AIArchitect traveled down to the National Mall on October 10 to speak with 2005 Solar Decathlon team members about their overall strategy for the solar homes and to hear from them the lessons they’ve learned along the way. Here’s what students from Washington State University, Cornell, University of Missouri-Rolla, and the New York Institute of Technology had to share.

Amanda Mauzey, fourth-year architecture student, Washington State University team
We liked the idea of using a shipping container for the home and having the HVAC and M/E/P systems all in one spot. It made it easy to ship the panelized system—which is really the heart and core of the building—from Washington State to Washington, D.C. It made building the house much easier, and we didn’t have to conform to the size of the truck bed for shipping. We also like that our PV panels can’t be seen from the outside. During the process, we learned a lot about interdisciplinary work. We had engineering, construction management, interior design, electrical engineering, and architecture students working together, so we developed an understanding of the role and needs of others on the project. With the public, it’s been great to show people the new products on the market and how well solar technology can be integrated into a home. This is a home first, not just a solar home.

Christopher Wright, junior mechanical engineering student, University of Missouri-Rolla and Rolla Technical Institute team
We wanted to make it more visually appealing, so we went with traditional architecture in the Frank Lloyd Wright style because of his popularity and the way in which he brings mathematics into his design. We incorporated the mathematical sequence known as the Fibonacci Sequence, or the Golden Ratio. We used all off-the-shelf Energy Star™ appliances. I’ve learned there are a lot of critics out here about solar, so we have to learn how to make it appeal to the public by helping people learn how to size their solar energy systems for their particular buildings and how to tweak them for their regions.

Jordan Goldman, BArch and MArch, Cornell University team
Our overall strategy was to stay within the rules of the competition: that meant working to stay in the designated square footage of no more than 800 square feet, but still making it seem as big as possible. We incorporated tall ceilings and big windows and tried to make it as livable as possible. We learned that it is difficult to ship a house down the road, and it takes a lot longer to do a task than anyone would assume. We also learned that engineers working with architects is not as hard as we thought. [The landscape is not just big to be large, says a fellow team member, it provides more function and utility and is part of the overall sustainable design. With one exception, the vegetable garden is edible and can feed two people for six months.]

Rick Merlau, fifth-year architecture student, New York Institute of Technology
We treated the project as two distinct spaces: the green machine, which provides the necessities of life, and the blue space, which is the living area. The plan allows the living area to be more open and enjoyable than would otherwise be possible. The house is generic in that it can be adjusted for local climates, but the living spaces are specific. We took advantage of daylighting and made the most of natural light with clerestories, and a breezeway, with a dog trot to separate the spaces. We learned a lot about passive systems, and the drawbacks of hydrogen systems, which are inefficient compared to newer technologies.

—Heather Livingston and Tracy Ostroff

Copyright 2005 The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. Home Page