Building Science 2 Project 1

SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE, BUILDING AND DESIGN Centre for Modern Architecture Studies in Southeast Asia

(MASSA)

Bachelor of Science (Honours) (Architecture) BUILDING SCIENCE 2 [ARC3413]

Project 1: [Lighting & Acoustic Performance Evaluation and Design] TUTOR: SIVARAMAN KUPPUSAMY

ALEXANDER CHUNG SIANG YEE 1003A78541 EVELYN SINUGROHO 0318217 HOOI WEI XING 0313995 LIM CHOON WAH 0311265 LING YUAN MING 0318758 WONG TENG CHUN 0318538

Abstract 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Aims and Objectives 1.2 Site Study 1.2.1 Site Introduction 1.2.2 Measured Drawings

1.3 Methodology 1.3.1 Equipment Specification 1.3.2 Data collection method

2.0 Lighting 2.1 Precedent Study 2.1.1 Lighting analysis 2.1.2 Daylight quantitative and qualitative analysis

2.2 Case Study 2.2.1 Site Study and Zoning 2.2.2 Tabulation and Interpretation of Data 2.2.3 Specifications of Materials 2.2.4 Lighting Fixtures and Specifications 2.2.5 Daylight Factor Analysis 2.2.6 Artificial Light Analysis 2.2.7 Daylight and Lighting Diagrams 2.2.8 Analysis and Evaluation

3.0 Acoustic 3.1 Precedent Study 3.1.1 Background 3.1.2 Interior Acoustical Design 3.1.3 Acoustical Separation 3.1.4 Acoustical Modeling

3.2 Case Study 3.2.1 Site Study and Zoning 3.2.1.1 External Noise 3.2.2.2 Zoning 3.2.2 Tabulation and Interpretation of Data 3.2.3 Human Noise 3.2.4 Specifications of Materials 3.2.5 Acoustic Fixtures and Specifications 3.2.6 Calculation 3.2.6.1 Zoning (Own Data) 3.2.6.2 Acoustic Fixture 3.2.6.3 Sound Reduction Index 3.2.6.4 Reverberation Time 3.2.8 Analysis and Evaluation

4.0 References 5.0 Appendix

ABSTRACT Lighting design is a key element in architecture design and interior architecture. Solid volumes, enclosed spaces, colors and texture can only be appreciated fully when they are imaginatively lit. Successful buildings are those in which the lighting of the building itself and the lighting of the activities it contains together make up a unified design concept. This project is design to expose and introduce students to daylighting and lighting requirement in a suggested space.

In architecture and interior architecture, Acoustic design is an element which concerned with control of sound in spaces especially enclosed spaces. It is essential to preserve and enhance the desired sound and to eliminate noise and undesired sound. Prestigious buildings are those in which the acoustic of the building itself speak of the quality of the building itself. This project is design to expose and introduce students to acoustic design and acoustical requirements in a suggested space.

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 AIM AND OBJECTIVES This assignment aims to allow students to understand the day-lighting & lighting and acoustic characteristics & acoustic requirement in a suggested space. Other than determining the characteristics and function of day-lighting & artificial lighting and sound & acoustic within the intended space, a critically report and analyze the space shall be documented into a report and presentation boards.

One of the objective is to produce a complete documentation on analysis of space in relation to lighting requirement and analysis of factors which effects the lighting design of a space through pictures, sketches and drawings. Students are also encourage to explore and apply understanding of building physic eg. Lighting towards building / construction technology and building materials on existing building projects.

They will also be able to evaluate and explore the improvisation by using current material and technology in relevance to present construction industry. For basic understanding and analysis of lighting layout and arrangements by using certain methods or calculations eg. Lumen method and PSALI. Whereas the basic understanding and analysis of acoustic design layout and arrangements by using certain methods or calculations eg. Reverberation time and sound transmission coefficient.

1.2 SITE INTRODUCTION Architects: Ong & Ong Location: Lot 111 (first floor), Empire Damansara, Jalan PJU 8/8A, Damansara Perdana, 47820 PJ. Contractor: Mammoth Empire Construction Sdn Bhd Project Year: 2013

Figure 1.2.1 Front façade of Cat In The Box

The site for this case study is Cat in the Box café which is located on the first floor of the low-rise F&B and retail units in the Empire Damansara. The lot is located within a dense mixed-development of five towers. Comprised of a hotel, SOHO units and corporate offices, as well as a heritage-themed village of F&B and retail units. Standing in even greater contrast to the high-rises, the lifestyle village connects the five towers in a central courtyard. The heritage-themed space borrows the aesthetic of old warehouses with elements of bare brick walls and heavy-duty black staircases with ornate balustrades. As a gesture of authenticity, ONG&ONG specially imported recycled bricks from China for the village as façade of F&B and retail units.

The lot only has openings on the front and end of the premise and being compartmented with walls on the two sides. The entrance is facing the east whereas the back of the café is facing the west. The front façade is covered with curtain wall made of green tinted glass panels and extended glass overhang. The back of the café is a glass cube with skylight and glass wall although two of the panels are covered with solid panels to provide some shade during sunset. The café allows high intensity of day lighting into the area through the front and back façade besides being illuminated with artificial lighting. The curtain walls also allow visual permeability between passer-by from the road outside and people inside Empire Damansara itself.

The cafe is located directly facing a busy road that connects the Empire Damansara, PJTC and Flora Damansara flat to the LDP highway which will affect significantly the acoustic comfortability of the premise.

The café is also surrounded with other F&B and retail that will emit noise pollution from their crowd and machinery as well as appliances and crowd activities within the café itself.

The café Cat in the Box was chosen to study the condition of the lighting qualities in the premise, as some area may seem to be overly lit during the day and poorly lit at night. For the acoustics of the site, there is many noise pollution produced form the surrounding context and interior of the café that will affect the acoustic comfortability of the patron in it. Therefore it is a very suitable site to be studied and analyze for this module.

Figure 1.2.2 Exterior view

Figure 1.2.3 Interior view

Figure 1.2.5 Interior panorama

Figure 1.2.6 Interior panorama

Figure 1.2.7 Interior panorama

Figure 1.2.4 View from top

Figure 1.2.8 Site elevation

Figure 1.2.10 Site plan

1.3 METHODOLOGY 1.3.1 EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS

Lux Meter A digital light meter model: LX-101 by LUTRON ELECTRONIC ENTERPRISE CO. LTD, which measures luminous flux unit and illuminance level. The device picks up accurate data as the sensor used the exclusive photo diode & multi-color correction filters, spectrum meet C.I.E standard.

GENERAL SPECIFICATION Display Ranges Zero adjustment Over-input Sampling time Sensor structure Operating Temp.

Operating Humidity Power Supply Power Consumption Dimension

Weight Accessories Included

13 mm (0.5" ) LCD. 0-50,000 Lux. 3 Ranges.

Internal adjustment Indication of " 1 " 0.4 second The exclusive photo diode & color correction filter 0 to 50 ( 32 to 122 ) Less than 80% R.H DC 9V battery. 006P, MN1604 ( PP3 ) or equivalent Approx. DC 2 mA. Main Instrument : 108x73x23 mm ( 4.3x2.9x0.9 inch) Sensor probe: 82x55x7 mm ( 3.2x2.2x0.3 inch ) 160g ( 0.36 LB ) with batteries Instruction manual............1 PC Carrying case ...................1 PC.

Electrical Specification (23± 5 ) RANGE RESOLUTION ACCURACY 2, 000 Lux 1 Lux ±(5%+2d) 20, 000 Lux 10 Lux ±(5%+2d) 50, 000 Lux 100 Lux ±(5%+2d) Note: Accuracy tested by a standard parallel light tungsten lamp of 2856K temperature.

Sound Level Meter A digital sound meter model: SL-4112 by LUTRON ELECTRONIC ENTERPRISE CO. LTD, are used in data collection for acoustics reading in the chosen site. The device picks up accurate data as it is sensitive to sound.

GENERAL SPECIFICATION Function Meter default function Measurement Range Resolution Range selector

Frequency Microphone type Microphone size Frequency weighting network

Time weighting (Fast & Slow) Calibrator Output Signal

Output Terminal

Calibration VR

dB ( A & C frequency weighting ), Time weighting ( Fast, Slow), Hold, Memory( Max. & Min. ), Peak hold, AC output RS232 output.

Range set to auto range.

Frequency weighting set to A weighting.

Time weighting set to fast 30 - 130 dB. 0.1 dB. Auto range: 30 to 130 dB. Manual range: 3 range, 30 to 80 dB, 50 to 100 dB, 80 to 130 dB, 50 dB on each step with over & under range indicating.

31.5 to 8,000 Hz Electric condenser microphone.

Out size, 12.7 mm DIA. ( 0.5 inch) Characteristics of A & C * A weighting The characteristic is simulated as "Human Ear Listing" response. Typical, if making the environmental sound level measurement, always select to A weighting.

Fast - t= 200 ms, Slow - t = 500 ms, * "Fast" range is simulated the human ear response time. * "Slow" range is easy to get the avg.

B & K (Bruel & kjaer), MULTIFUCTION ACOUSTIC CALIBRATOR 4226. * AC output : AC 0.5 Vrms corresponding to each range step. Out put impedance - 600 ohm * RS232 output.

Terminal 1: RS232 computer interface terminal, photo couple isolated.

Terminal 2: AC output terminal.

Terminal socket size: 3.5mm dia. Phone socket.

Build in external calibration VR, easy to calibrate on 94 dB level by screw driver.

Measuring Tape The tape is used to measure a constant height of the position of the lux meter and the sound meter, which is at 1.5m. The height is taken on one person as reference to obtain an accurate reading. It also used for the measured drawing.

Camera The camera is used to record picture on the lighting condition of the cafĂŠ and its surrounding during the daytime and night time, and the mechanical appliances includes: lighting appliances and the machine that generate noise.

1.3.2 DATA COLLECTION METHOD The site visit were allocated on 22th April to obtain measurements to collect the morning and night data. To obtain two different set of data to answer different lighting condition between the change of time. We’ve measured the data by setting flux meter 1.5m from the finishing floor level for each point in the grid generated from the measured drawing, in order to obtain an accurate data. The readings were recorded on a plotted plan with 1.5m x 1.5 gridlines which generated 35 intersection points. Only ground floor was measured. The floor plan was then divided into 4 different zone for further analysis.

Procedure 1. Recognition of area for light source measurements were based on gridlines produced.

2. Obtain data by lux meter. The device were placed on each point according to the gridlines at 1.5m.

3. Data is then recorded by indicating light level in each point based on gridlines. Variables affecting the site is also noted.

4. Step 1 to 3 is repeated for noon and night time as there might be different lighting condition.

5. The step 1-4 are repeated on Sound Level Meter to collects acoustic data.

2.0 LIGHTING 2.1 PRECEDENT STUDIES 2.1.1 LIGHTING ANALYSIS

Figure 2.1.1.1 Photography of the student café of the school of architecture at Laval University.

Building Location

School of Architecture at Laval University Café

Figure 2.1.1.2 Site Plan of Universite Laval

When it comes to the day-to-day practice, some architects seldom consider the occupant’s comfort and behaviour as perspectives in the design of a building. In the particular case of luminous ambiences of an interior space, electrical lighting systems are often preferred for their reliability and affordability for their certain easiness of control and their potential to offer a constant and uniform luminous environment compared with daylight. Indeed, daylight constantly changes in colour and intensity from dawn to sunset as well as from day to day. The variability and non-uniformity of the lighting conditions created have often been perceived negatively since it does not comply with the most common definition of visual comfort.

The investigation were carried out at the café of the School of architecture at Laval University. It mainly chosen because it fulfilled the underlying condition: the café is daylit and offers to its occupants the opportunity to exercise a certain amount of choice and control over their environment. These opportunities mainly correspond to the lighting conditions (natural and artificial), the furniture type (chair, stool and armed chair) and the view (through a window outside or towards the indoor café’s activity). The occupants constitute a homogeneous student population that regularly uses the café for several weeks during the full term typical days of October and November. Moreover, the chosen subjects were willing to be observed and respond to a questionnaire. Lunch periods were excluded as all the seat were occupied during that busy time, leaving not much choices for the user’s preferences on the location. Once the corpus of study was defined, data collection aimed to provide answers to the two following questions: 1) Are the daylit areas the busiest?

