Introduction
The choice of an interior movable wall system is a critical decision that significantly impacts a project’s cost, functionality, and aesthetic outcome. For decades, Traditional manually or electrically operated Track & Trolley systems have been the standard. However, the emergence of Vertical Lift Wall systems has introduced an alternative, offering unique benefits and distinct considerations. This guide explores the key factors to evaluate when selecting between these two space-division solutions.
Understanding the Systems
| Models | 321 | 322 |
|---|---|---|
| Stc | Verre Simple: 32-38 | Verre double: 36-40 |
| Verres et panneaux | Simple centré » Épaisseur: 8mm-10mm » Trempé, laminé ou laminé trempé | Double » Épaisseur: 8mm-10mm » Trempé, laminé ou laminé trempé |
| Jonctions | » Polycarbonate » Ruban adhésif deux faces | |
| Joints | Disponible en noir | |
| Electricity | Non disponible | |
| Profilés et plafond | Pour verre centré et double » Épaisseur: 41.3mm (1 5/8’’) » Hauteur: 25.4mm (1’’) | |
| Portes | Porte en verre » Porte pivot |
Advantages and Disadvantages
A. Traditional Track & Trolley Walls
| lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 |
| lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 |
| lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 |
| lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 | lorem ipsum 2 |
B. Vertical Lift Walls
| MODELS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
The Three Key Decision Factors
The final selection should focus on the following three crucial project factors:
1. Cost & Long-Term Investment
- Initial Cost: Vertical Lift Walls are the most expensive solution. For an initial Traditional Manual wall cost of $100/sq. ft., a Vertical Lift wall could be $400/sq. ft. Additional costs for Vertical Lift include specialized electrical wiring, heavy-duty structural supports, and potentially specialized surrounding wall construction.
- Maintenance: Vertical Lift systems are more expensive to service and maintain due to their complexity. Downtime can also be an issue due to the local non-availability of replacement parts and specialized technicians.
2. Acoustics: STC vs. NIC
While a Vertical Lift system can achieve a higher lab-measured Sound Transmission Class (STC) of 60 compared to the Traditional wall’s high of STC 55/56, it is critical to understand the real-world performance:
- STC vs. NIC: A wall’s field performance is measured by its Noise Isolation Class (NIC), which is typically 10 points lower than its lab STC.
- The Human Ear Factor: The human ear cannot detect a change of 1 dB which is equivalent to 1 STC point. Practically, an STC 55 and an STC 56 are considered acoustically equal.
- Required Performance: Before specifying a high STC, determine the desired NIC for the “receiving” room. For example, to achieve an NIC of 45 against a maximum “source” room level of 100 dB (like an amplified presentation), an STC 55 wall is typically required. Paying for and using an STC 60 may not provide any acoustic benefits.
- Flanking Paths: The biggest acoustic challenge in the field is flanking paths-sound bypassing the wall through adjacent structures (fixed walls, ductwork, etc.). Investing in an overly high STC is ineffective if flanking paths are not addressed through proper design and installation (consult ASTM E-557).
3. Supplier Recognition
All current North American suppliers for both Traditional and Vertical Lift systems are established, recognized, and proven in the market. This factor should not be the primary differentiator, as competence is typically assumed across both product types.
Conclusion
The decision between a Traditional Movable Wall and a Vertical Lift Wall hinges on balancing specific project requirements, budget constraints, acoustics, and aesthetics.
- Choose Traditional if cost-effectiveness, maximum flexibility in space division, a wide range of accessories (like pass doors), and ease of maintenance are top priorities.
- Choose Vertical Lift if high-end, modern aesthetics (clean ceiling line), minimal floor space usage, and fully automated operation are the defining needs, and the higher initial/long-term costs are acceptable.
By carefully evaluating these factors, especially the practicalities of cost and real-world acoustics (NIC)architects, designers, and users can make an informed choice that truly enhances the functionality of their interior space.
Key Trade-Offs: Cost vs. Flexibility
| MODELS | 841 | 842 | 843-E |
|---|---|---|---|
| Operation | Individual | Paired | Continuously hinged, electrically operated |
| Configuration | Remote/Side | Center | Center |
| Thickness | 4’’ (102mm) | ||
| PANEL FRAME | Trimless and protective trim aluminum frame | Protective trim aluminum frame | |
| STC | 44,47,49,52,53*,55** | 43,47,49,52,53*,55 | 43,47,49,52, 53, 55 |
| Finish Options | Vinyl, Fabric, Carpet, Customer owned or specified material, Plastic laminate, Full height marker board, Tack board, Wood veneer, Steel, Uncovered | ||
| MAX. Height | 33'-3'' (10130mm) | 22'-3'' (6780mm) | 22'-3'' (6780mm) |
| Panel Width | Min. 24'' (609mm) max. 48 1/2''(1230mm) | ||
| Panel Weight | 6 to 9,5 lbs./sq. ft. [29 to 46 kg/sq.m] | 6 to 9,5 lbs./sq. ft. [29 to 46 kg/sq.m] | 6 to 8,5 lbs./sq. ft. [29 to 41,5 kg/sq.m] |
| Closure | Telescopic panel or hinged closure panel | Telescopic panel or hinged closure panel | Side jamb, pocket door |
| Seals | FA, FM-1, FM-1.5, FM-2, FM-2.5, FM-4, MM-1, MM-1.5, MM-2, MM-2.5, MM-4, MM-55, AA-1.5 | FA, FM-1, FM-1.5, FM-2, FM-2.5, FM-4, MM-1, MM-1.5, MM-2, MM-2.5, MM-4, MM-55, AA-1.5 | FF. FA |
| TRACK | #23-T, #33-T, #55-T, #72 | #45-T, #55-T, #72 | #55-T |