The Architectural MeetUp became a conversation not just about the future, but directly about the processes that are already taking place and determining what Ukraine will be like after the war.
Can a modern building protect a person from the consequences of war? This question formulates new requirements for design and designers. It was this new reality that was discussed by the participants of the Architectural MeetUp. From practical experience in restoring destroyed enterprises to explosion-proof facades and windows, the discussion demonstrated that the Ukrainian construction industry is already responding quickly to the destructive factors of war and forming new standards of architecture and reconstruction. But are building codes, developers, and the state ready for this? These questions became the subject of the discussion "Shell: Facade as the First Line of Defense" within the framework of the Architectural MeetUp, which we will talk about in the first material from the series of articles dedicated to the results of the event.
The audience of the architectural MeetUp "A Building That Takes a Blow. Architecture of Sustainability: From Shell to City" awaiting the first discussion. Photo: Maksym Drobinenko
Reconstruction as a separate construction competence
How many months does it take to rebuild a building destroyed to its foundation? Not so long: 4–7 months, said Andriy Ozeychuk, director of Rauta, about the practice of construction during the war. During the years of full-scale war, the team rebuilt more than ten commercial facilities in different regions of Ukraine - from logistics centers to manufacturing enterprises. This experience, the specialist says, allowed him to formulate several principles, without which it is no longer possible to talk about reconstruction today: "For the end owner, the arrival is always a surprise. But first of all, they rebuild not just any building, but those that are critical to the operation of the business: a workshop, a logistics terminal, production. The main task is to restart processes as quickly as possible."
The facade is increasingly seen as a multifunctional system that is simultaneously responsible for safety, durability, energy efficiency and the quality of the urban environment.
Speed is becoming a key criterion for modern reconstruction. Even winter frosts or heat are not a reason to stop restoration work when it comes to critical infrastructure. According to Ozeychuk, there are ways to protect people on the construction site from climatic factors: "I remember working on the site in the winter in minus 20. Vests with heated power banks, gloves with chemical heating pads are very helpful, so even in a big minus you can work continuously."
If the structures were preserved at least partially, restoration is much cheaper than new construction. “Even when the building is practically demolished, the foundations, utilities, and land remain. Restoration above the zero cycle costs approximately 40–50% of the cost of a new building,” explained the director of the Rauta company.
Andriy Ozeychuk, CEO of Rauta. Photo: Yuriy Ferendovich
However, the war changed not only the pace of reconstruction, but also the requirements for reconstruction. Where before the task was simply to return a building to service, today every restoration becomes an opportunity to make it more sustainable.
“Customers set two tasks: to do it as quickly as possible and to do it better than before. This means using more modern solutions: to increase energy efficiency, change the architecture, apply explosion-proof glazing, and modernize engineering systems,” said Andriy Ozeychuk. He also emphasized that reconstruction can no longer be the sole responsibility of a construction company. The interaction of the architect, engineer, designer, and contractor at the very start of the work is crucial.
"When destruction occurs, only the person who designed the building has a good understanding of its structure and can help quickly make the right decisions about restoration. That is why teamwork between all project participants is critically important today," the expert concluded.
Double-glazed windows after field tests. Photo: Maksym Drobinenko
Triplex, STANAG and new safety standards
If Andriy Ozeychuk spoke about the speed of reconstruction, then Ivan Bohdan, CEO of Winkhouse Ukraine LLC, suggested looking at another problem — what needs to be changed in the building's design itself so that it better protects people during shelling. The greatest danger to civilians is not direct hits, but secondary fragments after the explosion. The largest share of them is precisely glass fragments.
“During military conflicts, about 80% of serious injuries to civilians occur after an explosion, and not from the ammunition itself. And among secondary fragments, the greatest threat is glass,” noted Ivan Bohdan. That is why the company, together with its partners, began developing translucent structures capable of withstanding the effects of a blast wave without the formation of dangerous fragments. The work was joined by “Winkhaus Ukraine”, “Vikna-Star”, Reynaers Aluminium, Glas Trösch, as well as military experts who helped form the test program. In a few years, it was possible to move from the idea to full-scale field tests and obtain positive results according to the first and second explosion resistance classes EXR1 (NS) and EXR2 (NS) of the European standard EN 13123.
