Y
LECTURER: MR. AZIM SULAIMAN
AMIR FAUZAN
0321844
DANIEL ROSIEN
0319889
DANIESH ASHIK
0315265
FARAH AIN
0321526
MOHD HAFIZI SIDRATUL
0315470
MUHD AZZAM AZIZ
0315543
CONTENTS PART I – ACOUTSIC ANALYSIS 1.0 PROJECT BRIEF 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Aim and Objectives
4
2.0 ACOUSTIC LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction to Acoustics 2.2 Architecture Acoustics 2.3 Sound Intensity Level 2.4 Reverberation Time (RT) 2.5 Sound Reduction Index (SRI)
5
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Acoustic Measuring Equipment i. Sound Level Meter ii. DSLR Camera iii. Laser Distance Meter 3.2 Methodology 3.3 Data Collection Procedures
7
4.0 PRECEDENT STUDY – ACOUSTICS 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Choice of Material 4.3 Noise Source 4.4 What is the Effect of Noise for the Restaurant? 4.5 Conclusion
9
5.0 ACOUSTIC ANALYSIS 5.1 External Noise Source 5.1.1 Site Context 5.1.2 Vehicular 5.1.3 Neighboring Analysis & Affected Area 5.2 Internal Noise Source 5.2.1 Primary Source 5.2.2 Secondary Source
13
6.0 ACOUSTIC ABSORPTION
18
2
7.0 DATA COLLECTED 7.1 Zoning 7.2 Sound Level 7.3 Acoustic Ray 7.4 Contour Diagram i. Peak Hour ii. Non-peak Hour 7.5 Analysis and Calculation 7.5.1 Zone A – Dining Area 1 i. Analysis ii. Calculation 7.5.2 Zone B – Entrance i. Analysis ii. Calculation 7.5.3 Zone C – Dining Area 2 i. Analysis ii. Calculation 7.5.4 Zone D – Cafeteria i. Analysis ii. Calculation 7.5.5 Zone E – Open Dining Area 3 i. Analysis ii. Calculation 7.5.6 Zone F – Dining Area 4 i. Analysis ii. Calculation 7.5.7 Zone G – Kitchen Area i. Analysis ii. Calculation 7.5.8 Zone H – Washroom Area i. Analysis ii. Calculation
20
8.0 SOUND REDUCTION INDEX i. Analysis ii. Calculation iii. Discussion
41
9.0 CONCLUSION ON ACOUSTIC ANALYSIS
45
3
PART II – LIGHT ANALYSIS 10)
LITERATURE REVIEW ON LIGHT AND ARCHITECTURE a) Significance of Light in Architecture b) Natural Daylighting & Artificial Electrical Lighting c) Modelling Spaces with Light
57
11)
ANALYTICAL APPROACHES TO DETERMINE LIGHTING QUALITY a) Daylight Factor b) Lumen Method
58
12)
PRECEDENT STUDY ON OPTIMIZING OF DAY & ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING IN OFFICES a) Place description b) Luminaries description c) Measurements d) Occupant’s satisfaction e) Conclusion
61
13)
CHOCHA FOODSTORE CASE STUDY a) Introduction b) Method of data collection and analysis c) Data measurement d) Measuring Device e) Zoning
64
14)
ANALYSIS OF EXISTING LIGHTING a) Daytime lighting b) Nighttime lighting c) Light fixtures and bulbs d) Materiality and reflective properties e) Materiality in relation to light sources
71
15)
DATA GATHERING
77
16)
DAYLIGHT FACTOR ANALYSIS
81
17)
CALCULATIONS AND ANALYSIS OF ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING
85
18)
CONCLUSION
90
19)
REFERENCES
91
4
5
1.0 Project Brief 1.1 Introduction Students are provided an understanding of building acoustic in relation to building design and construction. They are introduced to the field through acoustic history, practical measurement, sound insulation, reverberation and noise. Students are given the opportunity to use the sound pressure level meter to measure the sound level. 1.2 Aim and objectives The aim of this project is as the following:
To expose and introduce students to identify the characteristics and functional requirements of day-lighting and lighting equipment, indoor and outdoor acoustic requirements in a suggested building. To critically reporting and analyzing the space by using research methodology and comparison with precedents. To further students understanding the application of building science as a tool to maintain human comfort whilst reducing the environmental impact of construction. Students should be able to design room or spaces that are acoustically compatible with proper control of air and structure borne noise impact
6
2.0 Acoustic Literature Review 2.1 Introduction to acoustics Acoustics is defined as science of sound, including its production, transmission, and effects, including biological and psychological effects. Those qualities of a room that, together, determine its character with respect to auditory effects. The study of acoustics revolves around the generation, propagation and reception of mechanical waves and vibrations. . Many people mistakenly think that acoustics is strictly musical or architectural in nature. While acoustics does include the study of musical instruments and architectural spaces, it also covers a vast range of topics, including: noise control, SONAR for submarine navigation, ultrasounds for medical imaging, thermoacoustic refrigeration, seismology, bioacoustics, and electroacoustic communication. Below is the so called "Lindsay's Wheel of Acoustics", created by R. Bruce Lindsey in J. Acoust. Soc. Am. V. 36, p. 2242 (1964).
This wheel describes the scope of acoustics starting from the four broad fields of Earth Sciences, Engineering, Life Sciences, and the Arts. The outer circle lists the various disciplines one may study to prepare for a career in acoustics. The inner circle lists the fields within acoustics that the various disciplines naturally lead to. 2.2 Architecture Acoustic Architecture acoustic is defined as the study of a sound in space. It is the science and engineering of achieving a good sound within a building for example, achieving good speech intelligibility in a theatre, restaurant or railway station, enhancing the quality of music in a concert hall or recording
 7 Â
studio, or suppressing noise to make offices and homes more productive and pleasant places to work and live in. Architectural acoustic design is usually done by acoustic consultants. As an architect, it is very important to know about the scientific behavior of a sound and how it affecting the space. With this knowledge, an architect can achieve a good quality design in term of the controlling or manipulating the sound behavior as it relates with the designing a form of a space and selection of the material 2.3 Sound Intensity Level Sound intensity is measured as a relative ration to some standard intensity. . The response of the human ear to the sound waves follows closely to a logarithmic function of the formula log , where R is the response to the sound that has intensity of l, and k, is constant of proportionality. Hence, the formula of the sound intensity is
10
2.4 Reverberation Time (RT) Every architectural space needs to have its own analysis of specific RT in order to achieve its optimum performance based on the function of the space. Reverberation time (RT) is defined as the length of time required for sound to decay from its initial reading. This is the most important study as it can define the noise problem within a space. A reverberation is created when a sound reflected causing a large number of reflections to build up and then decay as the sound is absorbed by the surface of objects in the space including the furniture, the people and the air. This happen when the reflection of the sound continues even when the source of the sound has already stopped, or causing its amplitude to decrease until zero.
0.16
Where, RT = Reverberation time, s V = Volume of the room, A = Absorption coefficient
 8 Â
2.5 Sound Reduction Index (SRI) Sound reduction index is to measure the level of insulation provided by a structure. The understanding of sound reduction index is important to incorporate acoustic system design into a given space to decrease the possibility of sound from permeating from loud space to quite space. 1 10 log Where, T = Sound transmission
 9 Â
3.0 Research Methodology 3.1 Acoustic Measuring Equipments i. Sound Level Meter This device is used to measure sound levels in a particular point in a space. The unit measured is in decibels (dB).
Figure x: LUTRON Lighting sound level meter.
Manufacturer Model Dimensions/Weight Range Linearity Grade of Accuracy
Specifications LUTRON Lighting SL-4032SD 245mm x 68mm x 45mm / 489g (without batteries) 30-130 dB ± 1.5 dB N/A
ii. DSLR Camera Camera is used to record the sources of noises such as mechanical devices, speakers, and existing activities that are ongoing during the data analysis. It is also used to record the data of existing materials in the area for further research developments.
