1700, by hand, working about a year" (Johnson, 1996, 39). It was a common experience, spending years casting the blocks, as recounted by the owners. They did not seem to regret it though, considering it to be a labor of love. "Hooray! The basic house was finally completed! We had spent a full four years doing very little else with our spare waking hours than constructing this house. It took another couple of years of finishing details before we were ready to call the job finished" (Pratt, 2004, 51). Universal application - It was not usually possible to develop a textile block subdivision from scratch. Universal application (UNL) allowed for an alternative means of achieving economy of scale (SCA). Usonian Automatic molds and a hydraulic press were to be leased to individual clients for each project. The standard system, therefore, had to be appropriate for every region of the country. Societal-related barriers - The direction that the construction industry has taken has run counter to the direction Wright intended for it. Wright insisted that his organic "one-process" idea was the way to go, while the industry has instead evolved into separate trades and systems that performed their work at different times. It is not possible to integrate Wright’s textile block into this format. It has to reside outside of it (see So: RAD - radical). The trade unions were Wright's favorite scapegoats when costs inevitably soared for many of his projects. He believed that circumventing the labor unions was the key to housing affordability. His "factory goes to the house" concept relied on non-union field labor, while the construction industry trend was to use non-union labor in the factory in an attempt to minimize union field work. In actuality, Wright still needed carpenters, cement masons and electricians to complete the textile block houses. The on-site casting and assembly of the textile blocks would have been considered to be under the purview of the cement mason's union, so there would have been conflict there. If he had been successful in attracting a manufacturer for the textile blocks, then the issue with the unions could have been managed. 6-23 "There remain political and market‐ related issues that fall outside the scope of this work, and which raise doubts about the likelihood that the UABS [Usonian Automatic Building System] could be resurrected to solve the problem of affordable housing" (Fortier, 1994, 290). Mortgage lenders were concerned about resale value. Wright custom-designed homes for the original owner's needs, whatever they might be. He rejected the concept of designing for resale. He would have particularly disdained speculative development, where the owner had not yet been determined. The textile block system was radical and expensive. Nowadays, most owners and lenders are very concerned about resale. The system cannot achieve the size of market required for factory production without mass acceptance and adoption, and without mass production, it is too expensive to be adopted. Wright’s utopian exurban / decentralization ideal is not realistic or sustainable. It is not considered to be environmentally sound to build new detached housing out in the hinterlands. That means one has to deal with urban and suburban areas as they are. Most sustainable new development will be infill or adaptive re-use. The idyllic Doheny Ranch Project, #2104, would no longer fit in the Beverly Hills area site it was designed for, as that area has since been built up in a mish-mash of styles. In such an environment the organic, site-sensitive textile block would appear out of place, when in fact the opposite should be true. Conservative industry - The construction industry has made many advances in the 90 years since the first textile block homes were built. At the same time, it was and still is a conservative industry. One main reason for this is that it takes on quite a responsibility. If a musician plays a wrong note, ears may be hurt. By contrast, if an architect or builder makes a mistake, people could die. Consequently, inventors of new materials and methods have always had a hard time convincing architects, owners, contractors, code officials, and trade unions to give up the tried-and-true for something new. It has gotten even harder today. There are an ever-increasing number of hoops a new product has to jump through before it can be used on a building. Code acceptance - Nowadays, it would be very difficult for the textile block system to satisfy structural code requirements in a high-seismic zone. Extensive destructive testing of full assemblies would be required. It is not apparent that the system as designed would pass such tests. Otherwise, the textile blocks would have to be demoted to a non-structural role. It is unfortunate that the San Marcos Project [#2704] was cancelled before any of the planned structural wall tests were performed. That would have given us some idea of the system’s true structural capacity. If Wright were to try to build a textile block home in Los Angeles today, the following is a part of what he would need before he could get started: 1. City of Los Angeles code approval for a non-conforming structural material. Among other things, this would likely require the following tests: - Water penetration (ASTM E514), absorption (C642) - Structural capacity in bending (ASTM C1717-09) - Concrete compressive strength (ASTM C1314-10) - Ductility under seismic load 2. Third-party studies, tests, demonstrations and calculations to show that the textile block system can emulate either cast-in-place or reinforced concrete masonry construction for seismic design per the IBC building code. 6-24 3. Hot box tests per ASTM C1363-05 to show that the R-value of the system will meet California Title 24 energy requirements. 4. A UL fire rating heat transmission test 5. An IBC code 2603.5 standard test for spreading fire between floors on an exterior dual-wythe wall. 6. To meet LEED requirements: - Document the percentage of pre-consumer and post-consumer recycled content in the assembly. If fly-ash is used in the concrete, calculate that separately as a percentage of the cement content. - List all materials used, their cost and the distance from the point of harvesting or extraction and manufacture for each. Prepare cut-sheets with this information. - List all wood products used in the system and identify which are FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) certified Retain COC (Chain of Custody) certification documentation and wood vendor invoices. - For schools: Determine the STC rating of the assembly according to ASTM E-90 - Also for schools: Testing and documentation to verify the mold resistance of the assembly. It’s doubtful that the original system would have been able to overcome these hurdles. In summary, this author found no modern or alternative methods for the textile block that could bridge these societal barriers. In particular, the system required a lot of skilled labor to cast and assemble, regardless of the claims made by Wright to the contrary. His proposed solution was to import skilled non-union craftsmen from other countries to reduce labor costs. "Neither the men nor we are able to build houses for ourselves, why not open our doors to immigration from all countries where skills have not been cut back by ignorant labor unions emulating penny‐ wise employers" (Wright, 1994, 323). Since Wright’s time, unskilled labor has become expensive as well. Any system that requires a large amount of labor, whether skilled or not, has become cost prohibitive. 6.1.11 Structure Continuity - Wright sought a structural continuity to match the aesthetic continuity (CON) of his buildings. "Here today this element of continuity may cut structural substance nearly in two. It may cut the one half in two again by elimination of needless features, such elimination being entirely due to the simplification I have been calling 'plasticity'" (Wright, 1995, 97). This meant that the system should be able to be span horizontally (FLR) as well as vertically, typically manifested by using the blocks as stay-in-place forms for CIP concrete beams or slabs. For the Biltmore Hotel, #2710: "Floors and roofs are of reinforced concrete tiles and joist‐ knitted to exterior and interior walls, forming a continuous construction" (McArthur, 1929, 19). Flexibility / elasticity / seismic resistance - In 1923 Wright wrote that concrete block with steel rods in poured joints make for “a really flexible wall…[that] is less liable to damage from flexure or torsion and…would show no cracks.” The intent was to have the "tenuous flexibility" required to resist an earthquake, such as the one that had hit Tokyo that year. "They are earthquake‐ proof because they are flexible in their composition of comparatively small units, which are held 6-25 together by the reinforcing bars" - FLW, 1926. "Why not extreme lightness combined with the tenuity and flexibility that are a property of steel instead of the great weight necessary to the usually excessive rigidity" "A building made flexible…yielding to movement yet resilient to return to position when force…ceased" - FLW, 1937. Here Wright is claiming an elasticity that would make for a structure that was self-righting after a seismic event. This is as opposed to ductility, which is the basis for modern seismic structural design. His concept could be considered as equivalent to blocks held together with very stiff rubber bands. "Eric Wright maintained that the inherent flexibility of the textile block system would help protect the houses...The textile blocks, Eric Wright said, should be free to rotate slightly around the grout tubes, with the steel reinforcing providing a flexible mesh to hold the system in place" - Jeffrey Chusid. This theory does not appear to have borne out in the field. The Ennis House (#2401) and Freeman House (#2402) both suffered severe damage from the 1994 Northridge earthquake, with little evidence of elastic or even inelastic (ductile) behavior. Failure was brittle, as the stiff grout tubes pushed against the soft textile blocks, fracturing them. "The block membrane of the [Freeman House] walls stretched and bent, opening numerous cracks between individual blocks as well as separations between major building components" - Jeffrey Chusid. An observation by the author of the extensive structural damage to the Freeman House after the 1994 Northridge earthquake shows that the system did not fare as Wright expected. There are at least four reasons for this: 1. The poured grout in the block channels did not form a lasting bond with the block itself, so was able to pull away. This could be a result of various factors. A) The blocks were shown to be very dry and porous (McAlister 2009). Moisture was likely sucked out of the grout by the block at the bond interface, preventing hydration of the grout cement at the interface. B) The surfaces of the channels were relatively smooth, so a mechanical bond did not always form with the grout. C) Standard grout shrinks over time, so it could have pulled away from the block. A national specification for non-shrink grout was not developed until 1989. 2. The grout did not reach every part of the channel voids, especially at the horizontal portions, where gravity could not be counted on to fill them. There was no way to inspect the voids and make sure that the horizontal bars were totally encased in grout. At the Freeman House, many horizontal channels were indeed found to be devoid of grout (Chusid 1989). 3. The cavity ties that connected the wythes together were found to be unprotected from corrosion, and many had rusted away (Chusid 1989). This would have allowed the exterior wall to buckle outward, as was observed on the Ennis House after the 1994 earthquake (Fidler 2007). 4. The blocks were softer than the grout, so the grout often broke through in places when stressed, according to Jeffrey Chusid (Author correspondence, 07/22/2013). Under seismic load, without the continuity of solid, bonded grout to hold everything together, the walls behaved similar to unreinforced masonry. Woven reinforcing - The tendons in natural structures were claimed by Wright to be the inspiration for the woven reinforcing in the textile block. He believed that Nature's structural systems were superior to those devised by the engineers of his day. Wright considered this Quality to be a key component of his system. The "woven" reinforcing made 6-26 it unique, differentiating it from standard masonry in a fundamental way. (Here we are describing the structural Quality of Woven Reinforcing, as opposed to the design feature: "WOV - Woven character.") Structurally, the textile block reinforcing was intended to provide a monolithic wall, yet perform like a flexible mesh under extreme loads. Without a comprehensive series of dynamic load tests of representative wall assemblies, it is not possible to validate this claim. Alternative methods that would have improved the structural performance of the textile block system include adding composite action between wythes, increasing the size of the woven reinforcing, post-tensioning the reinforcing, and adding returns at openings for bracing / buttressing. 6.1.12 Utilities Integrated lighting and utilities – Utility and fixture placement was a vexing issue for Wright. He did not want to see radiators, electric lights, pipes, conduit, gutters, downspouts, or heat vents arbitrarily tacked onto the building. The organic house was to have pre- planned, prefabricated and consolidated utilities as much as possible. All had to be integrated. This was not done solely for economic reasons. The utilities needed to appear as an organic part of the house, not something that was bolted on indiscriminately. “The new practice made all furnishings so far as possible (certainly the electric lighting and heating systems) integral parts of the architecture.” (Wright 1954, 26) “It is necessary to consolidate and simplify the three appurtenance systems – heating, lighting, and sanitation….We need no radiators, no light fixtures. We will heat the house the ‘hypocaust’ way—in or between the floors. We can make the wiring system itself be the light fixture, throwing light upon and down the ceiling. Light will thus be indirect, except for a few outlets for floor lamps.” (Wright 1954, 71, 73) This Quality was in keeping with Wright's organic concept. Ideally, like an organism, the building would consist of a collection of specialized cells that differed in function but all fit together harmoniously. Some cells let in light, some ventilated, others allowed access to views, or splashed varied patterns of light about the interior with the movement of the sun. Certain blocks glowed, providing electric light to the occupants. The columns on the Turkel House do much more than simply provide support. Also note the lights built into the waffle ceiling troughs: 6-27 To make this happen, he devised ways to build the utilities into the structure. In the photo to the right, radiant heat is supplied though pipes embedded within the concrete floor. The lights are centered within ceiling blocks so that the block coffer also serves as the reflector for the fixture and the recessed position hides it from being directly revealed. This attention to detail often required a functional compromise. Locating the fixtures in the roof structure made them susceptible to water damage and subsequent rust when the roof leaked: Rusted light fixtures from the Turkel House (Norman Silk): Utility integration was problematic in practice, and undoubtedly contributed to delays and added cost. Much preplanning was required to ensure that holes were cast where needed for electrical outlets and pipes. Usually, this was not done, and openings had to be cut in the field. Repair was also an issue, in that the hidden or buried appurtenances were difficult to access. 6-28 Dissertation of Edward D Losch for the Degree Ph.D. in Architecture Chapter 7 A Selection of Modern Textile Block Concepts School of Architecture Department of Building Science University of Southern California 7-1 7.0 Proposed wall system design concepts or “manifestations” that attempt to follow Usonian Principles An alternate title for this chapter could be “What Would Wright do?” Assuming, for the sake of this dissertation, that the Usonian principles discussed earlier are not subject to change, how would the textile block have evolved, had Wright had 90 more years to develop it? What materials and methods would be adopted? What would be ignored or decried? 7.1 What is not “textile block”? It may be best to first concentrate on what an updated textile block is not. Once that is declared, then what is left can be critically examined. Not solely a curtain wall: Wright made it clear, through the Usonian principle of Integrity, that a component that appeared to be load-bearing should in fact be load-bearing. Not meant to be hidden or covered: According to the Usonian principles of Simplicity and Integrity, the load-bearing support of the structure should show itself. There should be no applied exterior finish that hides the block. 7.2 What is “textile block”? The physical characteristics of a textile block-like system should include the following: - Made with concrete or a similar plastic material that consists of aggregate and a binder - Formed with cast patterns - Has the ability to turn corners within the module - Reinforced in some manner to resist lateral loads, including seismic - Modular, stacked bond - No mason required, no mortar joints, unskilled assembly - Structural and architectural in one, loadbearing capability - The capacity to have an inner layer of blocks that echoes the exterior - Can be perforated and glazed to allow light, views and ventilation The units can be manufactured in a plant, not necessarily on-site. Wright searched unsuccessfully for a manufacturer to make his Usonian Automatic blocks (author conversation with Eric Lloyd Wright). He may have realized that the site- cast blocks were lacking in consistency and durability. The Usonian Automatic system standardized sizes and patterns, which made it more conducive to mass-production than previous iterations of the textile block. An updated textile block would also have to satisfy Wright’s Usonian Principles as well as contemporary concerns such as sustainability. These qualities can be called the “Qualifications”. The first of these Qualifications are based on the Usonian Ideals more fully described earlier: 7-3 7.2.1 Usonian Qualities: What follows is a set of Usonian Qualities that would be relevant to an updated Textile Block system. 7.2.1.1 M – Modular: Any textile block successor would have to follow a module. All of Wright’s designs were related to a basic module. Basic block dimensions in inches would be limited to 9, 12, 16, 18, 24, 32 or 36. The ratio of width to height would be 1:1, 1.5:1, 2:1, 3:1, or 4:1. Adherence to the module is required to allow integration of all other building components into the system. 7.2.1.2 C – Integrates With other components: The wall system should have the versatility to incorporate all other building components, such as fenestration, doors, lights and utilities. 7.2.1.3 U – Unifies exterior to interior: This is accomplished by blurring the boundary between interior and exterior. Perforating the block allows light, views and ventilation. The block becomes a screen which protects the occupants but allows a connection with the outdoors. 7.2.1.4 I – Integrity (mono-material): Honesty in expression can be achieved by using homogenous materials and avoiding coatings. A single material, in this case - concrete, should be used throughout in a consistent fashion, providing an expression of unity. Integrity also means that a wall which appears to support a floor or roof should in fact support that element. 7.2.1.5 P – Plasticity (mono-material, patterns): Plasticity, or continuity in the overall structure is accomplished by the use of a mono-material (concrete) in a fashion that appears to flow naturally. This is in contrast to a post- and-beam system, for example. On a unit level, the block appearance is moldable, plastic. Unlike standard machine-made blocks, limitless patterns and features can be applied. 7.2.2 Affordability: In order to solve the middle-income housing problem, the block system has to be affordable. The following are specific qualifications that Wright identified as important to affordability. 7.2.2.1 AM – Mass production: The system has to be amenable to cost-effective mass-production. In this case without sacrificing the other Usonian qualifications listed above. 7.2.2.2 AU – Unskilled labor: As labor is typically 50% of construction cost, a masonry system that can be assembled without special skills is essential. 7.2.2.3 AS – Streamlined construction: Wright envisioned a wall system that could provide the interior and exterior finished surface as well as the structure at the same time – installed in one step, thus simplifying the construction process. Minimizing move-ins by trades provides economy. Reducing the need for shoring will also provide a benefit. It should be easy and quick to assemble, with a low weight to face area ratio. 7-4 7.2.2.4 AI – Inexpensive local materials: Using local materials is a tenet of Wright’s organic principles, but also serves to keep costs down and is more sustainable. 7.2.2.5 AL – Life-cycle cost: The block should require minimal maintenance and be durable. Wright avoided the use of coatings and finishes that needed to be reapplied periodically. The block system’s ability to resist natural disasters (i.e., its functional resilience) is also an important factor in achieving a favorable life-cycle cost. 7.2.3 Serviceability: Although not specifically addressed in Wright’s writings, serviceability is obviously crucial to a successful textile block design. 7.2.3.1 SW – Water – no leaks: There are two parts to this qualification. 1. The block itself should absorb minimal water. Excess water absorption will reduce its long-term durability. 2. The wall system should also prevent water significant penetration. The original textile block system has been known to have both of these problems. 7.2.3.2 SF – Functional resilience: In addition, the wall system should have sufficient strength to remain serviceable after a catastrophic event, such as an earthquake, hurricane or fire. This is important for maintaining a low life-cycle cost as well as achieving true sustainability. 7.2.3.3 ST – Thermal comfort: This can be achieved by a combination of at least two factors. [1.] Sufficient insulation within the wall to minimize heat transfer, and [2.] Thermal mass which can absorb heat, moderating daily temperature swings. Positioning the thermal mass on the interior is considered most advantageous, as it can take advantage of night-flushing, where cool outside air is drawn in at night, pre-cooling the thermal mass walls. 7.2.3.4 SR – Modifiable / reconfigurable / repairable: Once installed, Wright’s textile block was notoriously difficult to repair or replace. Long term durability requires that the system have this capability. In addition, a building’s use often changes over time. An envelope system that is modifiable and reconfigurable is therefore advantageous. 7.2.4 Sustainability / LEED: In the 90-some years since the first textile block design appeared, expectations have changed a bit. A lot more is expected from a wall / envelope system. In addition to higher performance standards, sustainability issues must be addressed. The following qualifications will be referenced to the appropriate LEED credits (2009 Edition). 7.2.4.1 LE – Energy and Atmosphere 1, optimize energy performance: The textile block wall assembly can contribute to improved energy performance by achieving a high thermal resistance, R. It can also moderate temperature swings through the use of thermal mass. 7-5 7.2.4.2 LW – Materials and Resources 2, construction waste management: Construction debris is minimized as the prefabricated blocks are delivered from off-site. Modular construction also minimizes waste by reducing cuttings. Breakage during shipping should be minimized. 7.2.4.3 LR – Materials and Resources 4, recycled content: Ferrous reinforcing typically has a very high recycled content. The concrete can contain a pozzolan such as fly ash, which is a recycled by-product of coal burning. This reduces portland cement content which reduces carbon dioxide emissions. Not directly covered in LEED is the recyclability of the building components. Can the materials be separated easily for future recycling? 7.2.4.5 LM – Materials and Resources 5, regional materials: Using raw materials for the blocks which are extracted within 500 miles of the site reduces the environmental impact of transportation. 7.2.4.6 LD – Innovation in Design, lower carbon dioxide emissions: Cement production and use releases a significant amount of carbon dioxide gas. Alternatives to standard portland cement that reduce or eliminate these emissions should be considered. 7.3 What specifications should be used for a revived textile block system? First round: Assume that the specifications for a revived textile block should follow from the Qualifications listed above. These Specifications will be subject to review by inside and outside experts to establish their validity. The reviewed Specifications should then lead to the Manifestations or prototypes that will be developed. It is expected that the prototype designs cannot be developed from a rote process, but by applying knowledge, experience and inspiration: 7-6 The following explains the reasoning behind each score, a “qualitative quantification” as it were. A “+” denotes a Specification that is considered positive by the author for a particular Qualification. Likewise, a “-“ denotes a Specification that is negative for a particular Qualification. 7.3.1 Concrete face finish: 7.3.1.1 Stained – A face coating may violate the principles of Integrity (-I), Unification (-U), and Life-Cycle Cost (- AL), as it needs periodic reapplication. Stain was used at the Freeman House (Jeffrey Chusid), One can remove graffiti by re-staining (+AL, +SF). 7.3.1.2 Sandblasted exposed aggregate – Sandblasting is labor-intensive (-AM) and not that great for the environment, as it requires the use of silica sand (-LM). Can remove graffiti by field-blasting (+AL, +SF). 7.3.1.3 Retarded exposed aggregate – Provides an honest expression of the base material (cement and aggregate (+I), but is not that amenable to molded patterns (-P). Relatively environmentally friendly (+LM). 7.3.1.4 Dry-cast – This was the process Wright chose for the original textile block system. It has high integrity (+I) in that the face nicely depicts the underlying block material. It is difficult to form patterns with it (-P) but is amenable to mass-production techniques (+AM). Serviceability and durability are serious concerns, however (-SW, -SS, -SF). 7.3.1.5 Plain wet-cast – The simplest and most durable of the finishes (+AM, +AI, +SS), it is problematic in that the cement paste hides the aggregate, creating a smooth, pasty finish that doesn’t accurately reflect the underlying material (-I). It has a utilitarian look which needs creative form patterning to overcome. There are interesting possibilities however, if it is combined or alternated with another finish. 7.3.1.6 Acid-etched – Mimics the look of natural stone or dry-casting without the durability issues of dry-casting. Wet-cast concrete is sprayed with a muriatic acid solution, which eats away at the cement paste, for a pre- weathered effect. Labor-intensive, so may not be amenable to mass-production (-AM). The acid-wash also has sustainability issues (-LS, -LM). Muriatic acid was used to remove the cement scum from wetter blocks by Peter Purens at the Freeman and Storer Houses (in the 1980s, 1990s), and combined with a stain, to color blocks that were too gray (per Eric Wright), at the Freeman House originally (Jeffrey Chusid). 7.3.1.7 Honed or polished – Rotating abrasive discs create a smooth, polished surface, like granite or marble. Often used for countertops, it is a labor-intensive process (-AM). There are possibilities if used as an accent, however. 7-7 7.3.2 Insulation type: 7.3.2.1 Sprayed polyurethane foam – Allows two-piece construction with a larger block size (+M, +AM). Perforated units more difficult to assemble (-U, -AU, -AS). Requires reinforcing in both inner and outer block channels (-AU, -AS). Improved moisture-barrier, no joints (+SW). Excellent thermal performance (+ST, +LE). Non-recyclable (-LM) and emits on-site vapors (-LI). 7.3.2.2 Rigid closed-cell polystyrene foam – Amenable to a one-piece block and perforations/lites (+AS, +U). Efficient thermally (+ST, +LE).. Non-recyclable, oil-based (-LM). 7.3.2.3 Rigid soy-based foam – Similar to 7.3.2.2, but using an organic-based chemistry, for a biodegradable and recyclable product (+LM). 7.3.2.4 Insulating concrete with polystyrene beads – Insulation has structural capacity (+U, +I, +SS, +SF). No construction waste (+LM). Easy to assemble, stable (+AS). Not easily recyclable (-LM). 7.3.2.5 Insulating concrete with soy-based foam beads – Like 7.3.2.4 only using organic foam beads mixed with the cement. Biodegradable and potentially recyclable (+LM). 7.3.2.6 Insulating concrete – aerated foam – Like 7.3.2.4, but highest scoring for mono-materiality, all cement- based (+I). Easiest to recycle (+LM), no emissions (+LI). Mass production would require specialized equipment and higher startup costs (-AM). All insulating concrete options are heavier and require thicker walls (-AS). 7.3.2.7 Air gap – no insulation – This was Wright’s selection. (Insulation in walls was not as common as it is today.) Block configuration would be two-piece, inner and outer, requiring shoring, like 7.3.2.1 (-U, -AU, -AS). Air gap is more susceptible to water penetration and pests (-SW, -SP). Blocks wythes are independent and not nearly as strong as with the insulated options (-SS, -SF). Block manufacture would be simpler (+AM). 7.3.3 Face concrete: 7.3.3.1 Ultra-high performance concrete – Allows a thinner concrete wythe and lighter weight (+P, +AU, +AS). Still an expensive, exotic product (-AM, -AI). Very durable and strong (+AL), but paradoxically, its thin profile is not well-suited to a bearing application (-SF). Face finish options are limited (-P, -U). 7.3.3.2 Photo-catalytic cement – Provides a durable, white surface that is resistant to dirt and staining (+U, +P). Also an expensive, exotic product (-AM, -AI). Face finish options are limited (-P, -U). Like standard cement, its manufacture produces significant CO2 emissions (-LE, -LI). 7.3.3.3 Magnesium oxide cement (Carbon-negative) – A relatively expensive product not yet available in the U.S. (-AM, -AI), but has potential to be less costly in the future. Best option for reducing CO2 emissions (+LE, +LI). Can get a LEED Innovation credit. Strength may not be as high as standard portland cement (-SS, -SF). 7-8 7.3.3.4 Standard Type III portland cement (High-early strength) – An inexpensive, proven, universally available product (+AM, +AI, +AL, +SS, +SF). Its manufacture produces significant CO2 emissions, as is the case with 7.3.3.2 as well (-LE, -LI). 7.3.3.5 Natural cement – A hydraulic cement produced by heating a naturally occurring limestone and grinding it to a fine powder. It has a faster set time than portland cement but takes longer to gain strength. The lower temperatures required for calcining allow the use of renewable energy sources (+LD). It cannot be dry-cast. 7.3.4 Face reinforcement: 7.3.4.1 Polyethylene fibers – Provides a non-corrosive and durable face (+AL, +SF). Requires a sophisticated batch plant and careful mixing (-AM, -AI). Not a local material (-LM), but percentage of total block is very low. Improved impact resistance (+SF, +AL). A mono-material, as fibers are homogenous with the block (+I, +P). 7.3.4.2 Steel fibers – Superior resistance to cracking (+SW, +SP, +AL). (Chanh) Improved impact resistance makes this product well-suited for secure facilities (+SF, +AL). Requires a sophisticated batch plant and careful mixing to avoid clumping (-AM, -AI). The fibers themselves are expensive (-AI, -AL). Biodegradable eventually through corrosion (+LM). Not suitable for architectural finishes (-I, -P). 7.3.4.3 Glass fiber reinforced polymer mesh – GFRP is more expensive than mild steel (-AI) but non-corrosive (+AL, +SF). Recycling is possible, but not yet common, and is currently limited to down-cycling (-LM). 7.3.4.4 Carbon fiber mesh – More expensive than mild steel and GFRP (-AI) but non-corrosive (+AL, +SF). Stronger than GFRP but not ductile (+SS, -SF). 7.3.4.5 Mild steel welded wire fabric reinforcement – Least expensive option and commonly available (+AI). High percentage (nearly 100%) uses recycled material and is easily recyclable (+LM). Subject to corrosion (-AL, - SW, -SS, -SF). 7.3.4.6 Epoxy-coated steel welded wire fabric – Combines the characteristics of mild steel WWF with the benefit of greater corrosion protection (+AI, +LM, +AL, +SW, +SS, +SF). Needs to be touched up where cut or nicked (- AM). 7.3.4.7 No reinforcement – This is the option Wright used for his textile block system. Least expensive and easily produced with unskilled labor (+AI, +AM), but not durable, as the face is susceptible to cracking and spalling (-AL, - SW, -SS, -SF, -SP). A mono-material (+I, +P) and easiest to recycle (+LM). 7-9 7.3.5 Textile reinforcement type: 7.3.5.1 Glass fiber reinforced polymer bars -- GFRP is more expensive than mild steel (-AI) but non-corrosive (+AL, +SF). Recycling is possible, but not yet common, and is currently limited to down-cycling (-LM). Bending the bars is difficult and needs to be done in the factory (-AM, -AU, -AS). 7.3.5.2 Mild steel reinforcing – Least expensive option and commonly available (+AI). High percentage (nearly 100%) uses recycled material and is easily recyclable (+LM). Subject to corrosion (-AL, -SW, -SS, -SF). 7.3.5.3 Epoxy-coated mild steel reinforcing – Combines the characteristics of mild steel WWF with the benefit of greater corrosion protection (+AI, +LM, +AL, +SW, +SS, +SF). Needs to be touched up where cut or nicked (-AM, - AU). In this 2011 photo, epoxy-coated steel was used horizontally with stainless steel threaded rods vertically for the Florida Southern College Visitor Center (designed 1938, completed 2013). 7.3.5.4 Galvanized threaded mild steel reinforcing – More expensive (-AI), but allows threaded couplers for ease of field assembly. Good corrosion protection (+AI, +LM, +AL, +SW, +SS, +SF). Resistant to damage from nicks (+AM, +AU). 7.3.5.5 Post-tensioned reinforcing – Expensive, requires couplers (-AI). Can be disassembled (+M, +AU, +AL). Tendons limit design flexibility – need a straight path (-P, -C, -AS). Ducts can hold water (-SW). Less redundancy if a tendon is damaged (-SF). 7.3.6 Location of textile reinforcement: 7.3.6.1 In channels located in panel joints – Complicates block forming and requires great precision to cast and install (-AM, -AU, -AS). This is the approach that Frank Lloyd Wright used in all the textile block structures. Difficult to replace blocks (-AL). Joints prone to leakage and deterioration of reinforcing (-SW, -SS, -AL). Requires two layers of reinforcing – twice the labor and material (-AU, -AS). 7-10 7.3.6.2 Behind panel joints in insulated space – Simplifies block forming (+AM, +AU, +AS). Provides additional barrier to water infiltration and better protection of reinforcing (+SW, +SS, +AL). Requires a thicker wall and more insulation (- LE). 7.3.6.3 Through center tubes in insulation – Similar to 7.3.6.2. Allows inner and outer face to be symmetrical but harder to form (- AM). Easier to replace unit (+AL). Assembly is not as strong, due to lack of composite action (-SS). 7.3.6.4 In cast-in-place wall – Strongest configuration (+SS, +SF) with good weather barrier (+SW). Not very textile-like (-M, -I). Dependent on availability of ready-mix concrete (-D). Requires expensive, custom hardware (-AI, -AM). 7.3.7 Wythe connections: 7.3.7.1 Metal ties – This is what Wright used. They are inexpensive, but subject to corrosion and thermal bridging (+AI, -AL, -SW, -SS, -SF, -ST, -LE). It is hard to maintain precision during assembly (-AU, -AS) . Very high recycled content and emissions are not volatile under high heat (+LM, +LI). 7.3.7.2 Stainless steel clips – These were used for the 2011 Florida Southern College Usonian House. Expensive and still subject to thermal bridging, but corrosion resistant and easier to align (+AM, +AU, +AS, -AI, - ST, -LE, +LI). Provides a strong connection and is easily separated and recycled (+SS, +SF, +LM). Requires formed notches at the block edges (-AM). Stainless steel wythe clips used for the Florida Southern College Usonian House (completed 2013, 2011 photo by Wayne Koehler, Florida Southern College) 7-11 7.3.7.3 Fiber reinforced polymer ties – Provides a strong connection without thermal bridging (+SS, +SF, +ST, +LE). Cast- in during block manufacture, which greatly simplifies installation (+M, +U, -AM, +AU, +AS). More expensive and may be proprietary (-AI). Recycling is difficult, although it is a very small part of the block assembly. (-LM). (FRP tie - Thermomass.com) 7.3.7.4 Bolted ties – Allows precise adjustment in the field. Expensive hardware, complicated (-AM, -AU, -AS, - AI) 7.3.7.5 Insulation bond – Requires a structural insulation or insulating concrete, plus plastic or metal loop ties to engage the wythes mechanically. Thermal R value will be much lower than conventional insulation, requiring a thicker wythe (-AM, +AU, +AS, -ST, -LE). Will be corrosion- resistant but subject to cracking (-SF, +AL). Can be a mono-material (+M, +U, +I, +P, +LM). 7.3.7.6 Mechanical bond – hoop ties – Similar to 7.3.7.6 but less complicated to form (-AM). Requires inexpensive embedded ties of nylon or other similar non-conductive material. 7-12 7.4 The effect of climate variations on the textile block evaluation matrix 7.4.1 Warm-wet climates This climate type is characterized by high-humidity and warm temperatures year-round. Often located in hurricane or typhoon regions where wind-driven rain is a concern. High seismic activity is also a possibility, especially along the Pacific Rim. The following Block Qualifications therefore become more important: SW – Water penetration and absorption SF – Functional resilience (Hurricanes are more frequent and wide-spread than major earthquakes) SP – Pest control (Termites and other pests thrive in the warmth and higher humidity) LS – Heat island effect LI – Indoor environmental quality, low-emitting materials (The envelope is closed during the long cooling season) The following Block Qualifications become less important: ST – Thermal comfort (Not that thermal comfort is not important – it is simply less reliant on the thermal mass and R- Value of the envelope.) LE – Optimize energy performance (Day to night temperatures do not have a wide swing, so thermal mass and night flushing is less effective.) Below is a summary of the effect on various specifications: Concrete face finish: Wet-casting the face is recommended, due to its lower permeability and higher strength (useful for resisting airborne missiles during a storm). Face reinforcement: Embedded polyethylene fibers have potential due to their better crack-resistance and durability. Steel fibers are not recommended due to rust potential. Textile reinforcement type: Epoxy-coated and galvanized steel recommended over mild steel, due to the requirement for greater corrosion resistance. 7-13 A photo taken in 2011 of textile block mild steel reinforcing corrosion at Florida Southern College – a warm-wet climate (built 1950): Textile reinforcement location: Locating the textile reinforcement further inside the wall is a good idea, to better protect it from moisture penetration. 7.4.2 Cold climates This climate type is characterized by wide seasonal temperature swings, warm and humid in summer, below freezing in winter and moderate in the shoulder seasons. High seismic activity is present in some northern cities, such as St. Louis, Missouri and Tokyo, Japan. Air entrainment should be used in the face concrete for durability. A wall system that incorporates a rainscreen (air gap) may be required by the building code in certain hygrothermal regions. The following Block Qualifications therefore become more important: ST – Thermal comfort – The thermal mass and R-Value of the envelope are critical to thermal comfort in winter. LE – Optimize energy performance – The thermal mass and R-Value of the envelope are also critical for reducing heating costs and resultant greenhouse gas emissions. LI – Indoor environmental quality, low-emitting materials - The envelope is closed during the long heating season. There are no identified Block Qualifications that are less important for this climate type. Insulation type: The “air gap” option with no insulation becomes even less acceptable. It should not be considered as a viable option. Textile reinforcement location: The cast-in-place wall option gains in desirability, and so also the grouted tube options that are interior of the face. Wythe connections: The fiber reinforced tie option becomes more desirable due to its low conductance, which minimizes thermal bridging. It can also easily provide for an air gap, which is part of a rainscreen system. 7.4.3 Developing world In this case the differences are cultural and economic, as opposed to climate-related. As expected, a different set of 7-14 Qualifications become more important: D – Decentralization – A system that is economical for rural areas is preferred. AU – Unskilled labor – Relatively easy self-assembly by the home-owner is the goal. AI – Inexpensive local materials – This is an essential requirement. AL – Life-cycle cost – The cost of heating, maintenance and repairs should be low. SF – Functional resilience – This is the ability to weather natural disasters and remain serviceable. SP – Pest control – Important to prevent disease and contamination of precious food stocks. LM – Materials and resources – The use of local and recycled material is important. The following Block Qualifications become less important: AS – Streamlined construction – Lower labor costs means that extra steps for assembly can be tolerated. Concrete face finish: As with the Wet-Warm Climate, Wet-casting the face becomes more important, due to its lower permeability and higher strength (useful for resisting airborne missiles during a storm). Insulation type: Sprayed urethane would not likely be practical in a developing-world application as this is fairly sophisticated technology. Textile reinforcement type: Mild steel reinforcing becomes more desirable and post-tensioning less so. 7-15 7.5 Maximum unit weight for lifting: Consideration should be given to unit weight. Separate, single-wythe blocks have an advantage in that each wythe can be larger, covering more square ft. area, compared to a combined, dual-wythe block. The UK’s Health and Safety Commission recommends that masonry units not weigh more than 20 kilograms (44 lb) for a single person lift (HSE Construction Industry Advisory Committee, Construction Sheet No 37). The US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Technical Manual Section VII, Chapter 1 contains a “Lifting Analysis Worksheet” used for determining the maximum acceptable weight per single-person lift: The lifting index should be 1.0 or less to avoid increased risk of lifting-related low back pain, according to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). The Load Constant (LC) is set at 51 lb. and is the maximum recommended load to be lifted under ideal conditions. Therefore, according to this specification a textile block should not weigh more than 51 lb. for a single person lift in any scenario. 7-16 7.6 Inside and outside expert review of selected modern textile block concepts: A questionnaire was distributed to a team of experts in June, 2013. The Outside Experts were selected based on either their standing as a recognized Frank Lloyd Wright scholar with first-hand experience with historic textile block structures or for their reputation as an expert with precast concrete wall systems. Inside Experts: Anders Carlson AC Kenneth Breisch KB Gail Borden GB Outside Experts: Jeffrey Chusid JC Eric Lloyd Wright ELW Jeffrey Baker JB Rex Donahey RD The experts were given matrices that attempted to quantify and score six different modern textile block concepts on the basis of their satisfaction of a list of Essential Qualities. The questionnaire and comments received from this first review are summarized in Appendix D. Many took issue with the methodology used to determine the specifications. They felt that those should be determined holistically, as the same specification may work well for one type of manifestation but not for another. In other words, manifestations and specifications should be evaluated together. As such, the matrices were eventually discarded, but the expert comments proved useful and have been retained in the Appendix. Another concern was that the needs of the Owner often differed from that of the Builder, Manufacturer or Society. A balance is required among the qualifications so that all parties are satisfied. Based on the feedback received, a more appropriate Manifestation Diagram could look like this: 7-17 The climate variations were not considered to be critical, in the experts’ opinion. It was felt that it is more important that the system have broad applicability for various climates. This would greatly reduce the number of matrices required. There was also a discussion about the flexibility of the system. Wright’s textile block was versatile, so a modern version should also have that versatility. In addition, a modern manifestation may have capabilities that go beyond what could be achieved with the original system. That should also be recognized. As such, a second matrix will be used, one that evaluates the flexibility and versatility of the various manifestations in the following areas: - Ability to form corners, both inside and outside - Perforations to allow light penetration - Accommodate glazing within the module, providing views and ventilation - Provide support and attachment points for a second floor and roof - Can accommodate hidden structure, such as steel or concrete beams and columns - Multi-material capability - various materials can be used for the inner wythe besides textile block – paneling, plaster, wallboard, stone, brick etc. - Can accommodate utility runs for plumbing, electrical, lighting and HVAC Additional capabilities that go beyond that of the original system will also be noted. In addition, the “fidelity” of the various manifestations to the “spirit” of the original textile block system will be discussed by the experts. The author does not expect to find an overall “winner” among the manifestations that will be evaluated. Some systems may work better for the Owner, some for the Builder or Manufacturer and some for Society. This is intended to be an exploration of the possibilities. The textile block was a product of the Modernist era but also a rebellion against it, with its handcrafted look and its use of local materials. Whether such a system is still relevant for our time will not likely be answered by this dissertation. The work can only identify various metrics and use them to evaluate the selected manifestations as to suitability for the intended original usage as a building system for middle-income housing and other select building types. 