Ivan Bohdan, CEO of Vinkhouse Ukraine LLC. Photo: Maksym Drobinenko
Bohdan paid special attention to the widespread notion of “armored films,” which are often advertised as universal protection. However, this is only a partial solution: “It is not enough to strengthen the double-glazed window alone. If it is not held by the structure, then under the influence of the blast wave it turns into a “flying guillotine.” A double-glazed window weighing 40–60 kilograms can fly several meters into the room.”
That is why an explosion-proof window is a complex engineering solution. The first level of protection is provided by a triplexed glass unit with several polymer layers, which does not crumble into fragments. The second is a reinforced sash and frame that can withstand the load from the blast wave. The third is special anti-burglary fittings and fasteners that prevent the structure from breaking out of the opening. Correct installation is no less important: even the best system will not work if it is not properly fixed to the facade.
Exhibition stand of “Window-Star Company” LLC and “Winkhouse Ukraine” LLC as an illustration for a report on sustainable translucent structures. Photo: Yuriy Ferendovych
As the speaker emphasized, the very criterion for evaluating such structures has fundamentally changed. During testing, it is not important whether the window will remain intact after an explosion. The main thing is that not a single fragment of glass, profile or fittings gets inside the room, and the structure itself remains in the opening and does not form dangerous cracks. These are the requirements laid down in international testing standards.
Online speech by Mykhailo Orlenko, Executive Director of the Association "Ukrainian Manufacturers of Translucent Structures". Photo: Yuriy Ferendovych
Developing the topic, the executive director of the Association "Ukrainian Manufacturers of Translucent Structures" Mykhailo Orlenko said that the next stage of research was protection not only from the blast wave, but also from the striking elements of modern ammunition and drones. Since international standards for such tests do not yet exist, Ukrainian manufacturers took as a basis the NATO standard STANAG 2920, which is used for testing personal protective equipment - bulletproof vests, helmets and protective glasses. It is on its basis that a methodology for assessing the resistance of translucent structures to fragments is being developed today, and certified tests should be completed in the near future.
Is the facade as the first line of defense a metaphor or a new professional reality?
While the first experts' speeches were dedicated to specific technologies, the panel discussion took the conversation to a fundamentally different level. The main question was: should the facade of a modern building become an element of civil defense, or does its function remain unchanged - to separate the interior space from the external environment?
Participants in the discussion "Shell: Facade as the First Line of Defense": Ivan Bohdan, CEO of Winkhaus Ukraine LLC; Daryna Skrypnyk, architectural consultant and architect of Kompaniya Vikna-Star LLC; Pavlo Somov, developer, founder of the EcoBud Building Group; Pavlo Peker, architect, founder and CEO of the architectural bureau Peker&Partners; Gennady Fareniuk, director of the State Research Institute of Building Structures (SE NIIBK). Photo: Yuriy Ferendovych
Gennady Fareniuk, Director of the State Research Institute of Building Structures (SRIBK), offered a rather restrained view. In his opinion, war should not completely change the logic of civil construction.
"The outer shell of a building was historically created to protect a person from natural influences - cold, heat, wind, precipitation. If we are talking about protection from military threats, there are special protective structures for this." According to Gennady Fareniuk, no facade is able to protect against a direct hit by ammunition, and therefore the main emphasis should remain on developing a network of high-quality shelters.
Gennady Farenyuk, Director of the State Research Institute of Biotechnology. Photo: Yuriy Ferendovych
However, other participants in the discussion suggested expanding the concept of safety itself. Architect of the Window-Star Company LLC Daria Skrypnyk noted that modern facade systems have long performed more than just a heat-insulating or decorative function. They can significantly reduce the risks from a blast wave, glass fragments, and other secondary damage factors. “We are not talking about a direct hit by a missile. But we can make a house safer and save people those same five to ten minutes needed to go down to shelter,” she emphasized.
Daria Skrypnyk, architect, Window-Star Company LLC. Photo: Yuriy Ferendovych
This opinion was supported by Ivan Bohdan. He noted that new requirements for facades are formed not only by war, but also by the general evolution of the concept of security. If earlier window structures were evaluated primarily by thermal insulation or design, today they are added to their explosion resistance, burglar resistance, and the ability to hold fragments after an explosion.