10
iii. Laser Distance Meter It is used to determine the positions of the sound level meter from the ground level and to determine the 2m x 2m grid of the site.
3.2 Methodology i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii. ix.
Preliminary study on the types of spaces to choose a suitable enclosed area for the study of acoustics. Seek approval from the person in charge via e-mails and phone calls to conduct a site visit. Measure and produce the technical drawings (i.e.: floor plans, and sections) digitally based on-site measurements. Creating 2m x 2m grid lines after standardizing the drawings. Briefing on the method of recording data to group members and delegate tasks. Collecting data of different areas of the site. Observe and record the existing external and internal noise sources. Compiling and tabulate the recorded data. Creating a conclusion after analyzing the data.
3.3 Data Collection Procedures i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi.
Determine a grid line of 2m x 2m at the floor plan to identify the positions of data collecting. Collect data by standing at the intersections of the grid lines by holding the measuring device 1m above from the ground. Record the lowest and highest data so that we could average the data after tabulating. List down the source points, existing activities, speakers etc. Repeat steps i – iv for the rest of the points. Data collecting was done throughout the non-peak hour (10:00am) and peak hour (8:00pm) to analyze different acoustics conditions at different hours.
 11 Â
4.0 Precedent Study Acoustic Nobu Restaurant
4.1
Introduction
Nobu Restaurant, a world renowned Japanese restaurant opened its new branch at the Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre, Malaysia in 2014. That was designed by the architect Severine Tatangelo, from Studio PCH. The restaurant is a conceptual marvel, incorporating 360 degree view with an open kitchen, sushi bar, dining room and extraordinary bar with approximate of 365 m². Because of the restaurant is a formal type of restaurant where the private event been going acoustic comfort was a top priority for the restaurant to ensure that diners had the best possible experience. 4.2
Choice of material
The choice of material is really important as it affects the acoustic in the restaurants environment. For this reason, the material that been chosen to provide a restaurant with comfort noise where it is no t too load and not too quiet or the people will not come to the restaurant. In addition some article shared that people more intend to go to the noisy restaurant rather than the silent restaurant. So for the Nobu restaurant most of the material been used in the restaurant was wood and glass. For a restaurant it really appropriate choice of material as it is a restaurant that more too private event. For wood
 12 Â
material even it is not the most absorbing sound it really good consider the type of space which is restaurant, even for a different space in the Nobu restaurant where need to be more quiet there just put carpet not even create a nice space but also help to absorbed sound as carpet can control sound better than wood. As for the wall mostly made by window glass it really great to give view for a dinner from inside the restaurant and also blocking the sound from outside to inside. Material
125Hz
250Hz
500Hz
1kHz
2kHz
4kHz
Carpet
8%
24%
57%
69%
71%
73%
Paneling
28%
22%
17%
9%
10%
11%
Window glass Wood
35%
25%
18%
12%
7%
4%
15%
11%
10%
7%
7%
4%
The diagram show different type of material absorption and reflected sound at various frequancies Beside that Nobu Restaurant put some of feature that also can help to control unwanted sound, one of the feature is acoustic partition that can be open and close according to the event that be held by the restaurant between the various zones of restaurant composed of a sit-down dining, sushi bar and cocktail bar area.
The picture shows the use of partitions in the dining area
 13 Â
STC Rating
Speech heard through wall or Noise control level partition 25 Normal speech understandable Poor 30 Loud speech understandable Marginal 40 Loud speech audible but Good unintelligible 50 Load speech barely audible Very good 55 and up Loud speech not heard Excellent The diagram show the STC Rating and Noise reduction if they have a wall or partition
Another feature that Nobu restaurant do is using suspended baffle for the ceiling. Baffles are an economical way to reduce pressure level and lower the reverberation times in large space like restaurants. With this feature reverberation times can be lowered from RT60 of 4-9 seconds down to a RT60 of 0.5 -2 seconds. This is showed that with baffle sound intensity level can be simultaneously reduce by to 12 decibels.
 14 Â
4.3 Noise source Different noise source can be perceived in a restaurant that has different type of activities. First, sound ambience is generally depending of the service proposal for each particular eating space. Restaurant’s managers and owners will select background music to fit with target customers. This part of the global ambience is considered as desired noise. However, other noise sources can be less enjoyable when sharing a meal with other people such as people talking too loud, noise from kitchen, restroom, and also noise emitted from HVAC equipments. But with correct way that noise can be reduce significantly comfort of occupants and could be avoided or mitigated at some point.
plan view of the restaurant and also potential interior noise
4.4 What is the effect of noise for the restaurant? It is known that interaction between senses can affect overall perception. The study of physical ambiences in building and architecture is based on integration of lighting, thermal sensation, and acoustics. Of course, touch is implicitly included in perception of interiors when people walk into a room or if they sit at a table. In a restaurant, smell and taste are very valuable also for the appreciation of meals by clients. In addition some studies analyze effects of too load background noise on customer’s behavior. Others look at feeling by psychology aspects. In 2010, a article about the perception of salty and sweet taste was cited in much media, as it suggested that it could be an explanation of loosing partly those sense in noisy environments, like for meals served onboard commercial flights. This kind of researches still needs to be validated before generalizing conclusions.
15
Noise assessment Location Sound level (dBA) Cafeteria 45-55 Coffee bar 45-50 Restaurant 45-50 Conference 40-45 Office 35-45 The diagram shows standards of acceptable noise level in different type of space or location To evaluate noise event, a sound level meter was installed in the restaurant of the organization with limited space and knowing that it would not be useful to get questions from customers in addition to usual sound ambience, most of the recording was unattended. The main observation period was at normal eating time, as the place was filled with dinners. Recording and observation The noise recording consisted in saving spectrum by third octave bands between 50 Hz and 10 Hz at each 100 ms interval. This method would allow to post-process data for finding noise event between many sound sources.
The diagram shows noise level based on conservation 4.5 Conclusion From this case study we can simply identified how different type of material give different level of absorption or reflection just to control noise and even just put some simple feature like partition can create enough impact to space to be a comfortable space for do things. Besides that knowing how the noise come, what is the noise comfort for particular space really help to create a building with better acoustic. In this case study also we can see how noise can change people behavior and help to create different type of accommodation for people.
 16 Â
5.0 Acoustic Analysis 5.1 External Noise Source 5.2
The figure above shows Chocha Foodstore’s site context within 100 meter radius. Chocha Foordstore is squeezed between shop lots of Jalan Petaling. 5.2.1
Site Context
Activities happening on the front and back façade The entrance façade is facing the main street of Jalan Petaling and construction site whereas the back alleys of Lorong Petaling which use as service lane is facing the vegetation hills. Usually public will passing by the food store as it providing shelter on the shop lots corridor. Based on our observation, major noise that would affect the case study is from the main road of Jalan Petaling and construction area.
17
5.2.2
Vehicular site impact
Chocha Foodstore located on Jalan Petaling which near by the linking of Bulatan Merdeka. It is an major route for vehicular and public transport to use this street to go to Petaling Street or Central Marker LRT station. We visited the site 3 times. On the first day, we visited on Thursday afternoon. Traffic condition on that day was normal during lunch and most customers walked to the store. Not much interruption of noises produce from outside. On the second visit which on Saturday night, it was a peak hours on that store, the street was congested with cars and walking people because during that time there was a concert happening at Stadium Merdeka. During our last visit, we went on Sunday morning before the store open. Less vehicle passing by the street hence, we considered that as non-peak hour.
