AA School of Architecture Term 1 Project Refurbishing the City : London Building Case Studies
MSc + MArch, AA Sustainable Environmental Design, 2021- 22 Architectural Association School of Architecture Graduate School Term 1 Project Refurbishing the City : London Building Case Studies January 2022
Zeel Dhangdharia Neha Kurian Anagha Vasudevan Honeyksha Waghela
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The team would like to express our appreciation and gratitude to everyone who contributed to the project. We would like to appreciate the faculty and students of the AAIS, and Landscape and Urbanism programs at the AA School for their cooperation and patience. We would like to thank them for their willingness and time given to us. We would also like to especially mention Alfredo Ramirez and Eduardo Rico, program heads of Landscape and Urbanism, and Theo Lorenz, program head of AAIS for their support and encouragement. Inaddition to Mona Camille, Tanya Siems, Mingri Shu, Bradley Nissen, Chia Chun Chen. Firstly, we would like to thank Dr Simos Yannas and Dr Paula Cadima for their consistent feedback and review. We would also like to thank the rest of the faculty and staff of the Architectural Association School of Architecture’s Sustainable Environmental Design programme; Nick Baker, Byron Mardas, Gustavo Brunelli, Herman Calleja, Jorge Rodríguez, Joanna Goncalves and Mariam Kapsali for their valuable guidance, support and feedback throughout the project. We would like to especially acknowledge the sustained support of our colleagues in the cohort of M.Arch and M.Sc SED 21-22 for their timely inputs and assistance over the course of the term.
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
2
AUTHORSHIP DECLARATION FORM AASED Architectural Association School of Architecture AAIS Studio - Landscape and Urbanism Studio - Morwell Street
10,462 words
Zeel Dhangdharia Neha Kurian Honeyksha Waghela Anagha Vasudevan
Declaration: “I Certify that the content of this document are entirely my own work and that any quotation or paraphrase from the published or unpublished work of others is duly acknowledge”.
Zeel Dhangdharia
Neha Kurian
Honeyksha Waghela
Anagha Vasudevan
12 January 2022
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................6 2. OVERVIEW 2.1 Site Information..............................................................................8 2.2 London Weather Data..................................................................9 2.3 Spaces To Study...........................................................................10 3. OUTDOOR STUDIES 3.1 Solar Studies..................................................................................12 3.2 Solar Radiation..............................................................................13 3.3 Solar Access..................................................................................14 3.4 Wind Analysis.................................................................................15 3.5 Sectional View..............................................................................16 3.6 Morwell Street...............................................................................17 3.7 Spot Measurements.....................................................................18 4. INDOOR STUDIES 4.1 AAIS Studio....................................................................................20 4.1.1 Materiality 4.2 AAIS Occupancy........................................................................22 4.2.1 Case 1 Without Occupants 4.2.2 Case 2 With Occupants 4.2.3 Surface Temperature 4.3 AAIS Simulation............................................................................26 4.3.1 Illuminance 4.3.2 Daylight Autonomy/ Useful Daylight Illuminance 4.3.3 Luminance Visualisation 4.4 Landscape And Urbanism Studio..............................................32 4.4.1 Spot Measurements | No Occupants 4.4.2 Spot Measurements | With Occupants 4.4.3 Surface Temperatures 4.4.4 Illuminance 4.4.5 Daylight Autonomy/ Useful Daylight Illuminance 4.4.6 Luminance Visualisation 4.5 Occupant Survey ........................................................................38 4.6 Comparison between spaces....................................................39 4.7 Datalogger Readings..................................................................40 4.8 Thermal Performance based on MInT.......................................42 4.8.1 Base Case 50% Occupants 4.8.2 Base Case 100% Occupants 4.9 Envelope Conditions - Infiltration................................................44 4.10 Technical Studies - Thermal Insulation......................................45 4.10.1 Iterations - Barrel Vault 4.11 Technical Studies - Windows and Glazing................................47 4.11.1 Window Cases - Barrel Vault 4.11.2 Window Cases - AAIS 4.12 Technical Studies - Roof..............................................................50 4.13 Technical Studies - Solar Control................................................51 4.14 Technical Studies - Acoustics......................................................52 4.15 Thermal Insulation ........................................................................53 4.15.1Barrel Vault - Energy Performance 4.15.2 AAIS Studio - Energy Performance 5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 6. REFERENCES 7. APPENDIX AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
4
1
INTRODUCTION
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
5
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
1. INTRODUCTION : Architectural Association School of Architecture, Bedford Square, London This report is a product of the ‘Refurbishing The City’ project of the MSc - MArch Sustainable Environmental Design programme. This study aims to provide the foundation of environmental design principles for future design work through a combination of indoor and outdoor studies, occupant surveys, fieldwork, and further computational simulations. The areas of study in this project are the Landscape and Urbanism Studio and the AAIS Studio part of the AA School of Architecture, seen in figure 1.1, and Morwell Street. Very early on it was apparent to us that the area of focus would be the lightweight construction of the Landscape and Urbanism Studio (Barrel Vault). The vault is made of timber and external cladding. Being exposed to the outdoors entirely, the roof contributed to significant heat loss during winters and subsequent gains in summers making the space thermal inefficient. Thus, our study was focused mainly on the environmental and thermal performance of the space’s lightweight envelope. The fieldwork comprises observation, physical measurement of space, data logger measurements, and conduction of surveys. The analysis of the initial findings led to proposed solutions through parametric simulations. These initial visits provided useful information regarding the spatial characteristics and demonstrated an overview of the structure’s environmental capabilities and its relation to its geographical context. Simulation tools were used to predict the environmental performance of the spaces throughout the year. The tools also aided in developing and testing design strategies aimed at improving indoor thermal comfort conditions and optimising energy consumption. The structure of the report represents the project timeline over the term as Overview, Outdoor Studies and Indoor Studies.
Figure 1.1 Architectural Association School of Architecture (Picture Credits: Zeel Dhangdharia)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
6
1. INTRODUCTION
2
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
OVERVIEW
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
7
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
2. OVERVIEW : 2.1 SITE INFORMATION : AA School of Architecture, Bedford Square, London Location : 34-36 Bedford Square (rear building) Spaces to study : AAIS Studio, Landscape and Urbanism studio (Barrel Vault), Morwell Street
The AA School of Architecture is located in Bedford Square, the only remaining Georgian Square in London. As seen in figure 2.1.1, 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. The Georgian houses around Bedford Square have been refurbished into offices and educational buildings. Owing to the historical significance of these centuries old houses, there is limited scope for renovation on the frontal elevation of the AA School. Sustained internal refurbishments are made to reinvent the spaces to be more conducive as studio and collaborative workspaces.
Figure 2.1.1 Architectural Association School of Architecture bird eye view (Source : Google Earth)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
8
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
2. OVERVIEW : 2.2 LONDON WEATHER DATA : For this report, outside weather data is based on the records of St. James Park Weather Station, which is the closest station to AA School with the most complete hourly information shown in figure 2.2.1. Figure 2.2.2 shows the global solar radiation, daily outdoor dry-bulb temperature and comfort band of London. 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) 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.
Figure 2.2.1 London Map (Source : Google Earth) ASHRAE adaptive comfort (90%)
Dry bulb temperature Range
Average Dry bulb temperature
Dry Bulb temperature, °C
ASHRAE adaptive comfort (80%)
Figure 2.2.2 Global solar radiation, daily outdoor dry-bulb temperature and comfort band of London (Source : Climatool) AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
9
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
2. OVERVIEW :
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
AAIS Studio
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
L&U Studio ( Barrel Vault)
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
Morwell Street
2.3 SPACES TO STUDY The studios within the AA School that are the scope of this project are the AAIS Studio and The Landscape and Urbanism Studio (Barrel Vault) which are located on the 2nd and 3rd floor respectively of the rear side of the 34 - 36 Bedford Square, on the side facing Morwell Street. AAIS (AA Interprofessional Studio) is a Spatial Performance and Design course that involves performances, displays and shoots, in addition to conventional lectures. It is occupied by 30 students. The studio is therefore used dynamically with a flexible furniture layout and arrangement. The Landscape and Urbanism studio in the barrel vault has a fixed seating arrangement and about 30 students occupy the space. The studio is made of a lightweight timber vault roof construction, and two levels of single glazed windows extending the whole length of the studio. Morwell street forms an urban canyon with mid rise buildings flanking it. It is a narrow street and is mainly used for services and parking. Figure 2.3.2 is a section that shows the relationship between the three spaces.
