AA School of Architecture | Refurbishing the City: London Case Studies

AA School of Architecture Refurbishing the City: London Case Studies

AA SED MSc + MArch Sustainable Environmental Design 2014-15 Architectural Association School of Architecture Graduate School Term 1 Project Group 6 : AA School of Architecture | Effra Early Years Centre | Evelyn Grace Academy | Millennium Primary School Team 1 : Juanito Alipio de la Rosa | Maria Francisca Echeverri | Maria Teresa Sanchez Perez | Cindrella Semaan January 2015

1

AA E+E Environment & Energy Studies Programme Architectural Association School of Architecture MSc + MArch Sustainable Environmental Design 2014-15

Authorship Declaration Form

TERM 1 PROJECT: Refurbishing the City: London Case Studies TITLE: AA School of Architecture NUMBER OF WORDS: 14,799

STUDENT NAMES: Juanito Alipio de la Rosa Maria Francisca Echeverri Maria Teresa Sanchez Perez Cindrella Semaan

DECLARATION: “We certify that the contents of this document are entirely our own work and that any quotation or paraphrase from the published or unpublished work of others is duly acknowledged.”

Signatures: __________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________ Date: 12 January 2015

2

SUMMARY This report covers the study of The Architectural Association (AA) School of Architecture spaces: the Library, Rear Second Presentation Room, SED Office, and SED & EmTech Studios. It holds observations, analysis, data logger measurements, Radiance illuminance simulations, and TAS thermal simulations that were analysed and explored at a later stage to be able to understand the differences in each space, to visualize and examine the comfort levels that turn them into better spaces, and to see how much energy consumption may be potentially reduced.

The AA School was formally established in 1890 and in 1917 it moved its premises to Bedford Square in central London where it is still currently located. The challenge in the study was the centuries-old Georgian houses that were adaptively reused to accommodate the AA School needs. The team looked for the extent of ‘sustainability,’ environment-friendly and energy-efficient characteristics these Georgian houses contain compared to the contemporary 16 Morwell building which houses the graduate studios. Touching on and going through the history of AA school, its electricity bills, the heat gains and losses, and lux levels in some areas pushed us to investigate more and measure these observations. These concerns, which were studied and well analysed, created the structure of our research and hypothesis regarding the preferable school designs or spaces that best fit the type of building program in the UK climate.

3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The team would like to thank the Architectural Association (AA) administration and maintenance staff for sharing invaluable information about the AA premises, which includes access to plans, building manuals, and schedules among others.

In particular, the team’s gratitude goes to following persons for accommodating requests and interviews: Brett Steele, Roberta Jenkins, Anita Pfauntsch, Peter Keiff, Clement Chung, and Danielle Hewitt.

The group would also like to thank its tutor, Simos Yannas, for his patience and hands-on guidance throughout the term. The project has developed in depth, thanks to the lectures and inputs of Paula Cadima, Nick Baker, Gustavo Brunelli, Byron Mardas, Mariam Kapsali, and Herman Calleja.

Hereby acknowledged likewise are the authors of the previous SED reports on educational buuldings: AA School of Architecture, Effra Early Years Centre, Evelyn Grace Academy, and Millennium Primary School.

The lessons learned from each of the studies gave the group useful information needed in approaching this project.

Juanito Alipio de la Rosa would like to thank Don Jaime Augusto Zobel de Ayala for the sponsorship and Senator Cynthia Villar for additional funding for his MSc SED course 2014-2015.

Maria Francisca Echeverri would like to acknowledge the AA School of Architecture for the scholarship she was awarded to attend SED MArch course 2014-2016 and also COLFUTURO scholarship for her 2014-2016 studies.

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 06 2. Overview 2.1 Site Information 07

Location 07 Weather Data 07

Site History 08 2.2 Building Information 09

Building History 09 Current Building Use 09 3. Outdoor Studies 3.1 Solar Analysis 10 3.2 Wind Analysis 13 4. Indoor Studies 4.1 General Survey 14 4.2 Spaces Studied 15

4.2.1 Library Space Information 18 Field Work 19 Daylight Simulations 22 Thermal Simulations 30

4.2.2 Rear Second Presentation Room Space Information 44 Field Work 45 Daylight Simulations 48 Thermal Simulations 56 4.2.3 SED Office Space Information 68 Field Work 69 Daylight Simulations 70 Thermal Simulations 74 4.2.4 1st Floor, 16 Morwell Space Information 86 Field Work 87 Daylight Simulations 90

Thermal Simulations 100

Indoor Air Quality 110 5. General Conclusion s

113

6. Epilogue

115

7. References

117

8. Appendix

119

5

1. INTRODUCTION This research endeavors to understand and draw valuable lessons from previous urban case studies in London undertaken by the students of the Architectural Association School of Architecture - Sustainable Environmental Design (SED) programme. This forms part of a larger agenda on Refurbishing the City by improving the environmental performance of the buildings or spaces concerned.

The team had to review educational buildings, in particular, the AA School of Architecture, Effra Early Years Centre, Evelyn Grace Academy, and Millennium Primary School. Initial site observations, interviews, and spot measurements were done on each of the schools to gauge how the buildings are performing and if there are new points of interest worth researching on.

Eventually, the team decided to focus on studying the AA School of Architecture for the following reasons: a) the AA School has changed since the previous report as it is now consolidated in one area, whereas previously, it had studios in several locations, b) unlike in the other schools mentioned, all the buildings used by the AA School are refurbished and none of them were originally designed for educational purposes, c) the AA School provides the greatest access to information and to the premises itself, which would allow for a better understanding of the spaces.

These notwithstanding, the group shall not discount the lessons learned from the other reports which would be very helpful in assessing any new study done.

Process-wise, the research is straight-forward, beginning with the fieldwork, analysis of gathered data, analysis of a base case as necessary, simulation runs, and finally the drawing of conclusions.

The fieldwork comprises observation, physical measurement of space, data logger measurements, and conduction of surveys. The analysis of the initial findings leads to proposed solutions which will be tested through parametric simulations. Specific conclusions shall be drawn and where applicable, these will be compared with any useful information from preceding studies to validate or supplement the existing general conclusions.

A similar process will be done for each of the spaces being studied. The group has identified four spaces within the AA School which is of particular interest: a) the AA Library, b) the Rear Second Presentation Room, c) the SED Office, and d) 1st Floor, 16 Morwell. The parametric studies will focus on two things: daylighting and thermal simulations, with the ultimate end of creating conditions where these spaces will reduce energy consumption while keeping the occupants comfortable.

6

FIGURE 1.1 Sectional perspective of the Architectural Association School of Architecture (Source: Wright & Wright Architects)

2. OVERVIEW 2.1. SITE INFORMATION LOCATION British Museum

The AA School of Architecture is located in Bedford Square -- the only remaining Georgian Square in London -- and mainly occupies refurbished Georgian houses and office buildings. It is in Central London, Bloombury District in the Borough of Camden, bounded on the Northeast by Bedford Square and on the Southwest by Morwell Street. Surrounded mostly by midrise buildings, the closest landmark is the British Museum and the nearest major thoroughfares are Tottenham Court Road and Oxford Street.

AA School of Architecture Latitude: 51’31” Longitude: 0’07”

WEATHER DATA For this report, outside weather data is based on the records of Savoy Hill Weather Station (www.wunderground.com), which is the closest station to AA School with the most complete hourly information.

Savoy Hill Weather Station Latitude: 51’51” Longitude: 0’11” As for runs using Meteonorm data, the information is based on the software’s interpolalation for the exact coordinates of the AA School site.

FIGURE 2.1.1 Aerial view of London showing the AA School of Architecture and Savoy Hill weather station (Source: Google Earth)

Figure 2.1.2 illustrates the outside temperature on the site throughout the year. The lowest temperatures are in the months of January and February dropping to as low as -2 °C. The warmest months are June to August, with temperature reaching as high as 32 °C in mid-July.

The adaptive thermal comfort band (EN-15251) plotted for each month shows that for the most part of the year, indoor spaces will have to be warmer than the outdoor temperature to be considered comfortable.

°C

FIGURE 2.1.2 Daily mean temperature, diffuse and direct radiation in London throughout a year (Source: Meteonorm)

7

SITE HISTORY BEDFORD SQUARE Bedford Square is the only remaining original Georgian Square in London.

It has four sides of uniform palace-fronted terraced houses; with stucco faced perimeter centres surrounding a leafy garden. The square was built by the architect Thomas Leverton around 1775 / 1783 during the golden age of domestic architecture in London.

Talks about building a square on the western margins of the Bedford Estate in Bloomsbury started as early as 1763. John Russell, fourth Duke of Bedford, had proposed the creation of ‘Bedford Circus’ in imitation the King’s Circus in Bath. But the duke died in 1771 and it was left to Robert Palmer, the principal agent to the estate who collaborated with William Scott and Robert Grews, to carry out the speculation in association with the builder Thomas Leverton. (Longstaffe-Gowan 2012).

In 1776 the Building Agreements were settled. In 1917 The first independent architectural school in the UK moved into Bedford Square: the Architectural Association School of Architecture.

FIGURE 2.1.3 Bedford Square site plan (Source: Bedford Square: An Architectural Study, Byrne)

Today, Bedford Square remains intact but most of the residential areas are now institutional in use such as schools and offices. Because of architectural and historical significance, many of the buildings in the square are Grade 1 listed buildings under the Statutory List of Buildings of Special Architectural or Historic Interest.

FIGURE 2.1.5 Bedford Square aerial view (Source: Google Earth)

8

FIGURE 2.1.4 Bedford Square plan

2.2 BUILDING INFORMATION BUILDING HISTORY The Architectural Association was founded in 1847 by Robert Kerr and Charles Gray as a result of their discomfort with the traditional teaching methods and programmes in architectural schools. They proposed a new systematic course provided by and for the students.

They merged with the already existing Association of Architectural Draughtsmen and Kerr became the first president from 1847 to 1848. The school was not officially established until 1890, and in 1901 they were already working in the former Royal Architecture Museum. In 1917, they finally moved to their permanent location in Bedford Square.

At the start, the school was located in 34-35 Bedford Square. Eventually it was able to get the back building in Morwell Street, thus developing the students’ studios in 1929. In the 50´s the students were in charge of some additions and refurbishments.

With the introduction of a very important character in the history of the school being the director in 1971, Alvin Boyarsky started the expansion and openness of the AA, welcoming more foreign students and increasing the number of courses taught. This also led the school to disperse in different locations to supply enough space for the demand.

The next drastic change started to happen around the year 2000 when the school decided to start a project to bring all their students back together in the same location. Over the last few years, the school managed to secure a leasehold on more properties, encompassing Nos. 32 to 39 in Bedford Square and Nos. 4 and 16 in Morwell Street.

FIGURE 2.2.1 AA Front Members Room (Source: AA Archives)

FIGURE 2.2.2 AA Rear Second Presentation Room (Source: AA Archives)

CURRENT BUILDING USE Origininally occupying 34-35 Bedford Square, the AA School now occupies a total of 10 buildings: Nos. 32-39 in Bedfrod Square and Nos. 4 and 16 in Morwell Street. All the buildings are refurbished, with the ones along Bedford Square initially being residential and the ones along Morwell being office spaces.

The buildings along Bedford Square are Grade 1 listed and as such, are protected and only minimal intervention is allowed. This, however, did not prevent the spaces inside the school from changing in use. For instance, a lecture hall is now a wood and metal workshop. Additional spaces were also allowed along Morwell, such as the studio above the Rear Second Presentation Room built by the students in 1950’s and is now being used as offices for the faculty.

Some spaces have remarkably withstood the test of time, such as the AA Library, which has kept the same use since the AA moved in.

FIGURE 2.2.3 Old and current images of rooms and spaces at the AA School of Architecture (Source: AA Archives and actual photos by the team)

In summary, below are the buildings and their respective uses.

Bedford Square

No. 32 AA Bookshop, Graduate Studio

No. 33 Membership Office, Graduate Studio

Nos. 34-36 AA Library, Admin. Offices, Cafe, Restaurant,

Front Members Room, Undergrad Studios

No. 37 Photo Library, Cinema

No. 38 Exhibit Office, Exhibit Storage

No. 39 Computing Office Morwell Street

No. 4 Intermediate Studios

No. 16 Graduate Studios, Computer Lab, Materials Shop

9

3. OUTDOOR STUDIES A quick analysis on the outdoor spaces is done to gain a general understanding of the school vicinity and the conditions that may have an impact on the performance of the buildings where the AA School of Architecture is.

As the study will focus on the four spaces previously identified (Library, Rear Second Presentation Room, SED Office, and 1st Floor-16 Morwell), the outdoor studies were done having in mind the respective buildings where they are located: 34-36 Bedford Square and 16 Morwell.

3.1 SOLAR STUDIES The AA School of Architecture is located in buildings orientated to the North-East and South-West. (Figure 3.1.1) Rooms on the North-East facade such as the library look out into Bedford Square, which is an open space with minimal obstruction aside from the tall trees. The spaces along Morwell Street, on the other hand, are between courtyards, a narrow street, and other mid-rise buildings. This condition potentially creates overshadowing, particularly in lower levels of the building.

Aside from the orientation, the team has noted the sky conditions, which is found to be predominantly intermediate, occurring 42% of the time on average throughout the year. (Figure 3.1.2) A clear sunny sky happens 32% of the time and lastly, cloudy sky at 26%. For this reason, subsequent parametric runs were mostly done with the intermediate sky.

predimominant-intermediate sky FIGURE 3.1.2 London sky condition throughout a typical year (Source: Satel-Light) FIGURE 3.1.1 Sun path diagram on plan view (Source: Ecotect)

SUN PATH

September ecotect

FIGURE 3.1.3 Sun path diagram on aerial view (Source: Ecotect)

10

SHADOW RANGE ANALYSIS In addition to the orientation and sky condition, a look at the shadow range throughout the day was conducted to gain information on the extent of the shadows in outdoor spaces and to adjacent buildings.

In December (Figure 3.1.4), when the sun is lower and the shadows are longer, almost all the immediate spaces outside the AA are overshadowed. This gives the team an idea that during winter, there is not enough outdoor surface area that could receive solar radiation and aid in heating the surrounding spaces.

In March (Figure 3.1.5), the shadow range is somehow ideal, allowing for more sun patches on surfaces. Building surfaces on higher floors also receive less shadowing from surrounding buildings.

FIGURE 3.1.4 Shadow range from 9 AM until 5 PM every 30 minutes in December (Source: Ecotect)

In June (Figure 3.1.6), where the sun is highest, the shadows are also minimal. The outdoor areas are generally brighter this time, with just enough shadowing on spaces immediately outside the buildings. This shows that transitional areas, even during the summer, have enough shading that could probably reduce instances of overheating, Moving closer into the center of Bedford Square, some areas do not receive shadow at all and on a clear sunny day, may cause some doscomfort due to overheating.

Overall, most of the outdoor spaces immediately surrounding the buildings of the AA School of Architecure are overshadowed throughout the year.

FIGURE 3.1.5 Shadow range from 9 AM until 5 PM every 30 minutes in March (Source: Ecotect)

FIGURE 3.1.6 Shadow range from 9 AM until 5 PM every 30 minutes in June (Source: Ecotect)

11

Winter Sols,ce (December 21) Equinoxes (March/September 21)

12:00 PM

3:00 PM

9:00 AM

12:00 PM

3:00 PM

9:00 AM

12:00 PM

3:00 PM

Summer Sols,ce (June 21)

9:00 AM

FIGURE 3.1.7 Sun patch studies showing incident solar radiation on exterior surfaces(Source: Ecotect)

12

3.2 WIND ANALYSIS Wind rose diagrams generated from Ecotect show that in London, the prevailing winds are from the South-West. From June to November, winds are mostly from the West and from December to May, from the SouthWest. The latter also has stronger winds, mostly between 10-15 km/h. (Figures 3.2.1a to 3.2.1d) Running a CFD analysis on the site model, the flow vector (Figure 3.2.2) shows how the wind is redirected from South-West to the South-East by the obstruction on site. In general, the wind experienced outside the AA School is from the South-East (St. Gile’s Hotel) and goes towards NorthWest following the facade of the school buildings.

FIGURE 3.2.1a March to May prevailing winds (Source: Climate Consultant 5.5)

FIGURE 3.2.1b June to August prevailing winds FIGURE 3.2.1c September to November prevailing winds

FIGURE 3.2.1d December to February prevailing winds

As for the air flow rate (Figure 3.2.3), the buildings facing Bedford Square can experience around 2.5 to 3 m/s. However, the courtyards and Morwell Street have very minimal air flow rate with just around 0.5 m/s.

FIGURE 3.2.2 CFD Analysis - Flow Vector (Source: Ecotect and Winair)

FIGURE 3.2.3 CFD Analysis - Air Flow Rate (Source: Ecotect and Winair)

13

4. INDOOR STUDIES 4.1 GENERAL SURVEY An online survey was initially conducted to get a general feeling of the occupants of the AA School. Through the help of the Office of the Director, the survey was emailed to students, tutors, administrative and maintenance staff. A total of 99 respondents were accounted for, representing 52 cities from 30 countries. Eighty-four percent of the respondents are students.

Some have opted to name the possible sources of discomfort, with low air movement being the most common. This is closely followed by discomfort through temperature variance in a space and then by heat from equipment. However, the AA seems to have relatively good adaptive opportunities with 63% saying they have access to operable windows, 43% can control the window blinds or shade and 40% with control to interior doors. At the bottom is clothing, where only 2% use it to adapt to the space and feel more comfortable.

The access to adaptive opportunities is still perhaps the reason for a high overall satisfaction at the AA, with almost 80% generally feeling satisfied with the physical environment.

Interestingly, the same survey got some comments, mostly complaints on personal experiences with their respective spaces. From heating to poor air quality, to lack of space and even body odor, many isolated cases have surfaced. Some that are worth investigating on were pursued by the team.