2) Occupants performing the same type of activity choose similar lighting ambiences?

These two question deal with the available lighting conditions for occupants sitting in the café. Daylit is influenced by the annual sun path, the sky conditions, and several exterior elements such as the neighbouring basilica that keeps the café. As an example of such features, the café provides identified brighter zones of daylighting coming from the apertures of the inclined window wall surface. Three out of the four windows (Diagram 2.1) face the south-east direction, latter faces North-West. On the other hand, the areas located away from the apertures remain darker but can be artificially lit. Some spotlights are directed and indirect lighting conditions. The control panel is located near the entrance of the café and is accessible to all its users.

Due to the fact that the research had to consider certain human, architectural and physical parameters, numerous tools and methods were implemented into the experimental protocol. Behaviour mapping was integrated because its graphical format allows to gather information about the occupants’ location and activities during specific periods of time while observing in parallel the architecture and the ongoing lighting conditions. Five activity type were identified: reading and writing, teamwork, discussion, meal and rest. Observations were recorded at regular intervals of 15 minutes due to the intense activity of the café. The typical norm stays for five minutes visit to get a coffee and socialise to longer periods lasting more than an hour. The latter were especially relevant to the research as position of the observers becomes a key factor in the evaluation of user’s satisfaction and comfort.

Figure 2.1.1.3 Building Plan

The qualitative analysis combines many of the information gathered during the investigations to study each photograph of the occupants. It is inspired of the work undertaken by Flynn who highlighted the three following luminous qualities:   

The character of the source (natural or artificial) The quality of the source (direct or diffuse) The localization of the occupant in relation to the source

The quantitative image analysis requires that the photograph be adjusted to five level of gray values as the figure above shown, to obtain histograms. A histogram provide two data related to the amount and the dispersion of grey pixels found in each image. The standard deviation provides an indicator for global contrast. The level of brightness are obtained through the division of the mean data by the total amount of pixel, defines the indicator of lightness as against to darkness. Photographs are categorise into the different type of activity in the comprehensive graph in the next diagram to identify the diverse lighting ambiences according to brightness and contrast.

Figure 2.1.1.4 Graph showing the relationship between global contrast and percentage of brightness

The qualitative analysis has demonstrated that occupants performing the same type of activity, but at different times of the investigation, were exposed to highly diverse luminous ambiences. Occupants also seemed to be comfortable in locations that were not corresponding to the IES recommended values. For instance, activities that required higher visual acuity such as reading and writing were often performed in rather dark conditions. In fact, the average illumination levels recorded in the cafĂŠ during the visit were mostly fluctuating between 60 lux and 400 lux, which means that the minimum of 500 lux, required by the IES, was rarely encountered. The fact that occupants came freely to the cafĂŠ, notice that other places in the school were set to supply higher illumination levels and a more steady lighting, is significant. Users seem to have been higher awareness to the qualities of light than to its measurable quantities.

2.1.2 DAYLIGHTING QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS

Figure 2.1.2.1 Landscape photo of the Canadian Embassy Berlin.

Building

Canadian Embassy Berlin

Architects

Kuwabara Payne McKenna Blumberg Architects (KPMB Architects) with Gagnon Letellier Cyr architectes and Smith Carter Architects + Engineers Leipziger Platz 17, 10117 Berlin, Germany.

2005 Franciska Cape, Bill Colaco, Deni Di Filippo, Brian Graham, Simon Haus, Robert Kastelic, Carolyn Lee, Dan Nawrocki, Riki Nishimura, Karen Petrachenko, Shadi Rahbaran, Bruno Weber Hanover Leasing, Tercon Immobilien 180000 ft2 Suzanne Powadiuk Design

Location Project Design Team

Developer Area Lighting

The Canadian Embassy Berlin located at the junction of Leipziger Platz and Postdamer Platz where a portion of the Berlin Wall still stands, the new Canadian Embassy is one of several initiatives in the city’s third wave of reconstruction. The design participates in the reconstruction of the original octagonal wall of Leipziger Platz, and conforms to the stringent planning and design guidelines set out by the District Office of Central Berlin which dictated a stone exterior with punched windows, and 22 meter setbacks.

Figure 2.1.2.2 Site Plan of the Canadian Embassy Berlin

This analysis is focusing on the assessing light in architecture. On the ground floor, an exhibition room can be opened up either entirely or selectively to this central space, allowing it to accommodate a variety of large events or devote itself exclusively and securely to diplomatic functions. Above, the Timber Hall, which is open to the sky via a lightly framed glazed skylight system, includes a state-of-the-art conference facility and first-class conference room. Its exterior is copper; the treads and risers of the grand curved stairway are constructed of Ontario limestone. The building exterior is faced with Tyndall limestone from Manitoba. On the south side of the site, a water element creates an unexpected urban oasis.

Figure 2.1.2.3 Section of the Canadian Embassy Berlin

Method of Analysis Architecturally, contrasts of light and shade define surfaces and contribute to the character of a space, a question related not only to light and share patterns, but also on the nature of the different sources of light and surrounding surfaces. This part of demonstrates components of digital image that can be used to produce an assessment of light in space. An image when properly exposed, this event is a caption of the amount of light to which the area has been exposed. The image is then categorise as basis of method in recording lighting data in architecture. Digital photography has been the tool to support for recording lighting pattern in the pass decade. Integrated pose-meters, are now more versatile and provides more precision in the calculation for the right exposure of the subject in the view field of the camera.

The digital image allows the comparison of several lighting conditions in a systematic manner. It provides also a relation between patterns of light and the composition of space in a language that is meaningful to architecture. Four types of digital analysis have been presented in this research: 1.

2.

3.

4.

Level of detail Location of the dominant pattern Gradation of light General brightness of the image

The following image shows the lighting patterns in artificially lit environments are usually constant whereas in daylit spaces, they are dependant of the amount of light and direction occurring on the surface. It is possible to collect a more comprehensive and accurate analysis of a lighting effect under condition whereby the photograph are taken ideally under uniform and clear skies, with several sun angles.

Figure 2.1.2.4 Lighting Patterns

Gradations from light to dark can be interpreted from the pattern as an indicator of contrast on certain areas of a space. The main direction of the pattern and the relative measurements between the brightness zones on that axis become assessors of the gradation. Images are processed and simplified into five brightness zones (0%, 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%) using the “posterize�command of the software of image analysi. The five analysis base on Luminance Brightness Rating (LBR). These tools have the advantage of being already used by professionals and students of architecture and therefore are available at any time.

2.2 CASE STUDY 2.2.1 SITE STUDY AND ZONING

Figure 2.2.1.1 Ground floor plan – Cat In The Box

Figure 2.2.1.2 Zoning of spaces

Figure 2.2.1.3 Sections A-A and Section B-B – Cat In The Box

2.2.2 TABULATION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA The lightings were measured and recorded at the level of 1.0m and 1.5 m respectively.

Lighting Data Unit Lux (lx) Height 1.5 meter (Standing) and 1.0 meter (Sitting)

GRID 1 2 3 4 5

GRID 1 2 3 4 5

A 648 841 450 370 750 780 360 82 81 110

DAY B C D E F 138 88 105 280 1,040 218 69 111 420 1,020 136 97 110 270 710 252 105 135 520 690 146 80 131 280 930 220 102 156 397 848 100 92 101 250 643 262 130 110 292 620 48 49 56 110 465 72 38 83 156 430 Table 2.2.2.1 Daylight lux reading according to grid line

NIGHT A B C D E F 75 77 60 27 203 185 48 49 52 36 121 140 34 50 72 60 71 62 35 43 49 60 78 78 33 68 66 76 67 20 27 52 57 56 48 15 21 49 67 73 70 37 24 46 50 43 53 22 27 32 34 31 26 39 28 32 14 31 38 27 Table 2.2.2.2 Night Lux reading according to grid line

G 1,042 1,000 741 695 870 690 730 650 410 320

G 120 110 32 43 23 32 17 28 20 21

Grid

Day

Night

Grid

Day

Night

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5

648 450 750 360 81

75 34 33 21 27

E1 E2 E3 E4 E5

280 270 280 250 110

203 71 67 70 26

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5

138 136 146 100 16

77 50 68 49 32

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5

1,040 710 930 643 465

185 62 20 37 39

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5

28 25 14 25 15

60 72 66 67 34

G1 G2 G3 G4 G5

1,042 741 870 730 410

120 32 23 17 20

D1 D2 D3 D4 D5

78 50 55 28 25

Dining Lounge Kitchen Counter

Red Green Blue Orange

Grid

Day

Night

Grid

Day

Night

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5

841 370 780 82 110

48 35 27 24 28

E1 E2 E3 E4 E5

420 520 397 292 156

121 78 48 53 38

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5

218 252 220 262 40

49 43 52 46 32

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5

1,020 690 848 620 430

140 78 15 22 27

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5

17 56 45 80 24

52 49 57 50 14

G1 G2 G3 G4 G5

1,000 695 690 650 320

110 43 32 28 21

D1 D2 D3 D4 D5

75 75 126 67 52

27 LEGEND 60 A 76 B 73 C 31 D Table 2.2.2.3 Lux reading at 1.5m (standing)

36 LEGEND 60 A Dining 56 B Lounge 43 C Kitchen 31 D Counter Table 2.2.2.4 Lux reading at 1.0m (sitting)

Red Green Blue Orange

Interpretation Based on table 2.2.2.1 and table 2.2.2.2, the following observations were noted along with relevant discussions.

Observation 1 The data collected at the height of 1.5m are mostly higher than the data collected at the height at 1m from the floor.

Discussion 1 The data collected at the height of 1.5m are closer to both the artificial lighting and the daylighting from the curtain wall extended to the ceilings. Some data that have lower lux reading at 1.5m may due to the shadow of the fixtures at higher level blocking the light.

Observation 2 During daytime, the light data collected at grid A, F and G are significantly higher and lower around A5, B5, C5, and D5.

Discussion 2 Data collected at grid F and G are adjacent to the curtain wall that also extend till the ceiling, the lux reading shows glare coming into the space around that area. As for data collected at grid A, the higher lux readings are due to the light coming from the curtain wall of the entrance.

Lux reading around A5, B5, C5 and D5 are located at the kitchen area, the readings are relatively lower. The kitchen space is has a lot of cooking appliances and a number of lighting features, the glass wall adjacent to it are constructed with frosted glass, we can see that the lower lux readings are due to the lower light coming into the space.

Observation 3 During night, the light data collected at grid E1, F1, G1 are significantly higher and lower around A5, B5, C5, and D5.

Discussion 3 The lux reading around E1, F1 and G1 can be resulted from the interior lighting fixture such as the table lamp located near the curtain wall and also the exterior lighting like neon signage board facing the street.

Lux reading around A5, B5, C5 and D5 are located at the kitchen area, again similar to the daylight readings, they are relatively lower. According to our observation, the night has the lower customer visiting, and so some of the lighting fixtures around the kitchen are closed to safe electricity. And so lux reading and relatively much lower.

Based on the Table 7.1 and Table 7.2, the following observations were noted along with relevant discussions.

Observation 4 There is a peak of 76.7dB at grid point G4 Discussion 4 This is due to the speakers, XOUNT 360, are located next to the grid line. Hence, there are many direct sound ray particle pick up by the sound level meter.

Observation 5 There is a significant drop in decibel at point D4 from the peak hour to non-peak hour.

Discussion 5 D4 located in front of the wooden counter nearby kitchen area that contains most of the appliances. At non-peak hour, less activities are carried out in the Zone B. Hence, the figure reduce significantly.

Observation 6 The highest sound source contributor Coffee Grinder that located at grid point B5 has lowest figure compare to the other grid point.