Indication of external noise source
 18 Â
5.2.3
Neighboring Analysis & Affected Area
Façade View The building is located between 2 shop lots and facing Jalan Petaling. The surrounded building are Mamak Restaurant, Eyewear shop and jamming studio on the first floor as shown on the figure above. During the case study, all shops are open during day time. At night time, the eye wear shop closed, and there were people jamming on the studio. Mamak Restaurant operates 24 hours but only minor noise affecting the food store itself. We can hear it very loud while standing outside of the shop. However, we can’t hear it clearly when we entered the food store. Jalan Petaling always one of busies street in Kuala Lumpur. People are using the shop lot’s corridor to walk along Jalan Petaling shop lots due to its well shaded from sunlight and rain. The noise produce by the pedestrian and vehicles passing by the food store will affect the front dining area.
5.3
Internal Noise
Figure above shows noise produced from the café & kitchen Noise produce in door are determined by the activities happening at the space. We classified primary and secondary source of the noise. The primary is produced by the equipment and the secondary is human activity.
19
5.3.1
Primary Source
SOURCE POINT Café’
Kitchen
5.3.2
ACTIVITIES
EQUIPMENT
Dish washing, Background Music from the speaker, Coffee making & Staff preparing drinks
Coffee maker, Sink, Glass, Cup, & Music speaker
Dish washing, Cooking & preparing meals
Exhaust Hood, Char broiler, Range, Hot Plate, Cooking utensil
PHOTO
Secondary Source
SOURCE POINT Indoor Dining Area
ACTIVITIES Eating & Conversation
Open Dining Area
Eating & Conversation
EQUIPMENT
PHOTO
20
6.0 Acoustic Absorption Sound absorption coefficient on the building materials.
No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Material
Description
500 Hz
Non-reflective, matte surface.
0.03
Smooth surface, reflective.
0.01
Exposed brick wall
Rough surface with texture.
0.02
Brick wall with plaster finish
Semi-smooth surface with texture.
Peranakan tiles
Porcelain tiles
Photo
0.06
 21 Â
5.
Glass
Very reflective, transparent.
6.
Steel
Smooth surface, matte.
0.10
0.44
Sound absorption coefficient source: www.acoustic.ua
22
7.0 Data Collected 7.1 Zoning
23
7.2 Sound Level Date Time Status
: 22 October 2016 : 08.00 pm – 10.00 pm : Peak Hour
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
A
63.
63.
62.7
60.
65.7
67.
60.3
64.9
65.2
65.4
63.6
80.6
80.8
82.0
80.1
80.0
76.8
68.8
65.2
B
57.
68.
63.5
75.
74.6
68.
67.0
65.5
66.7
64.8
63.7
69.2
68.2
75.1
78.4
76.1
75.0
68.6
65.8
C
58.
70.
73.4
75.
73.2
73.
66.4
60.1
58.3
55.8
70.2
68.6
66.2
74.8
78.1
76.4
74.2
64.0
64.9
Date Time Status
A B C
: 23 October 2016 : 10.00 am – 12.00 pm : Non-Peak Hour
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
60. 3 55. 8 52. 5
66. 5 67. 2 73. 2
65.5
64. 4 62. 4 69. 7
68.5
63. 6 64. 3 74. 3
64.3
70.2
68.9
76.7
73.2
74.5
74.5
73.2
64.5
62.7
60.1
56.7
55.2
62.4
59.4
63.3
67.7
64.8
71.0
67.7
66.5
68.5
70.1
60.3
74.9
66.8
61.1
57.1
63.6
65.3
62.5
76.4
67.0
59.6
59.3
67.3
58.1
65.6
67.1
69.7 72.9
62.8 72.2
24
7.3 Acoustic Ray
25
7.4 Contour Diagram
i)
Peak Hour
26
ii)
Non-peak Hour
27
7.5 Analysis & Calculation 7.5.1
Zone A – Dining Area 1
i)
Analysis
FLOOR PLAN: Location of Dining Area 1
Interior images of Dining Area 1 are shown the space is surrounded by the internal façade wall with windows, open air cafeteria and concrete partition walls with tiles. Dining area 1 located near the open air cafeteria and the main road hence the sound sources are mainly from the external noise such as the vehicles and noise from the open air cafeteria such as sound of coffee maker or background music played.
Floor Area Height
: 24.7 m : 3.4 meter
28
Sound Meter Reading (dB):
Coordinate C
0 52.5
Coordinate C
0 58.0
Non-Peak Hour 1 2 73.2 72.9 Peak Hour 1 2 70.1 73.4
Reverberation Time Calculation: Surface Walls-Tiles Walls- Plaster Ceiling-Concrete Audience Furniture – Softwood/Timber Floor- Tiles Air Window-Glass
RT =
.
.
33.469 17.024 1.375
. .
.
4 72.2
3 75.0
4 73.2
-
Area 7.071 13.925 33.469 8 16.307
3 69.7
Absorption4 (500 Hz) 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.46 0.28 0.52 0.007 0.10 Total absorption (A)
Sa 0.071 0.279 1.673 3.680 4.566 17.404 0.119 0.134 27.926
29
-Sound Level Measurement: , where SPL 10
1
10
i) Peak Hour Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Highest reading 75.0 75.0
10 log = 3.162
Total Intensities Combined SPL
1
Lowest reading 58.0 58.0 10 log 1 10 = 6.309
10 3.225
10 log
.
75.1 dB
ii) Non-Peak Hour Highest reading Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Total Intensities Combined SPL
Lowest reading
73.2 73.2
52.5 52.5
10 log
1 10 = 2.089
10 log
1 = 1.778
10
2.107 10 log
.
63.4 dB
From the calculation above, sound level during the peak hour is higher than non-peak hour. This is because due to many people came to the restaurant having dinner or while waiting for the concert event at Merdeka Stadium. It is too crowded and some people have to que in front of the restaurant waiting to be seated
 30 Â
7.5.2
Zone B- Entrance
i)
Analysis
FOOR PLAN: Location of Entrance
Interior images of entrance are shown the space is surrounded by the internal façade wall with windows, glass door and concrete partition walls with tiles. The entrance is located beside the dining area and a staircase going up to an architectural studio by Mentah Mater. Source of noise are mainly came from outside activities such as vehicular or people walking passing by and people who enter or exit the store.
31
Floor Area Height
: 18.34 m : 3.370 meter
Sound Meter Reading. (dB) Non Peak Hour 1 66.5 67.2 Peak Hour 0 1 63.5 63.1 57.9 68.0 0 60.3 55.8
Coordinate A B Coordinate A B
ii)
RT =
2 65.5 69.7
3 64.4 62.4
2 62.7 63.5
3 60.3 75.0
Reverberation Time Calculation:-
.
Surface
Area
Walls-Tiles Walls- Plaster Audience Ceiling- Steel Decking Floor- Tiles Air Window-Glass Door - Glass
7.45 9.02 3 7.2 18.34 22.603 1.375 2.06
.
. .
.
Absorption (500 Hz) 0.01 0.02 0.46 0.85 0.52 0.007 0.10 0.44 Total absorption (A)
Sa 0.074 0.180 1.38 6.12 9.537 0.158 0.137 0.906 18.492
32
-Sound Level Measurement: SPL
10
,
where
1
10
i) Peak Hour Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Highest reading 75.0 75.0
10 log = 3.162
Total Intensities Combined SPL
Lowest reading 60.3 60.3
1
10
10 log
1 = 1.071
10
3.269 10 log
.
75.1 dB
ii) Non-Peak Hour Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Highest reading 69.7 69.7
10 log = 9.332
Total Intensities Combined SPL
Lowest reading 55.8 55.8
1
10
10 log
1 = 3.801
10
9.712 10 log
.
69.8 dB
Sound level measurement showing the noise is higher during the peak hour. This is because, it was a peak hour for people having their dinner and Cho Cha food store is the best place to grab any kinds of food. Some people queued on this area, to wait to be seated.
