Building envelopeengineering practice& complex facades.

Resolve the constraints otherwise, do not simplify.

Economic pressure pushes towards simplification ; with each simplification, the architectural intent erodes.

Economic pressure on complex projects naturally pushes towards simplification: replace a bespoke profile with a standard one, drop an elaborate corner node, reduce glazing spans. With each simplification, the architectural intent erodes. The building delivered is an impoverished version of the project designed.

Our role as a building envelope engineering practice is to prevent this drift, not by defending the design against constraints, but by resolving constraints otherwise. We preserve the architectural intent through computational rationalisation of geometries, re-design of construction nodes to make them buildable at the real budget, and a procurement strategy that maximises value per envelope unit.

On projects where we work in design integrity, the architect keeps mastery of the rendering ; we provide the means to achieve it without budget overrun.

Design integrity, our method in detail →

Industrial shadow pricing.

Build the cost at handover from real manufacturer, transport and installation prices, not from square-metre rules of thumb.

Facade cost engineering is too often produced too late and with too little precision. Square-metre rules of thumb do not capture industrial reality: project geometry, geographical location, level of finish required, market tensions on manufacturers at the time of tender. All these factors make the real cost vary by a factor of two or three from standard estimates.

Our approach is industrial shadow pricing: we build the cost at handover from real fabrication, transport and installation prices, refreshed against the market at the time of estimation. This makes it possible to compare design variants on their real cost, not on their assumed cost.

On complex projects, we also support CAPEX/OPEX trade-offs: a thermally more performant facade costs more to build, but how much does it save over twenty years of operation ? Few teams can put numbers on this equation. We put numbers on it systematically.

Project economics, our industrial cost engineering method →

20 to 30 % of embodied carbon, high room for action.

The envelope is the component that offers high room for action on materiality and sourcing.

The facade and roof account for 20 to 30 % of the embodied carbon of a high-rise building. It is also the component that offers high room for action on materiality and sourcing, unlike primary structure, which is constrained by superstructure.

Our envelope carbon strategy acts on four levers in parallel: low-carbon sourcing (aluminium produced by hydroelectricity or recycling, low-footprint glass, bio-sourced materials), parametric LCA in real time connected to the design model, generative energy (BIPV, active double-skin), and design for disassembly for end-of-life circularity.

The output is not an end-of-project ESG report ; it is a design parameter that drives material decisions from concept stage onwards.

Carbon strategy, our systemic approach →

From the model to the factory, from site to handover.

The handoff from the design model to the factory, file-to-factory, is the weak link of complex projects.

The design of a facade only carries value if it can be fabricated at the planned budget and installed on schedule. The handoff from the design model to the factory, what we call file-to-factory, is often the weak link of complex projects.

Our DFMA approach (Design for Manufacturing and Assembly) integrates real fabrication constraints from design stage: machining tolerances, transport capacities, installation sequences. This reduces back-and-forth between design and fabrication, and removes surprises at execution stage.

On procurement strategy, we support the selection and qualification of manufacturers, the drafting of technical tender documents, and negotiation on high-stakes packages. Our independence from manufacturers is decisive here: we recommend supply sources based on technical performance and cost/quality/lead-time ratio, not on pre-existing commercial relationships.

On site, our supervision covers conformity control of delivered parts, interface management with other trades, anticipation of potential claims, and support through to formal handover with defect liability close-out.

DFMA and file-to-factory → · Procurement → · Site execution and supervision →