7-18 7.7 Modern textile block design concepts or “Manifestations” A selection of design concepts for an updated textile block system are presented below. They attempt to meet a standard list of conditions, as noted above. 7.7.1 Florida Southern College Usonian two-piece Typical block unit weight: 16 in. by 16 in. – 38 lb. 12 in. by 24 in. – 42 lb. 9 in. by 36 in. – 47 lb. 7.7.1.1 Ability to form corners, both inside and outside 7-19 Forming a corner piece, Florida Southern College (photo courtesy of Wayne Koehler) Other than the Freeman House, corners typically use full width corner pieces instead of miters. These are complicated to form (see above) and both inside and outside pieces are required. The mitered corners on the Freeman House allowed 135 degree corners. It was not limited to 90 deg. 7.7.1.2 Perforations to allow light penetration This has been accomplished to great visual effect in the historic buildings, albeit at the expense of weather tightness and thermal efficiency. For the Florida Southern College (FSC) Visitor Center, dowels were threaded through the units to keep the sprayed rigid foam insulation from blocking the light. Small pieces of stained glass are caulked into place by hand. 7-20 Florida Southern College Visitor Center, 2012 (photo by Michael Maguire) Freeman House pierced block detail (Chusid 2011) 7-21 7.7.1.3 Accommodate glazing within the module, providing views and ventilation Turkel House, 1955, Detroit, MI: This was not accomplished effectively until the 1950’s, with the advent of the Usonian Automatic system. Glass or a vent screen was set directly into a single-wythe concrete frame with no thermal break. Such a configuration would not meet modern energy codes. Dual glass blocks could theoretically be used, similar to that shown in Section 7.7.5.3. It would not achieve the level of transparency that we find with the Usonian automatic, however. 7.7.1.4 Provide support and attachment points for a second floor and roof Florida Southern College Visitor Center (photo by Michael Maguire): There are at least three ways to bear a floor or roof. The first method is to bear directly on the inner wythe as shown above. A wood cap plate is anchored to the grouted inner block wythe and the joists are fastened to it. Florida Southern College Visitor Center (photo by Michael Maguire): A second method is to bolt a header to the face of the inner wythe as shown above. Joists are attached to the header using standard joist hangers. This is useful for a floor or parapet where the wall continues above. 7-22 Florida Southern College Visitor Center (photo by Michael Maguire): A third method has the joists bearing on and cantilevering past the wall. In this case, the joists bear on both wythes. 7.7.1.5 Accommodate hidden structure, such as steel or concrete beams and columns The system is amenable to encasing or embedding hidden steel or concrete beams and columns. Textile blocks used as stay-in-place forms for girder and column frames at the Freeman House Space is carved out for a hidden steel post at the Florida Southern College Usonian House (Photo by Michael Maguire). 7-23 7.7.1.6 Multi-material capability - various materials can be used for the inner wythe besides textile block – paneling, plaster, wallboard, stone, brick etc. Since a single block wythe can be self- supporting as well as loadbearing, various interior finish materials can be hung on the inside face of the blocks, as was commonly done with the Usonian Automatic houses. The single-wythe block walls do not figure structurally for walls with greater than 8.5 ft. laterally unsupported height (see Section 1.3.5, Calculation Sheet W1). Nevertheless, they were used for unsupported loadbearing walls up to 14 ft. high. Single layer Usonian Automatic outer block with interior mahogany paneling at the Turkel House 14 ft. high single-wythe textile block exterior walls carry a concrete roof at the Turkel House.: 7.7.1.7 Accommodate utility runs for plumbing, electrical, lighting and HVAC The 2 in. gap between wythes is sufficient for most utilities. Modification after installation would be exceedingly difficult, however. Multi-material capability would allow for easier placement and modification of piping and conduit runs (see 7.7.1.6). 7-24 7.7.1.8 Ability to form piers and columns within the module Piers require three-sided units and columns require four-sided units or two corner units. A partial module is often used to simplify casting. End cap/pier mockup for the Usonian House at Florida Southern College (Photo by Michael Maguire): 7.7.1.9 Lintels can be incorporated over openings To satisfy this requirement, the blocks should be able to span from three to six feet without extensive hidden structure. This can be accomplished by reinforcing the cavity and filling with grout to form a lintel, similar to as shown in Section 7.7.6.9. 7.7.1.10 Repair procedure / block replacement A block face that has been damaged or is weathered can be removed and replaced as follows: Sawcut the four edges of the block full depth. Remove the damaged block and cast a replacement, taking care to match the color and surface texture. Chisel the edges of the cavity to provide mechanical interlock for the new grout. Butter the edges of the cavity and the new block edges with grout, then insert the block into the cavity, removing the excess grout. The repair will likely be noticeable: Replaced block on the Eric Brown House, Kalamazoo, MI: A repair to more than a single block would require floor or roof shoring, complete wall removal/demolition and replacement with a new textile block wall assembly. 7.7.1.11 Additional capabilities that extend beyond that of the original system This system is as close to the original as is practical, and so shares its capabilities and limitations. 7-25 7.7.2 Single channel two-piece Typical block unit weight: 16 in. by 16 in. – 33 lb. The reinforcing and grouting operations can be cut in half by using a larger channel in one wythe only. UHPC can be used to reduce the weight of the load-bearing units. 7.7.2.1 Ability to form corners, both inside and outside Outside corner formed using a two-piece miter, similar to what was used on the Freeman House 7-26 Inside corner formed using a two-piece miter – with optional inner wythe. Inside corners can use standard channel blocks, as shown above. A corner dam contains the grout within the channels. 7.7.2.2 Perforations to allow light penetration Perforations can be added in the same manner as was done for the classic textile block. See Section 7.7.1.2 for further information 7.7.2.3 Accommodate glazing within the module, providing views and ventilation Glass or a vent screen can be set directly into a single-wythe concrete frame with no thermal break, as was done with the Turkel House (see 7.7.1.3). As with that system, such a configuration would not meet modern energy codes. 7.7.2.4 Provide support and attachment points for a second floor and roof This is accomplished by placing the load-bearing channel wythe on the inside. Bearing is similar to that shown in Section 7.7.1.4. 7.7.2.5 Accommodate hidden structure, such as steel or concrete beams and columns The system is amenable to encasing or embedding hidden steel or concrete beams and columns. The hidden structure can be placed in the insulation gap between the wythes. 7-27 7.7.2.6 Multi-material capability - various materials can be used for the inner wythe besides textile block – paneling, plaster, wallboard, stone, brick etc. The clip system can be used to hang a variety of materials to form the inner wall face. These materials can be made removable to allow access to the wythe gap for maintenance and upgrades within the wall. 7.7.2.7 Accommodate utility runs for plumbing, electrical, lighting and HVAC As one wythe is non-bearing and can be made removable, utility runs can be installed and maintained fairly easily. 7.7.2.8 Ability to form piers and columns within the module Piers require three-sided units and columns require four-sided units. These can consist of mitered units as shown. Columns would be filled with grout or concrete with a vertical reinforcing cage. 7.7.2.9 Lintels can be incorporated over openings To satisfy this requirement, the blocks should be able to span from three to six feet without extensive hidden structure. This can be accomplished by reinforcing the cavity and filling with grout to form a lintel, similar to as shown in Section 7.7.6.9. 7-28 7.7.2.10 Repair procedure / block replacement A block face that has been damaged or is weathered can be removed and replaced similar to the procedure detailed in Section 7.7.1.10. An advantage of the single channel two-piece system is that the non-bearing wythe can face the exterior. As it weathers it can be replaced by unbolting it and bolting in a replacement. Since the units bear on each other the top unit would need to be removed first. Multiple units can be replaced without shoring. 7.7.2.11 Additional capabilities that extend beyond that of the original system Introducing a removable non-bearing wythe allows for easier block modification and replacement. It also allows access for utility repairs and modification. More robust loadbearing interior walls can be formed with one wythe instead of two, due to the wider grouted channel’s increased structural capacity. 7-29 7.7.3 Bolted reusable two-piece Typical block unit weight: 16 in. by 16 in. – 32 lb. This system is designed to be reusable, modifiable and reconfigurable indefinitely. Ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC) is used to provide a durable precast concrete block module (1) that could last indefinitely. It utilizes bolted connections with no mortar or grout required. The UHPC mix includes high-carbon metallic or poly-vinyl alcohol (PVA) fibers, which provide significant tensile and flexural capacity. This allows the flanges of the block module 1 to transfer moment through the bolted connections and act as a unit to resist applied loads. High-density plastic shims 5 are used to distribute the force from one block to the 7-30 next. Since a “dry” connection method is used, the blocks can be unbolted and removed individually, allowing unlimited modification of the structure. The system can accommodate different geometries. Tapering the edge flanges allows for curved, serpentine or arched structures. In addition to square and rectangular modules, the system works with triangular (Fig. 5) or hexagonal units. Unique patterns can be cast in the face, as shown in the illustrations, and different integral colors and finishes can be used. 7-31 A wall assembly for an insulated building would include a layer of rigid insulation 8 and an interior wythe 11 that is removable (Fig. 8). Rigid insulation 8 would vary in thickness according to the project requirements. The insulation would come in pre-cut sheets. Polystyrene, polyurethane, polyisocyanurate, or soy-based or other organic “green” rigid foam insulation could be used. The insulation will be continuous, without any thermal breaks. The concrete blocks also provide a thermal mass benefit. Units containing glazing can be used as fenestration or perforations allowing views and/or light transmission. The panels will have tight, 1/16” wide joints and will not require mortar or a mason to set. Plastic shims will be used for setting, along with a continuous bead of silicone caulk along the edges to ensure weather tightness. Floor and roof joists can bear on the outside wythe immediately after wall installation. Block production: The main-load-bearing precast concrete wythe 1 is cast using a silicone, urethane or other type of form, either smooth or with a pattern, as shown in Figs. 1 and 3. A removable insert is used for the hollow trough (Fig. 2). Cylindrical inserts are used to form the bolt holes. Installation/assembly: Per Fig. 2, anchor bolts 3 are cast or field-drilled and post-installed into the concrete wall foundation. High-density plastic shims 5 are placed around the anchor bolts 3 (Fig. 3). Blocks 1 are lined up with the holes as shown with a silicone caulk joint along all edges and secured to the anchor bolts 3 with threaded nuts. Another row of blocks 1 are then stacked on shims 5 and bolted together using steel or fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) bolts 4. When the wall has reached the proper height, FRP straps 7 are threaded onto the bolt ends and secured with nuts (Fig. 6). The FRP material is non-conductive and minimizes thermal bridging through the insulation. Precut sheets of rigid insulation 8 are pre-punched with slots to accommodate the straps. The insulation is placed as shown in Fig. 7. Conduit and utilities can be run through the resultant air space. The inner wythe can consist of precast concrete blocks 11 or paneling, tile, plaster or other material. If precast concrete blocks 11 are used, they can be bolted to the FRP straps 7 using a steel clip angle 10 as shown in Fig. 8. This allows for easy removal if required. The wall installation is then complete. 7-32 7.7.3.1 Ability to form corners, both inside and outside Corners will be difficult to form as a single piece, as was the case with the original system. Using a half-module for the corners will reduce the form size and the piece weight, though not the complexity. Multiple removable inserts will be required to form the voids. 7-33 7.7.3.2 Perforations to allow light penetration 7-34 Light from the perforations needs to travel to the interior through the insulation. It could be accomplished using a reflective plastic tube with cut glass at each end, as shown below. The tube would be inserted and caulked or gasketed to the exterior wythe. The perforated insulation and inner wythe blocks would then be threaded around the tube. 7.7.3.3 Accommodate glazing within the module, providing views and ventilation A glazed fenestration concept based on Wright’s Turkel House, Detroit, MI, 1955 7-35 Casting with UHPC allows for thinner, lighter sections, making possible larger block units, up to 24 in. by 24 in., that still maintain a maximum 42 lb. unit weight. The transparency of the Turkel House living room can be achieved with much greater thermal efficiency. 7-36 7.7.3.4 Provide support and attachment points for a second floor and roof In keeping with the concept of a reusable, demountable building system, floor framing can be attached as shown by using non-conductive fiber reinforced polymer shapes (angles) as joist hangers bolted to the structural block wythe through the insulation. Alternately, coffered blocks can form a floor or roof similar to what was done with Wright’s Usonian Automatic. The deep, coffered UHPC blocks would be post-tensioned together in the field. Rigid insulation would be embedded in the floor units to reduce their weight. 7-37 Turkel House, 1955 7.7.3.5 Accommodate hidden structure, such as steel or concrete beams and columns The system is amenable to encasing or embedding hidden steel or concrete beams and columns. The hidden structure can be placed in the insulation gap between the wythes. 7.7.3.6 Multi-material capability - various materials can be used for the inner wythe besides textile block – paneling, plaster, wallboard, stone, brick etc. The clip angle system can be used to hang a variety of materials to form the inner wall face. These materials can be made removable to allow access to the wythe gap for maintenance and upgrades within the wall. 7-38 7.7.3.7 Accommodate utility runs for plumbing, electrical, lighting and HVAC As one wythe is non-bearing and can be made removable, utility runs can be installed and maintained fairly easily. 7.7.3.8 Ability to form piers and columns within the module Piers require three-sided units and columns require four-sided units. Insulation is not usually required for piers and columns. 7.7.3.9 Lintels can be incorporated over openings To satisfy this requirement, the blocks should be able to span from three to six feet without extensive hidden structure. Ideally, since the blocks are designed to be reusable, the lintels should be reusable as well. For deck-bearing walls, the standard bolted connections between the blocks are likely adequate to span the opening. For longer spans, lintel units could be cast as shown below. A lintel spanning a four ft. opening with five 16 in. units would be 6’-8” long and weigh about 200 lbs. Embedded epoxy coated rebar would provide the horizontal flexural reinforcing. It could be set using a skid-steer loader (“Bobcat”) or a forklift and bolted in place. 7-39 7.7.3.10 Repair procedure / block replacement A block face that has been damaged or is weathered can be removed and replaced as follows: Individual blocks can be removed by unbolting the non-loadbearing wythe for access, removing the bolts for the block in question, then sawcutting the 1/8 in. joints to break the weather seal and shred the plastic shims. The block can then be slid out of its place and a replacement, with new shims, slid in. New silicone caulk would be applied inside the joints on both faces to restore the weather seal. An advantage of the bolted reusable two-piece system is that the non-bearing wythe can face the exterior. As it weathers it can be replaced by unbolting it and bolting in a replacement. Since the units bear on each other the top unit would need to be removed first. Multiple units can be replaced without shoring. 7.7.3.11 Additional capabilities that extend beyond that of the original system The high flexural strength of UHPC allows for bending moment to be transmitted from one block to another by the clamping action of the bolts on the thin flanges. The plastic shims distribute the compression force away from the bolt, allowing a moment couple to form. The result is a wall that can resist lateral and gravity loads as a unit. Bolting the blocks as shown allows for replacement of individual blocks without undermining the structural integrity of the wall. Bolts are removed from the inside, and then the caulk broken with a keyhole saw. The block and shims can then be pushed out. Replacement would work in reverse. The connection concept can also be applied to blocks that are triangular and hexagonal as well as rectangular. Tapering the edge flanges allows for domed construction. Conventional reinforced masonry cannot do this easily because there would be three or more reinforcing bar rows crossing at the same point. 7-40 7-41 7.7.4 Cast-in-place form two-piece Typical block unit weight: 24 in. by 24 in. by 0.75 in. – 36 lb. (UHPC) Description: Insulated concrete form walls typically have two outer layers, or wythes, of rigid foam insulation containing a site-cast concrete interior (See US Patent 3,788,020). The proposed system replaces the outer insulation wythes with precast concrete or cut stone panels, 1, 2 and connects the panels to each other and the wythes together simultaneously using a unique connector design, referenced as the “O-Tie” 3. The advantage of the system over insulated concrete forms is that the inner and outer wall faces are hard, finished and do not need cladding. In addition, the thermal mass of the concrete wall can be utilized to temper interior heating and cooling loads, unimpeded by the insulation 6. The precast concrete or cut stone panels 1, 2 can vary from 12” to 24” wide (24” shown), 12” to 24” high, typically 1” thick, though thickness can vary based on the cast pattern used. The precast version would consist of consist of cast concrete with fiber or other reinforcing, using polypropylene or other structural fibers.. Unique patterns can be cast in the face, as shown, and many different types of finishes can be used. Rigid insulation 6, would vary in thickness, but commonly be 2 to 3” thick (3” shown). The insulation would come in sheets, squares, or could be foamed in place. Polystyrene, polyurethane, polyisocyanurate, or soy-based or other organic “green” rigid foam insulation could be used. 7-42 The cavity would contain mild steel or FRP reinforcement 4 per code and be filled with ready-mix concrete (optionally self-consolidating concrete - SCC, or ultra-high performance concrete - UHPC). The insulation 6 will face the exterior side, allowing maximum thermal mass benefit from the cast concrete wall (thickness varies, shown 4") and inner precast tiles 2. Alternately, the entire cavity could be filled with an insulating concrete. The panels will have tight, 1/16” joints and will not require mortar or a mason to set. Plastic shims will be used for setting, along with a continuous bead of silicone caulk along the edges to ensure weather tightness. Optionally, the outer panel 1 could be made removable by bolting through drilled holes in the panel to a ferrule glued to the inside of the FRP O-Tie flange 3. The bolt 7 could be recessed in a blockout on the exterior, then covered with a plastic plate which would be caulked in place. Specially-designed pultruded fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) O-ties 3 would be used to tie the wythes together as well as tie the panels 1, 2 to each other without any thermal bridging. Structurally they would act together with the panels 1, 2 similar to a vierendeel truss, providing a measure of composite action, even before receiving the cast-in-place concrete. The ties 3 would be manufactured initially by cutting and core-drilling commercially available H-shaped FRP structural members. The ties 3 could optionally be molded instead of pultruded. The fibers are expected to be either fiberglass or carbon. The ties 3 are non-conductive and non-corrosive, a key benefit of the design. A large hole in the center allows wet concrete to flow through unimpeded. Small recesses in the edges provide chairs to support and center the horizontal reinforcing bars 4 before concrete placement. The ties 3 are connected to the outer 1 and inner panels 2 with threaded fasteners 7. The fasteners 7 are threaded to commercially-available cast-in or drop-in inserts 5 in the panels. The system will include edge 13, cap 14, and corner 15, 16 pieces as shown in the illustrations. In addition, glazed window units and doors can be specifically manufactured to fit the block module. Smaller lites can be incorporated within the panels by using plastic tubes to keep concrete out and to funnel the light from outside. Electrical boxes can be cast into the panels as required. Large openings will be accommodated with lintels (17) as shown in Fig. 13. Floor and roof joists can bear on the inside wythe after the initial concrete pour. Installation: Per Fig. 2, reinforcing bar anchors 8 are cast into the concrete wall foundation 12. They will lap with the wall reinforcing. The first panel erected is an outside face panel 1. It is connected to two FRP base connectors 9 with threaded bolts 7 to threaded inserts 5. The FRP base connectors 9 are anchored to the foundation 12 with steel clip angles 10 and commercially-available drilled-in post-installed anchors 11. The process is repeated along the wall as shown in Fig. 3. O-Tie connectors 3 are bolted to the outer-face panels 1, and the inside-face panels 2 are then bolted to the O-Tie connectors 3 and the base connectors 9 as shown. Horizontal reinforcing bars 4 sized by a licensed structural engineer as required by the local building code are wired to the O-Tie connectors 3 and the base connectors 9. These connectors have recesses to receive and center the reinforcing. 7-43 Vertical reinforcing 4 is wired to the horizontal reinforcing bars 4 as shown in Fig. 4. If the wall is to be insulated, then rigid insulation 6 is placed as shown in Fig. 5. The process is repeated as shown in Figs.6 and 7 until the desired height is achieved. 7-44 Edge pieces 13 for exposed edges will be cast as a “U”-shape, as shown in Fig. 8. Similarly, Cap pieces 14 will also be cast as a “U”-shape. Cap pieces 14 are useful when a parapet is required, or for a free-standing wall, as shown in Fig. 9. Here the cast-in-place concrete is not shown for clarity. Vertical bars will anchored to and extend down from the cap piece into the fresh concrete pour to anchor the cap. 7-45 Corner pieces 15, 16 are installed as shown in Fig. 10. Reinforcing 4 is lapped with bent bars to provide continuous reinforcing around the corner. Large openings can be spanned with a lintel piece 17 as shown in Figs.12 and 13. The lintel piece holds the cast concrete until it sets. Alternate embodiment – bolt-through removable outer panels: Replacing the inserts 5 on the outer panels 1 with drilled holes 20 makes it possible to easily remove and replace the outer panels if needed. This is advantageous if the panels become damaged due to impact or weathering over time. Bolts 21 are threaded through the drilled holes and tightened to threaded ferrules 22 factory-glued to the inside of the O- Tie 3 flanges. The outer face of the panel 1 would contain a formed recess 23 so that the bolt head 21 will not extend past the panel face. After installation, a formed cover plate 24 can be caulked in place to hide and protect the bolts. One consideration with this embodiment is that the cover plates 24 would be exposed to view and would be part of the architectural expression of the structure. The cover plate 24 could be made from formed plastic, stainless steel, aluminum, or other durable materials. Alternately, the bolts 21 could be left exposed, no cover plate 24, either recessed or non-recessed, for an “industrial” look. 7-46 Fig. 14 Alternate embodiment - bolt-through removable outer panels 7.7.4.1 Ability to form corners, both inside and outside Half-module corners will meet the weight constraints and avoid a mitered joint, per Fig.10. Mitered corners are undesirable in that the sharp formed edges are prone to breakage. 7.7.4.2 Perforations to allow light penetration Perforations will need to be blocked out and secured to prevent shifting when the CIP concrete is placed. They would be smaller versions of the glazed units shown in Section 7.7.4.3. 7-47 7.7.4.3 Accommodate glazing within the module, providing views and ventilation Glazing modules would consist of an open-ended plastic box between two glazed panels, as shown. The plate glass and gaskets would be factory-cast into the panels. The plastic box would be caulked in place to prevent concrete from leaking into the cavity. The end result is a grouted channel system similar to some of the other design concepts. The configuration is rather boxy. Design flexibility is limited. 7-48 7.7.4.4 Provide support and attachment points for a second floor and roof The void needs to be filled with concrete prior to setting the floor or roof. Protruding cast-in threaded rods provide connection points for the joist members. 7.7.4.5 Accommodate hidden structure, such as steel or concrete beams and columns The CIP reinforced wall should be sufficient for most concentrated loads, obviating the need for embedded columns. That said, steel columns can be placed within the cavity prior to installation of the two-piece panels around them. 7.7.4.6 Multi-material capability - various materials can be used for the inner wythe besides textile block – paneling, plaster, wallboard, stone, brick etc. Various interior wall facings can be bolted to the O-ties. The rigid insulation board will contain the cast concrete until it sets. 7.7.4.7 Accommodate utility runs for plumbing, electrical, lighting and HVAC Utility space is available in the cavity before the CIP concrete is poured. 7.7.4.8 Ability to form piers and columns within the module Piers require three-sided units and columns require four-sided units. See Fig. 8 for an edge piece example. A column can be formed by combining two edge pieces and removing the insulation. 7-49 7.7.4.9 Lintels can be incorporated over openings To satisfy this requirement, the blocks should be able to span from three to six feet without extensive hidden structure. Fig. 13 shows how this can be done. 7.7.4.10 Repair procedure / block replacement A block face that has been damaged or is weathered will need to be removed and replaced. An exterior wythe panel can be sawcut and unbolted. This provides an access point for removing additional panels as required. The replacement panels would need grouted holes to engage the bolts. The bolted alternate shown in Fig. 14 allows for easier replacement of a single block face. 7.7.4.11 Additional capabilities that extend beyond that of the original system The lighter weight and thinner section allows for a larger block module, up to 24 in. by 24 in., as compared to the Usonian Automatic standard of 12 in. by 24 in. The bolted alternate shown in Fig. 14 allows for easy replacement of a block face. The monolithic reinforced concrete wall that is formed provides a superior code-approved means of resisting lateral loads, including seismic. It can also be used for secure facilities. The monolithic wall eliminates joints and resists moisture penetration. 7-50 7.7.5 Insulating concrete one-piece Typical block unit weight: 12 in. by 12 in. by 12 in. – 41 lb. The University of Aachen, Germany has sandwiched a layer of lightweight self-consolidating foam concrete (SCLFC) between two thin layers of fabric-reinforced concrete to create a lightweight insulated concrete wall. (Mott, Steinhoff, and Brameshuber 2010) The concept could just as well apply to a concrete block. The insulating concrete has a density of 450 kg/m3 (28 pcf). Despite it’s light weight, it has load-bearing capacity. A foaming agent and lightweight aggregate were used. It is not suitable for use as a surface exposed to weather, so 3/8” thick layers of high-strength concrete reinforced with a fiberglass fabric are used for the outer wythes. The resultant R value is relatively low, however: 1.38 per inch. It would require a 13” thick wall to achieve an R-19 wall assembly rating. The following describes an insulating concrete reinforced concrete block wall system with no thermal bridges. The inner and outer wythes consist of precast concrete square or rectangular blocks 2, 3. Sandwiched between the wythes is a layer of insulating concrete 1. The block assembly is held together by wythe hoop ties 5 which create a mechanical bond with the wythe concrete 2, 3 when embedded in same (Fig. 1). Figure 1. A typical insulating concrete block unit: The insulating concrete 1 forms a grid of channels 4 for locating steel or fiber- reinforced polymer (FRP) reinforcing and field-poured concrete grout . The precast concrete wythes 2, 3 are typically 12” wide, 12” high and around 1” thick, though width, height and thickness can vary. The wythes would consist of cast concrete with fiber or other reinforcing, using polypropylene or other structural fibers. Unique patterns can be cast in the face, as shown, and many different types of finishes can be used. The insulating concrete 1 would have air voids which provide insulating value. The voids can be created any number of ways. A foaming agent can be added to the concrete mix or polystyrene beads can be used as voids. The insulating concrete could be created using an autoclaved aerated concrete process (AAC) in a manufacturing plant or could be non-autoclaved with a foaming agent. The grout channels 4 would contain mild steel or FRP “textile” reinforcement 6 per code and be filled with concrete grout 7-51 using self-consolidating concrete – SCC. The insulation 1 will be unbroken on the exterior side, allowing maximum thermal mass benefit from the inner concrete wall assembly. The panels will have tight, 1/16” joints and will not require mortar or a mason to set. A continuous bead of silicone caulk along the edges will ensure weather tightness. Floor and roof joists can bear on the inside wythe after the initial concrete grout pour. Insulating concrete block production: The inner and outer precast concrete wythes 2, 3 are cast first with conventional high-strength concrete using a urethane or other type of form, either smooth or with a pattern, as shown in Fig. 2B. The wythe hoop ties 5 are partially embedded in the open face of the precast concrete wythes 2, 3. The two wythes are set into a cubical form and the aerated insulating concrete is placed. (Fig. 2C, D). The assembly is held in place with a jig until the insulating concrete 1 has set. After set, channels are cut into the soft, aerated concrete as shown (Fig. 2E). Alternately, the channels could be formed with polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) coated inserts when casting. The block wythes 2,3 are now ready to receive any number of standard finishes, such as sandblasting, acid-etch or water- wash. Alternately, the finish could be applied prior to Step C. Figure 2 Insulating concrete block unit production process: Installation/assembly: Per Fig. 3, foundation anchor rods 7 are cast into the concrete wall foundation 10. They will lap with the wall “textile” reinforcing 6. Blocks are stacked as shown with a silicone caulk joint along all edges. Vertical reinforcing bars 6 sized by a licensed structural engineer as required by the local building code are wired to the foundation anchor rods 7. Horizontal reinforcing bars 6, also sized by a licensed engineer, are chaired in-place and wired to the vertical bars 6. Another row of blocks are then stacked and the process repeated. When the wall has reached the proper height, concrete grout (SCC) is poured from the top until all the channels are filled. The wall installation is complete when the grout has set. 7-52 7.7.5.1 Ability to form corners, both inside and outside Inside corners and outside corners are identical with this module, as long as the basic block module is a cube. 7.7.5.2 Perforations to allow light penetration Light has a long way to travel to the interior with this particular concept. It could be accomplished using a reflective plastic tube with cut glass at each end, as shown. The insulating aerated concrete would be cast around the insert. 7-53 7.7.5.3 Accommodate glazing within the module, providing views and ventilation Four in. thick by twelve in. square conventional glass blocks can be used as glazing. The effect would be similar to what Wright used for the Richard Lloyd Jones House in Oklahoma (1929, Section 1.3.6). The 4 in. air space between the inner and outer blocks provides insulation value. Dams would be required to contain the grout in-between the glass layers. A commercially available 4 in. by 12 in. square hollow glass block 7-54 7.7.5.4 Provide support and attachment points for a second floor and roof Floor or roof joists can bear on the aerated concrete blocks as shown. The blocks can continue upward to form a parapet, if desired. The thermal break is preserved. 7.7.5.5 Accommodate hidden structure, such as steel or concrete beams and columns The aerated insulating concrete can be cut out with woodworking tools where required to provide room for hidden structure. The cutout can be located at a block joint along the module to avoid threading the blocks over the column. 7-55 7.7.5.6 Multi-material capability - various materials can be used for the inner wythe besides textile block – paneling, plaster, wallboard etc. Multi-material capability can be achieved by exposing the aerated insulating concrete on the inside. Furring strips can be screwed or glued to the inside face to provide support for paneling or wallboard. 7.7.5.7 Accommodate utility runs for plumbing, electrical, lighting and HVAC Utility runs can be accommodated similar to hidden structure (7.7.5.5) by cutting raceways into the insulating concrete along the block joints. 7.7.5.8 Ability to form piers and columns within the module Piers require three-sided units and columns require four-sided units. This can be accomplished by adding additional mitered faces to the form. 7.7.5.9 Lintels can be incorporated over openings To satisfy this requirement, the blocks should be able to span from three to six feet without extensive hidden structure. An aerated concrete lintel spanning a six ft. opening would be eight ft. long and weigh 330 lbs. It could be set using a skid-steer loader (“Bobcat”) or a forklift. 7-56 7-57 7.7.5.10 Repair procedure / block replacement A block face that has been damaged or is weathered can be removed and replaced as follows: Chisel out the damaged face completely. Core drill anchor holes into the underlying aerated concrete. Apply a stiff epoxy grout and set the new cast face with mechanical anchors extending into the drilled holes. The new face may need a light sandblast to match the weathering of adjacent units. 7-58 7.7.5.11 Additional capabilities that extend beyond that of the original system Referenced by the ASCE 7 standard for use in High-Seismic Zones: Reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete has been accepted by the American Concrete Institute for use in high-seismic regions. Section 1.18.3.2.6 of ACI 530 covers “special reinforced masonry shear walls”, which includes autoclaved aerated concrete masonry. ASCE 7-10 references the ACI 350 code specification. See Section 7.4 for more information. The aerated concrete insulation is inert and provides thermal mass: Unlike other common insulation types, it will not off-gas and is essentially impervious to fire. 7-59 7.7.6 Rigid insulation one-piece Typical block unit weight: 16 in. by 16 in. – 40 lb. The following describes an insulated reinforced concrete block wall system using sandwiched rigid insulation and non- conductive wythe connectors. The inner and outer wythes consist of precast concrete square or rectangular blocks 2, 3. Sandwiched between the wythes is a layer of rigid foam insulation 1 and an optional air-gap 5. The block assembly is held together by non-conductive rods 4 made of a fiber- reinforced polymer (FRP) or other non- conductive material. The ends of the rod 4 are deformed in order to create a mechanical bond with the wythe concrete 2, 3 when embedded in same. The rigid insulation 1 forms a grid of channels 6 for locating steel or fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) reinforcing and field-poured concrete grout. Non-conductive hoop-shaped ties of nylon or other similar material 7 are embedded in the inner wythe 3 to provide a mechanical bond with the field-poured concrete grout. The precast concrete wythes 2, 3 can vary from 12” to 24” wide (16” shown), 12” to 24” high, typically 1” thick, though thickness can vary based on the cast pattern used. The wythes would consist of consist of cast concrete with fiber or other reinforcing, using polypropylene or other structural fibers. Unique patterns can be cast in the face, as shown, and many different types of finishes can be used. Rigid insulation 1 would vary in thickness according to the project requirements. The insulation would come in sheets, squares, or could be foamed in place. Polystyrene, polyurethane, polyisocyanurate, or soy-based or other organic “green” rigid foam insulation could be used. The grout channels 6 would contain mild steel or FRP “textile” reinforcement 8 per code and be filled with concrete grout (optionally self-consolidating concrete - SCC. The insulation 1 will be unbroken on the exterior side, allowing maximum thermal mass benefit from the inner concrete wall assembly. The panels will have tight, 1/16” joints and will not require mortar or a mason to set. Plastic shims will be used for 7-60 setting, along with a continuous bead of silicone caulk along the edges to ensure weather tightness. In addition, the optional air gap 5 provides another barrier to water penetration. Floor and roof joists can bear on the inside wythe after the initial concrete grout pour. Block production: The inner precast concrete wythe 3 is cast first using a urethane or other type of form, either smooth or with a pattern, as shown in Fig. 2A. The wythe hoop ties 7 are partially embedded in the open face of the precast concrete wythe 3 and the rod wythe connectors 4 are threaded through drilled holes in the insulation 1 and also embedded in the concrete wythe prior to concrete set (Fig. 2B). The outer wythe 2 is then cast in a similar manner and the other end of the rod wythe connectors are embedded in the still-plastic concrete as shown in Fig. 2C. The assembly is held in place with a jig until the outer wythe concrete 2 has set. The jig setting allows for an optional air gap 5 as shown in Fig. 2D. The block wythes 2,3 are now ready to receive any number of standard finishes, such as sandblasting, acid-etch or water-wash. Installation/assembly: 7-61 Per Fig. 3, foundation anchor rods 9 are cast into the concrete wall foundation 10. They will lap with the wall “textile” reinforcing 8. Blocks are stacked as shown with a silicone caulk joint along all edges. Vertical reinforcing bars 8 sized by a licensed structural engineer as required by the local building code are wired to the foundation anchor rods 9. Horizontal reinforcing bars 8, also sized by a licensed engineer, are chaired in-place and wired to the vertical bars 8. Another row of blocks are then stacked and the process repeated. When the wall has reached the proper height, concrete grout (SCC) is poured from the top until all the channels are filled. The wall installation is complete when the grout has set. 7.7.6.1 Ability to form corners, both inside and outside Inside corners and outside corners can be formed as shown: 7-62 7.7.6.2 Perforations to allow light penetration Perforations could be accomplished using a reflective plastic tube with cut glass at each end, as shown. The rigid insulation would be threaded around the insert. 7-63 7.7.6.3 Accommodate glazing within the module, providing views and ventilation Glazing can also be added by using a reflective plastic tube with glass at each end, as shown. 7-64 A half-width corner (above) A full-width corner is shown above. Casting would be complicated. It would probably need to be cast in two phases, with each half jigged in place. 7-65 7.7.6.4 Provide support and attachment points for a second floor and roof Floor or roof joists can bear on the blocks as shown. The blocks can continue upward to form a parapet, if desired. The thermal break is preserved. A wooden dam is used to contain the grout in the channels. 7-66 7.7.6.5 Accommodate hidden structure, such as steel or concrete beams and columns The insulation can be cut out where required to provide room for hidden structure. The cutout can be located at a block joint along the module to avoid having to thread the blocks over the column. Polyurethane foam can be sprayed around the column to contain the grout and prevent a thermal bridge. 7-67 7.7.6.6 Multi-material capability - various materials can be used for the inner wythe besides textile block – paneling, plaster, wallboard, stone, brick etc. This can be accomplished by moving the grout channels to the outer wythe. Vertical furring/nailer strips are bolted to the protruding FRP rods as shown, replacing the concrete block inner wythe. Paneling or wallboard can then be attached to the nailers. 7.7.6.7 Accommodate utility runs for plumbing, electrical, lighting and HVAC Utility runs can be accommodated similar to hidden structure (7.7.6.5) by cutting raceways into the rigid insulation along the block joints. 7.7.6.8 Ability to form piers and columns within the module Piers require three-sided units and columns require four-sided units. This can be accomplished using half-width units. Piers could be formed with an 8” by 8” by 16” breakaway form. The void would be reinforced and filled with concrete. Two pier units could be combined to form an 8” by 16” column. Insulation is not usually required for piers and columns. 7-68 7.7.6.9 Lintels can be incorporated over openings To satisfy this requirement, the blocks should be able to span from three to six feet without extensive hidden structure. By leaving out or removing the inner rigid insulation block from the units, the resultant cavity can be reinforced and filled with grout to form a lintel, as shown. 7.7.6.10 Repair procedure / block replacement An outer block face that has been damaged or is weathered can be removed and replaced using the following procedure: 1. Core-drill four holes at the location of the FRP rod connectors. 2. Remove the outer face of the block. 3. Chisel the remaining concrete from the FRP rods, taking care not to break them. 4. Cast a replacement face with 4 cylindrical blockouts at the FRP rod locations. 5. Fill the four blockouts in the new face with stiff non-shrink grout and and set into the wall, engaging the FRP rods. 6. Carefully caulk the joints to complete the repair. 