 33 Â
7.5.3
Zone C- Dining Area 2
FLOOR PLAN: Location of dining area 2 i)
Analysis
Interior images of dining space are shown the space is enclose and surrounded by concrete partition walls. Dinning 2 is located beside the cafeteria and split by a walk away corridor that connecting the entrance to the center of the building which is the open dining space. Source of noise are mainly came from cafeteria.
Floor Area Height
: 12.50 m : 3.370 meter
 34 Â
Sound Meter Reading. (dB) Non Peak Hour 4 5 60.3 66.5 Peak Hour 4 5 63.5 63.1
Coordinate A Coordinate A ii)
6 65.5 6 62.7
Reverberation Time Calculation: -Surface Walls- Plaster Audience Ceiling- Wooden Floor- Tiles Furniture- Softwood
RT =
.
.
. .
Area 42.33 5 12.50 12.50 1.4
.
Absorption (500 Hz) 0.02 0.46 0.10 0.52 0.05 Total absorption (A)
Sa 0.846 2.3 1.25 6.5 0.07 10.96
Sound Level Measurement: SPL
10
,
where
1
10
i) Peak Hour Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Highest reading 63.5 63.5
10 log = 2.238
Total Intensities Combined SPL
1
Lowest reading 62.7 62.7
10
10 log
1 = 1.862
10
4.1 10 log
.
66.1 dB
35
iii) iv)
Non-Peak Hour
Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
66.5
10 log = 4.466
Total Intensities Combined SPL
Lowest reading 60.3
Highest reading 66.5
60.3 1
10
10 log
1 = 1.071
10
5.537 10 log
.
67.4 dB
Reading of sound level meter shows that the noise is higher during non-peak hour. Dining 3 is actually a private dining area and occupied only for visitors who booked that room. While measuring this room, there was no occupants as it prepared that space for the guest.
 36 Â
7.5.4
Zone D- Cafeteria
FLOOR PLAN: Location of cafeteria i)
Analysis
Interior images of cafeteria are shown the space is surrounded by concrete partition walls and openings. Cafeteria is located between dining 1 and open dining space. Source of noise are mainly came from staff preparing the drinks and appliances such as coffee maker.
Floor Area Height
: 10.95 m : 3.370 meter
 37 Â
Sound Meter Reading. (dB)
Non Peak Hour 5 74.3 Peak Hour 5 Coordinate 73.1 C
6 61.1
Coordinate C
ii)
6 66.4
Reverberation Time Calculation
RT =
.
Surface
Area
Walls- Plaster Audience Ceiling- Wooden Floor- Tiles Furniture- Metal
24.55 4 10.95 10.95 7.0
.
. .
.
Absorption (500 Hz) 0.02 0.46 0.10 0.52 0.38 Total absorption (A)
Sa 0.491 1.84 1.095 5.694 2.66 11.78
-Sound Level Measurement SPL
10
,
where
1
10
i) Peak Hour Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Highest reading 73.1 73.1
10 log = 2.041
Total Intensities Combined SPL
Lowest reading 66.4 66.4
1
10
10 log
1 = 4.365
10
2.477 10 log
.
73.9 dB
38
ii) Non-Peak Hour Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Highest reading 74.3 74.3
10 log = 2.691
Total Intensities Combined SPL
1
Lowest reading 61.1 61.1 10 log 1 10 = 1.288
10 2.819
10 log
.
74.5 dB
SPL table shows that slightly higher reading during Non-Peak hour than peak hour. The café providing coffee, thus people ordered coffee more during morning time compared to dinner time.
39
7.5.5
Zone E- Open Dining Area 3
i)
Analysis
FLOOR PLAN: Location of open dining area 3
Interior images of open dining area are shown the space is surrounded by concrete partition walls and openings. It is the main attraction for the customer to eat and chills. Open dining area is located under a clear skylight of a central courtyard. Source of noise are mainly came from cafeteria and people occupying the space.
Floor Area Height
: 19.01 m : 7.320 meter
 40 Â
Sound Meter Reading. (dB)
Coordinate C
7 57.1
Coordinate C
7 60.1
ii)
Non Peak Hour 8 61.1 Peak Hour 8 63.6
9 65.3
10 62.5
9 55.8
10 70.2
Reverberation Time Calculation Surface Walls- Plaster Audience Floor- Tiles Furniture- Timber Air- Sky light
RT =
.
.
Area 5.19 4 19.01 4.6 19.01
. .
.
Absorption (500 Hz) 0.02 0.46 0.52 0.1 0.007 Total absorption (A)
Sa 0.10 1.84 9.88 0.46 0.13 12.41
-Sound Level Measurement SPL
3)
10
,
where
1
10
Peak Hour Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Highest reading 70.2 70.2
10 log = 1.047
Total Intensities Combined SPL
1
Lowest reading 55.8 55.8
10
10 log = 3.801
1
10
1.086 10 log
.
70.3 dB
41
3)
Non-Peak Hour
Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
65.3
10 log = 3.388
Total Intensities Combined SPL
Lowest reading 57.1
Highest reading 65.3 1
57.1
10
10 log = 5.128
1
10
3.900 10 log
.
65.9 dB
As usual, this spot is the main attraction for the people to have dining. During peak hour it was pack with people having dinner and drinks. The noise produce by the customer caused the SPL reading is higher than the normal reading.
 42 Â
7.5.6
Zone F- Dining Area 4
i)
Analysis
FLOOR PLAN: Location of dining area 4
Interior images of dining area 4 are shown the space is surrounded by concrete partition walls with tiles. Dining area 4 is located at the back near the kitchen room. Ceilings height are different, half of it is covered with upper floor slab and the rest is an opening all the way to the main roof. Source of noise are mainly came from the kitchen room.
Floor Area Height
: 33.10 m : 3.370 meter
 43 Â
Sound Meter Reading. (dB)
Coordinate C
11 76.4
Coordinate C
11 68.6
ii)
Non Peak Hour 12 13 67.0 59.6 Peak Hour 12 13 66.2 74.8
14 59.3
15 67.3
14 78.1
15 76.4
Reverberation Time Calculation Surface Walls- Plaster Walls- Tiles Audience Floor- Tiles Ceiling- Wooden FurnitureSoftwood/Timber Air- Sky light
RT =
.
.
Area 51.34 32.57 6 33.10 26.13 7.2
Absorption (500 Hz) 0.02 0.01 0.46 0.52 0.10 0.28
6.07
. .
.
Sa 1.026 0.325 2.761 17.21 2.613 2.016
0.007 Total absorption (A)
0.042 25.99
-Sound Level Measurement SPL
10
,
where
1
10
i) Peak Hour
Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Highest reading 78.1 78.1
10 log = 6.456
Total Intensities Combined SPL
1
Lowest reading 66.2 66.2
10
10 log = 4.168
1
10
6.872 10 log
.
78.3 dB
44
ii) Non-Peak Hour
Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Highest reading 76.4 76.4
10 log = 4.365
Total Intensities Combined SPL
1
Lowest reading 59.3 59.3
10
10 log = 8.511
1
10
4.450 10 log
.
66.4 dB
Dining 4 located at the back area near the kitchen. It served 4 tables than can catered 16 pax maximum. The reading shows that it is higher during peak hour and noise are mainly produced by the customer and probably from the kitchen also affected the surrounding.
 45 Â
7.5.7 i)
Zone G- Kitchen Area Analysis
FLOOR PLAN: Location of Kitchen Area
Interior image of kitchen area is shown the space is surrounded by concrete partition walls with tiles. Source of noise are mainly came from the exhaust hood and kitchen appliances. Based on our data collection, we recorded that kitchen activities produce the highest value of sound meter reading during the peak hour.