Discussion 6 This is due to no permission to enter the Zone C during the peak hour, as the barista need private space for professional work. Hence, the coffee grinder isn’t functioning at the data collecting process.

2.2.5 DAYLIGHT FACTOR ANALYSIS Zone A – Dining

Figure 2.2.5.1 Daylight Zone for Dining Space

Figure 2.2.5.2 Image of Zone A

Daylight 362.40 394.60 378.50

1.5m 1.0m Average Flux

Table 2.2.5.3 Daylight Calculation for Zone A

Zone

Type

Daylight level in Malaysia E0 (Lx)

Average Lux reading based on collected data, Ex (Lx)

Daylight Factor, DF đ??¸đ?‘Ľ đ??ˇđ??š = đ?‘‹ 100% đ??¸đ?‘œ

Performance based on MS 1525

A

Dining

12000

378.50

đ??ˇđ??š 378.50 = đ?‘‹ 100% 12000

Bright

= 3.15 % Table 2.2.5.4 Daylight Factor Calculation for Zone A

Below is the daylight factors and distribution table obtained from the MS1525, Zone Very Bright Bright Average Dark

DF (%) > 6 3–6 1–3 0–1

Distribution Very large with thermal and glare problems Good Fair Poor

Table 2.2.5.5 Daylight factors and distribution table

Based on the MS1525, Zone A which is the dining area achieved bright lighting with a daylight factor of 3.15%. The presence of curtain wall at the front that is provides sufficient lighting even though it has solid walls at its side. Furthermore, the curtain wall at the front faces the east, meaning it receives morning till noon sunlight. Besides, the spiral staircase in the center also allow light entry as there is only a roof above with ample exposed space. Therefore, the daylight factor managed to fall in the bright category with good lighting.

Zone B – Lounge

Figure 2.2.5.6 Daylight Zone for Lounge

Figure 2.2.5.7 Image of Zone B

Daylight only 826.00 733.33 779.67

1.5m 1.0m Average Flux

Table 2.2.5.8 Daylight Calculation for Zone B

Zone

Type

B

Lounge

Daylight level in Average Lux reading Malaysia E0 (Lx) based on collected data, Ex (Lx) 12000

779.67

Daylight Factor, DF đ??¸đ?‘Ľ đ??ˇđ??š = đ?‘‹ 100% đ??¸đ?‘œ

Performance based on MS1525

đ??ˇđ??š 779.67 = đ?‘‹ 100% 12000

Very Bright

= 6.50 % Table 2.2.5.9 Daylight Factor Calculation for Zone B

Below is the daylight factors and distribution table obtained from the MS1525, Zone Very Bright Bright Average Dark

DF (%) > 6 3–6 1–3 0–1

Distribution Very large with thermal and glare problems Good Fair Poor

Table 2.2.5.10 Daylight factors and distribution table

Based on MS1525, Zone B successfully achieved a daylight factor of 6.50%. However, the lounge which is surrounded by corner curtain wall allowed too much lighting penetration. The lack of sun shades and curtains further contributed to severe thermal issue and glare problems. Due to the west-facing façade, it is exposed to mostly afternoon and evening sun, therefore bright and glaring making the space unfit to be a leisure spot. Although the space is very bright and well illuminated, the glare pulled the score down.

Zone C – Kitchen

Figure 2.2.5.11 Daylight Zone for Kitchen

Figure 2.2.5.12 Image of Zone C

Daylight 196.50 70.00 133.25

1.5m 1.0m Average Flux

Table 2.2.5.13 Daylight Calculation for Zone C

Zone

Type

Daylight level in Malaysia E0 (Lx)

Average Lux reading based on collected data, Ex (Lx)

Daylight Factor, DF đ??¸đ?‘Ľ đ??ˇđ??š = đ?‘‹ 100% đ??¸đ?‘œ

Performance based on MS1525

C

Kitchen

12000

133.25

đ??ˇđ??š 133.25 = đ?‘‹ 100% 12000

Average

= 1.11% Table 2.2.5.14 Daylight Factor Calculation for Zone C

Below is the daylight factors and distribution table obtained from the MS1525, Zone Very Bright Bright Average Dark

DF (%) > 6 3–6 1–3 0–1

Distribution Very large with thermal and glare problems Good Fair Poor

Table 2.2.5.15 Daylight factors and distribution table

Based on MS1525, Zone C (Kitchen) is the only space in Cat in the Box which lies in the average lighting distribution category. With a daylight factor of only 1.11%, the zone is considered dark. This is because most of the walls that wrapped the kitchen are solid walls that shut out light and cast shadow, affecting the daylight factor. Even with the main door and a translucent glass panel in its area, the light failed to fully illuminate the space.

Zone D – Counter

Figure 2.2.5.11 Daylight Zone for Counter

Figure 2.2.5.12 Image of Zone C

Daylight 551.50 460.50 506.00

1.5m 1.0m Average Flux

Table 2.2.5.13 Daylight Calculation for Zone C

Zone

Type

Daylight level in Malaysia E0 (Lx)

Average Lux reading based on collected data, Ex (Lx)

D

Counter

12000

506.00

Daylight Factor, DF đ??¸đ?‘Ľ đ??ˇđ??š = đ?‘‹ 100% đ??¸đ?‘œ đ??ˇđ??š

Performance based on MS1525

Bright

506 = đ?‘‹ 100% 12000 = 4.22 % Table 2.2.5.14 Daylight Factor Calculation for Zone C

Below is the daylight factors and distribution table obtained from the MS1525, Zone Very Bright Bright Average Dark

DF (%) > 6 3–6 1–3 0–1

Distribution Very large with thermal and glare problems Good Fair Poor

Table 2.2.5.15 Daylight factors and distribution table

Similar to Zone A, the Counter also managed to obtain a good light distribution. With a daylight factor of 4.22%, this space is also surrounded by curtain wall making it bright lit. Despite half of the space belongs to the storeroom and having multiple layer of walls, the uncovered glass allowed maximum penetration. As a result, Zone D is bright.

2.2.6 ARTIFICIAL LIGHT ANALYSIS Zone A Dining Dimension of room (L X W)(m) Total Floor Area, A (m²) Type of Lighting Fixture Number of Fixture, N Lumen of Lighting Fixture, F (lm) Height of Luminaire (m) Height of work level (m) Mounting height (m) Reflection Factors

9.3m X 5.5m 50.82m² SORA LED Remote Bulb E27 Ceiling Light 13 1250 2.4 0.8 1.6 Ceiling: Bare Ceiling + Grey colour Paint : 4.5 Wall: Brick wall + Plaster Finishing + Black colour Paint : 1.52 Floor: 9.3m X 5.5m Timber Flooring : 1.33

Room Index, RI (K) đ?‘…đ??ź =

đ??żđ?‘Ľđ?‘Š (đ??ż + đ?‘Š) đ?‘Ľ đ??ť

Utilisation Factor, UF Maintenance Factor, MF Number of lamps required – N đ?‘ =

đ??¸đ?‘Ľđ??´

đ?‘…đ??ź =

9.3 đ?‘‹ 5.5 (9.3 + 5.5) đ?‘Ľ 1.6

= 2.16 0.57 0.8 đ?‘ =

200 đ?‘Ľ 50.82 (1250 đ?‘Ľ 0.57 đ?‘Ľ 0.8)

(đ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘ˆđ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘€đ??š)

= 17.83 � 18 *MS1525 Recommended Dining Illumination Level – 200 Lux

Analysis: The Dining of the cafĂŠ is evidently under-lit and would suggest adding another 5 bulbs to meet the MS1524 Recommended Illumination Level. Another suggestion would be changing bulbs with higher lumen until the illumination level of the Dining Area achieve 200 Lux.

Zone B Lounge Dimension of room (L X W)(m) Total Floor Area, A (m²)

2.7m X 5.5m 14.75m²

Type of Lighting Fixture Number of Fixture, N Lumen of Lighting Fixture, F (lm) Height of Luminaire (m) Height of work level (m) Mounting height (m) Reflection Factors

Room Index, RI (K) đ?‘…đ??ź =

đ??żđ?‘Ľđ?‘Š

2

Dominant lighting SORA LED Remote Bulb E27 Ceiling Light 2

1065 1.2

1250 2.4

XOUNTS Speaker Table Lamp

0.8 1.2 Ceiling: Bare Ceiling + Grey colour Paint : 4.5 Wall: Brick wall + Plaster Finishing + Black colour Paint : 1.52 Floor: 2.7m X 5.5m Timber Flooring : 1.33 đ?‘…đ??ź =

(đ??ż + đ?‘Š) đ?‘Ľ đ??ť

2.7 đ?‘‹ 5.5

đ?‘ đ?‘Ľ đ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘ˆđ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘€đ??š đ??´

đ?‘…đ??ź =

(2.7 + 5.5) đ?‘Ľ 1.2

= 1.51

Utilisation Factor, UF Maintenance Factor, MF Illuminance Level - E (Lux) đ??¸=

2.7 đ?‘‹ 5.5 (2.7 + 5.5) đ?‘Ľ 1.6

= 1.13 0.6 0.8

đ??¸=

1.6

0.57 0.8

2 (1065 đ?‘Ľ 0.6 đ?‘Ľ 0.8) 14.75

= 77.29

-

Number of lamps required – N đ?‘ =

đ??¸đ?‘Ľđ??´ (đ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘ˆđ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘€đ??š)

*MS1525 Recommended Casual Reading Illumination Level – 150 Lux

đ?‘ =

(150 − 77.29) đ?‘Ľ 14.75 (1250 đ?‘Ľ 0.57 đ?‘Ľ 0.8)

= 1.88 â‹? 2

Analysis: The Lounge of the cafĂŠ is sufficiently lit as its illumination level meet the MS1524 Recommended Illumination Level of 150 Lux with the installed artificial lightings.

Zone C Kitchen Dimension of room (L X W)(m) Total Floor Area, A (m²)

9.3m X 3.3m 31m²

Type of Lighting Fixture Number of Fixture, N Lumen of Lighting Fixture, F (lm) Height of Luminaire (m) Height of work level (m) Mounting height (m) Reflection Factors

Room Index, RI (K) đ?‘…đ??ź =

đ??żđ?‘Ľđ?‘Š

(đ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘ˆđ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘€đ??š)

đ?‘…đ??ź =

9.3 đ?‘‹ 3.3

= 1.87

(9.3 + 3.3) đ?‘Ľ 1.5

0.71 0.8

3 (400 đ?‘Ľ 0.6 đ?‘Ľ 0.8) 31

= 18.58 đ?‘ =

9.3 đ?‘‹ 3.3

= 1.62 0.6 0.8

đ??¸=

1.5

đ?‘…đ??ź =

(9.3 + 3.3) đ?‘Ľ 1.3

-

(150 − 18.58) đ?‘Ľ 31 (1250 đ?‘Ľ 0.71 đ?‘Ľ 0.8)

= 5.74 � 6 *MS1525 Recommended Kitchen Illumination Level – 150 Lux

2.3

1.3 Ceiling: Bare Ceiling + Grey colour Paint : 4.5 Wall: Brick wall + Plaster Finishing + Black colour Paint : 1.52 Floor: 9.3m X 3.3m Timber Flooring : 1.33

Number of lamps required – N đ?‘ =

200 0.8

Utilisation Factor, UF Maintenance Factor, MF Illuminance Level - E (Lux)

đ??¸đ?‘Ľđ??´

400 2.1

(đ??ż + đ?‘Š) đ?‘Ľ đ??ť

đ?‘ đ?‘Ľ đ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘ˆđ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘€đ??š đ??¸= đ??´

3

Dominant lighting LED bulb E12 with angle reflector Ceiling Light 3

LED bulb GU10 with Spotlight

Analysis: The Kitchen of the cafĂŠ is under-lit and would suggest adding another 3 LED bulb E12 with angle reflector Ceiling Light to meet the MS1524 Recommended Illumination Level. Another suggestion would be adding under-cabinet lighting which act as a task lighting for cooking activities.