7.7.6.11 Additional capabilities that extend beyond that of the original system The FRP ties allow for an air gap at the exterior, similar to the original textile block, but with added insulation. The wall can function as a screen wall, providing an additional barrier to water penetration. 7-69 7.8 Seismic capacity 7-71 Discussion: Per ASCE 7 Section 14.4 (ref), Masonry structures are to be designed according to ACI 530 (ref). Section 1.18.3.2.6 of ACI 530 covers “special reinforced masonry shear walls” which are required in high-seismic zones. This section includes specifications for autoclaved aerated concrete masonry, which is similar to the above insulating concrete block prototype. One thing to note is that there is a significant reinforcement “penalty” or increase for using a stack bond instead of running bond. Twice the horizontal reinforcement is required for a stack bonded wall (ACI 530, 1.18.3.2.6c). For the 12 in. wide insulating concrete prototype, that works out to a bar area of 0.216 sq. in. per ft. Minimum reinforcing would require #5 bars at 12 in. O.C. horizontal and #3 bars at 12 in. O.C. vertical. The rigid foam prototype, 8 in. wide, would require #4 at 16 in. horizontal and #3 at 16 in. vertical, which is more reasonable. Due to the unique nature of the rigid foam prototype, extensive seismic testing would probably be required in order to achieve code acceptance. By contrast, it can be argued that the insulating concrete prototype would be covered under the ACI 530 provisions for AAC masonry. It should also be noted that calculated capacity for the minimum reinforcing for seismic forces in Los Angeles would be almost 10 times what is required to resist the code-prescribed seismic shear, according to the above calculation for a typical two-story residence. 7-72 Dissertation of Edward D Losch for the Degree Ph.D. in Architecture Chapter 8 Summary and Conclusions School of Architecture Department of Building Science University of Southern California 8-1 Summary and Conclusions A comprehensive examination of the complete historical record was undertaken to identify the essential qualities, challenges, problems, barriers to acceptance, and alternative methods of Frank Lloyd Wright’s textile block system. A computerized searchable and relational database was created using Microsoft Access to log and organize the data. The sum of Wright’s collected writings were examined, and relevant passages were noted and catalogued. Taliesin correspondence was combed for all references to any of the built or un-built textile block projects. Letters from key Taliesin Associates were examined for relevance. Interviews were conducted of established Frank Lloyd Wright experts. Site visits were made to many of the textile block buildings and current owners were interviewed. Original drawings and specifications for the approximately 100 textile block projects were examined and catalogued. Existing publications formed another major source of information about the textile block. Even if the information or opinion presented was not accurate, it could give an indication of public sentiment or an impression of the time. These included books, journals, magazines, newspapers, web articles, and audio and video transcripts. The documents were found by methodically exploring Robert Sweeney’s Annotated Bibliography (covering 1886 to 1977), as well as Donald Langmead’s Bio-Bibliography (covering 1886 to 2002). More recent documents were found through an internet search, including Doug Steiner’s excellent online “Wright Library” (www.steinerag.com/flw/). Many of the references included bibliographies as well, so those were also followed, in “rabbit hole” fashion. The Qualities, Challenges, and Alternatives were not assigned beforehand, but were logged in the database when they were identified from a particular reference, and assigned to one of 12 categories. The intent was for the database to develop in an organic, self-organized fashion. A hierarchy for the Essential Qualities was also developed. This was accomplished by listing the other Qualities that each Quality supports, then selecting the one other Quality that is supported the most (see Chapter 2). This was done individually for each of the 107 Qualities, without any consideration (initially) for the overall organization. In this way a tree could be developed “organically”. The resulting “Essential Qualities Map” presents lower tier qualities on the left and higher tiers on the right. Most of the lower-tier Qualities (4 through 6) could be considered supporting “techniques” or “methods” subject to experimentation (Alternative Methods). The higher-tier Qualities (1-3) should be considered as truly essential to the system as Wright envisioned it. The one Quality that does not or cannot support any other Quality would then be the only member of Tier 1, at the top of the tree, or in this case, on the right. This Quality, “Lifting the Spirit,” is not something that can be analyzed using building science. Some of the Qualities could be considered unproven or unrealized. These are shown as greyed out in the second “Modified” Qualities map. One can see how certain Qualities were compromised due to the problems that were had with the system. 8-3 8-4 8-5 A total of 107 Essential Qualities, 86 documented Challenges, and 90 Alternative Methods were found. A multitude of reports were generated from the database, including textile block project original estimate versus actual cost (Appendix E). These reports were used to document and analyze each Essential Quality, Challenge and Alternative Method (Chapters 2-4). Each project was also documented (Chapter 5). Of the116 projects listed, about 100 of these use textile blocks in a loadbearing fashion. The others are included because they have textile block accents or are otherwise noteworthy. The 283 individual analyses of the Qualities, Challenges, and Alternatives were used to inform an analysis of each of the twelve Categories (Chapter 6). Relationship diagram for the computerized textile block database Chapter 7 presents a selection of what-if modern textile block concepts. These were developed mainly to solicit comments from outside experts regarding 1) fidelity to Wright’s textile block idea, and, 2) viability as a practical construction system. The takeaway from this exercise was that it is very difficult to improve on the simplicity of Wright’s vision. An interpretation of the Essential Qualities hierarchy maps Of the four second-tier Qualities discovered, the Organic Quality “NAT – Inspired by Nature” had the most lower-tier Qualities supporting it. This reflected the importance that organic design played in the use of the system. The blocks served as a cellular analogy, and were meant to be erected one at a time, gradually “growing” the building from its 8-6 foundation. Excess material was minimized and economized, mimicking the hollow, light and optimized structures evolved by Nature. Next in importance was the Societal Quality “DEM – Democratic, Freedom of Choice.” As a Usonian product, the textile block system was intended to support housing for the American of average means. This was to be achieved mainly through use of factory mass-production and the minimization of skilled field labor. Organizing cooperative communities to pool resources and achieve economies of scale added a radical, almost subversive element, as did enlisting the owner in the construction process as a self-builder. Next was Durability “PER – Permanence.” (The Author found this surprising considering the system’s mostly poor performance in this regard.) The blocks were meant to stand the test of time, to “shelter and abide,” with little or no maintenance. An organic quality was the goal. Coatings were to be avoided – the textile block building was meant to weather naturally over time, exhibiting natural variations in finish, color and texture. To accomplish this, the blocks and joints had to be very durable in order to stand up to the elements without protection. The last of the second-tier Qualities was Design “BEA – Architectural Quality / Beauty.” Beauty was considered essential to achieving Wright’s over-arching goal of lifting the human spirit. It was to be achieved by taking advantage of the flexibility inherent in the textile block’s small module. This provided the versatility that Wright needed to realize his inspired designs. A major component was the ability to incorporate perforations in the blocks for light and views. The ever-changing patterns of light and shadow within these buildings were and are a source of delight to the occupants. Conversely, the buildings give a pleasing jewel-box effect at night when lit from within. The second, “Modified” diagram shows the same Qualities with those considered to be unproven or unrealized greyed out. One can see that this essentially wipes out Wright’s claims of durability and permanence, a serious deficiency. Also taking a hit is the Usonian Quality of Democracy. This Quality can be considered to be only a partial success. The system was not affordable and it was not simple to build, as claimed. Owner/self-builders were successful mainly through their own perseverance and ingenuity. Qualities related to organic design (inspired by Nature) and architectural beauty were virtually all achieved to some degree. Many occupants and visitors have testified to having their spirits lifted by the textile block buildings, so it may be that enough of the Qualities were achieved in the end for Wright to reach his goals. 8-7 Summary of results Certain Essential Qualities were compromised due to the problems that were had with the system. The listed references were used to document 86 problem types that were encountered with the system. These were ranked into three categories. “Challenges” are problems that could reasonably be overcome using modern materials and methods. “Problems” are more serious and may or may not be overcome with current technology. “Barriers” are problems that do not have a good solution and are likely not solvable in the near future. See Chapter 3 for a complete listing of these problems. Much more is expected of a modern building envelope than in Wright’s day. It is difficult for a mono-material construction to meet the strict code requirements for R-value, light, ventilation, durability, water resistance, seismic resistance, etc. One alternative method that was suggested by Aaron Green, one of Wright’s Taliesin Associates, on several occasions, was to precast a floor to ceiling wall unit and lift it into place with a small crane. Wright rejected the idea out of hand, probably because it would negate the organic, one cell at a time assembly process he envisioned as a sort of performance art. Since that time, labor costs have gone up and crane costs have come down. The precast concrete wall industry is robust. A parking deck added to the Arizona Biltmore Hotel [#2710] duplicated the look of the textile block by using precast concrete panels. Standard concrete block has also supplanted the textile block. Many Taliesin Associates used standard block in their own practices, but only one used the textile block (Patrick, 2015), and then, only once. Standard block had achieved sufficient versatility and economy by the 1950s. Wright himself designed quite a few standard concrete block buildings. After 1930, Wright did not confine his designs mainly to the textile block. In addition to standard concrete block, he experimented with many other materials and methods. At the same time that he developed the Usonian Automatic, he also developed a prefabricated panelized wood wall system for Marshall Erdman. By the 1950s, the textile block system was evolving, not in a linear fashion, but more like a tree with multiple branches. This was not immediately obvious, as all the built examples from this time are Usonian Automatics with 12x24” blocks. The drawing boards, however, tell another story. Curved blocks were used for circular rooms with different radii. Block sizes varied greatly, including 16x16, 18x18, 16x32, 24x24, even 36x36 and 36x48. Some are single-wythe, some double. The point is that Wright was always experimenting, throwing ideas out there to see if any would gain traction. He didn’t just shake designs out of his sleeve, as he once claimed, implying a mindless and rote process. His goal was to achieve the Essential Qualities listed in the first three tiers of the Essential Qualities Map in Chapter 2. Why did some projects get built while many others stayed on the drawing board? In some ways, the unbuilt projects were more valuable to this study because they did not have the compromises that often accompanied the finished works. They were closer to Wright’s intent. He regretted deeply that some of his best work remained on the drawing boards, probably none more-so than the San Marcos in the Desert Resort (#2704, 1928). “I have found that when a scheme develops beyond a normal pitch of 8-8 excellence the hand of fate strikes it down…In the vault at Taliesin is this completely developed set of plans, every block scheduled as to quantity and place. These plans are one of our prized possessions” (Wright, 1993, 283). In this case outside economic factors (the Great Depression) doomed the project. Some projects were speculative and never had a real client. The Doheny Ranch, #2104, comes to mind. Wright’s ultimate goal for Los Angeles included placing textile block subdivisions like Doheny Ranch in the hills. Sometimes the client was fickle, as when Aline Barnsdall cancelled both her Beverly Hills House, #2009 and the Little Dipper Playhouse, #2301. The latter was cancelled after construction was well underway. It is of interest that many projects were cancelled or converted to other materials because the client just did not like the idea of the textile block (see “De: Aversion to concrete” and “De: Not traditional / vernacular”). For others, there were cost issues (“Cs: Expensive to construct” and “Cs: Lack of bank financing”). The rise of architectural review committees in the 1950’s also caused some projects to be converted to other materials. Wright was often slow completing the plans, taking a year or more in some cases. In that time span, changes in personal circumstances caused some clients to put off building indefinitely. The correspondence at the Taliesin Archives bears this out. Was Wright sincere in his oft-repeated claims that his textile block system was cheap and easy to build? He claimed it was so simple that “women and children” could build them. Was it self-delusion? Was he exaggerating to get the commission? Or could it be that he had faith that, if executed properly, an organic building system just had to be superior to the standard “five-process” method? This document cannot answer that question definitively, but based on the fact that organic concepts drove virtually every part of the system’s design, it is likely the latter. Ramifications for historic preservation There are definitely “wrong ways” to build or restore the textile block but there is no single right way. Each building was an experiment. Wright was always on the lookout for new materials and methods and likely would not have objected if some were applied in the preservation of his buildings. This document attempts to isolate the Essential Qualities of his system, which should provide some guidance regarding whether a new technique is “kosher” when applied to an existing building. These qualities also have relevance to his work in general, although in many ways, his ideas and personal convictions were free to have their fullest expression in the textile block. This is because Wright was attempting to re- invent the means and methods of construction in an organic fashion, in addition to everything else. The Essential Qualities hierarchy map in Chapter 2 provides a blueprint for which qualities are most worth honoring and which could be altered, if need be. The tiers on the left more closely resemble supporting techniques than true qualities. (A higher Tier number denotes a lower hierarchy.) Modern methods could be applied to many of these Qualities to make them more effective in supporting the higher level Qualities to the right. The list of Alternative Methods can be mined for ideas regarding preservation, repair, restoration, and replacement techniques. It is important to know what has been tried and whether it was successful or not. 8-9 The David Hunt Project [#5601] as a prototype There appears to be an evolution with this unrealized design for David Hunt to a simpler form of Usonian Automatic. This project was unique in that it used 18" square blocks (see FLLWF 5601.017, below). The corner blocks were mitered, similar to the Freeman House, constructed many years before [#2402]. It is clearly an attempt to reduce the number of block types required. The ceiling blocks are the same thickness as the wall blocks, unlike with the Usonian Automatic. It's unfortunate that the project was not executed, as it could have come in at a reduced cost. On the other hand, the single layer of blocks would have radiated insufferable heat to the interior during the Arizona summer. Using a few modern methods, this project could serve as a prototype for a next-generation textile block. The key is to use a thicker block made from an insulating concrete to solve the hot and cold problem. It would require air pockets or other means to insulate the interior of the block, integral with a hard wearing surface front and back. An MIT paper explored the possibility of producing variable density cellular materials (Cooke, 2012). The grout channel is buried in the center of the wall, for protection against the elements. (See section 7.7.5 for a similar concept.) A thicker unit is much stiffer and more stable during erection. Forming is simplified, with no coffers required to reduce the block weight. (FLLWF 5601.017) 8-10 Spinoffs / legacy Just as the research for the NASA space program had useful commercial spinoffs, techniques used for the textile block have potential benefits. Natural cement has been superseded by Portland cement, mainly because Portland cement gains strength much faster. What is overlooked is that natural cement sets faster, allowing forms to be removed sooner. This can provide significant savings by reducing the number of forms or molds required for a project. In addition, natural cement can be calcined at lower temperatures, which allows the use of renewable heat sources. If a high 28 day strength is not critical, natural cement should be considered as a viable option. Insulating concrete: Lightweight concrete was used for the Usonian Automatic blocks on the Tonkens House [#5510]. In addition to easier handling, the blocks had some insulating value. Insulating concrete also forms the basis of autoclaved aerated concrete, or AAC. This material was developed in Sweden in the 1920s. Air bubbles formed by a chemical reaction provide the insulating value and light weight of the product. It has a steady-state R-value of around 1.0 per inch. Unlike the textile block, it is not suitable for use as a finished surface, either inside or out. Combining an insulating concrete such as this with a denser, durable concrete face in a single operation has been proposed by both Eric Lloyd Wright and Leonard J. Morse-Fortier as a potential successor to the textile block (see Chapter 4, “P: Insulation - integral with block”). It would be a mono-material and could be used in a single layer similar to what Wright proposed for the David Hunt House (above). Building codes recognize reinforced AAC as suitable for a loadbearing wall system, even in high-seismic zones. Textile blocks made with insulating concrete would perform similarly. See Section 7.7.5 for a design concept based on the use of insulating concrete. Seismic design calculations can be found at the end of Chapter 7. Fabric / membrane roofs: The San Marcos Water Gardens [#2705], an add-on project for San Marcos in the Desert [#2704], consisted of a series of cabins constructed of 4" thick concrete blocks. The roofs were canvas, similar to the Ocatilla cabins and also later to Taliesin West in Scottsdale, AZ. (FLLWF 2705.003) The limited technology of the time prevented more wide-spread adoption of Wright's fabric roof structure concept. The lightness and translucency of the fabric overhead would have provided a nice contrast to the heaviness of the concrete blocks below. Wright was not satisfied with the wood roofs used on many of his textile block buildings. They were not fire-resistant, for one thing. In the 1950s, he specified a concrete textile block roof system for his Usonian Automatic 8-11 designs [#5612]. Although it visually unified the building with a mono-material concrete construction, it was expensive and problematic to put all that weight at the roof level, especially for what was meant to be affordable housing. A roof fabric structure that uses modern technology for thermal, weather, and fire-resistance could be a viable option (Pedersen, 2014). The concept first appears in this project from 1929, Frank Lloyd Wright's unbuilt San Marcos Water Gardens. Mortar-less joints: In 2011, the Florida Southern College Faculty House [#3922] utilized silicone caulk at the block joints to seal the grout tubes. Combined with precision manufacturing of the blocks, this project demonstrates that it is now possible to realistically employ mortar-less block assembly. Reinforced concrete cavity fill was used typically by Wright for retaining walls and other walls where high flexural strength was required. The two layers of textile blocks formed a stay-in-place form. Reinforcing was set in the gap (typically 4” wide) and concrete poured to form a monolithic wall with the blocks as the finished face. Section 7.7.4 details a similar system with the addition of a layer of rigid insulation. Fiber-reinforced polymer ties minimize thermal bridging. Self-building: Many of the owner / self-builders of the Usonian period reported a sense of deep satisfaction in having constructed much of their Wright-designed textile block residence themselves. There were many challenges, but this author could not find reference to any owner-builder regretting their decision, at least after completion. (Apparently those who weren’t up to it had the sense to hire a contractor.) The process helped foster Wright’s overall goal of “Lifting the Spirit”. There could be a market for a versatile building system that would allow do-it-yourselfers to erect their own residence. It should avoid the use of specialized heavy machinery on-site, as Wright was able to demonstrate with the textile block. Another requirement is that special skills should not be required to assemble it. Mortar-less joints would help in this regard, as noted above. Chapter 7 explored some possibilities, although these are only possible starting points. Future work Frank Lloyd Wright’s son, Lloyd Wright, was instrumental in the genesis of the textile block system. Most of his designs did not use the block in a structural manner, but were often more aesthetically daring than those of his father. He was a master at designing non-orthogonal block layouts, for example. As such, Lloyd Wright’s buildings and unbuilt projects that utilized the textile block are worthy of further documentation and study. An online searchable textile block database could be made available to researchers and hobbyists. It could also be used in conjunction with the Getty Research Center’s Frank Lloyd Wright drawing and correspondence archives. The Getty version could call up facsimiles of the actual documents. Wright’s theology: An interdisciplinary study of Wright’s personal theology as manifested by the textile block system would be of value. This dissertation has shown that some aspects of Wright’s textile block system did not make sense from a strict building-science perspective. To fully understand the system one has to understand Wright’s theology. He 8-12 believed in the primacy of nature and endeavored to emulate it (without blindly imitating it). A harmony was sought between the built environment and nature. “I believe in God, only I spell it N.A.T.U.R.E.” (Wright, 1987). “Study nature, love nature, stay close to nature. It will never fail you” (Lind, 1992, p3). “Nature is the only body of God that we shall ever see” (Wright, 1987). Test textile block wall assemblies for seismic resistance: In order to properly restore historic buildings like the Freeman House and the Ennis House, entire wall sections will have to be rebuilt and the walls that exist will need to be strengthened. Wright’s “one process”, cellular growth concept stipulates that the blocks are to be assembled individually from the base, using woven reinforcing in grouted channels. Modern materials and methods could be used to satisfy Wright’s intent and also meet the IBC building code requirements without resorting to hidden structure. The strong grout and weak block strength present in the historical structures caused cracking and spalling when subjected to seismic forces. Doing the opposite may yield better results - a high compressive strength for the blocks combined with a lower strength for the grout. Wythe connectors that can transmit shear force would also be of benefit. In Conclusion Why study the textile block? Of all Wright’s ideas, the textile block most fully incorporated means and methods of construction as an essential component. The construction process became a form of “performance art.” The full life- cycle of the project was to be organic. It was also an outgrowth of Wright’s experience as a child, playing with the Froebel blocks provided by his mother. The unit system is laid out on a grid, just like the Froebel blocks. This Author’s first impression, upon being introduced to the textile block buildings in Los Angeles, was of the similarity to Lego blocks, another children’s toy. Wright’s self-building idea empowered owners to bypass certain societal barriers that otherwise prevented widespread use of the system. The cooperative community subdivisions outside Kalamazoo, Michigan were successful examples of this concept in practice. Lastly, many observers have testified to the power of these buildings to move the spirit. There is a sense of security and permanence (actual seismic performance notwithstanding). They belong to the ages and so it behooves us to ensure that they are preserved for future generations to enjoy. The project thesis asked a simple question: Can modern materials and methods transform the textile block from a “practical failure” to a practical building system? The answer is not quite as simple. Identified Barriers were found mainly in the categories of Assembly, Cost, Prefabrication, and Society. There were many Durability issues, but these were found to be, on the whole, fixable with current technology. Unfortunately, fixing these problems would add to the cost, which was too high already. The Assembly process was flawed by Wright’s insistence on using a “one-process” method that mimicked organic growth, but was not suited to standard construction practice. The Societal issues were the most problematic, as these cannot be solved by applying modern technology. The cost of labor, skilled and unskilled, has increased significantly since the 1950s, and continues to climb. Addressing these problems would involve changes to the system so drastic as to make it unrecognizable as Wright’s textile block. 8-13 The general answer therefore has to be: No, modern materials and methods alone cannot transform the textile block into a practical building system. There is at least one specific case, however, where the answer is “Maybe”. The self-builder can do an end-run around many of the Societal Barriers using sweat-equity. This can be seen in the “Earthship” communities in Taos, New Mexico, for example. Involving the owner in the actual construction process provides a satisfaction that cannot be had any other way. This furthers Wright’s ultimate goal of “Lifting the spirit”. It would require efficient and precise factory mass-production of the blocks. Custom face pattern molds could be commissioned and 3D printed, providing a unique identity for each house. A variable foam insulating concrete would allow for one layer of blocks instead of two, cutting the assembly time in half (see #5601, the David Hunt Project). The textile block manufacturing company would provide financing for the purchase of the kit-of-parts required to assemble the house. Detailed 3D drawings would show the stages of construction at each block course. An online community of self- builders would trouble-shoot and support one another. A final word: Although a negative answer to a thesis question is still considered valid and useful, this Author will go with “Maybe”. There is potential for Frank Lloyd Wright’s creative solution for middle-income housing to yet be realized. 8-14 Dissertation of Edward D Losch for the Degree Ph.D. in Architecture Appendices A, B, C and D School of Architecture Department of Building Science University of Southern California A-1 Appendix A: A Historical Timeline of Architectural Precast Concrete Masonry Use A-3 Appendix B: A Comprehensive List of Constructed FLW Textile Block Buildings Design Date Name, Project # Location Block Type Comments 1923 Millard house* 2302 Pasadena, CA 16” square, pattern Not a true textile-block, used mortar joints, but a precursor, visually similar 1923 Storer house 2304 Hollywood, CA 16” square, pattern First true textile-block house 1923 Freeman house 2402 Hollywood, CA 16” square, pattern Smallest of the L.A. houses, is considered to be the first Usonian prototype 1923 Ennis house 2401 Los Feliz area, Los Angeles, CA 16” square, pattern By far the largest of the L.A. houses, and most monumental in profile 1927 Biltmore Resort Hotel plus eleven cottages, 2710 Phoeniz, AZ 13.5” x 18”, pattern A rare collaboration – Albert McArthur is the Architect of Record. Wright recommends a 16” square block, but is over-ruled 1929 Richard Lloyd Jones house 2902 Tulsa, OK 15” x 20” w/ 10” returns, smooth Wright adopts a 3 by 4 block module for the first time, probably to save weight. Vertical ribbon windows are the width of one block. 1938-1954 Florida Southern College Campus Lakeland, FL 3.5” x 9” x 36”, pattern Ten textile block buildings are constructed over a 16 year period. Ultra-wide blocks provide horizontal visual emphasis 1938 FSC Sharp Center Lakeland, FL 3.5” x 9” x 36”, pattern Constructed in 2011-2012 from 1938 plans on the original planned site 1948 David I. Weisblat house, 4918 Galesburg, MI Rectangular, 3” x 12” x 16” First of three textile block homes in the Galesburg Country Homes subdivision 1948 Eric Pratt house 4827 Galesburg, MI Rectangular Galesburg Country Homes 1948 Samuel Eppstein house, 4905 Galesburg, MI Rectangular 3” x 12” x 16” Galesburg Country Homes 1948 Robert Levin house, 4911 Kalamazoo, MI Rectangular, pattern, 3” x 12” x 16” First of four textile block houses built for a planned Usonian community called “Parkwyn Village”. 1948 Erling P. Brauner House, 4601 Okemos, MI rectangular, perforated Appears to be rectangular block construction with perforated block accents to let in light 1949 Ward McCartney house, 4912 Kalamazoo, MI Rectangular, perforated Parkwyn Village house uses a diamond floor module 1949 Eric Brown house 5003 Kalamazoo, MI Rectangular, 3” x 12” x 16” Parkwyn Village 1950 Robert Winn house, 4813 Kalamazoo, MI Rectangular, smooth Parkwyn Village 1951 Benjamin Adelman house 5101 Phoenix, AZ 3.5” x 12” x 24” smooth, inset glass First “Usonian Automatic” design. The textile block system is resurrected and standardized. Profile emphasizes horizontality, prairie style B-1 1952 Arthur Pieper house, 5218 Paradise Valley, AZ 12” x 24” smooth, inset glass First Usonian Automatic house to be built. Constructed by Pieper, a Taliesen student on a limited budget, using block on exterior face of wall only. Roof is of wood construction 1954 Gerald B Tonkens house 5510 Amberley Village, OH 12” x 24” smooth, coffered, inset glass The largest and most elaborate Usonian Automatic. Extensive use of pierced blocks to let in light, has a coffered 24” square concrete block roof system. Construction supervised by Eric Lloyd Wright. 1955 Toufic H Kalil house, 5506 Manchester, NH 12” x 24” smooth, coffered, inset glass No large windows in this Usonian Automatic. All light enters through 5”x17” openings in pierced blocks. 6”x24”x24” coffered roof blocks 1955 Dorothy H Turkel house 5513 Detroit, MI 12” x 24” smooth, coffered, inset glass Only two story Usonian Automatic, coffered block roof, 6000 blocks used 1955 W.B. Tracy house 5512 Normandy Park, WA 12” x 24” smooth, coffered, inset corner glass One story Usonian Automatic coffered block roof 1955 T.A. Pappas house 5516 Saint Louis, MO 12” x 24” smooth, coffered, inset glass Last Usonian Automatic house built to-date, completed in 1964. The blocks have a reddish pigment for a warmer effect. Coffered block roof According to the above table, there are 43 textile block buildings in existence at 22 different sites in the U.S., counting the Millard house. Seven of these are Usonian Automatic houses designed between 1951 and 1955. B-2 Appendix C: Frank Lloyd Wright: Aus Dem Lebenswerke Eines Architekten, 1926 Pg. 65 (Translated by Edward Losch and Marc Schiler, July 22, 2014) ANMERKUNGEN DES ARCHITEKTEN FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT ZU SEINEN ZEMENTBLOCKHÄUSERN. Diese Entwürfe sind Ausdruck eines Konstruktionsschemas, das, einfach an sich, zu einer Architektur fűhr t In jenem Innerlichen Sinne dieses Begriffes, welchen Ich bei jeder Gelegenheit zu klären versucht habe. Die Häuser sind buchstäblich aus dem Grund geschaffen, auf dem sie stehen. Denn der kalifornische Boden ist in der Hauptsache nichts anderes als Sand, Kies oder Granitschotter. Nur gewöhnliche Tagelöhner sind für diese Bauart nötig, sofern sie von einem darauf geschulten Vorarbeiter geleitet sind. Im übrigen ist die ganze Technik des Bauens in das Büro des Architekten herübergenommen und ist Angelegenheit des Entwurfs ‐ ein Hineinweben des Einheitsmaterials in ein Einheitssystem. Die Bewehrungsstäbe und die Zement ∙ blöcke sind Kette und Schuß dieses Gewebes und sein Muster mag alles sein, dessen die Einbildungskraft fähig ist. Innerhalb der einfachen Grenzen, welche das System selbst absteckt, ist eine unabsehbare Mannigfaltigkeit möglich, wie schon die vorliegende Gruppe von Entwürfen zeigt. NOTES OF ARCHITECT FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT ON HIS CEMENT BLOCK HOUSES. These designs are an expression of a construction scheme that, simply in itself, leads to an architecture in that inward sense of the concept, which I have tried to clarify at every opportunity. The houses are literally created from the ground on which they stand. For the Californian soil is mainly nothing but sand, gravel or crushed granite. Only ordinary day laborers are needed for this design, if they are led by a trained foreman. Moreover, the whole technique of building is taken over in the office of the architect and is a matter of design ‐ a weaving of the unit material in a unit system. The rebars and cement blocks are the warp and weft of this fabric and its pattern may be anything which the imagination is capable of. Within the simple boundaries which marks out the system itself, an incalculable variety is possible, as already the present group of drawings show. C-1 Aus Dem Lebenswerke Eines Architekten Pg. 65 (continued) Nach Ausgießen der Fugen werden die Gebäude mit ihren Hohlwänden in der Tat monolithisch. Jede vorstellbare Behandlung, Formgebung, Ausbildung der Oberflächen für das Innere wie für das Äußere ist leicht zu bewerkstelligen. Mit den hier veröffentlichten Entwürfen war beabsichtigt, dem Hügelgelände gerecht zu werden, an dem Kalifornien so reich ist. Manche der Häuser sind für die Schluchten bestimmt. die von den Bauspekulanten vernachlässigt werden, welche gewohnheitsmäßig die Hügelgipfel und Kammlinien verbauen, dabei die Silhouette zerstören und den Wohngrund rundum entwerten. Man kann sehen, daß das Konstruktionsschema über das sonst gehandhabte hinausgeht. Denn es fehlt das Meiste der Zusammenflickarbeit verschiedener Handwerker, wie sie jetzt gemeinhin geübt wird. ‐ Die Fenster und Türen, einschließlich ihrer Fulterrahmen sind Blechkonstruktionen, in der Werkstatt ausgeführt und nahezu ohne Arbeitsaufwand auf der Baustelle versetzt. Die Gebäude sind kühl im Sommer, warm im Winter und stets trocken infolge des Hohlraumes in den Wänden ; sie sind feuersicher. Sie sind erdbebensicher, denn sie sind biegsam in ihrer Zusammensetzung aus vergleichsweise kleinen Einheiten, die von den Bewehrungsstäben zusammengehalten werden. Sie sind plastisch in Entwurf und Konstruktion, obwohl aufgebaut aus Einzelheiten, die in ihrem Format der Kraft eines einzelnen Arbeiters angepaßt sind. Der Grundsatz der Standardbildung, wie er von der Maschine herkommt, ist hier voll am Werk ‐ der Einbildungskraft steht es frei zu differenzieren, zu gliedern oder den natürlichen Formen und Vorgängen des Bauens reichere Ausdruckskraft zu geben. After pouring the joints, the building with its hollow walls, in fact, are monolithic. Every imaginable treatment, shaping, forming the surfaces of the interior as for the exterior is easily accomplished. The designs published here are intended to do the hill terrain justice, in which California is so rich. Some of the houses are intended for the canyons, which are neglected by the speculators, who habitually obstruct the hill summit and ridge lines, thereby destroying the silhouette and devaluing the residential land around. It can be seen that the construction scheme is handled differently. Because it lacks most of the patchwork of different craftsmen, as it is now commonly practiced. ‐ The windows and doors are sheet metal, prefabricated structures, carried out in the workshop with virtually no added work on the site. The buildings are cool in summer, warm in winter and dry at all times as a result of the cavity in the walls; they are fireproof. They are earthquake‐ proof because they are flexible in their composition of comparatively small units, which are held together by the reinforcing bars. They are plastic in design and construction, although made up of details which are adapted in their format to the strength of the individual worker. The principle of the standard form, as it comes out of the machine is fully at work here ‐ the imagination is free to differentiate, to divide or to give the natural forms and precedents of building richer expressiveness. FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT. FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT. C-2 Appendix D: Textile Block Questionnaire for Inside and Outside Expert Critique The following questionnaire was distributed to a selected team of experts in June, 2013. The Outside Experts were selected based on either their standing as a recognized Frank Lloyd Wright scholar with first-hand experience with historic textile block structures or for their reputation as an expert with precast concrete wall systems. Inside Experts: Anders Carlson AC Kenneth Breisch KB Gail Borden GB Outside Experts: Jeffrey Chusid JC Eric Lloyd Wright ELW Jeffrey Baker JB Rex Donahey RD The experts were given matrices that attempted to quantify and score six different modern textile block concepts on the basis of their satisfaction of a list of Essential Qualities. Most of the experts contacted were critical of this approach, considering it too simplistic for what should be a creative, holistic process. As such, the matrices were discarded, but the expert comments proved useful and have been retained below. Eric Lloyd Wright’s comments were obtained through an in-person interview, transcribed at the end of this appendix. Outside expert biographies: M. Jeffrey Baker, AIA: Partner, Albany, N.Y.-based Mesick, Cohen, Wilson, Baker Architects A leading historic building restoration specialist and the lead architect for the Florida Southern College's restoration of its Frank Lloyd Wright buildings. A member of the American Institute of Architects, the Society of Architectural Historians, and the Association for Preservation Technology, Baker holds a bachelor of architecture degree from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He has restored dozens of significant American landmark buildings, including some designed by Thomas Jefferson at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville; Benjamin Henry Latrobes Pope Villa in Lexington, Ky.; and the Emily Dickinson Museum in Amherst, Mass. He also has helped to restore the New York State Capitol; the Vermont State House; the St. Johnsbury Athenauem in St. Johnsbury, Vt.; and Richard Morris Hunts Ochre Court in Newport, R.I. D-1 Rex Donahey, Ph.D.: Editor in Chief, Concrete International Magazine, American Concrete Institute, Formerly Director of Engineering and Development at Composite Technologies Corp., ASCE State-of-the-art of Civil Engineering Award Co-Recipient in 1996 and 2000, Patent awarded: Post-tensioned insulated wall panels, 2007. Patent awarded: Method of designing partially composite concrete sandwich panels ..., 2007 Jeffrey M. Chusid: Associate Professor, Cornell University City & Regional Planning Jeffrey Chusid is an architect and an associate professor in the historic preservation planning program at Cornell University. He has also taught at Harvard, the University of Southern California, the University of New Mexico, and the University of Texas at Austin. He is currently president of the Society for the Preservation of Historic Cements. A past editor of the Journal of Architectural Education, he has lectured, written articles, and curated exhibitions on modernist architecture in India and in Southern California, with special emphasis on the work of Frank Lloyd Wright. Chusid was the director of the Freeman House, and its preservation architect, from 1986 to 1997. His book, Saving Wright, was awarded the 2012 Historic Preservation Book Prize by The University of Mary Washington Center for Historic Preservation, and received an honorable mention for the 2012 Lee Nelson Book Award from the Association for Preservation Technology, Intl. (APT). Eric Lloyd Wright: Eric Lloyd Wright is Founder and Principal Architect of Eric Lloyd Wright & Associates. During Eric's early years in architecture, he was an apprentice to his grandfather, Frank Lloyd Wright. In his time at Taliesin and Taliesin West he worked with his grandfather on such notable projects as the Tonkens Residence in Cincinnati, Ohio, the Guggenheim Museum in New York City and Monona Terrace in Madison, Wisconsin. Following this he moved back to Los Angeles to work with his father, Lloyd Wright. Eric became a licensed architect in 1967 and subsequently led the team as Chief Associate in the practice operating out of Eric’s childhood home at the Lloyd Wright Home & Studio on Doheny Drive in Hollywood, California until Lloyd’s passing in 1978. Eric’s portfolio includes the restoration and renovation of Frank Lloyd Wright and Lloyd Wright works as well as residences and institutional buildings of his own design. Eric's current focus is on the evolution of Organic Architecture and Green Building design. His design philosophy is rooted in the integration of ecology, social responsibility and beauty. D-2 Comments regarding the overall evaluation process 1. Do you consider the process outlined in the above diagram to be a logical way to determine a modern successor or successors to the Textile Block system as developed by Frank Lloyd Wright and Lloyd Wright? Why or why not? 2. Would you propose any changes? 3. Additional comments: The Qualifications 1. Are any Qualifications or Qualification categories missing, in your opinion? 2. Are there any Qualifications that don’t belong, in your opinion? 3. How do you feel about the weighting of each Qualification (down the left edge of the Matrix)? Would you make any changes? 4. Additional comments: The Specifications 1. Are any Specification categories missing, in your opinion? 2. Are there additional Specifications you would like to see within the each category, such as additional face finishes, for example? 4. Additional comments: The Rankings 1. Do you agree with the results of the Evaluation Matrix (See Section 7.4)? 2. What is your opinion of the Specifications grouped according to Wall Type 1 or 2 (along bottom edge of matrix)? 3. Additional comments: D-3 The Climate Variations 1. Do you agree with the list of Qualifications that become more or less important, based on climate type? 2. The weighting of Qualifications determined to be more important was doubled. Is this reasonable? 3. The weighting of Qualifications determined to be less important was cut in half. Is this reasonable? 4. Additional comments: The Manifestations 1. Do the resultant identified Manifestations in Sections 7.6 and 7.0 follow logically from the results of the Textile Block Specification Matrix? 