Floor Area Height
: 31.31 m : 3.370 meter
 46 Â
Sound Meter Reading. (dB)
Coordinate A
11 74.5
Coordinate A
11 80.6
ii)
Non Peak Hour 13 73.2 Peak Hour 12 13 80.8 82.0 12 74.5
14 64.5
15 62.7
14 80.1
15 80.0
Reverberation Time Calculation
Surface Walls- Plaster Audience Floor- Tiles Ceiling- Wooden Furniture- Metal
RT =
.
.
Area 77.55 5 31.31 31.31 11.9
. .
.
Absorption (500 Hz) 0.02 0.46 0.52 0.10 0.28 Total absorption (A)
Sa 1.55 2.3 16.28 3.13 3.33 26.59
-Sound Level Measurement SPL
i)
10
,
where
1
10
Peak Hour
Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Highest reading 82.0 82.0
10 log = 1.584
Total Intensities Combined SPL
1
Lowest reading 80.0 80.0
10
10 log = 1.0
1
10
2.584 10 log
.
84.1 dB
47
ii)
Non-Peak Hour
Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
74.6
10 log = 2.88
Total Intensities Combined SPL
Lowest reading 62.7
Highest reading 74.5 1
62.7
10
10 log = 1.86
1
10
3.070 10 log
.
83.5 dB
Kitchen is always busies spot in any restaurant. Sound produced from the exhaust hood, cooking station and other appliances affecting the intensity reading. Based on our calculation, sound level is higher during peak hour.
 48 Â
7.5.8 i)
Zone H- Washroom Area Analysis
FLOOR PLAN: Location of Wash room area
Interior image of washroom area is shown the space is surrounded by concrete walls with tiles. This area consists of toilet, exit door to the back lane, staircase to first floor and kitchen back entrance. Source of noise are mainly came from the kitchen and toilet.
Floor Area Height
: 20.08 m : 3.370 meter
49
Sound Meter Reading. (dB) Coordinate A B C
16 60.1 60.3 58.1
Coordinate A B C
16 76.8 75.0 74.2
iii)
Non Peak Hour 17 56.7 74.9 65.6 Peak Hour 17 68.8 68.6 64.0
18 55.2 66.8 67.1 18 65.2 65.8 64.9
Reverberation Time Calculation
Surface Walls- Plaster Wall- Tiles Walls- Brick Audience Floor- Concrete Ceiling- Wooden Door- Steel
RT =
.
.
Area 21.9 21.9 7.59 2 20.08 7.15 5.05
. .
.
Absorption (500 Hz) 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.46 0.52 0.10 0.44 Total absorption (A)
Sa 0.438 0.219 0.227 0.92 10.44 0.715 2.222 15.181
-Sound Level Measurement SPL
10
,
where
1
10
i) Peak Hour
Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Highest reading 76.8 76.8
10 log = 4.786
Total Intensities Combined SPL
1
10
Lowest reading 64.0 64.0 10 log 1 10 = 2.511
5.037 10 log
.
77.0 dB
50
ii) Non-Peak Hour
Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
74.9
10 log = 3.09
Total Intensities Combined SPL
Lowest reading 55.2
Highest reading 74.9
1
55.2
10
10 log = 3.31
1
10
3.123 10 log
.
74.9 dB
Based on our calculation, the table shows that sound level is higher during peak hour. This is because due to people using the washroom and toilet. Sound from the kitchen also more or less affecting this area due to the kitchen back entrance located on that space
 51 Â
8.0 Sound Reduction Index i.
Analysis The wall between the main entrance (Zone B), Dining 1 (Zone A) and outside
The wall between the zones (red line)
Interior wall on dining 1 area and entrance area
Sound reduction index is to measure the level of insulation provided by a structure. The understanding of sound reduction index is important to incorporate acoustic system design into a given space to decrease the possibility of sound from permeating from loud space to quite space. We decided to choose the façade wall as shown. This is because it is most significant structure that can incorporate with the sound reduction between outside source and internal space.
52
ii.
Calculation Building Elements Wall Wall Wall Door Window
Materials
Surface Area ( ) 8.59 4.02 4.94 2.06 1.4 2 units
Concrete Tiles Plaster Glazing Glazing
SRI (dB) 44 36 32 29 29
Transmission Co. 3.981 10 2.511 10 6.309 10 1.258 10 1.258 10
3.419 1.009 1.688 2.591 3.522
10 10 10 10 10
To calculate the transmission loss on materials, using the formula below: ,
Concrete Wall: 1
1
10
29
Glazing window & door:
1
10
10 44
1
10 .
.
Tiles Wall: 1
10 36
10
1
.
53
Plaster Wall: 1
10
32
1
10 log 10 .
To get the average transmission coefficient of materials:
⋯
3.419
10
.
1.009
10
1.688 10 22.41
2.591
10
3.522
10
Total Surface Reflection Index, SRI on the wall: 10
10
.
1 1 4.083
10
Sound Level Measurement for outside corridor during peak hour SPL
10
,
where
1
10
1) Peak Hour
Highest Intensity, I Power Edition, L
Highest reading 63.5 63.5
10 log
= 2.238 Total Intensities Combined SPL
1
Lowest reading 57.9 57.9 10 log 1 10 = 6.165
10 2.854
10 log
.
64.5 dB
54
iii) Discussion: Transmission loss after sound passes through the façade wall Outside SPL – SRI = Transmission loss 64.5 dB – 33.89 dB = 30.61 dB
Figure above shown the external sound wave travels to the façade wall.
From our analysis we calculate that the sound transmission loss on the façade wall is 30.61 dB, which is fairly good. The reduction of its loss proved that the wall structure and elements manage to barricade the noise that come from the main road activities and construction site across it. Therefore, the applications of material applied on that wall are gaining good comfort level for the occupants.
55
9.0 Conclusion on Acoustic Analysis
The acoustic analysis of Cho Cha Food store has been an interesting and challenging task. The noise level throughout the spaces during non-peak and peak hour is within recommended reverberation time of multi-purpose usage space, which is in the range of 0.8-1.3 seconds for a restaurant. Although the highest recorded is 1.7s at the open dining area during peak hour. This is due to the noise activities occurred on that space and it is also surrounded by to main sound source, which are the café and the kitchen. Maybe, they solved it by planting the trees which we did not considered in our calculation. Plant and vegetation is one of natural sound barrier that we can use to enhance the noise.
However, in our opinion, we observed that the area is still fairly well comfort for the guest having their meals and drinks. I didn’t causes to much noise disturbance and uncomfortable feeling for the guest. The guest can sit anywhere peacefully while having their delicious meals at any time.