Zone D Counter Dimension of room (L X W)(m) Total Floor Area, A (m²)

2.7m X 3.3m 9m²

Type of Lighting Fixture Number of Fixture, N Lumen of Lighting Fixture, F (lm) Height of Luminaire (m) Height of work level (m) Mounting height (m) Reflection Factors

Room Index, RI (K) đ?‘…đ??ź =

đ??żđ?‘Ľđ?‘Š

4 230 2.2 0.8 1.4 Ceiling: Bare Ceiling + Grey colour Paint : 4.5 Wall: Brick wall + Plaster Finishing + Black colour Paint : 1.52 Floor: 2.7m X 5.5m Timber Flooring : 1.33 đ?‘…đ??ź =

(đ??ż + đ?‘Š) đ?‘Ľ đ??ť

2.7 đ?‘‹ 3.3

đ?‘…đ??ź =

(2.7 + 3.3) đ?‘Ľ 1.4

= 1.06

Utilisation Factor, UF Maintenance Factor, MF Illuminance Level - E (Lux) đ?‘ đ?‘Ľ đ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘ˆđ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘€đ??š đ??¸= đ??´

Dominant lighting SORA LED Remote Bulb E27 Ceiling Light 1 1250 2.4

LED bulb GU4 Wall Spotlight

2.7 đ?‘‹ 3.3 (2.7 + 3.3) đ?‘Ľ 1.6

= 0.93 0.59 0.8

đ??¸=

1.6

4(230 đ?‘Ľ 0.59 đ?‘Ľ 0.8) 9

0.57 0.8 -

= 48.25 ___________________________ (200 − 48.25) đ?‘Ľ 9 Number of lamps required – N đ?‘ = đ?‘ =

đ??¸đ?‘Ľđ??´

(đ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘ˆđ??š đ?‘Ľ đ?‘€đ??š)

*MS1525 Recommended Office Filling Room Illumination Level – 200 Lux

(1250 đ?‘Ľ 0.57 đ?‘Ľ 0.8)

= 2.39 â‹? 3

Analysis: The Counter of the cafĂŠ is slightly under-lit and would suggest adding another 2 SORA LED Remote Bulb E27 Ceiling Light above the counter to meet the MS1524 Recommended Illumination Level. Another suggestion would be desk lamp which act as a task lighting for office work activities for the owner.

2.2.7 Daylight and Lighting Diagrams Revit Daylight Simulation Daylight Analysis

Figure : Light analysis diagram for natural light on all the zones located on second floor at day obtained using Revit (By Lim Choon Wah).

Based on the calculations, zone B (Lounge) & zone D (Counter) has the highest daylight factor while zone C (Kitchen) has the lowest daylight factor. This is mainly due to the curtain wall spanning all over the wall at zone B and D. Zone A (Dining) with half of the area has higher intensity because the existence of curtain wall accompanied by the spiral staircase allowed daylight penetration. Basically, the daylight factor gradually decreases as it approaches the Zone C as this zone doesn’t have sufficient sunlight. To counter, artificial lightings are installed to lighten up the area.

Artificial Lighting Analysis

Figure : Light analysis diagram for artificial light on all the zones located on second floor at night obtained using Revit (By Lim Choon Wah).

Based on the calculation, zone A (Dining) has the highest artificial light factor among the other spaces due to concentrated light bulbs. Zone B (Lounge) has two standing lamps only as it is close to the curtain wall where the daylight penetrates in. Therefore the only area that provide comfortable ambient light for the users is zone A contradicting to zone C and D which are relatively dimmer.

Daylight Factor Analysis & Calculations Zone A - Dining Area

Figure : Light analysis diagram for artificial light on zones A located on second floor at day obtained using Revit (By Lim Choon Wah).

Zone A is positioned with the grid 1 - 3, A – F where it is a dining area. It is exposed more as it is closer to the curtain wall. Even without switching on the incandescent light bulb, the daylight still provide comfort ambient light to user saving energy cost.

Zone B - Lounge

Figure : Light analysis diagram for artificial light on zones B located on second floor at day obtained using Revit (By Lim Choon Wah).

Zone B is positioned with the grid 1 - 4, F - G where it is a lounge which allows visitors to lay on the beanie to read the book. This zone is quite glare due to the exposure of curtain wall on side and slope glazing above on it. If the curtain wall and slope glazing were installed without double glazing, it would have allowed more heat to penetrate the building that might cause discomfort toward to users.

Zone C – Kitchen Area

Figure : Light analysis diagram for artificial light on zones B located on second floor at day obtained using Revit (By Lim Choon Wah).

Zone C is positioned within the grid 4 - 5, A – D where it is a kitchen area to allow the staff to cook and collect money. The zone C lighting depends on the daylight that penetrate from translucent curtain wall instead of using the angle reflected lights.

Zone D – Office & Storage

Figure : Light analysis diagram for artificial light on zones D located on second floor at day obtained using Revit (By Lim Choon Wah).

Zone D is positioned within the grid 4 - 5, E – G where office and storage area are. This zone needs lesser artificial light because of the existence of curtain wall that provide daylight penetrate into the space.

But only the left part of the zone D is suitable to use the space during the day because of the glare and heat from direct sunlight.

Artificial Factor Analysis & Calculations Zone A - Dining Area

Figure : Light analysis diagram for artificial light on zones A located on second floor at night obtained using Revit (By Lim Choon Wah).

Zone A is positioned with the grid 1 - 3, A – F where it is a dining area. It is exposed to the most artificial light compared to the other spaces such as lounge and counter. This is due to it is the main function space of the building. This is zone is basically hanging the incandescent light bulbs to provide lighting.

Zone B - Lounge Area

Figure : Light analysis diagram for artificial light on zones B located on second floor at night obtained using Revit (By Lim Choon Wah).

Zone B is positioned with the grid 1 - 3, E - G where it is a lounge area which allows visitors to lay on the bean bags to read the book and enjoy the daylight during the day or artificial light during the night. At zone B, lamp is switched on during the night to provide ambient lighting to the surrounding without the assistance of sunlight.

Zone C – Kitchen Area

Figure : Light analysis diagram for artificial light on zones B located on second floor at night obtained using Revit (By Lim Choon Wah).

Zone C is positioned within the grid 4 - 5, A – E where it is a kitchen area to allow the staff to cook and collect money. The zone C has the less artificial light factor node because of translucent curtain wall able to bring sunlight in.

Zone D – Counter

Figure : Light analysis diagram for artificial light on zones D located on second floor at night obtained using Revit (By Lim Choon Wah).

Zone D is positioned within the grid 4 - 5, E – G where it is counter and filing area. This zone basically required less artificial light factor during the day because curtain walls were just beside of the space. It just required some task lighting and one incandescent light bulb to provide enough illumination and ambient lighting during the night.

2.2.8 LIGHTING ANALYSIS OF CAT IN THE BOX The loadbearing wall structure of Cat in the Box only allows openings on the front and end of the premise and being compartmented with walls on the two sides. With the entrance facing the east whereas the back of the café is facing the west. The front façade is covered with curtain wall glazed with green tinted glass panels and extended glass overhang. The back of the café is an extrusion of glass cube with skylight and glass panels. This design intention of the café is to allow generous intensity of day lighting into the area through the front and back façade to reduce energy used for artificial lighting. With the front façade orientated to the east and back façade facing the west, allows optimization of daylighting in the spaces.

Figure 2.2.8.1 Images of Lourves on the West Facade

Figure 2.2.8.2 Images of Lourves on the East Facade

The bare front east facing curtain wall allows maximum morning sunlight to inter the café except the kitchen where frosted glass is installed to avoid over-illumination as well as privacy reasons. On the other hand, on the west facing façade, two opaque panels are installed to provide some level of shading during sunset. These panels are also able to contribute to user comfort of the café by decrease heat gain through solar radiation especially the hot evening sun. The Damansara hill located on opposite Jalan PJU 8/8 also provide a natural shading to the café in the evening.

Figure 2.2.8.3 Shaft of the circular staircase that creat a skylight

The shaft of the spiral staircase in the center left of the cafe is another daylight feature in the café.

With this opening, it allows daylighting to penetrate the middle portion of the building as there’s only two openings on the two far end of the cafe. The green polycarbonate roofing on the first floor avoid direct sunlight into the building through the shaft at the same time giving the green glow effect.

Figure 2.2.8.4 Wide angle lighting as task lighting in the kitchen

On the other hand, artificial lighting of the café aids illumination during gloomy days and in the night as well as providing aesthetic values. The wide angle lightings in the kitchen acts as task lighting for the baristas and chef to perform food preparation tasks as well as providing overall illumination of the kitchen.

Figure 2.2.8.5 Spotlights and wall lights as directional lightings

Accent lightings can also being seen in the café with it serving as a directional lighting that draws eye to the showcased subject besides illuminating the particular area. Spotlights and wall lights can be seen directed on the menu right beside the entrance as well as the feature wall at the counter area. Warm lights used also created a more relaxing and heartwarming atmosphere to the customer.

Figure 2.2.8.6 Suspended lighting for ambient lighting

The dominant ambient lighting which takes up to about 60% of the entire area are suspended dimmable light bulb without any fittings or luminaire. Without any fittings the industrial theme fittings creates many under illuminated corner and edges of the café as the light beam diffused too quickly before reaching the working plane. The dimmable option allow the mood and atmosphere of the café to be altered based on occasion or during daylight deficiency.

Figure 2.2.8.7 Interior features that reflects artificial lighting in the space

To improve internal light reflection and provide a better level of illumination, the interior finishes plays an indiscreetly major role. The tinted glass of the curtain wall decreases discomfort glare into the building during the sun rise and sun set as well as reflects interior lighting back in the space at night improving the illumination. The glossy laminated timber and steel mesh with high reflectance index contribute to the high level of light reflection and diffusion in the interior spaces. The grey wall and ceiling with low solar reflectance on the other hand absorbs the reflected illuminance which create a cozy and homie atmosphere for the customers to feel welcome and comfortable.

3.0 ACOUSTICS 3.1 PRECEDENTS 3.1.1 BACKGROUND

Figure 3.1.1.1 Exterior view of Burdock Bar and Music Venue

Figure 3.1.1.2 Site plan of Burdock Bar and Music Venue

Building Location Area

Burdock Bar and Music Venue 1184 Bloor St. West, Toronto, Canada.

314.28 m2

A vacant unit was renovated into a bar and a music venue in which it was divided into two spaces along the south-north axis. The Western part of the room was designed as a music venue for performances. It is utilized for three different events: solo musician (with and without amplification); a small group such as a jazz band (with and without amplification); and a rock band (with amplification). The eastern part of the room was designed as a regular bar and dining area. The back of the unit was used as a microbrewery unit.

Figure 3.1.1.3 Building plan with spatial labelling

Figure 3.1.1.4 Sectional plan perspective with labelling

3.1.2 INTERIOR ACOUSTICAL DESIGN The space is narrow and long therefore diffusers are needed in order to assist in the diffusivity of the sound.

Approximately 50 meters of diffusers were to be applied in the acoustical simulations and a few diffuser options.

Figure 3.1.2.1 The built music room a) East wall diffuser b) West wall diffuser c) Stage speakers d) Music room looking north

Figure 3.1.2.2 Polycylindrical diffuser

Figure 3.1.2.3 2d random pattern diffuser Figure 3.1.2.4 Pyramidal diffuser

To prevent echoes from the window and to add acoustical absorption to the room when the sound amplification is used, the room also required heavy valour drapes to be installed. The locations of speakers and sub-woofers are very critical to overcome low-frequency modal distribution in the music room. The speakers for the Bar music are to be hung by spring hangers from the main ceiling joist and the levels are controlled to be less than 85 dB and 90 dB (linear).

3.1.3 ACOUSTICAL SEPERATION Wall: Each wall assembly is two layers of drywall (5/811 thick) and is on separate metal studs. The spacing between the studs was chosen to fit the space. The air-gap between the two studs is filled with batt insulation. There are two wall assemblies for the music venue: one that separates the bar and the other one is next to the exterior wall. Both the wall assemblies, including the studs were placed on the floating floor.

