Architecture Portfolio 2021 // Basel Ghazaly by Basel Ghazaly

Basel Mamdouh Ghazaly Architect and Designer

Work experience

Internships

Master in advanced Computation in Architecture and Design [MaCAD]

360 Architects Environmental Architect 02/2021- Present + Reduced cost of operation of designs through optimization of performance results. + Created conceptual designs for projects in early stages. + Advised on mosque projects concerning design and environmental solutions.

Kronach Creativ Ligting design intern 04/2019- 05/2019.

2021 - 2021 Topics: + BIM and Smart Construction + Environmental and Structual Design + Artificial Intelligence in Architecture MSc. in Architectural Theory Ain Shams University ASU 2020 - 2022 Topic: To be decided BSc. Environmental Architecture & Urbanism Ain Shams University ASU & University of East London UEL 2016 - 2020 Breif: + 3.2 GPA | Environmental Architecture division. + Thesis Project Precedent. Grade: Excellent. + Mulitple Best Project Awards.

Ain Shams University Instructor/Teaching Assistant 11/2020- Present + Mentored students on designing sustainable buildings in various specialized studios. + Prepared and delivered the curriculum for Building Performance Simulation. +Taught students how to calculate costs of green and sustainable interventions including operational + inital costs and payback period adjusted for inflation. UDAAR Junior Architect 11/2020- 12/2020 + Designed large international projects. + Project presentation and visualization. + Modeled, and rendered interiors.

Engineering Consultants Group, UTW Architecture Intern 08/2017- 09/2017 Ezbet Project Intern 01/2015- 02/2015

Volunteering AIESEC in Egypt National support bord member of marketing 12/2015- 04/2016 AIESEC in Ain Shams Universiy Marketing team leader + other roles 12/2014- 04/2016

Team worker // Extensive experience working with both small and big teams both self organized and heirarichal. //Frequent leadership organizing roles Resolute Dedicated Improviser Passionate

Arabic: Mother Tongue

Education

Institute of Advanced Architecture of Catalonia IAAC & Polytechnic University of Catalonia UPC

Personal

German: A1 Level

Computational

Ig. instagram.com/basel_ ghazaly_/

Grasshopper // Scripting in Python // State-of-the art knowledge of #Collaborative BIM workflows #Environmental simulation #Structural optimization #Machine learning Machine learning // Keras //Tensorflow //Scikitlearn HTML, CSS

Design & Simulation

In. linkedin.com/in/baselghazaly/

English: C2 level IELTS Certification awarded on June 2016 - Score 8.0 / 9.0 Overall

Media

mail. baselghazaly7@gmail.com

Basel Ghazaly is a computational designer, architect, and engineer. He deeply believes in the open and free flowing circulation of knowledge and is passionate about teaching and sharing knowledge. In his work he explores simulation, artifical cognition, digital design and tries to investigate the porous zone of human and non-human collaboration.

Languages

cell. +201022698864

Biography

BASEL GHAZALY

# Cairo , Egypt

Rhinoceros 3D [+ Scripting] Revit [+ rhino.inside] Sketchup 3DS Max Lumion Ladybug tools [Grasshopper] Design Builder Flow Design CATT Acoustics

Photography // Lanscape, architecture, street Adobe Indesign Adobe Photoshop Adobe Lightroom Adobe Illustrator Adobe Premiere Pro Adobe Audition Office

The Sports Centrifuge The Sports Centrifuge is a project of IAAC, Institute for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia developed at the Master in Advanced Computation for Architecture & Design in 2020/21 by: Students: Basel Ghazaly, Felipe Romero and Keshava Narayan Lead faculty: David Andres Leon Faculty: Oana Taut

Click for Video

Graduation Project Individual work

Sustainable design studio 2 Individual Work

Al Sufrat Resort

Eco Urban 3 Individual Work

Performance Simulation a n d O p t i m i z at i o n

Teaching and Research

OPTIMIZATION OF FLOOR PLATE ROTATION The purpose of this project was to use open street maps to get the topography and buildings of the Central park vicinity in New York and then optimizes the floor plate rotation of a building overlooking the park to maximize the view from the two facades overlooking the park and to minimize the radiation and maximize the sunlight hours on the other two facades.