56
PART II – LIGHT ANALYSIS 10) Literature Review on Light and Architecture a) Significance of Light in Architecture
Light is one of the most significant elements in architecture. Light fulfills both personal needs of comfort, health as well as the practical communal needs. Vision is the major element of sense through which we experience architecture and light is the medium that allows us to perceive space, form, texture and color. As quoted by Le Corbusier, “…architecture is the masterly, correct and magnificent play of volumes brought together in light…”. However, light is not only related to the visual experience of form and space but also thermal qualities. The characteristics of light, heat, air movement and comfort are the key factors in determining a building’s energy consumption, and if careful considerations are paid to design then the use of artificial light can be minimized. The word of space is directly connected to the way light is integrated within the way the place is designed. Light interacts with people and its’ environment by vision, experiences, and interpretations of elements. Architecturally, we can analyze space, material and colour depending on the lighting that is utilized in a space involving both the object and the observer. The dynamic daylight and controlled artificial lighting is able to affect physical measurable setting in a space, but also to provoke psychological realms of visual experiences and the other senses and moods. b) Natural Daylighting & Artificial Electrical Lighting It is astounding how the importance of natural light has been emphasized in the architectural world. As per quote by Louis Kahn, “a room is not a room without natural light”. If done well, space and light enables the spatial experience of being in a building, or a simple space evoke different reactions and atmospheres – depending on the amount of light entering the space, and how it enters the space, as well. Although arguably, architects should always strive to designing a building that is able to draw in as much natural daylight as possible, it is clearly important to be able to consider the artificial lighting in design to be able to utilize the building during the absence of daylight. Building typologies such as museums, galleries and theatre complexes utilizes the means of artificial lighting to enhance and entice the users of being in a space and changes the way the users view the objects within the space. c) Modelling Spaces with Light The overall design and lighting of an object or space is crucial because “objects in the space receive ambient light and acquire a given brightness by their color and texture as compared with their background. Any additional, specialized light cast on them alters their luminance and 57
changes their brightness relationships as perceived against the spatial envelope and among their compositional relationships with objects nearby” (Michel, 192). Using light to model spaces is important when creating varieties of illumination. It assists with the discrimination of form, thus is essential to create a medium of contact for the vision as well as the impact on emotions. When an individual is viewing a space, the different surfaces are perceived as a continuous gradient that is interrupted by shadow or shape that lies on the plane of a surface and creating an optical edge. That is the reason why it is important to consider the physical and emotional/intellectual requirements of the users of a space when creating a building programme. 11) Analytical approaches to determine lighting quality a) Daylight Factor
A ratio representing the amount of illumination available indoors relative to the illumination present outdoors at the same time under overcast skies. This formula is commonly utilized to obtain the internal natural lighting levels as perceived on a place or a surface in order to determine the sufficiency of natural lighting for the users in a particular space to conduct their activities. It is also known as the ratio of internal to external light level, as per below – Daylight Factor, DF Indoor Luminance, Ei Outdoor Luminance, Eo
Where, Ei = Luminance due to daylight at a point on the indoor working planes Eo = Simultaneous outdoor luminance on a horizontal plane from an obstructed hemisphere of overcast sky
58
Daylight Factor & Distribution b) Lumen Method The Lumen Method is used to determine the number of artificial lighting that should be installed in a space, measured by the number of lamps. This could be calculated by calculating the total illuminance of the space based on the amount of fixtures and by determining whether or not that particular space, or area, has enough lighting fixtures to accommodate the space. The number of lamps can be calculated by using the formula below,
Where, N = Number of Lamps required E = Illuminance level required (Lux) F = Average luminous flux from each lamp (lm) UF = Utilisation factor, an allowance for light distribution of the luminaire and the room surfaces MF = Maintenance factor, an allowance for reduced light output due to dirt/wear‐tear The Utilisation Factor is dependant on the Room Index, RI, which is the ratio of room plan area to half wall area between the working and luminaire planes which is calculated via:
59
Where, L = Length of room W = Width of room Hm = Mounting height, vertical distance between the working plane and the luminaire
60
12) Precedent Study on optimizing of day lighting and artificial lighting in offices Place: Switzerland (Lausanne) Building type: Office building Contact: F. Linhart (LESO, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) a) Place description
Southern façade of the building and a cross section from the façade’ s system. A mirror redirects daylight from the sky to the diffuse room ceiling, which reflects the light into the room. Daylight is guided towards the ceiling by a mirror, in order to be forwarded to the parts further away from the window. The system increases the daylight entering to the rear of the room and helps to reduce glare near the window section. Moreover, the windows are built with outside blinds.
Office plan with luminaries position. 61
Two people use the office room and the working plane height is 0.8m. b) Luminaries description
Characteristics of the luminaires. Luminaires : Ceiling mounted luminaire LIP from REGENT, reflector with prismatic diffusion upon the longitudinal axis, and specular batwing upon the transverse axis (luminaire Light Output Ratio 69%). Lamp: Sylvania T8 36W lamp (Ra > 80, CCT = 3000K, luminous flux = 3350 lm). Ballast: Philips HFR 136 TLD 220‐240 dimmable 0V‐10V, announced power factor = 0.95 Price of the luminaire in catalogue = 250€ The control has been placed at the entrance of the office; people can operate it according to their needs. The lighting power density is 4.5W/m2. c) Measurements Illuminance measurements (artificial lighting only) on the work plane at maximum power for lighting: Eaverage = 235 lx Emax = 308 lx Emin =186 lx Uniformity = 0.79
62
d) Occupant’s satisfaction Six people have been working in this office over two years. All workers expressed that they were satisfied with their lighting conditions. Views of the six office‐workers: The light in my office is generally comfortable: 83% agree Artificial lighting in my office is able to provide enough light: 83% agree The facilities which are in my office (windows, blinds, artificial and day‐light systems) make me able to get every time a right lighting situation, so I can work in good conditions: 83% agree. With only artificial light, no remarks were mentioned about a too cold or too hot feeling. e) Conclusion From even a small intervention such as the one documented here, it becomes clear how carefully considered lighting can improve the comfort of the area and even the productivity of the workers in that area. It also becomes clear that there are several factors to keep in mind when designing the lighting strategy for an architectural object. This is not only limited to the choice of luminaire and its positioning but also a combination with other factors such as prevalent activities, materials and their properties, desired comfort level etc.
63
13) Chocha Foodstore Case Study a) Introduction The lighting analysis was undertaking at the Chocha Foodstore, a newly opened restaurant in the heart of Kuala Lumpur’s Chinatown. The restaurant is situated in an old shophouse typical of the area and its traditional features such as the central courtyard were preserved when it was turned into an eatery. The restaurant, kitchen, coffee making area and dining area occupy the ground floor of the shop lot.
Exterior view of the Chocha Foodstore
The architectural intervention in turning the shophouse into a restaurant was so minimal that most materials such as the original paint and tiles were kept in their original condition.
64
Sitting area in the courtyard of the shoplot
View of the dining and work station in the front part of the building
 65 Â
The building is split into a two-story building at the front, which is separated from the back part (also two stories) by the courtyard. The courtyard is bridged by a walkway connecting the upper floor of the front building with the upper floor of the back part. This has significant impact on the infiltration of the different spaces with daylight: The front part receives some degree of daylight through the windows and glass door. However, the light penetrating this area is dim as the five-foot walkway outside of the windows is covered by the protruding upper floor. Hence, there is only indirect lighting here. However, the same sitting area area receives daylight contribution from the central courtyard. Here too, the daylight is diminished though since at most time of the day it only receives indirect light. The length of the courtyard is perpendicular to the sunpath, which means that the time at which the courtyard receives direct sunlight is for a short period around midday only.
Axonometric view with highlighted areas showing rough daylight penetration
 66 Â
b) Method of data collection and analysis In order to analyse both, the utilisation rate of daylight as well as the effectiveness of artificial lighting, lighting data was collected at two different times: 1) Daytime scenario (22 October 2016 at 10:00 – 12:00) with most artificial light sources switched off. The quality of the daylight at that time was affected by a slightly overcast weather condition. 2) Nightime scenario (23 October 2016 at 20:00 – 22:00) with all of the restaurant’s artificial light sources switched on. It is important to highlight that the use of the analyzed object is a restaurant. As such, much emphasis has been placed on a lighting scenario that creates an atmosphere of comfort. Especially during the night time scenario, this was evident in the relatively low lux readings. However, generally speaking, where necessary, lighting was sufficient. This includes sufficient lighting for reading a menu at the table. With the exception of the kitchen, the bulbs fitted in the lamps had been chosen to within the warmer, more comfortable range of the Kelvin scale (the majority of the bulbs were rated at 3000 Kelvin). In the kitchen, standard 35 Watt fluorescent tubes were installed in order to provide a well-lit working condition. There was only minimal impact from the kitchen lighting on the neighboring dining area since the opening between the kitchen and the seating area was kept small. Further details on the lighting features and zoning are provided further below.
c) Data measurement
The light was assessed along the same grid at both occasions. The grid was placed with sufficient distance from the walls and aligned over the centres of the tables. The resulting grid was made up of squares with a side length of slightly under 2m.