Ceiling: The ceiling of the two spaces were designed as a membrane system to provide separation between the two spaces as well as to adequately separate the spaces from the apartments above.

Figure 3.1.3.1 Membrane Ceiling Detail

It is consisted of a 3- layer gypsum board with each layer’s taping staggered from the adjacent layers and were connected to the main slab through resilient hangars.

3.1.4 ACOUSTICAL MODELING Before the measurement was conducted, the room was first tested using ODEON simulation tool for comparison purposes. The two scenarios were applied to generate metrics along a grid at the height of 1.5m.

The grid simulations were undertaken for the fully occupied room and for the empty room.

Figure 3.1.4.1 The amount of reverberance of the space, RT 60 variation at (a) empty; (b) fully occupied

Figure 3.1.4.2 Sound Pressure Level (SPL) showing the sound distribution throughout the space at (a) empty; (b) fully occupied.

Figure 3.1.4.3 The center time T(30) which describes the balance between early and late sound to evaluate the balance between clarity and reveberance.

Finally, the simulation results showed the following values, of the remaining acoustical parameters, for a fully occupied room at 500 Hz: (a) C80 ranged between 3 dB and 8 dB; (b) Ts was between 25 ms to 65 ms; and (c) EchoDietsch values were between 0.39 and 0.49. And hence, it can be concluded that the music room had been designed to provide more than satisfactory acoustical conditions.

3.1.5 SITE MEASUREMENT A) Acoustical Separation Three potential noise paths existed between the two spaces: (a) through the separating walls; (b) through the double doors (two sets); and (c) through the ceiling. Three different sound sequences were played through the speaker system of the bar-restaurant: (i) 30 s of pink noise; (ii) 90 s of electronic music; and (iii) 120 s of a musical sequence. The sound sequences were played at a high 90 to 95 dBA level. The sound sequences were measured at two locations inside the bar-restaurant as well as at two locations inside the music room.

Figure 3.1.5.1 Noise reduction between bar-restaurant and music room (a) north side; (b) south side

The design results are compared to actual field measurements. The results showed that the music venue performed satisfactorily. The acoustical separation between the music venue and the bar/restaurant was better than expected other than an installation deficiency of the south side sound lock doors. The background sound along the northern portion was NC-35 or less. However, the southern portion’s background sound exceeded NC-35 due to the hissing of the return air grille.

B) Ambient Sound

Figure 3.1.5.2 HVAC system sound levels inside the music room.

The results of the figure above show that along the northern portion, near the stage, the sound levels are less than or equal to NC-35. However, the southern portion, near the return air grille, has sound levels between NC-35 and NC-40. It was observed that the sound levels decreased substantially if the large return air grille was removed. And hence, it can be seen that the flow speed across the return air grille is high as well as the current grille needs to be replaced with a quieter grille.

C) Music Avenue Acoustic The interior acoustical performance of the music room was evaluated from impulse response measurements.

Figure 3.1.5.3 Impulse response measurements locations of the empty music room

Point P1 and P2 are the speakers located on the stage ceiling and were used to generate sine-sweep signals.

The 4 blue points were the receiver locations, located 1.5 meter above the floor, where the impulse responses were measure. The impulse response measurements were analyzed using the ISO 3382 Standard procedures. Six acoustical parameters—Early Decay Time, EDT; Reverberation Time, T(30); Centre Time, Ts; Sound Pressure Level, SPL; Clarity, C80; and Echo Potential, EchoDietsch are analyzed for the current case study

(A) EDT and T(30) variations are not significant and the values are well within the design goals; (B) EDT at Location 1 is low since it is closest to the source; (C) The centre time Ts, vaues are well below 100 ms; (D) The SPL variation is not too large and hence additional rear area amplification may be required.

(E) Clarity, C80 values are well above 0 dB and is acceptable; (F) Echo potential values are well below 0.9 and hence echo is not a concern.

The main conclusion of the room acoustical measurements is that the music room performs satisfactorily and the original design guidelines have been satisfied adequately.

3.2 CASE STUDY 3.2.1 SITE STUDY AND ZONING 3.2.2.1 External Noise Identification TYPE OF EXTERNAL SOUND SOURCE

Macro Path analysis of Jalan PJU 8/8

DESCRIPTION Traffic of Jalan PJU 8/8 The road is just right in front of the café & is a high traffic path that’s a main access to the mixed-used and commercial hubs of PJ Trade centre and Empire Damansara as well as low lost residential of Flora Damansara. The construction of the new development, Empire City 2 is reason behind high frequency of heavy machineries and trucks crossing Jalan PJU 8/8. A busy road from distance of 5m has a sound pressure level of 80dB whereas a heavy truck has a decibel scale of 90dB from 10m away.

Micro Path analysis of Jalan PJU 8/8

A Cement Mixer driving pass Cat in the Box

West elevation of Cat in the Box

Image showing neighbouring restaurant and bar

Neighbouring Restaurants and Café Although Cat in the box is an end lot unit, the unit next door is a bar lounge restaurant with music that may be as high as 100dB with just a wall acting as a sound barrier of the noise in between the two unit. The floor below also belongs to several happening alfresco style restaurant with noise levels that can reach between 50 and 90 decibels.

Exhaust and Vent Duct of Surrounding Kitchen Being in a food hub with improper planning of exhaust ducts can be seen mounted inconsiderately facing and near Cat in the Box. These exhaust fan generate noise level as high as 70dB or higher depending on the kitchen exhaust system condition and maintenance.

Exhaust vent on the adjacent end lot unit

Exhaust vent from the opposite restaurant at the ground floor

Air-conditioner Condenser on the Upper Floor of CafĂŠ Two unit of Panasonic condenser is secured on steel racks which lower the structure-borne transmission of noise to the cafĂŠ below. Each unit could generate noise level as high as 47dB.

Air-con condensers seen from the adjacent street

Air-con condensers seen from the spiral staircase

Underground Carpark Exit The vehicular exit from the lower ground floor is located just right beside the cafĂŠ. The ramp required the vehicles to accelerate their engine to reach the ground level before exiting into Jalan PJU 8/8. The revving of engine creates unwanted noise pollution which may reach up to 80dB for medium size trucks.

Car seen leaving the underground carpark

Car seen leaving the underground carpark

Site plan showing carpark exit into Jalan PJU 8/8

Renovation Works on the Opposite Unit A minor renovation works is being carried out on an adjacent unit. Electric drilling could generate noise level as high as 87dB as well as other loud hardware tools.

Renovating unit viewed from entrance of cafe

Renovating unit in relative to Cat in the Box

3.2.2 TABULATION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA The acoustics were taken and recorded at the level of 1.5m.

Acoustic Data Units decibel (dB) Height 1.5 meter (Standing)

GRID 1 2 3 4 5

PEAK HOUR A B C D E F 74.3 67.7 67.3 70.3 67.4 68.0 70.2 74.8 69.8 74.4 70.8 69.9 71.8 69.7 74.0 76.3 71.2 68.5 70.3 69.5 69.7 71.5 68.1 70.5 70.0 62.6 68.9 67.0 69.5 71.9 Table 3.2.2.1 Sound level reading according to gridline at peak hour

G 67.9 68.6 72.6 76.7 64.5

GRID 1 2 3 4 5

NON-PEAK HOUR A B C D E F 53.0 58.6 56.0 57.3 58.3 55.0 61.2 57.7 57.1 54.0 57.5 54.5 63.5 55.6 58.1 58.1 56.8 57.6 59.8 57.4 56.7 57.7 56.0 61.3 58.7 56.3 60.7 58.8 57.9 59.5 Table 3.2.2.2 Sound level reading according to gridline at non-peak hour

G 60.2 59.8 59.3 67.2 63.7

Grid A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5

Peak Non-Peak Grid Peak Non-Peak 74.3 53.0 E1 67.4 58.3 70.2 61.2 E2 70.8 57.5 71.8 63.5 E3 71.2 56.8 70.3 59.8 E4 68.1 56.0 70.0 58.7 E5 69.5 57.9 67.7 58.6 F1 68.0 55.0 74.8 57.7 F2 69.9 54.5 69.7 55.6 F3 68.5 57.6 69.5 57.4 F4 70.5 61.3 62.6 56.3 F5 71.9 59.5 67.3 56.0 G1 67.9 60.2 69.8 57.1 G2 68.6 59.8 74.0 58.1 G3 72.6 59.3 69.7 56.7 G4 76.7 67.2 68.9 60.7 G5 64.5 63.7 70.3 57.3 LEGEND 74.4 54.0 A Dining Red 76.3 58.1 B Lounge Green 71.5 57.7 C Kitchen Blue 67.0 58.8 D Counter Orange Table 3.2.2.3 Sound level reading of ground floor at 1.5m (standing)

Interpretation The internal sound intensity are lower compare to ordinary café. In the daily basis, the customer visited the café tends to do individual task, chit-chat and then occasionally event such as birthday party. Due to the silence environment in the café the customer generate moderate noise level. During the peak hour, the customers tends to generated high noise level as the discussion among each table are intense, more discussion here generates higher noise level. Hence the sound pressure level in the Zone A are remarkably higher compare to the other Zone.

The Zone B contains the bean bag chairs, bar counter and wood plank stack, which customers doesn’t have sufficient space to make discussion. The main activity there are selling merchandise and reading or discussion on the bean bag chairs and sometime catnap. This is the one of the zone that create lower human noise compare to Zone A. The Zone C is a private area, it only allows the barista and the cashier to enter. The sound pressure level for human noise are lower compare to the Zone A and Zone B. As the source of human noise in that area are basically the sound generated when customer are placing order and occasional chit-chat among the worker in the space.

The Zone D is a storage zone where the private zone is not accessible for the public without permission. The storage room are rather quiet compare to the other zone. It has a curtain, as the picture shown above, to screen the unwanted vision and noise. Hence, the sound pressure level in Zone D is lowest compare to other zoning.

3.2.3 Human Noise

Figure 3.2.3.1 Zoning of Spaces

Figure 3.2.3.2 Human noise source

Figure 3.2.3.3 Clockwise from upper left Zone A, zone B, zone C and zone D

3.2.6 CALCULATION 3.2.6.1 ZONING CALCULATION (COLLECTED DATA)

Intensity, I đ??ź

đ?‘†đ??źđ??ż = 10 đ??żđ?‘œđ?‘” (1đ?‘Ľ10−12

Therefore,

đ?‘†đ??źđ??ż

đ??ź = 1đ?‘‹10−12 X Antilog ( 10 ) GRID 1 2 3 4 5

GRID 1 2 3 4 5

A 2.69E-05 1.05E-05 1.51E-05 1.07E-05 0.00001

B 5.89E-06 3.02E-05 9.33E-06 8.91E-06 1.82E-06

A 2E-07 1.32E-06 2.24E-06 9.55E-07 7.41E-07

PEAK HOUR D

C

5.37E-06 9.55E-06 2.51E-05 9.33E-06 7.76E-06

B

C

7.24E-07 5.89E-07 3.63E-07 5.5E-07 4.27E-07

E

1.07E-05 2.75E-05 4.27E-05 1.41E-05 5.01E-06

5.5E-06 1.2E-05 1.32E-05 6.46E-06 8.91E-06

NON-PEAK HOUR D

3.98E-07 5.13E-07 6.46E-07 4.68E-07 1.17E-06

F

E

5.37E-07 2.51E-07 6.46E-07 5.89E-07 7.59E-07

6.31E-06 9.77E-06 7.08E-06 1.12E-05 1.55E-05

F

6.76E-07 5.62E-07 4.79E-07 3.98E-07 6.17E-07

3.16E-07 2.82E-07 5.75E-07 1.35E-06 8.91E-07

x

Sum of Intensity for each zone, I GRID 1 2 3 4 5

A

GRID 1 2 3 4 5

A

B

PEAK HOUR D E

C

F

0.000272759

6.76797E-05

B

C

NON-PEAK HOUR D E F

1.13139E-05

5.66248E-06

G 3.16E-05

9.16693E-05

G 2.85E-06

1.08472E-05

G 6.17E-06 7.24E-06 1.82E-05 4.68E-05 2.82E-06

G 1.05E-06 9.55E-07 8.51E-07 5.25E-06 2.34E-06

Sound Intensity Level (SIL) per zone đ??ź

đ?‘†đ??źđ??ż = 10 đ??żđ?‘œđ?‘” (1đ?‘Ľ10−12 ) DAY

GRID 1 2 3 4 5

A

PEAK HOUR C D

B

E

F

G

84.36

75.00

78.30

79.62

x NIGHT

GRID 1 2 3 4 5

A

PEAK HOUR C D

B

E

F

G

70.54

67.53

64.55

70.35

NOTE After reviewing the formula "insert formula", sound power is "the total sound energy radiated by the source". By using this formula to to add together all the readings we collected simply assumed that each of the 35 points are all sound sources which is untrue. Therefore the reading collected can only be analyzed as it is because the reading collected itself already represent the resultant of all the sound interference in the cafe.