CLICK HERE FOR THE VIDEO

Top Iteration

Worst Iteration

Iteration mapping

GENERATIVE OPTIMIZATION OF PREDESIGN MODELS This project's aim was to use to generate a large no. of iterations based on specific criteria for morphology and analyize them based on a set of performative criterias to determine the optimum form in a pre design phase. The criteria used to rank them were how close it is to the required area and having the lowest possible radiation falling on facades. Calculating the difference between the base case and the optimum case, both criterion improved by 22%.

Base Case

Optimum Case

Base Case

Optimum Case

ACOUSTIC PANEL FORM SIMULATION An attempt to simulate two types of panels of different morphologies to see how that would affect the propagation of sound. It was done using Pachyderm, an acoustical simulation plugin for grasshopper, Rhino 3D's visual scripting interface.

CLICK HERE FOR THE VIDEO

PV ARRAY OPTIMIZATION A simple attempt at optimizing PV arrays' angle of inclination and angle of rotation based on the radiation falling on them.

CLICK HERE FOR THE VIDEO

WALL SECTION THERMAL TRANSMITTANCE

Wood Studs

Metal Studs

Wood Studs

Metal Studs

0.2 m wall thickness

0.4 m wall thickness

0.6 m wall thickness

0.7 m wall thickness

1 m wall thickness

1.3 m wall thickness

MULTI-ZONE BUILDING MODEL SIMULATION A multi zone HB model was tested for it's performance when conditioned using active heating and cooling, and unconditioned using natural ventialtion with other passive strategies tested in conjunction like fans, thermal mass and night flushing to achieve optimum results. The model was tested for the temperature fluctuation of the 24 hours of the first day of the hot design week and visualized in color. The energy balance was tested with several options to reduce overall consumption. These are some snippets from the project. For the rest of the results please get in touch.

CLICK HERE FOR ANIMATION

Operative temperature

Base Case Energy Balance

Comfort Chart

Base Case Energy Balance

Detailed Comfort Chart

Base case

Single Panned Clear, 3mm

DETAILED CASE STUDY PROJECT FOR ENERGY CONSUMPTION REDUCTION AND COST ESTIMATION This study was conducted using Design Builder to compare two cases with a different envelope in terms of operative cost and initial cost. It was intended to consider the buildings benefit, revenue, and payback period over the years based on the intial investment.

Wall: U Value (1.189 W/m2·K)

Semi-exposed Ceiling: U Value (3.106 W/m2·K)

Floor: U Value (2.465 W/m2·K)

Glazing: U Value (6.257 W/m2·K)

Design case

Double glazing low-E tinted 6mm/13mm Air Wall: U Value (0.265 W/m2·K)

Semi-exposed Ceiling: U Value (3.106 W/m2·K)

Floor: U Value (2.465 W/m2·K)

Glazing: U Value (1.345 W/m2·K)

Variable Component chosen for the study, of several other options.

Table 1 – Walls Vegetation Geo-textile Material Carpet /underlay Steel Frame Insulated pipe Waterproof Brick masonry Cement PlasterPlaster U-value

Density

0.3

Thermal conductivity (W/m·K) 0.2

(J/kg·K) 1000

(kg/m3) 400

0.1

1360

400

0.05 0.03 0.02 0.12

50 0.04 0.16 0.72

450 836 1004 840

7800 91 1379 1920

0.35

840

950

Thickness (m)

0.02

0.265 (W/m2·K)

Glazing Type

Design UBuilder value library layers

single clear (single clear glass 3mm)

Base case glass 3mm Double

(Generic LoE tint 6mm x Air

Design glazing low 13mm x case E tinted Generic LoE tint 6mm )

6.257

1.345

Comparison Between outside and inside Temp. (Max., Avg. & Min. For all options) 50.0 45.0 40.0 35.0

Temp. C

30.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 Outside Air Temp

Inside Air Temp. Design Case Option Max

Average

Inside Air Temp. Base Case

Min

Comparison between Max, Avg, Min Air Temp (1st of July)