2. Are there other Manifestations or designs that you feel should also be considered? Why? 3. Are there any variations that you would make to the Manifestations shown? Why? 4. Additional comments: D-4 Review comments from the 6/07/2013 questionnaire: Gail Borden: Diagram requires multiple systemic feedback loops. “Knowledge+Experience+Inspiration” should point to Qualifications and Specifications as well as Manifestations. Maintain a threshold so as not to go beyond what is a “textile block”. Good content - Many chapters need to ease the transition between points - now jumpy. Trim away some of the qualifications - the ones that erode the sensibility of the original system. The Qualification weighting is the point of greatest ambiguity - it depends on the goal: affordability vs. constructability vs. durability - different parameters. Simplicity of finish is important - acid etch is too fussy OK with the Evaluation Matrix premise but not sure about the weightings. Matrix not graphically clear - is there a way to diagram? Be less specific and more general in themes? (2x4 or Bruce Mar or Koolhaas?) Climate variations are trends not absolutes - Tuscon is different from Santa Fe. 40 to 50 lbs per block may be too high. Will require a two man lift which limits applications. Systems look like tiles not blocks Kenneth Breisch: I have reviewed the first 4 chapters of your dissertation, which cover the areas that I feel qualified to comment on. I have looked at the rest and they look okay to me, but I believe the rest of your committee should review these. I think your overviews of the history, analysis, strengths and weaknesses, as well as case studies look good. I just have a few brief corrections. In the abstract, I think you should note that both the outer "and inner wythe's were sometimes cast with a decorative pattern." p. 16, ch 1. The balcony shot of the Freeman House shows Samuel Freeman and Esther McCoy and was shot about 1953 by Julius Shulman p. 31, ch 1. Ocatillo camp was in Chandler not Phoenix--or you could say outside of Phoenix. Section 1.3.8 depicts Parkwyn Village, but you do not seem to say much of anything about it. If all of these images are there, it sees like you should describe the project. Otherwise this all seems solid and acts as a good intro to your project. D-5 Anders Carlson: Diagram - “Inside and Outside Experts” should also point to “Knowledge+Experience+Inspiration”. The process seems appropriate but the diagram is an over-simplification. I would like to see “Usonian Ideals” in the diagram, not buried in the qualifications. Maybe you list the major qualities (Usonian, Affordability, Serviceability, and Sustainability) on the right with an arrow pointing at Qualifications? You can do something similar for specifications. Inside & Outside Experts should point at Knowledge, Experience and Inspiration as well (or list them on the right as suggested above for the other categories. Expert point right to the process in the middle and lists of items point to the left to the process in the middle. I think it is crucial that the Qualification weighting be well defined to have your results be meaningful. Sandblasting, honing and other processes will create dust and other pollutants that should have some sort of negative grade for sustainability that I did not notice in your descriptions. I agree with the matrix in general. However, the rankings section only lists “high Usonian score” or not. I appreciate that a lot of “knowledge + experience + inspiration” and effort went into creating the scores (and I reference your process chart respectfully and sincerely), but I would want to see an explanation of why you chose the scales and scores you did. Some will be quantifiable and others are completely qualitative, but you should state how you made those decisions. For example, polystyrene foam is a “Top Usonian Score” for insulation type – why? Why does face reinforcement have half the Usonian score of most of the other specifications? Both the scale on the left and the scores through the matrix need further explanation. While it would increase the number of charts, I think it would be better to see results of each wall type separately. There is a lot of information to absorb on each page and a clearer picture of what is important or not will result from the matrix representing one type only. However, it would also be good to see differences between the two types for things you scored equal or other differences. For example, you say that Type 2 can be 16x16 vs. Type 1 being limited to 12x12 – this will definitely influence affordability in multiple ways (number of ties, fewer joints, fewer channels to cast, etc.). I am not sure about the aerated concrete insulation being the winner. Aerated concrete has to be made in a controlled environment and cut to size. Are you suggesting a non-Usonian approach of having the blocks prefabricated offsite? Is site fabrication not an option for any of the blocks because of the lack of durability of Wright’s use of poor site soils in the concrete blocks? More explanation of weighting factors and scores would help to understand why certain factors win even if they appear to be contradictory to certain qualities desired. The rigid polystyrene foam scored 1103 for warm-dry climates and the aerated insulating concrete scored 1138, only 3% better. A few tweaks might make the foam the winner. I noticed that you are allowing a Type 1 block to be 16x16. It would be good to quantify the affordability differences for this version over the 12x12 version (less labor, fewer reinforcing bars, fewer joints, fewer channels to fill, etc.). One thing missing is how the seven different specifications affect each other. You pointed out that using FRP ties and rigid foam could allow the Type 1 block to expand to 16x16 and weigh the same as a 12x12 block from the top scoring specifications. The resulting configuration could win with the multiple areas of reduced cost it affects. I am not suggesting D-6 you complicate things by adding ANOTHER dimension to your work, but you should look at second and third highest scores in certain categories to see if it can develop an overall better block like this example did. This is where your “experience + knowledge + intuition” will need to kick in again. Overall, your research is thorough, methodical and well-reasoned. Metrics alone will not give a solution and your diagram of the process is the right (Wright?) approach. Your experience, knowledge and intuition can make up for faulty metrics as your 16x16 manifestation example exhibits. I would like to see more of your reasoning that led to your scales and scores for the matrix of qualifications and specifications. A statistical analysis may even show that alternative manifestations you develop are within striking range of being best anyway without discrediting your methodology. Your thesis is part history, part research, part testing, part development, and infused with respectful homage and inspiration. I am looking forward to you testing prototypes and completing the work! D-7 Jeffrey Baker: I have read your dissertation progress report with great interest. As I am sure you are aware, the topic you have chosen for your dissertation is one that I have lived with for a number of years now, and after actually constructing a textile block building I believe I have unique and hopefully helpful insights on this matter. To be honest, I believe I would have to write a dissertation of my own to fully respond to your questions, but I have tried to be as succinct as possible given the limited time that I have. It is my hope that you view these comments in the spirit that they were conceived, which is one of respect for your strong interest and efforts, and are in no way critical toward what you are trying to achieve. Your dissertation is based on several premises that I feel should be defined and expanded upon. The first is that there is a “middle class housing problem”. I believe I know precisely how this may be defined, but I believe that you must define and articulate this to allow others to fully comprehend your goals. Once it has been defined, it is incumbent upon you to precisely articulate how any system you develop will help to solve the “problem” you sense. The second premise within your preamble is that Wright’s textile block system did not take hold “perhaps” owing to “technological limitations”. Because you have stated this, it is only fair that you describe those limitations and precisely how your proposed improvements address them. Owing to the fact that I spend a great deal of my time repairing the problems associated with the buildings at Florida Southern College, I have developed a first-hand understanding of the shortcomings of the system. Yet, I must confess that I have simultaneously developed an equally strong sense of wonder and appreciation for what Wright was trying to do and in fact did. This long exposure to the system has not been devoid of thoughts regarding how to improve the system and apply it to the 21 st century, and some of these observations have made their way into the new Usonian House design. I have also read some of your other reviewer’s comments with interest. It seems that some feel that you should look at the textile concept anew and address the development of an updated system unencumbered by the past. While this is certainly an approach you are free to take (and in a sense you have taken), it seems to me that if this approach is fully embraced the work of Wright would become a mere footnote in the long story of the development of prefabricated concrete block systems. A part of your title of the dissertation is the “Revival of Frank Lloyd Wright’s Textile Block”. Given this title, one immediately must begin to define exactly what constitutes a “revival”. On the one extreme, the system would be developed to precisely replicate the original, while on the other extreme it becomes…what? To me, any revival would retain the basic “character defining features” of the original system. One could argue what those features are (and you defined some of them in your report), but a simple test would be to use any system you devise to recreate a textile block building designed by Wright. If it can fully achieve the architectural diversity and splendor that was achieved in the original house and solves the other problems you have defined, you have succeeded. At this point, I don’t feel that the systems thus far developed can do that, but perhaps I can be proven wrong. A second characteristic of the original system is one of simplicity. Wright’s goal for these buildings was ease of fabrication and construction. I am sensing a move away from simplicity in the proposed systems, and I suppose I was hoping to see something even simpler than the original. You will see my additional comments below, and you may regret that you asked me for my views, but I would do a disservice to you if I did not express them. As an aside, I must point out that I disagree with your assessment related to Wright’s “compromises” on page 10, including the notion of steel “rearing its ugly head”. It must be considered that Wright’s textile D-8 block designs of the 1920s were very different from those that came later. Florida Southern College was designed in the aftermath of Fallingwater and other projects where he took artistic delight in mixing materials for architectural effect. For example, the textile block at FSC is combined with structurally more plastic and diverse cast-in-place concrete. Like Fallingwater, where concrete terrace trays are visually supported and mixed with stacked stone piers, the block and concrete on the campus is combined to achieve a similar kind of expression. At the Usonian House, I believe Wright knew precisely what he was doing when he mixed textile block with a wood and steel roof. In the end, he did not allow even his own precepts and concept of “integrity” to bind his artistic spirit. If he had, the great and soaring spaces he created on the campus would look very different, and perhaps more like the Arizona Biltmore. I have noticed that you have both and architectural and engineering license. That is quite an achievement and you are to be commended. It appears to me that during the preparation of this study your engineering mind has prevailed over the process. I think it is now time to set your architectural muse to the effort and see what happens. Specific Responses Page First statement: as mentioned above, define “middle class housing problem”. Many don’t know that there is a problem. Page 12 We resisted hurricane force winds not by the insulation, but by making the vertical reinforcement threaded rods that are rooted in the foundations and extend through the walls and through the roof, allowing the roof to be bolted into the walls and foundation of the house. Page14 When you state that “no attempt was made to use it in any commercial application” is not quite accurate since he used it at the Arizona Biltmore, San Marcos-in-the-Desert and FSC. Page 18 Wright likely eliminated the face patterns because the high cost of the molds. However, Usonian Automatics still had crenellated roof edges, and other examples can be found. In the final paragraph, the textile block roof system actually appeared in 1928 for the San Marcos project. Page 20 Actually, concrete block construction did sweep the nation, just not in this form. This can be seen in most of our towns beginning in about 1906. Concrete block construction was used in every kind of conceivable building from houses to gas stations. Page 23 Although the system was not hung like a curtain wall, there are plenty of examples of non-bearing walls at FSC. Page 28 Section 7.3.3, there is no mention of natural cement or lime based products as an option. D-9 Page 29 In the caption, we used type 304 stainless steel for the vertical threaded rods. No mention of stainless steel is found within the options presented. Page 32 SS clips did not require precision matching. We cast notches into the blocks. It is also possible to provide ties with thermal breaks and it may be possible to make ties from ABS or another similar material. Page 41 Section 7.6 Initial observations on this system: - no easy way to support the bars - never use plain steel reinforcing - very difficult to have zero tolerance joints with such large surface areas where they stack - easily breakable at the thin edge given the mass and weight of the blocks Page 42 Initial observations: - “blocks” become tiles - Easily broken - Difficult to manipulate - Perforated blocks and other shapes impossible Page 43 Questionnaire 1. Yes and no. 2. The overall concept regarding the qualifications are fine, yet they must be influenced by the manifestations. I believe the process is more circular or even simultaneous, not linear. For example, if you satisfy yourself with fabric reinforcing, this eliminates the possibility of an outside corner perforated block, which must be reinforced from within in a more robust way. Or if you assume the individual block section must meet prescribed R-values (rather than the building envelope) this eliminates perforated block altogether. Indeed, that is what has already occurred in your designs, which were arrived at after using this linear approach. It is clear that Wright approached this much differently, and in a holistic over-arching manner. As I mentioned, it may be helpful for you to actually design a somewhat simple building, or even one of Wright’s textile block designs, and actually design each block for that building. You will quickly sense if the system works or not. 6.7.2 Qualifications 1. Making of molds, ease of release, general manufacturing process. 2. Nothing missing 3. In one sense I can see the benefit of this scoring, on the other it is often found that scoring doesn’t provide the best answer. For example, you top score for a face finish is sandblasting (if I understand this correctly). We experimented with this and found a significant loss of detail on the molded surfaces at the expense of trying to reveal the aggregate. Moreover, this D-10 category doesn’t take into account what the block will do after it weathers over some time period of time. A finish may not be acceptable when first installed, but agreeable weathers and vice- versa. Also, the dry cast finish scores more highly than the wet cast, however, as your report states, there are durability issues related to the dry cast. So, while dry cast scores higher in terms of achieving an agreeable finish, it is problematic when it lasts a third as long as the wet cast block. 4. As I mentioned earlier, any qualifications must consider the variations on how the blocks and the system can work throughout the design from a structural and artistic perspective. It appears that, so far, this report focuses on only a simple wall construction without even a corner. This portion of the system is easiest to solve and a system designed around this application alone will be very limiting indeed. 6.7.3 Specifications 1. Yes, there are portions missing. Under concrete face finish, the first thing that must be recognized is that these blocks, using a correct definition, are generally not concrete. Concrete is recognized as having a minimum size aggregate of ¼”. The textile blocks are actually a cast stone or “mortar block”, which is really comprised of cement and sand. Second, the face finish is really a by-product of the manufacturing process. If the blocks are made using the dry cast method, no further concern needs to be given to its surface treatment because this would have matched the original intent (although Wright himself was perfectly willing to use the wet cast system). Surface treatment is only a concern if another manufacturing process is selected and you are trying to match the dry cast surface or another kind of surface. If you are attempting to invent a system that has little relevance to the system Wright was using, then the surface treatment issues come into play, but based on your own aesthetic sense of what it should be. Under the insulation section, there are other attributes of the insulation that should be considered. The first is the question of “how does it function or work best with the entire system?. What conditions are you designing for? Can a system be designed that is universal so that this doesn’t become a variable?” we have found that our spray foam adhered to the inner and outer wythes of blocks forming a very effective bond, this is a benefit that is not considered in this evaluation, but very important nonetheless. You made the assumption that there is “face concrete”. Where is the core concrete? Shouldn’t there be recognition that you have just added a higher level of complexity in making the different parts of the blocks with different “concrete”? Also, there should be some recognition that by doing so you have added an “unknown”, which is how those differing materials act or react under varying conditions? And, the evaluation of your face materials is silent on the level of difficulty and the time involved to actually mix the material, pour it into the mold, de-mold it and properly cure it. It is also interesting to me that no consideration has been given to lime and natural cement based products, which of course is what was actually used at FSC. D-11 Face reinforcement – Again, this is only necessary to consider if you are treating the blocks as thin tiles. Moreover, it may be insufficient or not required depending on the design of the block. For example, if you were making a thicker block with a simple flat surface, no face reinforcement is necessary. If you are using a long, thin perforated block of the kind we are using at FSC, reinforcing bars are necessary within the blocks themselves. Textile Block Reinforcement – Your caption on page 29 is incorrect; we actually used type 304 stainless steel threaded rods for the vertical reinforcement. This raises the point that stainless steel reinforcement in not on your list, but was ironically our first choice. The location of the textile block reinforcement is dependent on the level of fidelity you are to the original system. Since the level of fidelity on the proposed systems is rather low, you are free to consider any and all options. I find it interesting that in the thicker block scheme there is no discussion related to moving the reinforcement away from the block joints, particularly since this is one of the major flaws and cause of failure of the original blocks. This is something that should be considered. Your other system appears to be a tile veneer system, which is something totally different from the original system and has so many design limitations that I question if it belongs in this evaluation. If you disagree with this assessment, I would be interested in seeing how it works with perforated blocks. Grout – There is no specification discussion for the grout, which is a major part of the system (excepting the tile veneer system). There are many issues related to this, such as: What is the grout material and what are its desired characteristics related to the surrounding block? How is it poured or injected into the walls? What provisions must be made in the system itself to allow the grout to be introduced into the system? What is the cost of the grout material and how easy is it to pour or inject? How does the grout perform over time? Wythe Connections – Again, this is related to the overall design of the system and the characteristics of these is related to a host of variables. Our ties have the following characteristics: They are easily manufactured They don’t corrode They are easily placed They allow for the unimpeded flow of grout They form a seat for the horizontal reinforcing bars D-12 Of course, when the system includes spray foam insulation, an evaluation is needed as to whether these are necessary at all. There is certainly no danger of the wall compressing in section, therefore, only the tensile capacity of the insulation may be studied and understood. It may be that this, in conjunction with an ABS tie or similar material is sufficient. In essence, the evaluation of the ties should be considered in a holistic way as a part of the overall system. 6.7.4 Evaluation Matrix - The evaluation matrix works fine given the systems you have devised. However, your question is akin to someone inventing a new game with a complete set of its own rules and asking if everyone likes the rules. In term of the individual findings of each heading, I have the following to offer: 1. Concrete face finish – dry cast. This material is what Wright used, so it is understandable that the finish is the most agreeable if that is the appearance you are trying to achieve. However, there are other manufacturing and durability issues that are associated with this product. 2. Insulation type – selection is related to the overall system. 3. Face concrete – Portland is fine, but it takes more time to mold than other available binders. If you are concerned about sustainability, this may also be a concern. 4. This is related to the system you have devised. 5. I would not use mild steel reinforcing under any circumstances unless I was in a place where there is no other alternative. 6. Related to the system you have devised. 7. Related to the system you have devised. 7.7.5 Climate Variations Comments for questions 1-4: It seems to me that as Wright progressed through his career he made extraordinary efforts to simplify the construction process. This formed the basis of the entire textile block concept, which was continued in the Usonian concept and then the Usonian Automatics. Regardless of these efforts, in its simplest form the textile block system used by Wright was still very complex and efforts to make variations in the system adds yet another level of complexity. As you can see, Wright developed a system that he felt could be used anywhere from southern California to Florida to Detroit and New Hampshire. I believe that if a system is to be successful, it must be able to be deployed anywhere. The design of the building itself should vary according to the climate. D-13 7.7.6 The Manifestations Comments for questions 1-4: As I mentioned in my covering statement, your preamble statement assumes that Wright’s vision for the textile block system never took hold possibly because of technological limitations. However, as I have also previously mentioned, the original system could be used in a wide variety of ways. Conversely, I sense that the “manifestations” developed for your report can only function as a wall, which in a very real sense is vastly more limiting than the original system. I think that any new system should be as versatile as the original but without its shortcomings. Respectfully submitted, M. Jeffrey Baker 7.20.2013 D-14 Rex Donahey: 1. Do you consider the process outlined in the above diagram to be a logical way to determine a modern successor or successors to the Textile Block system as developed by Frank Lloyd Wright and Lloyd Wright? Why or why not? RD: I’m concerned that the user experience isn’t included in the diagram. For this product, the user could be within two classes: builders and owners. Inside and outside experts might include individuals with construction expertise, but it’s also important to have input from people that would be building the system. 2. Would you propose any changes? RD: It appears the design approach is “tuning” of an existing artifact. Would it be better to approach the design using a more general problem-solving process? If we consider the fundamental needs of the owner, the greatest needs might be resilience (against seismic effects, range fires, winds, and water), moderate initial cost, and low energy and maintenance costs. If we consider the fundamental needs of the builder, perhaps constructability is the primary need (and that might mean only that the building could be assembled with only manual labor and a grout pump). For both user and builder, it seems to be a disadvantage to require the product to have the inside and outside layers of concrete in a single block. If the inside layer comprised blocks with an inverted double tee or “” [pi] shape, for example, the insulation could more easily be made continuous and the exterior wythe could be made thinner (both would be installed after the inner blocks were stacked. If this route were taken, the major design issue we be developing a connector with low thermal conductivity and that would tie the inside blocks and the exterior wythe through the insulation layer. The major problem would be finding a solution that allowed easy assembly of the system in the field yet would reliably carry the pressure of grout placement in the cavities between the double tee blocks and the insulation layer. But look at the advantages:  The inner blocks could be lighter, allowing a larger module for those units;  Textile reinforcement could be installed after the inner blocks were stacked (eliminating splicing issues and blind installation), more easily encased in grout, and less subject to corrosion risk;  Electrical conduit and outlets could be installed before final assemble of the insulation and exterior wythe and placement of grout;  Insulation (as thick as needed for each climate zone) and the exterior wythe (as thin as 1/2 in.) could cover larger exterior surface areas;  The exterior layer and insulation system could be produced as an assembly (to provide structural support for the thin exterior concrete); and  Construction time would be reduced, the number of exterior joints would be minimized, and the wall could be more reliably sealed against water and air intrusion. 7.7.2 The Qualifications 1. Are any Qualifications or Qualification categories missing, in your opinion? RD: Would it be reasonable to design the system for repair and modification? D-15 7.7.3 The Specifications 2. Are there additional Specifications you would like to see within the each category, such as additional face finishes, for example? RD: The specifications should be updated to include the additional insulation systems you’re investigating, including vacuum insulated panels, Aerogel, and vacuum glass. 7.7.4 The Rankings 1. Do you agree with the results of the Evaluation Matrix (See Section 7.4)? RD: Again, I think it’s worthwhile to step back and evaluate the design from a more fundamental perspective. It seems some of the shortcomings of the textile block are being designed into its replacement. 7.7.5 The Climate Variations 1. Do you agree with the list of Qualifications that become more or less important, based on climate type? RD: Yes 2. The weighting of Qualifications determined to be more important was doubled. Is this reasonable? RD: Yes 3. The weighting of Qualifications determined to be less important was cut in half. Is this reasonable? RD: Yes 7.7.6 The Manifestations 1. Do the resultant identified Manifestations in Sections 7.6 and 7.0 follow logically from the results of the Textile Block Specification Matrix? RD: The manifestations follow from the results of the specification matrix, but the illustrations show that another parameter must be considered: manufacturing. These are complex assemblies. 4. Additional comments: I'd like to see a list of the needs of the owner, builder, and manufacturer. It seems there could be other designs that will fit the problem (gap) better. I'm assuming this is the gap: Home construction methods and materials currently used in the U.S. don't produce resilient homes and can't be adapted for climate change. Just as there are multiple approaches for solving a problem, there are multiple motives for solving it. Below is an example hierarchy illustrating some of the levels of abstraction for the problem "construct affordable, resilient, and energy efficient buildings." D-16 The most abstract problem is at the top. I started with the middle problem statement and asked "Why?" to boost the level of abstraction and "How?" to refine the level of abstraction. The correct level of abstraction isn't yet defined. On the one hand, an abstract problem statement opens up multiple avenues for exploration. On the other hand, too much abstraction will make it "less likely the designer will be able to significantly close the gap in the user experience." 1 As you can see, the hierarchy opens multiple layers for exploration. For example, it doesn't define the interior layer as portland cement concrete. That layer might be produced using gypsum concrete (which might produce advantages for the producer, constructor, and owner), while the exterior layer might be produced using any number of materials. Although I agree that portland cement concrete has numerous advantages for the exterior layer, it may not have persuasive advantages for the interior layer. That must be explored. Don’t use gypsum concrete though. The gypsum could cause a sulfate reaction in the concrete (grout) if it gets wet. Sand-lime brick might work. It can be lightweight, it produces less CO2 than concrete, it's strong enough, and some might say it's attractive. Why? ...respond to and limit climate change? ...increase the economic well being and security of families? ...provide comfortable and economical housing that resists multiple hazards? In what way might we................construct affordable, resilient, and energy efficient buildings? ...produce an insulated wall system with durable exterior and interior layers? ...produce a structurally robust, air and water tight sandwich wall system with interior insulation and rain screen construction? ...produce a rain screen sandwich wall system with exterior and interior layers that serve as formwork for a concrete structural wall, provide finished surfaces, comprise modular units that can be locally produced, allow easy integration of electrical and other systems, and that can be installed using unskilled labor? How? … The attached report might be a bit dated, but it could give you a head start on your life cycle analyses (Life Cycle Analysis of Brick_and_Mortar_Products.pdf) As I said, I haven't run the numbers, but I have a feeling you could use a sand-lime "brick" (in this report, it's called calcium silicate brick). But if the energy, material, and emissions associated with local production of concrete "brick" are lower than remote production and shipping of calcium silicate "brick," the concrete is the obvious choice. Note that you'd need to break down the costs on a common unit basis (I'm not sure this report does that well), taking into consideration the likely unit weights of the two products. 1 Ulrich, Karl T. 2011. Design: Creation of Artifacts in Society. University of Pennsylvania. (ISBN 978-0-9836487-0-3) http://www.ulrichbook.org D-17 Here are my initial thoughts on user needs: For the designer and owner, the wall system... Can be used to construct an infinite variety of homes and buildings (single or multiple floors); Can be supplied in multiple aesthetic variations, including exterior and interior colors, module sizes, and reliefs; Accommodates multiple fenestration systems and sizes; Can serve as a bearing and shear wall; Provides an air and moisture barrier; Can have thermal protection suitable for any climate zone; Is durable; Is fire, water, wind, and earthquake resistant; Can incorporate hydronic cooling and heating systems; Can be repaired if damaged; Comprises components that can be recycled; For the builder, the wall system... Can be installed by workers with minimal skill levels; Can be assembled without the need for a crane; Can be installed in stages, allowing multiple trades ("bricklayer," carpenter, electrician [rough in], plumber [rough in], concrete placement, insulation contractor) to work independently with minimal coordination. For the society, the wall system... Has a low to medium impact on the environment, including minimal material extraction, water use, and carbon and energy footprints (also low impact on the ozone layer); Provides a highly energy efficient and durable building envelope; Is resilient. D-18 Jeffrey Chusid: I read your report and like the other reviewers, have found it stimulating and thoughtful. I am also particularly grateful that you have shared the comments: concurring with many of them. Jeff Baker’s comments are particularly astute, so “what he said.” In trying to be helpful, much of what follows may sound uniformly critical, but of course there is a tremendous amount of interesting and valuable material in your dissertation to date; I’m focusing on those elements I question or with which I disagree. Take the comments for what they are worth, given the brevity of my review versus the time you have spent on it to date. At the start, I think you need to clarify the argument behind your trajectory. By this, I don’t mean necessarily quoting more Wright, or citing more facts about specific materials, but really thinking about what you are trying to achieve. Is the title the right one? If you want to revive Wright’s Textile Block, then I think you have gone too far in developing a novel system that, matrices aside, is really not the site-built, low-skilled, mono-material system Wright sought. If you are looking for a similar type of modular construction system, that achieves Wright’s goals but is more successful and more sustainable, then I wonder if you should be trying to revive the textile block. Wright’s system was a product of a very particular time in the development of modern architecture, and more especially, an individual architect. It sought to resolve a set of often conflicting ideas from the arts and crafts, manifest destiny, progressive social movements, and the industrial revolution; it was one in a long list of roughly simultaneous experiments in a novel material, concrete, and in the novel construction systems sweeping the country after the Civil War. You need to be clear what relevance that particular answer has to our condition today. Wright not only had multiple agendas, he had a hierarchy for them. And if you take what he wrote too literally, you’ll be mislead. Coming from the Arts and Crafts, he was more about appearance of honesty than honesty of appearance. As Jeff Baker points out, for example, the textile block was often used as a curtain wall (starting with the California Houses) while necessary structure was either hidden or expressed dramatically. This shouldn’t be surprising, because a single material system will need to perform different roles at different places in the building. You quote his desire for continuity, but don’t really ask what that means when building with multiple discrete elements, as opposed to using shells or gunnite (as on the Guggenheim). And so far, from what I can see, you have made a wall system, but not a floor or roof system. (Parenthetically, the Freeman House and, I believe, the garage of the Ennis House both have areas in which the block forms ceiling and roof.) The ability of Wright’s system to work in many different ways was still pretty impressive, even if flawed. Your system, I think, to be a revival of Wright’s, would have to do the same. Your final design also seeks to re-introduce patterned blocks, even though Wright himself “evolved” past that in the Automatics. He also introduced the rectangular block in the 1920s in order to double his dimensional choices, as well as to better accommodate construction conditions such as stairs and the thicknesses of intersecting floors and roofs. Your block D-19 appears to be square, or when horizontal, not really designed with a horizontal pattern. And that raises the point that each pattern in the various houses was unique to that house. If you want integral ornament again, in a Wrightian way, then you need to accommodate that kind of variety; and also find the architect who can design appropriately. Now for some specific comments (and some of these points may be addressed by you in the CD, for which I apologize). In your thesis statement, I think you need to be clear that prior to Frank Lloyd Wright, there was a concrete masonry system that was inexpensive, could be used by almost anyone, and thanks to various faceplate options, many found “aesthetically pleasing.” One need only look at all the Sears block homes, or similar made of Elgin Block, or all the buildings still around that used the Wizard block-making machine. The difference was Wright’s desire for a mono- material system. But even there, NATCO terra-cotta houses (the origin of the phrase, “textile-block”) advertised that their product could be used as both interior and exterior face as well as structure. If you think about how many concrete-block buildings there are in the world, I’m not sure it’s fair to say his “vision” never took hold. It was his specific, proprietary system (which itself changed over the years), that might not have achieved wide distribution, but he was able to use it repeatedly from the 1920s through the 1950s, so I would argue that it was a success for him. The question for you is can you continue to evolve that system in a way that remains true to “his vision,” a vision that always had a strong requirement for individual design and thought for each project, and each site. You ask if the concept was limited by materials and methods of his day. I would say that some bad design decisions, along with inadequate budget and supervision, were at least as important. For example, your CAD drawing of the system ignores one of the most persistent problems, at least as it was constructed at the Freeman House. The ties across the wythes did not turn down into the cavity, but looped around the verticals; and required chipping away the inside corners of the block. Both these conditions made grouting the cavities much more difficult. The straps used by Jeff at Florida Southern eliminates the problem, while also providing a chair for the horizontal reinforcing. That is a clever but modest change to the system that should make a huge difference in performance; but I don’t think it was beyond what was available at the time, as shown in the use of woven-wire mesh in the horizontal joints of the block system at the Millard House. Another critical problem with the textile-block system is that is was not mono-material. It was 50, 70, 120 or more- material, as in that many varieties of block were required to build a structure. How are you handling that? For your comments on page 4, Kathryn Smith’s book on Hollyhock House discusses the Little Dipper (the first real textile-block structure) as well as the construction of the main house, and its change by Aline Barnsdall to terracotta and wood frame with stucco. When talking about the recursive nature of the design at the Freeman House, remember that the design’s meaning is only a theory (even if one I believe). In your discussion of the need to incorporate systems on page 6, you should probably add gutters and downspouts because Wright’s desire to hide those has been especially damaging to the life of the block houses. Later on in your document, I seem to be missing where you run pipes, conduits and other systems in your walls, which was another important role for the cavity between the wythes. Page 9, again, the block system plays many roles: bearing wall, curtain wall, floor, ceiling, window frame, chase, ornament, D-20 etc. That “complexity and contradiction” is part of what makes it so interesting. And bottom line, Wright sought the best solution, not the purest. I would also disagree about Wright thinking that there could be only one possible solution. He was more flexible than that. Page 10, again, careful about what constitutes a compromise, and what is just necessity. The cantilevered corners of the Freeman House were accomplished with reinforced concrete beams in the floor and ceiling. They weren’t made visible because there was no need to. Yes, Wright often underestimated the structure needed to accomplish what he wanted, possibly for polemical reasons, but it was a matter of degree more than absolutes. Page 10, don’t forget the importance of the other architects building in concrete in California before Wright arrived, including Irving Gill, Lloyd Wright and Rudolph Schindler. Also, as someone who has lived in an LA house, please don’t overstate its thermal performance. During warm weather, it was like living in a bread oven. There were some ideas about ventilation, but these were largely sacrificed to the module and other programmatic considerations. Page 13, the California block was considerably softer than the grout. In fact, if the grout and steel system had been continuous, that would have been the major structure for the houses, with the blocks acting as spacers, and taking some of the vertical loads. For the sake of the blocks, it was probably a good thing that the grout was not continuous, because where it was, it often broke through the block as the walls moved, or experienced differential thermal expansion. Page 14: Decentralization. Should this really be a goal, today? And while Wright may have not seen the system used in a larger building than the Arizona Biltmore, the Nel-Stone system that Robert Sweeney identifies as the direct antecedent to the textile-block system was. See the 5-story Plaza Hotel and Theater, 1929, Trenton MO. Granted, it was a concrete frame with block walls, but so, essentially, were Wright’s buildings to that point. Page 16. When talking about the use of local materials, remember that for Wright this was an outgrowth of the Arts and Crafts idea of building with materials from a site; more aesthetic than sustainable. You seem to be trying to have it both ways, in discussing the role of location to sustainability. Local is not always more sustainable. But in any case, I am not sure I would know how to locally source rigid foam insulation. Page 18. What is the significance of the discussion about building codes to your dissertation? For Wright, it apparently played a role in that he was forced to adopt a different system for the Millard House than the one he ultimately preferred. But he was able to use the preferred system repeatedly in Los Angeles. More code enforcement might have been better, anyway. Page 20. You might address this on the CD, but also important was the impact that acid rain and fog had on the blocks in Los Angeles; helping to create fully carbonated blocks with a compressive strength of as little as 50 psi. But losing the hydraulic press from the job (along with inadequate curing on site) was a big part of that problem, as well as the dry- tamp method. Page 23. As noted elsewhere, your two points under No 7.1 were regularly violated by Wright. D-21 7.2.1.2 C. “Integrates with other components.” This is important, but as stated here too briefly, ambiguous. More critically, it seems to disappear from the remainder of your design. 