3.2.6.2 ACOUSTIC FIXTURES

Table 3.2.6.1.1 Mechanical appliances by zone

Table 3.2.6.1.2 Noise sources from appliances in zone A

Table 3.2.6.1.3 Noise sources from appliances in zone B

Table 3.2.6.1.4 Noise sources from appliances in zone C

Table 3.2.6.1.5 Noise sources from appliances in zone D

In the cafĂŠ, the mechanical appliance are the major noise source apart from human noise. Due to the open space design of Dinning area, Lounge are, Coffee bar counter, and the Storage area, 3 Panasonic CS/U-S24RKQ 2.5HP Inverter Single-Split are installed to keep the thermal comfort level. These air conditioners produce negligible noise due to the vibration of the unit cabinet. The appliances produce significant noise during the peak hours. The high rate usage of Teknomat Expobar Coffee Grinder generated relatively high density of noise (85db). The following data are shown in the internal sound pressure level table.

Appliances Intensity Calculation Source

Noise Level (dB)

Intensity, I

Panasonic CS/U-S24RKQ 2.5HP Inverter Single-Split

55

3.1623E-07

45

3.1623E-08

50

0.0000001

58

6.3096E-07

55

3.1623E-07

58

6.3096E-07

58

6.3096E-07

65

3.1623E-06

85

0.00031623

75

3.1623E-05

70

0.00001

KDK Ceiling Fan KY14X8MC JAMAJKA 1.3W LRE3061BD Black Stainless Steel Oven Arc Glass Kitchen Cooker/Range Hood Sharp Inverter Convection Microwave Oven Elba EOTD0989BK Oven Toaster Teknomat Expobar Elegance Espresso Machines Teknomat Expobar Coffee Grinder XOUNTS 360 DocuPrint CP105 b

Combined Appliances at Zone A Total Intensity

Source

Quantity

Intensity

Panasonic CS/U-S24RKQ 2.5HP Inverter Single-Split

2

3.1623E07

6.32456E-07

2

3.1623E08

6.32456E-08

KDK Ceiling Fan KY14X8MC Grand Total Intensity

6.95701E-07

Combined Appliances at Zone B Source

Quantity

Panasonic CS/U-S24RKQ 2.5HP Inverter Single-Split

1

XOUNTS 360

2

Grand Total Intensity

Intensity 3.1623E07 3.1623E05

Total Intensity 3.16228E-07 6.32456E-05 6.35618E-05

Combined Appliances at Zone C Source

Quantity

Intensity

JAMAJKA 1.3W LRE3061BD Black Stainless Steel Oven Arc Glass Kitchen Cooker/Range Hood Sharp Inverter Convection Microwave Oven Elba EOTD0989BK Oven Toaster Teknomat Expobar Elegance Espresso Machines Teknomat Expobar Coffee Grinder Grand Total Intensity

1

0.0000001

Total Intensity 0.0000001

6.3096E-07

6.30957E-07

3.1623E-07

3.16228E-07

6.3096E-07

6.30957E-07

6.3096E-07

6.30957E-07

3.1623E-06

3.16228E-06

0.00031623

0.000316228 0.000321699

1 1 1 1 1 1

Combined Appliances at Zone D Source

Quantity

Intensity

1

0.00001

DocuPrint CP105 b Grand Total Intensity

Total Intensity 0.00001 0.00001

Appliances SIL Calculation Sound Intensity Level (SIL) by Zone Zone

Intensity, I

A

Sound Intensity Level, SIL 58.42

6.95701E-07

B

78.03

6.35618E-05

C

85.07

0.000321699

D

70.00

0.00001

Sound Intensity Level (SIL) of entire space Zone A B C D Entire Space

Intensity, I 6.95701E-07 6.35618E-05 0.000321699 0.00001 0.000395957

đ??ź

đ?‘†đ??źđ??ż = 10 đ??żđ?‘œđ?‘” (1đ?‘Ľ10−12) 3.9557 đ?‘Ľ 10−4 = 10 đ??żđ?‘œđ?‘” ( ) 1đ?‘Ľ10−12 = 85.98 đ?‘‘

Hence, the total SIL of the space is 85.98 dB

Analysis

Table 3.2.6.1.1 Noise Criteria for Acoustic Environment in Building Interiors

According to Academic Resource Centre of Illinois Institute of Technology, restaurants or cafes have a noise criteria ranging from 48-52 dB. Cat in the box has total Sound Intensity of 85.98 dB, this shows much noise disturbances occurred inside the built environment that almost doubles the Noise Criteria. Noise that exceed 55 dB is considered as too loud.

ANALYTICAL DIAGRAMS

In order to visualize the effect of each ray, a Relative to Direct Sound colour-coding system is used to display the perceived effect of each ray at the current propagation time. These colours are based on the relative level and delay of the sound when compared to the direct sound at the current ray position.

If a reflection arrives within a few milliseconds of the direct sound and at a relatively high level (>25dB), the auditory mechanism cannot differentiate the two sources. This means that it will actually affect the perceived directionality of the sound, effectively creating a partial image shift. This is not always a problem as, for example, reflectors are often used directly above an orchestra pit to effectively 'raise' the sound. It can be a problem in rooms for speech as the focus is essentially directly on the speaker. However, humans are quite adaptable so it takes a large number of such rays to have any significant effect.

If the reflection arrives a little later, the ear integrates it with the direct sound and, whilst it does not affect the directionality, it will effectively increase the perceived sound level. This constitutes useful sound energy because it increases audibility and, in the case of speech, intelligibility.

There is a threshold beyond which this integration lasts too long and individual components of the sound waveform begin to merge together. This threshold varies with the type of sound. For speech, where the accurate distinction of consecutive syllables is essential for comprehension, the relative delay beyond which this occurs is around 50 ms.

For music, where the individual notes of many instruments sound better when they run together slightly, the relative delay is around 80 ms.

This band represents the borderline area between the speech and music threshold. In a music auditorium, orange border rays are fine. In a lecture hall or conference room, border rays indicate the potential for reduced intelligibility.\

When a reflection is quite delayed but still at a relatively high level, it can be perceived as quite distinct from the direct sound and represent an annoying echo. This usually only occurs when the echo arrives in relative isolation compared to the general level of reverberant decay. If many high level echoes arrive together the effect is to significantly increase the reverberation level. Either way they act to significantly reduce the audibility of the original sound. Thus reflections anywhere in this band should be avoided by reshaping the room geometry or using some well-placed sound absorber.

Below a certain level, the reflection simply becomes part of the ambient reverberation. At this level they do not significantly contribute to the perception of the direct sound but determine our spatial perception in the room. The threshold level continues to fall off with time well beyond the extents of the above graph.

At even lower relative sound levels the reflection is completely masked by the direct sound and other reflections. Such reflections pose no problems within the space.

Acoustic Analytical Diagram for the top 4 sound source contributor

1) Teknomat Expobar Coffee Grinder (85dB)

Sound Ray Particle during 20ms

Sound Ray Particle during 60ms

Sound Ray Particle during 40ms

Sound Ray Particle during 80ms

Sound Ray Particle during 100ms

From the acoustic analytical diagram generated, the sound ray orientate wildly around the Zone C. It is undesirable noise source in the cafĂŠ. However, the designer tackle the situation with a wooden counter which has 3.42 sound absorption index to screen out the noise source.

2) XOUNT 360 (75dB)

Sound Ray Particle during 20ms

Sound Ray Particle during 40ms

Sound Ray Particle during 60ms

Sound Ray Particle during 80ms

Sound Ray Particle during 100ms From the acoustic analytical diagram generated, the sound ray bouncing wildly around the Zone A and Zone B and a potion to the Zone. It was intentional as the Xount 360 is a lighting device integrate with speaker. The designer wisely apply the hybrid device and also keep the sound ray orientate throughout the cafĂŠ. It allows the customer enjoy the music.

3) DocuPrint CP105 b (70dB)

Sound Ray Particle during 20ms

Sound Ray Particle during 60ms

Sound Ray Particle during 40ms

Sound Ray Particle during 80ms

Sound Ray Particle during 100ms From the analytical diagram generated, it shows the sound ray bouncing wildly around the Zone C and Zone D. The printing machine is one of the undesirable sound source. Hence, the designer decides to locate it at zone D where it has wooden partition and wooden counter and the long wooden counter from Zone C to screen out the undesired sound source. Each of the sound absorbance unit has sound absorption index of 1.48, 3.42 and 3.42.

4) Teknomat Expobar Elegance Espresso Machines

Sound Ray Particle during 20ms

Sound Ray Particle during 60ms

Sound Ray Particle during 40ms

Sound Ray Particle during 80ms

Sound Ray Particle during 100ms

From the analytical diagram, it shows the sound ray particle bouncing wildly around the Zone C and Zone D. It is similar to the 3rd Mechanical appliance, the sound absorption device. However, the location of the device allows the sound ray particle scatter more to the Zone A.

3.2.6.3 SOUND REDUCTION INDEX CALCULATION (SRI) CEILING Component

Material

Colour

Finish

Ceiling

Concrete Tinted Glass

Grey Transparent

Matte Glossy

Total ST

�=

��� =

=

1 đ?‘†đ?‘…đ??ź đ?‘Žđ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘–đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” ( 10 )

�1 �1 + �2 �2 + �� ��

Surface Area, S/m² 84.30 16.30 100.60

SRI 50 37

1

SRI= 10 đ??żđ?‘œđ?‘”10 đ?‘‡đ?‘Žđ?‘Ł

= 10 đ??żđ?‘œđ?‘”10

1 4.1x 10â ťâ ľ

đ?‘‡đ?‘œđ?‘Ąđ?‘Žđ?‘™ đ?‘†đ?‘˘đ?‘&#x;đ?‘“đ?‘Žđ?‘?đ?‘’ đ??´đ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘Ž 4.1 đ?‘Ľ 10â ťáś&#x; 100.6

= 43.9 dB

= 4.1x 10â ťâ ľ

Hence, the Average Transmission of the ceiling is 4.1x 10â ťâ ľ

Hence, the Overall SRI of the ceiling is 43.9 dB

Transmission Coefficient, T 1 x 10â ťâ ľ 2 x 10â ťâ ´

ST 8.43 x 10â ťâ ´ 3.26 x 10â ťáś&#x; 4.1 x 10áś&#x;

FLOOR Component

Material

Colour

Finish

Floor

Concrete Timber

Black Black

Matte Matte

Total ST

𝑇=

𝑇𝑎𝑣 =

=

1 𝑆𝑅𝐼 𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑜𝑔 ( ) 10

𝑆1 𝑇1 + 𝑆2 𝑇2 + 𝑆𝑛 𝑇𝑛 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑆𝑢𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎

1.06 212

Surface Area, S/m² 106.00 106.00 212

SRI 50 20

1

SRI= 10 𝐿𝑜𝑔10 𝑇𝑎𝑣

1

= 10 𝐿𝑜𝑔10 5𝑥10⁻ᶟ

= 23 dB

= 5 𝑥 10⁻ᶟ

Hence, the Average Transmission of the floor is 5 𝑥 10⁻ᶟ

Hence, the Overall SRI of the floor is 23 dB

Transmission Coefficient, T 1 x 10⁻⁵ 0.01

ST 1.06 x 10⁻ᶟ 1.06 1.06

Figure 3.2.6.3.1 Cat in the Box plan with walls allocation for Sound Reduction Index

WALL A

Component Wall Window Total ST

Colour

Finish

Surface Area, S/m²

SRI

Transmission Coefficient, T

ST

Black

Matte

34.20

45

3.16 x 10⁻⁵

1.08x 10⁻ᶟ

Transparent

Glossy

11.40 45.60

37

2 x 10⁻⁴

2.28 x 10⁻ᶟ 3.36 x 10⁻ᶟ

Material Brick Wall with plaster finish Tinted Glass

𝑇=

𝑇𝑎𝑣 =

=

1 𝑆𝑅𝐼 𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑜𝑔 ( 10 ) 𝑆1 𝑇1 + 𝑆2 𝑇2 + 𝑆𝑛 𝑇𝑛

SRI= 10 𝐿𝑜𝑔10

= 10 𝐿𝑜𝑔10

1 𝑇𝑎𝑣

1 7.37 x 10⁻⁵

𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑆𝑢𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎

3.36 𝑥 10⁻ᶟ 45.60

= 41.3 dB

= 7.37 x 10⁻⁵

Hence, the Average Transmission of wall A is 7.37 x 10⁻⁵

Hence, the Overall SRI of wall A is 41.3 dB

WALL B Component

Material

Colour

Finish

Window Total ST

Tinted Glass

Transparent

Glossy

�=

��� =

=

1 đ?‘†đ?‘…đ??ź đ?‘Žđ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘–đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” ( 10 ) đ?‘†1 đ?‘‡1 + đ?‘†2 đ?‘‡2 + đ?‘†đ?‘› đ?‘‡đ?‘› đ?‘‡đ?‘œđ?‘Ąđ?‘Žđ?‘™ đ?‘†đ?‘˘đ?‘&#x;đ?‘“đ?‘Žđ?‘?đ?‘’ đ??´đ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘Ž

6.84 đ?‘Ľ 10â ťáś&#x; 34.2

Surface Area, S/m² 34.20 34.20

SRI= 10 đ??żđ?‘œđ?‘”10

SRI 37

Transmission Coefficient, T 2 x 10â ťâ ´

1 ���

= 10 đ??żđ?‘œđ?‘”10

1 2x 10â ťâ ´

= 37 dB

= 2x 10â ťâ ´

Hence, the Average Transmission of wall B is 2x 10â ťâ ´

Hence, the Overall SRI of wall B is 37 dB

ST 6.84 x 10â ťáś&#x; 6.84 x 10â ťáś&#x;

WALL C Component

Material

Colour

Finish

Surface Area, S/m²

SRI

Transmission Coefficient, T

ST

Wall

Brick Wall with plaster finish

Black

Matte

45.60

45

3.16 x 10â ťâ ľ

1.44 x 10â ťáś&#x;

Total ST

45.60

�=

��� =

=

1 đ?‘†đ?‘…đ??ź đ?‘Žđ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘–đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” ( ) 10 đ?‘†1 đ?‘‡1 + đ?‘†2 đ?‘‡2 + đ?‘†đ?‘› đ?‘‡đ?‘› đ?‘‡đ?‘œđ?‘Ąđ?‘Žđ?‘™ đ?‘†đ?‘˘đ?‘&#x;đ?‘“đ?‘Žđ?‘?đ?‘’ đ??´đ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘Ž 1.44 đ?‘Ľ 10â ťáś&#x; 45.6

SRI= 10 đ??żđ?‘œđ?‘”10

1.44 x 10â ťáś&#x; 1 đ?‘‡đ?‘Žđ?‘Ł

1

= 10 đ??żđ?‘œđ?‘”10 3.16x 10â ťâ ľ

= 45 dB

= 3.16x 10â ťâ ľ

Hence, the Average Transmission of wall C is 3.16x 10â ťâ ľ

Hence, the Overall SRI of wall C is 45 dB

WALL D Component

Material

Colour

Finish

Door Window Total ST

Tinted Glass Tinted Glass

Transparent Transparent

Glossy Glossy

𝑇=

𝑇𝑎𝑣 =

=

1 𝑆𝑅𝐼 𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑜𝑔 ( ) 10

𝑆1 𝑇1 + 𝑆2 𝑇2 + 𝑆𝑛 𝑇𝑛 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑆𝑢𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎

6.84 𝑥 10⁻ᶟ 34.2

Surface Area, S/m² 11.40 22.80 34.20

Transmission Coefficient, T 2 x 10⁻⁴ 2 x 10⁻⁴

SRI 37 37

SRI= 10 𝐿𝑜𝑔10

1 𝑇𝑎𝑣

1

= 10 𝐿𝑜𝑔10 2x 10⁻⁴

= 37 dB

= 2x 10⁻⁴

Hence, the Average Transmission of wall D is 2x 10⁻⁴

Hence, the Overall SRI of wall D is 37 dB

ST 2.28 x 10⁻ᶟ 4.56 x 10⁻ᶟ 6.84 x 10⁻ᶟ

SOUND TRANSMISSION BETWEEN THE EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR OF THE CAFE At peak hours, due to the higher sound level measurement of the cafe, we notice that the interior sound pressure level is higher than the exterior of the café.

At non-peak hours, due to lower sound level measurement of the café, we notice that the exterior sound pressure level is higher than the exterior of the café.

Therefore, we calculate how much sound is entering from the exterior to the interior space with the following formula: Outside Measured Sound Pressure Level – the Sound Reduction Index of specific surface= Sound Transmission of the surface.

From here, we are able to see how much the specific surface is able to block the noise from exterior to the interior of the café.

Figure 3.2.6.3.2 Cat in the Box section with outside measured Sound Level

Figure 3.2.6.3.3 Cat in the Box plan with outside measured Sound Level

Ceiling: Outside Measured Sound Pressure Level – the Sound Reduction Index of Ceiling = Sound Transmission loss of ceiling.

75.5 dB – 43.9 dB = 31.6 dB 31.6 75.5

đ?‘Ľ 100% = 41.8 %

Floor: Outside Measured Sound Pressure Level – the Sound Reduction Index of Floor = Sound Transmission loss of floor.

74.9 dB – 23 dB = 51.9 dB 54.9 74.9

đ?‘Ľ 100% = 69.3 %

Wall A: Outside Measured Sound Pressure Level – the Sound Reduction Index of Wall A = Sound Transmission loss of Wall A. 72.9 dB – 41.3 dB = 30.6 dB 30.6 72.9

đ?‘Ľ 100% = 42.0 %

Wall B: Outside Measured Sound Pressure Level – the Sound Reduction Index of Wall B = Sound Transmission loss of Wall B. 73.6 dB – 37 dB = 36.6 dB 36.6 73.6

đ?‘Ľ 100% = 49.7 %

Wall C: Outside Measured Sound Pressure Level – the Sound Reduction Index of Wall C = Sound Transmission loss of Wall C. 72.7 dB – 45 dB = 27.7 dB 27.7 72.7

đ?‘Ľ 100% = 38.1 %

Wall D: Outside Measured Sound Pressure Level – the Sound Reduction Index of Wall D = Sound Transmission loss of Wall D. 72.5 dB – 37 dB = 35.5 dB 35.5 72.5

đ?‘Ľ 100% = 49.0 %

Analysis Based on the calculation of sound transmission between the exterior and interior of the cafÊ, we can see that the surfaces have an average percentage of 48.3% for Sound Transmission, meaning the surfaces let in almost half of the sound from exterior to the interior of the cafÊ. We assume that mostly it is due to wall B and D that is placed facing the noisier side such as the entrance and the street and also the floor, in addition, they are consist of materials that have a lower Sound Reduction Index, blocking less sound transmission from the exterior. This can be solved by adding façades with higher Sound Reduction Index such as wood cladding on the exterior facing the street, decreasing the area of the barrier separating the interior to the exterior, increasing the materials with higher absorption coefficient, adding air space to the glazed curtain wall, and so on.

3.2.6.4 REVERBERATION TIME Component

Material

Concrete Tinted Glass Brick Wall with plaster finish Wall Wood Partition Wire Mesh Floor Timber Door Tinted Glass Tinted Glass Window Tinted Glass Stairs Metal Wood Pallet Table Wooden Chair Plastic Chair Wood Furniture Bookshelves Metal Cake Display Fridge Wooden Counter Total Absorption (A) Ceiling

Colour

Finish

Surface Area, S/m²

Grey Transparent

Matte Glossy

84.30 16.30

Black

Matte

72.38

Light Brown

Matte

11.40

Silver Black Transparent Transparent Translucent Black

Glossy Matte Glossy Glossy Glossy Glossy

3.75 106.00 10.64 56.06 7.60 9.05

Matte

Matte

5.00

Matte

Matte

7.20

Matte

Matte

4.32

Matte

Matte

3.84

Glossy

Glossy

4.50

Matte

Matte

9.00

Absorption Coefficient (500Hz), a 0.02 0.04

Sound Absorption (500Hz), Sa 1.69 0.65

Absorption Coefficient (2000Hz), a 0.03 0.03

Sound Absorption (2000Hz), Sa 2.53 0.49

0.02

1.45

0.02

1.45

0.14 0.24 0.10 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.70

1.60 0.90 10.60 0.43 2.24 0.30 6.34

0.13 0.23 0.07 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.86

1.48 0.86 7.42 0.32 1.68 0.15 7.78

0.22

1.10

0.38

1.90

0.40 0.33

2.88 1.43

0.44 0.37

3.17 1.60

0.22

0.84

0.38

1.46

0.22

0.99

0.38

1.71

0.22

1.98 35.41

0.38

3.42 37.42

500 Hz Room Volume, V Total Absorption, A RT = 0.16 X

đ?‘‰ đ??´

�� = 0.16 �

401.14 35.41

= 1.81 đ?‘

Therefore the total reverberation time for 500Hz is 1.81 seconds

2000Hz Room Volume, V Total Absorption, A �� = 0.16 �

401.14 37.42

= 1.72 đ?‘

Therefore the total reverberation time for 2000Hz is 1.72 seconds

Table 3.2.6.4. AS/NZS 2107:2000 standard for recommended Reverberation Time

Analysis According to AS/NZS 2107:2000 standard, cafes which falls under the application of Waiting rooms and Reception areas are recommended to have reverberation time of 0.4-0.7 seconds based on the table above. Cat in the Box has reverberation time of 1.81 seconds at 500Hz and 1.72 seconds at 2000Hz, in which both RT have exceeded the recommended reverberation time by more than 1 seconds. A long reverberation time makes a space acoustically “live� and may suit spaces for music, while shorter reverberation times enhance the speech intelligibility in a room and are better suited to spaces for speech. Cat in the box has a long reverberation time, creating excess noises that may disturb conversations inside the space. This is due to the low absorption coefficient of the materials which reflects the sounds within the space. This may also due to the excessive amount of furniture with low absorption coefficient material.

Excessive Reverberation time can be solved by adding panel absorber which are constructed from fixed sheets of continues materials with a space behind them; the space may be air or may contain porous absorbent.

3.2.7 ACOUSTIC ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION A standard café has recommended design (Noise Criteria - NC) sound level for cafes is 45-50dBA. Also in referring to AS/NZS 2107:2000, the recommended reverberation time for restaurant and café should be 0.4 to 0.6s. However, based on the research paper Acoustic in the Hospitality Industry acknowledged that cafes produces less than desirable acoustic condition for comfortable social interaction. It has been found that the average noise level in café is around 80dBA and reach up to 110dBA. Whereas, the ear is most sensitive to speech for conversation purposes between 48-72dBA. Acoustical comfort for the users is considered as high priority for their leisure and satisfaction of a space. It is defined as when activities can be undertaken without unwanted sound annoying others. Whence, it has effects on both the psychological and physiological well-being of the occupants.