FIGURE 4.1.1 Result of online survey on AA Environmental Comfort Satisfaction

14

4.2 SPACES STUDIED The Architectural Association School of Architecture occupies 10 buildings, each of which has many interesting spaces whose performance can be subject to the team’s research. To keep the focus, the team chose four spaces with the highest potential to give significant new information. They are as follows:

AA LIBRARY The Library is one of the most popular spaces at the AA, as attested by the team’s survey where it ranked second favorite space, next only to the studios. The team has chosen to study the Library because it is a school staple and a place where most of the students and even tutors go to many times during the year.

REAR SECOND PRESENTATION ROOM Of the spaces within the AA, the Rear Second Presentation Room is among the most robust in terms of flexibility. It is normally used for jury presentations and as studio for the undergraduate students. Often, it is also used for exhibitis, seminars, and even for parties. Of particular interest is how people perceive the space as the uses change.

1ST FLOOR 16 MORWELL SED OFFICE

REAR SECOND PRESENTATION ROOM

SED OFFICE Built right on top the the Rear Second Presentation Room, the SED Office (and the adjacent faculty offices) used to be a studio built and used by the AA students themeselves. Its construction, position, size, and current use is curious and renders it different from the other rooms within the AA. Furthermore, a comparison may be done with a previous SED report where this space was also studied.

1ST FLOOR, 16 MORWELL

AA LIBRARY

FIGURE 4.2.1 Aerial view of the AA premises showing the four indoor spaces chosen for the study

Home to SED and EmTech Programmes, 1st Floor of 16 Morwell is the space most familiar to the team. The main interest in studying this space is in the fact that it is located in the only building within the AA premises that is air-conditioned. The behaviour of the occupants here is expected to be different from those of the other three spaces aforementioned.

The general direction for this research is to check on the comfort level of the occupants and reduce energy consumption without sacrificing that comfort. Daylight and thermal studies were conducted and where deemed necessary, other tests were done such as on indoor air quality.

15

16

AA LIBRARY

Rendering condition: June 21, 6:30 AM

17

4.2.1 AA LIBRARY GENERAL INFORMATION Two areas of the library were subjected to the team’s research: the entrance where the programme books are and the main reading area where most of the books are. Collectively, the total floor area of these two spaces is 143 m2 and the volume is 619 m3.

The space has North-East/South-West orientation, like the rest of the buildings at the Architectural Association.

The average occupancy is 20-25 persons, usually peaking after lunchtime until around 6:00 PM. The opening hours is from 10:00 AM to 9:00 PM on weekdays and only until 5:00 PM on Saturdays. It is closed for 2 weeks in December and 1 week in January for the Christmas break, 3 weeks in April for the Easter break, and 1 week in August.

The activities are generally sedentary: reading, studying, consulting, and browsing the computer.

Eight radiators keep the space warm and if it were free-running, a mean indoor temperature of 23 °C was computed.

FIGURE 4.2.1.1 3D model of the AA Library including furniture

FIGURE 4.2.1.2 AA Library floor plan

FIGURE 4.2.1.4 AA Library section

daily

weekly

annually

Mon-Sat 10:00 AM-9:00 PM

2 weeks Dec-Jan 18 days April 1 week August

20-25 PERSONS

consulting

ACTIVITIES

reading

studying

FIGURE 4.2.1.5 AA Library general information: schedule, occupancy, activities and physical description

18

23 °C 8 RADIATORS

calculated MInT

area: 143m2 volume: 619m3 window to floor ratio: 55% Floor to ceiling height: 6.41 X 4.32 (main space) 8.44 X 4.32 Orientation: N-E / S-W

4.2.1.2 FIELD WORK SURVEY Two surveys were conducted in the Library: a point-in-time survey for the occupants and a general survey for the librarians.

During the the point-in-time survey, it was a rainy day with an outside temperature of 13 째C and inside temperature of 26.5 째C. After having computed the adaptive thermal comfort band which was between 2026 째C, the team was expecting that the respondents must feel warm and would prefer to be slightly cooler. The survey result confirmed the assumption with almost 70% feeling slightly warm to warm and 40% wanting to feel slightly cooler. The team also noted that the comments of the occupants are mostly about the spatial arrangement in the room, it being too cramped.

In the general survey, the librarians were aligned in saying that in warm weather, the library is occassionally too hot and in the cold weather, it is occasionally too cold. Also common is the comment that the thermostat is controlled by other people, hence causing a bit of inconvenience. Interestingly, they both explained how the occupants adapt to the space to feel more comfortable, primarily through the use or control of the windows.

Lastly, the team found the library to be relatively dark so it was somehow surprising when only 7% of those interviewed accounted for dissatisfaction with the daylight.

FIGURE 4.2.1.6 AA Library point-in-time and general survey results

19

AA LIBRARY SPOT MEASUREMENTS

ILLUMINANCE, TEMPERATURE AND HUMIDITY TEMPERATURE

DATE: October 29th 2014 10:00 am SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE TEMP: 13°C

DATE: October 29th 2014 16:00 pm SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE TEMP: 13°C

RELATIVE HUMIDITY

ARTIFICIAL LIGHT ON

NO ARTIFICIAL LIGHT ON DATE: October 30th 2014 09:00 am SKY CONDITION: Intermediate OUSIDE Illuminance: 16500 lx

20

DATE: October 29th 2014 10:00 am SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE Illuminance: 10000

ARTIFICIAL LIGHT ON DATE: October 29th 2014 16:00 pm SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE Illuminance: 5800 LX

DATE: October 29th 2014 10:00 am SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE RH: 94%

DATE: October 29th 2014 16:00 pm SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE RH: 94%

THE AA LIBRARY IN PICTURES A look into the library during a typical day says a lot on how the space is actually being used. Aside from direct observation, the team also took photos of the two areas in the library that are being studied.

After having gained access to the library before the opening hours, the team has observed that even with the lights off, the space is generally well-lit and reading without the use of artificial light should not be a problem. However, once the library is open at 10:00 AM, all the lights will be switched on and will remain so until closing time at night.

Within the first hour of opening, there would be around 4-6 people occupying the reading area. However, most of them are reading not from books but from their respective laptops. Some chose to sit next to the window and others near the shelves opposite the windows. There seems to be a unwritten rule of sitting as far as possible from other people until all the spaces start to fill up as the day gets busier.

After lunch, the occupancy peaks and there is not much choice for people to sit based on preference. In terms of clothing, the people are dressed down to their T-shirts, signifying that the space is warm or has become warmer. By the entrance is where most of the browsing and reading happens, usually with the programme books. In the main reading area, however, most people are working on their laptops. The team has also observed that ratio between persons and laptops is almost 1:1, and many of the occupants are not reading any books at all.

Come night-time, the number of occupants start to dwindle. The artificial lighting’s use becomes more evident. This is further supplemented by the laptops, where individuals could adjust the brightness of their screens as necessary. With this, the team assumes that the required illuminance for reading areas may no longer hold true as most people now use electronic gadgets with their own lighting.

FIGURE 4.2.1.7 The AA Library in pictures throughout a typical day in November

21

DAYLIGHTING STUDIES BASE CASE Good daylight access and adequate illuminance levels are the most important features of a space such as the library. As identified in the base case studies (without furniture), the library has very low daylighting all year round and of interest to the group is why it was not perceived so by its users and how its actual conditions were interfering its performance.

AA LIBRARY: DAYLIGHT FACTOR

The stereographic diagram in Figure 4.2.1.10 shows that the main façade (North-East orientation) is not overshadowed in the morning but because of the orientation, it does not receive direct sunlight after 10:00 AM. Satel-Light information (Figure 4.2.1.11) also confirms that there is little direct solar radiation for most of the months except some time in the morning from March to December, and during these hours, the library is not yet open.

1.5% recommended minimum

The daylight factor is good up to 3.25 meters from North-East facade window. Beyond which, it goes below 1.5% which is the minimum recommended value for libraries. The South-West window facing the courtyard also does not reach the recommended values. (Figure 4.2.1.8) As for illuminance during summer, the lux levels are good for up to 2.5 meters from the windows but they considerably decrease as one moves deeper into the space where the bookshelves are. In winter, however, in no case does the illuminance reach the minimum 300 lux throughout the day. (Figure 4.2.1.9)

FIGURE 4.2.1.8 Base Case AA Library daylight factor

QUESTION: “Is the performance of the library optimum for the activities that take place in it?”

AA LIBRARY: ILLUMINANCE FIGURE 4.2.1.10 Base Case AA Library daylight factor (Source: Ecotect)

300 lux recommended minimum

FIGURE 4.2.1.9 Base Case AA Library illuminance

FIGURE 4.2.1.11 Base Case AA Library daylight factor (Source: Satel-Light)

22

SUN PATCH STUDY A sun patch study in the library shows how little the solar penetration is in the space.

9:00 AM

12:30 PM

3:00 PM

Even if there is direct solar radiation at the North-East facade in the morning, the simulation shows that it does not penetrate the interior of the library during occupied hours. The main reading area, then, enjoys daylighting without direct sunlight and this can be ideal especially for prolonged reading hours where direct sun can be a source of discomfort.

Aside from maintaining comfort when working or reading, the lack of direct sunlight may also help keep the books is good condition. The downside is that the illuminance in the area is low.

The other side of the library with South-West orientation does get some sun patches but the use of this space is rather transient so it does not affect much the users.

JUNE 21

During the winter, almost the entire library does not have any sun patches, curtailing any potential solar heat gain in the interior space.

SEPTEMBER/MARCH 21

DECEMBER 21

FIGURE 4.2.1.13 AA Library sun patch study (Source: Ecotect)

23

PARAMETRIC STUDIES FOR DAYLIGHTING TABLE 4.2.1 Illuminance and daylight factor standards (Source: Daylight Design of Buildings by Nick Baker)

With the AA Library showing rather unsatisfactory daylighting based on standards (Table 4.2.1), it is deemed necessary that team explore some ways to ameliorate the situation. Given that the Library is inside a UK listed building, the challenge is to come up with proposals with minimal intervention.

ACTIVITY

ILLUMINANCE (Lux)

MINIMUM DAYLIGHT FACTOR %

AVERAGE DAYLIGHT FACTOR %

Three parametric runs (Figure 4.2.1.15) were eventually done to see how much improvement there will be:

Offices

300-500

1

5

Computer lab

300

Libraries stacks

300-500

1

3

Libraries reading

300-500

1.5

6

CASE 1 Actual furniture at 0.2 reflectance Since the base case was done without any furniture, the team wanted to find out how the actual furniture pieces are affecting the performance of the space.

AA School Key Plan - Library

CASE 2 Furniture at 0.8 reflectance, additional reflective doors on bookshelves Still with the furniture, the team wanted to find out by how much the improvement will be if they are highly reflective (from 0.2 to 0.8 reflectance).

Furthermore, it is proposed that the mesh doors for the bookshelves be replaced with reflective panels.

CASE 3 Furniture at 0.8 reflectance, furniture near the window removed Lastly, drawing inspiration from the AA Archives photo where the reading area used to be by the window and there were no deep shelves and computer tables obstructing the light, the team decided to look at a scenario without any furniture by the window.

ILLUMINANCE After doing the runs (Figure 4.2.1.16), some improvements have been noted. In general, CASE 3 has shown the most improvement, bringing higher illuminance deeper into the space.

In a summer morning (June, 10:00 AM), an illuminance of 300 lux can be achieved up to 2 meters from the window in CASE 3, whereas in CASE 1, this occurs only within 1 meter from the window. In the summer afternoon, the minimum as per standards is not reached but still, CASE 3 is the one with the highest illumination.

2. Furniture at 0.8 reflectance (tables and book shelves with reflective doors)

1. Actual furniture at 0.2 reflectance

WALLS CEILING FLOOR FURNITURE

During the equinoxes, good illuminance is still achievable but in winter, none of the cases seem to be of significant help to the generally dark condition of the space. Here, artificial lighting will definitely be needed most of the time.

BASE CASE*

1. ACTUAL FURNITURE

2. HIGH-­‐REFLECTANCE FURNITURE

3. NO SHELVES

50 80 20 -­‐

50 80 20

50 80 20

50 80 20

20

80

80

* Base case study-­‐no furniture / values given for Radiance

FIGURE 4.2.1.15 Illuminance and daylight factor standards

24

3. Furniture at 0.8 reflectance, No furniture by the window

3pm

june

10am

sep

300 LUX MIN.

dec

300 LUX MIN.

300 LUX MIN.

FIGURE 4.2.1.16 AA Library illuminance parametric study for June, September and December at 10:00 AM and 3:00 PM

25

PARAMETRIC STUDIES FOR DAYLIGHTING ILLUMINANCE The study focused on the actual space and how the furniture could affect its performance. The actual furniture, brown wooden tables and chairs, and the open book shelves that cover most of the walls, absorb most of the light that reaches them.

If the furniture was instead replaced by white high-reflectance surfaces, the overall illuminance will increase as by as much as 100 lux in several points.

Also, if the furniture pieces near the front faรงade that make the windows deeper were removed, the overall performance of the space would be much improved. This is better illustrated by the false color rendering (Figure 4.2.1.17), where improvement is evident from Case 1 to Case 3; illuminance increased by around 100 lux at the middle of the room and by 50 lux at the rear.

1. Actual Furniture (0.20)

2. White reflective Furniture (0.80)

3. White reflective Furniture (0.80) and no obstruction/shelves near the front windows FIGURE 4.2.1.17 Illuminance and daylight factor standards

26

PARAMETRIC STUDIES FOR DAYLIGHTING DAYLIGHT FACTOR The minimum recommended daylight factor for libraries is 1.5% for the reading area and 1% for the book stacks. The team finds the reading area as more important so the aim is to bring the daylight factor as close to 1.5% and also as deep as possible into the space.

The base case, which does not have any furniture, exhibits the best scenario in terms of depth as 1.5% daylight factor is achieved up to 3.4 meters from the window. (Figure 4.2.1.18) Just by putting the furniture (Cases 1 and 2), the ideal daylight factor is achieved only in the first 2.5 meters from the North-East window facing Bedford Square.

Case 3 is again the most ideal scenario because it brings the daylight factor deeper into the space similar to the base case without furniture.

Secondly, the drop in daylight factor is more gradual as compared to Cases 1 and 2. (Figure 4.2.1.19)

1.5% DF

As for the browsing area near the entrance with windows facing SouthWest towards the courtyard, the daylight factor remains unsatisfactory, having less than 1% in all cases.

FIGURE 4.2.1.18 AA Library daylight factor parametric studies

Base Case

1. Actual Furniture

2. White high-reflectance furniture

3. No furniture near front windows, white high- reflectance furniture

FIGURE 4.2.1.19 AA Library daylight factor parametric study rendering (Source: Radiance)

27

AA Library Rendering 1 | conditions: June 21, 8:00 AM

AA Library Rendering 4 | conditions: June 21, 4:00 PM

28

AA Library Rendering 2 | conditions: section, June 21, 7:30 AM

AA Library Rendering 3 | conditions: June 21, 6:30 AM

DAYLIGHTING CONCLUSION For all the spaces, the team chose to run Useful Daylight Illuminance (UDI) between 8:00 AM and 6:00 PM, which is a good average of the daylight periods for London in a year and also represents the time the school spaces are being used. The results are given in % of space with illuminance levels in the 3 ranges (a. <100 lux, b. 100-2000 lux, and c. >2000 lux) at least 50% of the time, taking into consideration active occupant behavior. This gives a more conclusive idea on the overall performance of the space in terms of daylight throughout the year.

1 0

For the library, it can be concluded that the main space (1) has better daylighting conditions than the smaller room (0); the former having a base case UDI between 100-2000 lux at 83% and the latter, only 65%.

For the case studies, the spaces can also be compared using the UDI between 100-2000 lux. Comparing the performance of the main space (1) in the three cases, Case 3 has the highest with 83%. This is an improvement by 10% from Case 1, which is the actual condition.

Although Case 3 has improved the condition in the main library area, it did not help much in the the smaller room, where the only improvement is the increase of UDI >2000 by 2%.

AA School Key Plan - Library

1 2 3

Even with the improvements shown by the case studies, they only brought the mean illuminance and daylight factor as close to the standards as possible. And from the standard’s point of view, the AA Library can still be considered a relatively dark space. The team could have gone further in coming up with more solutions but going back to the survey, daylighting was not at all a major concern for the occupants. The question leads to whether the occupants or the standards should be satisfied and the answer is obvious.

FIGURE 4.2.1.20 AA Library Useful Daylight Illuminance study

Standards do act as guides for ideal conditions but with the Library having areas below 300 lux and 1.5% daylight factor and the people are not complaining, it can be said that occupants can still work well in conditions that do not meet the ‘standards.’ Furthermore, the change in user behavior, particularly the prevalent use of laptops in the library, may require less need for daylighting after all.

FIGURE 4.2.1.21 AA Library daylight factor comparison involving UDI

29

THERMAL STUDIES

AA Library

The indoor temperature follows the outside in terms of trend but in colder days, it does not drop as much. In the other spaces studied, an outside temperature of less than 15°C tends to bring the indoor temperature below the comfort zone. In the case of the library, even with a drop in temperature to below 10°C, the inside temperature is still within comfort range.

Even on a Sunday, when the space is unoccupied, the indoor condition remains good.

Looking closely on another day (Figure 4.2.1.23), the impact of occupancy on the indoor temperature is evident, even pushing it close to the upper limit of the comfort zone.

QUESTION: “To what extent can the (comfortable) temperature of the library be maintained without conventional heating?”