7.2: Again, your Usonian Qualities were not consistently followed by Wright. Part of this is the overly-explicit way you state them. Wright was designing buildings, not lists. If the building required a stain, he applied it; or two layers of different cement in a block, he did that too. If exposing the structure was beautiful, and helped create the space he wanted, then it was exposed. If he thought it messy and confusing, then it disappeared. Always, the building was the important thing, not the words used to describe it. His principles and ideas were real, and he believed them, but they were not strait-jackets. And they certainly would not be followed if they led to something that was ugly, or violated another idea that was more important at that place, in that house, at that time. 7.2.2 Affordability You don’t mention weight; that was the constraint that prevented Wright from making his blocks 24” on a side, which apparently was the first choice. I agree with Jeff Baker, you need to be clear about what you mean by solving the middle-class housing problem, and then explain why you get into the question of the Developing World. (I would strongly argue against you doing that. Concrete is not sustainable in much of the developing world; nor is a construction system that evolved in the US in the 1920s culturally appropriate for everywhere else today. We have moved past the modernist belief that the world’s problems will be solved by finding a universal construction joint.) In the section on unskilled labor, you actually talk about ease and speed of assembly; which is different. Under Serviceability, I think you are being extremely ambitious to seek a system that remains serviceable after any catastrophe. Perhaps an inexpensive system that needs to be rebuilt (as in the tropical use of coconut thatch and light framing) is ultimately more sustainable. Life-safety is different than housing the national archives. Parenthetically, while you might think the textile-block system is an “effective deterrent to creatures that like to bore or gnaw,” in fact it turned out to be an ideal system for transporting subterranean termites to every piece of wood in a house, providing dark, dank, continuous cavities as built. Under sustainability, I am curious as to why you don’t question the use of concrete. Why not use another material, such as terracotta, or adobe, or a recycled material such as paperstone? Unless the block is as long and thin as at Florida Southern, you shouldn’t need face reinforcement. In fact, spalling is a symptom that one could argue should be visible, to identify where the underlying structure of reinforcing and grout tube has failed. The reinforcement won’t help if the concrete is poorly made, which was the main reason for deterioration, or where it is turned up to the rain. Now, as to the matrix and other systems for evaluation. Those can certainly be helpful, but I don’t think they should be D-22 the final arbiter for your choices. That should be good design and common sense. And, the needs and desires of, as Rex Donahey points out, at least two user groups. Wright’s system resulted in different buildings for different clients. It kept changing, because the world changes, and so do tastes, interests, ideas about sustainability, etc. A matrix that produces a variety of choices is good; a deliberative structure that reduces variety to arrive at a final result that is somehow universally applicable is much harder to get right. I appreciate you being sensitive to the different climatic conditions that might impact your system. But I worry that the reality of building different programs for different people in different conditions might defeat your attempt to develop a singular block. What Wright did surprisingly well, and what any clever building component does, is accommodate variety, even if it appears that compromises integrity. Wright pushed his system to the limits, but its very simplicity allowed it to morph and adapt. I wonder if you thought about making a more flexible system rather than a more omnipotent block. You need to show how a building happens, as an assembly of doors, windows, mechanical and electrical systems, foundations, etc. My final point though, is that, in fact, you don’t have to succeed for this to be a success. In other words, your exploration is really interesting. But it is a dissertation, not a business proposal. So as you go through this, if it turns out that the ideal textile-block system for today is an ephemeral or even impossible goal that is still a really valuable result. It is important always to be critical of what you are doing, and put that critique out there as part of your study. D-23 Notes from an Author interview with Eric Lloyd Wright in Malibu, CA on June 3, 2014: What are some essential qualities of a modern textile block? - The inner and outer wythes should be the same – a mono-material. - Smaller units allow for more articulation compared to precast concrete. - It is important to have the capacity for horizontal reinforcement. - Re: corner conditions – cast corners preferred to miters. The miter edge can be ragged and it negates the appearance of a monolithic block unit. - It should have the ability to form ceilings, similar to the six in. deep ceiling blocks used for the Usonian Automatic houses. - Ability to serve as forms for cast-in-place lintels over openings, as was done with the Ennis House, for example. - Multi-materiality is not essential. It was a compromise solution to use wood paneling on the Usonian Automatics. This was done mainly to add insulation to the wall. Better that the inner and outer wythes be the same material for the sake of a unified appearance (see first point). How can a modern textile block system compete with precast concrete? Mass production is critical in order to get the unit cost down. The textile block has more flexibility in articulating the structure from a basic set of shapes. A crane or heavy machinery is not required. Ideally, one could go to the local building supply store and pick up the blocks. Why would a precast panel with false joints violate the philosophy behind the textile block system? It would be inauthentic, plus a crane would be required to set it. Which manifestation would you most like to see built and tested? Type 5 has possibilities (lightweight insulating concrete). Of the options presented, it comes closest to the idea of a mono-material, i.e., the same inside and outside. When a block is set, the entire wall, inner and outer, is completed at the same time. It also has potential for automated production if the blocks are manufactured in a one-step process using a single casting. D-24 Dissertation of Edward D Losch, for the Degree Ph.D. in Architecture Appendix E Selected Database Reports School of Architecture Department of Building Science University of Southern California Dissertation of Edward D Losch, for the Degree Ph.D. in Architecture Appendix E.1 Essential Qualities Reports School of Architecture Department of Building Science University of Southern California E.1-1 Essential Qualities in Frank Lloyd Wright's Collected Writings Ăƚ Ğ Ő ŽƌǇ ƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůYƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐ hŶƉƌŽǀĞŶ ůĂŝŵƐ zĞ Ăƌ sŽů͘ WĂŐĞ EŽƚĞƐ Ɛ Ɛ Ğ ŵďůǇ ͗ Z Ͳ ĂƌĐ Ś ŝ ƚĞ Đ ƚ Ĩ ŝĞ ůĚƐƵƉĞƌǀŝƐŝŽŶ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞ Ě ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϬϱ ΗdŚŝƐŝƐƚƌƵĞďĞĐĂƵƐĞĂŚŽƵƐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐƚǇƉĞĐŽƵůĚŶŽƚďĞǁĞůůďƵ ŝůƚĂŶĚĂĐŚŝĞǀĞŝƚƐĚ ĞƐŝŐŶĞǆĐĞƉƚĂƐĂŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚŽǀĞƌƐĞĞƐƚŚĞ ď ƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͘Η ͗/E^ͲƐŝŵ Ƶ ůƚĂŶĞŽƵƐŝŶƐƚĂůůͲŽŶĞ ƉƌŽĐ Ğ Ɛ Ɛ ϭ ϵ Ϯϯ ϭ ϭϴϰ /ŵƉĞƌŝĂů,ŽƚĞůͲ ͞ƐĞůĨͲĨŽƌŵĞĚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͕ĚĞƉŽƐŝƚĞĚŝŶƐƚƌĂƚĂ͕ŐƌĂ ĚƵĂůůǇƌŝƐŝŶŐƵŶŝĨŽƌŵůǇ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞ĂůŝǀĂďůĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŵĂǇďĞŵĂĚĞŽĨŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůŝŶŽŶĞŽƉĞƌĂƚŝ ŽŶ͟&ůŽŽƌƐĂŶĚĐĞŝůŝŶŐƐĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚĞ Ěŝ Ŷ ƚŚĞƐĂŵĞǁĂǇĂƚƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ ƚŝŵĞ͘ ϭ Ϯϰϯ Η,ĞƌĞŝƐĂƉƌŽĐĞƐƐƚŚĂƚŵĂŬĞƐŽĨƚŚĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐƐŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞďƵŝů ĚŝŶŐĂŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĂŶĚŵŽŶŽͲŵĞƚŚŽĚĂĨĨĂŝƌŝŶƐƚĞĂĚŽĨƚŚĞƵƐƵĂ ůĐŽŵƉůĞǆ ƋƵĂƌƌĞůŝŶŐĂŐŐƌĞŐĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĞƐĂŶĚŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐΗ ϭ ϵ Ϯϴ ϭ ϮϱϮ ͞ĚŽƵďůĞǁĂůůĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƐƌĞƋƵŝƌŝŶŐŐƌĞĂƚƐŬŝůůŝŶƐƉĂĐŝŶŐƐŽ ƚŚĂƚƚŚĞŝŶƚĞƌŝŽƌƐŚĞůůǁŝůůǁŽƌŬƐŝŵƉůǇǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŽƵƚĞƌƐŚĞůů͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϴ ϯ Ϯϴϱ :ĂĐŽďƐ,Ɛ͗Η͙ŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇƚŽĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞ͕ĂƐĨĂƌĂƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͕ĨŝĞůĚ ůĂďŽƌǁŚŝĐŚŝƐĂůǁĂǇƐĞǆƉĞŶƐŝǀ Ğ͘ΗΗŶĚŝƚǁŽƵůĚďĞŝĚĞĂůƚŽĐŽŵ ƉůĞƚĞƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŝŶ ŽŶĞŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĂƐŝƚŐŽĞƐĂ ůŽŶŐ͕ŝŶƐŝĚĞĂŶĚŽƵƚƐŝĚĞ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϯϵ ϯ ϯϭϲ ΗtĞĂƌĞƚĂůŬŝŶŐŽĨĂŶĞŶƚŝƚǇǁŚĞŶǁĞƐƉĞĂŬŽĨĂŶŽƌŐĂŶŝĐďƵŝůĚŝ ŶŐ͖ǁĞĂƌĞŶŽƚƚĂůŬŝŶŐŽĨĂƐŚĞůůďĞŝŶŐƐĞƚƵƉĂŶĚĂƉƉƵƌƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ ŵĞŶĐƵƚƚŝŶŐŝƚŚĂůĨ ĚŽǁŶŝŶŽƌĚĞƌƚŽŐĞƚƚŚĞŝƌǁŽƌŬŝŶƚŽŝƚͲ ƚ ŚĞŶƚŚĞƉůĂƐƚĞƌĞƌĐŽŵ ŝŶŐŝŶ͕ĚĂƵďŝŶŐŝƚĂůůƵƉͲ ƚ ŚĞƉĂŝŶƚĞƌ ĐŽŵŝŶŐŝŶƚŽƉĂƚĐŚƵƉĚĞ ĨĞĐƚƐ͕ĂŶĚƐŽŽŶ͘Η ΗdŚŝŶŬŽĨƚŚŽƐĞŽůĚĨŝǀĞͲƉƌŽĐĞƐƐďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐ͊EŽǁǁĞĂƌĞďƵŝůĚŝŶ ŐŽŶĞͲƉƌŽĐĞƐƐďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐĂŶĚŚĂǀĞĚŝƐƉĞŶƐĞĚǁŝƚŚƐŽŵĞŽĨƚŚĞĂƉƉ ƵƌƚĞŶĂŶĐĞƐΗ ϭϵ ϰϬ ϰ ϱϳ ƌŽĂĚĂĐƌĞŝƚǇ,ŽƵƐĞƐ͗ΗŵŽƌĞ͘͘͘ĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐĂůŝŶĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶΗΗdŚ ĞǇĂƌĞŽŶĞͲƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŝŶƐƚ ĞĂĚŽĨĨŝǀĞͲƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŚŽŵĞƐ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϬϰ ΗŶĚŝƚǁŽƵůĚďĞŝĚĞĂůƚŽĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŝŶŽŶĞŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽ ŶĂƐŝƚŐŽĞƐĂůŽŶŐ ͘/ŶƐŝĚĞĂŶĚŽƵƚƐŝĚĞƐŚŽƵůĚďĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞŝŶŽ ŶĞŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞ ŚŽƵƐĞĨŝŶŝƐŚĞĚŝŶƐŝĚĞĂƐŝƚŝƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚŽƵƚƐŝĚĞ͘Η ͗DKZͲŶŽŵŽ ƌƚĂƌŽƌŵĂƐŽŶ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ΗWůĂƐƚĞƌŝŶŐ͍EŽŶĞ͘ĂƌƉĞŶƚĞƌǁŽƌŬ͍EŽŶĞ͘DĂƐŽŶƌǇ͍EŽŶĞ͘Ζ &ŽƌŵΖǁŽƌŬ͍EŽŶĞ͘WĂŝŶƚŝŶŐ͍EŽŶĞ͘ĞĐŽƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ͍ůůŝŶƚĞŐƌĂ ů͕ĐĂƐƚŝŶƚŽƚŚĞ ƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚĂůůƚŚĞƉůĂǇŽĨŝŵĂŐĞƌǇŬŶŽǁŶƚŽWĞƌ ƐŝĂŶŽƌDŽŽƌ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϮϯ Η͙ƚŚĞǇĐĂŶďĞŵĂĚĞĂŶĚĂůƐŽƐĞƚƵƉǁŝƚŚƐŵĂůůƐƚĞĞůŚŽƌŝǌŽŶƚĂů ĂŶĚǀĞƌƚŝĐĂůƌĞŝŶ Ĩ ŽƌĐŝŶŐƌŽĚƐŝŶƚŚĞũŽŝŶƚƐ͕ďǇƚŚĞŽǁŶĞƌƐƚŚĞŵ ƐĞůǀĞƐ͕ĞĂĐŚĐŽƵƌƐĞ ďĞŝŶŐŐƌŽƵƚĞĚ;ƉŽƵƌĞĚͿĂƐŝƚŝ ƐůĂŝĚƵƉŽŶƚŚĞŽŶĞďĞŶĞĂƚŚΗ ͗^dZ ͲƐ ƚ ƌ ĞĂŵůŝŶĞĚ ĂƐ ƐĞŵďůǇ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞ŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĂŶĚŵŽŶŽͲŵĞƚŚŽĚ͕͟͞ĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚĂŶĚƐĂĨĞ ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚĐŽŽůŝŶ ƐƵŵŵĞƌ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌ͟ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞ĂůŝǀĂďůĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŵĂǇďĞŵĂĚĞŽĨŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůŝŶŽŶĞŽƉĞƌĂƚŝ ŽŶ͟&ůŽŽƌƐĂŶĚĐĞŝůŝŶŐƐĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚĞ Ěŝ Ŷ ƚŚĞƐĂŵĞǁĂǇĂƚƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ ƚŝŵĞ͘ ϭϵ ϯϮ ϯ ϵϵ ĂƚŚƐĂŶĚŬŝƚĐŚĞŶƐĂƐĨĂĐƚŽƌǇĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚĞĚŵĂƐƐͲƉƌŽĚƵĐĞĚƵŶŝƚƐ͗ ΗdŚĞƉŽŽƌŵĂŶ͘͘͘ď ƵǇƐ͕ƚŚĞŵŽĚĞƌŶ͕ĐŝǀŝůŝǌĞĚ͕ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĞĚƉƌŝǀǇ ;ŝƚŝƐĂďĂƚŚƌŽŽŵͿ ŵĂŶƵĨĂĐƚƵƌĞĚĂŶĚĚĞůŝǀĞƌĞĚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞŝŶĂƐŝŶŐůĞƵŶŝƚ͕ĞǀĞŶĂƐŚ ŝƐĐĂƌŽƌďĂƚŚƚƵďŝƐŵĂŶƵĨĂĐƚƵƌĞĚ͕ƌĞĂĚǇƚŽƵƐĞǁŚĞŶĐŽŶŶĞĐƚĞĚ ƚ ŽĂƐĞƉƚŝĐƚĂŶŬ ŽƌĐĞƐƐƉŽŽů͘,ĞƉůĂŶƚƐƚŚŝƐĨŝƌƐƚƵŶŝƚŽŶŚŝƐŐƌŽƵŶĚĂƐĂĐĞŶƚ ĞƌƵŶŝƚƚŽǁŚŝĐŚĂƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĞĚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞŬŝƚĐŚĞŶƵŶŝƚƐŝŵŝůĂƌůǇ ĐŚĞĂƉĂŶĚďĞŶĞĨŝĐŝĂů ŵĂǇďĞĂĚĚĞĚ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϯϵ ϯ ϯϭϲ ΗtĞĂƌĞƚĂůŬŝŶŐŽĨĂŶĞŶƚŝƚǇǁŚĞŶǁĞƐƉĞĂŬŽĨĂŶŽƌŐĂŶŝĐďƵŝůĚŝ ŶŐ͖ǁĞĂƌĞŶŽƚƚĂůŬŝŶŐŽĨĂƐŚĞůůďĞŝŶŐƐĞƚƵƉĂŶĚĂƉƉƵƌƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ ŵĞŶĐƵƚƚŝŶŐŝƚŚĂůĨ ĚŽǁŶŝŶŽƌĚĞƌƚŽŐĞƚƚŚĞŝƌǁŽƌŬŝŶƚŽŝƚͲ ƚ ŚĞŶƚŚĞƉůĂƐƚĞƌĞƌĐŽŵ ŝŶŐŝŶ͕ĚĂƵďŝŶŐŝƚĂůůƵƉͲ ƚ ŚĞƉĂŝŶƚĞƌ ĐŽŵŝŶŐŝŶƚŽƉĂƚĐŚƵƉĚĞ ĨĞĐƚƐ͕ĂŶĚƐŽŽŶ͘Η ΗdŚŝŶŬŽĨƚŚŽƐĞŽůĚĨŝǀĞͲƉƌŽĐĞƐƐďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐ͊EŽǁǁĞĂƌĞďƵŝůĚŝŶ ŐŽŶĞͲƉƌŽĐĞƐƐďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐĂŶĚŚĂǀĞĚŝƐƉĞŶƐĞĚǁŝƚŚƐŽŵĞŽĨƚŚĞĂƉƉ ƵƌƚĞŶĂŶĐĞƐΗ ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϬϰ tŽŽĚhƐŽŶŝĂŶ͗ΗdŚĞƐĞǁĂůůƐůŝŬĞƚŚĞĨĞŶĞƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶŵĂǇďĞƉƌĞĨĂďƌ ŝĐĂƚĞĚŽŶƚŚĞĨůŽŽƌ͕ǁŝƚŚĂŶǇĚĞŐƌĞĞŽĨŝŶƐƵůĂƚŝŽŶǁĞĐĂŶĂĨĨŽƌ Ě͕ĂŶĚƌĂŝƐĞĚŝŶƚŽ ƉůĂĐĞ͕ŽƌƚŚĞǇŵĂǇďĞŵĂĚĞĂƚƚŚĞŵŝůůĂŶĚƐŚŝƉƉĞĚƚŽƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ ŝŶƐĞĐƚŝŽŶƐ͘Η ŽŵĨ Žƌƚ ŵ͗,KdͲ ŚŽ ƚͲĐ ŽůĚͬŝŶƐƵůĂƚŝŽŶǀĂůƵĞ ϭ ϵ Ϯϯ ϭ ϭϳϮ ͞ƐƵĐŚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐƚŚĞĐŚĞĂƉĞƐƚƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͙ǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌĂŶĚ ĐŽŽůŝŶƐƵŵŵĞƌĂŶĚĚƌǇŝŶďŽƚŚ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϴ ϭ ϮϱϮ ͞ĚŽƵďůĞǁĂůůĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƐƌĞƋƵŝƌŝŶŐŐƌĞĂƚƐŬŝůůŝŶƐƉĂĐŝŶŐƐŽ ƚŚĂƚƚŚĞŝŶƚĞƌŝŽƌƐŚĞůůǁŝůůǁŽƌŬƐŝŵƉůǇǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŽƵƚĞƌƐŚĞůů͟ ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϮϰ ΗtĂůůƐŵĂǇďĞĞŝƚŚĞƌ ƐŝŶŐůĞ ;ŽŶĞůĂǇĞƌŽĨďůŽĐŬƐͿ͕ƚŚĞĐŽĨĨĞƌĞĚďĂĐŬͲĨĂĐĞĨŽƌŵŝŶ ŐƚŚĞŝŶƚĞƌ ŝŽƌǁĂůůƐƵƌĨĂĐĞ͕Žƌ ĚŽƵďůĞ ǁŝƚŚƚǁŽůĂǇĞƌƐŽĨďůŽĐŬƐ͕ ǁŝƚŚĂŶŝŶƚĞƌŝŽƌŝŶƐƵůĂƚŝŶŐĂŝƌƐƉĂĐĞďĞƚǁĞĞŶ͘Η ϱϵϬ ΗDǇƐĞŶƐĞŽĨΗǁĂůůΗǁĂƐŶŽůŽŶŐĞƌƚŚĞƐŝĚĞŽĨĂďŽǆ͘/ƚǁĂƐĞŶ ĐůŽƐƵƌĞŽĨƐƉĂĐĞĂĨĨŽƌĚŝŶŐƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŝŽŶĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƐƚŽƌŵŽƌŚĞĂƚŽŶů ǇǁŚĞŶŶĞĞĚĞĚ͘Ƶƚ ŝƚĂůƐŽƚŽďƌŝŶŐƚŚĞŽƵƚƐŝĚĞǁŽƌůĚŝŶƚŽƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞĂŶĚůĞƚƚŚĞŝ ŶƐŝĚĞŽĨƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞŐŽŽƵƚƐŝĚĞ͘/ŶƚŚŝƐƐĞŶƐĞ/ǁĂƐǁŽƌŬŝŶŐĂǁĂ ǇĂƚƚŚĞǁĂůůĂƐĂǁĂůů ĂŶĚďƌŝŶŐŝŶŐŝƚƚŽǁĂƌĚƐƚŚĞĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶŽĨĂƐĐƌĞĞŶ͙Η ŵ͗^ ͲƐ ĞĐƵƌĞ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞ŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĂŶĚŵŽŶŽͲŵĞƚŚŽĚ͕͟͞ĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚĂŶĚƐĂĨĞ ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚĐŽŽůŝŶ ƐƵŵŵĞƌ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌ͟ WĂŐĞ ϭ ŽĨϮ ϯ E.1-3 Ăƚ Ğ Ő ŽƌǇ ƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůYƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐ hŶƉƌŽǀĞŶ ůĂŝŵƐ zĞ Ăƌ sŽů͘ WĂŐĞ EŽƚĞƐ Žŵ Ĩ Ž ƌƚ ŵ͗^ s Ͳ ƐĞ ǀĞƌĞ ǁĞĂƚŚĞƌ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞ŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĂŶĚŵŽŶŽͲŵĞƚŚŽĚ͕͟͞ĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚĂŶĚƐĂĨĞ ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚĐŽŽůŝŶ ƐƵŵŵĞƌ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌ͟ ϭϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϵϬ ΗDǇƐĞŶƐĞŽĨΗǁĂůůΗǁĂƐŶŽůŽŶŐĞƌƚŚĞƐŝĚĞŽĨĂďŽǆ͘/ƚǁĂƐĞŶ ĐůŽƐƵƌĞŽĨƐƉĂĐĞĂĨĨŽƌĚŝŶŐƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŝŽŶĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƐƚŽƌŵŽƌŚĞĂƚŽŶů ǇǁŚĞŶŶĞĞĚĞĚ͘Ƶƚ ŝƚĂůƐŽƚŽďƌŝŶŐƚŚĞŽƵƚƐŝĚĞǁŽƌůĚŝŶƚŽƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞĂŶĚůĞƚƚŚĞŝ ŶƐŝĚĞŽĨƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞŐŽŽƵƚƐŝĚĞ͘/ŶƚŚŝƐƐĞŶƐĞ/ǁĂƐǁŽƌŬŝŶŐĂǁĂ ǇĂƚƚŚĞǁĂůůĂƐĂǁĂůů ĂŶĚďƌŝŶŐŝŶŐŝƚƚŽǁĂƌĚƐƚŚĞĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶŽĨĂƐĐƌĞĞŶ͙Η ŵ͗d , Ͳƚ Ś Ğ ƌŵĂů ŵĂƐ ƐĞĨĨĞĐ ƚ ϭϵ Ϭϳ ϭ ϴϭ dŚĞĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞŚŽƵƐĞŝƐǁĂƌŵĞƌŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌ͕ĐŽŽůĞƌŝŶƐƵŵŵĞƌ ϭ ϵ Ϯϯ ϭ ϭϳϮ ͞ƐƵĐŚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐƚŚĞĐŚĞĂƉĞƐƚƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͙ǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌĂŶĚ ĐŽŽůŝŶƐƵŵŵĞƌĂŶĚĚƌǇŝŶďŽƚŚ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞ŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĂŶĚŵŽŶŽͲŵĞƚŚŽĚ͕͟͞ĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚĂŶĚƐĂĨĞ ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚĐŽŽůŝŶ ƐƵŵŵĞƌ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌ͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϯ ͞ƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞǁŽƵůĚďĞĐŽŽůŝŶƐƵŵŵĞƌ͕ǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌ͕ĂŶĚĚƌǇĂůǁ ĂǇƐ͘͟ ŵ͗sWͲ ǀ Ă Ɖ Ž ƌͬůŽǁƉĞƌŵĞĂďŝůŝƚǇ ϭ ϵ Ϯϯ ϭ ϭϳϮ ͞ƐƵĐŚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐƚŚĞĐŚĞĂƉĞƐƚƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͙ǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌĂŶĚ ĐŽŽůŝŶƐƵŵŵĞƌĂŶĚĚƌǇŝŶďŽƚŚ͟ ŽƐ ƚ Ɛ͗&&ͲĂĨ Ĩ Ž ƌĚĂďŝůŝƚǇ ϭ ϭϳϮ ͞ƐƵĐŚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐƚŚĞĐŚĞĂƉĞƐƚƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͙ǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌĂŶĚ ĐŽŽůŝŶƐƵŵŵĞƌĂŶĚĚƌǇŝŶďŽƚŚ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ΗtŚĂƚƉƌĞĐŝƐĞůǇŚĂƐŚĂƉƉĞŶĞĚ͍tĞůů͕ŽŶĞĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐĂů ŝŵƉĞƌŝƐŚĂďůĞǁŚŽůĞŝŶƐƚĞĂĚŽĨƚŚ Ğ ƵƐƵĂůĐŽŶĨƵƐŝŽŶŽĨĐŽŵƉůĞǆŝƚŝ ĞƐƚŽďĞ ƌĞĚƵĐĞĚƚŽĂŚĞĂƉŽĨƚƌĂƐŚǁŝƚŚƚŝŵĞ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϯ ͞ƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ͙ĨŝƌĞͲƉƌŽŽĨ͕ĂŶĚ͙ďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͕ĨŽƌΨϭϬ͕ϬϬϬ͘͟ Ϯ Ϯϳϲ ͞ůǁĂǇƐƚŚĞĚĞƐŝƌĞƚŽŐĞƚƐŽŵĞƐǇƐƚĞŵŽĨďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ ĂƐĂďĂƐŝƐĨŽƌĂƌĐ ŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ͙͟&ŽƌŵĐŽŵĞƐĨƌŽŵĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƐǇƐƚ Ğŵ͘ŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ ďůŽĐŬĂƐ͞ŐƵƚƚĞƌƌĂƚ͕͟͞ƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ͕ŶŽďůĞ͕ďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͙ĐŚĞĂƉ͟ ϯϵϵ ĂƚŚƐĂŶĚŬŝƚĐŚĞŶƐĂƐĨĂĐƚŽƌǇĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚĞĚŵĂƐƐͲƉƌŽĚƵĐĞĚƵŶŝƚƐ͗ ΗdŚĞƉŽŽƌŵĂŶ͘͘͘ď ƵǇƐ͕ƚŚĞŵŽĚĞƌŶ͕ĐŝǀŝůŝǌĞĚ͕ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĞĚƉƌŝǀǇ ;ŝƚŝƐĂďĂƚŚƌŽŽŵͿ ŵĂŶƵĨĂĐƚƵƌĞĚĂŶĚĚĞůŝǀĞƌĞĚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞŝŶĂƐŝŶŐůĞƵŶŝƚ͕ĞǀĞŶĂƐŚ ŝƐĐĂƌŽƌďĂƚŚƚƵďŝƐŵĂŶƵĨĂĐƚƵƌĞĚ͕ƌĞĂĚǇƚŽƵƐĞǁŚĞŶĐŽŶŶĞĐƚĞĚ ƚ ŽĂƐĞƉƚŝĐƚĂŶŬ ŽƌĐĞƐƐƉŽŽů͘,ĞƉůĂŶƚƐƚŚŝƐĨŝƌƐƚƵŶŝƚŽŶŚŝƐŐƌŽƵŶĚĂƐĂĐĞŶƚ ĞƌƵŶŝƚƚŽǁŚŝĐŚĂƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĞĚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞŬŝƚĐŚĞŶƵŶŝƚƐŝŵŝůĂƌůǇ ĐŚĞĂƉĂŶĚďĞŶĞĨŝĐŝĂů ŵĂǇďĞĂĚĚĞĚ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϯϴ ϯ Ϯϴϰ ΗdŚĞŚŽƵƐĞŽĨŵŽĚĞƌĂƚĞĐŽƐƚŝƐŶŽƚŽŶůǇŵĞƌŝĐĂΖƐŵĂũŽƌĂƌĐŚŝƚĞ ĐƚƵƌĂůƉƌŽďůĞŵ ďƵƚƚŚĞƉƌŽďůĞŵŵŽƐƚĚŝĨĨŝĐƵůƚĨŽƌŚĞƌŵĂũŽƌĂƌĐ ŚŝƚĞĐƚƐ͘ƐĨŽƌŵĞ͕ /ǁŽƵůĚƌĂƚŚĞƌƐŽůǀĞŝƚ͙ƚŚĂŶďƵŝůĚĂŶǇƚŚŝŶŐ/ĐĂŶƚŚŝŶŬŽĨĂƚƚ ŚĞŵŽŵĞŶƚ͙Η ϭ ϵ ϯϵ ϯ ϯϭϳ ΗdŚĞŵŽĚĞƐƚͲĐŽƐƚͲŚŽƵƐĞŵŽǀĞŵĞŶƚŝƐŶŽǁƚŚĞƚŚŝŶŐǁĞĂƌĞĞŶŐĂŐĞĚ ƵƉŽŶĨŽƌŵŽƐƚŽĨŽƵƌƚŝŵĞ͘Η Η/ĨĞĞůƚŚĂƚŝƚŝƐƚŚĞŵŽƐƚŝŵƉŽƌ ƚĂŶƚĨŝĞůĚƚŚĂƚ ǁĞŚĂǀĞĂŶĚŝƚŚĂƐďĞĞŶŶĞŐůĞĐƚĞĚďǇŽƵƌĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƐ͘Η ϭϵ ϰϬ ϰ ϱϳ ƌŽĂĚĂĐƌĞŝƚǇ,ŽƵƐĞƐ͗ΗŵŽƌĞ͘͘͘ĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐĂůŝŶĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶΗΗdŚ ĞǇĂƌĞŽŶĞͲƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŝŶƐƚ ĞĂĚŽĨĨŝǀĞͲƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŚŽŵĞƐ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϬϴ ZŝƐŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶĐŽƐƚƐƐŝŶĐĞϭϵϯϳ͗ΗtĞĨŝŶĚƚŚĂƚƚǁĞŶƚǇƚŚŽƵ ƐĂŶĚĚŽůůĂƌƐŝƐĂď ŽƵƚƚŚĞƐƵŵŶĞĞĚĞĚƚŽĚŽǁŚĂƚƚŚĞ:ĂĐŽďƐďŽƵŐ ŚƚĨŽƌĨŝĨƚǇͲĨŝǀĞ ŚƵŶĚƌĞĚ͘Η ϱ ϭϮϯ Η,ŽǁƚŚĞŶ͕ǇŽƵŵĂǇĂƐŬ͕ĐĂŶƉĞŽƉůĞǁŝƚŚĞǀĞŶŵŽƌĞůŝŵŝƚĞĚŵĞĂŶƐ ĞǆƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞƚ ŚĞůŝďĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƚŚĞƐĞŶƐĞŽĨĨƌĞĞĚŽŵƚŚĂƚĐŽŵĞƐǁŝƚ ŚƚƌƵĞ ĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ͍͘͘͘ǁĞŚĂǀĞŐŽŶĞĨĂƌŝŶƐŽůǀŝŶŐƚŚŝƐŐĞŶĞƌŝĐƉƌŽďůĞ ŵďǇƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌĂůĐ ŽŶĐƌĞƚĞďůŽĐŬŚŽƵƐĞǁĞĐĂůůƚŚĞΖhƐŽŶŝĂŶƵƚŽ ŵĂƚŝĐ͘ΖdŚŝƐ hƐŽŶŝĂŶŚŽƵƐĞŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞƐŝŶŶŽǀĂƚŝŽŶƐǁŚŝĐŚƌĞĚƵĐĞŵŽƐƚŽĨƚŚĞ ŚĞĂǀŝĞƌďƵŝůĚ ŝŶŐĐŽƐƚƐ͕ůĂďŽƌŝŶƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌ͘Η Ɛ͗> ͲůŽ ǁĞƌ ůĂďŽ ƌĐŽƐƚ ϱ ϭϮϯ Η,ŽǁƚŚĞŶ͕ǇŽƵŵĂǇĂƐŬ͕ĐĂŶƉĞŽƉůĞǁŝƚŚĞǀĞŶŵŽƌĞůŝŵŝƚĞĚŵĞĂŶƐ ĞǆƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞƚ ŚĞůŝďĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƚŚĞƐĞŶƐĞŽĨĨƌĞĞĚŽŵƚŚĂƚĐŽŵĞƐǁŝƚ ŚƚƌƵĞ ĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ͍͘͘͘ǁĞŚĂǀĞŐŽŶĞĨĂƌŝŶƐŽůǀŝŶŐƚŚŝƐŐĞŶĞƌŝĐƉƌŽďůĞ ŵďǇƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌĂůĐ ŽŶĐƌĞƚĞďůŽĐŬŚŽƵƐĞǁĞĐĂůůƚŚĞΖhƐŽŶŝĂŶƵƚŽ ŵĂƚŝĐ͘ΖdŚŝƐ hƐŽŶŝĂŶŚŽƵƐĞŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞƐŝŶŶŽǀĂƚŝŽŶƐǁŚŝĐŚƌĞĚƵĐĞŵŽƐƚŽĨƚŚĞ ŚĞĂǀŝĞƌďƵŝůĚ ŝŶŐĐŽƐƚƐ͕ůĂďŽƌŝŶƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌ͘Η Ɛ͗> ^ͲůĞƐ Ɛŵ ĂƚĞƌŝĂů͕ ůŝŐŚƚĞƌ ϱ ϭϮϰ Η͙ǁŝƚŚŽŶĞŽƵƚƐŝĚĞĨĂĐĞ;ǁŚŝĐŚŵĂǇďĞƉĂƚƚĞƌŶĞĚͿ͕ĂŶĚŽŶĞƌĞĂƌ ŽƌŝŶƐŝĚĞĨĂĐĞ͕ ŐĞŶĞƌĂůůǇĐŽĨĨĞƌĞĚ͕ĨŽƌůŝŐŚƚŶĞƐƐ͘Η ϱϵϳ ΗŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇŝŶǀĂƌŝĂďůǇƌĞĂůŝǌĞĚƌĞŵĂƌŬĂďůĞĞĐŽŶŽŵǇŽĨůĂďŽƌĂŶĚ ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐĂƐǁĞůůĂƐƐ ƉĂĐĞ͘hŶĨŽƌƚƵŶĂƚĞůǇƚŚĞƌĞŝƐǇ ĞƚůŝƚƚůĞŽƌŶŽĚĂƚĂƚŽ ƵƐĞĂƐƚĂďƵůĂƚŝŽŶ͘Η Ɛ͗Dd Ͳ /ŶĞ ǆƉ ĞŶ Ɛ ŝǀĞ͕ůŽĐĂůŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ ϭ ϵ Ϯϯ ϭ ϭϳϮ ͞ƐƵĐŚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐƚŚĞĐŚĞĂƉĞƐƚƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͙ǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌĂŶĚ ĐŽŽůŝŶƐƵŵŵĞƌĂŶĚĚƌǇŝŶďŽƚŚ͟ ϭ ϭϳϬ WƌĞĚŝĐƚƐƐƚĞĞůĨƌĂŵŝŶŐǁŝůůďĞŽďƐ ŽůĞƚĞ͘^ƚĞĞůƌƵƐƚƐĨƌŽŵƐĂůƚǇ ĂŝƌĂŶĚŚƵŵŝĚŝƚǇ͘^ƚ ĞĞůŵĞůƚƐƵŶĚĞƌĨůĂŵĞŚĞĂƚ͕ĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞĐŽǀĞƌ ďƌĞĂŬƐŽĨĨ ϭ ϵ Ϯϱ ϭ Ϯϭϯ ͞dŚŝƐƚǇƉĞŵĂǇďĞŵĂĚĞĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŐƌĂǀĞůŽĨĚĞĐĂǇĞĚŐƌĂŶŝƚĞŽĨƚŚ ĞŚŝůůƐĞĂƐŝůǇŽď ƚ ĂŝŶĞĚƚŚĞƌĞĂŶĚŵŝǆĞĚǁŝƚŚĐĞŵĞŶƚĂŶĚĐĂƐƚŝŶ ŵŽůĚƐ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞ƋƵŝĞƚŽƌĚĞƌůǇƐŝŵƉůŝĐŝƚǇ͕͟͞ĂƐŝŵƉůĞ͕ĐŚĞĂƉŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĞǀĞƌǇǁŚ ĞƌĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ͟ WĂŐĞ Ϯ ŽĨϮ ϯ E.1-4 Ăƚ Ğ Ő ŽƌǇ ƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůYƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐ hŶƉƌŽǀĞŶ ůĂŝŵƐ zĞ Ăƌ sŽů͘ WĂŐĞ EŽƚĞƐ ŽƐ ƚ Ɛ͗Dd Ͳ /ŶĞ ǆƉ ĞŶ Ɛ ŝǀĞ͕ůŽĐĂůŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϳϲ ͞ůǁĂǇƐƚŚĞĚĞƐŝƌĞƚŽŐĞƚƐŽŵĞƐǇƐƚĞŵŽĨďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ ĂƐĂďĂƐŝƐĨŽƌĂƌĐ ŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ͙͟&ŽƌŵĐŽŵĞƐĨƌŽŵĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƐǇƐƚ Ğŵ͘ŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ ďůŽĐŬĂƐ͞ŐƵƚƚĞƌƌĂƚ͕͟͞ƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ͕ŶŽďůĞ͕ďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͙ĐŚĞĂƉ͟ Ɛ͗^ Ͳ ĞĐ ŽŶ ŽŵŝĞ Ɛ Ž ĨƐĐĂůĞ ϭ ϵ ϰϯ ϰ ϭϵϰ ηϯϳϬϮ͕:ĂĐŽďƐ͗Η/ŵĂŐŝŶĞŚŽǁƚŚĞĐŽƐƚƐǁŽƵůĚĐŽŵĞĚŽǁŶǁĞƌĞƚŚĞ ƚĞĐŚŶŝƋƵĞĂĨĂŵŝůŝĂƌŵĂƚƚĞƌŽƌŝĨŵĂŶǇŚŽƵƐĞƐǁĞƌĞĞǆĞĐƵƚĞĚĂƚ ŽŶĞƚŝŵĞͲ ƉƌŽďĂďůǇĚŽǁŶƚŽΨϰϱϬϬ͕ĂĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽŶƵŵďĞƌďƵŝůƚĂŶĚůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘ Η;ĚŽǁŶĨƌŽŵΨϱϱϬϬͿ ϭϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϵϳ Η/ƚŝƐďǇƵƚŝůŝǌŝŶŐŵĂƐƐƉƌŽĚƵĐƚŝ ŽŶŝŶƚŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇŝŶƚŚŝƐĐŽŶŶ ĞĐƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚƐŽŵĞŝĚĞĂŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŵĂƌŬĂďůĞŶĞǁĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ ƚ ŽŵŽĚĞƌŶ ĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞŵĂǇďĞƐĞĞŶĂƉƉƌŽĂĐŚŝŶŐƚŚŽƐĞƌĞĂůŝǌĞĚŝŶĂŶǇǁĞůů ͲďƵŝůƚŵĂĐŚŝŶĞ͘/ĨƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĐ Ă ŶďĞŚƵŵĂŶŝǌĞĚĂŶĚŵĂĚĞĨ ůĞǆŝďůĞŝŶĚĞƐŝŐŶ ĂŶĚƚŚĞĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐƐďƌŽƵŐŚƚƚŽƚŚĞŚŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌ͕ƚŚĞŐƌĞĂƚĞƐƚƐĞƌǀŝ ĐĞǁŝůůďĞƌĞŶĚ ĞƌĞĚƚŽŽƵƌŵŽĚĞƌŶǁĂǇŽĨůŝĨĞ͘/ƚŵĂǇƌĞĂůůǇď ĞďŽƌŶͲ ƚŚŝƐ ĚĞŵŽĐƌĂĐǇ͕/ŵĞĂŶ͘Η ϱ ϭϬϯ DĂƐƐƉƌŽĚƵĐĞĚŚŽƵƐŝŶŐΗƉƵƚƚŝŶŐŽ ŶƐŽŵĞƐƚǇůĞŽƌŽƚŚĞƌ͕ƌĞĂůůǇŚ ĂǀŝŶŐŶŽŝŶƚĞŐƌŝ ƚǇ͘^ƚǇůĞ ŝƐ ŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚ͘ ƐƚǇůĞŝƐŶŽƚ͘Η ϱ ϭϬϱ Η/ŵĂŐŝŶĞŚŽǁƚŚĞĐŽƐƚƐǁŽƵůĚĐŽŵĞĚŽǁŶǁĞƌĞƚŚĞƚĞĐŚŶŝƋƵĞĂĨĂŵ ŝůŝĂƌŵĂƚƚĞƌŽƌŝĨŵĂŶǇŚŽƵƐĞƐǁĞƌĞƚŽďĞĞǆĞĐƵƚĞĚĂƚŽŶĞƚŝŵĞ Ͳ ƉƌŽďĂďůǇ ĚŽǁŶƚŽĨŽƌƚǇͲĨŝǀĞŚƵŶĚƌĞĚĚŽůůĂ ƌƐ͕ĂĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽŶƵŵďĞƌďƵŝůƚĂ ŶĚůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘Η Ɛ͗dZDͲŶ Ž ƚ ƌŝŵ ͕ ƉůĂƐƚĞƌ͕ƉĂŝŶƚŽƌŐƵƚ ƚĞ ƌ Ɛ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ΗWůĂƐƚĞƌŝŶŐ͍EŽŶĞ͘ĂƌƉĞŶƚĞƌǁŽƌŬ͍EŽŶĞ͘DĂƐŽŶƌǇ͍EŽŶĞ͘Ζ &ŽƌŵΖǁŽƌŬ͍EŽŶĞ͘WĂŝŶƚŝŶŐ͍EŽŶĞ͘ĞĐŽƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ͍ůůŝŶƚĞŐƌĂ ů͕ĐĂƐƚŝŶƚŽƚŚĞ ƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚĂůůƚŚĞƉůĂǇŽĨŝŵĂŐĞƌǇŬŶŽǁŶƚŽWĞƌ ƐŝĂŶŽƌDŽŽƌ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϰϯ ϰ ϭϵϯ ηϯϳϬϮ͕:ĂĐŽďƐhƐŽŶŝĂŶ,ŽƵƐĞ͗ŽƐƚƌĞĚƵĐĞĚďǇĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚŝŶŐĂƚƚŝĐ ͕ďĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ͕ƚƌŝŵ ͕ƌĂĚŝĂƚŽƌƐ͕ĨƵƌŶŝƚƵƌĞ͕ƉĂŝŶƚŝŶŐ͕ƉůĂƐƚĞƌŝŶŐĂŶ ĚŐƵƚƚĞƌƐ͘ ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϬϰ ŽƐƚƌĞĚƵĐĞĚďǇĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚŝŶŐĂƚƚŝĐ͕ďĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ͕ƚƌŝŵ͕ƌĂĚŝĂƚŽƌƐ͕Ĩ ƵƌŶŝƚƵƌĞ͕ƉĂŝŶƚŝŶŐ͕ƉůĂƐƚĞƌŝŶŐĂŶĚŐƵƚƚĞƌƐ͘ Ɛ͗hE^ ͲŵŝŶŝŵ ŝǌ Ğ ƐŬŝůůĞĚĨŝĞůĚůĂďŽƌ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞^ĞǀĞƌĂůŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵŽůĚƐŵĂǇďĞƚŚƌŽǁŶŝŶƚŽĂ&ŽƌĚ͙͟ΗdŚŝƐͲ ĂŶĚ ĂŶŽƌŐĂŶŝǌĂƚŝŽŶŽĨǁŽƌŬŵĞŶƚƌĂŝŶĞĚƚŽĚŽŽŶĞƚŚŝŶŐǁĞůů͘ΗůĂŝĚ ŽƵƚďǇ ĐŽƵŶƚŝŶŐďůŽĐŬƐ͕ƐƚĞĞůǁŽŽĨĂŶĚǁĂƌƉ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϳϳ ͞/ĐŽƵůĚĚŽĂǁĂǇǁŝƚŚƐŬŝůůĞĚůĂ ďŽƌ͘͟͞>ŝŐŚƚŶĞƐƐĂŶĚƐƚƌĞŶŐƚŚ͘͟ Ϯ Ϯϴϯ ͞dŚĞǁĂůůƐǁŽƵůĚƚŚƵƐďĞĐŽŵĞƚŚŝŶďƵƚƐŽůŝĚƌĞŝŶĨŽƌĐĞĚƐůĂďƐ͙͟ ͞ŶĚĐŽŵŵŽŶůĂďŽƌĐŽ ƵůĚĚŽŝƚĂůů͘͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϲ ϯ ϮϬϱ ΗŶŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚŝŶŐƉŝĐƚƵƌĞŽĨĂƉƌĞͲĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚĞĚŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůŚŽƵƐĞ ĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚŝŶŐƐŬŝůůĞĚ ůĂďŽƌŝŶŝƚƐ ĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚŚ ĞƌĞǁŝƚŚ͘Η<ŶŝƚƚŽŐĞƚŚĞƌ ďǇƐƚĞĞůƐƚƌĂŶĚƐ͕ΗƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŶŽƐ Ŭŝůů͕ďĞŝŶŐƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĂůůǇĂƵƚŽŵĂƚ ŝĐ͙/ŶƚŚŝƐĐĂƐĞƚŚĞΗ Ĩ ĂĐƚŽƌǇΗŝƐĞĂƐŝůǇƚƌĂŶƐĨĞƌĂďůĞĨƌŽŵƐŝƚĞ ƚ ŽƐŝƚĞ͘dŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇŐŽĞƐ ƚŽƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞŝŶƐƚĞĂĚŽĨƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞŐŽŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϯϴ ϯ Ϯϴϱ :ĂĐŽďƐ,Ɛ͗Η͙ŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇƚŽĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞ͕ĂƐĨĂƌĂƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͕ĨŝĞůĚ ůĂďŽƌǁŚŝĐŚŝƐĂůǁĂǇƐĞǆƉĞŶƐŝǀ Ğ͘ΗΗŶĚŝƚǁŽƵůĚďĞŝĚĞĂůƚŽĐŽŵ ƉůĞƚĞƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŝŶ ŽŶĞŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĂƐŝƚŐŽĞƐĂ ůŽŶŐ͕ŝŶƐŝĚĞĂŶĚŽƵƚƐŝĚĞ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϰϳ ϰ ϯϭϯ Η/Ĩ͕ŽǁŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞĨĂůƐĞĚŽĐƚƌŝŶĞƐŽĨĂƌƚŝĨŝĐŝĂůĐŽŶƚƌŽůƐŽƌŽĨ ĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐƐĐĂƌĐŝƚǇͲ ŵĂŬŝŶŐĂŶĚ ŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶŝŶŐďůĂĐŬŵĂƌŬĞƚƐŶŽǁ͕ƚŚ ĞǇ΀ƚŚĞ'͘/͘ΖƐ΁ĂƌĞ ƵŶĂďůĞƚŽďƵŝůĚ͕ǁŚǇŶŽƚƚŚƌŽǁŶĂ ƚƵƌĂůƌŽĂĚƐŽƉĞŶƚŽŝŵŵŝŐƌĂƚŝŽ ŶĨƌŽŵĐŽƵŶƚƌŝĞƐǁŚĞƌĞƚŚĞƐŬŝůůƐŚĂǀĞŶŽƚďĞĞŶĐƵƚďĂĐŬďǇŝŐŶ ŽƌĂŶƚůĂďŽƌ ƵŶŝŽŶƐĞŵƵůĂƚŝŶŐƐƚŝůůŵŽƌĞŝŐŶŽƌĂŶƚĞŵƉůŽǇĞƌƐ͍ΗΗŶĂƚƵƌĂůǁŽƌŬŝ ŶŐůĂǁŽĨƐƵƉƉůǇĂŶĚĚĞ ŵĂŶĚΗ΀ZŝŐŚƚƚŽtŽƌŬ΁ ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϮϯ ΗtŝƚŚƚŚĞůŝŵŝƚĞĚďƵĚŐĞƚŽĨĂ'͘/͘ǇŽƵĐĂŶŶŽƚƉĂǇĂƉůĂƐƚĞƌĞƌ͕ ŵĂƐŽŶ͕ďƌŝĐŬůĂǇĞƌ͕ĐĂƌƉĞŶƚĞƌ͕ĞƚĐ͕͘ƚǁĞŶƚǇͲŶŝŶĞĚŽůůĂƌƐĂĚĂǇ; ĂŶĚĂƚƚŚĂƚŶĞǀĞƌďĞ ƐƵƌĞǁŚĞƚŚĞƌƚŚĞǁŽƌŬŝƐĚŽŶĞǁĞůůͿ͘dŽďƵŝůĚĂůŽǁĐŽƐƚŚŽƵƐĞ ǇŽƵŵƵƐƚĞůŝŵŝŶ ĂƚĞ͕ƐŽĨĂƌĂƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͕ƚŚĞƵƐĞŽĨƐŬŝůůĞĚůĂď Žƌ͕ŶŽǁƐŽĞǆƉĞŶƐŝǀĞ͘Η ϱ ϭϬϯ Η͙ŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇƚŽĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞ͕ƐŽĨĂƌĂƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͕ĨŝĞůĚůĂďŽƌǁŚŝĐŚ ŝƐĂůǁĂǇƐĞǆƉĞŶƐŝǀĞ͗ŝƚŝƐŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇƚŽĐŽŶƐŽůŝĚĂƚĞĂŶĚƐŝŵƉůŝ ĨǇƚŚĞƚŚƌĞĞ ĂƉƉƵƌƚĞŶĂŶĐĞƐǇƐƚĞŵƐͲ ŚĞĂƚŝŶŐ͕ůŝŐŚƚŝŶŐ͕ĂŶĚƐĂŶŝƚĂƚŝŽŶ͘Η ĞƐ ŝŐŶ Ğ͗ ϯZͲƚŚ ŝƌĚŝŵ ĞŶƐŝŽŶ ϭ ϵ Ϯϱ ϭ Ϯϭϯ ͞ƵŶŝƚͲƐůĂď͟ƐǇƐƚĞŵ͕͞dŚŝƐŝƐƚŚĞ ďĞŐŝŶŶŝŶŐŽĨĂĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝǀĞĞĨ ĨŽƌƚƚŽƉƌŽĚƵĐĞĂƚǇƉĞƚŚ Ă ƚǁŽƵů ĚĨƵůůǇƵƚŝůŝǌĞƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶ ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶŽĨ ĞĂƐŝůǇŵĂŶŚĂŶĚůĞĚƵŶŝƚƐ ͘͟͞ƚŚŝƌĚĚŝŵĞŶƐŝŽŶ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϰ ͞dŚĞƚŚŝƌĚĚŝŵĞŶƐŝŽŶƚƌŝƵŵƉŚĂŶƚ͘͟ ϭ ϵ ϰϵ ϰ ϯϴϬ ΗEĞǀĞƌƚŚĞůĞƐƐƚŚĞƐĞŶƐĞŽĨĚĞƉƚŚǁŚŝĐŚǁĞĂƌĞŚĞƌĞĐĂůůŝŶŐƚŚĞ ƚŚŝƌĚĚŝŵĞŶƐŝŽŶͲ Ă ƐƉŝƌŝƚƵĂůƋ ƵĂ ůŝƚǇƚŚĂƚĐĂŶŶŽƚďĞĨŽƌĐĞĚďƵƚ ŵƵƐƚďĞǁŽŽĞĚͲ ŵĂƌƌŝĞƐƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƚŽŚƵŵĂŶůŝĨĞĂŶĚǁĞĚƐďŽƚŚƚŽƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘ Η ϭϵ ϱϮ ϱ ϰϴ ΗƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͕ĂƐĂďŽǆ͕ǁĂƐŐŽŶĞ͘dŚĞŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŽĨƚŚĞƚ ŚŝƌĚĚŝŵĞŶƐŝŽŶǁĂƐďŽƌŶƚŽĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ͘ΗΗŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůƋƵĂůŝƚǇŽĨ Ě ĞƉƚŚΗEĞǁƐĞŶƐĞŽĨ ƐƉĂĐĞĚƵĞƚŽĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇĂŶĚĐĂŶƚŝůĞǀĞƌ ϭϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϴϬ ΗŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇŝŶƚŚŝƐĂĞƐƚŚĞƚŝĐƐĞŶƐĞĂƉƉĞĂƌĞĚƚŽŵĞĂƐƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌ ĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽĂĐŚŝĞǀĞƚƌƵůǇŽƌŐĂŶŝĐĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞďǇŵĂĐŚŝŶĞƚĞĐŚŶ ŝƋƵĞŽƌďǇĂŶǇ ŽƚŚĞƌŶĂƚƵƌĂůƚĞĐŚŶŝƋƵĞ͘Η WĂŐĞ ϯ ŽĨϮ ϯ E.1-5 Ăƚ Ğ Ő ŽƌǇ ƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůYƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐ hŶƉƌŽǀĞŶ ůĂŝŵƐ zĞ Ăƌ sŽů͘ WĂŐĞ EŽƚĞƐ ĞƐ ŝŐŶ Ğ͗ ϯZͲƚŚ ŝƌĚŝŵ ĞŶƐŝŽŶ ϭϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϵϬ ΗDǇƐĞŶƐĞŽĨΗǁĂůůΗǁĂƐŶŽůŽŶŐĞƌƚŚĞƐŝĚĞŽĨĂďŽǆ͘/ƚǁĂƐĞŶ ĐůŽƐƵƌĞŽĨƐƉĂĐĞĂĨĨŽƌĚŝŶŐƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŝŽŶĂŐĂŝŶƐƚƐƚŽƌŵŽƌŚĞĂƚŽŶů ǇǁŚĞŶŶĞĞĚĞĚ͘Ƶƚ ŝƚĂůƐŽƚŽďƌŝŶŐƚŚĞŽƵƚƐŝĚĞǁŽƌůĚŝŶƚŽƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞĂŶĚůĞƚƚŚĞŝ ŶƐŝĚĞŽĨƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞŐŽŽƵƚƐŝĚĞ͘/ŶƚŚŝƐƐĞŶƐĞ/ǁĂƐǁŽƌŬŝŶŐĂǁĂ ǇĂƚƚŚĞǁĂůůĂƐĂǁĂůů ĂŶĚďƌŝŶŐŝŶŐŝƚƚŽǁĂƌĚƐƚŚĞĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶŽĨĂƐĐƌĞĞŶ͙Η ϱ ϭϮϰ ΗŝŶƐŽŵĞĐĂƐĞƐďůŽĐŬƐŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶŵĂĚĞǁŝƚŚƉĂƚƚĞƌŶĞĚŚŽůĞƐŝŶƚŽ ǁŚŝĐŚŐůĂƐƐ;ƐŽŵĞƚŝŵĞƐĐŽůŽƌĞĚͿŝƐƐĞƚ͘tŚĞŶƚŚĞƐĞŐůĂǌĞĚƉĞƌĨ ŽƌĂƚĞĚƵŶŝƚƐĂƌĞ ĂƐƐĞŵďůĞĚƚŚĞǇĨŽƌŵĂƚƌĂŶƐůƵĐĞŶƚŐƌŝůůŽƌƐĐƌĞĞŶŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ͕ ŐůĂƐƐĂŶĚƐƚĞĞů͘Η Ğ ͗E Ͳ ĂŶĐ ŝĞ Ŷƚ͕ƚŝŵ Ğ ůĞ ƐƐ͕ƉĞ ƌ ŵ ĂŶĞ Ŷƚ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ ϯϯϲ ΗdŚĞǁŚŽůĞƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞǁŽƵůĚďĞǁŚĂƚǁĞĐĂůůΖƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ͘ΖΗ Ğ͗d Ͳď Ăƚ ƚĞƌŝŶ Ő͕ ŽĨĨƐĞƚďůŽĐŬƐ ϯ ϭϮϴ KĨĨƐĞƚĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞďůŽĐŬǁĂůůƐĂůůŽǁǀĞŶƚŝůĂƚŝŽŶ Ğ͗ͲĂƌĐŚŝƚ ĞĐƚƵ ƌĂůƋƵĂůŝƚǇͬďĞ ĂƵƚ Ǉ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϯϭ Η^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĂƉƉƌĞŚĞŶĚĞĚĂƐĂ ƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞŽĨŽƌĚĞƌŚĂƐƚŚĞĚĂ ŶŐĞƌŽĨŵŽŶŽƚŽŶǇŝŶĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘Η ϭ ϵ Ϯϴ ϭ ϯϬϰ ŽŶĐƌĞƚĞďůŽĐŬ͗ŵŽƐƚ͞ŝŶĨĞƌŝŽƌ͟ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂů͘ ϭ ϯϬϰ ͞ƚŚĞ͚ďůŽĐŬ͛ďĞĐŽŵĞƐĂŵĞƌĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůƵŶŝƚŝŶĂƋƵŝĞƚ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐ ǁŚŽůĞ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϵ ϭ ϯϮϱ ^ĂŶDĂƌĐŽƐ͗͞/ĨŝŶĂůůǇĨŽƵŶĚƐŝŵƉ ůĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽƉƌŽĚƵĐĞ ĂĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞďƵ ŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚůŽŽŬƐƚŚĞǁĂǇƚŚĞDĂĐŚŝŶĞŵĂĚĞŝƚʹ ĂƐ ŵƵĐŚƐŽĂƚ ůĞĂƐƚĂƐĂŶǇǁŽǀĞŶĨĂďƌŝĐŶĞĞĚůŽŽŬ͘dŽƵŐŚ͕ůŝŐŚƚďƵƚŶŽƚ͚ƚŚŝŶ ͕͛ŝŵƉĞƌŝƐŚĂďůĞ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐʹ Ŷ ŽŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇůŝĞĂďŽƵƚŝƚĂŶǇǁŚĞƌĞĂŶ ĚǇĞƚ͕DĂĐŚŝŶĞͲ ŵĂĚĞ͕ŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůůǇƉĞƌĨĞĐƚ͘^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞ DĂĐŚŝŶĞŚĞƌĞ͕ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƚŝŵĞŵĂǇďĞƐĞĞŶŝŶƚŚĞŚĂŶĚŽĨƚŚĞ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͙͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϱ ͞^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶǁĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞŵĂĐŚŝŶĞ͕ĂŶĚŚĞƌĞƚŚĞĂƌĐŚ ŝƚĞĐƚǁĂƐƚĂŬŝŶŐŝƚĂƐĂƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞĂŶĚ͚ŬŶŝƚƚŝŶŐ͛ǁŝƚŚŝƚ͘zĞƐ͕ ĐƌŽĐŚĞƚŝŶŐǁŝƚŚĂĨƌĞĞ ŵĂƐŽŶƌǇĨĂďƌŝĐĐĂƉĂďůĞŽĨŐƌĞĂƚǀĂƌŝĞƚǇŝŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůďĞĂƵƚǇ ͘Η Ϯ Ϯϳϲ ͞ůǁĂǇƐƚŚĞĚĞƐŝƌĞƚŽŐĞƚƐŽŵĞƐǇƐƚĞŵŽĨďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ ĂƐĂďĂƐŝƐĨŽƌĂƌĐ ŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ͙͟&ŽƌŵĐŽŵĞƐĨƌŽŵĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƐǇƐƚ Ğŵ͘ŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ ďůŽĐŬĂƐ͞ŐƵƚƚĞƌƌĂƚ͕͟͞ƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ͕ŶŽďůĞ͕ďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͙ĐŚĞĂƉ͟ Ϯ Ϯϴϯ ͞ƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ͙ĨŝƌĞͲƉƌŽŽĨ͕ĂŶĚ͙ďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͕ĨŽƌΨϭϬ͕ϬϬϬ͘͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϲ ϯ ϭϵϰ ΗŶĚŝŶƚŚŝƐŵŽƌĞŶĂƚƵƌĂůŽƌĚĞƌŽĨŚƵŵĂŶŐƌŽǁƚŚƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞǁŝůů ŶŽƚŐŽƚŽƚŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇĨŽƌƉƌĞͲĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚŝŽŶͲ EŽ͕ƚŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇǁŝůů ŐŽƚŽƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞ͘ ŶĚǁŚĞŶŝƚĚŽĞƐŐŽŝŶƚŚĞŚĂŶĚŽĨƚŚĞĐŽŵƉĞƚĞŶƚƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚŐƌĞĂ ƚĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐƐĂŶ ĚĨƌĞƐŚŶĞǁďĞĂƵƚǇǁŝůůďĞƚŚĞďĞŶĞĨŝĐŝĂůƌĞƐƵůƚ͘ ΗdŚĞŵĂĐŚŝŶĞĂƐ ĂƐƵďŽƌĚŝŶĂƚĞĚƚŽŽůŽĨƚŚĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͘ ϭ ϵ ϰϵ ϰ ϯϯϰ Η/ƚŝƐƚŚĞƋƵĂůŝƚǇŝŶƚŚŝŶŐƐƚŚĂƚƐŚŽƵůĚŵĂŬĞƚŚĞŵĚĞƐŝƌĂďůĞĂŶ ĚďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵůΗ ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϬϵ ΗDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐǁĞƌĞŶŽǁƐŽƵƐĞĚĂƐƚŽďƌŝŶŐŽƵƚƚŚĞŝƌŶĂƚƵƌĂůďĞĂƵƚ ǇŽĨĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ͘Η ϱ ϭϮϭ ΗdŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƚŚŝŶŐƚŽĚŽƚŽŐĞƚĂhƐŽŶŝĂŶŚŽƵƐĞŝƐƚŽŐŽƚŽĂhƐŽ ŶŝĂŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͊ΗΗ/ĚŽƵďƚƚŚĂƚƚŚŝƐĂĨĨĂŝƌĐĂŶďĞ ƚĂƵŐŚƚ ƚŽĂŶǇŽŶĞ͘/ƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚĐŽŵĞ ĨƌŽŵĂƵŶŝǀĞƌƐŝƚǇǁŝƚŚƐŽŵĞĚĞŐƌĞĞŽƌŽƚŚĞƌ͘zŽƵĐĂŶŶŽƚŐĞƚŝ ƚĨƌŽŵďŽŽŬƐĂůŽŶ Ğ ͙Η ϱ ϭϮϰ ΗƐĂĐŽŶƐĞƋƵĞŶĐĞĐŽŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶĚ ŽĞƐŶŽƚŵĞĂŶƐƚƵůƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶďƵƚ ǁŝƚŚŝƚŝŵĂŐŝŶ Ă ƚŝŽŶŵĂǇĚĞǀŝƐĞĂŶĚďƵŝůĚĨƌĞĞůǇĨŽƌƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂ ůƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐĂŶ ŝŵŵĞŶƐĞůǇĨůĞǆŝďůĞǀĂƌŝĞĚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŝŶŐƌŽƵƉƐŶĞǀĞƌůĂĐŬŝŶŐŝŶŐ ƌĂĐĞŽƌĚĞƐŝƌĂďůĞĚ ŝƐƚŝŶĐƚŝŽŶ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϱ ϱ ϭϯϰ Η/ƚŝƐĨŽƌƚŚĂƚ ƚŚĂƚĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƐĂƌĞŵĞŵďĞƌƐŽĨƐŽĐŝĞƚǇ͗ĨŽƌƚŚĞ ƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶ ŽĨŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůŝƚǇ͕ƚŚƵƐŵĂŬŝŶŐďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͕ŝŶǀĂƌŝŽƵƐǁĂǇƐ͕ƚŚĞĐ ŽŵŵŽŶ ŶĞĐĞƐƐŝƚǇŽĨůŝǀŝŶŐ͘Η ϱ ϭϯϯ Η>ŽŽŬĂƚƚŚŝƐůŝƚƚůĞďĞĂƵƚǇ͘;Ă ƐĞĂƐŚĞůůͿ^ƵĐŚĂƐǁĞĞƚůŝƚƚůĞ ŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůŝƚǇ͊ŝǀŝůŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĐŽŵĞƐŝŶĂŶĚƐĂǇƐ͕ΖKŚ͕ŚĞůů͕ůĞƚΖƐ ŐĞƚĂŶĞĂƐǇƉĂƚƚĞƌŶŽƵƚŽĨ ƚŚŝƐ͕ƐŽǁĞĐĂŶƐƚĂŵƉƚŚĞŵŽƵƚ͕ĂůůũƵƐƚƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ͘ΖΗ/ƚďĞĐŽŵĞ ƐĂĐůŝĐŚĠ͕ĂƐƚǇůĞ͘ dŚĞŶƚŚĞĚŝǀŝŶĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶŝƚŐŽĞƐŽƵƚ͘Η Ğ͗>< ͲďůŽ Đ Ŭ ŝŶĞ ƐƐ͕ƵŶŝƚĨŽƌŵ ϭ ϵ Ϯϴ ϭ ϯϬϰ ͞ƚŚĞ͚ďůŽĐŬ͛ďĞĐŽŵĞƐĂŵĞƌĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůƵŶŝƚŝŶĂƋƵŝĞƚ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐ ǁŚŽůĞ͟ ϭ ϮϱϬ ͞ĐĂƐƚͲďůŽĐŬďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͗ƐƵĐŚŵĂƐƐŝŶŐĂƐŝƐĨĞůƚƚŽďĞĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞ ƚŽƚŚĞƐĞŶƐĞŽĨďůŽĐŬĂŶĚď Ž ǆĂŶĚƐůĂď͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϵ ϭ ϯϮϱ ^ĂŶDĂƌĐŽƐ͗͞/ĨŝŶĂůůǇĨŽƵŶĚƐŝŵƉ ůĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽƉƌŽĚƵĐĞ ĂĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞďƵ ŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚůŽŽŬƐƚŚĞǁĂǇƚŚĞDĂĐŚŝŶĞŵĂĚĞŝƚʹ ĂƐ ŵƵĐŚƐŽĂƚ ůĞĂƐƚĂƐĂŶǇǁŽǀĞŶĨĂďƌŝĐŶĞĞĚůŽŽŬ͘dŽƵŐŚ͕ůŝŐŚƚďƵƚŶŽƚ͚ƚŚŝŶ ͕͛ŝŵƉĞƌŝƐŚĂďůĞ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐʹ Ŷ ŽŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇůŝĞĂďŽƵƚŝƚĂŶǇǁŚĞƌĞĂŶ ĚǇĞƚ͕DĂĐŚŝŶĞͲ ŵĂĚĞ͕ŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůůǇƉĞƌĨĞĐƚ͘^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞ DĂĐŚŝŶĞŚĞƌĞ͕ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƚŝŵĞŵĂǇďĞƐĞĞŶŝŶƚŚĞŚĂŶĚŽĨƚŚĞ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͙͟ Ğ͗/DͲ Ζ h Ŷ ŝƚ^Ǉ ƐƚĞŵ͕ΖŶŽĚŝŵĞŶƐ ŝŽ Ŷ Ɛ ϭ ϵ Ϯϱ ϭ Ϯϭϯ ͞ƵŶŝƚͲƐůĂď͟ƐǇƐƚĞŵ͕͞dŚŝƐŝƐƚŚĞ ďĞŐŝŶŶŝŶŐŽĨĂĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝǀĞĞĨ ĨŽƌƚƚŽƉƌŽĚƵĐĞĂƚǇƉĞƚŚ Ă ƚǁŽƵů ĚĨƵůůǇƵƚŝůŝǌĞƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶ ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶŽĨ ĞĂƐŝůǇŵĂŶŚĂŶĚůĞĚƵŶŝƚƐ ͘͟͞ƚŚŝƌĚĚŝŵĞŶƐŝŽŶ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ ϮϰϮ ΗƵŶŝƚͲŵĂƐƐŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ͕ƐŝǌĞĂŶĚƐŚĂƉĞĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚďǇƚŚĞǁŽƌŬ ŝŶƚĞŶĚĞĚƚŽďĞĚŽŶĞĂŶĚǁŚĂƚǁĞŝŐŚƚĂŵĂŶĐĂŶƌĞĂƐŽŶĂďůǇďĞĞǆ ƉĞĐƚĞĚƚŽůŝĨƚ ĂŶĚƐĞƚŝŶĂǁĂůů͕ŝƐĨŝǆĞĚƵƉŽ Ŷ͘Ηϭϲ͟ǆϭϲ͟ǆϮ͘ϱ͟ƚŚŝĐŬ͘^ƚĞĞůŽ ƌĂůƵŵŝŶƵŵŵŽůĚƐƵƐĞĚ͕ŐƌŽŽǀĞƐ͕ůĂĐĞĚǁŝƚŚƐƚĞĞůƌŽĚƐ͘'ƌŽŽǀĞƐ Ă ƌĞŵĂĚĞĂƐůĂƌŐĞĂƐ ƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͕͞ůŽĐŬŝŶŐƚŚĞǁŚŽůĞŝŶƚŽŽŶĞĨŝƌŵƐůĂď͘͟ΗŵŽŶŽůŝƚŚΗ WĂŐĞ ϰ ŽĨϮ ϯ E.1-6 Ăƚ Ğ Ő ŽƌǇ ƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůYƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐ hŶƉƌŽǀĞŶ ůĂŝŵƐ zĞ Ăƌ sŽů͘ WĂŐĞ EŽƚĞƐ ĞƐ ŝŐŶ Ğ͗ /D Ͳ Ζ h Ŷ ŝƚ^Ǉ ƐƚĞŵ͕ΖŶŽĚŝŵĞŶƐ ŝŽ Ŷ Ɛ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞^ĞǀĞƌĂůŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵŽůĚƐŵĂǇďĞƚŚƌŽǁŶŝŶƚŽĂ&ŽƌĚ͙͟ΗdŚŝƐͲ ĂŶĚ ĂŶŽƌŐĂŶŝǌĂƚŝŽŶŽĨǁŽƌŬŵĞŶƚƌĂŝŶĞĚƚŽĚŽŽŶĞƚŚŝŶŐǁĞůů͘ΗůĂŝĚ ŽƵƚďǇ ĐŽƵŶƚŝŶŐďůŽĐŬƐ͕ƐƚĞĞůǁŽŽĨĂŶĚǁĂƌƉ ϭ Ϯϰϯ WůĂŶƐďĞĐŽŵĞĚŝĂŐƌĂŵƐ͕ǁŝƚŚŽƵƚ͞ŚĂƉŚĂǌĂƌĚĚŝŵĞŶƐŝŽŶƐ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϵ ϭ ϯϮϱ ^ĂŶDĂƌĐŽƐ͗͞/ĨŝŶĂůůǇĨŽƵŶĚƐŝŵƉ ůĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽƉƌŽĚƵĐĞ ĂĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞďƵ ŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚůŽŽŬƐƚŚĞǁĂǇƚŚĞDĂĐŚŝŶĞŵĂĚĞŝƚʹ ĂƐ ŵƵĐŚƐŽĂƚ ůĞĂƐƚĂƐĂŶǇǁŽǀĞŶĨĂďƌŝĐŶĞĞĚůŽŽŬ͘dŽƵŐŚ͕ůŝŐŚƚďƵƚŶŽƚ͚ƚŚŝŶ ͕͛ŝŵƉĞƌŝƐŚĂďůĞ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐʹ Ŷ ŽŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇůŝĞĂďŽƵƚŝƚĂŶǇǁŚĞƌĞĂŶ ĚǇĞƚ͕DĂĐŚŝŶĞͲ ŵĂĚĞ͕ŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůůǇƉĞƌĨĞĐƚ͘^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞ DĂĐŚŝŶĞŚĞƌĞ͕ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƚŝŵĞŵĂǇďĞƐĞĞŶŝŶƚŚĞŚĂŶĚŽĨƚŚĞ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͙͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϱ ͞^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶǁĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞŵĂĐŚŝŶĞ͕ĂŶĚŚĞƌĞƚŚĞĂƌĐŚ ŝƚĞĐƚǁĂƐƚĂŬŝŶŐŝƚĂƐĂƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞĂŶĚ͚ŬŶŝƚƚŝŶŐ͛ǁŝƚŚŝƚ͘zĞƐ͕ ĐƌŽĐŚĞƚŝŶŐǁŝƚŚĂĨƌĞĞ ŵĂƐŽŶƌǇĨĂďƌŝĐĐĂƉĂďůĞŽĨŐƌĞĂƚǀĂƌŝĞƚǇŝŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůďĞĂƵƚǇ ͘Η Ϯ ϯϮϳ ŝůƚŵŽƌĞʹ ͞ƚŚĞƵŶŝƚͲďůŽĐŬƐǇƐƚĞŵ͕͟ʹ ďĞƚƚĞƌƌĞƐƵůƚƐǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĐŽ ƚƚĂŐĞƐ ϯ ϭϮϰ >ĂǇŽƵƚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŽŶĂƵŶŝƚͲƐǇƐƚĞŵĨŽƌƌĞůĂƚŝǀĞůǇĨŽŽůͲƉƌŽŽĨĨŝŶ ĂůĂƐƐĞŵďůǇ͘ ϭ ϵ ϯϴ ϯ Ϯϴϲ ϮΖǆϰΖhŶŝƚ^ǇƐƚĞŵ ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϬϰ ΗdŽƐŝŵƉůŝĨǇĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚŝŽŶǁĞŵƵƐƚ ƵƐĞŽƵƌŚŽƌŝǌŽŶƚĂůͲƵŶŝƚƐǇƐƚĞŵ ŝŶĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ͘tĞŵƵƐƚĂůƐ ŽƵƐĞĂǀĞƌƚŝĐĂůƵŶŝƚƐǇƐƚĞŵ͙Η ϭ ϵ ϱϳ ϱ Ϯϭϱ Η͙ĂůůŵǇƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐǁĂƐĚĞǀŝƐĞĚŽŶĂƉƌŽƉĞƌůǇƉƌŽƉŽƌƚŝŽŶĞĚƵŶŝƚƐ ǇƐƚĞŵ͘/ĨŽƵŶĚ ƚŚŝƐǁŽƵůĚŬĞĞƉĂ ůůƚŽƐĐĂůĞ͙ǁŚŝĐŚƚŚƵƐďĞĐĂŵĞ Ͳ ůŝŬĞƚĂƉĞƐƚƌǇͲ Ă ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚĨĂďƌŝĐǁŽǀĞŶŽĨŝŶƚĞƌ ĚĞƉĞŶĚĞŶƚ͕ƌĞůĂƚĞĚƵŶŝƚƐ͕ŚŽǁĞǀ ĞƌǀĂƌŝŽƵƐ͘Η Ğ͗& >yͲĨ ůĞǆ ŝďŝůŝƚǇ ͬΖŝŶĨŝŶŝƚĞǀĂƌŝĞƚ Ǉ Ζ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ Η^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶŚĞƌĞĞĨĨĞĐƚƐĞĐŽŶŽŵǇŽĨĞĨĨŽƌƚĂŶĚŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƚŽ ƚŚĞĞǆƚƌĞŵĞ͕ďƵ ƚďƌŝŶŐƐǁŝƚŚŝƚĂƉĞƌĨĞĐƚĨƌĞĞĚŽŵĨŽƌƚŚĞŝŵĂŐ ŝŶĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞ ĚĞƐŝŐŶĞƌǁŚŽŶŽǁŚĂƐŝŶĨŝŶŝƚĞǀĂƌŝĞƚǇĂƐĂƉŽƐƐŝďŝůŝƚǇŝŶƵůƚŝŵ ĂƚĞĞĨĨĞĐƚƐĂĨƚĞƌŵĂƐƚĞƌŝŶŐĂƐŝŵƉůĞƚĞĐŚŶŝƋƵĞ͘Η ϭ ϮϰϮ ͘͘͘͞ůŝŐŚƚůǇĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚĞĚ͕ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞ͕ ŽĨŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůͲ ůŝƚĞƌĂůůǇǁ ŽǀĞŶŝŶƚŽĂƉĂƚƚĞƌŶŽƌĚĞƐŝŐŶĂ ƐǁĂƐƚŚĞŽƌŝĞŶƚĂůƌƵŐ͘͘͘ĨĂďƌŝĐĂ ƚŝŽŶĂƐŝŶĨŝŶŝƚĞŝŶĐŽůŽƌ͕ ƚĞǆƚƵƌĞ͕ĂŶĚǀĂƌŝĞƚǇĂƐŝŶƚŚĂƚƌƵŐ͘ΗůĂŝŵƐƚŚĂƚĂƐƐĞŵďůǇŝƐŶ ŽŵŽƌĞĐŽŵƉůĞǆƚŚĂŶƌƵŐǁĞĂǀŝŶŐ͘ ϭ Ϯϯϭ Η^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĂƉƉƌĞŚĞŶĚĞĚĂƐĂ ƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞŽĨŽƌĚĞƌŚĂƐƚŚĞĚĂ ŶŐĞƌŽĨŵŽŶŽƚŽŶǇŝŶĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘Η ϭ ϵ Ϯϴ ϭ ϯϬϰ ͞ƚŚĞ͚ďůŽĐŬ͛ďĞĐŽŵĞƐĂŵĞƌĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůƵŶŝƚŝŶĂƋƵŝĞƚ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐ ǁŚŽůĞ͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϱ ͞ƚůĂƐƚ͗ĂƌĞĂůďƵŝůĚŝŶŐͲŵĞƚŚŽĚďĞŐŝŶŶŝŶŐŝŶƚŚŝƐůŝƚƚůĞŚŽƵƐĞ ͖ŚĞƌĞǁĂƐĂΖǁĞĂǀŝŶŐΖŝŶďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚĐŽƵůĚŶŽƚŐŽǁƌŽŶŐĨŽƌ ĂŶǇŽŶĞ͗ĂƉƌŽŚŝďŝƚŝŽŶ ďǇŶĂƚƵƌĞ͕ŽĨĂĨĨĞĐƚĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƐŚĂŵ͕ŽƌƐĞŶƐĞůĞƐƐĞǆƚƌĂǀĂŐĂŶĐĞ͘/Ŷ ƚĞŐƌŝƚǇŝŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ ƵƌĞ͘͘͘DĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽŝŶĨŝŶŝƚĞǀĂƌŝĞƚǇ ǁ ĂƐŶŽůŽŶŐĞƌĂŶ ŝŵƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĂůĚƌĞĂŵ͊͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϲ ϯ ϭϵϰ ΗŶĚŝŶƚŚŝƐŵŽƌĞŶĂƚƵƌĂůŽƌĚĞƌŽĨŚƵŵĂŶŐƌŽǁƚŚƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞǁŝůů ŶŽƚŐŽƚŽƚŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇĨŽƌƉƌĞͲĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚŝŽŶͲ EŽ͕ƚŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇǁŝůů ŐŽƚŽƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞ͘ ŶĚǁŚĞŶŝƚĚŽĞƐŐŽŝŶƚŚĞŚĂŶĚŽĨƚŚĞĐŽŵƉĞƚĞŶƚƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚŐƌĞĂ ƚĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐƐĂŶ ĚĨƌĞƐŚŶĞǁďĞĂƵƚǇǁŝůůďĞƚŚĞďĞŶĞĨŝĐŝĂůƌĞƐƵůƚ͘ ΗdŚĞŵĂĐŚŝŶĞĂƐ ĂƐƵďŽƌĚŝŶĂƚĞĚƚŽŽůŽĨƚŚĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͘ ϭϵ ϰϬ ϰ ϱϵ ĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨŽƌΗƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶΗŝŶƌŽĂĚĂĐƌĞŝƚǇ͗Η Ζ^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶΖŝƐƐŽƵƐĞĚĞǀĞƌǇǁŚĞƌĞ͕ƚŽǁŝĚĞŶƚŚĞƐĐŽƉĞŽĨ ŝ ŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůŝƚǇ͘zŽƵ ŵĂǇƐĞĞƚŚŝƐďǇƐƚƵĚǇŝŶŐƚŚĞŐƌĞĂƚǀĂƌŝĞƚǇŽĨĨŽƌŵƐƚŚĂƚƐƉƌŝŶŐ ĨƌŽŵƚŚŝƐĨƌĞƐŚĐŽŶƚĂĐƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚǁŚĞŶƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚŝƚƐĞůĨ ďĞĐŽŵĞƐĂŶ ŝŶƐƉŝƌŝŶŐĨĂĐƚŽƌŝŶƚŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞĨŽƌŵ͘Η ϭϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϵϳ Η/ƚŝƐďǇƵƚŝůŝǌŝŶŐŵĂƐƐƉƌŽĚƵĐƚŝ ŽŶŝŶƚŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇŝŶƚŚŝƐĐŽŶŶ ĞĐƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚƐŽŵĞŝĚĞĂŽĨƚŚĞƌĞŵĂƌŬĂďůĞŶĞǁĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ ƚ ŽŵŽĚĞƌŶ ĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞŵĂǇďĞƐĞĞŶĂƉƉƌŽĂĐŚŝŶŐƚŚŽƐĞƌĞĂůŝǌĞĚŝŶĂŶǇǁĞůů ͲďƵŝůƚŵĂĐŚŝŶĞ͘/ĨƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĐ Ă ŶďĞŚƵŵĂŶŝǌĞĚĂŶĚŵĂĚĞĨ ůĞǆŝďůĞŝŶĚĞƐŝŐŶ ĂŶĚƚŚĞĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐƐďƌŽƵŐŚƚƚŽƚŚĞŚŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌ͕ƚŚĞŐƌĞĂƚĞƐƚƐĞƌǀŝ ĐĞǁŝůůďĞƌĞŶĚ ĞƌĞĚƚŽŽƵƌŵŽĚĞƌŶǁĂǇŽĨůŝĨĞ͘/ƚŵĂǇƌĞĂůůǇď ĞďŽƌŶͲ ƚŚŝƐ ĚĞŵŽĐƌĂĐǇ͕/ŵĞĂŶ͘Η ϱ ϭϮϰ ΗdŚĞhƐŽŶŝĂŶƵƚŽŵĂƚŝĐƐǇƐƚĞŵŝƐ ĐĂƉĂďůĞŽĨŝŶĨŝŶŝƚĞŵŽĚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝ ŽŶƐŽĨĨŽƌŵ͕ƉĂƚƚ ĞƌŶĂŶĚĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͕ĂŶĚƚŽĂŶǇĞǆƚĞŶƚ͘Η ϱ ϭϮϰ ΗŚŽƵƐĞƚŚĂƚŵĂǇďĞƉƵƚƚŽǁŽƌŬŝŶŽƵƌƐŽĐŝĞƚǇĂŶĚŐŝǀĞƵƐĂŶ ĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞĨŽƌΖ ŚŽƵƐŝŶŐΖǁŚŝĐŚŝƐďĞĐŽŵŝŶŐƚŽĂĨƌĞĞƐŽĐŝĞƚǇ ď ĞĐĂƵƐĞ͕ƚŚŽƵŐŚ ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĞĚĨƵůůǇ͕ŝƚǇĞƚĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞƐƚŚĞĚĞŵŽĐƌĂƚŝĐŝĚĞĂůŽĨ ǀĂƌŝĞƚǇͲ ƚŚĞƐŽǀĞƌĞŝŐ ŶƚǇŽĨƚŚĞŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂů͘Η ϱ ϭϮϰ ΗƐĂĐŽŶƐĞƋƵĞŶĐĞĐŽŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶĚ ŽĞƐŶŽƚŵĞĂŶƐƚƵůƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶďƵƚ ǁŝƚŚŝƚŝŵĂŐŝŶ Ă ƚŝŽŶŵĂǇĚĞǀŝƐĞĂŶĚďƵŝůĚĨƌĞĞůǇĨŽƌƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂ ůƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐĂŶ ŝŵŵĞŶƐĞůǇĨůĞǆŝďůĞǀĂƌŝĞĚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŝŶŐƌŽƵƉƐŶĞǀĞƌůĂĐŬŝŶŐŝŶŐ ƌĂĐĞŽƌĚĞƐŝƌĂďůĞĚ ŝƐƚŝŶĐƚŝŽŶ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϱ ϱ ϭϯϯ Η>ŽŽŬĂƚƚŚŝƐůŝƚƚůĞďĞĂƵƚǇ͘;Ă ƐĞĂƐŚĞůůͿ^ƵĐŚĂƐǁĞĞƚůŝƚƚůĞ ŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůŝƚǇ͊ŝǀŝůŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĐŽŵĞƐŝŶĂŶĚƐĂǇƐ͕ΖKŚ͕ŚĞůů͕ůĞƚΖƐ ŐĞƚĂŶĞĂƐǇƉĂƚƚĞƌŶŽƵƚŽĨ ƚŚŝƐ͕ƐŽǁĞĐĂŶƐƚĂŵƉƚŚĞŵŽƵƚ͕ĂůůũƵƐƚƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ͘ΖΗ/ƚďĞĐŽŵĞ ƐĂĐůŝĐŚĠ͕ĂƐƚǇůĞ͘ dŚĞŶƚŚĞĚŝǀŝŶĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶŝƚŐŽĞƐŽƵƚ͘Η WĂŐĞ ϱ ŽĨϮ ϯ E.1-7 Ăƚ Ğ Ő ŽƌǇ ƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůYƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐ hŶƉƌŽǀĞŶ ůĂŝŵƐ zĞ Ăƌ sŽů͘ WĂŐĞ EŽƚĞƐ ĞƐŝŐŶ Ğ͗& >yͲĨ ůĞǆ ŝďŝůŝƚǇͬΖŝŶĨŝŶŝƚĞǀĂƌŝĞƚ Ǉ Ζ ϭ ϵ ϱϴ ϱ ϮϰϮ ΗdŚĞŝŶƚƌŝĐĂĐǇŽĨĚŽŽƌƐĂŶĚǁŝŶĚŽǁƐĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚĐŽŶǀĞŶŝĞ ŶĐĞƐŽĨŽĐĐƵƉĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƚŚĞĂƉƉƵƌƚĞ ŶĂŶĐĞƐǇƐƚĞŵ;ŚĞĂƚĂŶĚůŝŐŚƚͿͲ ŝ ŶƚŚĞƐĞŵĂƚƚĞƌƐ ƚŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇŵƵƐƚĨŝŶĂůůǇĚĞĐŝĚĞĂŶĚǇĞƚ͕ĂůůƚŚĞƐĞŵĂƚƚĞƌƐŵƵƐƚ ďĞƐŽĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚĂƐƚŽĂĚŵŝƚŽĨĨ ŝŶĞǀĂƌŝĞĚƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐŝŶƚŚĞĚĞƐŝ ŐŶ͘Η Ğ͗& hZͲĨƵƌŶ ŝ Ɛ Ś ŝŶŐ Ɛ ŵĂƚĐŚďůŽĐŬŵŽĚ Ƶ ůĞ ϭϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϴϲ ΗdŚĞŶĞǁƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĞŵĂĚĞĂůůĨƵƌŶŝƐŚŝŶŐƐƐŽĨĂƌĂƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ;ĐĞƌƚ ĂŝŶůǇƚŚĞĞůĞĐƚƌŝĐůŝŐŚƚŝŶŐĂŶĚŚĞĂƚŝŶŐƐǇƐƚĞŵƐͿŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůƉĂƌƚƐ ŽĨƚŚĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ͘^Ž ĨĂƌĂƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞĂůůĨƵƌŶŝƚƵƌĞǁĂ ƐƚŽďĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚŝŶƉůĂĐĞĂƐƉĂ ƌƚŽĨƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͘Η Ğ͗'>ͲŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůŐůĂǌŝŶŐ͕ŵŽĚƵůĂƌ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ΗtŝŶĚŽǁƐ͍DĂĚĞŝŶƚŚĞƐŚŽƉ͕ƐƚĂ ŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĞĚƚŽǁŽƌŬǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐůĂď ͲďůŽĐŬƵŶŝƚƐ͘DĂĚĞŽĨƐŚĞĞƚŵĞƚĂůĨŝŶŝƐŚĞĚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĂŶĚƐĞƚŝŶ ƚŚĞǁĂůůƐĂƐƚŚĞ ǁŽƌŬƉƌŽĐĞĞĚƐ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϬϰ ΗůůƚŚŝƐĨĞŶĞƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶĐĂŶďĞŵĂĚĞƌĞĂĚǇĂƚƚŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇĂŶĚƐĞƚ ƵƉĂƐƚŚĞǁĂůůƐ͘ƵƚƚŚĞƌĞŝƐŶŽůŽŶŐĞƌƐĞŶƐĞŝŶƐƉĞĂŬŝŶŐŽĨ Ě ŽŽƌƐĂŶĚǁŝŶĚŽǁƐ͘ dŚĞƐĞǁĂůůƐĂƌĞůĂƌŐĞůǇĂƐǇƐƚĞŵŽĨĨĞŶĞƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶŚĂǀŝŶŐŝƚƐŽǁŶ ƉĂƌƚŝŶƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶ ŐƐĐŚĞŵĞ͙Η ϱϵϱ ΗtĂůůƐƚŚĞŵƐĞůǀĞƐďĞĐĂƵƐĞŽĨŐůĂƐƐǁŝůůďĞĐŽŵĞǁŝŶĚŽǁƐĂŶĚǁŝŶĚ ŽǁƐĂƐǁĞƵƐĞĚƚŽŬŶŽǁƚŚĞŵĂƐŚŽůĞƐŝŶǁĂůůƐǁŝůůďĞƐĞĞŶŶŽŵ ŽƌĞ͘Η Ğ͗'h/ ͲŐ Ƶ ŝĚ Ğ Ɛ ĚĞƐŝŐŶĞǆƉƌĞƐƐŝŽŶ ϭ ϵ Ϯϴ ϭ ϮϱϬ ͞ĐĂƐƚͲďůŽĐŬďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͗ƐƵĐŚŵĂƐƐŝŶŐĂƐŝƐĨĞůƚƚŽďĞĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞ ƚŽƚŚĞƐĞŶƐĞŽĨďůŽĐŬĂŶĚď Ž ǆĂŶĚƐůĂď͟ ϭ Ϯϱϯ ͞/ŶƚŚĞƉƌĞĐĂƐƚͲďůŽĐŬďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͕ƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽĨďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁŚŽůůǇĚ ĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞƐƚŚĞĨŽƌŵĂŶĚƐƚǇůĞ͘͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϵ ϭ ϯϮϱ ^ĂŶDĂƌĐŽƐ͗͞/ĨŝŶĂůůǇĨŽƵŶĚƐŝŵƉ ůĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽƉƌŽĚƵĐĞ ĂĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞďƵ ŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚůŽŽŬƐƚŚĞǁĂǇƚŚĞDĂĐŚŝŶĞŵĂĚĞŝƚʹ ĂƐ ŵƵĐŚƐŽĂƚ ůĞĂƐƚĂƐĂŶǇǁŽǀĞŶĨĂďƌŝĐŶĞĞĚůŽŽŬ͘dŽƵŐŚ͕ůŝŐŚƚďƵƚŶŽƚ͚ƚŚŝŶ ͕͛ŝŵƉĞƌŝƐŚĂďůĞ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐʹ Ŷ ŽŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇůŝĞĂďŽƵƚŝƚĂŶǇǁŚĞƌĞĂŶ ĚǇĞƚ͕DĂĐŚŝŶĞͲ ŵĂĚĞ͕ŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůůǇƉĞƌĨĞĐƚ͘^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞ DĂĐŚŝŶĞŚĞƌĞ͕ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƚŝŵĞŵĂǇďĞƐĞĞŶŝŶƚŚĞŚĂŶĚŽĨƚŚĞ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͙͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϳϲ ͞ůǁĂǇƐƚŚĞĚĞƐŝƌĞƚŽŐĞƚƐŽŵĞƐǇƐƚĞŵŽĨďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ ĂƐĂďĂƐŝƐĨŽƌĂƌĐ ŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ͙͟&ŽƌŵĐŽŵĞƐĨƌŽŵĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƐǇƐƚ Ğŵ͘ŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ ďůŽĐŬĂƐ͞ŐƵƚƚĞƌƌĂƚ͕͟͞ƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ͕ŶŽďůĞ͕ďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͙ĐŚĞĂƉ͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϳ ϯ Ϯϰϵ ΗĂŶĞǁƚĞĐŚŶŝƋƵĞ͙΀ǁŚŝĐŚ΁ďƌŝŶŐƐƚŽƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞďƵŝůĚĞƌĂŶĚŚŽŵĞŽ ǁŶĞƌƚŚĞďĞŶ ĞĨŝƚƐŽĨŝŶĚƵƐƚƌŝĂůŝƐ ŵĂŶĚƚŚĞĞĨĨŝĐŝĞŶĐŝĞƐŽĨƚŚĞ Ĩ ĂĐƚŽƌǇΗ ΗĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĞƐŽĨƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶ͙ƵƐ ŝŶŐƚŚĞƐŝŵƉůĞƵŶŝƚƐǇƐƚĞŵΗŚŽƌ ŝǌŽŶƚĂůůǇĂŶĚǀĞƌƚŝĐĂůůǇǁŽǀĞŶ͕ĂĞƐƚŚĞƚŝĐŝŵƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐĂƐǁĞůů Ă ƐƐĐŝĞŶƚŝĨŝĐĂŶĚ ĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐ Ğ͗,KZͲŚ ŽƌŝǌŽŶƚĂů ĞŵƉŚĂƐŝƐ ϭϵ ϰϬ ϰ ϲϲ ƌŽĂĚĂĐƌĞŝƚǇ͗ΗůĞƚƚŚĞŚŽƌŝǌŽŶƚĂůĐŝƚǇĂƉƉĞĂƌƚŽŐĞƚŚĞƌǁŝƚŚĂ ƐǇƐƚĞŵŽĨĐƌĞĂƚŝŽŶ ĂŶĚĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶŵŽƌĞĐŽƌƌĞƐƉŽŶĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ Ŷ ĂƚƵƌĂůĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐ ƚŽŽƵƌůŝĨĞŚĞƌĞŽŶĞĂƌƚŚ͘Η ϰϱϵ ĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨŽƌΗƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶΗŝŶƌŽĂĚĂĐƌĞŝƚǇ͗Η Ζ^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶΖŝƐƐŽƵƐĞĚĞǀĞƌǇǁŚĞƌĞ͕ƚŽǁŝĚĞŶƚŚĞƐĐŽƉĞŽĨ ŝ ŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůŝƚǇ͘zŽƵ ŵĂǇƐĞĞƚŚŝƐďǇƐƚƵĚǇŝŶŐƚŚĞŐƌĞĂƚǀĂƌŝĞƚǇŽĨĨŽƌŵƐƚŚĂƚƐƉƌŝŶŐ ĨƌŽŵƚŚŝƐĨƌĞƐŚĐŽŶƚĂĐƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚǁŚĞŶƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚŝƚƐĞůĨ ďĞĐŽŵĞƐĂŶ ŝŶƐƉŝƌŝŶŐĨĂĐƚŽƌŝŶƚŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞĨŽƌŵ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϰϯ ϰ ϮϯϬ ΗsĞƌƚŝĐĂůŝƐǀĞƌƚŝŐŽ͕ŝŶŚƵŵĂŶůŝĨĞ͘dŚĞŚŽƌŝǌŽŶƚĂůůŝŶĞŝƐƚŚ ĞůŝĨĞͲůŝŶĞŽĨŚƵŵĂŶŬŝŶĚ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϰϱ ϰ ϮϴϬ ΗĞŵŽĐƌĂĐǇƐƚĂƌƚƐǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŚŽƌŝǌŽŶƚĂůĂƐƐƵŵƉƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚŵĞŶĂƌĞĐ ƌĞĂƚĞĚĞƋƵĂůƚŽůŝǀŝŶŐƚŽŐĞƚŚĞƌŽŶƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚƚŽŐƌŽǁŝŶ&ƌĞĞĚŽ ŵ͘Η ϭϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϳϵ Η/ŚĂĚĂŶŝĚĞĂ͙ƚŚĂƚƚŚĞƉůĂŶĞƐƉĂƌĂůůĞůƚŽƚŚĞĞĂƌƚŚŝŶďƵŝůĚŝŶ ŐƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĨǇƚŚĞŵƐĞůǀĞƐǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚ͕ĚŽŵŽƐƚƚŽŵĂŬĞƚŚĞďƵŝ ůĚŝŶŐƐďĞůŽŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ ŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘Η Ğ͗,h DͲ ŚƵ ŵ ĂŶƐ Đ ĂůĞ ϱ ϭϭϮ Η/ŶĚĞƐŝŐŶŝŶŐƚŚĞhƐŽŶŝĂŶŚŽƵƐĞ͕ĂƐ/ŚĂǀĞƐĂŝĚ͕/ŚĂǀĞĂůǁĂǇƐ ƉƌŽƉŽƌƚŝŽŶĞĚŝƚƚŽƚŚĞŚƵŵĂŶĨŝŐƵƌĞŝŶƉŽŝŶƚŽĨƐĐĂůĞΗ Ğ͗/E EͲŝŶŶ Ğƌ Ğ ĐŚŽĞƐŽƵƚĞƌ ϭ ϵ Ϯϴ ϭ ϮϱϮ ͞ĚŽƵďůĞǁĂůůĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƐƌĞƋƵŝƌŝŶŐŐƌĞĂƚƐŬŝůůŝŶƐƉĂĐŝŶŐƐŽ ƚŚĂƚƚŚĞŝŶƚĞƌŝŽƌƐŚĞůůǁŝůůǁŽƌŬƐŝŵƉůǇǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŽƵƚĞƌƐŚĞůů͟ ϭ ϵ ϰϵ ϰ ϯϲϮ Η/ǁĂŶƚĞĚƚŽƐĞĞ͕ƐŽŵĞĚĂǇ͕ĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŽƵƐůǇƉůĂƐƚŝĐĨƌŽŵ ŝŶƐŝĚĞƚŽŽƵƚƐŝĚĞΗ ϭϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϴϬ ΗŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇŝŶƚŚŝƐĂĞƐƚŚĞƚŝĐƐĞŶƐĞĂƉƉĞĂƌĞĚƚŽŵĞĂƐƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌ ĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽĂĐŚŝĞǀĞƚƌƵůǇŽƌŐĂŶŝĐĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞďǇŵĂĐŚŝŶĞƚĞĐŚŶ ŝƋƵĞŽƌďǇĂŶǇ ŽƚŚĞƌŶĂƚƵƌĂůƚĞĐŚŶŝƋƵĞ͘Η ϱ ϭϬϵ ΗdŚĞŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐŽĨƚŚĞŽƵƚƐŝĚĞǁĂůůƐĐĂŵĞŝŶƐŝĚĞũƵƐƚĂƐĂƉƉƌŽƉƌ ŝĂƚĞůǇĂŶĚĨƌĞĞůǇĂƐƚŚŽƐĞŽĨƚŚĞŝŶƐŝĚĞǁĂůůƐǁĞŶƚŽƵƚƐŝĚĞ͘Η Ğ ͗ DK Ͳ ŵ Ž Ě ƵůĂƌ ϭ ϵ Ϯϵ ϭ ϯϮϱ ^ĂŶDĂƌĐŽƐ͗͞/ĨŝŶĂůůǇĨŽƵŶĚƐŝŵƉ ůĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽƉƌŽĚƵĐĞ ĂĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞďƵ ŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚůŽŽŬƐƚŚĞǁĂǇƚŚĞDĂĐŚŝŶĞŵĂĚĞŝƚʹ ĂƐ ŵƵĐŚƐŽĂƚ ůĞĂƐƚĂƐĂŶǇǁŽǀĞŶĨĂďƌŝĐŶĞĞĚůŽŽŬ͘dŽƵŐŚ͕ůŝŐŚƚďƵƚŶŽƚ͚ƚŚŝŶ ͕͛ŝŵƉĞƌŝƐŚĂďůĞ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐʹ Ŷ ŽŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇůŝĞĂďŽƵƚŝƚĂŶǇǁŚĞƌĞĂŶ ĚǇĞƚ͕DĂĐŚŝŶĞͲ ŵĂĚĞ͕ŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůůǇƉĞƌĨĞĐƚ͘^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞ DĂĐŚŝŶĞŚĞƌĞ͕ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƚŝŵĞŵĂǇďĞƐĞĞŶŝŶƚŚĞŚĂŶĚŽĨƚŚĞ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͙͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϱ ͞^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶǁĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞŵĂĐŚŝŶĞ͕ĂŶĚŚĞƌĞƚŚĞĂƌĐŚ ŝƚĞĐƚǁĂƐƚĂŬŝŶŐŝƚĂƐĂƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞĂŶĚ͚ŬŶŝƚƚŝŶŐ͛ǁŝƚŚŝƚ͘zĞƐ͕ ĐƌŽĐŚĞƚŝŶŐǁŝƚŚĂĨƌĞĞ ŵĂƐŽŶƌǇĨĂďƌŝĐĐĂƉĂďůĞŽĨŐƌĞĂƚǀĂƌŝĞƚǇŝŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůďĞĂƵƚǇ ͘Η WĂŐĞ ϲ ŽĨϮ ϯ E.1-8 Ăƚ Ğ Ő ŽƌǇ ƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůYƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐ hŶƉƌŽǀĞŶ ůĂŝŵƐ zĞ Ăƌ sŽů͘ WĂŐĞ EŽƚĞƐ ĞƐ ŝŐŶ Ğ͗ DK Ͳ ŵ ŽĚ ƵůĂƌ ϭϵ ϯϮ ϯ ϵϵ ĂƚŚƐĂŶĚŬŝƚĐŚĞŶƐĂƐĨĂĐƚŽƌǇĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚĞĚŵĂƐƐͲƉƌŽĚƵĐĞĚƵŶŝƚƐ͗ ΗdŚĞƉŽŽƌŵĂŶ͘͘͘ď ƵǇƐ͕ƚŚĞŵŽĚĞƌŶ͕ĐŝǀŝůŝǌĞĚ͕ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĞĚƉƌŝǀǇ ;ŝƚŝƐĂďĂƚŚƌŽŽŵͿ ŵĂŶƵĨĂĐƚƵƌĞĚĂŶĚĚĞůŝǀĞƌĞĚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞŝŶĂƐŝŶŐůĞƵŶŝƚ͕ĞǀĞŶĂƐŚ ŝƐĐĂƌŽƌďĂƚŚƚƵďŝƐŵĂŶƵĨĂĐƚƵƌĞĚ͕ƌĞĂĚǇƚŽƵƐĞǁŚĞŶĐŽŶŶĞĐƚĞĚ ƚ ŽĂƐĞƉƚŝĐƚĂŶŬ ŽƌĐĞƐƐƉŽŽů͘,ĞƉůĂŶƚƐƚŚŝƐĨŝƌƐƚƵŶŝƚŽŶŚŝƐŐƌŽƵŶĚĂƐĂĐĞŶƚ ĞƌƵŶŝƚƚŽǁŚŝĐŚĂƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĞĚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞŬŝƚĐŚĞŶƵŶŝƚƐŝŵŝůĂƌůǇ ĐŚĞĂƉĂŶĚďĞŶĞĨŝĐŝĂů ŵĂǇďĞĂĚĚĞĚ͘Η Ğ͗DKE ͲŵŽŶŽůŝƚ Ś ŝĐĂƉƉĞĂƌĂŶĐĞ ͕ƐĞŶ Ɛ Ğ ŽĨŵĂƐƐ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ ϮϰϮ ΗƵŶŝƚͲŵĂƐƐŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ͕ƐŝǌĞĂŶĚƐŚĂƉĞĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚďǇƚŚĞǁŽƌŬ ŝŶƚĞŶĚĞĚƚŽďĞĚŽŶĞĂŶĚǁŚĂƚǁĞŝŐŚƚĂŵĂŶĐĂŶƌĞĂƐŽŶĂďůǇďĞĞǆ ƉĞĐƚĞĚƚŽůŝĨƚ ĂŶĚƐĞƚŝŶĂǁĂůů͕ŝƐĨŝǆĞĚƵƉŽ Ŷ͘Ηϭϲ͟ǆϭϲ͟ǆϮ͘ϱ͟ƚŚŝĐŬ͘^ƚĞĞůŽ ƌĂůƵŵŝŶƵŵŵŽůĚƐƵƐĞĚ͕ŐƌŽŽǀĞƐ͕ůĂĐĞĚǁŝƚŚƐƚĞĞůƌŽĚƐ͘'ƌŽŽǀĞƐ Ă ƌĞŵĂĚĞĂƐůĂƌŐĞĂƐ ƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͕͞ůŽĐŬŝŶŐƚŚĞǁŚŽůĞŝŶƚŽŽŶĞĨŝƌŵƐůĂď͘͟ΗŵŽŶŽůŝƚŚΗ ϭ ϵ Ϯϴ ϭ ϮϱϬ ͞ĐĂƐƚͲďůŽĐŬďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͗ƐƵĐŚŵĂƐƐŝŶŐĂƐŝƐĨĞůƚƚŽďĞĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞ ƚŽƚŚĞƐĞŶƐĞŽĨďůŽĐŬĂŶĚď Ž ǆĂŶĚƐůĂď͟ ϭ ϯϬϰ ͞ƚŚĞ͚ďůŽĐŬ͛ďĞĐŽŵĞƐĂŵĞƌĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůƵŶŝƚŝŶĂƋƵŝĞƚ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐ ǁŚŽůĞ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϵ ϭ ϯϮϱ ^ĂŶDĂƌĐŽƐ͗͞/ĨŝŶĂůůǇĨŽƵŶĚƐŝŵƉ ůĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽƉƌŽĚƵĐĞ ĂĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞďƵ ŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚůŽŽŬƐƚŚĞǁĂǇƚŚĞDĂĐŚŝŶĞŵĂĚĞŝƚʹ ĂƐ ŵƵĐŚƐŽĂƚ ůĞĂƐƚĂƐĂŶǇǁŽǀĞŶĨĂďƌŝĐŶĞĞĚůŽŽŬ͘dŽƵŐŚ͕ůŝŐŚƚďƵƚŶŽƚ͚ƚŚŝŶ ͕͛ŝŵƉĞƌŝƐŚĂďůĞ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐʹ Ŷ ŽŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇůŝĞĂďŽƵƚŝƚĂŶǇǁŚĞƌĞĂŶ ĚǇĞƚ͕DĂĐŚŝŶĞͲ ŵĂĚĞ͕ŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůůǇƉĞƌĨĞĐƚ͘^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞ DĂĐŚŝŶĞŚĞƌĞ͕ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƚŝŵĞŵĂǇďĞƐĞĞŶŝŶƚŚĞŚĂŶĚŽĨƚŚĞ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͙͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϯ ͞dŚĞǁĂůůƐǁŽƵůĚƚŚƵƐďĞĐŽŵĞƚŚŝŶďƵƚƐŽůŝĚƌĞŝŶĨŽƌĐĞĚƐůĂďƐ͙͟ ͞ŶĚĐŽŵŵŽŶůĂďŽƌĐŽ ƵůĚĚŽŝƚĂůů͘͟ Ϯ Ϯϴϳ ΗdŚĞƌĂǀŝŶĞŚĂĚďĞĐŽŵĞĂůŝǀĞůǇůŝƚƚůĞŐĂƌĚĞŶ͕ĂƉŽŽůƌĞĨůĞĐƚŝŶ ŐƚŚĞďůŽĐŬŵĂƐƐĂŶ Ě ƚƌĞĞƐ͘dŚĞǁŚŽůĞŵĂƐƐĂŶĚƚĞǆƚƵƌĞŽĨƚŚĞ Ś ŽƵƐĞŵĂĚĞƚŚĞ ĞƵĐĂůǇƉƚƵƐƚƌĞĞƐŵŽƌĞďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͕ƚŚĞǇŝŶƚƵƌŶŵĂĚĞƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞǁĂ ůůƐŵŽƌĞƐŽ͘Η ϭϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϴϳ ΗŽŶĐƌĞƚĞǁĂƐũƵƐƚĐŽŵŝŶŐŝŶƚŽƵ ƐĞĂŶĚhŶŝƚǇdĞŵƉůĞďĞĐĂŵĞƚŚĞ ĨŝƌƐƚĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞŵŽŶŽůŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞǁ ŽƌůĚ͕ƚŚĂƚŝƐƚŽƐĂǇ͕ƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚ ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞ ĂƐŵŽŶŽůŝƚŚŝĐĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞǁŚĞŶƚŚĞǁŽŽĚĞŶĨŽƌŵƐŝŶǁŚŝĐŚŝƚǁĂ ƐĐĂƐƚǁĞƌĞƚĂŬ ĞŶĂǁĂǇ͘Η ϱϴϭ Η>ĞƚǁĂůůƐ͕ĐĞŝůŝŶŐƐ͕ĨůŽŽƌƐŶŽǁďĞĐŽŵĞŶŽƚŽŶůǇƉĂƌƚǇƚŽĞĂĐŚ ŽƚŚĞƌďƵƚ ƉĂƌƚŽĨĞĂĐŚ ŽƚŚĞƌ ͙ĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇŝŶĂůů͘͘͘Η Ğ͗KZ'Ͳ Ě Ğ Ɛ ŝŐŶĞĚďǇ ĂŶŽƌŐĂŶŝĐĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ ϱ ϭϮϭ ΗdŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƚŚŝŶŐƚŽĚŽƚŽŐĞƚĂhƐŽŶŝĂŶŚŽƵƐĞŝƐƚŽŐŽƚŽĂhƐŽ ŶŝĂŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͊ΗΗ/ĚŽƵďƚƚŚĂƚƚŚŝƐĂĨĨĂŝƌĐĂŶďĞ ƚĂƵŐŚƚ ƚŽĂŶǇŽŶĞ͘/ƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚĐŽŵĞ ĨƌŽŵĂƵŶŝǀĞƌƐŝƚǇǁŝƚŚƐŽŵĞĚĞŐƌĞĞŽƌŽƚŚĞƌ͘zŽƵĐĂŶŶŽƚŐĞƚŝ ƚĨƌŽŵďŽŽŬƐĂůŽŶ Ğ ͙Η Ğ͗W dͲ ƵŶ ŝƋƵ ĞŝŵƉ ƌ ŝŶƚĞĚƉĂƚƚĞƌŶƐ ǁŝƚ Ś ĚĞƉƚŚ ϭϵ Ϭϴ ϭ ϵϱ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůĚĞĐŽƌĂƚŝŽŶΗŝƐĂůǁĂǇƐ ŽĨ ƚŚĞƐƵƌĨĂĐĞ͕ŶĞǀĞƌ ŽŶ ŝƚ͘Η ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ ϮϰϮ ΗdŚĞŵŽůĚƐŝŶƚŚŝƐĐĂƐĞĂƌĞŵĞƚĂů͕ŐŽŽĚĨŽƌŵĂŶǇďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐ͕ĂŶĚ ƚĂŬĞƚŚĞŝŵƉƌĞƐƐŽĨĂŶǇĚĞƚĂŝůŝŶĂŶǇƐĐŚĞŵĞŽĨƉĂƚƚĞƌŶŽƌƚĞǆ ƚƵƌĞŝŵĂŐŝŶĂƚŝŽŶ ĐŽŶĐĞŝǀĞƐ͘dŚĞǁŚŽůĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐΖƉƌĞĐĂƐƚΖŝŶĂŵŽůĚĂŵĂŶĐĂŶůŝ Ĩƚ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϳ ΗdŚĞƌĂǀŝŶĞŚĂĚďĞĐŽŵĞĂůŝǀĞůǇůŝƚƚůĞŐĂƌĚĞŶ͕ĂƉŽŽůƌĞĨůĞĐƚŝŶ ŐƚŚĞďůŽĐŬŵĂƐƐĂŶ Ě ƚƌĞĞƐ͘dŚĞǁŚŽůĞŵĂƐƐĂŶĚƚĞǆƚƵƌĞŽĨƚŚĞ Ś ŽƵƐĞŵĂĚĞƚŚĞ ĞƵĐĂůǇƉƚƵƐƚƌĞĞƐŵŽƌĞďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͕ƚŚĞǇŝŶƚƵƌŶŵĂĚĞƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞǁĂ ůůƐŵŽƌĞƐŽ͘Η Ğ͗W Z & Ͳ Ɖ Ğ ƌ Ĩ Ž ƌĂƚŝŽ Ŷ ƐĨŽƌůŝŐŚƚĂŶ Ě ďĞĂƵƚǇ ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϮϰ ΗŝŶƐŽŵĞĐĂƐĞƐďůŽĐŬƐŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶŵĂĚĞǁŝƚŚƉĂƚƚĞƌŶĞĚŚŽůĞƐŝŶƚŽ ǁŚŝĐŚŐůĂƐƐ;ƐŽŵĞƚŝŵĞƐĐŽůŽƌĞĚͿŝƐƐĞƚ͘tŚĞŶƚŚĞƐĞŐůĂǌĞĚƉĞƌĨ ŽƌĂƚĞĚƵŶŝƚƐĂƌĞ ĂƐƐĞŵďůĞĚƚŚĞǇĨŽƌŵĂƚƌĂŶƐůƵĐĞŶƚŐƌŝůůŽƌƐĐƌĞĞŶŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ͕ ŐůĂƐƐĂŶĚƐƚĞĞů͘Η Ğ͗^EͲ ŽƉ Ğ Ŷ ƉŽƌĞďůŽĐŬĨĂĐĞ͕ƐĂŶĚǇ ͕ ǀĂƌŝĞĚ ϭϵ Ϭϳ ϭ ϴϯ ZĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚƐĂĐŝĚǁĂƐŚŝŶŐƚŚĞĞǆƚĞƌŝŽƌŽĨĂƉƌŽƚŽƚǇƉĞΗĨŝƌĞƉƌŽŽĨΗ ĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞŚŽƵƐĞ͗ΗtŚĞŶƚŚĞĨŽƌŵƐĂƌĞƌĞŵŽǀĞĚƚŚĞŽƵƚƐŝĚĞŝƐǁĂƐ ŚĞĚǁŝƚŚĂ ƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶŽĨŚǇĚƌŽĐŚůŽƌŝĐĂĐŝĚ͕ǁ ŚŝĐŚĐƵƚƐƚŚĞĐĞŵĞŶƚĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŽ ƵƚĞƌĨĂĐĞŽĨƚŚĞƉ ĞďďůĞƐ͙Η ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ ϮϰϮ ĞƐĐƌŝďĞƐŚŽǁƚŽƌĞƚĂƌĚĂĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞƐƵƌĨĂĐĞƚŽĞǆƉŽƐĞĂŐŐƌĞŐĂƚĞ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϳ ΗdŚĞƌĂǀŝŶĞŚĂĚďĞĐŽŵĞĂůŝǀĞůǇůŝƚƚůĞŐĂƌĚĞŶ͕ĂƉŽŽůƌĞĨůĞĐƚŝŶ ŐƚŚĞďůŽĐŬŵĂƐƐĂŶ Ě ƚƌĞĞƐ͘dŚĞǁŚŽůĞŵĂƐƐĂŶĚƚĞǆƚƵƌĞŽĨƚŚĞ Ś ŽƵƐĞŵĂĚĞƚŚĞ ĞƵĐĂůǇƉƚƵƐƚƌĞĞƐŵŽƌĞďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͕ƚŚĞǇŝŶƚƵƌŶŵĂĚĞƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞǁĂ ůůƐŵŽƌĞƐŽ͘Η Ϯ Ϯϴϱ DŝůůĂƌĚͲ ǀĂƌŝĞĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƌƚŝŽŶƐŽĨ ƐĂŶĚ͕ŐƌĂǀĞůĂŶĚĐĞŵĞŶƚƐŽ͞ ƚŚĂƚƚŚĞďůŽĐŬƐǁŽƵůĚŶŽƚ ĂůůďĞƚŚĞƐĂŵĞĐŽůŽƌ͘͟ ϭϵ ϰϬ ϰ ϯϱ Η,ĞƌĞĂůůŝƐƐĐƵůƉƚƵƌĞĚďǇǁŝŶĚĂŶĚǁĂƚĞƌ͕ƉĂƚƚĞƌŶĞĚŝŶĐŽůŽƌĂ ŶĚƚĞǆƚƵƌĞ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϬϵ ΗDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐǁĞƌĞŶŽǁƐŽƵƐĞĚĂƐƚŽďƌŝŶŐŽƵƚƚŚĞŝƌŶĂƚƵƌĂůďĞĂƵƚ ǇŽĨĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ͘Η Ğ͗^dEͲ Ɛ ƚ ĂŶ ĚĂƌĚ ŝǌĂƚŝŽŶ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ Η^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶŚĞƌĞĞĨĨĞĐƚƐĞĐŽŶŽŵǇŽĨĞĨĨŽƌƚĂŶĚŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƚŽ ƚŚĞĞǆƚƌĞŵĞ͕ďƵ ƚďƌŝŶŐƐǁŝƚŚŝƚĂƉĞƌĨĞĐƚĨƌĞĞĚŽŵĨŽƌƚŚĞŝŵĂŐ ŝŶĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞ ĚĞƐŝŐŶĞƌǁŚŽŶŽǁŚĂƐŝŶĨŝŶŝƚĞǀĂƌŝĞƚǇĂƐĂƉŽƐƐŝďŝůŝƚǇŝŶƵůƚŝŵ ĂƚĞĞĨĨĞĐƚƐĂĨƚĞƌŵĂƐƚĞƌŝŶŐĂƐŝŵƉůĞƚĞĐŚŶŝƋƵĞ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϱ ͞^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶǁĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞŵĂĐŚŝŶĞ͕ĂŶĚŚĞƌĞƚŚĞĂƌĐŚ ŝƚĞĐƚǁĂƐƚĂŬŝŶŐŝƚĂƐĂƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞĂŶĚ͚ŬŶŝƚƚŝŶŐ͛ǁŝƚŚŝƚ͘zĞƐ͕ ĐƌŽĐŚĞƚŝŶŐǁŝƚŚĂĨƌĞĞ ŵĂƐŽŶƌǇĨĂďƌŝĐĐĂƉĂďůĞŽĨŐƌĞĂƚǀĂƌŝĞƚǇŝŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůďĞĂƵƚǇ ͘Η WĂŐĞ ϳ ŽĨϮ ϯ E.1-9 Ăƚ Ğ Ő ŽƌǇ ƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůYƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐ hŶƉƌŽǀĞŶ ůĂŝŵƐ zĞ Ăƌ sŽů͘ WĂŐĞ EŽƚĞƐ ĞƐ ŝŐŶ Ğ͗^dEͲ Ɛ ƚ ĂŶ ĚĂƌĚ ŝǌĂƚŝŽŶ ϭ ϵ ϯϲ ϯ ϮϬϰ ΗƵƚƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐƚŚĞŵƐĞůǀĞƐŵƵƐƚďĞƐŽĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚƚŚĂƚŐĞŶƵŝŶĞ ǀĂƌŝĞƚǇŝŶƵŶŝƚǇ ŝƐƚŽďĞŚĂĚŝŶŐŽŽĚƉƌŽƉŽƌƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚŽƵƚƐƚƵůƚŝ ĨǇŝŶŐƚŚĞĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐƐ ŽĨƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϯϳ ϯ Ϯϰϵ ΗĂŶĞǁƚĞĐŚŶŝƋƵĞ͙΀ǁŚŝĐŚ΁ďƌŝŶŐƐƚŽƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞďƵŝůĚĞƌĂŶĚŚŽŵĞŽ ǁŶĞƌƚŚĞďĞŶ ĞĨŝƚƐŽĨŝŶĚƵƐƚƌŝĂůŝƐ ŵĂŶĚƚŚĞĞĨĨŝĐŝĞŶĐŝĞƐŽĨƚŚĞ Ĩ ĂĐƚŽƌǇΗ ΗĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĞƐŽĨƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶ͙ƵƐ ŝŶŐƚŚĞƐŝŵƉůĞƵŶŝƚƐǇƐƚĞŵΗŚŽƌ ŝǌŽŶƚĂůůǇĂŶĚǀĞƌƚŝĐĂůůǇǁŽǀĞŶ͕ĂĞƐƚŚĞƚŝĐŝŵƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐĂƐǁĞůů Ă ƐƐĐŝĞŶƚŝĨŝĐĂŶĚ ĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐ ϭϵ ϰϬ ϰ ϱϵ ĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚŵĞĂŶŝŶŐĨŽƌΗƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶΗŝŶƌŽĂĚĂĐƌĞŝƚǇ͗Η Ζ^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶΖŝƐƐŽƵƐĞĚĞǀĞƌǇǁŚĞƌĞ͕ƚŽǁŝĚĞŶƚŚĞƐĐŽƉĞŽĨ ŝ ŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůŝƚǇ͘zŽƵ ŵĂǇƐĞĞƚŚŝƐďǇƐƚƵĚǇŝŶŐƚŚĞŐƌĞĂƚǀĂƌŝĞƚǇŽĨĨŽƌŵƐƚŚĂƚƐƉƌŝŶŐ ĨƌŽŵƚŚŝƐĨƌĞƐŚĐŽŶƚĂĐƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚǁŚĞŶƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚŝƚƐĞůĨ ďĞĐŽŵĞƐĂŶ ŝŶƐƉŝƌŝŶŐĨĂĐƚŽƌŝŶƚŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞĨŽƌŵ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϮϰ ΗƐĂĐŽŶƐĞƋƵĞŶĐĞĐŽŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶĚ ŽĞƐŶŽƚŵĞĂŶƐƚƵůƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶďƵƚ ǁŝƚŚŝƚŝŵĂŐŝŶ Ă ƚŝŽŶŵĂǇĚĞǀŝƐĞĂŶĚďƵŝůĚĨƌĞĞůǇĨŽƌƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂ ůƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐĂŶ ŝŵŵĞŶƐĞůǇĨůĞǆŝďůĞǀĂƌŝĞĚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŝŶŐƌŽƵƉƐŶĞǀĞƌůĂĐŬŝŶŐŝŶŐ ƌĂĐĞŽƌĚĞƐŝƌĂďůĞĚ ŝƐƚŝŶĐƚŝŽŶ͘Η ϱ ϭϮϰ ΗŚŽƵƐĞƚŚĂƚŵĂǇďĞƉƵƚƚŽǁŽƌŬŝŶŽƵƌƐŽĐŝĞƚǇĂŶĚŐŝǀĞƵƐĂŶ ĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞĨŽƌΖ ŚŽƵƐŝŶŐΖǁŚŝĐŚŝƐďĞĐŽŵŝŶŐƚŽĂĨƌĞĞƐŽĐŝĞƚǇ ď ĞĐĂƵƐĞ͕ƚŚŽƵŐŚ ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĞĚĨƵůůǇ͕ŝƚǇĞƚĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞƐƚŚĞĚĞŵŽĐƌĂƚŝĐŝĚĞĂůŽĨ ǀĂƌŝĞƚǇͲ ƚŚĞƐŽǀĞƌĞŝŐ ŶƚǇŽĨƚŚĞŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂů͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϴ ϱ ϮϰϮ ΗdŚĞŝŶƚƌŝĐĂĐǇŽĨĚŽŽƌƐĂŶĚǁŝŶĚŽǁƐĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚĐŽŶǀĞŶŝĞ ŶĐĞƐŽĨŽĐĐƵƉĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƚŚĞĂƉƉƵƌƚĞ ŶĂŶĐĞƐǇƐƚĞŵ;ŚĞĂƚĂŶĚůŝŐŚƚͿͲ ŝ ŶƚŚĞƐĞŵĂƚƚĞƌƐ ƚŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇŵƵƐƚĨŝŶĂůůǇĚĞĐŝĚĞĂŶĚǇĞƚ͕ĂůůƚŚĞƐĞŵĂƚƚĞƌƐŵƵƐƚ ďĞƐŽĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚĂƐƚŽĂĚŵŝƚŽĨĨ ŝŶĞǀĂƌŝĞĚƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐŝŶƚŚĞĚĞƐŝ ŐŶ͘Η Ğ͗^dzͲŶ ŽƚĂΖƐ ƚ ǇůĞΖ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϱ ͞ƚůĂƐƚ͗ĂƌĞĂůďƵŝůĚŝŶŐͲŵĞƚŚŽĚďĞŐŝŶŶŝŶŐŝŶƚŚŝƐůŝƚƚůĞŚŽƵƐĞ ͖ŚĞƌĞǁĂƐĂΖǁĞĂǀŝŶŐΖŝŶďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚĐŽƵůĚŶŽƚŐŽǁƌŽŶŐĨŽƌ ĂŶǇŽŶĞ͗ĂƉƌŽŚŝďŝƚŝŽŶ ďǇŶĂƚƵƌĞ͕ŽĨĂĨĨĞĐƚĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƐŚĂŵ͕ŽƌƐĞŶƐĞůĞƐƐĞǆƚƌĂǀĂŐĂŶĐĞ͘/Ŷ ƚĞŐƌŝƚǇŝŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ ƵƌĞ͘͘͘DĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽŝŶĨŝŶŝƚĞǀĂƌŝĞƚǇ ǁ ĂƐŶŽůŽŶŐĞƌĂŶ ŝŵƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĂůĚƌĞĂŵ͊͟ ϭϵ ϰϭ ϰ ϳϬ ΗtĞĚŽŶŽƚĂĚǀŽĐĂƚĞĂƐƚǇůĞĂƚdĂůŝĞƐŝŶ͕ďĞůŝĞǀŝŶŐ͙ƚŚĂƚĂƐƚǇůĞ ŝƐƚŚĞŐƌĂǀĞŽĨ^ƚǇůĞ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϰϲ ϰ ϮϵϬ Η>ĞƚΖƐĚŝƐƌĞŐĂƌĚƚŚŝƐ'ĞŽƌŐŝĂŶƚŚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚǁĂƐŚĞĚƵƉŚĞƌĞŽŶŽƵƌ ƐŚŽƌĞƐǁŝƚŚŽƵƌŶŐůŝƐŚĨŽƌĞĨĂ ƚŚĞƌƐ͘ΗΗŶŽĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞŽĨŽƵƌ Ž ǁŶΗ ϰ ϯϬϭ ΗtŚǇƉůĂŶƚŵŽƌĞKǆĨŽƌĚͲŐŽƚŚŝĐŽŶƚŚĞƉůĂŝŶƐŽĨKŬůĂŚŽŵĂ͍>ĞƚƵ ƐŵŝŵŝĐŶŽŵŽƌĞ͘ /ĨǁĞďƵŝůĚŝŶƚŚĞĚĞƐĞƌƚ͙΀ŵĂŬĞ΁ƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞĂŶ ĞǆƚĞŶƐŝŽŶŽĨ ƚŚĞĚĞƐĞƌƚ͘ΗΗEĂƚŝǀĞŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐĨŽƌŶĂƚŝǀĞůŝĨĞǁŚĞƌĞƐƵĐŚĞǆŝƐƚ ĂƌĞďĞƚƚĞƌƚŚĂŶƉůĂƐƚŝĐƐǁŚŝĐŚŚĂǀĞƚŽďĞďƌŽƵŐŚƚŝŶ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϰϴ ϰ ϯϮϯ Η^ŽůĞƚƵƐŐŽĂŶĚďƵŝůĚĂŶĚƐŽďƵŝůĚƚŚĂƚǁĞŵŝŵŝĐ/ŵƉĞƌŝĂůŝƐŵ͕ DŽďŽĐƌĂĐǇ͕ŽƌŽǁĂƌĚŝĐĞŶŽŵŽƌĞ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϰϵ ϰ ϯϰϴ ΗůůĂƌĞďĂƐƚĂƌĚŝǌĞĚĞĐŚŽĞƐŽĨďĂĚŽůĚ<ŝŶŐ'ĞŽƌŐĞΖƐĐŽƵƌƚΗ ϭϵ ϱϮ ϱ ϰϴ Η,ĞƌĞĐĂŵĞƚŽŵĞƌŝĐĂďǇǁĂǇŽĨŝƚƐŽǁŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞĂŶĂƚƵƌĂů ĐŽŶĐĞƉƚŽĨĐƵůƚƵ ƌĂůŚƵŵĂŶŐƌŽǁƚŚĂƐĂŶŝŶƚĞŐƌŝƚǇĐŽŵƉĂƌĂďůĞƚŽ Ő ƌŽǁƚŚŽĨƚƌĞĞƐ ŽƌĂƉůĂŶƚƚŽŐƌĂĐĞƚŚĞĂůƌĞĂĚǇĚŝƐŐƌĂĐĞĚůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉĞĂŶĚůŝďĞƌĂƚĞƚŚĞŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƐŚĂŵŽĨĐůĂƐƐŝĐŝƐŵ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϬϯ DĂƐƐƉƌŽĚƵĐĞĚŚŽƵƐŝŶŐΗƉƵƚƚŝŶŐŽ ŶƐŽŵĞƐƚǇůĞŽƌŽƚŚĞƌ͕ƌĞĂůůǇŚ ĂǀŝŶŐŶŽŝŶƚĞŐƌŝ ƚǇ͘^ƚǇůĞ ŝƐ ŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚ͘ ƐƚǇůĞŝƐŶŽƚ͘Η ϱϴϭ ΗtŚĞƌĞƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞŝƐƉƵƚƚŽǁŽƌŬ͕ŶŽƚĂƐĂƌĞĐŝƉĞŽƌĨŽƌŵƵůĂ͕ƚŚ ĞƌĞǁŝůůĂůǁĂǇƐďĞ ƐƚǇůĞ ĂŶĚŶŽŶĞĞĚƚŽďƵƌǇŝƚĂƐΗĂƐƚǇůĞ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϱ ϱ ϭϯϯ Η>ŽŽŬĂƚƚŚŝƐůŝƚƚůĞďĞĂƵƚǇ͘;Ă ƐĞĂƐŚĞůůͿ^ƵĐŚĂƐǁĞĞƚůŝƚƚůĞ ŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůŝƚǇ͊ŝǀŝůŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĐŽŵĞƐŝŶĂŶĚƐĂǇƐ͕ΖKŚ͕ŚĞůů͕ůĞƚΖƐ ŐĞƚĂŶĞĂƐǇƉĂƚƚĞƌŶŽƵƚŽĨ ƚŚŝƐ͕ƐŽǁĞĐĂŶƐƚĂŵƉƚŚĞŵŽƵƚ͕ĂůůũƵƐƚƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ͘ΖΗ/ƚďĞĐŽŵĞ ƐĂĐůŝĐŚĠ͕ĂƐƚǇůĞ͘ dŚĞŶƚŚĞĚŝǀŝŶĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚŝŶŝƚŐŽĞƐŽƵƚ͘Η Ğ͗t K s Ͳǁ ŽǀĞ ŶĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϱ ͞^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶǁĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞŵĂĐŚŝŶĞ͕ĂŶĚŚĞƌĞƚŚĞĂƌĐŚ ŝƚĞĐƚǁĂƐƚĂŬŝŶŐŝƚĂƐĂƉƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞĂŶĚ͚ŬŶŝƚƚŝŶŐ͛ǁŝƚŚŝƚ͘zĞƐ͕ ĐƌŽĐŚĞƚŝŶŐǁŝƚŚĂĨƌĞĞ ŵĂƐŽŶƌǇĨĂďƌŝĐĐĂƉĂďůĞŽĨŐƌĞĂƚǀĂƌŝĞƚǇŝŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůďĞĂƵƚǇ ͘Η Ϯ Ϯϴϱ ͞ƚůĂƐƚ͗ĂƌĞĂůďƵŝůĚŝŶŐͲŵĞƚŚŽĚďĞŐŝŶŶŝŶŐŝŶƚŚŝƐůŝƚƚůĞŚŽƵƐĞ ͖ŚĞƌĞǁĂƐĂΖǁĞĂǀŝŶŐΖŝŶďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚĐŽƵůĚŶŽƚŐŽǁƌŽŶŐĨŽƌ ĂŶǇŽŶĞ͗ĂƉƌŽŚŝďŝƚŝŽŶ ďǇŶĂƚƵƌĞ͕ŽĨĂĨĨĞĐƚĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƐŚĂŵ͕ŽƌƐĞŶƐĞůĞƐƐĞǆƚƌĂǀĂŐĂŶĐĞ͘/Ŷ ƚĞŐƌŝƚǇŝŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ ƵƌĞ͘͘͘DĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽŝŶĨŝŶŝƚĞǀĂƌŝĞƚǇ ǁ ĂƐŶŽůŽŶŐĞƌĂŶ ŝŵƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĂůĚƌĞĂŵ͊͟ Ϯ Ϯϴϱ ΗdŚĞďůŽĐŬƐďĞŐĂŶƚŽƚĂŬĞƚŽƚŚĞƐƵŶĂŶĚĐƌĞĞƉƵƉďĞƚǁĞĞŶƚŚĞĞ ƵĐĂůǇƉƚŝ͘dŚĞΖtĞĂǀĞƌΖͲ ĚƌĞĂŵƐƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚĞŝƌĞĨĨĞĐƚ͘Η ƵƌĂď ŝůŝ ƚǇ Ƶ͗ ^ͲǁĂƚ Ğ ƌĂďƐŽƌƉƚŝŽŶŵŝŶŝŵ ŝǌĞĚ Ϯ ϯϯϳ ,ŽůďƌŽŽŬʹ ͞tĞǁĂŶƚĞĚƚŽŝŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚĞĂŶĞǁŶĂƚƵƌĂůĐĞŵĞŶƚĨŽƵŶĚ ŝŶƚŚĂƚƌĞŐŝŽŶ͕ĂƐƉĞƌŚĂƉ Ɛ ĂŶŝĚĞĂůŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĨŽƌďůŽĐŬͲŵĂŬŝŶŐ͘͟ ͞dŚŝƐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂů ͙ǁĂƐǁŚŝƚĞ͕ƐĞƚƋƵŝĐŬůǇĂŶĚŚĂƌĚ͕ĂŶĚǁĂƐǁĂƚĞƌƉƌŽŽĨ͘͟ Ƶ͗& / ZͲĨŝƌĞƌĞ Ɛ ŝƐƚĂŶĐĞ ϭ ϵ Ϯϯ ϭ ϭϳϬ WƌĞĚŝĐƚƐƐƚĞĞůĨƌĂŵŝŶŐǁŝůůďĞŽďƐ ŽůĞƚĞ͘^ƚĞĞůƌƵƐƚƐĨƌŽŵƐĂůƚǇ ĂŝƌĂŶĚŚƵŵŝĚŝƚǇ͘^ƚ ĞĞůŵĞůƚƐƵŶĚĞƌĨůĂŵĞŚĞĂƚ͕ĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞĐŽǀĞƌ ďƌĞĂŬƐŽĨĨ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϯ Η/ŶƐƚĞĂĚŽĨĂĨŝƌĞͲƚƌĂƉĨŽƌŚĞƌƉƌĞĐŝŽƵƐďŽŽŬĐŽůůĞĐƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚĂ ŶƚŝƋƵĞƐƐŚĞǁŽƵůĚŚĂǀĞĂŚŽƵƐĞĨŝƌĞͲƉƌŽŽĨ͘Η ϯ ϭϯϬ ΗĨŝƌĞƉƌŽŽĨΗΗdŚĞǁĂůůƐĂƌĞĂƐŝŶŐůĞƐŚĞůůŽĨƌĞŝŶĨŽƌĐĞĚĐŽŶĐƌĞƚ ĞďůŽĐŬƐŝŶƐĞƚĂƚĞĂĐ Ś ŽƉĞŶŝŶŐƚŽƐƚƌĞŶŐƚŚĞŶƚŚĞƚŚŝŶǁĂůů͘Η WĂŐĞ ϴ ŽĨϮ ϯ E.1-10 Ăƚ Ğ Ő ŽƌǇ ƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůYƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐ hŶƉƌŽǀĞŶ ůĂŝŵƐ zĞ Ăƌ sŽů͘ WĂŐĞ EŽƚĞƐ ƵƌĂď ŝůŝ ƚǇ Ƶ͗& / ZͲĨŝƌĞƌĞ Ɛ ŝƐƚĂŶĐĞ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ ϯ ϭϮϴ ΗdŚĞƐƚǇůĞŽĨƚŚŝƐĨŝƌĞƉƌŽŽĨŚŽƵƐĞŐƌŽǁƐŶĂƚƵƌĂůůǇĨƌŽŵƚŚŝƐƐĞ ŶƐĞŽĨƐƉĂĐĞĂƌƌĂŶŐ ĞŵĞŶƚ͘͘͘Η Ϯ Ϯϴϯ ͞ƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ͙ĨŝƌĞͲƉƌŽŽĨ͕ĂŶĚ͙ďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͕ĨŽƌΨϭϬ͕ϬϬϬ͘͟ Ƶ͗,ϮKͲ ǁ Ă ƚĞƌ Ɖ ĞŶĞƚƌĂƚŝŽŶŵŝŶŝŵŝǌ Ğ Ě ϭ ϵ Ϯϯ ϭ ϭϳϮ ͞ƐƵĐŚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐƚŚĞĐŚĞĂƉĞƐƚƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͙ǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌĂŶĚ ĐŽŽůŝŶƐƵŵŵĞƌĂŶĚĚƌǇŝŶďŽƚŚ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞ŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĂŶĚŵŽŶŽͲŵĞƚŚŽĚ͕͟͞ĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚĂŶĚƐĂĨĞ ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚĐŽŽůŝŶ ƐƵŵŵĞƌ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌ͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϯ ͞ƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞǁŽƵůĚďĞĐŽŽůŝŶƐƵŵŵĞƌ͕ǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌ͕ĂŶĚĚƌǇĂůǁ ĂǇƐ͘͟ Ƶ͗/ DW ͲĨ Ă Đ Ğ Ě Ƶ ƌ ĂďŝůŝƚǇ͕ŝŵƉĂĐƚƌĞƐ ŝ Ɛ ƚ ĂŶĐĞ Ϯ ϯϯϳ ,ŽůďƌŽŽŬʹ ͞tĞǁĂŶƚĞĚƚŽŝŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚĞĂŶĞǁŶĂƚƵƌĂůĐĞŵĞŶƚĨŽƵŶĚ ŝŶƚŚĂƚƌĞŐŝŽŶ͕ĂƐƉĞƌŚĂƉ Ɛ ĂŶŝĚĞĂůŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĨŽƌďůŽĐŬͲŵĂŬŝŶŐ͘͟ ͞dŚŝƐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂů ͙ǁĂƐǁŚŝƚĞ͕ƐĞƚƋƵŝĐŬůǇĂŶĚŚĂƌĚ͕ĂŶĚǁĂƐǁĂƚĞƌƉƌŽŽĨ͘͟ Ƶ͗WZ ͲƉ Ğ ƌ ŵ ĂŶĞŶĐĞ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞ŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĂŶĚŵŽŶŽͲŵĞƚŚŽĚ͕͟͞ĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚĂŶĚƐĂĨĞ ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚĐŽŽůŝŶ ƐƵŵŵĞƌ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌ͟ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ΗtŚĂƚƉƌĞĐŝƐĞůǇŚĂƐŚĂƉƉĞŶĞĚ͍tĞůů͕ŽŶĞĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐĂů ŝŵƉĞƌŝƐŚĂďůĞǁŚŽůĞŝŶƐƚĞĂĚŽĨƚŚ Ğ ƵƐƵĂůĐŽŶĨƵƐŝŽŶŽĨĐŽŵƉůĞǆŝƚŝ ĞƐƚŽďĞ ƌĞĚƵĐĞĚƚŽĂŚĞĂƉŽĨƚƌĂƐŚǁŝƚŚƚŝŵĞ͘Η ϭ ϵ Ϯϵ ϭ ϯϮϱ ^ĂŶDĂƌĐŽƐ͗͞/ĨŝŶĂůůǇĨŽƵŶĚƐŝŵƉ ůĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽƉƌŽĚƵĐĞ ĂĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞďƵ ŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚůŽŽŬƐƚŚĞǁĂǇƚŚĞDĂĐŚŝŶĞŵĂĚĞŝƚʹ ĂƐ ŵƵĐŚƐŽĂƚ ůĞĂƐƚĂƐĂŶǇǁŽǀĞŶĨĂďƌŝĐŶĞĞĚůŽŽŬ͘dŽƵŐŚ͕ůŝŐŚƚďƵƚŶŽƚ͚ƚŚŝŶ ͕͛ŝŵƉĞƌŝƐŚĂďůĞ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐʹ Ŷ ŽŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇůŝĞĂďŽƵƚŝƚĂŶǇǁŚĞƌĞĂŶ ĚǇĞƚ͕DĂĐŚŝŶĞͲ ŵĂĚĞ͕ŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůůǇƉĞƌĨĞĐƚ͘^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞ DĂĐŚŝŶĞŚĞƌĞ͕ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƚŝŵĞŵĂǇďĞƐĞĞŶŝŶƚŚĞŚĂŶĚŽĨƚŚĞ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͙͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϳϲ ͞ůǁĂǇƐƚŚĞĚĞƐŝƌĞƚŽŐĞƚƐŽŵĞƐǇƐƚĞŵŽĨďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ ĂƐĂďĂƐŝƐĨŽƌĂƌĐ ŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ͙͟&ŽƌŵĐŽŵĞƐĨƌŽŵĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƐǇƐƚ Ğŵ͘ŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ ďůŽĐŬĂƐ͞ŐƵƚƚĞƌƌĂƚ͕͟͞ƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ͕ŶŽďůĞ͕ďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͙ĐŚĞĂƉ͟ Ϯ Ϯϴϯ ͞ƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ͙ĨŝƌĞͲƉƌŽŽĨ͕ĂŶĚ͙ďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͕ĨŽƌΨϭϬ͕ϬϬϬ͘͟ Ϯ ϯϯϲ ΗdŚĞǁŚŽůĞƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞǁŽƵůĚďĞǁŚĂƚǁĞĐĂůůΖƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ͘ΖΗ / Ŷ ƚĞ Ő ƌ ŝƚ Ǉ / ͗>ZͲ ŝŶƚ ĞŐƌĂů Đ Ž ů Žƌ͕ ŶŽĐŽĂƚŝŶŐƐ ϭ ϵ Ϯϱ ϭ Ϯϭϯ ͞dŚŝƐƚǇƉĞŵĂǇďĞŵĂĚĞĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŐƌĂǀĞůŽĨĚĞĐĂǇĞĚŐƌĂŶŝƚĞŽĨƚŚ ĞŚŝůůƐĞĂƐŝůǇŽď ƚ ĂŝŶĞĚƚŚĞƌĞĂŶĚŵŝǆĞĚǁŝƚŚĐĞŵĞŶƚĂŶĚĐĂƐƚŝŶ ŵŽůĚƐ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϴ ϭ ϯϬϰ ŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ͗ŚŝŐŚĞƌƵƐĞƐƌĞŵĂŝŶƚŽďĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚͲ ΗŶŽŶͲŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂů͕ ƉůĂƐƚŝĐŝŶŵĞƚŚŽĚ͕ƚƌĞĂƚŵĞŶƚĂŶĚŵĂƐƐ͙ǁŽƌŬŝŶŐŶĂƚƵƌĂůůǇǁŝƚŚĐ ŽůŽƌŝŶƚŽƚƌƵůǇ ƉůĂƐƚŝĐďĞĂƵƚǇΗ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϱ DŝůůĂƌĚͲ ǀĂƌŝĞĚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƌƚŝŽŶƐŽĨ ƐĂŶĚ͕ŐƌĂǀĞůĂŶĚĐĞŵĞŶƚƐŽ͞ ƚŚĂƚƚŚĞďůŽĐŬƐǁŽƵůĚŶŽƚ ĂůůďĞƚŚĞƐĂŵĞĐŽůŽƌ͘͟ ϭϵ ϰϬ ϰ ϯϱ Η,ĞƌĞĂůůŝƐƐĐƵůƉƚƵƌĞĚďǇǁŝŶĚĂŶĚǁĂƚĞƌ͕ƉĂƚƚĞƌŶĞĚŝŶĐŽůŽƌĂ ŶĚƚĞǆƚƵƌĞ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϮϬ Η/ŶŽƌŐĂŶŝĐĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞƚŚĞƌĞŝƐůŝƚƚůĞŽƌŶŽƌŽŽŵĨŽƌĂƉƉůŝƋƵ ĞŽĨĂŶǇŬŝŶĚ͙tĞƵ ƐĞŶŽƚŚŝŶŐĂƉƉůŝĞĚǁŚŝĐŚƚĞŶĚƐƚŽĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞƚ ŚĞƚƌƵĞĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŽĨ ǁŚĂƚŝƐďĞŶĞĂƚŚ͙Η ϱ ϭϬϵ ΗDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐǁĞƌĞŶŽǁƐŽƵƐĞĚĂƐƚŽďƌŝŶŐŽƵƚƚŚĞŝƌŶĂƚƵƌĂůďĞĂƵƚ ǇŽĨĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ͘Η /͗KEͲ ĐŽŶ ƚ ŝ Ŷ Ƶ ŝƚǇ͕ ĂĞƐ ƚŚĞƚŝĐĂŶĚƐƚƌƵĐƚƵ ƌĞ ĂƐŽŶĞ ϱϵϵ ΗŶĚǁŚĞŶ/ƐĂǇEĂƚƵƌĞ͕/ŵĞĂŶŝŶŚĞƌĞŶƚ ƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ ƐĞĞŶĂůǁĂǇƐďǇƚŚĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚĂƐĂŵĂƚƚĞƌŽĨĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶ͘/ ƚŝƐŝŶŝƚƐĞůĨ͕ĂůǁĂǇƐ͕ ŶĂƚƵƌĞͲ ƉĂƚƚĞƌŶ ͘Η ϱϵϳ Η,ĞƌĞƚŽĚĂǇƚŚŝƐĞůĞŵĞŶƚŽĨĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇŵĂǇĐƵƚƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĂůƐƵďƐƚ ĂŶĐĞŶĞĂƌůǇŝŶƚǁŽ͘/ƚŵĂǇĐƵƚƚŚĞŽŶĞŚĂůĨŝŶƚǁŽĂŐĂŝŶďǇĞů ŝŵŝŶĂƚŝŽŶŽĨŶĞĞĚůĞƐƐ ĨĞĂƚƵƌĞƐ͕ƐƵĐŚĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚŝŽŶďĞŝŶŐĞŶƚŝƌĞůǇĚƵĞƚŽƚŚĞƐŝŵƉůŝĨŝĐĂ ƚŝŽŶ/ŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶĐĂůůŝŶŐΗƉůĂƐƚŝĐŝƚǇΗ͘ ϱϴϭ WůĂƐƚŝĐŝƚǇĂƉƉůŝĞĚƚŽƚŚĞǁŚŽůĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͕ŶŽƚũƵƐƚƚŚĞƉĂƌƚƐ͗ Η/ƉƌŽŵŽƚĞĚƉůĂƐƚŝĐŝƚǇĂƐĐŽŶĐĞŝǀĞĚďǇ>ŝĞďĞƌDĞŝƐƚĞƌ΀>ŽƵŝƐ^Ƶ ůůŝǀĂŶ΁ƚŽ ĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇ ŝŶ ƚŚĞĐŽŶĐĞƉƚŽĨƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĂƐĂ ǁŚŽůĞ͘/ĨƚŚĞĚŝĐƚƵŵ͕ΗĨŽƌŵĨ ŽůůŽǁƐĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶ͕ΗŚĂĚĂŶǇďĞĂƌŝŶŐĂƚĂůůŽŶďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŝƚĐŽƵůĚƚ ĂŬĞĨŽƌŵŝŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ ŽŶůǇďǇŵĞĂŶƐŽĨƉůĂƐƚŝĐŝƚǇǁŚĞŶƐĞĞŶĂƚǁŽƌŬĂƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇ ͘^ŽǁŚǇŶŽƚƚŚƌŽǁĂǁĂǇĞŶƚŝƌĞůǇĂůůŝŵƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐŽĨƉŽƐƚĂŶĚ ďĞĂŵ ĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ͍ ϱϴϬ ΗƵƚǁĞƌĞƚŚĞĨƵůůŝŵƉŽƌƚŽĨĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇŝŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞƚŽďĞŐ ƌĂƐƉĞĚ͕ĂĞƐƚŚĞƚŝĐĂŶĚƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞďĞĐŽŵĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůǇŽŶĞ͕ŝƚǁŽƵůĚ ĐŽŶƚŝŶƵĞƚŽ ƌĞǀŽůƵƚŝŽŶŝǌĞƚŚĞƵƐĞĂŶĚǁŽŶƚŽ ĨŽƵƌŵĂĐŚŝŶĞĂŐĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ͕ ŵĂŬŝŶŐŝƚƐƵƉĞƌŝŽƌŝŶŚĂƌŵŽŶǇĂŶĚďĞĂƵƚǇƚŽĂŶǇĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ͕ ' ŽƚŚŝĐŽƌ'ƌĞĞŬ͘Η ϱϴϬ ΗŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇŝŶƚŚŝƐĂĞƐƚŚĞƚŝĐƐĞŶƐĞĂƉƉĞĂƌĞĚƚŽŵĞĂƐƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌ ĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽĂĐŚŝĞǀĞƚƌƵůǇŽƌŐĂŶŝĐĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞďǇŵĂĐŚŝŶĞƚĞĐŚŶ ŝƋƵĞŽƌďǇĂŶǇ ŽƚŚĞƌŶĂƚƵƌĂůƚĞĐŚŶŝƋƵĞ͘Η ϱϴϰ Η͙ŝƚĂƉƉĞĂƌƐƚŚĂƚĂĞƐƚŚĞƚŝĐΗĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇΗĂƚǁŽƌŬŝŶƚŚĞƉƌĂĐƚŝĐ ĞŽĨƉŚǇƐŝĐĂůƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞŝƐĐŽŶĐƌ Ğ ƚĞƉƌŽŽĨŽĨƚŚĞƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĂůƵƐĞĨ ƵůŶĞƐƐŽĨƚŚĞĂĞƐƚŚĞƚŝĐ ŝĚĞĂůŝŶĚĞƐŝŐŶŝŶŐĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůĨŽƌŵƐĂŶĚ͕/ŚŽƉĞ͕ŵĂǇƐŽŽŶďĞ ĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĂƐƐƚƌƵĐ ƚƵƌĂůĨŽƌŵƵůĂŝŶƐŽŵĞŚĂŶĚďŽŽŬ͘tĞůĚŝŶŐŝŶƐ ƚĞĂĚŽĨƌŝǀĞƚŝŶŐ ƐƚĞĞůŝƐŽŶĞŶĞǁŵĞĂŶƐƚŽƚŚŝƐŶĞǁĞŶĚ͙Η WĂŐĞ ϵ ŽĨϮ ϯ E.1-11 Ăƚ Ğ Ő ŽƌǇ ƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůYƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐ hŶƉƌŽǀĞŶ ůĂŝŵƐ zĞ Ăƌ sŽů͘ WĂŐĞ EŽƚĞƐ / Ŷ ƚĞ Ő ƌ ŝƚ Ǉ / ͗KEͲĐŽŶƚ ŝŶƵ ŝƚǇ ͕ ĂĞƐ ƚŚĞƚŝĐĂŶĚƐƚƌƵĐƚƵ ƌ Ğ ĂƐŽŶĞ ϭϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϴϭ Η>ĞƚǁĂůůƐ͕ĐĞŝůŝŶŐƐ͕ĨůŽŽƌƐŶŽǁďĞĐŽŵĞŶŽƚŽŶůǇƉĂƌƚǇƚŽĞĂĐŚ ŽƚŚĞƌďƵƚ ƉĂƌƚŽĨĞĂĐŚ ŽƚŚĞƌ ͙ĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇŝŶĂůů͘͘͘Η ϱϵϲ Η͙ƚŚĞƵƉƌŝŐŚƚĂŶĚŚŽƌŝǌŽŶƚĂůŵĂǇŶŽǁďĞŵĂĚĞƚŽǁŽƌŬƚŽŐĞƚŚĞƌĂ ƐŽŶĞ͘ŶĞǁǁŽƌůĚŽĨĨŽƌŵŽƉĞŶƐŝŶĞǀŝƚĂďůǇ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϵ ϱ ϯϰϴ ΗdŚĞƚƌĞĞŝƚƐĞůĨƌŝƐĞƐƚŽŵĂũĞƐƚ Ǉ͘ŽŶŐƌƵŝƚǇ͕ĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇĂŶĚƉ ůĂƐƚŝĐŝƚǇǁĞƐĞĞĂƐƋ ƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽƵƚĂůůŶĂƚƵƌĂůďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͘Η /͗,KEͲŚ ŽŶ ĞƐƚ Ğǆ Ɖƌ Ğ Ɛ ƐŝŽŶ͕ŝŶƚĞŐƌŝƚǇ ϭϴ ϵϰ ϭ ϯϯ ĞŶŽƵŶĐĞƐ͞ƌĞĨƌĂĐƚŽƌǇ͟ŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐĂŶĚƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĞƐǁĂƌƉĞĚďǇƚƌĂĚŝƚŝŽŶ ϭϵ Ϭϭ ϭ ϲϮ ĞƌŝĚĞƐŐƌĂŶŝƚĞďůŽĐŬƐĐƵƚĂƌŽƵŶĚƐƚĞĞůƉŽƐƚƐ͕ƚŽŚŝĚĞƚŚĞŵ ϭϲϯ ϵϵĐƌĞƉƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶƐĂƚ͞dŚĞ&Ăŝƌ͟ʹ ͞ŚĂƌŵĨƵůƉĂƌĂƐŝƚĞƐ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϯ ϭ ϭϴϰ /ŵƉĞƌŝĂů,ŽƚĞůͲ ͞ƐĞůĨͲĨŽƌŵĞĚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͕ĚĞƉŽƐŝƚĞĚŝŶƐƚƌĂƚĂ͕ŐƌĂ ĚƵĂůůǇƌŝƐŝŶŐƵŶŝĨŽƌŵůǇ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϴ ϭ ϮϱϬ ͞ĐĂƐƚͲďůŽĐŬďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͗ƐƵĐŚŵĂƐƐŝŶŐĂƐŝƐĨĞůƚƚŽďĞĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞ ƚŽƚŚĞƐĞŶƐĞŽĨďůŽĐŬĂŶĚď Ž ǆĂŶĚƐůĂď͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϵ ϭ ϯϮϱ ^ĂŶDĂƌĐŽƐ͗͞/ĨŝŶĂůůǇĨŽƵŶĚƐŝŵƉ ůĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽƉƌŽĚƵĐĞ ĂĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞďƵ ŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚůŽŽŬƐƚŚĞǁĂǇƚŚĞDĂĐŚŝŶĞŵĂĚĞŝƚʹ ĂƐ ŵƵĐŚƐŽĂƚ ůĞĂƐƚĂƐĂŶǇǁŽǀĞŶĨĂďƌŝĐŶĞĞĚůŽŽŬ͘dŽƵŐŚ͕ůŝŐŚƚďƵƚŶŽƚ͚ƚŚŝŶ ͕͛ŝŵƉĞƌŝƐŚĂďůĞ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐʹ Ŷ ŽŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇůŝĞĂďŽƵƚŝƚĂŶǇǁŚĞƌĞĂŶ ĚǇĞƚ͕DĂĐŚŝŶĞͲ ŵĂĚĞ͕ŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůůǇƉĞƌĨĞĐƚ͘^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞ DĂĐŚŝŶĞŚĞƌĞ͕ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƚŝŵĞŵĂǇďĞƐĞĞŶŝŶƚŚĞŚĂŶĚŽĨƚŚĞ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͙͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ Ϯϴϯ ͞ŽƵƌƚŚŽƌŽƵŐŚďƌĞĚŚŽƵƐĞ͟;^ĞĞsŽůϮ͕WŐϮϭϯ͕/ϰϱĨŽƌtƌŝŐŚƚΖƐ ĚĞĨŝŶŝƚŝŽŶŽĨΗƚŚ ŽƌŽƵŐŚďƌĞĚΗͿ Ϯ Ϯϭϯ ĞĨŝŶĞƐͲ ͞ƚŚŽƌŽƵŐŚďƌĞĚ͟ĂƐďĞŝŶŐ͞ďƵŝůƚŝŶĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŽƵƚŽĨŽŶĞ ŵĂƚĞƌŝĂů͟;ƌĞĨĞƌƌŝŶŐƚŽhŶŝƚǇdĞŵƉůĞΖƐĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶͿ Ϯ Ϯϳϲ ͞ůǁĂǇƐƚŚĞĚĞƐŝƌĞƚŽŐĞƚƐŽŵĞƐǇƐƚĞŵŽĨďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ ĂƐĂďĂƐŝƐĨŽƌĂƌĐ ŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ͙͟&ŽƌŵĐŽŵĞƐĨƌŽŵĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶƐǇƐƚ Ğŵ͘ŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ ďůŽĐŬĂƐ͞ŐƵƚƚĞƌƌĂƚ͕͟͞ƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚ͕ŶŽďůĞ͕ďĞĂƵƚŝĨƵů͙ĐŚĞĂƉ͟ Ϯ Ϯϴϱ ͞ƚůĂƐƚ͗ĂƌĞĂůďƵŝůĚŝŶŐͲŵĞƚŚŽĚďĞŐŝŶŶŝŶŐŝŶƚŚŝƐůŝƚƚůĞŚŽƵƐĞ ͖ŚĞƌĞǁĂƐĂΖǁĞĂǀŝŶŐΖŝŶďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚĐŽƵůĚŶŽƚŐŽǁƌŽŶŐĨŽƌ ĂŶǇŽŶĞ͗ĂƉƌŽŚŝďŝƚŝŽŶ ďǇŶĂƚƵƌĞ͕ŽĨĂĨĨĞĐƚĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƐŚĂŵ͕ŽƌƐĞŶƐĞůĞƐƐĞǆƚƌĂǀĂŐĂŶĐĞ͘/Ŷ ƚĞŐƌŝƚǇŝŶĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ ƵƌĞ͘͘͘DĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽŝŶĨŝŶŝƚĞǀĂƌŝĞƚǇ ǁ ĂƐŶŽůŽŶŐĞƌĂŶ ŝŵƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĂůĚƌĞĂŵ͊͟ Ϯ ϯϮϳ ŚĂŶĚůĞƌʹ ͞ ƚŚŽƌŽƵŐŚďƌĞĚƵŶĚĞƌƚĂŬŝŶŐƐ͟;^ĞĞsŽůϮ͕WŐϮϭϯ͕/ϰϱ ĨŽƌtƌŝŐŚƚΖƐĚĞĨŝŶŝƚŝŽŶŽĨΗƚŚŽƌŽƵŐŚďƌĞĚΗͿ ϭ ϵ ϰϵ ϰ ϯϴϮ ΗKƌŐĂŶŝĐĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞŝƐƚŚĞƌĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞŐƌŽǁƚŚŝŶƐƉĂĐĞŽĨĂŶŝĚ ĞĂͲ ĂƐƚĂƚĞŽĨŵŝŶĚƉƌŽĐĞĞĚŝŶŐďǇƚŚĞ Ŷ ĂƚƵƌĂůƐĐŝĞŶĐĞŽĨƐƚƌƵĐƚ ƵƌĞŝŶƚŚĞƵƐĞŽĨ ŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐƚŽƚŚĞƐƉůĞŶĚŝĚ͕ĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĂƌƚŽĨ&KZD͗ĨŽƌŵƚƌƵĞƚ ŽƉƵƌƉŽƐĞ͘ΗΗ/ŶŽƌŐĂŶŝĐƐĞŶƐĞƐƵĐŚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŝƐĂŶĞŶƚŝƚǇŽĨƚŚ ĞŚƵŵĂŶƐƉŝƌŝƚĂƐƚŚĂƚ ŽĨĂŶǇƚƌĞĞŽƌĨůŽǁĞƌŝƐŽĨƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϬϯ DĂƐƐƉƌŽĚƵĐĞĚŚŽƵƐŝŶŐΗƉƵƚƚŝŶŐŽ ŶƐŽŵĞƐƚǇůĞŽƌŽƚŚĞƌ͕ƌĞĂůůǇŚ ĂǀŝŶŐŶŽŝŶƚĞŐƌŝ ƚǇ͘^ƚǇůĞ ŝƐ ŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚ͘ ƐƚǇůĞŝƐŶŽƚ͘Η ϱ ϭϭϬ Η:ƵƐƚĂƐŝƚŝƐŝŶĂŚƵŵĂŶďĞŝŶŐ͕ƐŽŝŶƚĞŐƌŝƚǇŝƐƚŚĞĚĞĞƉĞƐƚƋƵ ĂůŝƚǇŝŶĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐΗΗ/ŶƚĞŐƌŝƚǇŝƐĂƋƵĂůŝƚǇ ǁŝƚŚŝŶ ĂŶĚ ŽĨ ƚŚĞŵĂŶŚŝŵƐĞůĨ͘^ŽŝƚŝƐŝŶĂ ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͘Η ϱ ϭϬϭ ΗŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůŽƌŶĂŵĞŶƚŝƐƐŝŵƉůǇ ƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞͲƉĂƚƚĞƌŶŵĂĚĞǀŝƐŝďůǇĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƚĞ ĂŶĚƐĞĞŶŝŶ ƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĂƐŝƚŝƐ ƐĞĞŶĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƚĞŝŶƚŚĞƐƚƌƵĐƚ ƵƌĞŽĨƚŚĞƚƌĞĞƐ ŽƌĂůŝůǇŽĨƚŚĞĨŝĞůĚƐ͘/ƚŝƐƚŚĞĞǆƉƌĞƐƐŝŽŶŽĨŝŶŶĞƌͲƌŚǇƚŚŵ ŽĨ&Žƌŵ͘Η ϱ ϭϮϬ Η/ŶŽƌŐĂŶŝĐĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞƚŚĞƌĞŝƐůŝƚƚůĞŽƌŶŽƌŽŽŵĨŽƌĂƉƉůŝƋƵ ĞŽĨĂŶǇŬŝŶĚ͙tĞƵ ƐĞŶŽƚŚŝŶŐĂƉƉůŝĞĚǁŚŝĐŚƚĞŶĚƐƚŽĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞƚ ŚĞƚƌƵĞĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŽĨ ǁŚĂƚŝƐďĞŶĞĂƚŚ͙Η ϱϵϲ ΗƐŶĂƚƵƌĂůĐŽŶƐĞƋƵĞŶĐĞƚŚĞŶĞǁĞƐƚŚĞƚŝĐŽƌĂƉƉĞĂƌĂŶĐĞǁĞĐĂůů WůĂƐƚŝĐŝƚǇ ͙ŝƐŶŽůŽŶŐĞƌĂŵĞƌĞĂƉƉĞĂƌĂŶĐĞ͘WůĂƐƚŝĐŝƚǇĂĐƚƵĂůůǇďĞĐŽŵĞƐƚ ŚĞ ŶŽƌŵĂů ĐŽƵŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ ͕ƚŚĞ ƚƌƵĞĞƐƚŚĞƚŝĐ ŽĨŐĞŶƵŝŶĞƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĂůƌĞĂůŝƚǇ͘Η ϱ ϭϭϭ ΗŶŝƌƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďůĞ͕ĨůĂƐŚǇ͕ƉƌĞƚĞŶƚŝŽƵƐŽƌĚŝƐŚŽŶĞƐƚŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂů ǁŽƵůĚŶĞǀĞƌďĞŚĂƉ ƉǇŝŶƐƵĐŚĂŚŽƵƐĞĂƐǁĞŶŽǁĐĂůůŽƌŐĂŶŝĐďĞĐ ĂƵƐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐƋƵĂůŝƚǇ ŽĨŝŶƚĞŐƌŝƚǇ͘Η ϱ ϭϬϵ ΗDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐǁĞƌĞŶŽǁƐŽƵƐĞĚĂƐƚŽďƌŝŶŐŽƵƚƚŚĞŝƌŶĂƚƵƌĂůďĞĂƵƚ ǇŽĨĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϱϴ ϱ ϮϰϮ Η͙ĂŚŽƵƐĞŝƐƚŚĞƌĞĨŽƌĞŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌĞŽĨƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚƐ ĂŶĚŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐƵƐĞĚƚŽďƵŝůĚŝƚ͘ΗΗ/ŶƚĞŐƌŝƚǇ͕ŽŶĐĞƚŚĞƌĞ͕ĞŶĂďů ĞƐƚŚŽƐĞǁŚŽůŝǀĞŝŶ ƚŚĂƚŚŽƵƐĞƚŽƚĂŬĞƐƉŝƌŝƚƵĂůƌŽŽƚĂŶĚŐƌŽǁ͘Η /͗>K ͲůŽĐĂůͬŶ ĂƚŝǀĞŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ ϭϴ ϵϰ ϭ Ϯϯ ͞>ĞƚǇŽƵƌŚŽŵĞĂƉƉĞĂƌƚŽŐƌŽǁĞĂƐŝůǇĨƌŽŵŝƚƐƐŝƚĞ͙͟ ϭϮϭ ͞&ŝƌƐƚ͕ŝƚƐŚŽƵůĚĂƉƉĞĂƌƚŽďĞĂƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͙͟ WĂŐĞϭϬŽĨϮϯ E.1-12 Ăƚ Ğ Ő ŽƌǇ ƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůYƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐ hŶƉƌŽǀĞŶ ůĂŝŵƐ zĞ Ăƌ sŽů͘ WĂŐĞ EŽƚĞƐ / Ŷ ƚĞ Ő ƌ ŝƚ Ǉ / ͗>K ͲůŽĐĂůͬŶĂƚŝǀĞ ŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ ϭ ϵ Ϯϯ ϭ ϭϴϰ /ŵƉĞƌŝĂů,ŽƚĞůͲ ͞ƐĞůĨͲĨŽƌŵĞĚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͕ĚĞƉŽƐŝƚĞĚŝŶƐƚƌĂƚĂ͕ŐƌĂ ĚƵĂůůǇƌŝƐŝŶŐƵŶŝĨŽƌŵůǇ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϱ ϭ Ϯϭϯ ͞dŚŝƐƚǇƉĞŵĂǇďĞŵĂĚĞĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŐƌĂǀĞůŽĨĚĞĐĂǇĞĚŐƌĂŶŝƚĞŽĨƚŚ ĞŚŝůůƐĞĂƐŝůǇŽď ƚ ĂŝŶĞĚƚŚĞƌĞĂŶĚŵŝǆĞĚǁŝƚŚĐĞŵĞŶƚĂŶĚĐĂƐƚŝŶ ŵŽůĚƐ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞^ĞǀĞƌĂůŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵŽůĚƐŵĂǇďĞƚŚƌŽǁŶŝŶƚŽĂ&ŽƌĚ͙͟ΗdŚŝƐͲ ĂŶĚ ĂŶŽƌŐĂŶŝǌĂƚŝŽŶŽĨǁŽƌŬŵĞŶƚƌĂŝŶĞĚƚŽĚŽŽŶĞƚŚŝŶŐǁĞůů͘ΗůĂŝĚ ŽƵƚďǇ ĐŽƵŶƚŝŶŐďůŽĐŬƐ͕ƐƚĞĞůǁŽŽĨĂŶĚǁĂƌƉ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞ƋƵŝĞƚŽƌĚĞƌůǇƐŝŵƉůŝĐŝƚǇ͕͟͞ĂƐŝŵƉůĞ͕ĐŚĞĂƉŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĞǀĞƌǇǁŚ ĞƌĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ ϯϯϳ ,ŽůďƌŽŽŬʹ ͞tĞǁĂŶƚĞĚƚŽŝŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚĞĂŶĞǁŶĂƚƵƌĂůĐĞŵĞŶƚĨŽƵŶĚ ŝŶƚŚĂƚƌĞŐŝŽŶ͕ĂƐƉĞƌŚĂƉ Ɛ ĂŶŝĚĞĂůŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĨŽƌďůŽĐŬͲŵĂŬŝŶŐ͘͟ ͞dŚŝƐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂů ͙ǁĂƐǁŚŝƚĞ͕ƐĞƚƋƵŝĐŬůǇĂŶĚŚĂƌĚ͕ĂŶĚǁĂƐǁĂƚĞƌƉƌŽŽĨ͘͟ ϭ ϵ ϰϲ ϰ ϯϬϭ ΗtŚǇƉůĂŶƚŵŽƌĞKǆĨŽƌĚͲŐŽƚŚŝĐŽŶƚŚĞƉůĂŝŶƐŽĨKŬůĂŚŽŵĂ͍>ĞƚƵ ƐŵŝŵŝĐŶŽŵŽƌĞ͘ /ĨǁĞďƵŝůĚŝŶƚŚĞĚĞƐĞƌƚ͙΀ŵĂŬĞ΁ƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞĂŶ ĞǆƚĞŶƐŝŽŶŽĨ ƚŚĞĚĞƐĞƌƚ͘ΗΗEĂƚŝǀĞŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐĨŽƌŶĂƚŝǀĞůŝĨĞǁŚĞƌĞƐƵĐŚĞǆŝƐƚ ĂƌĞďĞƚƚĞƌƚŚĂŶƉůĂƐƚŝĐƐǁŚŝĐŚŚĂǀĞƚŽďĞďƌŽƵŐŚƚŝŶ͘Η ϭϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϴϴ Η͙ĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŶŽǁĂŶĞŶƚŝƚǇďǇǁĂǇŽĨŶĂƚŝǀĞŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐĂŶĚŶĂƚƵƌ ĂůŵĞƚŚŽĚƐŽĨƐƚ ƌƵĐƚƵƌĞΗ /͗DKDͲDŽŶ Ž ͲDĂƚĞƌŝ Ăů ϭ ϵ Ϯϯ ϭ ϭϴϰ /ŵƉĞƌŝĂů,ŽƚĞůͲ ͞ƐĞůĨͲĨŽƌŵĞĚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͕ĚĞƉŽƐŝƚĞĚŝŶƐƚƌĂƚĂ͕ŐƌĂ ĚƵĂůůǇƌŝƐŝŶŐƵŶŝĨŽƌŵůǇ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϱ ϭ Ϯϭϯ ͞dŚŝƐƚǇƉĞŵĂǇďĞŵĂĚĞĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŐƌĂǀĞůŽĨĚĞĐĂǇĞĚŐƌĂŶŝƚĞŽĨƚŚ ĞŚŝůůƐĞĂƐŝůǇŽď ƚ ĂŝŶĞĚƚŚĞƌĞĂŶĚŵŝǆĞĚǁŝƚŚĐĞŵĞŶƚĂŶĚĐĂƐƚŝŶ ŵŽůĚƐ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ ϮϰϮ ͘͘͘͞ůŝŐŚƚůǇĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚĞĚ͕ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞ͕ ŽĨŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůͲ ůŝƚĞƌĂůůǇǁ ŽǀĞŶŝŶƚŽĂƉĂƚƚĞƌŶŽƌĚĞƐŝŐŶĂ ƐǁĂƐƚŚĞŽƌŝĞŶƚĂůƌƵŐ͘͘͘ĨĂďƌŝĐĂ ƚŝŽŶĂƐŝŶĨŝŶŝƚĞŝŶĐŽůŽƌ͕ ƚĞǆƚƵƌĞ͕ĂŶĚǀĂƌŝĞƚǇĂƐŝŶƚŚĂƚƌƵŐ͘ΗůĂŝŵƐƚŚĂƚĂƐƐĞŵďůǇŝƐŶ ŽŵŽƌĞĐŽŵƉůĞǆƚŚĂŶƌƵŐǁĞĂǀŝŶŐ͘ ϭ Ϯϰϯ Η,ĞƌĞŝƐĂƉƌŽĐĞƐƐƚŚĂƚŵĂŬĞƐŽĨƚŚĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐƐŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞďƵŝů ĚŝŶŐĂŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĂŶĚŵŽŶŽͲŵĞƚŚŽĚĂĨĨĂŝƌŝŶƐƚĞĂĚŽĨƚŚĞƵƐƵĂ ůĐŽŵƉůĞǆ ƋƵĂƌƌĞůŝŶŐĂŐŐƌĞŐĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĞƐĂŶĚŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐΗ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞ŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĂŶĚŵŽŶŽͲŵĞƚŚŽĚ͕͟͞ĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚĂŶĚƐĂĨĞ ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚĐŽŽůŝŶ ƐƵŵŵĞƌ͕ĚƌǇĂŶĚǁĂƌŵŝŶǁŝŶƚĞƌ͟ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ͞ĂůŝǀĂďůĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŵĂǇďĞŵĂĚĞŽĨŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůŝŶŽŶĞŽƉĞƌĂƚŝ ŽŶ͟&ůŽŽƌƐĂŶĚĐĞŝůŝŶŐƐĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚĞ Ěŝ Ŷ ƚŚĞƐĂŵĞǁĂǇĂƚƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ ƚŝŵĞ͘ ϭ ϵ Ϯϴ ϭ ϯϬϰ ͞ƚŚĞ͚ďůŽĐŬ͛ďĞĐŽŵĞƐĂŵĞƌĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůƵŶŝƚŝŶĂƋƵŝĞƚ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐ ǁŚŽůĞ͟ ϭϵ ϯϭ Ϯ ϱϲ ͞ĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞĐŽŵďŝŶĂƚŝŽŶƐŽĨĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐŝŶĨĂǀŽƌŽĨŵŽŶŽ ͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐŽĨĂƌĂƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ ϯϯϱ ^ĂŶDĂƌĐŽƐͲ ͞ŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĂŶĚƚŚĞůĂƚĞƐƚĞǆƉƌĞƐƐŝŽŶ ŽĨƚŚĞďůŽĐŬͲƐŚĞůůƐǇƐƚĞŵ ͘ZĞŝŶĨŽƌĐĞĚŵĂƐŽŶƌǇǁŝƚŚŝŶĂŶĚǁŝƚŚŽ Ƶƚ͘͟ Ϯ Ϯϳϳ ͞tŚǇŶŽƚǁĞĂǀĞĂŬŝŶĚŽĨďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͍͘͘͘^ŚĞůůƐǁŝƚŚǁŝƚŚƐƚĞĞůŝŶů ĂŝĚŝŶƚŚĞŵ͘͘͘ŵĂŶŚ Ă ŶĚůĞĚƵŶŝƚƐǁĞŝŐŚŝŶŐϰϬƚŽϱϬƉŽƵŶĚƐ͘͘͘ƐƚĞĞů ͲǁŽƵŶĚĂŶĚƐƚĞĞůͲ ďŽƵŶĚ͘&ůŽŽƌƐ͕ĐĞŝůŝŶŐƐ͕ǁĂůůƐĂ ůůƚŚĞƐĂŵĞͲĂůůƚŽďĞŚŽůůŽǁ͘ Η Ϯ Ϯϭϯ ĞĨŝŶĞƐͲ ͞ƚŚŽƌŽƵŐŚďƌĞĚ͟ĂƐďĞŝŶŐ͞ďƵŝůƚŝŶĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŽƵƚŽĨŽŶĞ ŵĂƚĞƌŝĂů͟;ƌĞĨĞƌƌŝŶŐƚŽhŶŝƚǇdĞŵƉůĞΖƐĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶͿ Ϯ ϯϮϳ ŚĂŶĚůĞƌʹ ͞ ƚŚŽƌŽƵŐŚďƌĞĚƵŶĚĞƌƚĂŬŝŶŐƐ͟;^ĞĞsŽůϮ͕WŐϮϭϯ͕/ϰϱ ĨŽƌtƌŝŐŚƚΖƐĚĞĨŝŶŝƚŝŽŶŽĨΗƚŚŽƌŽƵŐŚďƌĞĚΗͿ Ϯ Ϯϴϯ ͞ŽƵƌƚŚŽƌŽƵŐŚďƌĞĚŚŽƵƐĞ͟;^ĞĞsŽůϮ͕WŐϮϭϯ͕/ϰϱĨŽƌtƌŝŐŚƚΖƐ ĚĞĨŝŶŝƚŝŽŶŽĨΗƚŚ ŽƌŽƵŐŚďƌĞĚΗͿ ϭ ϵ ϯϲ ϯ ϮϬϱ ΗŶŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚŝŶŐƉŝĐƚƵƌĞŽĨĂƉƌĞͲĨĂďƌŝĐĂƚĞĚŵŽŶŽͲŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůŚŽƵƐĞ ĞůŝŵŝŶĂƚŝŶŐƐŬŝůůĞĚ ůĂďŽƌŝŶŝƚƐ ĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚŚ ĞƌĞǁŝƚŚ͘Η<ŶŝƚƚŽŐĞƚŚĞƌ ďǇƐƚĞĞůƐƚƌĂŶĚƐ͕ΗƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŶŽƐ Ŭŝůů͕ďĞŝŶŐƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĂůůǇĂƵƚŽŵĂƚ ŝĐ͙/ŶƚŚŝƐĐĂƐĞƚŚĞΗ Ĩ ĂĐƚŽƌǇΗŝƐĞĂƐŝůǇƚƌĂŶƐĨĞƌĂďůĞĨƌŽŵƐŝƚĞ ƚ ŽƐŝƚĞ͘dŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇŐŽĞƐ ƚŽƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞŝŶƐƚĞĂĚŽĨƚŚĞŚŽƵƐĞŐŽŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞĨĂĐƚŽƌǇ͘Η ϭ ϵ ϰϵ ϰ ϯϲϮ Η/ǁĂŶƚĞĚƚŽƐĞĞ͕ƐŽŵĞĚĂǇ͕ĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŽƵƐůǇƉůĂƐƚŝĐĨƌŽŵ ŝŶƐŝĚĞƚŽŽƵƚƐŝĚĞΗ ϭϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϴϭ Η>ĞƚǁĂůůƐ͕ĐĞŝůŝŶŐƐ͕ĨůŽŽƌƐŶŽǁďĞĐŽŵĞŶŽƚŽŶůǇƉĂƌƚǇƚŽĞĂĐŚ ŽƚŚĞƌďƵƚ ƉĂƌƚŽĨĞĂĐŚ ŽƚŚĞƌ ͙ĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇŝŶĂůů͘͘͘Η ϱ ϭϬϵ ΗdŚĞŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐŽĨƚŚĞŽƵƚƐŝĚĞǁĂůůƐĐĂŵĞŝŶƐŝĚĞũƵƐƚĂƐĂƉƉƌŽƉƌ ŝĂƚĞůǇĂŶĚĨƌĞĞůǇĂƐƚŚŽƐĞŽĨƚŚĞŝŶƐŝĚĞǁĂůůƐǁĞŶƚŽƵƚƐŝĚĞ͘Η /͗KZE ͲŝŶ ƚ ĞŐƌĂůŽƌŶĂŵĞŶƚ ϭϵ Ϭϴ ϭ ϵϱ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůĚĞĐŽƌĂƚŝŽŶΗŝƐĂůǁĂǇƐ ŽĨ ƚŚĞƐƵƌĨĂĐĞ͕ŶĞǀĞƌ ŽŶ ŝƚ͘Η ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϰϯ ΗWůĂƐƚĞƌŝŶŐ͍EŽŶĞ͘ĂƌƉĞŶƚĞƌǁŽƌŬ͍EŽŶĞ͘DĂƐŽŶƌǇ͍EŽŶĞ͘Ζ &ŽƌŵΖǁŽƌŬ͍EŽŶĞ͘WĂŝŶƚŝŶŐ͍EŽŶĞ͘ĞĐŽƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ͍ůůŝŶƚĞŐƌĂ ů͕ĐĂƐƚŝŶƚŽƚŚĞ ƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞĂƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚĂůůƚŚĞƉůĂǇŽĨŝŵĂŐĞƌǇŬŶŽǁŶƚŽWĞƌ ƐŝĂŶŽƌDŽŽƌ͘Η ϭϵ ϯϭ ϯ ϱϳ Η͘͘͘ŽƌŶĂŵĞŶƚĂƐŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůĨĞĂƚƵƌĞŽĨďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͗KƌŶĂŵĞŶƚ͕ƐĞĞŶĂ ƐƚŚĞƉĂƚƚĞƌŶŽĨƚŚĞƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞŝƚƐĞůĨ͘ΗΗŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůŽƌŶĂŵĞŶƚŝƐ ƚ ŚĞĞǆƉƌĞƐƐŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞ ŶĂƚƵƌĞŽĨƚŚĞǁŝƚŚŝŶ͘Η ϭϵ ϰϬ ϰ ϯϱ ΗEĂƚƵƌĞŶĞǀĞƌƐƚŝĐŬƐŽƌŶĂŵĞŶƚŽŶƚŽĂŶǇƚŚŝŶŐ͘^ŚĞŐĞƚƐŝƚĂůůŽ ƵƚĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŝŶƐŝĚĞŽĨƚŚĞƚŚŝŶŐƚŚĞǁĂǇŝƚŐƌŽǁƐ͘/ƚŝƐĂůǁĂǇƐ ŽĨƚŚĞƚŚŝŶŐ͘/ŶƚĞŐƌĂů͘Η WĂŐĞϭϭŽĨϮϯ E.1-13 Ăƚ Ğ Ő ŽƌǇ ƐƐĞŶƚŝĂůYƵĂůŝƚŝĞƐ hŶƉƌŽǀĞŶ ůĂŝŵƐ zĞ Ăƌ sŽů͘ WĂŐĞ EŽƚĞƐ / Ŷ ƚĞ Ő ƌ ŝƚ Ǉ / ͗KZE ͲŝŶƚ ĞŐƌĂůŽƌŶĂŵĞŶƚ ϭ ϵ ϰϵ ϰ ϯϱϭ ΗƚŚĞŵĂƐƚĞƌ΀>ŽƵŝƐ^ƵůůŝǀĂŶ΁͙ĂďƐŽƌďĞĚŝŶĂƉĂƚƚĞƌŶĨŽƌŝŶƚĞŐƌĂů ŽƌŶĂŵĞŶƚďĞĨŽƌĞŚŝŵŽŶŚŝƐĚƌĂǁŝŶŐďŽĂƌĚΗ ϭ ϵ ϱϰ ϱ ϭϬϭ ΗŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůŽƌŶĂŵĞŶƚŝƐƐŝŵƉůǇ ƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞͲƉĂƚƚĞƌŶŵĂĚĞǀŝƐŝďůǇĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƚĞ ĂŶĚƐĞĞŶŝŶ ƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĂƐŝƚŝƐ ƐĞĞŶĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƚĞŝŶƚŚĞƐƚƌƵĐƚ ƵƌĞŽĨƚŚĞƚƌĞĞƐ ŽƌĂůŝůǇŽĨƚŚĞĨŝĞůĚƐ͘/ƚŝƐƚŚĞĞǆƉƌĞƐƐŝŽŶŽĨŝŶŶĞƌͲƌŚǇƚŚŵ ŽĨ&Žƌŵ͘Η ϱϴϬ ΗƵƚŵŽƌĞŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚƚŚĂŶĂůů͙ƚŚĞŝĚĞĂůŽĨƉůĂƐƚŝĐŝƚǇǁĂƐŶŽǁƚŽ ďĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚĂŶ ĚĞŵƉŚĂƐŝǌĞĚŝŶƚŚĞƚƌĞĂƚŵĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĂ ƐĂǁŚŽůĞ͘Η ϱ ϭϬϭ ΗKƌŶĂŵĞŶƚŵĞĂŶŝŶŐŶŽƚŽŶůǇ ƐƵƌĨĂĐĞƋƵĂůŝĨŝĞĚďǇŚƵŵĂŶŝŵĂŐŝŶĂƚŝŽŶ ďƵƚŝŵĂŐŝŶĂƚŝŽŶŐŝǀŝŶŐ ŶĂƚƵƌĂůƉĂƚƚĞƌŶ ƚŽƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͘Η ϱ ϭϬϭ ΗKƌŶĂƉŚŽďŝĂΗĂŶĚΗKƌŶĂŵĞŶƚŝĂΗ ϱ ϭϮϰ Η͙ǁŝƚŚŽŶĞŽƵƚƐŝĚĞĨĂĐĞ;ǁŚŝĐŚŵĂǇďĞƉĂƚƚĞƌŶĞĚͿ͕ĂŶĚŽŶĞƌĞĂƌ ŽƌŝŶƐŝĚĞĨĂĐĞ͕ ŐĞŶĞƌĂůůǇĐŽĨĨĞƌĞĚ͕ĨŽƌůŝŐŚƚŶĞƐƐ͘Η ϱ ϭϬϬ ΗtĞŚĂǀĞĂƌƌŝǀĞĚĂƚŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůŽƌŶĂŵĞŶƚͲ ƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌĞͲƉĂƚƚĞƌŶŽĨĂĐ ƚƵĂůĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ͘Η /͗W>^Ͳ Ɖ ůĂƐƚŝĐŝƚǇ͕ ƉĂƚƚ ĞƌŶƐ ϭ ϵ Ϯϳ ϭ Ϯϯϳ ZĞŝŶĨŽƌĐĞĚĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ͗͞ĨůĞƐŚĂŶĚƐŝŶĞǁƐ͘͟^ƚĞĞůнĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ͕͞Ă ƉĞƌĨĞĐƚǁĞĚĚŝŶŐŽĨƚǁŽƉůĂƐƚŝĐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϴ ϭ ϯϬϰ ŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ͗ŚŝŐŚĞƌƵƐĞƐƌĞŵĂŝŶƚŽďĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚͲ ΗŶŽŶͲŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂů͕ ƉůĂƐƚŝĐŝŶŵĞƚŚŽĚ͕ƚƌĞĂƚŵĞŶƚĂŶĚŵĂƐƐ͙ǁŽƌŬŝŶŐŶĂƚƵƌĂůůǇǁŝƚŚĐ ŽůŽƌŝŶƚŽƚƌƵůǇ ƉůĂƐƚŝĐďĞĂƵƚǇΗ ϭ ϯϬϰ WĂƚƚĞƌŶĂƐƚŚĞƐĂůǀĂƚŝŽŶŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞ ϭ ϯϬϰ ͞ƚŚĞ͚ďůŽĐŬ͛ďĞĐŽŵĞƐĂŵĞƌĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůƵŶŝƚŝŶĂƋƵŝĞƚ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐ ǁŚŽůĞ͟ ϭ ϵ Ϯϵ ϭ ϯϮϱ ^ĂŶDĂƌĐŽƐ͗͞/ĨŝŶĂůůǇĨŽƵŶĚƐŝŵƉ ůĞŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůŵĞĂŶƐƚŽƉƌŽĚƵĐĞ ĂĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞďƵ ŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚůŽŽŬƐƚŚĞǁĂǇƚŚĞDĂĐŚŝŶĞŵĂĚĞŝƚʹ ĂƐ ŵƵĐŚƐŽĂƚ ůĞĂƐƚĂƐĂŶǇǁŽǀĞŶĨĂďƌŝĐŶĞĞĚůŽŽŬ͘dŽƵŐŚ͕ůŝŐŚƚďƵƚŶŽƚ͚ƚŚŝŶ ͕͛ŝŵƉĞƌŝƐŚĂďůĞ͕ƉůĂƐƚŝĐʹ Ŷ ŽŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇůŝĞĂďŽƵƚŝƚĂŶǇǁŚĞƌĞĂŶ ĚǇĞƚ͕DĂĐŚŝŶĞͲ ŵĂĚĞ͕ŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůůǇƉĞƌĨĞĐƚ͘^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚŝǌĂƚŝŽŶĂƐƚŚĞƐŽƵůŽĨƚŚĞ DĂĐŚŝŶĞŚĞƌĞ͕ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƚŝŵĞŵĂǇďĞƐĞĞŶŝŶƚŚĞŚĂŶĚŽĨƚŚĞ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͙͟ ϭ ϵ ϯϮ Ϯ ϯϳϬ WůĂƐƚŝĐŝƚǇͬŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇ͗͞DǇŽǁŶůĂƚĞƌǁŽƌŬ͕ĂƌƌŝǀŝŶŐĂƚƐƚĞĞů͕Ĩ ŝƌƐƚƵƐĞĚĐŽŶƚŝŶƵŝƚǇ Ă ƐĂĐƚƵĂůƐƚĂďŝůŝǌŝŶŐƉƌŝŶ