Figure 2.3.1 Photographs of the study areas (Picture Credits: Zeel Dhangdharia, Honeyksha Waghela)
Figure 2.3.2 Bedford square section (Source : Wright & Wright Architects) AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
10
3
OUTDOOR STUDY
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
11
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY : 3.1 SOLAR STUDIES | SHADOW ANALYSIS
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
Time : 09:00
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
Time : 12:00
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
Time : 15:00
Shadow analysis was done to understand the impact of the adjacencies on the spaces, and on Morwell street. The analysis was conducted for 3 selected days of the year - the spring equinox, and summer and winter solstices. The range was studied across different times of the selected day to gain information on the extent of the shadows in outdoor spaces and to adjacent buildings as shown in Figure 3.1.1. On March 21st, the shadow range is optimum, allowing for more sun patches on surfaces. Building surfaces on higher floors also receive less shadowing from surrounding buildings. On June 21st, where the sun is highest, the shadows are shorter. The outdoor areas are generally brighter this time, with shadowing only on spaces immediately outside the buildings.
Equinox (March 21st)
On December 21st, when the sun is lower and the shadows are longer, almost all the immediate spaces outside the AA are overshadowed. Hence, during winter, there is not enough outdoor surface area that could receive direct sunlight and aid in heating the surrounding spaces.
Summer Solistice (June 21st)
Winter Solistice (December 21st) AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Figure 3.1.1 Shadow Analysis (Source : ladybug)
12
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
3. OUTDOOR STUDY :
4. INDOOR STUDY
September - March
3.2 SOLAR STUDIES | SOLAR RADIATION
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
March - September
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
Annual
Solar radiation on the exposed roof of the barrel vault and on Morwell Street was studied to understand the trends in the radiation over the course of the year. The analysis was conducted for 2 periods of the year - Summer months (March to September) and winter months (September to March). Annual solar radiation was also studied to understand the average radiation over the study area. As depicted in Figure 3.2.1, in summer months there is high incident solar radiation on the barrel vault of >700 KWh/m2. Most of the street is found to receive >350 KWh/m2, except the southern part of the street where radiation is <250 KWh/m2 because of tall shading. In winter months, the barrel vault receives 200-300 KWh/m2 of solar radiation on the roof. The entire street receives less than 200 KWh/ m2 of solar radiation due to low sun height into Morwell Street which Plan View is a narrow canyon.
View from NW
View from SE AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Figure 3.2.1 Solar Radiation (Source : ladybug)
13
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
3. OUTDOOR STUDY : 3.3 SOLAR ANALYSIS | SOLAR ACCESS Solar access simulations are performed to analyse the daylighting on Morwell Street and the immediate context of the AA School. The shadow masking analysis in figure 3.3.1 shows the amount of obstruction around the space. The sky view component is moderately low, due to the narrow street, due to higher obstruction all around. Solar access analysis is done to understand the daylight hours on the roof of barrel vault and Morwell Street, as seen in figure 3.3.2. The building at the end of Morwell Street (South West) is blocking solar access to the street; that part of the street receives least solar access most of the year. In winter, there is almost nil solar access on the street because of tall buildings and low sun height in those months. In contrast to this, the other end of the street (NE) junction is wider with shorter buildings, and receives most daylight hours on the street throughout the year.
Figure 3.3.1 Shadow masking Analysis (Source : ladybug)
March
June
December
Figure 3.3.2 Solar Access Analysis (in hours) (Source : ladybug)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
14
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
3. OUTDOOR STUDY : 3.4 WIND ANALYSIS A computational fluid dynamics analysis was made to study the airflow rate, wind speed and flow patterns. The flow vector 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 North-West following the facade of the school buildings (Fig. 3.4.1). The side of the AA School facing Bedford Square experienced a wind velocity of 2.5 to 3 m/s. However, the courtyards and Morwell Street lower wind velocity of around 0.5 m/s v(Fig. 3.4.3). Morwell Street being a canyon, and having tall buildings on the mouths of the street, experienced higher wind velocity on the ends at the intersections, and close to nil velocity at the core. The direction of wind on the ends of the street was mixed as wind was channelled from all around the large buildings, so that it felt like wind was blowing from multiple directions.
B A
A
B
Figure 3.4.1 Context and building wind velocity | Plan (Source : Autodesk CFD)
Figure 3.4.2 Context and building wind velocity | Section AA (Source : Autodesk
Figure 3.4.3 Context and building wind velocity | Section BB (Source : Autodesk CFD) AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
15
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
3. OUTDOOR STUDY : 3.5 SOLAR ANALYSIS | SECTIONAL VIEW Figures 3.5.1 is a section depicting the solar access in the three spaces being studied. Between March to September, the sun angles allow for reasonable daylight access into the windows of AAIS and Barrel vault facing morwell street. In March all spaces receive direct solar radiation except for Morwell Street on 21st march 9am. Sunshine hits the windows directly. Direct solar access on Morwell Street occurs in peak summer months. Summer solstice or June 21st, shows all spaces getting solar access and daylight at all times. On December 21st (Winter solstice)because sun angles are low, daylight isn’t reaching Morwell Street, AAIS, Barrel at all. It is being blocked by buildings on the other side of Morwell Street.
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Figure 3.5.1 Sectional view (Source : Wright & Wright Architects)
16
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
3. OUTDOOR STUDY : 3.6 MORWELL STREET Morwell street forms an urban canyon with mid rise buildings flanking it as seen in the plan in figure 3.6.1. It is a narrow street and is mainly used for services and parking. There is an alternative access for the AA School at 16 Morwell Street, as seen the pictures of the street in figure 3.6.2. Usage and occupancy is highlighted in the figure 3.6.3. It is observed that many service outlets go onto Morwell street, and let heat into the street. The service entries are not used throughout the day and the street is largely unoccupied. The AA side elevations are largely opaque and made of brick. The opposite elevation is contrastingly transparent with glazing.
Bedford Avenue
Bailey Street 16 Morwell St.
Figure 3.6.1 Morwell Street | Plan
Pedestrians Students
Smoking
Service entry for buildings
Parking
Figure 3.6.3 Morwell Street | Usage
Figure 3.6.2 Morwell Street | Photographs (Picture Credits: Neha Kurian, Anagha Vasudevan) AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
17
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
3. OUTDOOR STUDY : 3.7 MORWELL STREET|SPOT MEASUREMENTS Illuminance spot measurements were taken on Morwell Street on October 28th 2021, between 16:00-16:15, under overcast sky conditions. The sun set that day at 17:41 on that day. The street width was divided into 3 spots for measurement - either ends and the centre of the street width. The dry bulb temperatures measured on Morwell Street depicted in figure 3.7.1, ranged from 19.6° to 21°C, and about 4-5°C warmer than the weather station temperature. Lower temperatures of 19.6-20° are measured at the ends of the street, at the junctions of other streets. This is hypothesised to be because of higher wind velocity that was recorded at these intersections. The core of the street is observed to be warmer with almost 1° variation compared to the ends, at 21°C. This is because the core traps the heat due to lower wind velocity and ventilation. Relative humidity is measured at various points on the street and is observed that it ranges from 66-70%. At the point where it was measured to be that highest at 70% it was observed that there was a service outlet expelling steam onto the street.
Figure 3.7.1 Morwell Street temperature Analysis (Source : Spot measurement tools)
28/10/21
Overcast
16:00
Illuminance spot readings are depicted in figure 3.7.2. As the sky was overcast, the recorded measurements on Morwell are considered evenly distributed in illuminance. The highest measured illuminance was 3746Lux at the south west end of Morwell Street. The illuminance levels reduced as one walked to the core of the street from 2000 to 837 Lux which was the lowest measured illuminance. The illuminance is observed to increase again as one walks to the other end of the street. The core is darker as the cannon has tall buildings on either side that are largely opaque and have lower access to daylight. Although the measured illuminance at the core is lower than the ends of the street, it is observed that the illuminance is ambient for the functions of the street.
Figure 3.7.2 Morwell Street Illuminance and wind Analysis (Source : Spot measurement tools)
28/10/21
Overcast
16:00 Legend (Lux)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
18
1. INTRODUCTION
4
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
INDOOR STUDY AAIS STUDIO
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
19
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.1 AAIS STUDIO The AAIS Studio is accessed from the AA Bar terrace on one side, and has large single glazed windows also facing Morwell Street as seen in the plan in figure 4.1.1. The studio is comfortable in acoustic quality. Voice carries across the space with ease as the carpeted floor absorbs sound, whereas the ceiling reflects sound keeping it ambient. However, there are external sources of noise like the metal staircase leading to the third floor as well as construction noise from Morwell Street. It is observed that the lux levels on the side facing Morwell street is considerably high. The sky is not visible from the east (Morwell) facing windows. The AAIS Studio, having a very considerable window to wall area, develops high levels of Illuminance. This can be inconvenient when presentations are being given and the space needs to be darker. There are centrally controlled motor blinds over all windows that make these less flexible to operate. Thermally, the space is adequately comfortable except during some weeks when the radiators were under maintenance. Students carried smaller space heaters during those weeks. Most of the year, the space functions free-running.
AA Terrace
The appliances used in the studio, as shown in figure 4.1.3, are mechanical blinds, ceiling spotlights, projector and 8 radiators, in addition to speakers, cell phones and personal computers.