FIGURE 4.2.1.22 AA Library general thermal data for a typical week

FIGURE 4.2.1.23 AA Library thermal data for a typical day

30

St.

ell rw

31 October – 6 November 2014 Indoor Temperature and Humidity from Data-logger Outdoor Temperature and Humidity from www.wunderground.com

Mo

Making use of the data loggers, the team tracked how the AA Library performs in terms of temperature during a typical week. It was the first week of November, rather rainy and with outside temperature ranging from as high as 20°C to as low as 8°C. People come and go but during busy hours, there are around 20 to 30 occupants. The radiators were on for most of the day, usually from 6:30 AM to 10:00 PM. With all these external and internal factors, the space managed to fare well as the indoor temperature stayed within the comfort band throughout the week. (Figure 4.2.1.22)

Bedford Square

AA School Key Plan - Library

ANALYSIS ON IMPACT OF BOOKS It appeared very interesting to the team that in the data loggers, the temperature in the AA Library never dropped as much as in the other places studied. The group hypothesized that this occurrence might be attributed to the presence of many books in the space.

TABLE 4.2.2 Thermal Properties of Wood (assumed for paper) (Source: Introduction to Architectural Science by Szokolay)

Thermal Property

Value

Conductivity

0.7 W/m K

Density

600 kg/m3

Specific Heat

1350 J/kg K

By looking at them not as books but as wood -- paper being a product of it (Table 4.2.2), the group saw that even though wood is not recognized for its insulation properties, it does have some thermal capacity (thermal mass).

AA Library Key Plan

Doing field work with a surface thermometer and a thermal camera (Figure 4.2.1.25), it was found that in the bookcases located adjacent to the exterior walls, the temperature difference between the interior wall surface and the books was about 3K. Another observation was that the same temperature (24째C) was registered for both the books and the shelves near the walls connecting to other interior spaces.

Lastly, there is also a temperature difference of a little over 1K between the books and indoor air temperature, with the books being slightly warmer.

It can be inferred that the books near the windows are acting as heat storage of the space, preventing the temperature from outside to significantly affect the interior.

On the other hand, the books on the rest of the walls might be performing as a small layer of insulation.

Moreover, the books also take up space, hence reducing the volume of air the needs to be heated.

FIGURE 4.2.1.24 AA Library temperature diagram showing performance of books in a space

FIGURE 4.2.1.25 Thermal pictures of books and shelves at two different locations in the AA

31

32

January

March

February

April

May

June

August

July

September

October

November

December

40

Comfort Band

35 30 25 20 15 10

Library Temperature

5

Outside Temperature Internal Condi@ons for TAS

Light Appliances 15.00 W/m2 Sensible Gains 12.50 W/m2

0 -­‐5

Latent Gains 7.50 W/m2

24

Equipment Gains 4.51 W/m2

FIGURE 4.2.1.26 AA Library year-long Base Case analysis and internal conditions for TAS

THERMAL STUDIES

Annual Heat Gains

Kwh/m2

BASE CASE

16

It is seen from the Base Case analysis (Figure 4.2.1.26) that the Library, being one of the most occupied and visited places at the AA, has a tendency to overheat many times throughout the year.

14 12

Annual Heat Losses

Kwh/m2

0

-­‐8 -­‐12 -­‐14

InfiltraEon r

er No

ve m be De r ce m be r

ob

Oc t

be

st

em

gu

pt

Se

ly Ju

ne Ju

ay

M

ri l Ap

br

ry

ua ry

M ar ch

-­‐16

Fe

be to

be r

Oc

em

us

pt

Se

Au g

Ju

ne Ju

ay

The space has minimum ventilation rate as the occupants do not seem to maximize the adaptive opportunity of opening the windows as necessary.

nu a

Occupancy Gains Equipment Gains

The space performs somehow parallel to the outside in terms of temperature trend so it also gets cold for several months during the year. This perhaps influenced the School maintenance to use conventional heating at regular schedules to keep the space within the comfort zone.

-­‐10

Ja

LighEng Gains

M

Ap r

ch ar

ry

M

ua

ry

br

Fe

Ja nu a

Solar Gains

No r ve m be De r ce m be r

-­‐6

2 t

-­‐4

ly

4

-­‐2

6

il

0

8

Au

10

Opaque Elements Glazing Elements

In warmer months, solar gains are the biggest source of heat but in colder months (November to February), it is dwarfed by lighting gains. On the other hand, heat losses are primarily attributed to infiltration and glazing elements. (Figure 4.2.1.27)

FIGURE 4.2.1.27 AA Library monthly breakdown of heat gains and losses for Base Case

33

THERMAL STUDIES WINTER ANALYSIS In an attempt to improve the indoor conditions without having to rely on conventional heating, the following cases (Figure 4.2.1.28) were studied using data from an average winter week in January: CASE 1 The first run was done to test how the space works without occupancy.

With the occupants being one of the main sources of heat gain, it becomes evident that without them during cold months, it will be difficult for the space to be within the comfort standards without intervention. With no occupancy, the indoor temperature drops with up to 4K difference from the base case.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

In really cold days (10°C and below), the average occupancy may not be enough to warm the interior space.

CASE 2 Towards improving the temperature of the space without going directly to mechanical systems, the first viable solution viewed was changing the existing glazing from single to double glazing.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

Although the improvement is not drastic (only 1-2K), it allowed the space to be within the comfort zone even if the outside temperature is around 10°C.

CASE 3 The next solution that could be done on the space is the use of night shutters, being a common feature in many European countries.

After being applied to the space, it is seen that the temperature does not rise much but the shutters do help in slowing down the drop in temperature during the night.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

CASE 4 By combining both options (night shutters and double glazing), the space sees the best improvement in indoor temperatures for an average winter week.

Even the coldest days manage to reach the lower limit of the comfort band.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.1.28 AA Library thermal simulations for an average winter week

34

THERMAL STUDIES WINTER CONCLUSION This graph shows how different each case is performing and how it actually keeps on improving (Figure 4.2.1.29).

Because the space is a protected building due to its age and architectural significance, the amount of changes and solutions that can actually be done are very limited. Furthermore, any alteration should be done quickly as the space is constantly used throughout the day for most of the year.

Double glazing and night shutters, which provided the most improvement, do not intervene much with the architectural integrity of the building and they are also relatively easy to implement.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.1.29 AA Library thermal simulations for an average winter week - consolidated

Even though the proposals presented here are not drastic refurbishments, they represent an enormous amount of improvement in the thermal performance of the space, only requiring mechanical systems use on days below 10°C and only during the early morning hours.

35

THERMAL STUDIES SUMMER ANALYSIS Using data from an average summer week in July, four cases were also studied (Figure 4.2.1.30) to see how each parameter would affect the performance of the space.

CASE 1 10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

During summer, it is generally warm but the indoor temperature of the library can drop by as much 3K if unoccupied. Even so, the temperature is still considerably high to be in the comfort zone.

CASE 2 Just by the appropriate use of the existing windows by the users, the general temperature may be lowered enough to achieve very comfortable levels during occupied hours. However, at night, the indoor temperature still follows closely the outside temperature with just an average difference of 4K.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

CASE 3 Changing the glazing from single to double not only helps during the cold months but also in summer, where it smoothens the temperature fluctuation, preventing drastic drops even at night time.

CASE 4 Adding the night shutters helps take this effect a little further. From the graph showing the use of both night shutters and double glazing, it can be seen that the AA Library can sustain comfortable indoor temperature for most of the week, whether occupied or not.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.1.30 AA Library thermal simulations for an average summer week

36

THERMAL STUDIES SUMMER CONCLUSION The AA Library, being part of a structure built in the 1800’s, was not intended to use mechanical systems for its cooling.

Back then, it was evident that the usual way to achieve likeable temperatures in a space was through passive techniques. The simulations show that this is still true, as in the case of just opening the windows and having significant effect on indoor conditions.

The smart use and operation of windows is one of the most important aspects of adaptive oportunity, which people may tend to forget. Only by the appropiate use of them can comfortable temperatures be achieved during the occupied hours.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

The existing wondows at the library are operable and will just have to be used as necessary.

FIGURE 4.2.1.31 AA Library thermal simulations for an average summer week - consolidated

37

38

Library; Night Shutters, Double Glazing, Operable Windows.

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

40 35

Comfort Band

30 25 20 15 10

Library Temperature

5

Outside Temperature

0 -­‐5

24

FIGURE 4.2.1.32 AA Library year-long analysis for improved case using night shutters, double glazing and operable window

THERMAL SIMULATIONS

Annual Heat Gains

Kwh/m2

IMPROVED CASE

18 16 14 12

Kwh/m2

10

0

8

-­‐2

6

-­‐4

4

-­‐6

-­‐12 -­‐14

Ju

ne Ju

ay

M

ly Au gu st Se

pt em be r Oc to be r No ve m be r De ce m be r

Equipment Gains

InfiltraEon il

-­‐18

Ap r

LighEng Gains

y br ua ry

M ar ch

-­‐16

Ja nu ar

Solar Gains Occupancy Gains

Annual Heat Losses

Fe

Ju ly Au gu st Se

pt em be r Oc to be r No ve m be r De ce m be r

ne Ju

ay M

Ap r

Ja nu

0

il

-­‐8 -­‐10

ar y Fe br ua ry

M ar ch

2

Comparing the annual graph of the base case with this one that contains the proposals (night shutters, double glazing, operable windows), the improvement in performance is evident: during the cold months, more hours are achieving the comfort zone; in warm months, the amount of overheating is significantly decreased.

Opaque Elements Glazing Elements

FIGURE 4.2.1.33 AA Library monthly breakdown of heat gains and losses

39

Library; Thermal Conclusions January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

December

November

40 35

Comfort Band

40

30

35

25

30

20

25

15

20

10

15

Library Temperature

5

10

0

5

Outside Temperature

-­‐5

0

Ac/h .5-­‐1 ac/h Winter

30

.5-­‐1 ac/h Winter

2.5-­‐28 ac/h Summer

FIGURE 4.2.1.35 AA Library year-long thermal performance analysis - conclusion

THERMAL STUDIES CONCLUSION In the improved case, taking into consideration the number of hours that would absolutely require assisted heating during the year allows the space to have a much better performance. A free running status is achieved for a significant part of the year and the annual heat load is decreased from 12.73 Kwh/m2 (base case) to 9.92 Kwh/m2 (improved case).

Relating the results to the occupancy of the space, it is noted that in winter, the Library will need at least 16-17 occupants to maintain the ideal indoor temperature. In summer, if the space has more than 40 occupants, the overheating issue might start manifesting itself again.

2

Improved 9.92

1

Kwh/m2

Base Case 12.73

0

2

4

6

8

10

FIGURE 4.2.1.36 AA Library annual heat load requirement (in Kwh/m2.)

40

Winter Winter

20 20

40 40 35 35 30 30 25 25 20 20

15 15

15 15

10 10

10 10

5 5

5 5

40 40 35 35 30 30 25 25

12

Kwh/m2

0 0

14

1

3

5

7

9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

0 0

Summer Summer

1

3

5

7

9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

Outside 5 occupants 10 occupants 20 occupants Outside 0 occupants 3 occupants 12 occupants

50 occupants 40 occupants 30 occupants 32 o ccupants

24 o ccupants

17 occupants

FIGURE 4.2.1.37 AA Library occupant density changes for average summer and winter days

THERMAL STUDIES CONCLUSION Hours

800

The AA Library, after the proposed use of night shutters, double glazing and operable windows, has demosnstated a significant increase of occupied hours within the comfort zone (Figure 4.2.1.38).

Amount of Hours per month

700

This improved case also show how much overheating (pegged at above 28°C) is reduced in the space, whether occupied or not. In the base case, 18% of occupied hours in a year experiences overheating but in the improved case, this is reduced to 0.60%. (Figure 4.2.1.39)

600 500 400

As for the heating requirement (which is set to prevent the space from going below 18°C), considering the space alone would necessitate heating for 36% of the total number of hours in a year. However, if the heating were to be matched to occupied hours, it will only be needed in 4% of the total number of hours in a year and this translates to significant energy savings.

300 200 100 0

Occupied Hours within the Comfort Band Improved Case

Occupied Hours within the Comfort Band Base Case

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

FIGURE 4.2.1.38 AA Library graph showing improvement in occupied hours within the comfort band after intervention

Base Case Overheating

22% Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating.

(Above 28°C)

Base Case/Improved Case Heating Requirement

Percentage of hours in a year the space requires heating.

(Below 18°C)

18%

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating and is occupied. (Above 28°C)

100%

Total percentage of hours a year.

36% 4% Percentage of hours in a year the space requires heating and is occupied. (Below 18°C)

100%

Total percentage of hours a year.

Improved Case Overheating

1.62%

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating.

(Above 28°C)

0.60%

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating and is occupied. (Above 28°C)

100%

Total percentage of hours a year.

FIGURE 4.2.1.39 AA Library graph showing occupant-matched heating requirement and reduction in overheating hours

41

42

REAR SECOND PRESENTATION ROOM

43

4.2.2 REAR SECOND PRESENTATION ROOM GENERAL INFORMATION The Rear Second Presentation Room (RSPR), like the Library, is one the of places where students from different programmes go to. This multi-purpose space has an area of 149 m2 and a volume of 541 m3 . The space has a South-West/North-East orientation.

The occupancy ranges from 10 up to 100 persons. Except when used as a studio for the undergraduate students, it has no permanent schedule of occupancy. It can be booked anytime between 10:00 AM - 10:00 PM from Monday to Saturday. It is closed during Christmas, Easter and summer breaks.

The activities are as diverse as the following: lectures, seminars, workshops, meetings, exhibits, parties, jury presentation, and many others.

A total of 9 radiators keep the space warm when necessary. A mean indoor temperature of 27 째C was computed, assuming it were free-running.

(Figure 4.2.2.4)

FIGURE 4.2.2.1Rear Second Presentation Room floor plan

FIGURE 4.2.2.2 Rear Second Presentation Room section

FIGURE 4.2.2.3 Rear Second Presentation Room 3D model

daily

weekly

annually

area_149.44 m2 volume: 540.97 m3 SEMINAR

Mon-Sat 09:00 AM -10:00 PM

2 WEEK DEC-JAN 18 DAYS APRIL 1 WEEK AUGUST

10-100 PERSON

WORKSHOP

EVENTS

ACTIVITIES

LECTURE

9 radiators

FIGURE 4.2.2.4 Rear Second Presentation Room general information: schedule, occupancy, activities and physical description

44

17.3 째C Free-running MInT

window to floor ratio: 43% floor to ceiling height: 7.85 m x 3.62 m orientation: S-W / N-E

FIELD WORK SURVEY A point-in-time survey was made during the AA Open Week, where prospective students came to learn about the AA School. As the activity is transient in nature, the respondents were mostly visitors (students and parents) with little expectations on the conditions of the space.

It was a mostly-sunny day with an outside temperaure of 17 째C and an inside temperature of 24.2 째C. This was well within the comfort band of 21.4 to 27.4 째C but since it was already almost November, it can be considered a relatively warm day. This was attested by a good number of people, around 80% in fact, who were feeling slightly warm to hot. Consequently, around 75% expressed that they would prefer to feel rather neutral.

The group believes that familiarity with the space has an impact on the general comfort of the occupants in the sense that they know what to expect and henceforth would know how to behave, what to wear, etc.

In this point-in-time survey for instance, the team has interviewed a mother and daughter from Sweden who were expecting London to be already cold that time of the year. They were relatively dressed well for the cold, only to find out they would be in a room with temperature above 24 째C. And so they felt hot, not to mention the fact that they were from Scandinavian region.

In terms of other factors affecting comfort, satisfaction is rather high: 75% for air quality, 84% for visual comfort, 100% for daylight, and 83% for noise level. (Figure 4.2.2.5) This survey points out that at this time of the year, transient occupants find the Rear Second Presentation Room relatively comfortable, except for the temperature which can be much warmer than expected.

FIGURE 4.2.2.5 Rear Second Presentation Room point-in-time satisfaction survey

45

REAR SECOND PRESENTATION ROOM SPOT MEASUREMENTS ILLUMINANCE AND TEMPERATURE

ILLUMINANCE Rear Second Presentation Room Spot Measurements.

TEMPERATURE

TEMPERATURE

NO ARTIFICIAL LIGHT DATE: October 28th 2014 10:30 am SKY CONDITION: Intermediate OUSIDE TEMP: 17°C

46

DATE: October 28th 2014 16:30 pm SKY CONDITION: Intermediate OUSIDE TEMP: 17°C

DATE: November 3rd 2014 09:30 am SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE ILLUMINANCE: 10000 LX

DATE: October 28th 2014 09:30 am SKY CONDITION: Intermediate OUSIDE ILLUMINANCE: 16500 LX

DATE: November 3rd 2014 16:30 pm SKY CONDITION: Intermediate OUSIDE ILLUMINANCE: 8700 LX

THE REAR SECOND PRESENTATION ROOM IN PICTURES Probably one of the most flexible spaces at the AA School is the Rear Second Presentation Room. It is big, generally well-lit, has a large volume, and more or less centrally-located with respect to other rooms at the AA. Because of these ideal qualities, it is used for many functions.

The first image shows how the space is being prepared for an undergraduate studio class. The tables are set apart one from another to leave enough room for students to do some drafting works.

In another photo, vertical panels are set up by the windows, in preparation perhaps for an exhibit or jury presentation.

Lastly, the bottom photo shows AA Open Day event for prospective undergraduate students. It is very interesting how the space easily managed to fit two functions, one on each end of the room. One end was set up like a lecture room with seats facing the front; the projector is on and the blackout blinds are down to make the space darker. With no partition, the other end of the room was set up with tables and panels exhibiting works of undergraduate students for the visitors to see.

These changes in use would have different requirements, especially in terms of spatial arrangement, noise control, daylighting, and visiual comfort. It is noteworthy that the Rear Second Presentation Room has managed to serve its purpose, or in this case, purposes.

FIGURE 4.2.2.6 Rear Second Presentation Room pictures showing flexibility in the use of space

47

DAYLIGHTING STUDIES BASE CASE The Rear Second Presentation Room is relatively well illuminated. Studying the base case daylight factor reveals that it there is good lighting up to 3.5 meters from either window side. This creates a very small area at the center of the room, with a width of around 1.5 meters, that does not meet the minimum standard of 2% daylight factor. (Figure 4.2.2.7)

ILLUMINANCE

9:00AM

12:30PM

JUNE

Illuminance-wise, the areas along the windows enjoy enough daylighting except for winter, where the daylight is unsatisfactory (below 300 lux) after the first meter from the windows. In the equinoxes, there is substantial daylight up to 2.5 meters from the windows and in summer, there is more than enough illuminance throughout the space. (Figure 4.2.2.8) The plan view illuminance study (Figure 4.2.2.9) shows a clear passive zone along the windows especially in summer and the equinoxes. However, this may be an issue in terms of even light distribution.

“Is the current condition of the RSPR optimum to accommodate flexible uses?”

SEPTEMBER/MARCH

DAYLIGHT FACTOR

2% DF

FIGURE 4.2.2.7 Rear Second Presentation Room base case daylight factor

DECEMBER

ILLUMINANCE

300 lux

FIGURE 4.2.2.8 Rear Second Presentation Room base case daylight factor

48

FIGURE 4.2.2.9 Rear Second Presentation Room illuminance and light distribution base case study (Source: Radiance)

3:00PM

PARAMETRIC STUDIES FOR DAYLIGHTING For the parametric studies, it has been decided that light shelves be tested. This is because light shelves are multi-purpose, just like the Rear Second Presentation Room.

The shelves reflect the light to the ceiling, allowing it to penetrate deeper into the space. Another function of light shelves is solar shading as it blocks high-angle sun during the summer. Moreover, light shelves help evenly distribute the light, hence reducing lighting contrast in the space especially near windows.

BASE CASE

These reasons led the group to check the explore two cases on top of the base case.

Case 1 proposes high interior light shelves mounted 2.20 meters from the floor.

Case 2, on the other hand, has low interior light shelves at 0.80 meter from the floor.

Figure 4.2.2.10 shows the reflectance values assigned to the parametric runs, as well as the false-color renderings of the space. Here, Case 1 shows how light bounces to the ceiling and distributes a more subtle light throughout the room. Case 2 seems to have improved from the base case as well but does not help much in reducing the contrast.

CASE 1 HIGH LIGHT SHELF 2.20 m

CASE 2 LOW LIGHT SHELF 0.80 m

CASE 1

CASE 2

WALLS CEILING FLOOR LIGHT SHELF

BASE CASE

LIGHT SHELF 1

LIGHT SHELF 2

70 80 20 -­‐

70 80 20 90

70 80 20 90

FIGURE 4.2.2.10 Rear Second Presentation Room false color rendering and reflectance values used (Source: Radiance)

49

PARAMETRIC STUDIES FOR DAYLIGHTING

CASE 2 - 0.80m-high light shelf

CASE 1 - 2.20m-high light shelf

ILLUMINANCE CASE 1 light shelves at 2.20 m height

In June and during the equinoxes, the minimum satisfactory illuminance of 300 lux is achieved even up to 4 meters deep into the space from the windows, leaving very little area in the room that can be considered dark.

JUNE

The graphs in section (Figure 4.2.2.12) show how Case 1 compare with a no-obstruction scenario and with Case 2. Case 1 performs somewhere in between these two. Nonetheless, it is clear that Case 1 satisfies the minimum illuminance requirements most of the time except in winter.

3:00 PM

10:00 AM

JUNE

10:00 AM

Parametric runs for Case 1 shows improvement from the base case, registering higher illuminance level especially in the afternoons. The side facing Morwell Street also experiences the highest lux values. In December, regardless of time or orientation, the space is relatively dark throughout the day. (Figure 4.2.2.11)

SEPTEMBER/MARCH DECEMBER

However, in many instances, Case 2 has values that are even lower than the base case. (Figure 4.2.2.12)

SEPTEMBER/MARCH

Case 2 creates a more even lighting distribution in the mornings but registers lower lux values. In the afternoons of summer and the equinoxes, it allows more light but there is concentration near the windows. Except for winter season, satisfactory illuminance (above 300 lux) is achieved up to 2.5 meters from the windows.

DECEMBER

CASE 2 light shelves at 0.80 m height

FIGURE 4.2.2.11 Rear Second Presentation Room illuminance parametric studies (Source: Radiance)

50

3:00 PM

ILLUMINANCE

3pm

300 LUX minimum

sep

june

10am

dec

300 LUX minimum

300 LUX minimum

FIGURE 4.2.2.12 Rear Second Presentation Room illuminance parametric studies

51

52

DAYLIGHT FACTOR

PARAMETRIC STUDIES FOR DAYLIGHTING DAYLIGHT FACTOR Different daylight factors are recommended for each use of the space.

As a presentation room or seminar space, the minimum recommendation is 2% DF. If the space is used as a studio, 2.5% DF is recommended. As an exhibition, a minimum of 1% DF is acceptable.

For the purposes of this study, the target is to have at least 2% DF because it addresses the main use of the space as a presentation room. It is also not too low if used as a studio and not too high if used as an exhibition space.

The runs show how high the daylight factor can be (more than 5% average DF) in an deal situation with no obstruction and how the specific conditions of the RSPR bring about the actual base case.

In a sample section, better daylight factor is observed using low light shelf than in the high one. However, the mean daylight factor across the space remains higher with the high light shelf scenario.

FIGURE 4.2.2.13 Rear Second Presentation Room daylight factor parametric studies

BASE CASE

NO OBSTRUCTION

HIGH LIGHT SHELF

LOW LIGHT SHELF

FIGURE 4.2.2.14 Rear Second Presentation Room daylight factor parametric studies (Source: Radiance)

53

Rear Second Presentation Room rendering; condition: June 21, 3:00 PM

54

DAYLIGHTING CONCLUSION As for the daylight factor, both Cases 1 and 2, with high and low light shelves respectively, have a mean daylight factor of around 1.5%. This is less than the target 2% but taking into account the Useful Daylight Illuminance (UDI), both cases went beyond 2%. (Figure 4.2.2.15) Comparing both cases only, Case 1 with the high light shelf exhibits a better performance.

Regarding the illuminance, Figure 4.2.2.16 shows that Case 1 has a higher tendency to reach 300 lux than Case 2.

A more definitive conclusion is povided through UDI analysis (Figure 4.2.2.17), looking specifically at the performance of the space by how much area is experiencing 100 to 2000 lux at least 50% of the time. In this case, the differences between the base case and the two other proposed cases are not far apart. The values, however, allows for an easier comparison, with Case 1 (high light shelf) having the highest UDI at 77.90%. Case 2 has a UDI of 74.95%.

FIGURE 4.2.2.15 Rear Second Presentation Room daylight factor comparison

Although Case 1 is just a slight improvement from the base case, it further improves the condition by reducing contrast, in which case the areas with over 2000 lux dropped from 4.16% to 2.94%.

900 800 700 600 500 BASE CASE

400

LIGHTSHELF 1

300

LIGHTSHELF 2

200

Lastly, as the spaces keep on changing in use, those that would require more lighting may arrange the tables or chairs next to windows, where there is usually enough light, hence reducing dependence on artificial lighting.

12/21/15

12/21/10

09/21/15

09/21/10

06/21/10

0 lux

06/21/15

100

As distinct passive zones near the windows were also observed, the team would also recommend that the artifical lighting be arranged in three zones with separate switches. This way, it woud be possible to turn lights on only in areas needed, such as in the middle of the room while the rest of the space near the windows are naturally-lit.

FIGURE 4.2.2.16 Rear Second Presentation Room illuminance comparison

USEFUL DAYLIGHT ILLUMINANCE LIGHTSHELF 2

LIGHTSHELF 1

BASE CASE

lux

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

BASE CASE 18.77%

LIGHTSHELF 1 19.15%

LIGHTSHELF 2 22.51%

100-­‐2000

77.08%

77.90%

74.95%

>2000

4.16%

2.94%

2.54%

<100

100%

FIGURE 4.2.2.17 Rear Second Presentation Room daylight factor parametric studies

55

THERMAL STUDIES Bedford Square

The Rear Second Presentation Room has indoor temperatures that follow closely the outside temperatures in terms of trend but maintains a difference of 4-6K.

31 October – 7 November 2014 Indoor Temperature from Data-logger Outdoor Temperature from www.wunderground.com

When outside temperatures are below 15°C, it would most likely bring the inside temperatures down and outside the comfort band unless there are many occupants.

Detail on another day (Figure 4.2.2.19) shows a typical situation wherein 3 different activities are scheduled. The radiators were on, sky was partly cloudy, and the activities with different number of occupants happened one after another thus keeping the space warm enough to be in the comfort zone the whole time.

“To what extent can the space accommodate the different number of occupancy without affecting comfort?”

FIGURE 4.2.2.18 Rear Second Presentation Room general thermal data for a typical week

AA Rear Second Presentation Room 25-26 November 2014 Indoor Temperature from Data-logger Outdoor Temperature from www.wunderground.com

FIGURE 4.2.2.19 Rear Second Presentation Room sample thermal data for a typical day

56

St. ell rw

AA Rear Second Presentation Room

Mo

The radiators are on early in the morning and way before the usual occupied time that starts at 10:00 AM. It does help to preheat the room but biggest driver of temperature increase indoors is the significant number of occupants. In Monday, for example (Figure 4.2.2.18), even if the outside temperature went down, the inside temperature went up because of the interim jury gathering. The case is similar in Thursday, where the Graduate School open jury’s many occupants increased the indoor temperature and sustained it within comfort zone.

AA School Key Plan - RSPR

Rear Second Presentation Room Base Case January

March

February

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

40 35

Comfort Band

30 25 20 15 10

RSPR Temperature

5

Outside Temperature

Internal CondiAons for TAS

Light Appliances 10.03 W/m2 Sensible Gains 15.05 W/m2

0 -­‐5

W/m2 Latent Gains 9.03

Equipment Gains 2.00 W/m2

30

FIGURE 4.2.2.20 Rear Second Presentation Room base case analysis and internal consitions for TAS

Annual Heat Gains

Kwh/m2

THERMAL SIMULATIONS

25

BASE CASE

20

The Rear Second Presentation Room is a rather challenging space to study. It has two sides with relatively large glazing area (single-glazed) and it changes a lot in terms of use and occupancy.

15

Annual Heat Losses

Kwh/m2

10

The base case study shows how the space almost follows closely the outside temperature, allowing for the occurrence of more drastic changes whether it be excessive cold or overheating as the seasons change. (Figure 4.2.2.20)

0

5

-­‐5

r No ve m be r De ce m be r

-­‐10

to be

Oc

em

be

r

t us Se

pt

ly

Au g

Ju

ne Ju

ay M

ril

Ap

ch ar M

ry ua

br Fe

Ja

nu

ar

y

0

Solar Gains

-­‐15 -­‐20

Ligh(ng Gains Infiltra(on r

Oc

to

be

be r No ve m be r De ce m be r

Se

pt

em

st

gu

ly

Au

Ju

ne Ju

ay M

ril Ap

ry

ch

M

ua

ry

br

Fe

ua Ja n

Equipment Gains

ar

-­‐25

Occupancy Gains

Opaque Elements Glazing Elements

FIGURE 4.2.2.21 Rear Second Presentation Room base case heat gains and losses

57

THERMAL STUDIES WINTER ANALYSIS CASE 1 Like the AA Library, the Rear Second Presentation Room is highly dependent on occupancy to achieve thermal comfort during winter.

Without occupancy, the temperatures drastically drop and follow very closely the outside temperature with a difference of just 1-3K.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

CASE 2 After studying the scenario without occupancy, the next solution tested was changing the glazing from single to double. In doing so, a slight improvement was observed, allowing for some more hours to be within the comfort zone.

CASE 3 By implementing the night shutters, the inside temperature takes longer to drop after the sunset and maintains a 1-2K difference from the base case.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

CASE 4 Employing both the night shutters and double glazing, more ideal temperatures are reached, with the exception of days where the outside temperature is below 10°C.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.2.22 Rear Second Presentation Room parametric thermal studies

58

THERMAL STUDIES WINTER CONCLUSION After the physical refurbishments were applied at the Rear Second Presentation Room, indoor temperatures have improved and heating would be necessary only during the early morning hours to bring it within the comfort zone.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.2.23 Rear Second Presentation Room parametric thermal studies - conclusion

59

THERMAL STUDIES SUMMER ANALYSIS CASE 1 In the warm summer months where outside temperature, amount of solar radiation and diurnal variation is higher, the unoccupied Rear Second Presentation Room’s temperature can easily fluctuate.

The temperarure usually peaks in the afternoon, sometimes going beyond the comfort zone. At night, however, the temperature drops drastically, often going below the lower limit of the comfort band.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

CASE 2 Just by operating the existing single-glazed windows, the temperature can be maintained more evenly inside the thermal comfort band. This test registered very few occupied hours outside the comfort zone.

CASE 3 Changing the glazing from single to double improves further the indoor temperature and reduces the fluctuation. Double glazing allows for a much slower drop in temperature come nighttime.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

CASE 4 By using both night shutters and double glazing, the best improvement from the base case was observed. Although the temperatures achieved during occupied hours is very similar to the previous case, the drop in temperature at night is more gradual.

In unoccupied hours at night, the indoor temperature can have up to 7K difference from the outside.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.2.24 Rear Second Presentation Room parametric thermal studies

60

THERMAL STUDIES SUMMER CONCLUSION Adaptive opportunities such as the mere use of operable windows is enough to achieve thermal comfort during summer. This opportunity exists for the Rear Second Presentation Room and is the single biggest solution to immediately improve indoor condition.

Also, solutions originally thought to help solely during the cold months are found to be just as useful during summer nights as temperatures also drop.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.2.25 Rear Second Presentation Room parametric thermal studies - conclusion

61

62

Rear Second Presentation Room; Night Shutters, Double Glazing, Operable Windows.

January

March

February

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

40

Comfort Band

35 30 25 20 15 10

RSPR Temperature

5

Outside Temperature

0

30

-­‐5

FIGURE 4.2.2.26 Rear Second Presentation Room improved case year-long data

Kwh/m2

Annual Heat Gains

20

THERMAL SIMULATIONS

18

IMPROVED CASE

16 14

Being a challenging space to analyse, the proposal to use all the solutions (night shutters, double glazing, operable windows) did not necessarily meet the group’s high expectations. Nonetheless, comparing with the base case, the improvement is still considerable.

12 10

Annual Heat Losses

Kwh/m2

-­‐8 -­‐10 -­‐12 -­‐14 -­‐16

be r

to be r No ve m be r De ce m be r

Se

Oc

em

us t

y

Au g

Ju l

ay

ne

Ju

Ja nu

Infiltra.on

Equipment Gains

M

-­‐18 -­‐20 ar y Fe br ua ry

M ar ch

Occupancy Gains

ril

be r No ve m be r De ce m be r

r

to

be

Oc

st

em

gu

Se pt

Au

Ju

Ju

The case with the most improvement has managed to reduce the overheating hours, reduce heat losses through glazing elements, and bring more hours into the comfort zone.

Ap

Ligh.ng Gains

M

ar c

M

br u

ar y

Fe

Ja nu

Solar Gains

ly

-­‐6 ne

-­‐4

0 ay

2 Ap ril

-­‐2

h

0

4

ar y

6

pt

8

Opaque Elements Glazing Elements

FIGURE 4.2.2.27 Rear Second Presentation Room improved case heat gains and losses

63

Rear Second Presentation Room; Thermal Conclusions January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

December

November

40 35 90 30

80

25

70

20

60

Comfort Band

50

15

40

10 5

30

RSPR Temperature

20

Outside Temperature

0

10

-­‐5

0

Ac/h .5-­‐1 ac/h Winter

30

.5-­‐1 ac/h Winter

4-­‐60 ac/h Summer

FIGURE 4.2.2.28 Rear Second Presentation Room year-long thermal performance analysis - conclusion

THERMAL STUDIES CONCLUSION Improved 10.17

Kwh/m2

By realizing the proposed changes (use of operable windows, double glazing and night shutters), the annual heat load requirement is reduced by 21.9 Kwh/m2 from the base case.

This can be further improved by occupancy-matched scheduling.

As the Rear Second Presentation Room goes through several density changes in terms of occupancy, it is noted that during winter, it can manage to accommodate up to 90 people without having overheating issues. However, in the summer, the same number of people brings the indoor temperature to almost the same as the outdoor, hence causing overheating.

Looking at the year-long graph (Figure 4.2.2.28), more hours have been brought to the comfort zone at least closer to the lower limit of the comfort band.

64

Winter Winter

40 40

Base Case 32.06

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Kwh/m2

35

FIGURE 4.2.2.29 Rear Second Presentation Room annual heat load required (in Kwh/m2)

35 35

35 35

30 30

30 30

25 25

25 25

20 20

20 20

15 15

15 15

10 10

10 10

5 5

5 5

0 0

1

3

5

7

9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

Summer Summer

40 40

0 0

1

3

5

7

9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

Outside 5 occupants 20 occupants 30 occupants Outside

5 occupants

10 occupants

20 occupants

60 o ccupants

70 occupants 50 o ccupants 40 occupants

50 occupants

40 occupants 30 occupants 90 occupants 100 80 occupants occupants

FIGURE 4.2.2.30 RSPR occupant density changes for average summer and winter days

Density changes for an average winter and summer days.

THERMAL STUDIES

Hours

Amount of Hours per month

800

CONCLUSION

700

Figure 4.2.2.31 shows how the proposed intervention has increased the number of occupied hours within the comfort zone. There is also more improvement during the warmer months from May to September.

600 500

As for the heating requirement, the improved case only registered a decrease by 1% (Figure 4.2.2.32) but considering only the hours that the space needs heating and is occupied, it is down to 6% from 53% hours in a year.

400 300

Lastly, the base case shows that 5% of the number of hours in a year is considered to be overheating (above 28 °C). With the improved case, it is down to 0.12%, hence reducing need for cooling.

200

No ve m be r De ce m be r

be to

be Se

Oc

Au

r

r

gu

st

ly

Ju

ne

Ju

M

ay

ri l Ap

ch

ar

ua br

Fe

M

ry

y ar nu Ja

Occupied Hours in the Comfort Band Base Case

em

0

Occupied Hours in the Comfort Band Improved Case

pt

100

FIGURE 4.2.2.31 RSPR graph showing improvement in occupied hours within the comfort band after intervention

Base Case Heating Requirement Percentage of hours in a year the space requires heating. (Below 18°C)

Base Case Overheating

59% 7%

Percentage of hours in a year the space requires heating and is occupied. (Below 18°C)

100%

18.5%

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating.

(Above 28°C)

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating and is occupied. (Above 28°C)

100%

Total percentage of hours a year.

Total percentage of hours a year

Improved Case Heating Requirement

Percentage of hours in a year the space requires heating. (Below 18°C)

53%

5%

Improved Case Overheating

6%

Percentage of hours in a year the space requires heating and is occupied. (Below 18°C)

100%

Total percentage of hours a year.

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating.

(Above 28°C)

2%

0.12%

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating and is occupied. (Above 28°C)

100%

Total percentage of hours a year.

FIGURE 4.2.2.32 RSPR graph showing occupant-matched heating requirement and reduction in overheating hours

65

66

SED OFFICE

67

4.2.3 SED OFFICE GENERAL INFORMATION The SED Office is located on top of the Rear Second Presentation Room and it used to be part of a larger studio built by former AA students themselves. The studio was subdivided into several offices for the faculty and the one for SED has an area of 17.42m2 and a volume of 65.85m3 including the vaulted ceiling.

It has a corridor on the North-East side which acts as a transition space before entering the offices. The space is used by around 1 to 3 people and sometimes more if there are consultations.

Three radiators keep the space warm and the calculated mean indoor temperature is 12.4 째C.

FIGURE 4.2.3.1 SED Office 3D model

FIGURE 4.2.3.2 SED Office floor plan

FIGURE 4.2.3.3 SED Office section

daily

weekly

annually

Mon-Sat 09:00 AM-10:00PM

2 week dec-jan 18 days april 1week august

FIGURE 4.2.3.4 SED Office general information

68

1-5 PERSONS

studying consulting

MEETING

ACTIVITIES

OFFICE

12.4 째C 3 RADIATORS

calculated MInT

area: 17.42 m2 volume: 65.85 m3 window to floor ratio: 65% floor to ceiling height: 5.33 X 4. 03 m orientation: S-W / N-E

SED OFFICE SPOT MEASUREMENTS

THE SED OFFICE IN PICTURES

TEMPERATURE, RELATIVE HUMIDITY, ILLUMINANCE

TEMEPERATURE

The SED Office is used primarily by the tutors and the space is somehow cramped by the furniture and shelves. From time to time, some students would come for brief consultations.

RELATIVE HUMIDITY

In the morning, it appears that the natural light is enough and this is perhaps the result of the windows and the clerestory window. The window facing North East, however, is obstructed by book shelves.

The high window to floor ratio may pose some problems in terms of glare and overheating especially in clear sunny days. The existing blinds may be of help for this situation.

DATE: November 26h 2014 9:30 am.

SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE Termperature: 9 ̊C

DATE: November 26h 2014 9:30 am.

SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE Illuminance: 93%

ILLUMINANCE

DATE: November 26h 2014 9:30 am.

SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE Illuminance: 3521Lux

FIGURE 4.2.3.5 SED Office in pictures

69

ILLUMINANCE

10:00 AM

DAYLIGHTING STUDIES

For offices and spaces of similar use such as the SED office, the recommended minimum daylight factor is 1% and a good average would be 5%. Doing the base case runs without furniture, the space registers a very high daylight factor in the region of 6-13%. In another run with furniture, the daylight factor is between 5-11%. These values are relatively high and are way beyond 5% average daylight factor recommended. (Figure 4.2.3.6)

JUNE

BASE CASE

As for the illuminance, the recommended 300-500 lux is achieved most of the time. Even in December, only a very small part in the middle of the room goes slightly below 300 lux. In June and September, the space performs similar, with illuminance between 600-1600 lux. In December, it is within the region of 260-500 lux. The space is very responsive to outside conditions and could pose issues on over-illumination and glare

SEPTEMBER

“To what extent can the daylight in the office be useful without causing visual discomfort”

DECEMBER

DAYLIGHT FACTOR

Base Case

WALLS CEILING FLOOR Overhang

FIGURE 4.2.3.6 SED Office daylight factor FIGURE 4.2.3.7 SED Office illuminance

70

50 30 20 50

3:00 PM

DAYLIGHTING ANALYSIS CONCEPTUAL SHADING The aim of running the conceptual shading is to check a test node in the space (Figure 4.2.3.10) as to whether it receives direct solar radiation or not. If it does get direct sunlight, the blinds go down.

This method applies an assumption that when the blinds go down, the direct solar radiation is blocked and only 25% diffuse solar rdiation goes through the blinds.

A schedule of 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM occupied hours was chosen. The shading control graph (Figure 4.2.3.9) read between these hours show when the space is shaded and unshaded. The shaded hours signify that there is direct solar radiation, and this is seen in the warmer months (May to July).

In winter, it is mostly unshaded.

FIGURE 4.2.3.8 SED Office occupied hours schedule used in shading control study

FIGURE 4.2.3.9 SED Office conceptual shading study result

TEST NODE

WITHOUT FURNITURE

WITH FURNITURE

FIGURE 4.2.3.10 SED Office daylight factor with test node used in the shading control

71

SED Office rendering; conditions: May 21, 4:00 PM

SED Office rendering; conditions: June 21, 5:00 PM

SED Office rendering; conditions: June 21, 5:00 PM

72

DAYLIGHTING CONCLUSION The illuminance in SED office is enough to keep the occupied hours bright most of the time. In June and September, the illuminance goes even beyond 2000 lux. (Figure 4.2.3.11) The furniture in the space makes the space slightly darker, usually by 200 lux lower.

The mean daylight factor without the furniture is 8.8% and with furniture, only 7.3%. Nevertheless, both cases exhibit more than the recommended average of 5%. This makes the SED generally well-lit. Among the spaces studied by the team, this is also the brightest, but not necessarily the most ideal.

FIGURE 4.2.3.11 SED Office illuminance

Useful daylight illuminance study shows us that the actual case with furniture has 58% of space with UDI 100-2000 lux at least 50% of the time.

This figure is not high compared to the AA Library or the Rear Second Presentation Room, wherein both have more than 70%. This is because a big area of the space (30.10%) receives greater than 2000 lux and this is no longer considered as useful because it might create visual discomfort.

This is easily remedied using solar shading such as blinds, which can be easily controlled as needed by the occupants. With the presence of clerestory windows, the place will remain relatively well-illuminated.

FIGURE 4.2.3.12 SED Office daylight factor

FIGURE 4.2.3.13 SED Office useful daylight illuminance

73

THERMAL STUDIES

26 November – 2 December 2014 Indoor Temperature from Data-logger Outdoor Temperature from www.wunderground.com

“How does a light-weight construction affect the thermal performance of an office space?”

FIGURE 4.2.3.14 SED Office general thermal data for a typical week

SED Office

26-27 November Indoor Temperature from Data-logger Outdoor Temperature from Data-loggers and www.wunderground.com

FIGURE 4.2.3.15 SED Office general thermal data for a typical day

74

St. ell rw

Occupied hours are always within the comfort zone, except when temperature outside is below 10°C.

SED Office

Mo

The SED office is very responsive to the outside conditions in terms of temperature. The week-long graph in a typical week (Figure 4.2.1.14) shows the inside temperature runs almost parallel to the outside, maintaining a difference of around 6-8K. The hallway temperature is always warmer than the office temperature.

Bedford Square

AA School Key Plan - SED Office

SED Office Base Case January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

40 35

Comfort Band

30 25 20 15 10

SED Office Temperature

5 Internal CondiAons for TAS

Light Appliances 3.50 W/m2

Sensible Gains 12.60 W/m2

Latent Gains 2.52 W/m2

Equipment Gains 5.61 W/m2

0 -­‐5

Outside Temperature

1-­‐5

FIGURE 4.2.3.16 SED Office base case analysis and internal consitions for TAS

THERMAL SIMULATIONS

Annual Heat Gains

Kwh/m2

BASE CASE

30

The SED Office is by far the space with the most drastic temperature changes.

25 20 15

Kwh/m2

10

0

The space performs almost as the same way as the outside; which forces the maintanance of the school to use mechanical systems all the time to keep it inside the comfort standards.

Annual Heat Losses

The occupancy is not able to impact the inside temperatures in a significant way because it is not much occupants stay only for a few hours every day.

-­‐5

5

-­‐10

Ligh(ng Gains Occupancy Gains Equipment Gains

-­‐20 -­‐25 -­‐30 nu Fe ary br ua ry M ar ch

Ap ril

M ay

Ju ne

Ju l A y Se ugu pt st em b Oc er t No obe ve r m De be ce r m be r

Solar Gains

-­‐15

Ja

Ja

nu

a Fe ry br ua ry M ar ch

Ap ril

M ay

Ju ne

Ju ly Au Se gus pt t em be Oc r to No be ve r m De ber

ce m be r

0

Infiltra(on Opaque Elements Glazing Elements

FIGURE 4.2.3.17 SED Office base case heat gains and losses

75

THERMAL STUDIES WINTER ANALYSIS CASE 1 In the graph is seen that occupancy makes a very little difference in the space, not even achieving 1°C. With the space as it is now, if the temperature outside is near or below 10°C, achieving the romfort zone seems impossible.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

CASE 2 By having double-glazed windows, some improvement is seen during the afternoon hours.

The double glazing helps to prevent heat losses in the spaces, using the internal gains to maintain the temperature.

CASE 3 10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

Insulating the roof on its own does not make much difference in the space. It only helps to keep the temperature from dropping more during the afternoon and night hours.

CASE 4 When applying all the improvements together, a more significant impact happens in the space, almost achieving the comfort zone in days with temperatures above 12°C outside; the heating demand is also lowered in general.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.3.18 SED Office parametric thermal simulations

76

THERMAL STUDIES WINTER CONCLUSION Adding the changes help raise the inside temperatures quickly in the mornings and maintain them in the afternoons while not allowing them to drop as much at night.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.3.19 SED Office thermal simulations - conclusion

77

THERMAL STUDIES SUMMER ANALYSIS CASE 1 As in Winter, the occupancy makes a very little difference in the space´s temperature.

The office follows the outside temeprature directly and overpasses the comfort band during the hottest hours.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

CASE 2 Only by operating the existing windows is it possible to maintain the space inside the comfort band and prevent the overheating.

The occupants must use the adaptive oportunity constantly to achieve enjoyable temperatures.

CASE 3 10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

Applying the double glazing, a very similar result is achieved as with single glazing.

Operating the windows keep the temperatures inside the comfort zone, and in very hot days some overheating might happen at around 2:00 PM.

CASE 4 When applying all the improvements, it is seen that while they are somehow beneficial in winter, they make it a little harder to lower the temeperatures in summer.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.3.20 SED Office parametric thermal simlulations

78

THERMAL STUDIES SUMMER CONCLUSION Comparing the results show that the building performs in a very similar way as the exterior in summer.

When all of the improvements are put together, the temperature in the afternoons can still be maintained in the comfort band but it is higher than without them.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.3.21 SED Office thermal simulations - conclusion

79

80

SED Office; Double Glazing, Operable Windows, Insulated Roof and Walls.

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

40 35

Comfort Band

30 25 20 15 10

SED Office Temperature

5

Outside Temperature

0 -­‐5

1-­‐5

FIGURE 4.2.3.22 SED Office improved case year-long analysis

Annual Heat Gains

Kwh/m2

THERMAL SIMULATIONS

30

IMPROVED CASE

25

During the year, the proposed interventions managed to attain more hours into the comfort zone, reaching the lower limits and diminishing heating loads, as well as overheating.

20 15 Kwh/m2

10

The heat losses trough glazing, opaque elements and infiltration have also been reduced.

0

5

-­‐5

Solar Gains Ligh.ng Gains Occupancy Gains Equipment Gains

-­‐10 -­‐15 -­‐20 -­‐25 -­‐30

Ja nu Fe ary br ua r M y ar ch

Ap ril

M ay

Ju ne

Ju Au ly Se gu pt st em b Oc er t No obe ve r m De be ce r m be r

Fe

nu ar br y ua r M y ar ch

Ap ril

M ay

Ju ne

Ju Au ly Se gu pt st em b Oc er t No obe ve r m De be ce r m be r

0

Ja

Annual Heat Losses

Infiltra.on Opaque Elements Glazing Elements

FIGURE 4.2.3.23 SED Office improved case heat gains and losses

81

SED Office; Thermal Conclusions January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

40 35

Comfort Band

30 25 20 15 10

SED Office Temperature

5

Outside Temperature

0 -­‐5

1-­‐5

FIGURE 4.2.3.24 SED Office improved case year-long analysis - conclusion

THERMAL STUDIES CONCLUSION For the most-improved scenario, heating will be required in many of the winter days, mostly during the early morning hours. But even when heating cannot be supressed, the heat loads from the base case to the improved one was reduced by half, which is a very important difference.

(Figure 4.2.3.25)

Improved 24.23

Kwh/m2

Base Case 56.10

0

10

20

30

40

FIGURE 4.2.3.25 SED Office annual heat load requirement (in Kwh/m2)

82

50

Kwh/m2

60

THERMAL STUDIES CONCLUSION Hours

800

Of the spaces reviewed, the SED office has the least number of hours within the comfort zone. Proposed intervention has somehow increased this, as seen in Figure 4.2.3.26.

Amount of Hours per month

700

Just analyzing the building itself, the base case would need heating 60% of the time but in the improved case, it is down to 48%. If only the occupied hours will be considered, the heating hours required is down to 6%.

600 500

The occupied overheating hours is also reduced from 3% to only 0.34%.

400 300 200 100 0

January

February

Occupied Hours in the Comfort Band Improved Case

Occupied Hours in the Comfort Band Base Case April May June July

March

August

September

October

November December

FIGURE 4.2.3.26 RSPR graph showing improvement in occupied hours within the comfort band after intervention

Base Case Heating Requirement Percentage of hours in a year

Base Case Overheating

60%

7%

7%

the space requires heating.

(Below 18°C)

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating.

(Above 28°C)

Percentage of hours in a year the space requires heating and is occupied. (Below 18°C)

100%

year the space requires heating.

(Below 18°C)

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating and is occupied. (Above 28°C)

100%

Total percentage of hours a year.

Total percentage of hours a year.

Improved Case Heating Requirement Percentage of hours in a

3%

48% 6%

Percentage of hours in a year the space requires heating and is occupied.

(Below 18°C)

100%

Total percentage of hours a year.

Improved Case Overheating

7%

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating.

(Above 28°C)

FIGURE 4.2.3.27 RSPR graph showing occupant-matched heating requirement and reduction in overheating hours

0.34%

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating and is occupied. (Above 28°C)

100%

Total percentage of hours a year.

83

84

1ST FLOOR, 16 MORWELL

85

4.2.4 1ST FLOOR, 16 MORWELL GENERAL INFORMATION Sixteen Morwell was built and used as an office space before the AA School got it on leasehold. Of all the buildings within the AA premises, this is the only one that is air-conditioned.

The 1st Floor studio is exclusively for EmTech and SED students of the AA Graduate School. The total area of both studios is 237.64 m2 and the volume is 617.67 m3. The space is oriented Southwest/Northeast.

Each of the studios has around 30 students, hence a typical day would have 60 students on the entire floor. The studios are open from 9:00 AM to 10:00 PM, seven days a week. It is closed for around 3 weeks for the Christmas break, another 3 weeks for Easter break, and 1 week for summer.

Activities are usually limited to lectures, seminars and workshops.

The space is kept ‘comfortable’ using VRV Air-Conditioning System. The computed mean indoor temperature is 21°C if air-conditioned and 23.4°C if free-running.

FIGURE 4.2.4.2 1st Floor, 16 Morwell section

FIGURE 4.2.4.1 1st Floor, 16 Morwell 3D model

FIGURE 4.2.4.3 1st Floor, 16 Morwell floor plan

daily

weekly

annually

area_237.64 m2 volume:617.67 m3

Mon -Sat Sun 09 AM -10 PM / 09 AM – 6 PM

2 WEEK DEC-JAN 18 DAYS APRIL 1WEEK AUGUST

FIGURE 4.2.4.4 1st Floor, 16 Morwell general information

86

2 graduate studios 30-60 PERSON

SEMINAR

WORKSHOP

ACTIVITIES

LECTURE

AIR CONDITIONED

With AC: 21 °C Free-running: 23.4 °C MInT

window to floor ratio: 22% Floor to ceiling height: 10.25 x 2.6 m / 4:1 orientation: S-W / N-E

FIELD WORK SURVEY During a typical day in the SED Studio, the point-in-time survey was conducted. It was towards the end of October, cloudy with outside temperature of 16 째C and inside temperature of 24.2 째C. The air conditioning keeps the temperature almost steady and always within the comfort band of 21.1 - 27.1 째C. In terms of thermal comfort, most of the people felt slightly warm. Fifty percent of the respondents also wanted to feel neutral. Almost 80% are satisfied with the noise level and daylight and 86% with the visual comfort. However, the air quality seems to be a problem as 43% expressed dissatisfaction. This is a curious fnding since the space is air-conditioned the team expects that air changes should be more effective with mechanical help.

Unlike other spaces within the AA, 16 Morwell has restrictions in terms of controlling the thermostat. Even opening the windows is discouraged as it might affect the air conditioning system.

FIGURE 4.2.4.5 SED Studio 1st Floor, 16 Morwell survey

87

16 MORWELL SPOT MEASUREMENTS

TEMPERATURE, RELATIVE HUMIDITY, ILLUMINANCE

ILLUMINANCE

TEMPERATURE

DATE: November 18th 2014 9:30 am.

SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE TEMPERATURE: 9°C

88

DATE: November 18th 2014 16:30 am.

SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE TEMPERATURE: 12°C

DATE: November 18th 2014 9:30 am.

SKY CONDITION: Overcast OUSIDE Illuminance: 10000

THE SED STUDIO (1ST FLOOR, 16 MORWELL) IN PICTURES The SED Studio, which forms half of the 1st floor in 16 Morwell seems generally well-lit because of the presence of the windows on two side. Even so, it has become customary for the occupants to turn the lights on when working in the studio.

It is usually brighter near the windows and the space at the center where some students are are usually dark. The white walls and ceiling add to the general brightness of the area at the time this study was conducted.

All students work with their laptops in general.

FIGURE 4.2.4.6 SED Studio 1st Floor, 16 Morwell in pictures

89

DAYLIGHTING STUDY The first floor of 16 Morwell St. houses 2 of the AA graduate programmes: Sustainable Environmental Design (SED) and Emergent Technologies (EmTech). From the first studies and spot measurements, a difference has been observed in the performance of the two spaces in terms of daylight. On the south-west side, part A (SED) has a lower mean illuminance than part B (EmTech).

A. SED

“Is the permorfoance of 16 Morwell conditioned by its positioning within a highly-densed area?”

B. EMTech

(SED)

(EMTech) FIGURE 4.2.4.8 -16 Morwell stereographic diagrams

90

WALLS CEILING FLOOR

No Obstruc+on

1st floor

high reflectance

2nd Floor

3rd Floor

70 80 20

70 80 20

80 80 50

70 80 20

70 80 20

FIGURE 4.2.4.7 1st Floor, 16 Morwell illuminance base case for SED and EmTech studio

DAYLIGHTING STUDY 16 Morwell is located in a very narrow street surrounded by high-density buildings. With its main facades orientated towards the Southeast and Northwest and the particulars of this location, its access to direct solar radiation and daylight is limited. The study is concentrated on understanding the effects of the obstruction in the different floors and distribution along its elongated floor plan (31.5m) as these can often be a problem in dense cities such as London. All these factors have to be taken into account to have better performing buildings in terms of energy consumption.

Part B of the building has less obstruction in the afternoon hours thus having higher illuminance levels than part A.

MAIN FACADE

BACK FACADE

1ST

59 ̊

60 ̊

2ND

57 ̊

54 ̊

3RD

53 ̊

47 ̊

FIGURE 4.2.4.9 Obstruction angles at 16 Morwell

FIGURE 4.2.4.10 Sun path diagram on 16 Morwell

FIGURE 4.2.4.11 Key reference for divisions and levels

FIGURE 4.2.4.11 Aerial view

91

PARAMETRIC STUDIES FOR DAYLIGHTING ILLUMINANCE Two scenarios were considered in studying the illuminance of 1st Floor: one with no obstruction and the other with higher reflectance (for walls, floor and ceiling).

ANALYSIS ON IMPACT OF OBSTRUCTION AND REFLECTANCE

B -­‐ EMTECH

A -­‐ SED

As previously established in the base case that Side B (EmTech Studio) performs better, it is validated in the subsequent parametric studies.

Looking at the case with high reflectance, a summer morning can have an improvement by as much as 180 lux at the EmTech side. However, at the same moment, the SED side did not improve as much.

B - EmTech

Considering a no-obstruction scenario, the space would enjoy generous amounts of illuminance for most of the year except in the winter.

JUNE 21 10 AM

SEPTEMBER / MARCH 10 AM

DECEMBER 10 AM

FIGURE 4.2.4.12 Parametric study on illuminance considering relfectance and obstruction

92

A - SED

PARAMETRIC STUDIES FOR DAYLIGHTING

ANALYSIS ON IMPACT OF OBSTRUCTION AND REFLECTANCE

DAYLIGHT FACTOR As for the daylight factor, the base case in EmTech is also better performing compared to SED. This variance, however, is diminished in the high-reflectance scenario. Without obstruction, the recommended average daylight factor of 5% for studios is easily reached.

FIGURE 4.2.4.13 Parametric study on daylight factor considering relfectance and obstruction

BASE CASE â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 1st Floor

HIGH REFLECTANCE

NO OBSTRUCTION

FIGURE 4.2.4.14 Parametric study on daylight factor considering relfectance and obstruction (Source: Radiance)

93

PARAMETRIC STUDIES FOR DAYLIGHTING ILLUMINANCE This time, 1st Floor of 16 Morwell is compared to the performance of the other floors in the building: 2nd floor and 3rd floor.

The studies show that in general, as the floor goes higher, there is also better illuminance in the space. In winter however, there is not much significant improvement.

B -­‐ EMTECH

A -­‐ SED

ANALYSIS ON IMPACT OF ELEVATION (FLOOR LEVEL)

SUMMER

10 AM

3PM

WINTER

10 AM

3PM

FIGURE 4.2.4.15 Parametric study showing illumance at different floor levels in 16 Morwell

94

PARAMETRIC STUDIES FOR DAYLIGHTING

ANALYSIS ON IMPACT OF ELEVATION (FLOOR LEVEL)

DAYLIGHT FACTOR The daylight factor also increases as the floor goes higher but this true only for EmTech side. Because of possible more obstruction at the SED side, not much improvement was seen and in some case, the daylight factor has even gotten lower.

FIGURE 4.2.4.16 Parametric study showing daylight factor at different floor levels in 16 Morwell

1st Floor

2nd Floor

3rd Floor

FIGURE 4.2.4.17 Parametric study showing daylight factor at different floor levels in 16 Morwell (Source: Radiance)

95

ANALYSIS ON IMPACT OF ELEVATION (FLOOR LEVEL) 1st Floor

PARAMETRIC STUDIES FOR DAYLIGHTING SUN PATCHES

9:00AM

A sun patch study was conducted for all the levels in 16 Morwell to see if the spaces get direct sunlight. Figure 4.2.4.18 shows this throught the spread.

12:30PM

The biggest sun patches are observed during the equinoxes at the 2nd and 3rd floors. During the same season, 1st floor barely has any except during lunchtime.

During summer, all the levels experience almost the same amount of sun patches. In winter, there are no sun patches at all.

The direct sunlight has impact on the illuminance of the space so this study shows how much brighter the higher levels can become.

JUNE 21

SEPTEMBER /MARCH 21

DECEMBER 21 FIGURE 4.2.4.18 Sun Patch study for different floor levels at different times in 16 Morwell

96

3:00PM

2nd Floor

9:00AM

JUNE 21

3rd Floor

12:30PM

9:00AM

3:00PM

12:30PM

3:00PM

JUNE 21

SEPTEMBER /MARCH 21

SEPTEMBER /MARCH 21

DECEMBER 21

DECEMBER 21

97

SED Studio rendering; conditions: June 21, 2:00 PM

SED Studio rendering; conditions: June 21, 2:00 PM

SED and EmTech Studios rendering

98

EmTech Studio rendering; conditions: June 21, 2:00 PM

EmTech Studio rendering; conditions: June 21, 2:00 PM

DAYLIGHTING CONCLUSION

1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0

FIGURE 4.2.4.19 Daylight factor at different levels in 16 Morwell

The mean daylight factor is around 2-2.5% in 1st and 2nd floors and goes as high as 7% in the 3rd floor. Standards-wise, only the 3rd floor can be said to be compliant to the 5% recommended mean daylight factor for studios.

Looking at the illuminance across the different levels, the 3rd floor is also the best performing space with obstruction.

No Obstruc6on 1st floor 2nd Floor 3rd Floor

06/21/10 06/21/15 09/21/10 09/21/15 12/21/10 12/21/15

For the 1st floor, illuminance studies show that higher reflectance can give the space over 100 lux more. In some cases, this difference is enough to achieve the minimum 300 lux as per standards.

A more definitive way to gauge the illuminance of the space is through useful daylight illuminance. In the study, the best performing level is the second floor, which has 78.11% of the area having a UDI (100-2000 lux) at least 50% of the time. The first floor is only at 71.31% but by using high-reflectance materials, this increases to 76.64%. This means that performance-wise, the first floor and second floor are almost similar because of the parameter used. The third floor may be the brightest but it has a lot of incidences above 2000 lux which can sometimes cause visual discomfort.

FIGURE 4.2.4.20 Illuminance at different levels in 16 Morwell

UDI

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

No Obstruc6on 49.65%

1st floor 1.76%

high reflectance 1.20%

2nd Floor 2.12%

3rd Floor 26.75%

100-­‐2000

41.92%

71.31%

76.64%

78.11%

59.05%

<100

8.41%

26.62%

22.33%

19.77%

14.15%

>2000

FIGURE 4.2.4.22 Daylight factor at different levels in 16 Morwell

12/21/15

0%

No Obstruc=on

12/21/10

No Obstruc6on

high reflectance

09/21/15

1st floor

1st floor

09/21/10

high reflectance

06/21/15

2nd Floor

06/21/10

3rd Floor

1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0

FIGURE 4.2.4.21 Illuminance in three different parameters in 16 Morwell

99

Bedford Square

THERMAL STUDIES

AA SED Studio, 16 Morwell

The indoor temperature also does not drop as much even when unoccupied. When occupied, the increase in termperature is evident.

The air-conditioning is on at fixed schedule everyday, regardless of whether the space is occupied or not. It is also on way before the school opening hours and is turned off automatically a few hours after the school closes.

A closer look in another data logger study, this time involving the EmTech studio, it is noticed that EmTech is usually warmer than SED studio by 2-3K. More evident in this study is the impact of occupancy on the indoor temperature.

An experiment was done, where the team turned off the air-conditioning without telling the occupants. In which case, SED studio managed to remain within the comfort band but EmTech studio went slightly beyond.

“To what extent can 16 Morwell be free-running?”

FIGURE 4.2.4.22 Week-long data logger result for SED Studio, 1st floor, 16 Morwell

AA SED Studio

17-20 November 2014 Indoor Temperature from Data-logger Outdoor Temperature from www.wunderground.com

FIGURE 4.2.4.23 Data logger result for SED and EmTech Studios, 1st floor, 16 Morwell

100

St. ell rw

31 October – 6 November 2014 Indoor Temperature from Data-logger Outdoor Temperature from www.wunderground.com

Mo

The week-long data logger study was conducted at SED Studio, which is half of 1st Floor, 16 Morwell. It is observed that majority of the occupied hours are within the comfort zone, primarily because the space is air-conditioned.

16 Morwell 1st Floor, Base Case January

March

February

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

40 35

Comfort Band

30 25 20 15

RSPR Temperature

10 5 Internal CondiAons for TAS

Light Appliances 13.88 W/m2 Sensible Gains 18.65 W/m2

0 -­‐5

Latent Gains 11.19 W/m2

Equipment Gains 6.94 W/m2

Outside Temperature

30

FIGURE 4.2.4.25 Base Case temperature data of 1st floor, 16 Morwell

Annual Heat Gains

Kwh/m2

THERMAL SIMULATIONS

18

BASE CASE

16 14

Studying the Base Case scenario of 1st Floor, 16 Morwell, it appears that the main concern will be the overheating during the warm months. Secondarily, several days in the cold months also did not achieve the minumum comfortable temperatures.

12 10

Annual Heat Losses

Kwh/m2

-­‐14 -­‐16

Infiltra(on be

Oc

to be r No ve m be r De ce m be r

r

st

em

ly Ju

ne Ju

ay M

gu

pt Se

Ja

ril

-­‐18 nu

Equipment Gains

-­‐12

Ap

Occupancy Gains

-­‐10

br ua ry

M ar ch

Ligh(ng Gains

This finding has guided the research approach towards checking the light appliances and occupancy gains.

-­‐8

ar y

Solar Gains

As for the heat gains, it is noted that the solar gains are relatively low compared to other spaces studied. This is attributed to the location of the building and influence of its immediate surroundings.

Fe

be

Oc to

em

pt Se

Au

Ju

ne Ju

M

ril Ap

ar y

Fe

nu Ja

be r No ve m be r De ce m be r

-­‐6 r

0 gu st

-­‐4 ly

2

-­‐2

ay

4

0

br ua ry

M ar ch

6

Au

8

Opaque Elements Glazing Elements

FIGURE 4.2.4.26 Base Case heat gains and losses for 1st floor, 16 Morwell

101

102

16 Morwell 1st Floor, SED and EMTECH study.

1ST FLOOR, 16 MORWELL Studying the 1st Floor of 16 Morwell was an easy choice for the group since this is where the SED Studio is located, which meant unrestricted access and more leeway in terms of experimenting with the space. As the 1st Floor is also made up of another studio which is EmTech, the group was prompted to analyse the two spaces separately to see how each performs.

After the field research and the base case runs in TAS, it was seen that apart from lunchtime wherein most EmTech students do not leave their room, the two spaces behave very similarly.

As a consecuence of this finding, it was decided that the two spaces be approached as one to simplify the analysis.

Average winter week January

Saturday

Sunday

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Sunday

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

Average summer week July

Saturday 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

FIGURE 4.2.4.27 Thermal performance comparison of SED and Emtech Studios

103

THERMAL SIMULATIONS WINTER ANALYSIS CASE 1 As expected at the onset, the occupancy gains are absolutely necessary for the space to have the ideal temperatures.

It is also observed that unlike in other spaces studied, the temperature here does not drop as much so as to be similiar to the outside temperature.

CASE 2 In pursuit of decreasing the amount of heat load necessary to keep the space thermally comfortable, the approach sought was the implementation of night shutters. This is on top of the double glazing which is already in place.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

The result is not a drastic improvement, with only 0.5-1.5K difference from the base case. This, however, brings some more hours within the comfort zone.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.4.28 Parametric thermal simulations for 1st Floor, 16 Morwell - winter

104

THERMAL SIMULATIONS SUMMER ANALYSIS CASE 1 In summer, 1st Floor of 16 Morwell can experience temperatures as high as 35°C. Even without occupancy, high temperatures can be observed, easily making the space uncomfortable.

CASE 2 At the moment, the windows in the space are not supposed to be opened because of the mechanical air conditioning in place.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

However, the group finds that simply taking advantage of the adaptive opportunity to open the windows will do wonders to the space in terms of thermal comfort. The use of windows from 30% to 80% opening is enough to maintain the indoor temperature at a comfortable level for most of the day, whether occupied or not.

10 17 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21 10 21

FIGURE 4.2.4.28 Parametric thermal simulations for 1st Floor, 16 Morwell - summer

105

106

16 Morwell 1st Floor; Night Shutters, Operable Windows.

January

March

February

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

40 35

Comfort Band

30 25 20 15 10

1st Floor Temperature

5

Outside Temperature

0

30

-­‐5

FIGURE 4.2.4.29 Year-long temperature data for improved case, 1st Floor, 16 Morwell

Annual Heat Gains

Kwh/m2

16

THERMAL SIMULATIONS IMPROVED CASE

14 12

Without having to implement drastic changes and by just using the existing opportunities in the building, 1st Floor of 16 Morwell can actually operate as a free-running space for most of the occupied hours during the year, thus challenging the need for energy-intensive air conditioning currently in use.

10 8 0

4

-­‐2

2

-­‐4

-­‐14

to be r No ve m be r De ce m be r

be r

Oc

m

st

pt e

Se

ly

Au gu

Ju

ne Ju

ay M

ril Ap

ar M

ua r

Opaque Elements

-­‐18 ch

Infiltra.on y

-­‐16

Ja

Equipment Gains

-­‐12

y

Occupancy Gains

-­‐10

br

Ligh.ng Gains

-­‐8

Fe

Solar Gains

-­‐6

nu ar

ly Au gu st Se

pt em be r Oc to be r No ve m be r De ce m be r

Ju

ne Ju

ay M

ril

Ap

ch ar

M

ua r br

Fe

nu a

ry

y

0 Ja

Annual Heat Losses

Kwh/m2

6

Glazing Elements

FIGURE 4.2.4.30 Annual heat gains and losses, 1st Floor, 16 Morwell

107

16 Morwell 1st Floor; Thermal Conclusions January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

December

November

40 35 70

30

60

25

Comfort Band

50

20

40

15

30

10 5

20

0

10

-­‐5

0

.5-­‐1 ac/h Winter

1st Floor, 16 Morwell Temperature Outside Temperature

30

.5-­‐1 ac/h Winter

2-­‐24 ac/h Summer

FIGURE 4.2.4.31 Year-long thermal data,1st Floor, 16 Morwell - conclusion

Winter 1ST FLOOR, 16 MORWELL: THERMAL STUDIES

Improved 1.31

CONCLUSION After seeing that comfortable free-running conditions are achievable, it is important to note that in the cold months, each space would need around 27-30 occupants to keep it within the comfort zone.

During the summer, an occupancy of 40 or more in either of the two spaces would also bring about overheating and the mere use of the windows may not be enought to keep the space thermally comfortable.

Kwh/m2

Base Case Kwh/m2 1.31

0

0.5

1

1.5

FIGURE 4.2.4.32 Annual heating load, 1st Floor, 16 Morwell

35

35

30

30

25

25

20

20

15

15

10

10

5

5 1

3

5

7

9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

0

1

3

5

7

9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

Outside 5 occupants 10 occupants 20 occupants

50 occupants 40 occupants 30 occupants

2

Improved 1.31 Kwh/m2

FIGURE 4.2.4.34 Occupant density changes for an avergae winter and summer days

Base Case 19.31

1

0

5

10

15

Kwh/m2

20

FIGURE 4.2.4.33 Annual cooling load, 1st Floor, 16 Morwell

108

40

0

In both the base and improved cases, it is found that some occupied early morning hours will need heating.

As for the cooling load, the requirement can potentially be reduced from 19.31 Kwh/m2 to 1.31 Kwh/m2 just by the appropiate use of windows and folluwing an occupancy-matched conditioning.

Summer

40

25

THERMAL STUDIES Hours

CONCLUSION

800

Amount of Hours per month

The occupied hours within the comfort band have increased, more significantly so during the summer.

700 600

As for the base case, heating is only 6% of the time if based on occupied hours only. This is further brought down to 5% in the improved case.

500

The total hours in a year that the space is overheating is 18.5% but taking into consideration only the occupied hours, it is only 13%. In the improved case, only 0,42% of the occupied hours is considered overheating.

400 300 200 100

Occupied Hours with in the Comfort Band Improved Case

Occupied Hours in the Comfort Band Base Case

0

As with the other spaces, the 1st Floor-16 Morwell performs differently if gauged based on occupied hours. As the spaces are primarily for people, it makes a lot of difference to do things based on them.

No ve m be r De ce m be r

be to Oc

be em pt Se

r

r

st Au

gu

ly Ju

ne

ay M

Ju

ril Ap

ch ar M

ry ua br Fe

Ja

nu

ar

y

16 Morwell can be free-running for several months in a year without compromising occupant comfort, just as the studies show. Just by providing more adaptive opportunities, comfort can be achieved. In so doing, more energy is also conserved.

FIGURE 4.2.4.35 Occupied hours within the comfort band showing base case and improved case

Base Case Heating Requirement

Percentage of hours in a year the space requires heating.

(Below 18°C)

34%

Base Case Overheating

18.5%

6%

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating.

(Above 28°C)

Percentage of hours in a year the space requires heating and is occupied. (Below 18°C)

100%

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating and is occupied. (Above 28°C)

100%

Total percentage of hours a year.

Total percentage of hours a year.

Improved Case Heating Requirement 34%

Percentage of hours in a year the space requires heating.

(Below 18°C)

13%

Improved Case Overheating

5%

Percentage of hours in a year the space requires heating and is occupied. (Below 18°C)

100%

Total percentage of hours in a year.

0.80%

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating.

(Above 28°C)

0.42%

Percentage of hours in a year the space is overheating and is occupied. (Above 28°C)

100%

Total percentage of hours a year.

FIGURE 4.2.4.36 Heating requirement and overheating hours

109

AIR QUALITY STUDY CARBON DIOXIDE CONCENTRATION The first floor of the 16 Morwell building is home to the SED and EmTech master programs on the AA schools, being the space where the team spent most of its time for the past months. After spending long hours there, it was noticed that the air quality of the space wasn’t very good, the studios were very smelly during the lunch hours, and the air got stuffy and people started feeling sleepy after being there for some consecutive hours. Even though the space is air conditioned and the windows are not supposed to be opened at any time, it was observed that students and teachers opened the windows and the interior door to the corridor to get fresh air and remove the strong odors. That’s why is it was decided to carry out an experiment measuring the CO2 concentrations during several days, with and without the air conditioning in both studios and without telling the students to monitor the ppm concentrations and the reactions of its occupants to it.

The main hypothesis was that the mechanical system wasn’t supplying the necessary fresh air and instead it was recycling it without putting enough new fresh air in. After a lot of research, there was no complete information about the installed system in the school but the experiment results were enough to prove it wasn’t working as it was supposed to. It was observed that the day the AC was on (Nov. 20), the concentrations were higher than the days it was turned off in the SED studio, reaching almost 1900ppm at some point in the afternoon. In general, after 11am and until 6pm the ppm concentrations were above the recommended limit for schools, which is 1000 ppm as per Building Buletin 96 and CIBSE guide A. Different behaviour patterns were also noticed. In the morning, before the spaces were occupied the, CO2 concentration measuring device stated around 600-800ppm. They started rising rapidly, breaching the 1000ppm limit at 11am and reaching its highest point just before lunch time at 1pm. Between the break, 1pm-2pm the concentrations lowered with the lower occupancy but went rapidly higher at 3pm. At this hour the windows were opened constantly as the food odors are high after people have just had lunch.

The EmTech students got interested in the new device measuring their indoor air quality after the first day and that’s why they started using their adaptive means more, opening their windows constantly and keeping the door to the corridor opened. The students in the SED studio were less aware of it and so their behavioural patterns are more constant over the three days.

FIGURE 4.2.4.37 CO2 Concentration study for SED and EmTech studios

110

The days the AC was off, Nov. 18 and 19, it registered lower CO2 concentrations over the day but still were not all the time under the required limit.

This could be explained and based on our observations and talks with the occupants, by the fact that people rely on the mechanical systems and do not open windows even if they have the opportunity, and in cold seasons they are afraid to get cold. But, as the experiment graph shows, as soon as one window was opened, the concentrations lowered rapidly most of the time even if it was less than a cm without lowering the indoor temperature and without causing any discomfort.

As the mentioned regulations state, when school and working spaces have more than 1000ppm concentration, its because they are not complying with the 10l/s ventilation rate needed. But independently of the ventilation system used, as conclusion, it could be stated that if people were more aware of the adaptive means and possibilities they have, opening windows and door in this case, better comfort conditions could be achieved rapidly, better, and by less energy-demanding means.

FIGURE 4.2.4.37 CO2 Concentration study for SED and EmTech studios - typical day

111

5. GENERAL CONCLUSION DAYLIGHTING The overall daylight performance of the studied spaces of the AA School as identified in the fieldwork and surveys, is not unsatisfactory for its users and the different activities that take place in them. Nontheless there are things that could still be changed for a better comfort.

Spaces such as the RSPR and the first floor of the 16 Morwell street which are illuminated at both sides tend to have a marked passive zone towards the center and high lux levels near the windows. However, RSPR, because of the higher window to floor area and floor to ceiling height with 2:1 ratio compared with the 2.8:1 from the other, has a much better performance. The rear second presentation room as showed in the different studies suffers from a very high contrast and that is why light shelves were simulated proving to even the light without compromising the over all illumination of the space.

SPACE

|

RSPR

LIBRARY

1ST FLOOR

SED OFFICE

16 MORWELL

window to wall

55%

47%

38%

75%

window to floor

24%

43%

22%

65%

floor to ceiling

6.41 X 4.32 m 8.44 X 4.32 m

7.85 X3.62 m

5.33 X 4.03 m

10.52 X 2.6 m

The 16 Morwell building has a totally different condition that causes its low daylight levels, occurring mostly in the lowest floors all year round.This is due to its location in a high-density urban area with narrow streets and high buildings nearby. Simulations were done and even if the space had higher-reflectance materials, the conditions are difficult to improve with realistic solutions.

On the other hand, the other two spaces with single-sided windows mostly tend to have different performances with its daylighting. The library which uses permanent artificial light tends to have low lux levels that get worse as one moves to the back part because all of its walls are covered with books, dark coloured furniture and crowded distribution, but even thought it doesn’t meet the minimum requirements for illuminance, observations showed us activities have changed and the use of laptops lessen need of light. If realistic measures were to be taken, the use of high reflectance furniture, tables and bookshelf covers and taking off the furniture blocking the light near the façade window will give much better lux levels because the space has a good window areas and ceiling height.

base case

base case base case

base case

The SED faculty office, because of its position on the top of a 4-story building, has a very good daylight availability to the point it could get glare and high solar gains in summer months. Because of its narrow plan and South-West orientation, most of the direct light comes in the afternoon and enters directly to the space. The use of several shading devices is needed.

As a conclusion, spaces in the AA can have very different activities changing over the day and the year and they have to have adaptive means to satisfy them. The use of blinds, solar shading and different furniture arrangements can help them use the space in the most fitting way, using the least amount of artificial light and having higher comfort levels.

Also, different ways of teaching, studying and interacting in schools are changing constantly with the use of new technologies and the school has to be able to evolve with them.

112

DAYLIGHT FACTOR %

0.8 lrv + no fron funiture

FIGURE 5.1 Daylighting performance comparison among different AA Spaces

No obstruction

No obstruction

With furniture

GENERAL CONCLUSION THERMAL ANALYSIS Just by applying very simple and possible measures into the four different spaces, the results can be drastic.

All the spaces were able to achieve between 45-65% of hours a year wherein there is no need for mechanical systems.

With this, not only occupant comfort is being attained but also the considerable savings in electricity and gas consumption.

If a space is zoned, it can potentially save 50% of energy use and if it is occupancy-matched, the savings can be as high as 70%.

It is clear that the Rear Second Presentation Room and the SED Office are spaces that work in a very similar way, that is, following the outside temperatures.

The Library, due to its constant occupancy and the influence of the books as was explained in the report, it was able to reach likeable temperatures easily.

Morwell 16, being air-conditioned and hence consumes the biggest amount of electricity, is the one that needs the least amount of intervention to perform in a better way. Just by using the adaptive opportunities already existing, the space can maintain comfortable levels for its occupants.

FIGURE 5.2 Diagram showing the percentage of hours in a year the spaces would require heating, are overheating, and are not in need of mechanical systems.

113

OVERALL CONCLUSIONS

‘Is the performance of the spaces optimum for the activities that take place in them?’

‘To what extent can the comfortable temperature be main- ‘Are the spaces “enjoyed” by its occupants?’ tained without conventional heating?’

The original Georgian Houses do not comply with the contemporary standards and regulations and they run dependent on the outside temperature for most part of the year. The AA being located in these houses not meant to be a school makes of it a place were the opportunities to refurbish are limited due to the site´s historic value.

To be able to keep what is considered “comfortable” in terms of temperature, the spaces might rely on occupancy and adaptive opportunity, which could from a certain perspective, be seen as an issue when it really is an interesting example of the interaction between a space and its users. (Passive design goals).

The Library in terms of illuminance, what originally appeared to be a place performing below standards and minimum requirements is actually welcomed and even appreciated. Being occupied for most of the open hours is more than enough proof of it. One cause of this could be the fact that it is the only space evaluated that has a delightful view to the outside (Bedford Square), and there is a direct perspective to the sky from every working space.

The two spaces that perform best are luckily the two that are used the most: the library and 16 Morwell 1st floor. The library is occupied throughout all the school´s working hours; although its occupancy varies; and 16 Morwell 1st floor during lesson hours is always occupied by around 60 people, and keeps being used until 10:00 pm most of the days. Rear Second Presentation Room is the space that behaves in the most variable way. Has different densities, in different times. And the SED Office despite being the worst performing space analysed behaving parallel to the outside, it is the one used less and by the least amount of people.

Rear Second Presentation Room naturally has an excellent environment for some of the activities that take place inside of it, but maybe not a very good one for others. This is expected in so multi-purpose a space. Having a very considerable window to wall area, it develops more than sufficient levels of illuminance; that becomes a problem when presentations take place and the space needs to be dimmed.

SED Office due to its location at the highest level of the building, “suffers” from the substantial amount of sunlight it receives during the warmer months, and sometimes this ends up causing overheating, it keeps the space well lit for more than half of the occupied hours a year.

Sixteen Morwell being a more recent building originally designed for offices, fell into the trend of deep plan design, and even when it is a double sided window space, only the passive zones near the windows get to be lit adequately. But even there, none of the working tables get a direct view to the sky, only the surrounding buildings.

The Architectural Association has made Bedford Square buildings its home. Creating a sense of identity and belonging has had the power to transform an antique set of homes and constructions into a symbol. It becomes the place where people spend most of their time, and when a huge percentage of the users is foreign, their second home. The AA buildings are the living proof that architecture done right could last for a long time because sometimes is not only about the envelope, it is also about how people perceive it.

“I’m more than two centuries old and people sAll like me” – 36 Bedford Square

“I want to be FREE! (-­‐running)” –16 Morwell St.

“I’m dark and hot.” –AA Library “I’m the brightest!”

– Rear Second Presenta?on Room

114

MARIA TERESA SÁNCHEZ PEREZ GONZALEZ

JUANITO ALIPIO A. DE LA ROSA

Choosing the AA installations as our main research space was a challenging thing to do. While at the beggining could have sound as the easiest one; it came out to be an extremelly interesting experience.

The old is seldom preferred to the new because it is often associated with decay, instability, weakness, inefficiency and what have you. However, this is not always the case. One of surprises for me in doing this research endeavor is the realization that the over 200-year old Georgian houses which the AA School uses are still functioning well. In many cases, its spaces have more ideal conditions than the young and new 16 Morwell building.

By looking at the other projects we had, you could be able to guess why the architects designed them the way they did, and have an idea of why decitions were taken; but in the AA being such an old group of buildings that were not meant to be a school and that had to be refurbished, the answers were not so clear to see.

Being able to live the spaces every day and see all the different ways they were used and their constant changes, was for me; the clearest way to understand all the theory taught in the course. If we had chosen other school , that we could only have visited once or twice, it would not have been simple to realise if the results obtained in our software analysis were accurate or not. But by experiencing the spaces ourselfs you could see how temperatures rised or lowed; if the daylight income was actually enough for working; how density immediatly increased the levels of CO2… but most importantly how all these affected the occupants behavior.

While doing this report, I have learned things that everyone should apply while designing a space, but always using them having the main goal set…people.

CINDRELLA SEMAAN This type of research was both interesting and challenging in studying the typology of London schools, in particular how to take advantage of Georgian houses design and transform them from a residential into educational buildings. Moreover the decision of studying one of the new technical/modern buildings (16 morwell building) in the AA school raised up several questions on how sustainable, environmental & energy-efficient it is than the Georgian houses?

The shocking results in relation to illuminance and thermal data clarified our analytical questions and doubts and raised the types of simulations we tried for better solutions.

What helped us understand better the four spaces (library, rear second presentation room, SED/EMTECH Studio, SED office) our presence at school that facilitated in the observation on hourly or daily basis. Each space had a certain problem either due to the orientation or obstruction or furniture reflectance.

For example in the library main façade (North west oriented) is overshadowed almost all year long, mainly during the afternoon, because of its orientation therefore the library has very low daylight levels that aren’t evenly distributed; only good lux levels were present next to the windows but decreased significantly towards the back of the space where the bookshelves are located. The rear second presentation room has a very marked passive zone in the center of the space which is not a problem for the activities running in this room but the kind of such activities should be placed in another space and be replaced by workshops and seminars. As for SED & Emtech internal heat gains were recognized in the thermal simulations moreover although both spaces have the same orientation and are on the same floor they had difference in daylight levels where SED was lower in illuminance than EmTech. Finally the SED office that had high illuminance levels during summer which caused glare and internal heat gains in the space that we tried to solve by conceptual shading device.

All spaces were different than each other although they fit in the same kind of program; ‘an educational building’ & since different spaces and different occupants could have different comfort levels, it is preferable to be within the comfort band in the design interventions & keep in mind that the occupant using the space can adapt strategies that will keep him within his comfortable visual/ thermal level.

6. EPILOGUE PERSONAL OUTCOMES

The AA School (in the Georgian houses) is for me a solid example of a refurbishment project that keeps the charm of the building, creates intimate spaces at personal scale, adapts to changing needs, and even manages to keep the energy consumption relatively low.

This leads to another realization, which is the unsatisfactory performance of an air-conditioned space such as 16 Morwell. These spaces are not necessarily the most comfortable and the additional energy cost for its use may not be worth it. Innovative design should continue to help us do away with the engineering gene that gives us the propensity to use mechanical systems indiscriminately just because technology is available or because there is money to pay for its use anyway.

I have likewise come to realize how much different a space performs if gauged in the context of occupied hours. After all, spaces for people have to be designed with the people in mind. This brings occupant-matched conditioning to the fore, the use of which leads to big energy savings. In the same light, I have seen how we must not be always held hostage by numbers, such as standards, as they were meant to serve the people and not the other way around. If occupants can be comfortable in situations that are below ‘standards,’ then so be it.

MARIA FRANCISCA ECHIVERRI ARANZAZU The opportunity to study different schools and the AA school in dept gave us the opportunity to understand the complexity of this typology and how different design decisions could affect the needed balance between the thermal and daylight comfort .

The AA School which is located in several refurbished Georgian houses from late 1770´s compared to a school such as the Millennium School in Greenwich, designed as a sustainable building and built for its actual purpose on 2000, show us how no matter what new technologies and new resources we have good design decisions are decisive for a good thermal and daylight performance. As shown in the research outcomes and the interviews done to the school’s community good comfort conditions are provided in most of the cases and its users are satisfied.

In contrast, the Millennium School with its main southern suffers from high indoor temperatures, glare and poor distribution of light, to the point that air conditioned is now being installed.The AA School has managed to expand its campus cleverly inside the spaces that were designed as dwellings and even though they have to be preserved in many of its original conditions, different spaces are conditioned for the different needs with success. Not surprising the building that has the poorest performance is the one located on 16 Morwell street built as an office building on the 1990s and the only one in the campus that is air conditioned. The spaces used as lecture and seminar rooms have low daylight levels due to its deep plan and low ceiling height , high obstruction angles because of the surrounding buildings, and narrow streets, and poor indoor air quality in many of its spaces.The results given by the research and simulations done show that for a great part of the year this building could work as a free running not only lowering the energy consumption but having better thermal and daylight conditions. As for the other spaces improvements can be done in a realistic way changing the furniture material and arrangement and indoor reflectance and material conditions. But, in both cases the good use of adaptive opportunities could give better thermal and daylight comfort by involving its occupants to do so.

115

116

7. REFERENCES -Arboleda S., Guzman J., Natanian J., Pradeep S. (2013) Evelyn Grace Academy: : Urban case studies Refurbishing the City, Msc/March Sustainable Environmental Design Architectural Association.

-ASHRAE (2013) Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy ASHRAE 55, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers.

-Baker N., Steemers K. (2002) Daylight design of buildings, James & James London.

-Buildings Buletin 101 (2006) Natural Ventilation in Schools, Regulations Standards Design Guidance.

-Byrne, A. (1990). Bedford Square: An Architectural Study, Burns & Oates London.

-CIBSE (2006) Natural Ventilation in non Domestic Buildings, The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, London.

-CIBSE (2006) Environmental design Guide A, The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, London.

-Clancy Eoin (2011) Indoor Air quality and ventilation, The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, London.

-Google Maps. (n.d.). Retrieved 2014, Available at:http://maps.google. com -London Weather Archive. (n.d.). Retrieved 09 2008, from WeatherUnderground: http://www.wunderground.com - Longstaffe-Gowan T. (2012) A Little history of Bedford Square, Yale University Press, Available at: www. http://yalebooksblog.co.uk/ -Nicol F. (2012) Adaptive Thermal Comfort, Routledge London.

-Nitin B., Parag S., Pushkin P., Yun Ho C., (2008) AA Premises: Urban case studies Refurbishing the City, Msc/March Sustainable Environmental Design Architectural Association.

-Papacosta E., Polytimi I., Riveros G., Theodorou A. (2008) Millenium Primary School: Urban case studies Refurbishing the City, Msc/March Sustainable Environmental Design Architectural Association.

-Satel-Light. (n.d.). Retrieved December 2014, from Available at::http:// www.satel-light.com -Szokolay, S. K. (2003). Introduction to Architectural Science : TheBasis of Sustainable Design. New York: Architectural Press.

-Yannas S. (1994) Solar Energy and Housing Design Volumes 1 and 2, Architectural Association Publications London.

-Yannas S. (1995) Design of Educational Buildings, Environment and Energy Studies Programme, AA Graduate School London.

-Wright & Wright (2014) Arhitectural Association , At: www.wrightandwright.co.uk (December 2014)

117

118

8. APPENDIX Overall satisfaction Survey - AA Community

Timestamp

Age

City/Town and Country

Occupation

Year / Programme

Which space / room are you in most of the time?

On what floor is the space / room located

11/1/2014 10:58:51

27

bogota/colobia

Student

SED

classroom / studio / lecture room

1st floor

11/1/2014 11:08:49

27

leon

Student

SED

classroom / studio / lecture room

In what period of the day Which of the following do are you usually in this you personally adjust or space? control in your space?

How satisfied are you with the general temperature in your space?

If you are dissatisfied with the temperature in your space, which of the following contribute to your dissatisfaction?

How would you describe the source of this discomfort?

In general, how satisfied In general, how satisfied are you with the visual In general, how satisfied are you with the air comfort of the lighting are you with the noise quality in your work (e.g. glare, reflections, level in your work space? space? (i.e. stuffy/stale etc.) air, odor)

Which space at the AA do you feel most comfortable in/at?

All things considered (temperature, air quality, visual comfort, noise level, etc.), how satisfied are you with the AA physical environment?

Comments (optional):

AA

Morning, Afternoon

door to exterior space

1

Often too hot

Humidity too low (dry), Air movement too low

1

1

1

Gallery

2

1st floor

Morning, Afternoon

none of these

3

Often too hot

Heat from equipment

3

3

3

Cafeteria

3

1st floor

Morning, Afternoon, Evening, All day

operable window

0

Always too hot

Heat from equipment

3

0

3

Studio / Classroom

1

1

3

4

Studio / Classroom

3

5

5

5

comp room

5

4

3

4

bar

4

Air movement too low

3

3

2

Library

3

11/7/2014 16:33:15

20

Bangkok

Student

Inter 5

classroom / studio / lecture room

11/7/2014 16:33:59

26

Monterrey, MĂŠxico

Student

SED

classroom / studio / lecture room

Ground floor

All day

window blinds or shade, operable window

5

11/7/2014 16:34:00

30

uk

Student

aadrl

classroom / studio / lecture room

2nd floor

All day

window blinds or shade, room air-conditioning unit

2

11/7/2014 16:35:06

26

lima, peru

Student

phase 2 SED

classroom / studio / lecture room

Ground floor

Afternoon, All day

window blinds or shade, operable window

4

11/7/2014 16:35:16

21

Baton Rouge, USA

Student

Third

classroom / studio / lecture room

Ground floor

Morning, Afternoon, Evening

window blinds or shade, operable window

3

Occasionally too hot

1st/SED

classroom / studio / lecture room

All day

room air-conditioning unit, operable window

3

Occasionally too hot

Heat from equipment

3

3

2

Terrace

3

Air movement too low, The area is hotter/colder than in other areas

0

0

1

Studio / Classroom

0

11/7/2014 16:36:03

27

Madrid/Spain

Student

2nd floor

11/7/2014 16:36:16

27

London

Student

5th

classroom / studio / lecture room

3rd floor

Afternoon, Evening

11/7/2014 16:36:39

24

Turkey

Student

1st EmTech

classroom / studio / lecture room

1st floor

11/7/2014 16:37:27

25

SANTIAGO DE COMPOSTELA, SPAIN

Student

2014-2015/SED

classroom / studio / lecture room

11/7/2014 16:39:21

31

London

Administrative Staff

11/7/2014 16:39:46

26

Mexico City

Student

11/7/2014 16:41:53

77

London

Tutor / Lecturer / Professor

11/7/2014 16:42:01

36

Spain

Tutor / Lecturer / Professor

11/7/2014 16:42:01

27

THESSALONIKI GREECE

Student

11/7/2014 16:43:38

34

UK

Administrative Staff

11/7/2014 16:44:12

19

Trento, Italy

Student

11/7/2014 16:45:04 11/7/2014 16:46:36 11/7/2014 16:48:40

24 28 27

Thessaloniki, Greece Italian mexico

2015 Sustainable Environmental Design

Student Student Student

Humidity too low (dry)

0

Often too hot

All day

operable window

5

Occasionally too cold

Noise from equipment

5

5

3

Studio / Classroom

4

1st floor

All day

room air-conditioning unit, door to interior space, thermostat

1

Often too cold

The area is hotter/colder than in other areas

4

4

4

Library

4

office

2nd floor

All day

portable fan, operable window

4

Heat from equipment, Uncomfortable light levels

0

3

0

bar

3

classroom / studio / lecture room

Ground floor

All day

Heat from equipment

2

2

2

Cafeteria

4

Adaptive Opportunities this is a really stupid survey and clearly bears no relation whatsoever to the very particular conditions of a school of architecture which occupies a collection of

3rd floor

All day

classroom / studio / lecture room

2nd floor

All day

classroom / studio / lecture room

1st floor

Morning, Afternoon, Evening, All day

office

Ground floor

All day

Foundation

classroom / studio / lecture room

2nd floor

All day

MSc SED

classroom / studio / lecture room

1st floor

All day

DRL

classroom / studio / lecture room

3rd floor

All day

sed 2014 2015

classroom / studio / lecture room

1st floor

All day

3rd floor

Morning, Afternoon

window blinds or shade, permanent heater, door to interior space, window blinds or shade, door to interior space, operable window, window blinds or shade, operable window window blinds or shade, door to interior space, door to exterior space, permanent heater, door to interior space, portable fan, operable window door to interior space, operable window

2

Occasionally too hot

5 1

Always too hot

Humidity too high (damp), Heat from equipment

4

Occasionally too hot

Heat from equipment

5 3

5

5

5

confortable in what way ?

5

1

1

1

Terrace

1

3

2

5

Terrace

4

5

5

5

Gallery

5

Often too cold

Air movement too high

4

4

5

Studio / Classroom

5

1

3

4

Terrace

4

operable window

3

Occasionally too cold

The area is hotter/colder than in other areas, CO2 levels

window blinds or shade

0

Often too cold

Air movement too high

0

1

0

Library

0

3

Often too hot

Air movement too low

4

4

5

Library

4

1

Occasionally too cold

Air movement too high

1

1

3

Studio / Classroom

1

window blinds or shade, operable window portable heater, door to interior space, operable window

11/7/2014 16:49:02

23

Cairo egypt

Student

4

classroom / studio / lecture room

11/7/2014 16:49:32

29

Guadalajara/Mexico

Student

SED

classroom / studio / lecture room

2nd floor

Afternoon, Evening

none of these

4

Always too hot

Humidity too low (dry), The area is hotter/colder than in other areas

5

1

2

Library

2

11/7/2014 16:49:43

50

London

Tutor / Lecturer / Professor

classroom / studio / lecture room

2nd floor

All day

window blinds or shade, door to interior space, door to exterior space, operable window

4

Occasionally too hot

Incoming sun, The area is hotter/colder than in other areas

3

3

3

Studio / Classroom

4

11/7/2014 16:51:05

19

Kyiv/Ukraine

Student

First Year

classroom / studio / lecture room

1st floor

All day

none of these

4

Occasionally too hot

A lot of people in the room

3

4

5

Library

5

DRL

classroom / studio / lecture room

2nd floor

All day

room air-conditioning unit, thermostat, operable window

3

Occasionally too cold

Air movement too high

3

4

5

Cafeteria

4

16 months

classroom / studio / lecture room

1st floor

All day

operable window

3

Occasionally too hot

Air movement too low

2

3

3

Studio / Classroom

2

4

3

0

Corridor / Hallway

4

11/7/2014 16:52:59 11/7/2014 16:55:30

11/7/2014 16:55:31

27 23

25

Italy Silchar, india

India

Student Student

Student

11/7/2014 16:55:46

42

london

Administrative Staff

11/7/2014 16:56:08

25

london

Student

11/7/2014 16:57:01

22

Istanbul

Student

11/7/2014 16:57:38 11/7/2014 16:58:05

30 49

London London

Maintenance / Service Staff Administrative Staff

MARCH/SED

On a general note, the AA spaces are not adapted to house student facilities and the amount of people occupying the spaces.

permanent heater, operable window, light

classroom / studio / lecture room

HOUSING AND URBANISM PHASE 2

Occasionally too cold

classroom / studio / lecture room

Ground floor

All day

operable window

4

Occasionally too cold

Incoming sun, The area is hotter/colder than in other areas

4

Occasionally too cold

The area is hotter/colder than in other areas

4

4

5

office

4

office

Basement

All day

window blinds or shade, permanent heater, door to interior space, portable fan, operable window

5th year

classroom / studio / lecture room

3rd floor

All day

door to interior space, door to exterior space, Need more ventilation

2

Occasionally too hot

Air movement too low

1

1

1

Terrace

1

2014/2015 SED MSc

classroom / studio / lecture room

1st floor

Morning, Afternoon

room air-conditioning unit, thermostat, operable window

2

Occasionally too cold

Incoming sun, The area is hotter/colder than in other areas

3

3

4

Studio / Classroom

3

4

Occasionally too hot

Humidity too high (damp)

4

5

4

office

4

Occasionally too hot

Incoming sun, Heat from equipment

2

1

4

Terrace

2

office office

Basement

All day

2nd floor

Morning, Afternoon, Evening

door to interior space, portable fan, operable window window blinds or shade, portable heater, portable fan, operable window

2

The air in the offices can be stale. The only way to refresh it is to open the window but this is not practical in the colder weather.

I think your survey isn't detailed enough wirh regard to such a complicated building: Geogian rooms are very different from extensions built in the 60s or more recently constructed spaces. Also few acadmemic staff spend their time in only one type of space (we move

Please have the spaces better ventilated and better noise controlled. Please make school's circulation more convenient.

119

Point in time and Overall satisfaction Surveys

120

General information

OCCUPANCY

SPACE

UNITS

LIBRARY A

LIBRARY B

SRPR

1ST FLOOR MORWELL

SED OFFICE

SIZE

M

16.6 X 6.41 X 4.32

5.22 X 8.44 X 4.32

19.11 X 7.85 X 3.62

30.54 X 10.25 X 2.6

5.33 x 3.28

FLOOR AREA

M2

103.48

40.52

149.44

237.64

17.42

445

174.22

540.97

617.67

65.85

south west - north east (main façade)

south west - north east (main façade)

south west - north east (main façade)

south west (main façade) - north east

south west - north east (main façade)

6

3

10

22

3

1.25 X 3.54

1.04 X 2.96

5.52/307 X 2.46

1.76 X 1.73 / 1.56 X 1.47

5.33 X 0.60 / 5.33 X 0.60 / 5.33 X 0.93

VOLUME

M3

ORIENTATION NO. OF WINDOWS

#

GLAZING

SIZE OF WINDOWS

619.22

AREA OF WINDOWS

M2

25.72

9.24

64.12

51.56

11.35

TOTAL EFFECTIVE GLAZED AREA

M2

18.00

6.47

44.88

36.09

7.95

%

56%

55%

47%

38%

75%

single glazed / wood frame

single glazed / wood frame

double glazed / metalic frame

continuos

-

blackouts

venetian blinds

sun screen

5.1

5.1

2.9

5.7

137.8

135.05

15.0342

2

2

0.6

1.25

white paint

white paint

white paint

white paint

GLAZING % TYPE OF WINDOW TYPE OF BLINDS WINDOW U VALUE

NE

30.55

20

SW

33.57

22

149.44

WINDOW TO FLOOR RATIO

FLOOR AREA

WALL

SRPR

WALL AREA WALL U VALUE

w/m²K M2

46.16

16.9

w/m²K

WALL FINISHES ROOF U VALUE

0.75

w/m²K

FIRST MORWELL 16 19.62

8

SW

31.94

13

237.64

WINDOW TO FLOOR RATIO

WINDOW TO FLOOR RATIO

%

LARGE COPIER

70 320

LAPTOPS

50

INTERNAL GAINS

70

SENSIBLE

LATENT

75

55

dark green carpet

#

6 radiators

W

2800

OCCUPANTS

OCCUPANCY DENSITY FUNCTION ACTIVITY PATTERN

0.2

0.2

4 chairs / 2 desks / 1 table

75 tables / chairs

4 tables

2 radiatiors

9 radiators

AC (cold air and warm air)

3 radiators

15.99

560

1170.0

730.00

M-F 10AM-9PM / S 10AM-5PM 10AM - 7PM

30/ 50W halogenspot

32+10 54W /840 + 5 24W/840 + 22 / 50Whalogenspot= sed 36 x 54w/840 + 7 24x/840 + 20 halogenspot= EMTech

1 x 20 W + 1 x 100 W

1500

6600

140

30-60

30+30

3

3000

6000

6000

1 proyector + sound system + tv.screens

60 laptops / projector

2 computer + 1 laptop

300

3300

M-S 9AM-10PM

M-S 9AM-10PM

M-S 9AM-10PM

10AM - 7PM

10AM - 7PM

#

20

4

30

120

3

P/M2

5.2

40.524

149.4430

237.64120

17.41523

seminar / clasrrom / envent / lecture hall

classroom

office / meeting

sedentary / standing

sedentary / workshop activity

sedentary

PEAK TIME OCCUPANCY

0.2

1 laser printer + 8 LCD + 2 printer-photocopier + 2 scanners + laptops W

brick masonry

76 black plastic chairs / 34 tables

20-25

OCCUPANTS

concrete columns and beams

0.2

31 (X2) / 54W fluorecent (indirect light) =+ 1 desk lamp

OCCUPANCY TIME

OCCUPANCY

MONITORS W LASER PRINTER W

dark green carpet

HVAC

APPLIACES

15

grey carpet

#

26.09

65%

grey carpet

FURNITURE

W

22%

masonry

5 wood tables/ 50 chairs - 5 desks 5chairs

LIGHTS

43%

masonry

0.2

REFLECTANCE

APPLIACES

300

SCANNER

OFFICE WORK

IDEL

23%

FLOORING TYPE

LIGHTING FIXTURES

CONTINUOS

25%

STRUCTURE

FLOOR / FURNITURE

FLOOR AREA

NE

reading - studing space mostly sedentary

121

Energy index

250 y = 68.795x -­‐ 103.78 R² = 0.89223 200

150

100

50

00

122

00

01

01

02

02

03

03

04

04

05

05

HLC

EI CH / m2

MORWELL 16

1.7

31.0

LIBRARY

3.1

67.0

SECOND REAR PRESENTATION

4.4

191.0

OFFICE

4.2

215.0

LOCATION Bedford Square Borough of Camden, London

NOR TH E S AS T- S OUTH WE S T

35 Effra Parade Borough of Lambeth, London

S OUTH E AS T – NOR TH WE S T

255 Shakespeare Road Borough of Lambeth, London

S OUTH E AS T – NOR TH WE S T

50 John Harrison Way Borough of Greenwich, London

NOR TH- S OUTH

123

LOCATION EXISTING STUDIES CONCLUSIONS 124

Bedford Square Borough of Camden, London

35 Effra Parade Borough of Lambeth, London

255 Shakespeare Road Borough of Lambeth, London

50 John Harrison Way Borough of Greenwich, London

Year Studied: 2008-2009

Year Studied: 2008-2009

Year Studied: 2012-2013

Year Studied: 2008-2009

The report analyzed four spaces within the AA School: -Dr. Yannas’s Office -Front Members Room -First Floor Front and First Floor Back studio -Bloomsbury Front and Back Studios

The study on this school focused on two main areas: -Community Center -Nursery School

This comprehensive report has studies Four spaces were studied for this on two main general areas: report: -Outdoors (playgrounds) -Classroom -Indoors (classrooms) -Community Hall -Library -Extended day room

Refurbishment of Georgian Houses, COMMUNITY CENTER no insulation, single glazing…

-openplan_ noise - Not enough air flow_ DR. YANNAS’S OFFICE highest heating loads= large exposed - Improve day lighting surface area and high U-Values of - Clerestories and roof lights-no even the construction distribution of light - Neigbours reduce daylight factor 37FFF & 36FMR lower heating loads= higher gains from the occupants NURSERY SCHOOL 30BB front studio has the lowest heating loads and high cooling loads due to better insulation of external elements and higher solar heat gains.

Shading in the play ground area

daylight/visual/thermal comfort OUTDOORS (PLAYGROUNDS) -

Switch uses- seating areas and playground INDOORS (CLASSROOMS)

- Not enough daylight back part+ glare and sun patches = light shelves -Not adaptive solar control -South oriented= light shelves Single sided - Double sided classrooms -atrium= ventilation for less energy consumption, temperature moderator , daylight distribution - overheating= lack thermal mass

CLASSROOM - Un even distribution of lights - Blinds have to be used always – direct sunlight - High heat gains COMMUNITY HALL - High heat gains multiple activities - Nos even distribution of light blinds have to be used= artificial light always on LIBRARY - No efficiently lit -Extended day room Difficoult to control heat gainsinternal and solar Blinds have to be used often+ direct sunlight and glare