42.00

37.00

32.00

27.00

22.00 Base Case

Design Case Max

Conclusion •

Avg

Outside

Min

The maximum, minimum, and average temperatures are much lower inside than

DCH (Degree Cooling Hours) during one year

DHH (Degree Heating Hours) during one year DHH

DCH

4000

10000

3500

9000 8000

3000

7000 6000

Hours

2500 2000

5000 4000

1500

3000

1000

2000

500

1000 0

Base Case

Design Case

Base Case

Conclusion •

The DHH and DCH for the design case are about half of the DHH and DCH of the Base case, with the design case having 1827 h DHH and 4854 h DCH, compared to 3661 h DHH and 8572 h DCH, with a difference of 1834 h DHH (50.10%) and 3719 h (43.38%) DCH, with an overall difference of 5553 h (45.39%).

Design Case

Option

DHH Base Case Design Case Difference (hours) Difference (%)

3661 1827 1834 50.10%

DCH 8572 4854 3719 43.38%

Sum 12233 6680 5553 45.39%

Case Operation Cost/Year EGP 70,000.0

EGP 60,000.0

EGP 50,000.0

EGP 40,000.0

EGP 30,000.0

EGP 20,000.0

EGP 10,000.0

EGP 0.0 Base Case

Design Option 2019

2020

Energy Consumption+ Cost

Energy Consumption and Cost Office Equipment

Investment Calculation 2.71

Consumption (W)

No. of units

No. of Hours

Total consumption (W)

450

10800

Water Cooler

1632

Water Heater

2000

Workstation

200

8000

Laptop

150

6000

Printer

170

3400

Scanner

100

2000

Fax

120

1200

Plasma TV Phone Charger

325

1300

870

1.37 3.44 1.52

Length of walls (m)

3.64 1.86 2.03 1.66 1.05 1.5

Total wall length (m) Wall height (m) Surface area (m2) Cost/m2

20.78 4 83.12 $2,000

Cost/m2 in EGP

EGP 32,320.00

Total Cost in EGP

EGP 2,686,438

Cost Fridge

Total

37.2 kWh

Comments • The cost of 1m2 for a professionally installed green wall is $12003000 and hence 2000 was taken as an average, this was then multiplied by 16.16 to convert it to EGP. The total length of walls was then calculated and multiplied by the height to get the wall area in m2. Then the wall area was multiplied by the cost per m2 to get the total investment costs.

2020

Investment Operation Total Costs PV Total Cost PV Revenues PV Total Benefit PV NPV

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

EGP 2,686,438 0

2686438.4

0 EGP 18,352.09

EGP 19,711.50

EGP 28,176.75 EGP 30,263.91 EGP 32,505.68

EGP 34,913.51

0 EGP 16,385.79

EGP 15,713.89

0 EGP 16,385.79 EGP 32,099.68 (2686438.40)

Total Costs Total Benefits Total Revenue NPV

$2,398,605.71

ROI

-95%

EGP 21,171.61 EGP 22,739.88 EGP 24,424.31 EGP 26,233.52 EGP 15,069.53 EGP 14,451.60

EGP 13,859.01 EGP 13,290.72 EGP 12,745.73 EGP 12,223.09

EGP 11,721.88

EGP 11,241.22

EGP 47,169.21 EGP 61,620.82 EGP 75,479.83 EGP 88,770.55 EGP 101,516.28 EGP 113,739.37 EGP 125,461.24 EGP 136,702.46

-EGP 2,670,052.61

-EGP 2,654,338.72

-EGP 2,639,269.19

-EGP 2,624,817.58

-EGP 2,610,958.57

-EGP 2,597,667.85

-EGP 2,584,922.12

-EGP 2,572,699.03

-EGP 2,560,977.16

-EGP 2,549,735.94

169.916746

176.1393931

182.6281119

189.3942795

196.449759

203.8069211

211.4786653

219.4784428

227.8202796

2686438.4

18352.0865

38063.58681

59235.19826

81975.07723

106399.3917

132632.9146

160809.6614

191073.5747

223579.2593

258492.7724

(2686438.40)