Morwell Street
Figure 4.1.2 AAIS Studio| Photographs (Picture Credits: Anagha Vasudevan, Zeel Dhangdharia)
Tutors
Students
Performance
Presentation
Students Working
Lecture Series
Group Discussions
Figure 4.1.3 AAIS Studio| Usage
Figure 4.1.1 AAIS Studio| Plan AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
20
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.1.1 AAIS STUDIO | MATERIALITY AAIS studio, as seen in figure 4.1.1.1, has a brick wall with white plaster. The floor is carpeted which absorbs the sound resulting in good sound quality, which is also beneficial for them for performance. The windows 2.5m high are top hung. This helps in adequate daylight. Only 50% of the window area can be used for ventilation. All benches and chairs are also white in colour which again helps in reflecting daylight and diffused light. L&U studio has a lightweight wall construction white white plaster inside. The floor of L&U was replaced from carpet to blue paint on concrete to avoid stuffiness during summers. The roof is a lightweight timber vault with no insulation inside supported by the RCC framework. This causes lots of infiltration in the space resulting in extreme temperatures in summer and winter. The strip of windows open outwards. There is a clerestory that helps for ventilation.
Figure 4.1.1.1 AAIS Studio plan showing the different indoor material of the space AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
21
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.2 AAIS STUDIO | OCCUPANTS USAGE
Time : 11:00
Time : 13:30
Time : 16:00
AAIS (AA Interprofessional Studio) is a Spatial Performance and Design course that involves performances, displays and shoots, in addition to conventional lectures. It is occupied by 30 students. The studio is therefore used dynamically with a flexible furniture layout and arrangement. The needs of the space vary across the day; the studio goes from needing a green screen to a projector screen, and a running theatre to a classroom. The pictures of the studio is seen in figure 4.2.1. Interviews with the occupants of the studio was conducted to gather their experiences within the spaces. Respondents who were interviewed are as shown in figure 4.2.2. Respondents aadaptability to the space is shown by mapping their clo values in figure 4.3.3, while utilising the space. It is gathered that most occupants dressed warmly, but did not have additional outwer wear on to add layers. 90% of respondents wore a pullover, while most of them dressed for a light winter.
Figure 4.2.1 AAIS Studio| Occupancy patterns
CLOTHING
Short Sleeve Long Sleeve Vest Trouser Shorts
RESPONDANT (35)
Respondants (35)
Dress Pullover
10%
Jackets 15%
Tights
Students 75%
Staff Program directors
Figure 4.2.2 Respondents Students
Staff
Program Directors
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Boots Shoes Sandal 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Figure 4.2.3 Occupancy clo values 22
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.2 AAIS STUDIO | SPOT MEASUREMENTS 4.2.1 CASE 1 | NO OCCUPANTS
Illuminance & Relative Humidity
Temperature
The AAIS studio is L shaped and the longer part is the studio which is 8m wide, and measurements were taken 1m apart in each row, and 7 rows across the length of the studio. The smaller part is 4m wide and measurements were taken across. Illuminance spot measurements were taken in the studio on September 29th 2021, between 16:30-16:45 and the sky conditions were partly cloudy. The outdoor illuminance is measured to be 4532 lux. The sun set that day at 18:43 on that day. The results are depicted in Fig. 4.2.1.1 and Fig 4.2.1.2. The illuminance readings on the side facing Morwell Street are higher than the rest of the readings. Maximum illuminance in the room is measured as 4000lux. The windows on the opposite side facing the AA terrace have lower levels of illuminance as the terrace is surrounded by buildings on all sides. In spite of large windows on either end of the room, the illuminance levels drop drastically toward the centre of the room. The least illuminance is recorded in the centre of the studio space to be 350lux. The AAIS studio has a more even distribution of illuminance because of large windows on both sides. But the lux levels are lower than expected because of its context. Most of the studio receives more than the minimum illuminance of 300 lux which is sufficient for the studio to function as a classroom. But the studio requires lower levels of light as it functions as a multipurpose space, and the harsh daylight coming in from the large windows are under utilised and undesirable. There are mechanical blinds to reduce the daylight allowed into the space during presentations and performances. Dry bulb temperature and relative humidity readings are also taken on the same spots as illuminance for a free running studio. There were no occupants when the measurements were taken. The outdoor dry bulb temperature was measured to be around 22°C. The temperature in the studio ranges from 21.9° to 23°C. The highest measurement is in the centre of the room at 23°C and the cooler temperatures are naturally towards the windows on either side between 21.9° and 22°C. The dry bulb temperature in the studio in the free-running state is very close to the outdoor measured temperature, and that was unexpected. The temperature was expected to be warmer than the outdoors, which it was not.
AA Terrace 4532 lux 22 C 58% 1m/s
Figure 4.2.1.1 Illuminance and humidity analysis (Source : Spot measurement tools)
28/09/21 Windows closed Blinds Open
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Morwell Street
Partly Cloudy
AA Terrace 4532 lux 22 C 58% 1m/s
Morwell Street
Figure 4.2.1.2 Temperature analysis (Source : Spot measurement tools)
16:30 Legend (Lux)
23
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.2 AAIS STUDIO | SPOT MEASUREMENTS 4.2.2 CASE 2 | WITH OCCUPANTS
Illuminance & Relative Humidity
Temperature
Another set of measurements were taken with 15 occupants in the studio during a presentation (Fig. 4.2.2.1 and Fig. 4.2.2.2). Spot measurements were taken in the studio on October 28th 2021, between 16:30-16:45 and the sky conditions were partly cloudy. The sun set that day at 17:10 on that day.The studio arrangement was such that the chairs were facing forward towards a projector screen. The blinds were shut to dim the daylight entering the space. The outdoor illuminance on AA Terrace is 10300 lux and on the Morwell Street side is 15000 lux. The maximum illuminance in the space is seen to be 1400 lux near the windows facing AA Terrace. The least measured illuminance was found to be 176 lux in the studio space, and 58 lux in the storage space. The outdoor relative humidity is measured to be 56%. The relative humidity in the studio around occupants is measured to be between 60.5% and 63.3%. The increase in humidity is attributed to the presence of occupants, and lack of ventilation. Dry bulb temperature was also measured in the studio with 15 occupants present. The outdoor measured temperature is 18°. The temperature in the studio ranges from 18.5° to 19.3°C. The increase in temperature in the space is inferred to be because of the occupant heat gains.
Figure 4.2.2.1 Illuminance and humidity analysis (Source : Spot measurement tools)
28/10/21
Partly Cloudy
Figure 4.2.2.2 Temperature analysis (Source : Spot measurement tools)
16:30
Legend (Lux)
15 Occupants Windows closed Blinds closed
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
24
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.2 AAIS STUDIO | SPOT MEASUREMENTS 4.2.3 SURFACE TEMPERATURES The surface spot measurements depict the studio’s performance under free-running conditions. It indicates that all the surfaces were only a few degrees lower than the outdoor temperature of 14°C, as seen in figure 4.2.3.1. The thermal camera images were taken while the heaters were on as seen in figure 4.2.3.2. The thermal camera indicated a temperature of 21.9°C in the ceiling and 18-19°C on the walls, which was higher than the outdoor temperature of 7°C. The outdoor walls indicated a lower temperature of 5.6°C. The images show that the wooden window sashes are warmer from the inside around 19-22°C.
Figure 4.2.3.1 Surface temperature analysis (Source : Spot measurements tools)
Partly Cloudy
8 Radiators
14°C Outdoor Temperature
Ceiling Spotlights
15/10/2021 3pm
Occupants present
Mechanical Blinds
Figure 4.2.3.2 Surface temperature (Source: Thermal Imaging camera) AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
25
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.3 AAIS STUDIO | SIMULATIONS 4.3.1 DAYLIGHTING | ILLUMINANCE
Equinox (March 21)
Summer Solistice (June 21)
Winter Solistice (Decemebr 21)
Daylighting simulations were run for the AAIS studio for March 21st (Spring equinox), June 21st (Summer solstice), December 21st (Winter Solstice) for two sky conditions - overcast and sunny (Fig. 4.3.1.1 )
Overcast The results indicate that it is very well lit except in December due low sun angles. The long windows that exist in two layers allow a lot of natural light to enter the space. Especially in summer, when the sun’s position is high in the sky, it is clear that the light penetrates deep into the studio. The studio achieves more than the 300 lux which is the minimum requirement for comfortable usage of the space, except in December where the average illuminance is around 200 lux. The minimum lux in the space is between 50-100 lux in December due to low solar access. But the depths of the space receive avg illuminance of around 200-300 lux.
AA Terrace
Morwell Street
AA Terrace
Morwell Street
Sunny Sky It is observed that the windows facing morwell street receive more illuminance on sunny days. The maximum illuminance is >1500 lux. The minimum lux in the space is between 50-100 lux in December due to low solar access.