Grid layout over floor plan to identify measurement points
67
At both visits, the measurements were taken from two heights, which are critical for restaurant scenarios: At a standing, average eye-level height of 1.5 meter and at an average sitting eye-level height of 1.0m
Measurment levels: Sitting eye-level and Standing eye-level
d) Measuring Device
Lux meter used for gathering lighting data
The light level was assessed using a standard lux meter. The device is used to measure the intensity of light. The above photo shows a light meter with a photo-detector (right) and an LCD display (left). The intensity of the light os measured with the photo-detector, which is held upright and perpendicular to the source of light. The reading is then taken from the LCD display and can be subsequently
 68 Â
tabulated. The light meter used for this analysis indicates the light intensity in units of lux within a range from 0 to 50000 lux. The photo sensitive diode which is responsible for the light reading is adjusted to only capture light visible to the human eye. Ultra-violet and infra-red light does not affect the readings. The specifications state an accuracy of +/- 5%. The instrument offers three measuring ranges and the data collection was undertaken in line with the recommendations as follows:
If the measured value is , 2000 Lux, Range A should be selected If the measured value is within 2000 to 19990 Lux, Range B should be selected If the measured value is above 20000 Lux, Range C should be selected.
Most readings fell in the Range A, under 2000 Lux but a number of daylight readings in the courtyard fell into Range B. All figures given in this report are the final Lux readings and no further adjustments are necessary.
e) Zoning For the lighting analysis, the areas were zoned according to their use, placement with regards to natural light sources such as the windows and courtyard opening as well as with regards to the different lighting requirements in the different work area. In general, the dining and seating areas throughout the restaurant are dimly lit with low hanging light sources above the tables. This creates a comfortable ambience. The working areas, such as the coffee making areas and the kitchen are more brightly lit, with a specific focus of lighting up the work areas such as the counter tops and cooking stations. Corridors as well as entrance areas are sufficiently lit with dedicated lamps as well as indirect lighting, which helps create a spatial hierarchy by lighting these secondary areas differently from the dining areas.
69
70
14) Analysis of Existing Lighting a) Daytime lighting
71
b) Nighttime lighting
72
c) Light fixtures and bulbs
Main types of light bulbs used: 3.5 Watt LED (used for direct table lighting, indirect lighting and wall mounted lighting) The vast majority of the bulbs used throughout the restaurant are of this type. LED bulbs have become better at imitating the comfortable “warm light” of the traditional incandescent bulbs at far less consumption of energy. This bulb consumes 3.5 Watts but has the equivalent intensity of a 25W incandescent lamp. Purchase cost but also the lifetime of LED bulbs are considerably higher. Further specifications: Colour temperature: 3000K (“warm white”) Brightness: 250lm Beam angle: 180 degrees (without reflector) Lamp finish: frosted 35 Watt Fluorescent tube (Used only in the kitchen area) The fluorescent tube is popular in working environments that require bright lighting. As they are mounted inside a reflective casing they are able to illuminate a large area. Further specifications: Colour temperature: 4000K (“cool white”) Brightness: 2800lm dependent on mounting/reflector Beam angle: Lamp finish: frosted
73
d) Materiality and reflective properties The reflectivity of the materials play a large role in the amount of light that is bounced of or absorbed by surfaces. It can have a significant level on the effectiveness of lighting (Utilisation Factor) as well as on comfort. In general glares from too shiny surfaces and odd placements of light sources are to be avoided.
No
Material
Photo
Description
Reflectance
Non-reflective, matte surface. 1.
Mosaic tiles
30% Yellow/ Brown / Grey
2.
Porcelain tiles
Smooth surface, reflective.
30%
Yellow/
3.
Exposed brick wall
Rough surface with texture.
18%
Grey
 74 Â
4.
Brick wall with plaster finish and lime wash
Semi-smooth surface with texture. 35% Medium grey / green / blue
Rough surface. Timber beams and planks
brown, slightly varnished
15%
5.
Glass
Transparent, Low reflection
2%
Clear glass
6.
Steel
Smooth surface, matte.
5%
Black 7.
 75 Â
e) Materiality in relation to light sources
Wall material Floor material Ceiling material Numbers according to table above
1
5
5
1
1
A
1
A
5
Floor plan
3
6 2
4
7 Section A‐A
76
15) Data gathering
Daytime light measurements in grid over floor plan
 77 Â
Daytime light measurements in grid over floor plan
 78 Â
Light contour diagram for daylight scenario
79
Light contour diagram for daylight scenario
80
16) Daylight Factor Analysis
The following is an overview of the daytime factors contributing to the lighting of the different zones as mentioned above. It is important to note again that the central part of the building is an open courtyard. This explains the wide range of readings from very dimly lit areas up areas that receive a very high degree of daylight.
Daylight factor calculations
General conditions Time
Daytime, 10:00-12:00
Weather conditions:
Slighty overcast
Unobstructed daylight reading (E external):
25000
Daylight factor calculation:
D = (E internal/E external) x100%
Luminance in different zones: lux ranges
average (E internal)
daylight factor
Data gatering at 1.5m height Dining area 1
60-95
79.50
0.32%
Dining area 2
2-11
7.00
0.03%
Dining area 4
159-232
183.00
0.73%
Dining area 3 (courtyard)
4020-6740
5,672.50
22.69%
working area (café)
55-105
80.00
0.32%
working area (kitchen)
72-564
413.40
1.65%
main corridors (no direct daylight)
3-440
61.40
0.25%
main corridors (direct daylight)
1280-3240
2,475.00
9.90%
81
Luminance in different zones: lux ranges
average (E internal)
daylight factor
Data gatering at 1.0m height Dining area 1
53-352
130.50
1%
Dining area 2
9-32
24.00
0%
Dining area 4
107-206
152.60
1%
Dining area 3 (courtyard)
3480-5330
4,535.00
18%
working area (café)
63-631
347.00
1%
working area (kitchen)
232-535
373.60
1%
main corridors (no direct daylight)
7-180
52.69
0%
main corridors (direct daylight)
1760-3080
2,497.50
10%
*where readings showed extreme values due to grid location too close too object or light sources, these readings were ignored
Daylight factor ranges according to Malaysian Standards Zone
DF (%)
Distribution
Very bright
>6
Large (potential glare & heat gain)
Bright
3-6
Good
Average
1-3
Fair
Dark
0-1
Poor
Conclusion on Daylight Factor calculations: The daylight factor calculations are in line with the actual measurements on site. Most notably is the fact that there is very little daylight contribution from the front façade’s fenestration to the dining area inside. The same is valid for the areas adjoining to the courtyard: While the courtyard receives a high degree of daylight (without the negative side effects of glare), the daylight that penetrates into the front and back building part (i.e. dining areas 2 and 4 as well as the café working area) does not reach far inside either.
82
While we were able to undertake the light measurements without the light sources having been switched on (prior to official opening time). The restaurant does use a PSALI (Permanent Supplementary Artificial Lighting of Interiors) approach and complements the limited amount of daylight in the dining areas by switching on all available lamps illuminating the dining and working areas.
 83 Â
Daylight factors by zone
84
17) Calculations and analysis of artificial lighting
Based on the approach described in the literature review above, the artificial lighting was analysed. This includes the comparison of the actual measurements taken on site and the comparison with the calculated light required to fulfil the Malaysian Standards MS1525 recommendations.
Room Index:
LxW RI=
-----------H x (L+W)
Number of lamps required:
ExA N=
---------F x UF x MF
The analysis of the artificial lighting was undertaken by zones. The main activity of the zone (e.g. dining area or kitchen‌) determines the required lighting levels. It is necessary to highlight that the Chocha Foodstore is dimly lit in spaces other than the working and dining areas. The corridors and the seating areas in the courtyard rely largely on the indirect lighting from the neighbouring areas.