Type of Space Café

Recommended Design Sound level Satisfactory Maximum 45 50

Recommended Reverberation Time (s) 0.4 – 0.6

Table AS/NZS 2107:2000

The external acoustic condition contribute the acceptability of acoustic quality in the Café, Cat in the Box. The 1st floor is not affected as it is an enclosed space with curtain wall and solid wall. However, the neighbourhood context as diagram below shown are noise source disrupt the acoustic quality to the 2nd floor due to the open concept.

Figure 3.2.7.1 Air-con condensers seen from the adjacent street

Figure 3.2.7.3 Car seen leaving the underground carpark

Figure 3.2.7.2 A Cement Mixer driving pass Cat in the Box

Figure 3.2.7.4 Renovating unit in relative to Cat in the Box

As for the interior space, a large proportion of noise sources contributing to background noises were those associated with kitchen areas. The loud humming of appliances such as Coffee Grinder and Expresso Machine.

These sources may contribute a major factor to the overall acceptability of a space.

Diagram 3.2.7.5 Background noises from kitchen appliances.

Diagram 3.2.7.6 Sound Propagation to dining area from kitchen.

The issue has been resolve by allocate the speaker, XOUNT 360, around the Zone for sound masking. It generates direct sound ray particle and with help of glass curtain wall, low absorption coefficient, to reflect sound ray particle to the dining area. It provides acoustical distraction by playing relax music.

Diagram 3.2.7.7 Speakers used in the cafĂŠ that act as masking purpose and the bean bag (soft material).

Diagram 3.2.7.8 Material choice for the furniture and floor finishes. Diagram 3.2.7.9 Material choice for Zone partition.

The choice of furniture material with different acoustic absorption characteristics affects the acoustic acceptability of a space. In other word, proper selection of materials directly influence the desire acoustic quality by providing optimum reverberation time based on the absorption coefficient of all the materials and the dimensions. The implementation of wooden finishing assist in diffusing sound due to its nature. However, the CafĂŠ lacks in soft materials that could achieve better acoustic quality by absorb unwanted sound source.

The owner may consider to use carpets and sofas to integrate in the design layout.

The data below shows the unit decibel of interferences of sound wave. The sources are generated from human and mechanical appliances during the peak hour.

GRID 1 2 3 4 5

A 74.3 70.2 71.8 70.3 70.0

B 67.7 74.8 69.7 69.5 62.6

PEAK HOUR C D 67.3 70.3 69.8 74.4 74.0 76.3 69.7 71.5 68.9 67.0

E 67.4 70.8 71.2 68.1 69.5

F 68.0 69.9 68.5 70.5 71.9

G 67.9 68.6 72.6 76.7 64.5

Table 3.2.7.10 Sound level reading of ground floor according to gridline at peak hour

Zone A C1, 67.3-D3, 76.3dB In the analytical diagram generated from Ecotect, each appliances generated sound ray particle to demonstrate the orientation of the sound ray particle. It is justification on the data collected. For instances, at C1, the analytical diagram shows that less density of sound ray particle orientation at the grid point, due to the sound source contributor closer to the C1 is Panasonic Inverter Single Split; that contribute 55db.

However, at grid point D3 there are high density of sound ray particle orientation. The grid point is closer to the kitchen areas whereas it is large proportion of noise sources contributing to background noises.

Zone B G1, 67.9-G3, 72.6dB As for the grid point at G1, there are lesser direct sound ray particle orientation compare to G3, where the XOUNT 360 are locate closer. Hence there are relatively high density of the direct sound ray particle. It also reflect on the data collected as shown in the table 7.1.

Zone C B5, 62.6-D4, 71.5dB As for the grid at B5, it has lowest figure in the table chart due to the appliance, Teknomat Expobar Coffee Grinder, wasn’t in use during the data collection. Yet, appliance closer to grid D4, JAMAJKA 1.3W, are constantly in use.

Zone D G5, 64.5-F5, 71.9dB At grid G5, it has relatively low figure due to the less sound ray particle orientation in refer to analytical diagram, where the main sound source contributor are Espresso Machines and DocuPrint CP105D; but there are relatively high density of direct sound ray particle at grid F5 coming from the XOUNT 360, Panasonic Inverter Single Split, and ceiling fan. Hence, it justify the high figure in the table chart.

CONCLUSION QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS – DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Lighting Design Conclusion Based on the observation of the daylight calculation 3 out of the 4 zones analyzed have fair to bright daylight distribution. The only zone which has discomfort glare issue is the lounge area beside the curtain wall facing the west which will mainly get the overexposure during sunset. Suggestions of adding egg-crate pattern louvres which is recommended by MS 1525 could help to shadow most direct sunlight into the space.

The unwanted solar radiation will also ensure the interior temperature is regulated in an optimum thermal comfort level by reducing the heat gain.

Based on the Lumen Method calculation, majority of the spaces are artificially under lit when compared to the illuminance level required in the MS 1525 except the lounge zone which is optimally lit. The light contour also suggest plenty of dark zone especially at the corners and edge of the café but concentrated light exposure in the middle of the café. A more careful selection of type of light bulb with higher lumen and higher degree of beam spread to ensure the entire area is evenly lit as well as meeting the recommended illumination level. Task lights such as table lamp and under-cabinet light can be added at the counter and kitchen zone as these lightings are more suitable for performing the specific task which should be free of distracting glare, shadows and prevent eye strain.

The dimmable lighting fixture also allow a more energy efficiency when transiting lighting settings from day to night. The adjustment also allow lights to be brighten up during gloomy days or raining days where not full artificial illumination is needed. The feature also allow the lighting to be adjusted to desired illumination level or ambience to suit any events or occasion in the café.

Acoustic Design Conclusion Acoustically, The Cat in the Box has unhealthy noise level of 85.5 dB in the space compared to the recommended 40dB to 50dB in a restaurant. The noise are mostly generated from the kitchen appliances which transmit through air-borne transmission due to the open concept kitchen. Based on the options available, noise control can be achieved by redesigning or enclosing the kitchen space to ensure the transmission path is blocked or diluted before reaching the receiver. Ways of doing so includes compartmentalized the kitchen using high Sound Transmission Class (STC) material such as double partition wall as well as detailed sealing such as corner reinforcement tape, acoustical sealant taped and acoustical sealant on both sides of the wall base. However the owner did realized the issue by masking these noise by installing two speakers. The speakers are strategically placed in the lounge area facing the dining area where it can cover bigger transmission range.

Regarding the calculated 1.7 second reverberation time of the entire interior space it is way too long compared to the recommended 0.4 to 0.7 second. This issue can be solve by increasing the sound absorption of the space through acoustic panels or adding more soft elements such as sofa or more bean bags. Types of acoustic panels that can reduce the prolonged sound energy includes adding porous absorber for high frequency or panel absorber for lower frequency sound energy.

From the Noise Reduction aspect, the calculated envelope of the scape will allow range of 30db to 40db into the café which is equivalent to a quiet living room which is fairly effective except the front and back façade which are both curtain walls. Façade treatment can be taken to counter this issue where there can be limitless solutions to increase the SRI as well as allowing the café to have a more eye-catching exterior and solving the discomfort glare problem.

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS- SURVEY QUESTIONS QUESTION 1 We have conducted surveys inside the place at the peakiest hour, we were able to conduct surveys to 20 visitors. The objective of this survey is to analyze visitors’ comments towards the comfortability of the café and what could be improve.

QUESTION 2

QUESTION 3

QUESTION 4

QUESTION 5

QUESTION 6

QUESTION 7

QUESTION 8

QUESTION 9

10 QUESTION

To summarize it, the visitors are mostly youngsters who come to the café frequently to either study, chill or to meet up with friends. The reason of visitation due to the comfortable atmosphere provided by the interior of café, the visitors mostly stay for more than an hour. The evening are usually the peakiest hour, this may due to the comfortable lighting ambience around that time. The lighting ambience was responded in a good way, people prefer seating by the window side because of it. Most of the visitor responded to ambience and acoustic as ‘perfect’ although some did complained about the evening glare.

REFLECTION Comparing the quantitative and qualitative data collection, the user preference differ from the recommended requirement be it lighting and room acoustic. This suggest the user inclination of comfortable lighting and acoustics may not always conformed to the requirement as it is very personal and subjective although the required conditions offer the most conducive and safe environment to occupy in.

As conclusion, we would like to conclude that this lighting and acoustic performance analysis project is a challenging task as it require a lot of comprehensive and critical analysis. To produce lighting and acoustic model simulation and data interpretation through software like Revit and Ecotect Analysis are being used.

Observation of the site is also an important factor as unknown factors and intangible variables or weather may affect the data collected as well as many unforeseen circumstances. The uncontrolled environment couldn’t allow us to obtain an accurate data due to the unconsidered factors.

Based on the observation and analysis, it can be seen the Cat in the Box has insufficient lighting to meet the lighting standards required for a café which has many room for improvement. However their under-lit ambience may be made purposely as an attraction and the empirical evaluations are taken without considering the poetic qualities.

Acoustically it can be seen the background music is fairly effective with majority of the interviewee giving a “perfect” rating in terms of the acoustic quality. Another lesson learnt is to revise and be vigilant on the formula given as the Sound Power Formula can’t be used to find the average noise level in the area but rather the combined sound pressure. This set a reminder to understand a formula before using it blindly at the wrong context.

SKETCHES and PHOTOS

Sectional Interior Perspectives

Leader posing with lux meter

IT team

Data collecting team

Group photo with the owner of Cat In The Box, Mr Muzz

4.0 REFERENCES Acoustics Azhar, S., Brown, J., & Farooqui, R. (2009, April). BIM-based sustainability analysis: An evaluation of building performance analysis software. InProceedings of the 45th ASC annual conference (Vol. 1, No. 4).

Bengtsson, M., Olsson, E., Funk, P., & Jackson, M. (2004). Design of condition based maintenancesystem— A case study using sound analysis and case-based reasoning. Condition Based Maintenance Systems—An Investigation of Technical Constituents and Organizational Aspects; Malardalen University: Eskilstuna, Sweden, 57.

Marsh, A. (2003). ECOTECT and EnergyPlus. Building Energy Simulation User News, 24(6), 2-3.

Quartieri, J., Guarnaccia, C., D’Ambrosio, S., & Iannone, G. (2009, March). Room acoustics experimental study: characterization of the sound quality in a new built church. In Proceedings of the 10th WSEAS International Conference on “Acoustics & Music: Theory & Applications”(AMTA'09), Prague (Rep. Ceca) (pp. 2325).

Yang, W., & Kang, J. (2005). Soundscape and sound preferences in urban squares: a case study in Sheffield. Journal of Urban Design, 10(1), 61-80.

Lighting Azhar, S., Carlton, W. A., Olsen, D., & Ahmad, I. (2011). Building information modeling for sustainable design and LEED® rating analysis. Automation in construction, 20(2), 217-224.

Demers, C. (2006). Assessing light in architecture: A numerical procedure for a qualitative and quantitative analysis. Proceedings of the Italian Lighting Association (AIDI).

Dubois, C., Demers, C., & Potvin, A. (2007). The influence of daylighting on occuopants: comfort and diversity of luminous ambiences in architecture. InProceedings of the Solar Conference (Vol. 2, p. 720).

AMERICAN SOLAR ENERGY SOCIETY; AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS. Kota, S., Haberl, J. S., Clayton, M. J., & Yan, W. (2014). Building Information Modeling (BIM)-based daylighting simulation and analysis.Energy and Buildings, 81, 391-403.

PEREIRA, M. S., & GUEDES, M. D. A. B. C. Comparative Analysis of the Performance of Natural Lighting Software: A Case Study.

Plume, J., & Mitchell, J. (2007). Collaborative design using a shared IFC building model—Learning from experience. Automation in Construction,16(1), 28-36.