Figure 4.3.1.1 Daylight analysis, Illuminance (Source : honeybee/ladybug)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
26
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.3 AAIS STUDIO | SIMULATIONS 4.3.2 DAYLIGHTING AUTONOMY | UDI (USEFUL DAYLIGHT ILLUMINANCE)
Daylight Autonomy
Useful Daylight Illuminance
Average : 79%
Daylight Factor
Average : 80%
Average : 2%
Daylight Autonomy (DA) and Useful Daylight Illuminance (UDI) are two dynamic climate-based calculations, which help to predict daylight performance throughout the year. They are useful in demonstrating the performance of the space visually and consider over and under-illumination. DA indicates the percentage of occupied hours per year, when the minimum illuminance level can be maintained by daylight alone inside the studio. The AAIS studio is observed to be autonomous for 79% of the work year, without being dependent on artificial lighting. Therefore, as depicted in Figure 4.3.2.1, most of the space could maintain its daylight autonomy for at least 79% of the year.
AA Terrace
Morwell Street
UDI simulation to get an understanding of glare and unwanted solar gains. The values on the representation are the percentage of time that each point of the floor area meets the UDI criteria (300-3000 lux). In Figure 4.3.2.1 it is indicated that illuminance levels of 1002000 lux could be achieved for around 80% of the year in the studio. The AAIS studio is observed to be autonomous for 79% of the work year, without being dependent on artificial lighting. To find what percent of the outside luminance is available in the internal space, Daylight Factor simulation is performed on the studio. Daylight Factor, measured as the percentage of ratio of outside to inside luminance is found to be between 2-6%. The AAIS studio achieves an average DF of 2%. The DF near the windows is between 5-7%, and the deepest space in the studio has a DF of 2%.
Figure 4.3.2.1 Daylight Autonomy, Useful daylight illuminance, Daylight Factor (Source : honeybee/ladybug)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
27
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.3 AAIS STUDIO | SIMULATIONS 4.3.3 LLUMINANCE VISUALISATION Figure 4.3.3.1 demonstrates the Image-based Illuminance study for the AAIS Studio. The study was conducted under sunny sky conditions for three indicative days (Summer Solstice, Equinox, Winter Solstice) at 12.00 pm. The orientation of the visualisation is depicted in the key plan in figure 4.3.3.2. The illuminance levels depend mainly on the orientation, the sun angle and therefore the time of the year. The studio seems to be particularly well lit and receives a fair amount of direct solar radiation most of the year, except in winter months. The visualisation for Winter Solstice shows that the low sun angles and taller buildings on the side is preventing the studio from being adequately lit. The visualisation shows that the studio seems to be receiving >50 cd/m2 of luminance.
Equinox (March 21)
Summer Solistice (June 21)
Sunny Sky cd/m2
Winter Solistice (December 21) Figure 4.3.3.2 Key plan for AAIS Studio AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0
Figure 4.3.3.1 Render daylight analysis. Luminance (Source : honeybee/ladybug) 28
1. INTRODUCTION
4
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
INDOOR STUDY
L&U STUDIO (BARREL VAULT)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
29
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.4 LANDSCAPE & URBANISM STUDIO (BARREL VAULT) The Landscape and Urbanism studio in the barrel vault has a fixed seating arrangement and about 30 students occupy the space. The studio is made of a lightweight timber vault roof construction, and two levels of single glazed windows extending the whole length of the studio as seen in the plan in figure 4.4.1. The photographs of the space are seen in figure 4.4.3.v The overall exposure to the outside, and poor thermal mass and insulation makes the studio mimic the outdoor environmental conditions throughout the year; it undergoes significant heat loss in the winter months and corresponding heat gain in the summer months. The studio due to its location at the highest level of the building receives a substantial amount of sunlight and keeps the space well lit for more than half of the occupied hours a year.
AA Terrace
The clerestory glazing on the south side of the studio is tinted so that the projector screen is better visible. Barrel vault has poor acoustic quality as the vaulted wooden ceiling reflects sound, causing echoes. The linear arrangement of the space is also inconvenient in a classroom setting as the rear section of the studio has poor visibility of the projector screen.
Morwell Street Figure 4.4.2 AAIS Studio| Photographs (Picture Credits: Neha Kurian, Honeyksha Waghela)
Tutors
It is observed that the illuminance from the side facing Morwell street is considerably high. It results in the occupants leaving lights on without realising the difference in the brightness, with or without the lights.
Students
The appliances used in the studio are wall spotlights, projector and 6 radiators, in addition to speakers, cell phones and personal computers, as per the figure 4.4.3.
Lecture Series
Group Discussions
Presentation
Students Working Figure 4.4.3 AAIS Studio| Usage
Figure 4.4.1 AAIS Studio| Plan AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
30
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.4 L&U STUDIO | OCCUPANTS USAGE The Landscape Urbanism studio has a conventional approach to classes. It is occupied by 30 students. The studio is therefore used fixed furniture layout. This is illustrated in figure 4.4.4. Interviews with the occupants of the studio was conducted to gather their experiences within the spaces. Respondents who were interviewed are as shown in figure 4.2.3. Respondents aadaptability to the space is shown by mapping their clo values in figure 4.4.5, while utilising the space. It is gathered that most occupants dressed by layering themselves with pullovers and jackets to keep warm in the studio.
Figure 4.4.4 L&U Studio| Occupancy patterns
CLOTHING
Short Sleeve Long Sleeve Vest Trouser Shorts
RESPONDANT (35)
Respondants (35)
Dress Pullover
20%
Jackets Tights Boots
20%
75%
Students Staff Program directors
Figure 4.4.6 Respondants Students Staff Program Directors
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Shoes Sandal 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Figure 4.4.5 L&U Studio occupancy clo value 31
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.4 L&U STUDIO | SPOT MEASUREMENTS 4.4.1 CASE 1 | NO OCCUPANTS
Illuminance & Relative Humidity
Temperature
The L&U studio is a narrow and long studio space which is 4.8m wide, and measurements were taken in 3 points of each row and in 7 rows across the length of the studio. Illuminance spot measurements were taken in the studio on September 29th 2021, between 16:30-16:45 and the sky conditions were partly cloudy. The outdoor illuminance is measured to be 10616 lux on the side facing AA terrace and 5979 lux on the side facing Morwell Street. The sun set that day at 18:43 on that day. The results are depicted in Fig. 4.4.1.1 and Fig. 4.4.1.2. Maximum illuminance in the room is measured as 1700lux. The illuminance readings on the side facing AA Terrace, on the west, are higher than the rest of the readings. This is opposite to the illuminance on the floor below in the AAIS studio. This is because the L&U studio is higher than the other AA buildings facing the terrace. Lower levels of illuminance is observed on the Morwell Street side as it is a narrow street with taller buildings on the other side. In spite of having 2 strips of windows extending to the entire length of the room, the illuminance levels drop drastically toward the centre of the room. The least illuminance is recorded in the centre of the studio space to be 80 lux. This is because the front of the studio has tinted windows to avoid glare on the projector screen. Most of the studio received a minimum illuminance of 300 lux which was just sufficient for the studio to function as a classroom. The studio was dim but adequately lit, even on an overcast day such as the day when the measurements were taken. Dry bulb temperature and relative humidity readings are also taken on the same spots as illuminance for a free running studio. There were no occupants when the measurements were taken. The outdoor dry bulb temperature was measured to be around 18.3°C. The temperature in the studio ranges from 19° to 22.8°C. The highest measurement is the east corner in the front of the room as the tinted windows were helping trap the heat in the darkest corner. The cooler temperatures are naturally towards the windows on either side between 19-20°C. The dry bulb temperature in the studio in the free-running state is very close to the outdoor measured temperature, and that was expected as the L&U studio’s barrel vault is a lightweight roof construction, with single glazed windows and poor insulation. The outdoor relative humidity was measured to be between 54-55.9%. The humidity is measured indoors and is found to be between 54.7% and 56.9%. This is found to be very close to the outdoor condition as the studio was free running and was unoccupied at the time of the measurements.
Figure 4.4.1.1 Daylight analysis, Illuminance (Source : Spot measurement tools)
28/09/21
Partly Cloudy
Figure 4.4.1.2 Temperature analysis (Source : Spot measurement tools)
16:32
No Occupants Windows closed Blinds Open
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
32
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.4 L&U STUDIO | SPOT MEASUREMENTS 4.4.2 CASE 2 | WITH OCCUPANTS
Illuminance & Relative Humidity
Temperature
Another set of measurements were taken with 15 occupants in the studio during a presentation (Fig. 4.4.2.1 and Fig. 4.4.2.2). Spot measurements were taken in the studio on October 28th 2021, between 11:00-11:15 and the sky conditions were partly cloudy. The sun set that day at 17:10 on that day. The outdoor illuminance on the side facing AA Terrace is 10616 lux and on the Morwell Street side is 5979 lux. Maximum measured illuminance of 790 lux is towards the side facing Morwell Street on the east due to the orientation of the sun, and the time of reading. The least illuminance in the space is seen to be 35 lux at the front of the studio with the tinted windows. Dry bulb temperature was also measured in the studio with 15 occupants present. The outdoor measured temperature is 18.3° - 18.9°. The temperature in the studio ranges from 22-24°C. The increase in temperature in the space is inferred to be because of the occupant and equipment heat gains that the barrel vault is trapping within the space. The outdoor relative humidity is measured to be 54-55.9%. The relative humidity in the studio around occupants is measured to be between 59% and 64%. The increase in humidity is attributed to the presence of occupants, and lack of ventilation. Highest humidity is measured where most occupants were seated towards the front of the studio.
Figure 4.4.2.1 Daylight analysis, Illuminance (Source : Spot measurement tools)
28/10/21
Partly Cloudy
Figure 4.4.2.2 Temperature analysis (Source : Spot measurement tools)
11:00
15 Occupants Windows closed Blinds Open
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
33
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.4 L&U STUDIO | SPOT MEASUREMENTS 4.4.3 SURFACE TEMPERATURES The surface spot measurements depict the studio’s performance under free-running conditions. It indicates that all the surfaces were only a few degrees lower than the outdoor temperature of 23°C. The white tables have the highest temperatures compared to other surfaces. This could be due to the sunlight falling directly on them from the windows as seen in figure 4.4.3.1. The thermal camera images were taken while the heaters were on. The thermal camera indicated a temperature of 20.2°C in the ceiling and 14.4°C on the RCC columns, which was higher than the outdoor temperature of 7°C. The outdoor walls indicated a lower temperature of 5.6°C. Outside of the studio the measurement on the roof indicated a much lower temperature of -3.2°C. (Figure 4.4.3.2) This was due to the metal roof cladding on the exterior. This also seems to explain the reason why the barrel vault tends to cool down extremely fast.
Figure 4.4.3.1 Surface temperature analysis (Source : Spot measurements tools)
6 Radiators
Occupants present
Partly Cloudy
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
23°C Outdoor Temperature
Wall Mounted Spotlights
8/10/2021 5:20pm
Manual Blinds
Figure 4.4.3.2 Surface temperature (Source: Thermal Imaging camera) 34
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.4 L&U STUDIO | SIMULATIONS 4.4.4 DAYLIGHTING | ILLUMINANCE
Equinox (March 21)
Summer Solistice (June 21)
Winter Solistice (Decemebr 21)
Daylighting simulations were run for the L&U studio for March 21st (Spring equinox), June 21st (Summer solstice), December 21st (Winter Solstice) for two sky conditions - overcast and sunny. The results are indicated in Figure 4.4.4.1.
AA Terrace
Morwell Street
AA Terrace
Morwell Street
Overcast The studio is very well lit except in December due low sun angles. The long windows that exist in two layers allow a lot of natural light to enter the space. Especially in summer, when the sun’s position is high in the sky, clerestory windows ensure the studio is well lit. The studio achieves more than the 300 lux which is the minimum requirement for comfortable usage of the space. In peak summer, there appears to be excessive daylight where most of the studio seems to be receiving over 600 lux, likely to cause glare. The minimum lux in the space is between 150-300 lux in December due to low solar access.
Sunny Sky The results of simulations for a sunny day indicate that the spaces are harshly lit in the summer months. The daylight on the windows facing morwell street are harsher >1500 lux due to the west orientation of the windows. In December, the average illuminance is around 400 lux. The minimum lux in the space is between 150-300 lux in December which is more than the illuminance on an overcast day.
Figure 4.4.4.1 Daylight analysis, Illuminance (Source : honeybee/ladybug)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
35
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.4 L&U STUDIO | SIMULATIONS 4.4.5 DAYLIGHTING AUTONOMY | UDI (USEFUL DAYLIGHT ILLUMINANCE)
Daylight Autonomy Average : 90%
Useful Daylight Illuminance Average : 67%
Daylight Factor Average : 5%
Daylight Autonomy indicates the percentage of occupied hours per year, when the minimum illuminance level can be maintained by daylight alone inside the studio. The L&U studio is observed to be autonomous for 90% of the work year, without being dependent on artificial lighting. Therefore, as depicted in Figure 4.4.5.1, most of the space could maintain its daylight autonomy for 90% of the year. UDI simulation to get an understanding of glare and unwanted solar gains. The values on the representation are the percentage of time that each point of the floor area meets the UDI criteria (300-3000 lux). In Figure 4.4.5.1 it is indicated that illuminance levels of 100-2000 lux could be achieved for around 67% of the year in the studio. The L&U studio is observed to be autonomous for 79% of the work year, without being dependent on artificial lighting. To find what percent of the outside luminance is available in the internal space, Daylight Factor simulation is performed on the studio. Daylight Factor, measured as the percentage of ratio of outside to inside luminance is found to be between 4-7%. The studio achieves an average DF of 5%. The DF near the windows is between 6-8%, and the deepest space in the studio has a DF of 4%.
Figure 4.4.5.1 Daylight Autonomy, Useful daylight illuminance, Daylight Factor (Source : honeybee/ladybug)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
36
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.4 L&U STUDIO | SIMULATIONS 4.4.6 LUMINANCE VISUALISATION Figure 4.4.6.1 demonstrates the Image-based Illuminance study for the L&U Studio. The study was conducted under sunny sky conditions for three indicative days (Summer Solstice, Equinox, Winter Solstice) at 12.00pm. The orientation of the visualisation is seen in the key plan in figure 4.4.6.2. The illuminance levels depend mainly on the orientation, the sun angle and therefore the time of the year. The studio seems to be particularly well lit and receives a fair amount of direct solar radiation most of the year, except in winter months. The visualisation for Winter Solstice shows that the low sun angles and taller buildings on the side is preventing the studio from being adequately lit. The visualisation shows that the studio seems to be receiving >100 cd/ m2 of luminance.
Equinox (March 21)
Summer Solistice (June 21)
Sunny Sky cd/m2
Winter Solistice (December 21) Figure 4.4.6.2 Key Plan of Barrel Vault Studio AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0
Figure 4.4.6.1 Render daylight analysis. Luminance (Source : honeybee/ladybug) 37
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.5 OCCUPANT SURVEY
Interviews with the occupants of the two indoor spaces were conducted to gather their experiences within the spaces. It is found that more occupants found the AAIS studio to be thermally comfortable than the barrel vault. Visually, the AAIS Studio seems to be more ambient than the barrel vault according to the respondants. The respondents also had more flexibility in controlling the amount of daylight entering the space in the AAIS Studio in case of excess glare, while the barrel vault was not far behind. The Barrel Vault was better than the AAIS studio in air quality and also noise. There were more respondents who complained of noise from the AA Terrace entering the AAIS studio. The questionnaire also enquired about the usage patterns and observations of the occupants of each space that are reported as percentage of respondents in figure 4.5.1 THERMAL COMFORT It was also asked what the respondents would like to change THERMAL COMFORT 0% about their respective spaces. The responses are outlined in figure 4.5.1. 10%
THERMAL COMFORT
AIR QUALITY
NOICE QUALITY
10%
10%
20%
30% 60%
15%
Good OK Bad AIR QUALITY AIR QUALITY
Thermal Comfort 10%
30%
30%
10% 10%
Air Quality
10% 20% 30%
30%
30% 60%
THERMAL COMFORT THERMAL0% COMFORT 10% 10%
QUALITY Good AIROK Bad Good OK Bad AIR QUALITY
GoodNOICE OK QUALITY Bad Good OK QUALITY Bad NOICE
30%
Noise Quality
Good Good
30%
40% 50%
15% 65%60%
90%
OK OK
Bad Bad
60%
THERMAL COMFORT THERMAL0% COMFORT
30%
OK OK
Bad Bad
Good Good
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
OK OK
Bad Bad
Good Good
OK Bad OK Bad
30% 50%
Visual Comfort
Figure 4.5.1 Survey responses - Comparison
Good AIROK Bad QUALITY Good OK Bad AIR QUALITY 10% 10%
AIR QUALITY Good OK Good OK AIR QUALITY 10% 10%
Good O NOICE Q NOICE Q
30% 30%
30% 30%
30% 30%
NOICE Good QUALITY OK Bad Good QUALITY OK Bad NOICE
Bad Bad
VISUALGood COM VISUALGood COM
Air Quality
30% 30%
30% 30%
40% 40%
50% 50%
30% 30%
GoodNOICE OK QUALITY Bad Good OK Bad NOICE QUALITY
30%
30%
30%
30%
60%
90% Good OK Bad Good OK Bad
10% 10%
60% 60%
10%
Good OK Bad VISUAL COMFORT Good OK Bad COMFORT Noise VISUAL Quality
Good Good
40% 40%
50%
50%
50%
50%
30%
60%
90% Good Good
THERMAL COMFORT THERMAL COMFORT 0% 0% 10% 10%
0% 10%
10%
75%
Good OK Bad AIR QUALITY QUALITY ThermalAIRComfort
60% 60%
90% 90%
90% 90%
10%
15% 60%
10%
75%
VISUAL COMFORT Good OK Bad Good COMFORT OK Bad VISUAL
THERMAL COMFORT THERMAL COMFORT 0% 0% 10% 10%
50%
10% 20%30%
Good OK Bad Good OK Bad
30%
60%
30%
Bad
10%
75%
VISUALGood COMFORT OK Bad Good OK Bad VISUAL COMFORT
50%
65% 60%
90%
60%
40%
15%
OK
50%
10%
15%
Good
30%
50%
60%
90%
Good OK Bad VISUAL COMFORT VISUAL COMFORT
40%
30%
NOICE Good QUALITY OK Bad Good QUALITY OK Bad NOICE
Bad Bad
10%
10%
15% 65%60%
AIR QUALITY Good OK Good OK AIR QUALITY
60% 75%
Good OK Bad NOICE QUALITY NOICE QUALITY
10%
30%
65%
15%
THERMAL COMFORT THERMAL COMFORT 0%
10%
15%
20%30%
90%
AIR QUA
0%
10%
60%
THERMAL COMFORT
VISUAL COMFORT
30%
Good
OK
Bad
Good
OK
Bad
Good
OK
Bad
Good
OK
Bad
Good
OK
Bad
Good
OK
Bad
Good
OK
Bad
Good
OK
Bad
Visual Comfort
38
OK OK
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.6 COMPARISON BETWEEN THE SPACES The sections depict the interrelationship between the three spaces for illuminance and temperature. Dry Bulb Temperature accross the three spaces is seen in figure 4.6.1. Temperature on Morwell Street was observed to be higher than mean outdoor temperature because the deep canyon traps heat. In the barrel vault, the indoor temperatures are close to outdoor temperatures which might be due to poor insulation and low thermal mass. Internal temperatures in the AAIS Studio are surprisingly consistent considering higher occupancy, thermal mass and insulation. Illuminance in the three spaces is seen in figure 4.6.1. Illuminance on the side facing Morwell Street increases with increase in height; illuminance is least on the street level because it forms a deep canyon. Though the barrel vault is a narrow space, the illuminance decreases significantly in the centre of the space as compared to the readings by the windows on either side. The AAIS studio has a more even distribution of illuminance because of large windows on both sides. But the illuminance levels are lower than expected because of its context. Figure 4.6.1 Difference of temperature levels in Indoor and outdoor spaces.
Figure 4.6.2 Difference of Illuminance (lux) levels in Indoor and outdoor spaces. AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
39
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.7 DATA LOGGER READINGS | AAIS STUDIO - BARREL VAULT - MORWELL STREET - OUTDOOR 4.7.1 TEMPERATURE COMPARISON | 22/10/21 - 28/10/21 The data loggers data of the three spaces being studied has been compiled to be able to understand the difference in the way the three spaces perform with relation to dry bulb temperature. Historic data from the weather station is also represented to gain more context about generic trends. The data loggers readings gathered date for 2 significant periods - one free running and with heating. FREE RUNNING Data logger readings were gathered for a free running period between 22/10/2021 and 28/10/2021 the outdoor conditions were largely cloudy or overcast, barring one rainy day. Fluctuations ranging from 4-7°C within the space, and the studio loses and gains heat in a matter of hours. The temperature trends in the studio mimics the trends of the measurement temperatures from Morwell street. This is inferred to be because of the low thermal mass of the barrel vault, and its inability to store heat or insulate the space. AAIS remains consistent during the weekend, and on weekdays it fluctuates for about 2 °C. The maximum measured temperature in the AAIS studio is 18°C (25/10 at 12pm) and the minimum one was 16°C (weekend). The AAIS has a higher thermal mass and has the ability to store heat within the envelope and it shows in the readings, as the AAIS studio is warmer than the outdoor temperature without large deviations. WITH HEATER Between 15/11//2021 and 26/11/2021, data logger readings were collected for a period that was heated. The outdoor conditions were largely cloudy or overcast, barring one rainy day. The outdoor temperature fluctuation in the same day can reach upto 9°C.
Figure 4.7.1.1 Free-Running data logger readings
There are a lot of fluctuations ranging from 4-7°C within the space, and the studio loses and gains heat in a matter of hours. The temperature trends in the studio mimics the trends of the measurement temperatures from Morwell street. This is inferred to be because of the low thermal mass of the barrel vault, and its inability to store heat or insulate the space. Overall, lowest fluctuations are noticed during the weekends when there are less or no occupants and it can be seen increasing during weekdays. It is evident that the ability to store heat in the AAIS envelope is higher than in L&U studio. AAIS with 50% occupants fluctuate 2°C. It loses heat much slower over the weekend than the drastic drop that is seen in the barrel vault. The envelope is weak and has high infiltration in the barrel vault and loses heat and gains heat quickly. The AAIS studio lost 2°C over the weekend when the studio was unoccupied and the barrel vault took 6 hours to lose 4°C without occupants.
AAIS
Barrel Vault
Morwell Street
Outdoor Temperature
Heating off
Heating on
Figure 4.7.1.2 Heating Period - Datalogger readings AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
40
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.7 DATA LOGGER READINGS | BEDFORD SQUARE - MORWELL STREET - OUTDOOR 4.7.2 TEMPERATURE COMPARISON | 04/11/21 - 14/11/21 The outdoor data logger data from Morwell street is compared with data logger readings from Bedford Square as seen in figure 4.7.2.1. The conditions of Bedford Square are quite the opposite from Morwell Street; the street is a narrow canyon with tall buildings on all sides whereas the square is an open garden with vegetation and tall trees. In spite of their different conditions, the microclimate of both the spaces seem to be similar and the graphs are close to each other, and differ from the outdoor weather station data significantly. A sudden temperature peak is noticed around 8:30 am in Bedford Square probably due to direct sunshine on the device. From 8:30am to 5pm Bedford Square is 0.5°C warmer than Morwell Street probably because of higher solar access. Temperature of both the spaces meet at 12:00am to 5:00am. Comparison of the data logger readings of AAIS studio is done with its immediate context (AA Terrace and Morwell Street) to understand the inter-relationship of the context and the studio. There are peaks observed in the graph for AA terrace because of direct sunshine on the device. During daylight hours, AA terrace is warmer than Morwell Street. This is inferred because of higher solar access and also varied occupancy throughout the day on the Terrace. In the evenings, Morwell and AA temperatures appear to coincide. At all times, AAIS is at least 3°C warmer than the outdoor graphs, due to heating being switched on. But the rise and fall in temperatures are similar to the outdoor trends in the AA Terrace and Morwell Street.
Figure 4.7.2.1 Free-Running data logger readings
Figure 4.7.2.2 Heating Period - Datalogger readingsv AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
41
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.8 THERMAL PERFORMANCE BASED ON MInT 4.8.1 BASE CASE | 0-50% OCCUPANTS
AAIS Studio Heat Loss Coeficient: 7.1 W/K m2 Swing: 1.89 K
L&U (Barrel Vault) Studio
Outdoor Temperature: 15 °C Mean Indoor Temperature: 17 °C
Heat Loss Coeficient: 13.85 W/K m2 Swing: 4.31 K
Outdoor Temperature: 15 °C Mean Indoor Temperature: 17.5 °C
The base case scenarios for the indoor spaces are outlined here. The existing conditions of the space in its unoccupied form with the sources of heat exchange is illustrated in figure 4.8.1.1. The base case is simply the spaces in their existing form with an average occupancy of 50%. For the following calculations 15 occupants are considered for AAIS and 20 occupants for Barrel Vault. Heat gains and losses from the two spaces are considered from analysis through Mint and OpenStudio and EnergyPlus. The sources of the respective heart exchanges are highlighted with the findings. Primary sources of heat gain, shown in figure 4.8.1.3 are solar, occupants laptops and lighting in the AAIS Studio, and the maximum contributor in the barrel vault is solar gains from figure 4.8.1.5. Heat loss in the AAIS shown in figure 4.8.1.2 occurs through glazing, external walls and infiltration. In the barrel vault, highest heat loss occurs through the windows, while the roof, walls and infiltration also contribute significantly as shown in figure 4.8.1.4. The materials used in Barrel Vault have a higher U-Value from Table 3.5 10(a), Table 3.29, Table 3.49 (a), 3.51 (a), Table 3.54 (g), 3.50 of CIBSE Guide A. The gains through lighting in both spaces are much higher even though both spaces are very well lit.
Figure 4.8.1.2 Heat loss for AAIS Studio Base Case (15 Occupants)
Figure 4.8.1.4 Heat loss for Barrel Vault Studio Base Case (20 Occupants)
Solar Gains in the barrel vault are higher due to the poor thermal mass, and the weak envelope leads to high infiltration. It is also attributed to larger glazing area, and window wall ratio in the barrel vault. The proportion of heat gain is divided as solar gains and occupant gains for each space (figure 4.8.1.6 for AAIS and figure 4.8.1.7 for barrel vault). While both the studios show more solar gains compared to occupancy, the proportion is significantly high in the barrel vault. A similar subtotal is depicted for heat losses by building envelope, and infiltration and ventilation(figure 4.8.1.8 for AAIS and figure 4.8.1.9 for barrel vault). Heat loss through the envelope accounts for the higher sub total in both spaces, but the weak envelope of the barrel vault loses more heat than the AAIS studio.
Total Heat Loss
Gains Figure 4.8.1.3 Heat gainHeat for AAIS Studio Base Case (15 Occupants)
Total Heat Loss
Heat Gains Figure 4.8.1.5 Heat gain for Barrel Vault Studio Base Case (20 Occupants)
23%
23%
15%
43% 57%
77%
Figure 4.8.1.6 Total heat Gain Figure 4.8.1.7 Total heat loss Occupancy Gains SUBTOTAL Solar Gains BUILDING ENVELOPE SUBTOTAL VENTILATION & INFILTRATION Figure 4.8.1.1 Heat exchange from the building envelope without occupants AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Subtotal Building Envelope Subtotal Ventilation & Infiltration
77%
85%
Figure 4.8.1.8 Total heat Gain Figure 4.8.1.9 Total heat loss Occupancy Gains SUBTOTAL Solar Gains BUILDING ENVELOPE SUBTOTAL VENTILATION & INFILTRATION
Occupancy Gains Solar Gains
42
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.8 THERMAL PERFORMANCE BASED ON MInT 4.8.2 BASE CASE | 100% OCCUPANTS
AAIS Studio Heat Loss Coeficient: 7.1 W/K m2 Swing: 1.89 K
L&U (Barrel Vault) Studio
Outdoor Temperature: 15 °C Mean Indoor Temperature: 17 °C
Heat Loss Coeficient: 13.85 W/K m2 Swing: 4.31 K
Outdoor Temperature: 15 °C Mean Indoor Temperature: 17.5 °C
The heat exchanges are analysed with full occupancy in the two spaces. 30 occupants are considered for AAIS and 40 occupants for the Barrel vault. Predominant source of heat gain, shown in figure 4.8.2.3 is occupancy gains, but solar, laptops and lighting gains are also significant in the AAIS Studio, and the maximum contributor in the barrel vault remains solar gains even with increased occupancy from figure 4.8.2.5. Heat loss in the AAIS shown in figure 4.8.2.2 occurs through glazing, external walls and infiltration. In the barrel vault, highest heat loss occurs through the windows, while the roof, walls and infiltration also contribute significantly as shown in figure 4.8.2.4. Additional Ventilation is required in both spaces for occupant well-being. The barrel vault has a lesser deficiency of air changes/hour as compared to AAIS due to its existing high infiltration values. Solar Gains in the barrel vault are higher due to the poor thermal mass, and the weak envelope leads to high infiltration. It is also attributed to larger glazing area, and window wall ratio in the barrel vault. The proportion of heat gain is divided as solar gains and occupant gains for each space depicted in fig. 4.8.2.6, fig. 4.8.2.8 While both the studios show more solar gains compared to occupancy, the proportion is significantly high in the barrel vault. A similar subtotal is depicted in fig. 4.8.2.7 and fig. 4.8.2.9 for heat losses by building envelopes, and infiltration and ventilation. Heat loss through the envelope accounts for the higher sub total in both spaces, but the weak envelope of the barrel vault loses more heat than the AAIS studio.
Figure 4.8.2.2 Heat loss for AAIS Studio Base Case (15 Occupants)
Heat Gains
Figure 4.8.2.4 Heat loss for Barrel Vault Studio Base Case (20 Occupants)
Total Heat Loss
Figure 4.8.2.3 Heat gain for AAIS Studio Base Case (15 Occupants)
Heat Gains
Total Heat Loss
Figure 4.8.2.5 Heat gain for Barrel Vault Studio Base Case (20 Occupants)
15%
24% 34%
47% 66%
76%
Figure 4.8.2.6 Total heat Gain Figure 4.8.2.7 Total heat loss Occupancy Gains SUBTOTAL Solar Gains BUILDING ENVELOPE SUBTOTAL VENTILATION & INFILTRATION Figure 4.8.2.1 Heat exchange from the building envelope without occupants AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
53%
Subtotal Building Envelope Subtotal Ventilation & Infiltration
85%
Figure 4.8.2.8 Total heat Gain
Figure 4.8.2.9 Total heat loss
Occupancy Gains SUBTOTAL Solar Gains BUILDING ENVELOPE
Occupancy Gains Solar Gains
SUBTOTAL VENTILATION & INFILTRA
43
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.9 ENVELOPE CONDITIONS | INFILTRATIONS The findings from observations, analyses, and occupant interviews indicate that the barrel vault performs poorly in its ability to keep the occupants thermally comfortable, as depicted in figure 4.9.1. It is found to be extremely cold in winter months and very hot in summer. The section shown in figure 4.9.2 investigates the construction techniques involved in the barrel vault and the thermal bridges so formed. Thermal bridges are points of infiltration in the construction that is affecting the air tightness of the envelope, thus causing significant heat loss in winter months, as the heat exchange in the envelope is causing the internal conditions to be similar to the outdoor conditions which is not always desirable. Thermal bridges negatively impact occupant health, energy performance and lifespan of materials.
Figure 4.9.1 Inefficient Building Envelope
The various points of infiltration have been identified so as to try to resolve them in the following proposals. Major areas of concern in the construction have been identified in the junctions such as - window frames, lintels, wall junctions, and single glazed windows and the uninsulated roof.
Figure 4.9.2 Points of Infiltration from the building envelope AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
44
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.10 TECHNICAL STUDY | THERMAL INSULATION 4.10.1 ITERATIONS | BARREL VAULT STUDIO The barrel vault is an uninsulated space, with single glazed windows. The impact of adding insulations and double glazing is being explored with analysis through the MInT table and EnergyPlus simulations. Base Case: Existing Barrel Vault In the base case, the existing heat loss coefficient of the Barrel Vault is very high due to its weak envelope (Table 4.10.1.1).
Base Case : Existing Barrel Vault Construction with single glazing and uninsulated surfaces.
Case 1 (Double Glazed) : Double glazing, air filled, low-E: εn = 0.05 with wood frame and 16mm gap.
Case 1: Adding Double Glazing With the addition of double glazing to the windows there is a significant reduction in the Heat Loss coefficient (Table 4.10.1.2). The Mean indoor temperature has increased, but is still within the comfort band during summers, not during winters (Fig. 4.10.1.3 and Fig 4.10.1.4). The most solar gains during summers and heat loss during winters takes place through the windows. The introduction of double glazing has reduced the heat gains and losses by half. The infiltration has also reduced. Table 4.10.1.1 Energy performance based on MInT and EnergyPlus
Figure 4.10.1.1 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.10.1.2 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus) AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Table 4.10.1.2 Energy performance based on MInT and EnergyPlus
Figure 4.10.1.3 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.10.1.4 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus) 45
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.10 TECHNICAL STUDY | THERMAL INSULATION 4.10.1 ITERATIONS | BARREL VAULT STUDIO Case 2: Adding mineral wool insulation only to walls The addition of insulation to only the walls has reduced the heat loss coefficient a lot more, with higher temperatures in summers and winters (Table 4.10.1.3).
Case 2: Double-glazed + insulation added to walls. 95mm studding, 95mm mineral wool insulation between studs.
Table 4.10.1.3 Energy performance based on MInT and EnergyPlus
Case 3: Adding mineral wool insulation to walls and roof The addition of insulation to only the walls and roof has reduced the heat loss coefficient (Table 4.10.1.4) a lot more, with higher temperatures in summers and winters (Fig. 4.10.1.5 and Fig. 4.10.1.6). A much more comfortable temperature has been achieved in winters. The energy balance graph depicts that the heat loss through infiltration and the walls and roof have reduced significantly
Case3: Double-glazed + insulation added to walls. 95mm studding, 95mm mineral wool insulation between studs. Insulation added to roof 25mm mineral wool.
Table 4.10.1.4 Energy performance based on MInT and EnergyPlus
Heat Loss Heat Gain Figure 4.10.1.5 Heat gains and losses in typical Summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Figure 4.10.1.6 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus)
46
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.11 TECHNICAL STUDY | WINDOWS & GLAZING 4.11.1 WINDOW CASES | BARREL VAULT This section explores the impact of windows and glazing on illuminance and heat gains and losses of Barrel Vault. Case 1: Existing Glazing An illuminance of 600-800 lux is achieved in the centre of the Barrel Vault Studio, while around 1500 lux is achieved close to the windows which causes glare in the month of June. Very less illuminance is achieved in the month of December with an average of 266 lux(Fig. 4.11.1.1). The solar gain in a typical summer week is very high (Fig. 4.11.1.2).