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Frank Lloyd Wright had a vision for an inexpensive and versatile concrete masonry system he dubbed the “textile block”. It was meant to be locally produced and assembled without special skills in order to help solve the middle-income housing problem. Many of the buildings constructed with the blocks were highly acclaimed (and still are), but there were practical challenges with the system and his vision never took hold outside of his own work. The system has been called a philosophical success but a practical failure. What would be required to make it a practical success as well? To answer that question, a comprehensive examination of the historical record has been undertaken to identify the essential qualities of the system as envisioned by Wright, document the main challenges, problems and barriers encountered, and finally, note any variations or alternative methods used or proposed to overcome those barriers. ❧ By scouring the complete historical record, 107 Essential Qualities of the system were identified, catalogued and ranked. References used included all of Wright’s written work and his recorded lectures. Also included were any relevant correspondence, documents, project drawings and specifications from the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation Archives. The multitude of books, journals and articles written about Wright were also examined. Known experts on Wright and his work were interviewed. Site visits of many of the existing textile block buildings were also undertaken, and owners interviewed. ❧ The above references were used to document 86 problem types that were encountered with the system. These were ranked into three categories. “Challenges” are problems that could reasonably be overcome using modern materials and methods. “Problems” are more serious and may or may not be overcome with current technology. “Barriers” are problems that do not have a good solution and are likely not solvable in the near future. ❧ Any Variations or Alternative Methods that were used or proposed were documented. If any of these could overcome a listed Challenge, it was noted. 89 Alternative Methods have been recorded. ❧ Identified Barriers were found mainly in the categories of Assembly, Cost, Prefabrication, and Society. There were many Durability issues, but these were found to be, on the whole, fixable with current technology. Unfortunately, fixing these problems would add to the cost, which was already too high. The Assembly process was flawed by Wright’s insistence on using a “one-process” method that mimicked organic growth, but was not suited to standard construction practice. The Societal issues were the most problematic, as these cannot be solved by applying modern technology.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Conservation and reconstruction of textile blocks: an investigation of treatment and replacement options at the Frank Lloyd Wright Freeman House