 85 Â
Artificial lighting analysis – Dining Areas 1,2 & 4
Artificial Lighting Analysis Dining area 1
Dining area 2
Dining area 4
Length (L) in meter
8.8
5.1
11.5
width (W) in m
4.3
2.5
2.5
37.84
12.75
28.75
200
200
200
restaurant
restaurant
restaurant
3.5W LED bulb
3.5W LED bulb
3.5W LED bulb
9
12
10
lumen per light *
250
250
250
heigth of light fixture
2.45
2.1
2.5
table height
0.75
0.75
0.75
1.7
1.35
1.75
Room Index:
1.70
1.24
1.17
Ceiling reflectance
15%
15%
15%
Wall reflectance
30%
30%
30%
table top / floor reflectance
12%
12%
12%
Resultant Utilisation Factor (UF)
0.46
0.33
0.37
Maintenance factor (MF)
0.80
0.80
0.8
number of lights required
9.14
3.22
7.77
0
+9
+2
dimension in m2 MS 1525 requirement (lux) Type of area: Type of light fixture number of lights in area
mounting height over table (H)
shortfall/excess of light sources *(F= lumen/light x no. of lights) Observation on dining areas 1,2 & 4:
The dining areas are pleasantly lit. The chosen lights and their locations set a comfortable atmosphere. Even though dining area 1 is actually a little dimmer than the recommended 200lux it appears sufficiently lit. Dining area 2, on the other hand has been over allocated with light sources. However, their arrangement is part of the decoration and since the bulbs are energy efficient and do not light the area too brightly, an intervention is not necessary here either. Dining area 4 is very close to the recommended values and again does not seem to require any intervention considering the generally intended dim lighting of the restaurant.
86
Artificial lighting analysis – Dining Area 3 (Courtyard)
Artificial Lighting Analysis Dining area 3 (courtyard) Length (L) in meter width (W) in m dimension in m2 MS 1525 requirment (lux) Type of area: Type of light fixture number of lights in area
7 2.7 18.90 200 restaurant 3.5W LED bulb * 5
lumen per light *
250
heigth of light fixture
5.5
table height
0.75
mounting height over table (H)
4.75
Room Index:
0.41
Ceiling reflectance
0%
Wall reflectance
20%
table top / floor reflectance
12%
Resultant Utilisation Factor (UF)
0.27
Maintenance factor (MF)
0.8
number of lights required
14.00
shortfall/excess of light sources
-9
Observation on dining area 3 (courtyard): The dining area situated in the courtyard does not have any dedicated lighting with the intention of illuminating the table areas with the exception of some candles placed on the tables. The area is lit by contribution from the light sources of the neighbouring areas as well as some lights mounted above and for the illumination of the bridge over the courtyard. Here the shortfall of lighting is obvious as it is too dark to read a menu at the table at night. Interventions to brighten the area could include table lamps, hanging lights above the table area or indirect lighting bounced of the wall at the back of the seating area.
87
Artificial lighting analysis – Working areas (Café & Kitchen)
Artificial Lighting Analysis Working area (café) Length (L) in meter width (W) in m dimension in m2 MS 1525 requirment (lux)
Working area (kitchen) 4.05
11.2
2.8
3.05
11.34
34.16
300
300
kitchen
kitchen
Kitchen/Café
Kitchen/Food prep
8
4
lumen per light *
250
2800
heigth of light fixture
2.45
3.2
0.9
0.9
1.55
2.3
Room Index:
1.07
1.04
Ceiling reflectance
15%
5%
Wall reflectance
30%
30%
table top / floor reflectance
15%
15%
Resultant Utilisation Factor (UF)
0.37
0.37
0.8
0.8
5.75
3.09
+2
+1
Type of area: Type of light fixture number of lights in area
table height mounting height over table (H)
Maintenance factor (MF) number of lights required Shortfall (-)/excess(+) of light sources *(F= lumen/light x no. of lights) Observation on lighting of working areas:
The working areas are very well lit and line with the recommended values. This is particularly true for the kitchen area, where the fluorescent lighting illuminates the work surfaces well and in a suitable angle so as not to throw shadows onto the counter tops. No intervention is required for improving the lighting in the working areas.
88
Artificial lighting analysis – Corridors
Artificial Lighting Analysis main corridors Length (L) in meter
31
width (W) in m
1.2
dimension in m2 MS 1525 requirment (lux) Type of area: Type of light fixture number of lights in area
37.20 50 corridor LED downlights 3
lumen per light *
250
heigth of light fixture
3.2
table height mounting height over table (H)
0 3.2
Room Index:
0.36
Ceiling reflectance
15%
Wall reflectance
30%
table top / floor reflectance
12%
Resultant Utilisation Factor (UF)
0.27
Maintenance factor (MF)
0.8
number of lights required
11.48
shortfall/excess of light sources *(F= lumen/light x no. of lights)
-8
Observation on lighting of corridors: With the exception of a small section in the front of the building, where the corridor is illuminated by a couple of LED down lights, the corridors rely largely on the indirect lighting from the neighbouring areas. However, as the measurements show, this is sufficient in some of the corridor sections. Some corridor sections, especially the part of the corridor leading through the courtyard are too dimly lit though. However, safety is not affected since a well-placed indirect light sources helps to illuminate the ground level. This is not captured by the readings at 1m height.
89
18) Conclusion
The lighting at the Chocha Foodstore is thoughtfully implemented and generally well placed. While at first sight some area appear somewhat dimly lit and below the recommended illumination levels it has to be noted that the lighting creates a comfortable and inviting atmosphere. Safety is not impacted by the low level of lighting in some of the areas as care has been taken to add additional indirect lighting where needed. The work stations are lit in line with the recommended lighting levels. Further consideration appears to have been put into the energy efficiency of the lighting design. All light sources in use are energy efficient and the vast majority of light bulbs in use are of the low Watt LED type. The only area where lighting could be improved at night, is the courtyard seating area.
View of the central courtyard of the Chocha Foodstore
 90 Â
19) References 1. Schiler, M. (1992). Simplified Design of Building Lighting. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 2. Auliciems, A. & Szokolay, S.V. 1997. Thermal Comfort. Brisbane: The University of Queensland Printery. 3. Cavanough, William J. & Wikes, Joseph A. 1998. Architectural Acoustics: Principles and Practice. New York, Wiley and Sons. 4. Madan, M., Johnson, J. & Jorge, R. 1999. Architectural Acoustics: Principles and Design. USA, Prentice-Hall,Inc. 5. McMullan, R. 1998. Environmental Science in Buildings. 4th. ed. Basingstoke: McMillan. 6. Olgyay, V. 1963. Design with Climate. Princeton, New Jersey. Princeton University Press. 7. Stein, Benjamin & Reynolds, John S. 2000. Mechanical and Electrical Equipment for Buildings. New York. John Wiley. 8. Szokolay, S.V. 2004. Introduction to Architectural Science: The Basis of Sustainable Design. Oxford. Architectural Press. 9. McMullan, R. 1991. Noise Control in Buildings. Oxford. BSP Professional Books. 10. Absorption Coefficient. (2016). Retrieved 1 November 2016, from http://www.acoustic.ua/st/web_absorption_data_eng.pdf 11. Australia, C. (2015). Sound Insulation - Properties of Concrete Walls and Floors. Cement Concrete & Aggregates Australia. Retrieved 1 November 2016, from http://59.167.233.142/publications/pdf/SoundInsulation.pdf 12. Smith, B. (1970). Acoustics. New York: American Elsevier Pub. Co. 13. University, B. (2015). What is Acoustics? | Acoustics Research Group. Acoustics.byu.edu. Retrieved 1 November 2016, from https://acoustics.byu.edu/content/what-acoustics
 91 Â