At the same time, architect Pavlo Peker proposed another dimension to the discussion - a social one. He noted that Ukrainian society is gradually adapting to life during war, but this does not mean that cities should turn into a system of concrete fortresses.
Pavlo Peker, architect, founder and CEO of the architectural bureau Peker&Partners. Photo: Yuriy Ferendovych
“I don’t believe in total protection of the entire environment. We won’t live in solid bunkers. Architecture must find a balance between security and quality of life,” he said, citing the example of Israel, where protected spaces are integrated into residential buildings but do not define their architecture.
The practical dimension of this balance was outlined by developer Pavlo Somov. He agreed that new glazing technologies could already become a competitive advantage for expensive housing, but for mass construction, the main limitation is still economics: "No facade will help against a direct hit. But solutions that protect against a blast wave and debris can already be an additional option for new projects today. The only question is how much the market is willing to pay for it."
Pavlo Somov, developer, founder of the EcoBud Building Group. Photo: Maksym Drobinenko
Despite their different views, the participants in the discussion agreed on one thing: the war had already changed the technical task for architects. The facade can no longer be designed only as a shell that provides energy efficiency and comfort. From now on, it is increasingly seen as a multifunctional system that is simultaneously responsible for safety, durability, energy efficiency and the quality of the urban environment. It was the search for the optimal balance between these requirements, and not the maximum level of protection at any cost, that became the main conclusion of the discussions.
Peacetime norms don't work for war.
However, the most heated part of the discussion was not even about technologies, but about the rules of the game, because there are no simple solutions in security issues. The participants agreed: the Ukrainian market has already learned to create new security solutions, but the regulatory framework and state policy have not kept up with the speed of these changes.
The question of the moderator, editor-in-chief of PRAGMATIKA.MEDIA Kostyantyn Kovshevatsky, was straightforward: does the state have time to revise building codes in accordance with new threats and generally respond adequately?
Kostyantyn Kovshevatsky, editor-in-chief of PRAGMATIKA.MEDIA and moderator of the discussion “Shell: Facade as the First Line of Defense.” Photo: Yuriy Ferendovych
Director of the State Research Institute of Nuclear Power Engineering Gennady Fareniuk admitted that no. "Is the regulatory framework up to date? It's not up to date. For decades, we have been designing buildings to protect against natural influences. And today we don't even have an answer to the basic question - what load a structure should withstand during a war."
According to Farenyuk, the problem is not only in the lack of new DBN. There are still no physical criteria by which the effectiveness of such structures can be assessed. If modern manufacturers are already testing facades and windows under loads measured in megapascals, then the current standards operate with completely different parameters, formed for peacetime. Moreover, even a successful test of the structure does not answer the main question - whether a person inside the building will survive after a blast wave passes through. For this, the speaker emphasized, separate state research programs and a new measurement system are needed.
Experts argue that the problem lies not only in the regulatory framework, but also in the lack of a state policy to promote safe construction.
At the same time, experts argued that the problem lies not only in the regulatory framework, but also in the lack of a state policy to promote safe construction. Ivan Bohdan gave the example of European countries, where the issue of protected facades has long ceased to be the business of individual manufacturers: "In Europe, the state itself speaks about this. The police, insurance companies, municipalities explain to developers and homeowners what solutions should be used. Safe structures are becoming the standard, not a premium option."
Despite their different views, the participants in the discussion agreed on one thing: the war has already changed the technical task for architects. Photo: Maksym Drobinenko
In his opinion, it is precisely this interaction between the state, business and the insurance sector that allows for gradual market changes. As an example, he cited Germany, where, after an increase in the number of apartment robberies, the state launched a large-scale information campaign on burglar-resistant structures, and insurance companies began to stimulate their installation with financial discounts. This gave tangible results in a few years.
Ukrainian participants in the discussion actually proposed a similar approach for security solutions related to the war. It was not only about updating building codes, but also about state programs for co-financing protected facades for housing, mandatory requirements for hospitals, kindergartens and other social facilities, as well as a systemic dialogue between the state, manufacturers and designers. Otherwise, according to the participants, even the best technologies will remain niche solutions, and not a new standard for Ukrainian construction. Technologically, the Ukrainian industry is already ready for the new challenges of war. Now the main question is different: will state policy, regulatory framework and rules according to which Ukrainian cities will be designed after the victory keep up with it.
