Accessibility

The last S-ATT is accessibility; which is the most important factor, as without it both of the previ- ous factors cannot work and perform very well. Each element should be easy to access for maintainance, as has been referred to by several authors (NASA, 2008 and Crow, 2002). Accessibility can be in terms of the diagnoses, testing or changing. Without any access, the aspect of maintenance cannot be achieved. Accessibility can eliminate the possibility of dysfunctionality of other elements. Different authors confirmed its importance in terms of equipment, facilities and components to achieve maintainability in the building. Lin (2010) points out the importance of considering maintain- ability from the early design stages as well as diagnostic, access/instrumentation. Diagnostic refers to accessibility in terms of routes, visibility or ease of access to the equipment. This confirms this theme as the most important of the three main factors. Cleaning and maintenance are usually coupled togeth- er. When EUs inspect or clean any expected maintenance area or interior design element then they can discover the dysfunctionality of them. Also this can mean they are easy to access or diagnose or change any elements. For this reason, areas should be easy to access to investigate. The Energy Sav- ing Trust (2006) point out that usually PD requires little maintenance in normal circumstances. As the roof terminal needs to be checked periodically, access should be provided to it. The outside of the building can have critical elements, such as the roof which should be easy access, inspect, test or change. In addition, the grills, such as those in the kitchen, should be easy to clean and there should be no restriction of the air flow.

Chew et al (2004) claimed that providing adequate space is necessary for repair, change or diagno- ses. The personnel or user needs to be able to perform their task easily (Solana et al, 2005). Cleaning and maintenance can be difficult or easy tasks; this will be based on the degree of the simplicity of the design process. NASA (2008) refers to the importance of considering opening size of place main- taince expected to be easy for personnel to change, test, and diagnose when they practice their work. Also, optimal size opening can help them to practice maintenance without creating another dysfunc-

tionality. In contrast, the tight space will be uncomfortable; this will reflect on their performance too. It is necessary to help personnel to perform their functions within a comfortable space. If the EU is in a tight space, they cannot use it to live or to inspect the defects of components or space.

NASA (2008) referred to the need to avoid any obstacles on the route when providing any compo- nents. For this reason, the designer should take into account the dimensions of the space; and corridors should be considered with regard to the need to move materials and elements through them. Otherwise, it will be hard to do anything except to create many problems and stop the performance of the building and EU in managing it. Providing wide corridors can also help to test and replace the el- ements if they are not suitable and vice versa. Finally, during the design stages, starting from the concept to the final drawing, maintainability should be considered, as well as any factors which can interrupt the design for maintainability, such as structure.

Code End User Factors References

FC1 The cleanliness and maintenance of passive spaces enhances or interferes with well-being of occupants

Solana et al (2005)

FC2 The interior of the passive building is designed to be easy to clean and maintain

NASA (2008), Chew et al (2004) FC3 Access routes of passive space for transport of

maintenance materials

NASA (2008,13-5) FC4 Critical lighting, ventilation and thermal com-

fort element should be visible for inspection

Lin (2010) FC5 All elements of the external passive building

shell should be easy to access for maintenance and cleaning

Energy Saving Trust (2006), Solana et al (2005)

FC6 Optimise sizes for passive design openings for workmanship access

NASA (2008) FC7 Locate passive design elements where they are

accessible for maintenance and repair

NASA (2008), Crow (2002) Table 4-26: Accessibility Measurements

Issues learned from the literature

Argumentations Research gaps Research Questions Are there EUFs that

could help the designer to meet EU needs during PDF?

As per the literature re- view discussed in this chapter, the EUFs be classified in different ways.

There is a need to invis- tigate the EUFs of PDF.

What are the EUFs of PDF?

Are there EUFs that could help the designer to meet EU needs during PDP?

As per the literature re- view discussed in this chapter, the EUFs be classified in different ways.

There is a need to invis- tigate the EUFs of PDP.

What are the EUFs of PDP?

Are there EUFs that could help the designer to meet EU needs during PDU?

As per the literature re- view discussed in this chapter, the EUFs be classified in different ways.

There is a need to invis- tigate the EUFs of PDU.

What are the EUFs of PDU?

Are there EUFs that could help the designer to meet EU needs during PDFL?

As per the literature re- view discussed in this chapter, the EUFs be classified in different ways.

There is a need to invis- tigate the EUFs of PDFL.

What are the EUFs of PDFL?

Are there EUFs that could help the designer to meet EU needs during PDR?

As per the literature re- view discussed in this chapter, the EUFs be classified in different ways.

There is a need to invis- tigate the EUFs of PDR.

What are the EUFs of PDR?

Are there EUFs that could help the designer to meet EU needs during PDM?

As per the literature re- view discussed in this chapter, the EUFs be classified in different ways.

There is a need to invis- tigate the EUFs of PDM.

What are the EUFs of PDM?

Table 4-27: The issues learned from the literature