(2668086.31)

(2648374.81)

(2627203.20)

(2604463.32)

(2580039.01)

(2553805.49)

(2525628.74)

(2495364.83)

(2462859.14)

(2427945.63)

Conclusion • The initial investment was a hefty sum of about EGP 2,686,450. • The NPV at the end of the 10 years is EGP 2,398,600. • The total benefit PV at the end of the 10 years is approximately EGP 136,700. • The revenues are almost doubled at the end of the 10 years. • The total revenue at the end of the 10 years is –EGP 2,427,950. • The total return on investment in 10 years from 2020 to 2030 is -95%, meaning on 5% has been repaid. According to this result it would take a lifetime and then some to break even.

7/1/2002 8/1/2002 9/1/2002 10/1/2002 11/1/2002 12/1/2002 Average

ASHRAE ENERGY MODEL SIMULATION

Date/Time

To pass the ASHRAE requirements for energy modeling optimization the building's energy is first simulated in design builder for the base orientation. It is then simulated for the same building rotated 90 degrees three more times. The average of these four cases is considered the base case. The energy of the optimized model was then simulated and the difference between both case and the % improvement are calcualted. The optimized model reduced energy consumption by 6.8%.

1/1/2002 2/1/2002 3/1/2002 4/1/2002 5/1/2002 6/1/2002 7/1/2002 8/1/2002 9/1/2002 10/1/2002 11/1/2002 12/1/2002 Average

Date/Time 1/1/2002 2/1/2002 3/1/2002 4/1/2002 5/1/2002 6/1/2002 7/1/2002 8/1/2002 9/1/2002 10/1/2002 11/1/2002 12/1/2002 Average

Date/Time 1/1/2002 2/1/2002 3/1/2002 4/1/2002 5/1/2002

Lighting kWh

101.4347 92.70759 108.6426 111.8899 117.8272 114.0263 117.8272 116.789 110.4923 111.5577 100.7686 102.1136

0 Degrees System Fans System Pumps Auxiliary Energy Heating (Gas) Cooling (Electricity) Total kWh kWh kWh kWh kWh 64.04552 0.451157 0 0 73.22095 165.931377 57.84757 0.406046 0 0 63.26274 150.961206 64.04552 0.102295 0.236881 32.06703 12.15679 205.094326 61.97954 0.133961 1.760115 238.8377 0 414.601216 64.04552 0 0 0 0 181.87272 61.97954 0.000663 0.001017 0.130714 0 176.138234 64.04552 0.02202 0.156575 20.39422 0 202.445535 64.04552 0.00162 0.003272 0.420518 0 181.25993 61.97954 0 0 0 0 172.47184 64.04552 0.167179 2.138117 290.8578 0.271899 468.766316 61.97954 0.089125 0.34173 45.90976 6.532174 209.088755 64.04552 0.316052 0 0 51.94634 166.475172

1306.07669 754.08437

Lighting kWh

101.834 92.82739 108.6626 111.8899 117.8272 114.0263 117.8272 116.789 110.5721 111.6975 100.8684 102.3931

102.4131 93.60609 109.1817 112.429 117.8272

4.637707

628.617742

207.390893

2902.49752

90 Degrees System Fans System Pumps Auxiliary Energy Heating (Gas) Cooling (Electricity) Total kWh kWh kWh kWh kWh 76.0367 0.493681 0 0 75.82881 178.364381 68.67831 0.539344 0 0 84.31773 162.045044 76.0367 0.362427 0.153867 20.46794 53.56083 205.683534 73.5839 0.174591 1.016967 136.4789 9.550503 323.144258 76.0367 0 0 0 0 193.8639 73.5839 0 0 0 0 187.6102 76.0367 0.002511 0.009471 1.219966 0 195.095848 76.0367 0 0 0 0 192.8257 73.5839 0 0 0 0 184.156 76.0367 0.160604 1.766295 239.5455 1.922872 429.206599 73.5839 0.098791 0.336534 45.21882 7.03183 220.106445 76.0367 0.310378 0 0 48.17186 178.740178