PDF

The textile block system: structural analysis and alternative seismic upgrading to IBC 2003

PDF

Water in the Freeman House: a study of the block in the textile block construction assembly as the primary route for water infiltration

PDF

Unitized double skin façade assemblies: achieving the needs of future envelope systems through construction and performance advances

PDF

Vegetated facades as environmental control systems: filtering fine particulate matter (PM2.5) for improving indoor air quality

PDF

An examination of supervisors’ perspectives of teamwork in a federal agency: promising practices and challenges using a gap analysis framework

PDF

Aerophysics of double-skin facades: simulation-based determination of pressure coefficients for multi-story double-skin facades

PDF

Glass beam design for architects: brief introduction to the most critical factors of glass beams and easy computer tool

PDF

ctrl+z: exploring the effects of undoing retrofits to pre-war buildings in Los Angeles

PDF

Envisioning seismic Los Angeles: data visualization techniques for an interactive seismicity and building response map application

PDF

Skin fit and retrofit: challenging the sustainability of curtainwall practice in tall buildings

PDF

Façade retrofit performance evaluation: Predicting energy conservation potential from renovations to the building envelope

PDF

Occupant-aware energy management: energy saving and comfort outcomes achievable through application of cooling setpoint adjustments

PDF

Lateral sound flanking transmission at curtain wall mullions: an empirical investigation to identify controlling mechanisms

PDF

Tiny house in the desert: a study in indoor comfort using moveable insulation and thermal storage

PDF

The Schindler Terrace, an early modern garden: a case for conservation

PDF

Energy efficient buildings: a method of probabilistic risk assessment using building energy simulation

PDF

Developing a data-driven model of overall thermal sensation based on the use of human physiological information in a built environment

PDF

Visualizing architectural lighting: creating and reviewing workflows based on virtual reality platforms

PDF

Transformational technology: a case study of a public middle school

Asset Metadata

Creator Losch, Edward D. (author)

Core Title Frank Lloyd Wright's textile block: the essential qualities, challenges and alternative methods

School School of Architecture

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Architecture

Degree Conferral Date 2016-08

Publication Date 07/08/2016

Defense Date 06/08/2016

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag automatic,Concrete,Frank Lloyd Wright,masonry,OAI-PMH Harvest,precast,textile block,Usonian

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Carlson, Anders (committee chair), Anderson, James (committee member), Borden, Gail (committee member), Breisch, Kenneth (committee member), Noble, Douglas (committee member)

Creator Email EdLosch@gmail.com,losch@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-265741

Unique identifier UC11280036

Identifier etd-LoschEdwar-4525.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-265741 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-LoschEdwar-4525.pdf

Dmrecord 265741

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Losch, Edward D.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA