Bsciencefinal

Page 1

BUILDING SCIENCE II ARC 3413

CHEN ROU ANN 1001G76463 LEE MAY WEN, ANDREA 0314320 REZAL ADRIAN 0310427 WILLIAM YAP BOON YANG 0314127 SOE WOEI HAO 0309924 WAN NUR ADRIANA 0308109 MR SIVA

2|Page

Table of content: 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Introduction to site 1.2 Aim and objectives 2.0 Precedent Study 2.1 Lighting studies : Comparison of LED and fluorescent lighting in a meeting room 2.1.1

Introduction

2.2 Method of analysis and analysis table 2.3 Summary 2.4 Acoustic precedent studies 3.0 Research Methodology 3.1 Methodology of lighting analysis 3.1.1

Description of equipment: Digital lux meter.

3.1.2

Data collection method

3.1.3

Limitations

3.1.4

Lighting analysis equations

3.2 Methodology of acoustic analysis 3.2.1

Description of equipment: Sound level meter

3.2.2

Data collection method

3.2.3

Limitations

3.2.4

Acoustic analysis equations

3.3 Other equipment 3.4 Material lighting reflectance and sound absorption data 3.5 Orthographic drawings 4.0 Lighting Analysis 4.1 Natural Lighting (Daylight) 4.2 Artificial Lighting 4.3 Types of Artificial Light 4.4 Lighting Zoning Data 4.4.1

Daylight Lux Data

4.4.2

Lux Colour Diagram

4.5 Light analysis and calculation 5.0 Acoustic Calculation and Analysis 5.1 External Noise source 5.2 Internal Noise source 5.3 Noise level Data 5.3.1

Peak Hour Reading

5.3.2

Acoustic Analysis Calculation

6.0 Conclusion

3|Page

1.0 Introduction The aim for this project is to be able to determine the quality of each element in the proposed space and conclude if the chosen elements are suitable. In order to further understand the role of acoustic and lighting performance in architectural design, a space environment was analyzed based on selected case-studies. In a group of 6, we are to produce a comprehensive documentation on the various factors affecting the lighting and acoustics of the space. The information collected is to be thoroughly analyzed and presented in the form of a report. In addition, project aims to provide a firm understanding and analysis of both lighting and acoustic layouts/arrangements with the aid of various types of methods or calculation. The analysis done at the chosen site is relevant to the present construction industry. With that said, students are able to further evaluate and explore using current materials and technology that affect the quality of lighting and acoustics in the space.

1.1 Introduction to Site

SUNWAY UNIVERSITY

Figure 1.1.1 Location plan of Garage51 Standing out on a street of auto workshops, Garage 51 can be easily distinguished by its exterior of splashed fever-dream work and its unique interior. The cafe is at located at Jalan PJS11/9, neighboring Monash University and Sunway college campus. Garage 51 has just recently been established with intention of bringing Melbourne-flavored cafĂŠ culture to Malaysian suburb. During operational hours, the cafĂŠ is filled with a majority of students. The vibrant atmosphere and close-

4|Page

quarters-seats which the café designed with, takes a bold step into the world of cafes, drawing people in for more.

Figure 1.1.2 Exterior view of Garage 51

Figure 1.1.3 Interior space of Garage 51 Advantages (based on observation) 

Whole place is well lit

Large windows inviting exterior sunlight into the space

Most of the furniture seen in the café were made from recycled products

5|Page

By night, the mood of the café changes from vibrant into a more relaxing frame of mind.

Figure 1.1.4 Exterior space of Garage 51 (night)

Figure 1.1.5 Interior space of Garage 51 (night) Disadvantages (based on observation) 

Poorly lit space

Café becomes noisier than usual

6|Page

With a concept of industrialist design, most of the materials used were left raw with minimum finishes. Garage 51 is at a two-story height, combining level 2 seats - situated above the café’s kitchen into one atmosphere with the other one below. This counteracts the narrow space the café has. One would say the glass façade on north elevation also assists the café poky weakness, which widely spanned not just merely for aesthetic reason. The glass façade serves as a channel for natural light, bringing a glimpse of urban life energy into the space. In addition to most of the café’s furniture found being made by re-cycled goods-turned-art, there is no question as to why the public would not be attracted to this café.

Figure 1.1.6 View from Garage51’s entrance to Sunway campus (newly built)

1.2 Aims and objectives Students are assigned to study the performance of light and sound in a designated space based on the following aims and objectives:  To understand the lighting and acoustic characteristics and their standard requirement in a proposed space.  To determine the characteristics and function of day-lighting & artificial lighting and sound & acoustic within the intended space.  To do a quantitative and qualitative analysis of lighting and acoustic performance.  To thoroughly report and analyze space. In order to achieve the level required for this project it is essential for us to document each data and analyzed it thoroughly. Diagrams, pictures, orthographical drawings and 3D models will be provided to enhance the clarity of the analysis.

7|Page

2.0

Precedent Studies

2.1

Lighting Study: Comparison of LED and fluorescent lighting in a meeting room

2.1.1 Introduction Place: Finland (Espoo) Building Type : Office Building This precedent study shows the study between the effectiveness of two different lighting source by comparing the results through a few studies with the first lighting source being LED and the other fluorescent lighting. The study is done in Meeting room 271, located in Otakaari 7 and is part of Aalto University’s Lighting unit. Size of the meeting room is 7m x 4.7m x 2.7m. The room contains 6 fluorescent luminaries and 2 LED luminaries. Both of these are recessed ceiling luminaries. It is also possible to utilize daylight in the room, but for this case study, daylight capabilities were removed. Luminaries:

Figure 2.1.1 Meeting Room 271

Figure 2.1.2 Philips Indolight TBS300

Figure 2.1.3 Greenlux GLP 606

8|Page

Table 2.1.1 Luminaries installation specifications The most notable thing about the luminaries specifications is that LED luminaries’ luminous efficacy increased with dimming. Fluorescent luminaries had better luminous efficacy than LEDs.

2.2 Method of Analysis and Analysis Table Illuminance, luminance and UGR values of the lighting installations were measured. Philips Indolight FL luminaries were measured using only full power but Greenflux LED luminaries were measured in addition using preset dimming level (dim = 55.5%) fluorescent and LED measurements cases were different, because fluorescent luminaries covered the whole meeting room but LEDs only the working area. Therefore the results are not fully comparable.

9|Page

Table 2.2. Measured illuminance levels

Flourescent luminaries gave much more light than LEDs but this is mainly because of the larger amount of luminaries used in the fluorescent installation. LED luminaries used less W/100 1x as can be seen in Table 2.2

10 | P a g e

Table 2.2.1 Measured Luminance Levels Luminance levels of the meeting room were lower with LED lighting than with fluorescent lighting. This was mainly due to smaller amount of LED luminaries and also much less power was used for the LED lighting. Electrical power density was 11.43 W/m2 for fluorescent luminaries and 3.71 W/m2 – 1.65 W/m2 for the LEDs, depending on the dimming level. UGR values of both installations were at about the same level.

11 | P a g e

2.3 Summary Case study showed that LED luminaries can achieve similar glare results than fluorescent luminaries, although measured LED luminaries had lower luminous efficacy than the measured fluorescent luminaire. I think this case study really showcased what kind of lighting should be used for different space to produce different results and spatial experience. We also find out the power usage for different luminaries which is very important for designers and consultants to be able to decide which lighting is able to successfully provide lighting whilst still maintaining a low power usage. Conserving power or reducing the usage of power while still allowing the building to function smoothly is always vital in achieving a great architecture. However, the study did not mention nor did it state the surrounding environment and if there were any materials that could affect the illumination of the site. Materials plays a huge role in determining whether the site is over lighted or not and should always be taken into consideration.

12 | P a g e

2.4 ACOUSTICS PRECEDENT STUDIES

WALT DISNEY CONCERT HALL Los Angeles, California, U.S.A 2003

Figure 2.4 Picture of the Walt Disney Concert Hall The Walt Disney Concert Hall opened on October 23, 2003, 16 years after the project started, as the new home of the Los Angeles Philharmonic. This $274 million stainless-steel building with flowing lines designed by Frank O. Gehry houses the concert hall, pre-concert area, numerous rehearsal/practice rooms, other backstage and dining facilities and amphitheater.

Building Details and Acoustics Data Location

151 South Grand Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90012-3034

Seating Capacity

2,265

Room Volume

30,900 CM

13 | P a g e

Reverberation Time (Mid Frequency) Unoccupied

2.2 sec (at 500Hz)

Occupied

2.0 sec (at 500Hz)

Finishing Materials Ceiling

:

Douglas Fir

Wall

:

Douglas Fir

Floor

:

Oak

Seat

:

Upholstered

Organ

:

Rosales Organ Builders, Inc.

Noise Level

:

NC-15

Total Cost

:

$274 Million

14 | P a g e

Introduction

Nagata Acoustics and Frank Gehry Architects are two of the major creative designers in the world, one for sound and one for architecture. Nagata described their collaboration as “So fantastic! It is incredible.” They gradually “built a process” for collaboration in which both disciplines could achieve re-markable success to forge the optimal listening experience for classical music. The architect, Frank Gehry, envisioned the Walt Disney Concert Hall to be the “living room” for the city, where people would enjoy great music. Gehry commented on numerous visits he made to precedent halls, including Berlin, Boston the Amsterdam Concertgebuow, and others, where “direct experience was a progressive approach to the definitive intuition.”

15 | P a g e

The room volume was approximately 30,600 cubic meters for 2265 seats. This means the room air volume per seat is more than 13.5 cubic meters. This decision resulted in a ceiling height higher than many halls. There are suggestions in the literature that 10 cubic meters per person is a reasonable design target. Nagata’s analysis of precedent halls and rooms perceived as relatively reverberant, such as Symphony 3

3

3

Hall Boston (7.1m /seat), Vienna’s Musikvereinsaal (8.9m /seat), the Leipzig Gewandhaus (11m /seat), 3

3

the Birmingham Symphony Hall (11.3m /seat), and the Sapporo “Kitara” Concert Hall (12.4m /seat), led him to increase the room volume for this project.

Materials

Each row of seats is slightly higher than the previous one and wider. The hall seats 2,265 guests, RT60 of 2.2 sec, measured at 500Hz, when the hall is fully occupied. RT60 is similarly 2.0 sec at 500Hz when the hall is unoccupied due to custom made absorptive seats, “Made of steel, wood polyurethane and various fabrics for the upholstery, the chair is designed to meet acoustic requirements.

It is said that the Walt Disney concert hall has the most accurate acoustics so far, with clarity at the faintest of sounds, and never too loud.

Design

The walls and the ceiling are finished with Douglas fir, and the floor with oak. Together with curved wood ceiling, these surfaces contributes to the superb acoustics. There are parts of the wall behind the seats that are cleverly covered with transparent mesh through which sound travels and reflects off concave curves, and is therefore focused where needed. The entire venue is rich in convex and concave curves, strategically placed for focusing or scattering sound. Some reports state Walt Disney hall has up to 38,000 convex faces.

16 | P a g e

Acoustical Details

An orchestra is only as good as the hall they play in, and to that extent, a hall becomes an instrument of its orchestra.

In the building of Walt Disney Concert Hall, acoustic tests were performed on a one-tenth-scale model. Everything had to be reduced by the same amount, which required that the frequency of sounds be increased tenfold to reduce the wavelength to a tenth of normal, and the model was filled with nitrogen to expel the oxygen and water vapor that absorb high-frequency sounds. Testing was considered dangerous since no one could breathe in the oxygen-deficient model.

The acoustical clarity of Walt Disney Concert Hall caused members of the Los Angeles Philharmonic to be both excited and anxious. Repertoire that they had learned, and knew how to play well, would have to be relearned in the new Hall.

Summary

The studies studies and design of Walt Disney concert hall, the word simplicity comes to mind. Even though it took years to make, and a top team of acousticians to get it so right, the Disney hall goes against both Musikvereinssaal and Sydney concert hall. It kept the dĂŠcor to a minimum, using its own shape of the room to do the work of redirecting sound, and it was built from inside out.

Toyota achieved what was needed to enable great sound, and then Gehry took over and did the rest with the exterior. Another measurement that Toyota did differently to other two (and many other world standard concert halls) was calculating RT60 at a lower center frequency (500Hz), presumably because classical music on the whole holds most energy around these frequencies, and therefore are the most sensitive to look out for. Many acoustical engineers base their principle primarily on the reverberation time.

Most of the times, to get this calculation right, other parts of acoustical engineering suffer, resulting in a hall that does not deliver pleasant sound. Whereas other acousticians do not strive to get the ideal reverb time if it means running short on other layers of design which could enrich and brighten the sound.

17 | P a g e

Study of architectural acoustics is very vast and comprehensive and is still improving. As we can learn from some unsuccessful acoustical architectures, sometimes there is no way to mathematically tame the behaviour of sound. Perhaps there is still an element of sound perception or experience, when we listen to music in a certain space, that no engineering or acoustic study will be able to figure how to control and reproduce. Nevertheless, the importance of acoustics cannot and must not be overlooked. An average music performance or instrument will still sound average in a well acoustically treated concert hall. However, even the most remarkable of musicians, instruments and compositions can easily be ruined by an acoustic space that does not work in its favour. As one music critic reported upon the opening of Walt Disney Hall, embracing the importance of an accurate and clear sounding hall :

“ Salonen could hardly believe his ears. To his amazement, he discovered that there were wrong notes in the printed part of the Ravel that sit on the players’ stands. The orchestra has owned these scores for decades, but in the Chandler no conductor had ever heard the inner details well enough to notice the errors� - (Mark Swed, 2003, LA Times)

18 | P a g e

3.0 Research Methadology Research methalogy can be defined as the process used to collect information and data for the purpose of making work-based decisions. This is set symtematically to understanding whatever relevant information and issues related to the assignment and view it with a more analitical frame of mind. It is crucial for the research methadologies to be discussed before diving into the actual project as it enables us to inculcate the ability in evaluating and the appropriate usage of hard data. Through the whole data collection process, the 6 of us have successfully developed a more rational and disciplined thinking, observing the field more objectively. The following diagram shows the sequence of our research methadology:

Figure 3.0.1 Process of research methodology

19 | P a g e

Figure 3.0.2 Zoning and gridlines done for Garage51

Zoning and gridlines done for Garage51

The figures above shows the zoning done based on different functions and conditions of lighting found in Garage51. With proper zoning, it was easier to take a more qualitative approach towards analyzing the place based on the function and its users. To provide a more accurate analysis on the affected zones, gridlines are placed. Data for both acoustics and lighting and taken in every ‘box’ drawn. With this, a more accurate result is achieved.

20 | P a g e

3.1 Methodology for Lighting Analysis 3.1.1 Description of Equipment Used: Digital lux meter

Figure 3.1.1 Image: Digital Lux meter, model code: LX-101 (MI4N) Source: http://www.instrumentchoice.com.au/instrument-choice/environment-meters/lx101-digital-luxmeter-mi4n Model Features: 

Sensor used the exclusive photo diode & multi-color correction filters, spectrum meet C. I. E. standard.

Sensor COS correction factor meet standard.

Separate LIGHT SENSOR allows user take measurements of an optimum position.

Precise and easy readout, wide range.

High accuracy in measuring.

Built-in low battery indicator.

LSI-circuit use provides high reliability and durability.

LCD display provides low power consumption.

Compact, light-weight, and excellent operation.

LCD display can clearly read out even of high ambient light.

21 | P a g e

3.1.2 Data Collection Method Respective measurements are taken at 2 different height levels: a) On an individual’s hip level (±1m above ground level) this is the average height of an individual’s seating position. b) ±1.5m above ground level - where an average human’s ear-position rests when standing.

Figure 3.1.2 Measurements taken at two different height levels The following measuring procedures were applies on each point indicated by a grid of 2m x 2m. This grid serves as our take on to ensuring a well distributed and accurate reading is recorded in the designated space. And as for comparisons done, the readings were taken at peak hour and non-peak hour.

22 | P a g e

3.1.3 Limitations No special skill was required to operate lux meter as it is fairly easy to obtain readings. However, we experienced several constrains/limitations that ultimately affected the readings:

Incomplete definition Different height levels of the device placement will affect the readings, different readings will be collected as each individual who operate the devices are of different heights. Shadow casted by the operator might unintentionally affect the readings. Instrument Drift Lux meter readings fluctuates frequently when measurement is being taken due to its sensitivity. Therefore several readings should be taken to calculate the average for each individual point. Environmental factor Weather during site measurement would affect the readings of the lux meter. Higher lux meter readings would be obtain during sunny day and compared to rainy days. Standard references Standard MS 1525 LUX recommendation Lighting standard MS 1525 2007

Lighting equipment installed must provide a suitable environment for the users by following the Code of practice on energy efficiency and use of energy.

Table below shows the adequate luminance level for designated spaces according to MS 1525.

23 | P a g e

Utilization factor

3.1.4 Lighting analysis equations

Daylight factor calculation equation:

đ??ˇđ??š =

đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™

Where,

E internal = illuminance due to daylight at a point on the indoor working plane

E external = direct sunlight = 32000 lx

Room index equation: đ??żĂ—đ?‘Š

Room index = (đ??ż+đ?‘Š)Ă—đ??ť

Where,

L = Length of the space

24 | P a g e

W = Width of the space

H = Height of the space

IL luminance level equation:

E=

đ?‘› Ă— đ?‘ Ă— đ??š Ă— đ?‘ˆđ??š Ă— đ?‘€đ??š đ??´

Number of light required:

N=

đ??¸Ă—đ??´ đ??š Ă— đ?‘ˆđ??š đ?‘‹ đ?‘€đ??š

Where,

n = Number of lamps in each luminaire

N = Number of luminaire

F = Lighting design lumens per lamp

UF = Utilization Factor

MF = Maintenance Factor (0.8 factor as the cafĂŠ has just recently been established)

A = Area

E = Average IL luminance over the horizontal working plane

3.2 Methodology of Acoustic analysis 3.2.1 Description of Equipment used: Sound Level Meter

25 | P a g e

Figure 3.2.1 Image: dB meter model code 13733-SIB1001000 Source: http://www.instrumentation2000.com/extech-407764-data-logging-sound-level-meter.aspx

Model features: Standard References

IEC 804 and IEC 651

Grade of Accuracy

Not assigned

Quantities displayed

Lp, Lp Max, Leq

Display: LCD/display resolution

1 dB

Frequency weighting: A/ Time

Fast

weighting (Lp) Time integration (Leq

Free or user defined

Measurement range

30 –120 dB/ Range: 30 -90 & 60 –120

Linearity

± 1.5 dB

Overload

from (± 1.5 dB maximum) 93 dB and 123 dB Peak

Dimensions/ Weight

160 x 64 x 22 mm/ 150g without battery

Battery/ battery life

Alkaline (6LR61)/ min 30 h (20oC)

Environment: Relative humidity

storage < 95% / measurement< 90%

Temperature

storage < 55oC / 0oC <measurement < 50oC

CE marking

comply with: EN 50061 -1 and EN 50062 -1

The particular model shown above is similar with the one our team used during the measurement on site. They have more or less the same specifications, especially level of accuracy. 3.2.2 Data Collection Method

26 | P a g e

Figure 3.2.2 Data collections done at peak and non-peak hours For acoustic readings, the following measuring procedures were applied on each point indicated by a grid of 2m x 2m system. Similar to the previous explanation, the grid function as our lead to ensure a well distributed and accurate reading is made in the designated space. And as for comparison purpose, the readings were taken and both peak and non-peak hours.

3.2.3 Limitations No specific skillset was needed to use such equipment. However, there were a number of factors and limitations which affect the readings. Incomplete definition Different grid point placement would affect the readings, one such thing we called as human error. Other than that, peak reading might vary due to random site circumstance.

27 | P a g e

Failure to account The data recording might vary due to inappropriate operating hours, where assumable peak and nonpeak hours do not seem to be properly utilized. For example, certain occasions which might increase the number of customers for the particular day, such as birthday event. Environment factors Any additional external sound like raindrops and lightning strike would affect the the dB value. During rainy day, higher dB value would be obtained due to supplementary noise factor. Standard references:

MS 1525 acoustic standard Typical noise sources with their noise level and sound pressure Source

Noise level (dB)

Jet take off (25m distane)

140

Rock concert

115

Construction site

100

Average street traffic

80

Busy office

65

Conversation speech

55

Living room

40

Moderate to Quiet

Library

35

Quiet

Rural location

30

Bedroom

20

Intolerable

Very Noisy

Loud

Very quiet

3.2.4 Acoustic analysis calculation

Step 1: Reverberation Time, (RT)

Reverberation time is the primary descriptor of an acoustic environment which to calculate the reverberation time of an enclose space. Equation:

RT =

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´

, Where V = volume of space

28 | P a g e

Step 2: Sound Pressure Level (SPL)

The sound pressure level is the average sound level at a space.

SPL = 10log10

1 1 đ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“

, Where

1 1 đ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“

= 1 Ă— 10−12

Step 3: Sound Reduction Index (SRI)

To calculate transmissions loss on materials, using the formula below:

đ?‘†đ?‘…đ??ź = đ?‘‡đ??ż = 10log10

1 , đ?‘¤â„Žđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘’ đ?‘‡đ?‘Žđ?‘Ł = đ??´đ?‘Łđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘Žđ?‘”đ?‘’ đ?‘Ąđ?‘&#x;đ?‘Žđ?‘›đ?‘ đ?‘šđ?‘–đ?‘ đ?‘ đ?‘–đ?‘œđ?‘› đ?‘?đ?‘œđ?‘’đ?‘“đ?‘“đ?‘–đ?‘?đ?‘–đ?‘’đ?‘›đ?‘Ą đ?‘œđ?‘“ đ?‘šđ?‘Žđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘–đ?‘Žđ?‘™đ?‘ đ?‘‡đ?‘Žđ?‘Ł

đ?‘†đ?‘…đ??źđ?‘› = 10log10

( đ?‘†1 Ă— đ?‘‡đ?‘?1 ) + ( đ?‘†2 Ă— đ?‘‡đ?‘?2 )+. . ( đ?‘†đ?‘› Ă— đ?‘‡đ?‘?đ?‘› ) 1 , đ?‘‡đ?‘Žđ?‘Ł = đ?‘‡đ?‘› đ?‘‡đ?‘œđ?‘Ąđ?‘Žđ?‘™ đ?‘†đ?‘˘đ?‘&#x;đ?‘“đ?‘Žđ?‘?đ?‘’ đ??´đ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘Ž

3.3 Other equipment

Figure 3.3.1 & 2 DSLR Camera & Measuring tape.

29 | P a g e

There are other equipment that played no-less significant roles during data recording, they are: 

Digital Camera: Used to photographing the situations and conditions of designated cafe as well as journaling our team progress on site.



Measuring tape: Used to measure designated spaces.

3.4. Material Lighting reflectance and sound absorption data Material Lighting reflectance and sound absorption data

material Limewashed

color Light brown

raw/reclaimed timber Reused gallon/oil drums(cushioned seat)

texture

Dark red

matt, slightly

Black

Matt, nonreflective

Tinted tempered

Transparent

Smooth,

glass

white

translucent

Metal container

Dark grey

Matt, nonreflective

Concrete masonry

white

unit wall Concrete wall

Matt, nonreflective

Steel beam

Black

Matt, nonreflective

Concrete floor

Grey

Matt, nonreflective

Porcelain tiles

black

Glossy,

white

slightly reflective

Steel bar

black

Matt, nonreflective

Steel plate

black

Matt, nonreflective

human

500 Hz

2000 Hz

25-35

0.02

0.05

0.10

70-80

0.15

0.22

0.38

10-15

0.15

0.22

0.38

25-35

0.15

0.22

0.38

2-10

0.07

0.15

0.18

6-8

0.30

0.10

0.07

0.1

0.06

0.09

0.02

0.05

0.08

0.21

0.46

0.51

10-15

Matt, nonreflective

Black

125 Hz

reflective

Yellow ocher Steel chair

(%)

Absorbance coefficient

Matt, slightly reflective

white

Reflectance

70-80

2-10

2-10

15-40

65-75 2-10

2-10

30 | P a g e

3.5 Orthographic

Figure 3.5.1 Ground Floor Plan with 2m x 2m grid line

31 | P a g e

Figure 3.5.2 First Floor Plan with 2m x 2m grid line

32 | P a g e

4.0 Lighting Analysis 4.1 Natural Lighting (Daylight) Based on observation, it can be said that certain parts of the café are illuminated by natural light during the day, more specifically the front of the store as its façade is mainly composed of tinted glass panels. The usage of these panels allow for a constant flow of natural light into the building and at the same time reduce glare and heat caused by the sunlight. The café’s outdoor receives shading from the ceiling above and the five foot way in front of the store. This results in results in a large amount of direct sunlight located on the front side of café. With this, it can be said that the thermal comfort outside is significantly less when compared to thermal comfort levels inside the café. Figure 4.0 Exterior part of the café showing the presence of light throughout the day

33 | P a g e

Figure 4.1.1 Sun path & Shadow analysis at 9am

Figure 4.1.2 Sun path & Shadow analysis on interior at 9am.

34 | P a g e

Figure 4.1.3 Sun path & Shadow analysis at 12pm.

Figure 4.1.4 Sun path & Shadow analysis on interior at 12pm.

35 | P a g e

Figure 4.1.5 Sun path & Shadow analysis at 4pm.

Figure 4.1.6 Sun path & Shadow analysis on interior at 4pm.

36 | P a g e

4.2 Artificial Lighting

As the presence of natural lighting is not sufficient to illuminate the entire café (more specifically the middle and mezzanine floor of the café), artificial lighting is used after 1pm all the way until the café’s closing time. This is to ensure customers receive a good and constant source of lighting throughout their time there. In addition, the café furniture is composed of dark and non-reflective materials such as steel and wood. This enhances the concept of Garage 51 being quite an industrial themed workshop. The artificial lighting used enhances the user experience at the same time increases the overall visual performance of the café.

Figure 4.2.1 The interior of café is illuminate by natural lighting and artificial lighting during the day.

Figure 4.2.2 The interior and outdoor areas is illuminated by warm color lighting to create the mood in the café during night time

37 | P a g e

Figure 4.2.3 Zoning based on the types of lighting found on site

Types of Artificial Light

Artificial Lighting Artificial and Natural Lighting Artificial Lighting

38 | P a g e

4.3 Types of Artificial Lights Types of light

CRI

Colour

Lumens

Watt/Volt

Temperature

Life Time

Reference

(Hours)

Squirrel Cage

Dimmable

Teardrop Filament

Standard B22

Bulb

bayonet Diameter: 64mm 100

2100 K

220 lm

40 W/240

3000

Height: 150mm

V

Incandescent Globe

Dimmable

in Clear Glass

Standard E27 medium, fits contemporary 100

2100 K

260 lm

40 W/240

2000

V

lighting fittings and our Brass Lamp holder Diameter: 28mm Height: 290mm

Round Squirrel Cage

Dimmable

Tungsten Filament

Standard E27

Bulb

medium, fits contemporary 100

2100 K

220 lm

25 W/240 V

2000

lighting fittings and our Brass Lamp holder Diameter: 95mm Height: 130mm

39 | P a g e

Incandescent

Dimmable

Filament Tube Light

Standard E27 medium, fits contemporary 100

2100 K

260 lm

40 W/240

2000

V

lighting fittings and our Brass Lamp holder Lumen 260 Diameter: 28mm Height: 290mm

LED Fancy Round

Standard E4

Globe in Clear Glass

small, fits contemporary 100

2700 K

280 lm

100 W/240

50000

V

lighting fittings and E14 Lamp holder Diameter: 40mm

Fluorescent Tube Light Size 48” 82

3500 K

2950 lm

32 W

20000

Mol 47.78”

Fluorescent Tube Light Size 24” 82

4100 K

1400 lm

32 W

20000

Mol 23.78”

40 | P a g e

Figure 4.3.1 Diagram showing position of lights

41 | P a g e

4.4 Lighting Zoning Data 4.4.1 Daylight lux data

42 | P a g e

4.4.2 Lux Color Diagram (Day)

1200+ 1080 960 840 720 600 480 360 240 120 0

Figure 4.4.2 Lux color diagram showing data from Garage 51

43 | P a g e

1200+ 1080 960 840 720 600 480 360 240 120 0

Figure 4.4.3 Lux color diagram showing data from Garage 51 (Upper Floor)

44 | P a g e

Lux Color Diagram (Night)

100+ 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Figure 4.4.4 Lux color diagram showing data from Garage 51 at night

45 | P a g e

100+ 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Figure 4.4.5 Lux color diagram showing data from Garage 51 at night (Upper floor)

46 | P a g e

4.5 Light Analysis and Calculation Zone A

Zone A is the veranda of garage 51 located at the outdoor region before the entrance. In Zone A there is a shaded outdoor space that is classified as a smoking area as well for users who request for a warmer atmosphere.

Figure 4.5.1 Garage 51 bar condition during daytime

47 | P a g e

Figure 4.5.2 Garage 51 bar condition during night time

Zone A is the only region that is constantly exposed to high amount of sunlight as well as artificial lighting during night time. During the night time it is lit by incandescent globe lamps. The average lux reading is 391.5 lux while at night, the average lux value is 68.56 lux.

As we can see from the difference in lux value, there is a distinctive difference between the daylight and the night time reading. This is due to the fact that the outdoor dining space is lit by natural light during the day and artificially lit during the night.

Average DF at 1m Date/ Time/ Weather 25 April 2015/1330

Data Collection (Lux) Outdoor

Mean of Zone A

32000

407.22

Sunny đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ 407.22 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ = Ă— 100% 32000 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ đ??ˇđ??š =

= 1.27% ≈ 0.0127

48 | P a g e

Average DF at 1.5 m Date/ Time/ Weather 25 April 2015/1330

Data Collection (Lux) Outdoor

Mean of Zone A

32000

376.67

Sunny đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ 376.67 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ = Ă— 100% 32000 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ đ??ˇđ??š =

= 1.186% ≈ 0.0186

The average daylight factor in this zone A is 1.186% to 1.5%. According to MS 1525, the light distribution in this zone is considered fairly distributed.

Lumen Analysis & calculation (Zone A).

Location

Outdoor Dining

Dimensions

6mx4m

Area

24 m

Height of working plane

0.75 m

Height of Luminaries

3.8 m

Mounting Height, Hm

3.05 m

Standard Illuminance

200

2

đ??żĂ—đ?‘Š 24 = (đ??ż + đ?‘Š)đ??ťđ?‘š (6 + 4)3.05

Room Index

24 = 0.79 30.5 Utilization Factor

0.57

Maintenance Factor

0.8

Type of Light

LED fancy round globe in clear glass

Lighting Design Lumen per lamp

280 lm

Illuminance Required

đ?’? Ă— đ?‘ľ Ă— đ?‘­ Ă— đ?‘źđ?‘­ Ă— đ?‘´đ?‘­ đ?‘¨ đ?&#x;? Ă— đ?&#x;‘đ?&#x;Ž Ă— đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;–đ?&#x;Ž Ă— đ?&#x;Ž. đ?&#x;“đ?&#x;• Ă— đ?&#x;Ž. đ?&#x;– đ?‘Ź= đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;’ đ?‘Ź=

đ?‘Ź = đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;“đ?&#x;—. đ?&#x;” đ?’?đ?’–đ?’™

Recommended average illumination levels by MS 1525 =200 lux

49 | P a g e

200 – 159.6 = 40.4 lux Therefore, the cafÊ’s outdoor dining areas (Zone A) lacks of average illuminance levels of 40.4 lux before reaching the recommended standard by MS 1525. Number of Light Required

đ??¸Ă—đ??´ đ??š Ă— đ?‘ˆđ??š Ă— đ?‘€đ??š 200 Ă— 24 đ?‘ = 0.57 Ă— 0.8 Ă— 280 đ?‘ =

đ?‘ = 40,28 ≈ 40 lamps Therefore the cafÊ’s outdoor dining areas (Zone A) needs to have 10 more lamps of same type to reach MS 1525 standard.

50 | P a g e

ZONE B

Zone B is the main dining area where customers sit, serve and eat. The only other area which has a dining area is Zone A with is an outdoor area and Zone There is a large window that spans for about 3 meters towards the right wall and is where most of the natural lighting is obtained. During daytime, the space is lit by both artificial and natural lighting for the users to enjoy their meal. This glass curtain wall is located facing the north elevation of the cafe.

There is a drastic change between the average of daytime lux reading and night time lux reading where by the difference reached 277.3 lux with the daytime being 320.4 and night time being 43.1.

This is due to the absence of natural light that was presence during the day. While at noon the interior space is being lit from both light sources, at night the interior space is only lit from 1 light source, the artificial light.

51 | P a g e

Average DF at 1m Date : 25 / 4 / 2015 Time : 12 p.m. Weather : Sunny Date collection (Lux) Outdoor : 32000 Mean of Zone B : 362.3 đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ 362.3 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ = Ă— 100% 32000 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ đ??ˇđ??š =

= 1.13% ≈ 0.0113

Average DF at 1.5m Date : 25 / 4 / 2015 Time : 12 p.m. Weather : Sunny Date collection (Lux) Outdoor : 32000 Mean of Zone B : 286

đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ 286đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ = Ă— 100% 32000 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ đ??ˇđ??š =

= 0.89% ≈ 0.0089

The daylight factor of zone B at 1.5m is 0.89% which falls in the range between 0-1%. At this rate, under MS 1525, this area is categorized as the dark zone where daylight distribution is poor.

Lumen Analysis and Calculation Dimensions : 13.5 m x 5.765 m Area : 77.83 m

2

Height of Luminaries : 0.75m Height of working plane : 2.2 m and 2.4 m

52 | P a g e

Mounting Height, Hm : 1.45 m and 1.65 m Standard Luminance : 200 Room Index : đ?‘ł Ă—đ?‘ž ( đ?‘ł+đ?‘ž )đ?‘Żđ?’Ž

=( =

đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;“.đ?&#x;—đ?&#x;’ đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;‘.đ?&#x;“+đ?&#x;“.đ?&#x;•đ?&#x;”đ?&#x;“ )đ?&#x;?.đ?&#x;’đ?&#x;“

đ?&#x;•đ?&#x;•.đ?&#x;–đ?&#x;‘ đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;•.đ?&#x;—đ?&#x;‘

= 2.7861 Utilization Factor : 0.62 Maintenance Factor : 0.8 Type of light : Squirrel Cage Teardrop filament bulb / Incandescent globe in clear glass / Fluorescent tube light Lighting Design Lumen per Lamp : 220 lm / 260 lm / 1400 lm Illuminance required : đ?‘Ź= đ?‘Ź=

đ?’?Ă—đ?‘ľĂ—đ?‘­Ă—đ?‘źđ?‘­Ă—đ?‘´đ?‘­ đ?‘¨ đ?&#x;?Ă—đ?&#x;?Ă—đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;ŽĂ—đ?&#x;Ž.đ?&#x;”đ?&#x;?Ă—đ?&#x;Ž.đ?&#x;– đ?&#x;•đ?&#x;•.đ?&#x;–đ?&#x;‘

đ?‘Ź = đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;?. đ?&#x;Žđ?&#x;‘ đ?’?đ?’–đ?’™

đ?‘Ź= đ?‘Ź=

đ?’?Ă—đ?‘ľĂ—đ?‘­Ă—đ?‘źđ?‘­Ă—đ?‘´đ?‘­ đ?‘¨ đ?&#x;?Ă—đ?&#x;’Ă—đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;”đ?&#x;ŽĂ—đ?&#x;Ž.đ?&#x;”đ?&#x;?Ă—đ?&#x;Ž.đ?&#x;– đ?&#x;•đ?&#x;•.đ?&#x;–đ?&#x;‘

đ?‘Ź = đ?&#x;”. đ?&#x;”đ?&#x;? đ?’?đ?’–đ?’™

đ?‘Ź= đ?‘Ź=

đ?’?Ă—đ?‘ľĂ—đ?‘­Ă—đ?‘źđ?‘­Ă—đ?‘´đ?‘­ đ?‘¨ đ?&#x;?Ă—đ?&#x;’Ă—đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;’đ?&#x;Žđ?&#x;ŽĂ—đ?&#x;Ž.đ?&#x;”đ?&#x;?Ă—đ?&#x;Ž.đ?&#x;– đ?&#x;•đ?&#x;•.đ?&#x;–đ?&#x;‘

đ?‘Ź = đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;•. đ?&#x;–đ?&#x;’ đ?’?đ?’–đ?’™ The recommended average illumination levels according to MS 1525 is 150 lux. 200 – 21.03 – 6.62 – 17.84 = 154.5. lux

53 | P a g e

Therefore, the cafe’s dining area (Zone B) lacks of average illuminance levels of 154.5 lux before reaching the recommended standard by MS 1525.

Number of lights required : đ?‘ = đ?‘ =

đ??¸Ă—đ??´ đ??šĂ—đ?‘ˆđ??šĂ—đ?‘€đ??š 200Ă—77.83 0.62Ă—0.8Ă—220

đ?‘ = 142.65 ≈ 143 lamps

đ?‘ = đ?‘ =

đ??¸Ă—đ??´ đ??šĂ—đ?‘ˆđ??šĂ—đ?‘€đ??š 200Ă—77.83 0.62Ă—0.8Ă—260

đ?‘ = 120.7 ≈ 121 lamps

đ?‘ =

đ?‘ =

đ??¸Ă—đ??´ đ??šĂ—đ?‘ˆđ??šĂ—đ?‘€đ??š

200Ă—77.83 0.62Ă—0.8Ă—1400

đ?‘ = 22.4 ≈ 22 lamps

Therefore cafe’s dining area (Zone B) needs to have at least 128 more lamps of Squirrel Cage Teardrop filament bulb type or 117 more lamps of incandescent globe in clear glass type or 20 more of Fluorescent tube light type to reach MS 1525 standard.

54 | P a g e

Zone C

Entering the cafĂŠ, on the left is Zone C where the bartender works, which is the counter where the coffee grinding and other beverages making takes place.

Figure 4.5.3 Garage 51 bar condition during daytime

55 | P a g e

Figure 4.5.4 Garage 51 bar condition during night time

A low-built ceramic wall which functions as a table for the coffee grinders and the coffee machines is placed in between Zone C (counter) and the interior dining separating two spaces, one for the staffs and another for the diners. A study was conducted and it was proven that the average daylight lux reading in Zone C is around 60.5 lux and during night time, the value is around 17.25 lux. Although there are not much difference in lux reading, they greatly differ in terms of qualitative experience due to the difference of light exposure at day and night.

Average DF at 1m Date/ Time/ Weather 25 April 2015/1330

Data Collection (Lux) Outdoor

Mean of Zone C

32000

56.17

Sunny đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ 56.17 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ = Ă— 100% 32000 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ đ??ˇđ??š =

= 0.176% ≈ 0.00176

56 | P a g e

Date/ Time/ Weather 25 April 2015/1330

Data Collection (Lux) Outdoor

Mean of Zone C

32000

64.83

Sunny Average DF at 1.5 m đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ 64.83 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ = Ă— 100% 32000 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ đ??ˇđ??š =

= 0.203% ≈ 0.00203

According to standard daylight factor distribution, this space fall into the dark category where the percentage range is 0-1% and has poor light distribution.

Lumen analysis & calculation (Zone C).

Location

Coffee Bar

Dimensions

10 m x 2 m

Area

20 m

Height of working plane

0.85 m

Height of Luminaries

2.4 m

Mounting Height, Hm

1.55 m

Standard Illuminance

150-300

2

đ??żĂ—đ?‘Š 20 = (đ??ż + đ?‘Š)đ??ťđ?‘š (10 + 2.0)1.55

Room Index

20 = 1.08 18.6 Utilization Factor

0.58

Maintenance Factor

0.8

Type of Light

Round Squirrelcage tungsten filament bulb Fluorescent tube light

Lighting Design Lumen per lamp

220 lm 1400 lm

Illuminance Required

i)

đ?‘Ź=

đ?’?Ă—đ?‘ľĂ—đ?‘­Ă—đ?‘źđ?‘­Ă—đ?‘´đ?‘­

đ?‘Ź=

�

đ?&#x;– Ă— đ?&#x;? Ă— đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;Ž Ă— đ?&#x;Ž. đ?&#x;“đ?&#x;– Ă— đ?&#x;Ž. đ?&#x;– đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;Ž

đ?‘Ź = đ?&#x;–đ?&#x;?. đ?&#x;”đ?&#x;” đ?’?đ?’–đ?’™

57 | P a g e

i)

đ?‘Ź=

đ?’?Ă—đ?‘ľĂ—đ?‘­Ă—đ?‘źđ?‘­Ă—đ?‘´đ?‘­ đ?‘¨

đ?&#x;? Ă— đ?&#x;? Ă— đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;’đ?&#x;Žđ?&#x;Ž Ă— đ?&#x;Ž. đ?&#x;“đ?&#x;– Ă— đ?&#x;Ž. đ?&#x;– đ?‘Ź= đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;Ž đ?‘Ź = đ?&#x;‘đ?&#x;?. đ?&#x;’đ?&#x;– đ?’?đ?’–đ?’™

Recommended average illumination levels by MS 1525 = 300 lux 300 – 81.66 – 32.48 = 185.86 lux Therefore, the cafÊ’s outdoor dining areas (Zone A) lacks of average illuminance levels of 185.86 lux before reaching the recommended standard by MS 1525. Number of Light Required

i)

đ?‘ = đ?‘ =

đ??¸Ă—đ??´ đ??šĂ—đ?‘ˆđ??šĂ—đ?‘€đ??š

300 Ă— 20 0.58 Ă— 0.8 Ă— 220 đ?‘ = 58.78 ≈ 59 lamps

ii)

đ?‘ = đ?‘ =

đ??¸Ă—đ??´ đ??šĂ—đ?‘ˆđ??šĂ—đ?‘€đ??š

300 Ă— 20 0.58 Ă— 0.8 Ă— 1400 đ?‘ = 9.24 ≈ 9 lamps

Therefore Garage 51 cafÊ’s coffee bar area (Zone C) needs to have 43 more lamps of Round Squirrelcage tungsten filament bulb type or 8 more of Fluorescent tube light type to reach MS 1525 standard.

58 | P a g e

ZONE D

ZONE D indicates where Garage 51 café kitchen is located. The space layout is inspired by the shape of a container box, similar to the whole concept of the store, linear and direct.

Positioned at the back of the café, the kitchen is the most private space in the café and only accessible by the staffs of the café. The situation of the café was shared by the owner of the café himself.

The average lux value during the afternoon is 87.2 and at night is 75.8 lux. There’s not much difference as the kitchen space is only lit by using the single artificial light that was in-built on the kitchen ceiling. Exterior lights from the dining area could also access the kitchen from the single opening of the container box but won’t do much justice onto the lighting effects.

Average DF at 1m

Date/ Time/ Weather

Data Collection (Lux) Outdoor

Mean of Zone D

32000

152.5

25 April 2015 1330hrs Sunny

59 | P a g e

Figure 4.5.5 Picture of Zone D at designated cafĂŠ

đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ 152.5 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ = Ă— 100% 32000 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ

đ??ˇđ??š =

= 0.477% ≈ 0.00477

60 | P a g e

Zone D outdoor light source

The diagram above shows the only light source lighting the kitchen. There’s only one opening for the kitchen

Average DF at 1.5 m

Date/ Time/ Weather

Data Collection (Lux) Outdoor

Mean of Zone D

32000

158.3

25 April 2015 1330hrs Sunny

đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ 158.3 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ = Ă— 100% 32000 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ

đ??ˇđ??š =

= 0.495% ≈ 0.00495 The daylight factor of the kitchen area is below 1% which indicates that the space has poor light distribution.

61 | P a g e

Lumen analysis & calculation (Zone D). Location Dimensions Area Height of working plane

Kitchen 5 m x 3m 15m

2

0.85 m

Height of Luminaries

3m

Mounting Height, Hm

2.15 m

Standard Illuminance

150-300 đ??żĂ—đ?‘Š 15 = (đ??ż + đ?‘Š)đ??ťđ?‘š (5 + 3)2.15

Room Index

15 = 0.87 17,2 Utilization Factor

0.52

Maintenance Factor

0.8

Type of Light Lighting Design Lumen per lamp Illuminance Required

Fluorescent tube light 2950 lm đ?’? Ă— đ?‘ľ Ă— đ?‘­ Ă— đ?‘źđ?‘­ Ă— đ?‘´đ?‘­ đ?‘¨ đ?&#x;? Ă— đ?&#x;? Ă— đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;—đ?&#x;“đ?&#x;Ž Ă— đ?&#x;Ž. đ?&#x;“đ?&#x;? Ă— đ?&#x;Ž. đ?&#x;– đ?‘Ź= đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;“ đ?‘Ź=

đ?‘Ź = đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;”đ?&#x;‘. đ?&#x;”đ?&#x;? đ?’?đ?’–đ?’™

Recommended average illumination levels by MS 1525 =300 lux 300 – 163.62= 40,136.38 lux Therefore, the cafÊ’s kitchen areas (Zone A) lacks of average illuminance levels of136.38 lux before reaching the recommended standard by MS 1525. Number of Light Required đ??¸Ă—đ??´ đ??š Ă— đ?‘ˆđ??š Ă— đ?‘€đ??š 300 Ă— 15 đ?‘ = 0.52 Ă— 0.8 Ă— 2950 đ?‘ =

đ?‘ = 3.6 ≈ 4 lamps Therefore cafÊ’s Kitchen areas (Zone D needs to have 2 more lamps of same type to reach MS 1525 standard.

62 | P a g e

ZONE E

Zone E serves mainly as a corridor for workers to obtain goods from the storage area located behind and also to enter the kitchen (Zone D). The stairs to the area upstairs (Zone F) which has a few tables can also be located in zone E right behind the kitchen. Additionally, the toilet located on the very end on Garage 51 can also be located in Zone E. It should also be noted that there is a large roller door that can be used to access the back alley behind Garage 51. This door is still functional and is mostly used as a gate to transfer goods like food into the storage area without accessing the front door. Zone E is the darkest zone found in Garage 51 if compared to the other zones as it has no openings for light to penetrate into any of the zones. The kitchen which is a large container located in front of the zone also blocks almost all of the light into zone E. Moreover, although there are lighting available, lights located in this region is mostly dim even during the night. However, if the roller door is used to gain access into Garage 51 or to the alley, Zone E will be well lit significantly. For the following lux reading, we did not obtain readings for then the roller door is opened as it happens rarely and is not opened for very long. With very limited to none natural lighting available in Zone E, the lights available in the space are turned on from morning until night. Even so, the lights are very dim. Hence, the average lux reading for both daylight and night time is somewhat similar to each other.

63 | P a g e

Figure 4.5.6 Pictures of Zone E Average DF at 1m Date : 25 / 4 / 2015 Time : 12 p.m. Weather : Sunny Date collection (Lux) Outdoor : 32000 Mean of Zone E : 12.33 đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ 12.33 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ = Ă— 100% 32000 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ đ??ˇđ??š =

= 0.0385% ≈ 0.000385

Average DF at 1.5m Date : 25 / 4 / 2015 Time : 12 p.m. Weather : Sunny Date collection (Lux) Outdoor : 32000 Mean of Zone E : 14

đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ 14 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ = Ă— 100% 32000 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ đ??ˇđ??š =

= 0.0438% ≈ 0.0004375

64 | P a g e

Lumen Analysis and Calculation Dimensions : 8.465 m x 6 m – 3 m x 5 m Area : 35.79 m

2

Height of Luminaries : 2.2m Height of working plane : None = 0m Standard Luminance : 100 – 150 Room Index : � ×� ( �+� )��

=( =

đ?&#x;‘đ?&#x;“.đ?&#x;•đ?&#x;— đ?&#x;–.đ?&#x;’đ?&#x;”đ?&#x;“+đ?&#x;” )đ?&#x;?.đ?&#x;?

đ?&#x;‘đ?&#x;“.đ?&#x;•đ?&#x;— đ?&#x;‘đ?&#x;?.đ?&#x;–đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;‘

= 1.12 Utilization Factor : 0.56 Maintenance Factor : 0.8 Type of light : Squirrel Cage Teardrop filament bulb / Fluorescent tube light Lighting Design Lumen per Lamp : 220m / 1400lm Illuminance required : đ?‘Ź= đ?‘Ź=

đ?’?Ă—đ?‘ľĂ—đ?‘­Ă—đ?‘źđ?‘­Ă—đ?‘´đ?‘­ đ?‘¨ đ?&#x;?Ă—đ?&#x;?Ă—đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;ŽĂ—đ?&#x;Ž.đ?&#x;“đ?&#x;”Ă—đ?&#x;Ž.đ?&#x;– đ?&#x;‘đ?&#x;“.đ?&#x;•đ?&#x;—

đ?‘Ź = đ?&#x;?. đ?&#x;•đ?&#x;“ đ?’?đ?’–đ?’™

đ?‘Ź= đ?‘Ź=

đ?’?Ă—đ?‘ľĂ—đ?‘­Ă—đ?‘źđ?‘­Ă—đ?‘´đ?‘­ đ?‘¨ đ?&#x;?Ă—đ?&#x;’Ă—đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;’đ?&#x;Žđ?&#x;ŽĂ—đ?&#x;Ž.đ?&#x;“đ?&#x;”Ă—đ?&#x;Ž.đ?&#x;– đ?&#x;‘đ?&#x;“.đ?&#x;•đ?&#x;—

đ?‘Ź = đ?&#x;•đ?&#x;Ž. đ?&#x;Žđ?&#x;— đ?’?đ?’–đ?’™

The recommended average illumination levels according to MS 1525 is 150 lux. 150 – 2.75 - 70.09 = 77.16 lux

65 | P a g e

Therefore, the cafe’s corridor area (Zone E) lacks of average illuminance levels of 77.16 lux before reaching the recommended standard by MS 1525 Number of lights required : đ?‘ = đ?‘ =

đ??¸Ă—đ??´ đ??šĂ—đ?‘ˆđ??šĂ—đ?‘€đ??š 150Ă—35.79 0.56Ă—0.8Ă—220

đ?‘ = 54.47 ≈ 54 lamps

đ?‘ = đ?‘ =

đ??¸Ă—đ??´ đ??šĂ—đ?‘ˆđ??šĂ—đ?‘€đ??š 150Ă—35.79 0.56Ă—0.8Ă—1400

đ?‘ = 8.56 ≈ 9 lamps

Therefore cafe’s corridor area (Zone E) needs to have 53 more lamps of Squirrel Cage Teardrop filament bulb type or 5 more of Fluorescent tube light type to reach MS 1525 standard.

66 | P a g e

ZONE F

Zone F is where the upper part of the dining space is located. It is located right on top of the kitchen

Though this dining space is elevated, Zone F is still being lit with the same light sources as any other zone in Garage51. This is due to the fact that Zone F is still in the same horizon as any other zone is.

Figure 4.5.7 Zone F condition

67 | P a g e

Zone F is lighted by the natural and artificial lighting during the day. The average reading at Zone F at day is 66.2 lux while at night it drops to 62.6 lux. The daylight source factor doesn’t affect this space much as this space is elevated higher that the glass façade. Average DF at 1m

Date/ Time/ Weather

Data Collection (Lux) Outdoor

Mean of Zone F

32000

31.8

25 April 2015 1330hrs Sunny

đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ 31.8 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ = Ă— 100% 32000 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ

đ??ˇđ??š =

= 0.0993% ≈ 0.00993

Average DF at 1.5 m

Date/ Time/ Weather

Data Collection (Lux) Outdoor

Mean of Zone A

32000

171

25 April 2015 1330hrs Sunny

đ??¸ đ?‘–đ?‘›đ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ Ă— 100% đ??¸ đ?‘’đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ąđ?‘’đ?‘&#x;đ?‘›đ?‘Žđ?‘™ 171 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ = Ă— 100% 32000 đ?‘™đ?‘˘đ?‘Ľ

đ??ˇđ??š =

= 0.54% ≈ 0.0054

This zone falls into dark zone category as the daylight factor ranged from 0.14% to 0.27%. So the conclusion is, this zone has a poor daylight distribution.

68 | P a g e

Lumen analysis & calculation (Zone F). Location

Mezzanine Floor Dining Area

Dimensions

5 m x 3m

Area

15m

Height of working plane

0.75 m

Height of Luminaries

2.2 m

Mounting Height, Hm

1.65 m

Standard Illuminance

200

2

đ??żĂ—đ?‘Š 15 = (đ??ż + đ?‘Š)đ??ťđ?‘š (5 + 3)1.65

Room Index

15 = 1.136 13.44 Utilization Factor

0.56

Maintenance Factor

0.8

Type of Light

Incandescent Filament tube Light

Lighting Design Lumen per lamp

260 lm

Illuminance Required

đ?’? Ă— đ?‘ľ Ă— đ?‘­ Ă— đ?‘źđ?‘­ Ă— đ?‘´đ?‘­ đ?‘¨ đ?&#x;? Ă— đ?&#x;’ Ă— đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;”đ?&#x;Ž Ă— đ?&#x;Ž. đ?&#x;“đ?&#x;” Ă— đ?&#x;Ž. đ?&#x;– đ?‘Ź= đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;“ đ?‘Ź=

đ?‘Ź = đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;“đ?&#x;‘. đ?&#x;’đ?&#x;? đ?’?đ?’–đ?’™

Recommended average illumination levels by MS 1525 =200 lux 200 – 153.41= 46.59 lux Therefore, the cafÊ’s mezzanine floor dining areas (Zone F) lacks of average illuminance levels of 46.59 lux before reaching the recommended standard by MS 1525. Number of Light Required

đ??¸Ă—đ??´ đ??š Ă— đ?‘ˆđ??š Ă— đ?‘€đ??š 200 Ă— 15 đ?‘ = 0.56 Ă— 0.8 Ă— 260 đ?‘ =

đ?‘ = 25.76 ≈ 26 lamps Therefore cafÊ’s mezzanine floor dining areas (Zone E) needs to have 20 more lamps of same type to reach MS 1525 standard.

69 | P a g e

Material Lighting and Reflection

material

color

texture

Reflectance (%)

Limewashed raw/reclaimed timber

Light brown

Reused gallon/oil drums

Matt, slightly reflective

20-30

white

70-80

Maroon

10-15

Glossy, slightly Yellow ocher

reflective

25-35

Steel chair

Black

Tinted tempered glass

Transparent

Matt, nonreflective

Smooth,

5-10

8-10

70 | P a g e

white

translucent, Reflective

Metal container

Black, white

Concrete masonry wall

white

black

Matt, nonreflective

Matt, nonreflective

Matt, nonreflective

510

70-80

2-10

Steel beam black

Matt, non-

2-10

reflective

71 | P a g e

Concrete floor

Light grey

Matt, nonreflective

15-40

Porcelain tiles black

40-65 Glossy, reflective

white

65-75

72 | P a g e

5.0 Acoustic calculation & Analysis

The café is located at Jalan PJS 11/9, this street is usually lively all day round as it is the center of activity for students studying in Sunway University – located opposite Garage 51. After classes, the high number of students will bleed out from the university to the neighboring cafes around it. With this, a constant flow of business can be seen. In addition to the school, a number of car workshops can be found on the street. These workshops are open until 10pm which results in loud sounds coming from the workshop area. From observation, no noise buffering tools were spotted on site. Noise sources play a major role in the acoustic performance of our designated café. These sources can be categorized into two types: 1. External source 2. Internal source

5.1 External noise source

Figure 5.1 External noise coming from Sunway University (located opposite the café) As the site is located on the corner of a commercial shop area, some spaces are exposed to external noises such as vehicular and site activities. The entrance of the café is placed directly across the main road of PJS 11/9, resulting in a lot of interference in terms of sound. One way to reduce the external noise from these sources is by having more plants around.

73 | P a g e

Plants serve as a sound absorbers - which from observation lacks at this cafĂŠ. As for the external source, they too can be categorized into two types:

Figure 5.1.1

: Vehiculars traffic happening on site

During peak hour (1-3pm), most of students from Sunway University leave for home. A minor traffic jam occurs along the road. The noise affects people situated on the outdoor space of the cafĂŠ most. As for non-peak hours (7-10pm), almost no vehicular activity is seen. Besides the neighboring car workshop, there is noise affecting the space as compared to during the day.

74 | P a g e

5.2 Internal Noise factors Apart from external noise factors affecting the acoustic performance outside the building, a number of other factors also contributed to the noise level readings taken.

Speakers

Figure 5.2.1 Ceiling mounted speaker.

Figure 5.2.2 Speaker grid diagram. To further improve the mood inside the cafĂŠ there are speakers aligned in-grid installed inside cafĂŠ.

75 | P a g e

Specifications Rated input Rated Impedance Sensitivity Frequency Response Speaker Component Dimensions For Fixing Hole Speaker Mounting Method Applicable Cable Connection Finish Dimensions Weight Accessory

15 W (100 V, 70 V line) 100 V line: 670 Ω (15 W), 1 kΩ (10 W), 2 kΩ (5 W), 3.3 kΩ (3 W) 70 V line: 330 Ω (15 W), 670 Ω (7.5 W), 1 kΩ (5 W), 2 kΩ (2.5 W), 3.3 kΩ (1.5 W) 96 dB (1 W, 1 m) (500 - 5,000 Hz, pink noise) 45 - 20,000 Hz (peak -20 dB) 20 cm (8") coaxial cone-type Mounting hole: φ250±3 mm (φ9.84"±0.12") Ceiling thickness: 5 - 25 mm (0.2" - 0.98") Spring clamp 600 V vinyl-insulated cable (IV wire or HIV wire) Solid copper wire: φ0.8 - φ1.6 mm (equivalent to AWG 20 - 14) 7-core twisted copper wire: 0.75 - 1.25 m㎡ (equivalent to AWG 18 - 16) Push-in connector (bridging terminal-2 branch type Baffle: Steel plate, off-white (RAL 9010 or equivalent color), paint Grille: Surface-treated steel plate net, off-white (RAL 9010 or equivalent color), paint φ280 × 92 (D) mm (φ11.02" × 3.62") 1.6 kg (3.53 lb) Paper pattern …1

Ceiling Mounted Fan

Figure 5.2.3 Ceiling fans in Garage 51

76 | P a g e

Low

747 – 913

High

1103 – 1348

Low

26.5 – 32.3

High

46.3 – 56.3

Fan size (cm)

Air Delivery Motor HP

0.08

Motor Type

4 Pole Condenser Method

Noise level (dB)

<60

Nett Weight (jkg)

5.2

Figure 5.2.4 Panasonic 16” Oscillation Fan F-MQ409 White

Coffee maker Specifications Width (mm) Depth (mm) Height (mm) Weight (kg) Power at 220-240V ~ 50Hz (W) Power at 220-240V3 ~ 50Hz (W) Power at 380415V3N ~ 50Hz (W) Noise Level (dB)

970 510 495 90 6200 - 7300 6200 - 7300 6200 - 7300 <65

Figure 5.2.5 Cimbali M24 Premium C3.

77 | P a g e

Mazzer Coffee grinder

Specifications Power (W) Grinding blades diameter (mm) Grinding blade speed (min) Bean Container Capacity (kg) Net Weight (kg) Noise level (dB)

900 71 420/min. (50Hz) 500/min. (60Hz) 1.8 28 80-90

Figure 5.2.6 Typical coffee grinder used in Garage51 cafĂŠ

78 | P a g e

5.3 Noise Level Data 5.3.1 Peak hours reading

A B C D E F G H I J K L M

1 60 60 66 61 71 70 72 72 73 74 85 84 69

2 60 64 64 62 65 75 79 73 71 78 83 80 68

3 60 60 62 63 62 69 74 63 68 70 85 79 71

2 65 60 61 63 77 69 66 69 65 64 65 68 69

3 62 60 61 63 78 71 69 68 66 65 70 71 72

A B C D E F G H I J K L M

1

2

3

70 70

68 66

68 80

1

2

3

70 73

69 75

72 71

Non-peak hours reading

A B C D E F G H I J K L M

1 65 60 60 60 75 72 68 68 67 65 62 73 64

A B C D E F G H I J K L M

79 | P a g e

Figure 5.3.1 Acoustic Ray for Speaker 3 (left) and Speaker 4 (right)

80 | P a g e

Figure 5.3.1 Acoustic Ray for Speaker 1 and Speaker 2

81 | P a g e

5.3.2 Acoustic analysis and calculation

Zone A (Outdoor dining space).

The major sound produced in zone A is from the speaker and users. There is a little sound absorption material in this area, except from the fabric on chair and the furniture that made from timber.

the acoustic ray diagram that’s happening on zone A.

82 | P a g e

Reverberation time calculation. AREA (m2) MATERIAL Wall

Concrete (unpainted)

Floor

Ceiling

No. of Furniture

26.02

Concrete (painted)

41.285

Steel frame glass

22.8255

26.02

Total Area (m2)

Absorption Coefficient (500 Hz)

Sound Absorption

26.02

0.04

1.0408

67.305

0.06

4.0383

22.8255

0.04

0.913

(Sa)

Lime-washed raw timber

14

14

0.05

0.7

Re-used gallon

6

6

0.15

0.9

Cushioned seats

6

6

0.42

2.52

Human

12

12

0.42

5.04

Total Absorption

15.1521

Table 1: Material absorption coefficient in 500 Hz at peak hours. t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´

t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ 119.7 15.2

t = 1.26s

Garage 51 CafÊ’s reverberation time for the zone A in 500 Hz of absorption coefficient is 1.26 s. According to the standard of reverberation time the standard comfort reverberation of a cafe is between 0.8s - 1.3s. The reverberation time of the case study on 500 Hz still within the range of comfort reverberation level.

83 | P a g e

AREA (m2) MATERIAL Wall

Concrete (unpainted)

Floor

Ceiling

No. of Furnitures

26.02

Concrete (painted)

41.285

Steel frame glass

22.8255

26.02

Total Area (m2)

Absorption Coefficient (2000 Hz)

Sound Absorption

26.02

0.08

2.0816

67.305

0.09

6.0574

22.8255

0.02

0.4565

(Sa)

Lime-washed raw timber

14

14

0.10

1.4

Re-used gallon

6

6

0.18

1.08

Cushioned seats

6

6

0.43

2.58

Human

12

12

0.45

5.4

Total Absorption

19.06

Table 2: Material absorption coefficient in 2000 Hz at peak hours t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´

t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ 119.7 19.06

t = 1s

Garage 51 CafÊ’s reverberation time for the zone A in 2000 Hz of absorption coefficient is 1s. According to the standard of reverberation time the standard comfort reverberation of a cafe is between 0.8s - 1.3s. The reverberation time of the case study on 2000 Hz still within the range of comfort reverberation level.

84 | P a g e

Sound pressure level PEAK HOURS

NON-PEAK HOURS

Highest sound level meter reading (dB)

66

63

Lowest sound level meter reading (dB)

60

60

Intensity for highest reading, IH

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“) đ??ź

66=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź

6.6=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

Intensity for lowest reading, IL

đ??ź

6.3=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) antilog 6.3 =đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(

IH = 3.98 x 10-6

IH = 1.99 x 10-6 đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“) đ??ź

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

6.0=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

Sound Pressure Level, SPL

đ??ź

63=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

antilog 6.6=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(

60=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

Total Intensities, I

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“) đ??ź

60=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

6.0=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

antilog 6.0=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(

antilog 6.0=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(

IL = 1 x 10-6

IL = 1 x 10-6

I=(3.98 x 10-6) + (1 x 10-6)

I=(1.99 x 10-6) + (1 x 10-6)

I= 4.98 x 10-6

I= 2.99 x 10-6 đ??ź ) đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

4.98 x 10−6 ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

SPL=67 dB

SPL=65 dB

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

đ??ź ) đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“

2.99 x 10−6 ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

Therefore, at zone A, the average sound pressure level during peak hour and non-peak hour are 67 dB and 65 dB. The range of the noise level at zone A is under a comforting level.

85 | P a g e

Zone B

When compared, Zone B is considered the noisiest and busiest zone as most of the activity like brewing, talking, eating are concentrated here. Many of the noise sourse comes from the constant buzzing of the people within the cafe and also ocassionally sounds from the kicthen.

86 | P a g e

Reverberation Time Calculation

AREA ( m2)

MATERIAL Wall

Metal container

Floor

Ceiling

Amount

12.15

Concrete (unpainted)

77.30

Total Area ( m2)

Absorption Coefficient (500 Hz)

Sound Absorption

12.15

0.22

2.673

77.30

0.04

3.092

(Sa)

Concrete (painted)

70.445

70.445

0.06

4.2267

Steel frame glass

36.54

36.54

0.04

1.4616

77.30

0.02

1.546

Plaster

77.30

Steel chair

28

28

0.15

4.2

Lime-washed raw timber

24

24

0.05

1.2

Re-used gallon

3

3

0.15

0.45

Cushioned seats

3

3

0.42

1.26

Human

35

35

0.42

14.7

Total Absorption

34.809

Table 4.4: Material absorption coefficient in 500 Hz at peak hour

Reverberation of time is calculated with the formula

t=

0.16 đ?‘‰ đ??´

t = Reverberation time 3 V= Volume of room (m ) 2 A = total absorption of room surfaces (m sabins)

87 | P a g e

Peak Hour Calculation at 500Hz (According to table 4.4)

t= t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´ 0.16 đ?‘Ľ 299.52 34.809

t = 1.38 s According to the standard of reverberation time the standard comfort reverberation of a cafe is between 0.8s - 1.3s. Garage 51 Cafe’s reverberation time for the zone E in 500 Hz of absorption coefficient is 1.38 s. Hence, the reverberation time of Garage 51 on 500 Hz is slightly above the comfort reverberation level.

AREA 2 (m )

MATERIAL

Wall

Metal container

Floor

Ceiling

Amount

12.15

Concrete (unpainted)

77.30

Absorption Coefficient (2000 Hz)

Sound Absorption

12.15

0.38

4.6

77.30

0.08

6.184

Total Area 2 (m)

(Sa)

Concrete (painted)

70.445

70.445

0.09

6.34

Steel frame glass

36.54

36.54

0.02

0.73

77.30

0.04

3.092

Plaster

77.30

Steel chair

28

28

0.18

5.04

Lime-washed raw timber

24

24

0.10

2.4

Re-used gallon

3

3

0.18

0.54

Cushioned seats

3

3

0.43

1.29

Human

35

35

0.45

15.75

Total Absorption

45.966

Table 4.5: Material absorption coefficient in 2000Hz at peak hour Peak Hour Calculation at 2000Hz

88 | P a g e

(According to table 4.5)

t= t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´ 0.16 đ?‘Ľ 299.52 45.966

t = 1.04 s

According to the standard of reverberation time the standard comfort reverberation of a cafe is between 0.8s - 1.3s. Garage 51 Cafe’s reverberation time for the zone E in 2000 Hz of absorption coefficient is 1.04 s. Hence, the reverberation time of Garage 51 on 2000 Hz is still within the comfort reverberation level.

89 | P a g e

Sound pressure level calculation PEAK HOURS

NON-PEAK HOURS

Highest sound level meter reading (dB)

79

75

Lowest sound level meter reading (dB)

62

65 đ??ź

Intensity for highest reading, IH

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“) đ??ź

79=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź

7.9=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

Antilog 7.9=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (

IH= 7.94 x 10-5 Intensity for lowest reading, IL

đ??ź

75=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź

7.5=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

Antilog 7.5=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (

IH = 3.16 x 10-5

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“) đ??ź

62=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

6.2=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (

đ??ź

Total Intensities, I

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“) đ??ź

65=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) 6.5=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 đ??ź

Antilog 6.2=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

Antilog 6.5=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

IL = 1.58 x 10-6

IL = 3.16 x 10-6

I=(7.94 x 10-5) + (1.58 x 10-6)

I=(3.16 x 10-5) + (3.16 x 10-6)

I= 8.098 x 10-5

I= 3.476 x 10-5

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“) Sound Pressure Level, SPL

8.098 x 10−5 ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (

SPL= 79 dB

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“) 3.476 đ?‘Ľ 10−5 ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (

SPL= 65 dB

Table 4.6: SPL Calculation Therefore, at zone B, the average sound pressure level during peak hour and non-peak hour are 79 dB and 65 dB respectively. In conclusion, zone B is under the comfort level during peak hours but is close to the comfort level during non peak hours.

90 | P a g e

Zone C

Zone C (Bar). Zone C located in the same atmosphere with zone B, therefore they share the same activity and noise factors. While Zone B focused more on costumers’ activity, zone C is where beverages making is concentrated. The sound from coffee grinding machine and steam gas produced by coffee makers contributes to the noise level in zone C itself.

This figure shows the acoustic ray analysis. It shows the acoustic ray from noise factors that affect zone C.

Figure 4.7.C: Acoustic ray analysis affecting zone C. 91 | P a g e

Reverberation time calculation

AREA (m2) MATERIAL Wall

Concrete (unpainted)

Floor

Ceiling

No. of Furniture

24.97

Total Area (m2)

Absorption Coefficient (500 Hz)

Sound Absorption

24.97

0.04

0.9988

(Sa)

Concrete (painted)

95.23

95.23

0.06

5.7138

Metal container

3.3

3.3

0.22

0.726

24.97

0.02

0.4994

Plaster

24.97

Porcelain tiles (counter table)

2

2

0.01

0.02

Human

5

5

0.42

2.1

Total Absorption

10.058

Table 1: Material absorption coefficient in 500 Hz at peak hours. t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´

t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ 224.73 đ?&#x;?đ?&#x;Ž.đ?&#x;Žđ?&#x;“đ?&#x;–

t = 3.57s

Garage 51 CafÊ’s reverberation time for the zone C in 500 Hz of absorption coefficient is 3.57 s. According to the standard of reverberation time the standard comfort reverberation of a cafe is between 0.8s - 1.3s. The reverberation time of the case study on 500 Hz exceeds the comfort reverberation level.

92 | P a g e

AREA (m2) MATERIAL Wall

Concrete (unpainted)

Floor

Ceiling

No. of Furniture

24.97

Total Area (m2)

Absorption Coefficient (2000 Hz)

Sound Absorption

24.97

0.08

1.9976

(Sa)

Concrete (painted)

95.23

95.23

0.09

8.5707

Metal container

3.3

3.3

0.38

1.254

24.97

0.04

0.9988

Plaster

24.97

Porcelain tiles (counter table)

2

2

0.02

0.04

Human

5

5

0.45

2.25

Total Absorption

15.111

Table 2: Material absorption coefficient in 2000 Hz at peak hours RT =

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´

RT =

0.16 đ?‘Ľ 224.73 15.111

RT = 2.38 s

Garage 51 CafÊ’s reverberation time for the zone C in 2000 Hz of absorption coefficient is 2.38 s. According to the standard of reverberation time the standard comfort reverberation of a cafe is between 0.8s - 1.3s. The reverberation time of the case study on 2000 Hz exceeds the comfort reverberation level.

‘

93 | P a g e

Sound Pressure level PEAK HOURS

NON-PEAK HOURS

Highest sound level meter reading (dB)

74

75

Lowest sound level meter reading (dB)

70

65

Intensity for highest reading, IH

đ??ź

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

đ??ź

74=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź

đ??ź

7.4=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

7.5=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź

Intensity for lowest reading, IL

antilog 7.5=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

IH = 2.51 x 10-5

IH = 3.16 x 10-5 đ??ź

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

đ??ź

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

đ??ź

65=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

7.0=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(

6.5=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”( đ??ź

Sound Pressure Level, SPL

đ??ź

antilog 7.4=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

70=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

Total Intensities, I

đ??ź

75=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

đ??ź

antilog 7.0=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

antilog 6.5=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

IL = 1 x 10-5

IL = 3.16 x 10-6

I=(2.51 x 10-5) + (1 x 10-5)

I=(3.16 x 10-5) + (3.6 x 10-6)

I= 3.51 x 10-5

I= 3.52 x 10-5 đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“) 3.51 x 10−5 ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“) 3.52 x 10−5 ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

SPL= 75 dB

SPL= 75 dB

Therefore, at zone C, the average sound pressure level during peak hour and non-peak hour are 75 dB and 75 dB. The range of the noise level at zone C is under a comforting level. The disturbing noise mainly comes from coffee machine.

94 | P a g e

Zone D (Kitchen).

Zone D is an eclosed space where the kitchen is located, it has a wide of less than 4 meters and a length of about 5. The exterior structure is made of using a container box with an opening on side that acts as entrance and another on front façade, facing the internal dining room which acts as internediate space where dishes is pass over to the servers.

Figure 4.7.D: Shows the acoustic ray diagram that’s happening on Zone D. Though zone D is an enclosed space, noises still can be heard from outside the kitchen. The container box that is made using steel material couldn’t be said as a benefit that reflect outside noise factor from entering the space. In fact, it does the same thing to the internal noise factors. It acts as reflectance that bounce the noise ray inside the space.

95 | P a g e

Reverberation time calculation.

AREA (m2) MATERIAL Wall

Concrete (unpainted)

Floor

Ceiling

No. of Furniture

14.95

Metal container

46.56

Steel plate

Total Area (m2)

Absorption Coefficient (500 Hz)

Sound Absorption

14.95

0.04

0.598

46.56

0.22

10.22

0.15

2.242

0.42

1.68

Total Absorption

14.74

14.95

human

4

4

Table 1: Material absorption coefficient in 500 Hz at peak hours t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´

t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ 44.85 15

t = 0.47 s

Garage 51 CafÊ’s reverberation time for the zone D in 500 Hz of absorption coefficient is 0.47 s. According to the standard of reverberation time the standard comfort reverberation of a cafe is between 0.8s - 1.3s. The reverberation time of the case study on 500 Hz less than the comfort reverberation level. It is considered good since zone D is kitchen area.

96 | P a g e

(Sa)

AREA (m2) MATERIAL Wall

Concrete (unpainted)

Floor

Ceiling

No. of Furniture

14.95

Metal container

46.56

Steel plate

14.95

human

4

Total Area (m2)

Absorption Coefficient (2000 Hz)

Sound Absorption

14.95

0.08

1.196

46.56

0.38

17.692

14.95

0.18

2.691

4

0.45

1.8

Total Absorption

23.379

(Sa)

Table 2: Material absorption coefficient in 2000 Hz at peak hours t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´

t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ 44.85 23.4

t = 0.3 s

Garage 51 CafÊ’s reverberation time for the zone D in 2000 Hz of absorption coefficient is 0.3 s. According to the standard of reverberation time the standard comfort reverberation of a cafe is between 0.8s - 1.3s. The reverberation time of the case study on 2000 Hz less than the comfort reverberation level. It is considered good since zone D is kitchen area.

97 | P a g e

Sound pressure level calculation. PEAK HOURS

NON-PEAK HOURS

Highest sound level meter reading (dB)

74

75

Lowest sound level meter reading (dB)

70

65

Intensity for highest reading, IH

đ??ź

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

74=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

7.4=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(

7.5=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”( đ??ź

Intensity for lowest reading, IL

antilog 7.5=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

IH = 2.51 x 10-5

IH = 3.16 x 10-5 đ??ź ) đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

đ??ź ) đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

65=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

7.0=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(

6.5=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”( đ??ź

Sound Pressure Level, SPL

đ??ź

antilog 7.4=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

70=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

Total Intensities, I

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

75=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

đ??ź

antilog 7.0=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

antilog 6.5=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

IL = 1 x 10-5

IL = 3.16 x 10-6

I=(2.51 x 10-5) + (1 x 10-5)

I=(3.16 x 10-5) + (3.6 x 10-6)

I= 3.51 x 10-5

I= 3.52 x 10-5 đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

3.51 x 10−5 ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

SPL= 75 dB

SPL= 75 dB

3.52 x 10−5 ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

Therefore, at zone D, the average sound pressure level during peak hour and non-peak hour are 75 dB and 75 dB. The range of the noise level at zone D is under a comforting level. The noise level still can be tolerated since zone D is kitchen area.

98 | P a g e

Zone E

Zone E is considered the most silent area in comparison to the others. Mostly acts as a circulatory zone for users wanting to use the bathrooms or access the storage. The main noise contributor of this zone is the exhaust fan that is installed behind the kitchen wall.

Figure 4.7.E: Noise activity on Zone E.

99 | P a g e

Reverberation time calculation. AREA ( m2) MATERIAL Wall

Concrete (unpainted)

F loor

Ceiling

No. of Furnitures

33.28

Absorption Coefficient (500 Hz)

Sound Absorption

33.28

0.04

1.33

Total Area ( m2)

(Sa)

Metal container

33.24

33.24

0.22

7.31

Concrete (painted)

155.46

155.46

0.06

9.327

4.983

0.15

0.74

38.263

0.02

0.76

10.5

0.22

2.31

Total Absorption

21.777

Steel plate

4.983

Plaster

38.263

Metal garage door

10.5

Table 4.13 : Material absorption coefficient in 500 Hz at peak hours

Reverberation of time is calculated with the formula

t=

0.16 đ?‘‰ đ??´

t = Reverberation time 3 V= Volume of room (m ) 2 A = total absorption of room surfaces (m sabins)

Peak Hour Calculation at 500Hz (According to table 4.13)

t= t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´ 0.16 đ?‘Ľ 35.79 21.777

t = 0.2 s

100 | P a g e

According to the standard of reverberation time the standard comfort reverberation of a cafe is between 0.8s - 1.3s. Garage 51 Cafe’s reverberation time for the zone E in 500 Hz of absorption coefficient is 0.2 s. Hence, the reverberation time of Garage 51 on 500 Hz is below the comfort reverberation level.

AREA ( m2) MATERIAL Wall

Concrete (unpainted)

Floor

Ceiling

33.28

No. of Furnitures

Total Area ( m2)

Absorption Coefficient (2000 Hz)

Sound Absorption

33.28

0.08

2.66

(Sa)

Metal container

33.24

33.24

0.38

12.6

Concrete (painted)

155.46

155.46

0.09

13.99

4.983

0.18

0.89

38.263

0.04

1.53

10.5

0.38

3.99

Total Absorption

35.66

Steel plate

4.983

Plaster

38.263

Metal garage door

10.5

Table 4.14. : Material absorption coefficient in 2000 Hz at peak hours

Peak Hour Calculation at 2000Hz (According to table 4.14)

t= t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´ 0.16 đ?‘Ľ 35.79 35.66

t = 0.16 s According to the standard of reverberation time the standard comfort reverberation of a cafe is between 0.8s - 1.3s. Garage 51 Cafe’s reverberation time for the zone E in 2000 Hz of absorption coefficient is 0.16 s. Hence, the reverberation time of Garage 51 on 2000 Hz is below the comfort reverberation level. Zone E is both uncomfortable at both Hz even during peak hours.

Sound pressure level calculation.

101 | P a g e

Table 4.15. : Material absorption coefficient in 2000 Hz at peak hours

PEAK HOURS

NON-PEAK HOURS

Highest sound level meter reading (dB)

71

72

Lowest sound level meter reading (dB)

68

64

Intensity for highest reading, IH

đ??ź

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

71=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 ( đ??ź

đ??ź

7.1=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

7.2=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź

Intensity for lowest reading, IL

Antilog 7.2=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

IH = 1.26 x 10-5

IH = 1.26 x 10-5 đ??ź ) đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

đ??ź ) đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

64=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

6.8=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (

6.4=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” ( đ??ź

Sound Pressure Level, SPL

đ??ź

Antilog 7.1=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

68=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (

Total Intensities, I

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

72=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (

đ??ź

Antilog 6.8=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

Antilog 6.4=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘” (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

IL = 6.31 x 10-6

IL = 2.51 x 10-6

I=(1.26 x 10-5) + (6.31 x 10-6)

I=(1.26 x 10-5) + (2.51 x 10-6)

I= 1.891 x 10-5

I= 1.511 x 10-5 đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“) 1.891 x 10−5 ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”10 (

SPL= 73 dB

SPL= 72 dB

1.511 x 10−5 ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

Therefore, at zone E, the average sound pressure level during peak hour and non-peak hour are 73 dB and 72 dB respectively. In conclusion, zone E is under the comfort level during both peak hours and non peak hours.

102 | P a g e

Zone F (Upper Dining Zone)

Zone F is the upperside of the cafÊ which is an additional dining area located on top of the Kitchen. It requires you to go up the stairs and it’s measuring 4 meters by 5 meters, exactly the same measurement of Zone D as it is located right on top of it. This area shares the same noise as the lower dining area but is more raised and less reflected.

103 | P a g e

AREA (m2) MATERIAL Wall

Steel Plate Plaster

Floor

No. of Furnitures

Ceiling

33.28 33.28

Absorption Coefficient (500 Hz)

Sound Absorption

33.28

0.15

4.99

33.28

0.02

0.66

Total Area (m2)

(Sa)

Lime-washed raw timber

5

5

0.05

0.25

Steel chair

16

16

0.15

2.4

Total Absorption

8.3

Table 1: Material absorption coefficient in 500 Hz at peak hours t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´

0.16 đ?‘Ľ 199.68 23.6

t=

t = 3.84s

Garage 51 CafÊ’s reverberation time Zone F in 500 Hz of absorption coefficient is 3.84s. According to the standard of reverberation time the standard comfort reverberation of a cafe is between 0.8s - 1.3s. The reverberation time of the case study on 500 Hz exceeds the comfort reverberation level.

104 | P a g e

AREA (m2) MATERIAL Wall

Steel Plate Plaster

Floor

Ceiling

No. of Furniture

33.28 33.28

Total Area (m2)

Absorption Coefficient (2000 Hz)

Sound Absorption

33.28

0.18

5.99

33.28

0.04

1.33

(Sa)

Lime-washed raw timber

5

5

0.10

0.5

Steel chair

16

16

0.18

2.88

Total Absorption

10.7

Table 2: Material absorption coefficient in 500 Hz at peak hours

t= t=

0.16 đ?‘Ľ đ?‘‰ đ??´

0.16 đ?‘Ľ 199.68 10.7

t = 2.98 s

Garage 51 CafÊ’s reverberation time for Zone F in 2000 Hz of absorption coefficient is 2.98s. According to the standard of reverberation time, the standard comfort reverberation of a cafe is between 0.8s - 1.3s. The reverberation time of the case study on 2000 Hz exceeds the comfort reverberation level.

105 | P a g e

Sound pressure level calculation.

Therefore, at zone F, the average sound pressure level during peak hour and non-peak hour are 78 dB and 78 dB. The range of the noise level at zone F is under a comforting level.

PEAK HOURS

NON-PEAK HOURS

Highest sound level meter reading (dB)

79

78

Lowest sound level meter reading (dB)

62

64

Intensity for highest reading, IH

đ??ź ) đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“

đ??ź ) đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

79=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

7.9=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(

7.8=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”( đ??ź

Intensity for lowest reading, IL

antilog 7.8=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

IH = 6.3 x 10-5

IH = 6.3 x 10-5 đ??ź ) đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“

đ??ź ) đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

đ??ź

đ??ź

đ??ź

64=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź

6.2=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

6.4=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 ) đ??ź

Sound Pressure Level, SPL

đ??ź

antilog 7.9=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

62=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

Total Intensities, I

đ??ź ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

78=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

đ??ź

antilog 6.2=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

antilog 6.4=đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”(1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12 )

IL = 1.58 x 10-6

IL = 2.51 x 10-6

I=(6.3 x 10-5) + (1.58 x 10-6)

I=(6.3 x 10-5) + (2.51 x 10-6)

I= 6.46 x 10-5

I= 6.55 x 10-5 đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

6.46 x 10−5 ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

đ??ź

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€(đ??źđ?‘&#x;đ?‘’đ?‘“)

6.55 x 10−5 ) 1 đ?‘Ľ 10−12

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

SPL=10đ?‘™đ?‘œđ?‘”â‚ â‚€ (

SPL= 78 dB

SPL= 78 dB

106 | P a g e

6.0 Conclusion Based on the findings and analysis done, it can be said that the 6 of us have now obtained a more thorough understanding towards studying the lighting and accoustics of a space. The tasks carried out while working on our chosen case study were knowledgable as we dealt with managing our time, conducting site analysis and getting permissions from different parties so calculations and tabulations of data could be carried out with minimal interuption. In terms of experience, we definitely gained a decent amount of it as we were able to have hands-on-experience in collecting data. In addition, we were exposed to more in-depth functions of existing softwares such as Echotect and Abobe Photoshop.

As for the current lighting conditions in Garage 51, it can be said that the existing lighting is not suitable for the users as majority of them are students who need sufficient lighting for work purposes. Openings and windows of the space are located at the side of the cafĂŠ, this results in the space being partially lighted up during the day. Artificial lightings provided result in a dim atmosphere, making it hard to study/read. However, the subtle atmosphere does benefit the overall aesthetics of the place. With this, it can be concluded that there is still room for improvement and better spatial planning to create healthier atmosphere.

Based on analysis conducted regarding the acoustic performance of the space, it can be said that Garage 51 has a bad sound performance. During peak hour, the narrow space between the seats make noises concentrated and more apparent. With this, the natural reaction of the people would be to speak louder – this causes the space to have a higher noise level. As the materials used at Garage51 have high reflective properties, the reverberation time fluctuates and goes up to about 4 seconds.

In a nutshell, we conclude with the statement that a number of improvements can be made to make Garage 51 a more pleasant space. Although dim lighting and noise are the reasons why we would love to go back to the cafĂŠ, the comfort level of Garagae51 is definitely quiet unique on its own. This project has allowed us to obtain necessary knowledge regarding lighting and the acoustics of a space. Knowledge gained from learning the different properties of materials, different design considerations and tolerances, will definitely be of use to us in future assignments to come.

107 | P a g e

Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.