1307.21469 895.27081

Lighting kWh

1.690118

2.142327

3.283134

442.931126

280.384435 2931.226522

Date/Time 1/1/2002 2/1/2002 3/1/2002 4/1/2002 5/1/2002 6/1/2002 7/1/2002 8/1/2002 9/1/2002 10/1/2002 11/1/2002 12/1/2002 Average

117.8272 116.789 110.5721 111.6975 100.8684 102.3931

76.0367 76.0367 73.5839 76.0367 73.5839 76.0367

0.002511 0 0 0.160604 0.098791 0.310378

0.009471 0 0 1.766295 0.336534 0

1.219966 0 0 239.5455 45.21882 0

1307.21469 895.27081

2.142327

3.283134

442.931126

Lighting kWh

102.4131 93.60609 109.1817 112.429 117.8272 114.0263 117.8272 117.0885 111.3708 112.5561 101.5872 103.032

102.3532 93.22672 109.0619 112.4889 117.8272 114.0263 117.8272 117.1084 111.3508 112.3564 101.1679 102.6127

101.4347 92.70759 108.6426 111.8899 117.8272 114.0263 117.8272 116.789 110.4923 111.5577 100.7686 102.1136

280.384435 2931.226522

1.820416

3.291065

444.671325

192.570024

2886.12036

270 Degrees System Fans System Pumps Auxiliary Energy Heating (Gas) Cooling (Electricity) Total kWh kWh kWh kWh kWh 62.70222 0.306292 0 0 42.13659 165.361712 56.63426 0.24261 0 0 31.21664 150.10359 62.70222 0.034112 0.246193 33.38058 1.187574 205.425005 60.67957 0.138734 1.892656 256.8257 0 432.02556 62.70222 0 0 0 0 180.52942 60.67957 0.002421 0.003994 0.512771 0 175.225056 62.70222 0.023525 0.170952 22.21005 0 202.933947 62.70222 0.002688 0.008123 1.042894 0 180.864325 60.67957 0 0 0 0 172.03037 62.70222 0.17415 2.38619 324.7418 0 502.36076 60.67957 0.074286 0.439212 58.7834 2.453491 221.144368 62.70222 0.183355 0 0 21.33744 165.498275

1311.40762 738.26808

Lighting kWh

195.095848 192.8257 184.156 429.206599 220.106445 178.740178

180 Degrees System Fans System Pumps Auxiliary Energy Heating (Gas) Cooling (Electricity) Total kWh kWh kWh kWh kWh 79.05614 0.44617 0 0 60.25722 181.91541 71.40556 0.485533 0 0 64.4271 165.497183 79.05614 0.258594 0.143496 19.02195 29.09829 207.66188 76.50595 0.125434 1.02098 137.2929 1.88575 327.374264 79.05614 0 0 0 0 196.88334 76.50595 0 0 0 0 190.53225 79.05614 0.003528 0.01502 1.938115 0 198.840003 79.05614 0 0 0 0 196.14464 76.50595 0 0 0 0 187.87675 79.05614 0.156306 1.774581 241.0738 0.21979 434.616927 76.50595 0.082823 0.336988 45.34456 3.964044 223.857521 79.05614 0.262028 0 0 32.71783 182.350168

1312.94519 930.82234

Lighting kWh

0 0 0 1.922872 7.03183 48.17186

1.182173

5.14732

697.497195

98.331735 2851.834123

Optimized System Fans System Pumps Auxiliary Energy Heating (Gas) Cooling was removed kWh kWh kWh kWh 64.04552 0.451157 0 0 57.84757 0.406046 0 0 64.04552 0.102295 0.236881 32.06703 61.97954 0.133961 1.760115 238.8377 64.04552 0 0 0 61.97954 0.000663 0.001017 0.130714 64.04552 0.02202 0.156575 20.39422 64.04552 0.00162 0.003272 0.420518 61.97954 0 0 0 64.04552 0.167179 2.138117 290.8578 61.97954 0.089125 0.34173 45.90976 64.04552 0.316052 0 0

1306.07669 754.08437

1.690118

4.637707

Total 165.931377 150.961206 205.094326 414.601216 181.87272 176.138234 202.445535 181.25993 172.47184 468.766316 209.088755 166.475172 2695.106627

628.617742

Base Case Average Energy Reduction %

2892.919631 6.83783269

Daylighting analysis, PV generation, PV payback period and PV area utilization.

LEED v4 Daylighting BD+C: New Construction (sDA and ASE) Intent To connect building occupants with the outdoors, reinforce circadian rhythms, and reduce the use of electrical lighting by introducing daylight into the space. Requirements Provide manual or automatic (with manual override) glare-control devices for all regularly occupied spaces. Option 1. Simulation: Spatial Daylight Autonomy (2–3 points, 1-2 points Healthcare)

lighting level at 9 am

Demonstrate through annual computer simulations that spatial daylight autonomy 300/50% (sDA 300/50%) of at least 55%, 75%, or 90% is achieved. Use regularly occupied floor area. Healthcare projects should use the perimeter area determined under EQ Credit Quality Views. Points are awarded according to Table 1 towards the bottom of the report. AND Demonstrate through annual computer simulations that annual sunlight exposure 1000,250 (ASE 1000,250) of no more than 10% is achieved. Use the regularly occupied floor area that is daylit per the sDA 300/50% simulations. The results below were calculated using the Daysim/Radiance simulation engines which provide a detailed multi-zone physics-based calculation of illumination levels on the working planes of the building over the whole year using real climate data. Daylighting data

lighting level at 3 pm

Project file

Midterm DB.dsb

Report generation time

11/12/2019 11:05:10 AM

Location

LONDON/GATWICK ARPT

Working plane height (m)

0.760

Max Grid Size (m)

0.600

Min Grid Size (m)

0.600

sDA lower Illuminance threshold

300

ASE upper Illuminance threshold

1000

Summary Results Total area (m2)

56.895

sDA area in range (m2)

0.000

ASE area in range (m2)

11.1

sDA Points

ASE Status

FAIL

Overall points

Eligible zones for daylighting

lighting level at both times

Zone

Block

Floor area (m2)

sDA area in range (m2)

sDA % in Range%

ASE area in range (m2)

ASE % in range

Living

Ground

56.895

0.000

0.00

11.140

19.6

Total

56.895

0.000

0.00

11.140

19.6

Table 1: New Construction, Core and Shell, Schools, Retail, Data Centers, Warehouses & Distribution Centers, CI, Hospitality sDA (for regularly occupied floor area)

Points

55%

75%

LEED v4 Daylgihting report for SDA and ASE from Design Builder

Indoor air comfort simulation using Design Builder

Average Daylighting Factor using Design Builder

BUILDING LIFECYCLE ASSESSMENT FOR INSULATION IN EGYPT (A1-A5) This was a Building Lifecycle Assessment for two insulative materials in the Egyptian context focusing on just the global warming potential and water use. The two insulations were rockwool and Polyesterine sheets. The rresult concluded that the rockwool insulation was a much better option due to it's lower global warming potential and lower water use.

Acoustical Simulation for a point source.

CFD Simulation using flow design

Branding/ DEsign

VISUAL IDENTITY The project’s visual identity was concived from the project’s main purpose of acting as a center that unifys the community, rejuvinating a 14 century old architectural typology, and bringing new life into the Egyptian community.

+ WHOLENESS

= CALLIGRAPHY

ISLAMIC WHOLENESS

FONT USED AaBbCc12i3

AaBbCc12i3

Gilroy - Bold

Gilroy - Light

AaBbCcDdEeFfGgHhIiJjK kLlMmNnOoPpQqRrSsTtU uVvWwXxYyZz 987654321

COLOR PALETTE There are three main Gardient colors.

R232,G276,B89

R147,G90,B50

R152,G152,B152

R24,G24,B24

R232,G232,B232

R81,G81,B81

The Colors where chosen to represent the golden tongue of Arabic (the language of the quran) and to give a feeling of stability, timelessness, dependability, harmony and control at the same time.

Photography

Selected phothgraphs

Lighting Design

Kronach Leuchtet Workshop

baselghazaly7@gmail.com