Case 1: Existing Windows :
Case 2: Clearstorey fully blocked :
Case 2: Clerestory fully blocked: It is hypothesised that the additional layer of glazing that the clerestory is adding is causing additional heat loss through windows. To test it, an iteration is run without the clerestory windows. By blocking the clerestory the illuminance received in June is around the middle of the Barrel vault studio is around 340 lux (Fig. 4.11.1.4), which is half of what was received in the centre of the studio with existing glazing. The solar gains received in summer (Fig. 4.11.1.5) is almost halved after blocking the clerestory. Not much difference is observed in solar gains during winter period. The heat loss through windows in winter has reduced to almost half.
June Avg : 852lux
December Avg : 266lux
Figure 4.11.1.1 Daylight analysis, Illuminance (Source : Honeybee/ladybug)
Figure 4.11.1.2 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.11.1.3 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus) AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
June Avg : 581lux
December Avg : 249lux
Figure 4.11.1.4 Daylight analysis, Illuminance (Source : Honeybee/ladybug)
Figure 4.11.1.5 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.11.1.6 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus) 47
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.11 TECHNICAL STUDY|WINDOWS & GLAZING 4.11.1 WINDOW CASES | BARREL VAULT Case 3: Blocking the front and rear section of the clerestory By blocking the front and rear clerestory, only the glare of the front and the rear portion of the Barrel Vault Studio is reduced. The illuminance received in June and December is only slightly reduced (Fig. 4.11.1.7).
Case 4: Alternate clearstorey blocked Case
Case 3: Front and rear clearstorey blocked
Case 4: Blocking alternatte shutters of the clerestory By blocking alternate portions of clerestory (Fig. 4.11.1.9), the glare is reduced throughout. The illuminance is slightly lower in June and December. The heat gains and losses through the windows are lesser. Figure 4.11.1.8 compares illuminance received in all cases. Illuminance is significantly reduced by blocking the clerestory. Adequate amount of daylight without glare is achieved by blocking alternate clerestory panels.
June Avg : 803 lux
December Avg : 232 lux
June Avg : 733 lux
Figure 4.11.1.7 Daylight analysis, Illuminance (Source : Honeybee/ladybug)
December Avg : 228 lux
Figure 4.11.1.9 Daylight analysis, Illuminance (Source : Honeybee/ladybug)
Figure 4.11.1.10 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Case 1
Case 2
Case 3
Case 4
Summer Solistice (June 21) Winter Solistice (December 21) Figure 4.11.1.8 Comparison of illuminance in each Case AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.11.1.11 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus) 48
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.11 TECHNICAL STUDY|WINDOWS & GLAZING 4.11.2 WINDOW CASES|AAIS STUDIO The AAIS Studio has a high window-floor ratio of 0.3 (Figure 4.11.2.1) as compared to the optimum ratio required for educational buildings. Recommended ratio for educational buildings is 0.2. An analysis of daylighting and subsequent thermal performance is done with the reduced floor window ratio. Adequate daylight is received in summer but inadequate daylight is received in winter (Figure 4.11.2.2). By reducing the window-floor ratio to 0.2 as shown in figure 4.11.2.5, the illuminance received by the studio in June is an average of 316 lux, which is adequate (figure 4.11.2.6). The illuminance received in December is an average of 97 lux which is very less (fig. 4.11.2.6). There is not much difference in solar gains through the window by reducing the glazing area.
Figure 4.11.2.1 AAIS Studio existing floor-window ratio
Figure 4.11.2.5 AAIS Studio proposed floor-window ratio
June Avg : 483lux
June Avg : 316lux
December Avg : 150lux
Figure 4.11.2.2 Daylight analysis, Illuminance (Source : Honeybee/ladybug)
Figure 4.11.2.3 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.11.2.4 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus) AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
December Avg : 97lux
Figure 4.11.2.6 Daylight analysis, Illuminance (Source : Honeybee/ladybug)
Figure 4.11.2.7 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.11.2.8 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus) 49
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.12 TECHNICAL STUDY | ROOF The roof of the barrel vault is uninsulated and made of lightweight construction, due to which the heat gains and losses through the roof are very high. The option of increasing the thermal mass of the Barrel Vault roof was explored. There was a minimal increase in the MInT (Table 4.12.1). Another option of making the Barrel Vault a flat roof was explored. The aim was to reduce the surface area through which there is significant heat gain and loss (Fig. 4.12.1 and Fig. 4.12.2). There was a slight decrease in the heat loss coefficient and a slight increase in temperature. When the thermal mass of the flat roof was increased there was a minimal increase in the MInT.
Base Case: Existing barrel vault roof in lightweight construction
Case 1: Existing barrel vault construction with higher thermal mass
Figure 4.12.1 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.12.2 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Case 2: Assumed vault as flat roof without insulation
Case 3: Assumed vault as flat roof with higher thermal mass Table 4.12.1 Energy performance based on MInT and EnergyPlus 50
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.13 TECHNICAL STUDY | SOLAR CONTROL The Barrel Vault has a very high glazing area, which is subject to heat gain during the summer months (fig. 4.13.1). The space tends to be very warm during summers and cold during winters. By adding a horizontal overhang, the clerestory is shaded from harsh summer solar gain and allows for solar gains during the winters due to the lower sun angle. In figure 4.13.3, it is observed that the operative temperature of the studio with shading is slightly lower than the temperature of existing glazing conditions in a typical summer week. In figure 4.13.4, it is observed that the operative temperature of the studio with shading is slightly lower than the temperature of existing glazing conditions, but almost the same, in a typical winter week (Fig. 4.13.6).
Figure 4.13.1 Existing solar gains from the building envelope
Base Case: Existing barrel vault with exposed glazing that is subject to high heat gain in the summer months due to the clere story.
Figure 4.13.3 Typical free running summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Figure 4.13.2 Proposed shading device on clearstorey
Case 1: Adding an overhang to shade the clerestory from harsh summer solar gain and allow for desirable lower winter gains.
Heat Loss AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Case 1: Operative temperature Base Case: Operative temperature Figure 4.13.4 Typical free running winter week (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Gain
Figure 4.13.5 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Loss
Dry bulb temperature (Outdoor)
Heat Gain
Figure 4.13.6 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus)
51
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.14 TECHNICAL STUDY | ACOUSTICS The AAIS Studio being used for performative learning and recordings, requires more soundproofing. There is also significant noise coming in from the AA Terrace as shown in figure 4.14.1, and figure 4.14.2. The existing sash windows in the AAIS studio are old construction and are single glazed. An efficient solution to improve the soundproofing without tampering the existing construction would be to add a glazing insert internally in the window frame as seen in figure4.14.3. This is preferred for older construction with valuable historic windows, where one does not want to alter their original windows. It also adds flexibility where scenarios, such as at the AA, may require the inserts to be taken down to different functions being assigned to spaces frequently.
Morwell Street
AA Terrace
Figure 4.14.1 Noise received from AA Terrace into AAIS Studio
The inserts are made from silicone compression tubing, and are assembled by simply pressing inside the existing window frames. The air gap between the original glazing and the insert adds another layer of soundproofing. The secondary glazing is made from 6mm thick acrylic glazing.
Figure 4.14.2 Plan showing the noise received from AA Terrace
6mm Acrylic Glazing
Figure 4.14.3 Detailed part section showing acoustic window insert
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Silicon Compression tube
Figure 4.14.4 Detailed section for the insert
52
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.15 THERMAL SIMULATIONS 4.15.1 BARREL VAULT |ENERGY PERFORMANCE As mentioned before the Barrel Vault has a lightweight construction and its value of infiltration is very high. The heat losses through the envelope is also high. Effective proposals from the technical studies have been combined in different ways. The thermal performance of all these cases were analysed using simulation results from EnergyPlus and Open Studio.
Base Case
Case 1 is a combination of Double-glazed windows and insulation added to walls and to the roof. Figure 4.15.1.5 depicts that with the above solutions the heat gain during summers and heat loss during winters is halved. The infiltration has also reduced significantly Case 2 is a combination of Case 1 and blocking the clerestory. Figure 4.15.1.6 depicts that there is a further reduction in heat gains and losses through the windows.
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.15.1.1 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.15.1.4 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus)
Case 1 Base Case : Existing floor-window ratio with the clearstorey window
+
+
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.15.1.2 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.15.1.5 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus)
Case 1 : Double-glazed + insulation added to walls + insulation added to roof
+
Case 2
Case 2 : Case 1 + Reducing glazing area by blocking clerestory Figure 4.15.1.13 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.15.1.3 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Loss
Heat Gain
Figure 4.15.1.6 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week (Source : Energy Plus)
53
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : Base Case 4.15 THERMAL SIMULATIONS 4.15.1 BARREL VAULT |ENERGY PERFORMANCE Figure 4.15.1.9 depicts Case 3 with all 40 occupants of Barrel Vault present. It is interesting to note that the occupants are the major source of heat gain. Figure 4.15.1.9 analyses the periods of the year occupants are either cold, hot or comfortable. In the base case it is seen that the occupants are cold from October to April, hot in July and August and comfortable in the rest. Hence, the users are uncomfortable in most months of the year. In Case 2 March to October months are comfortable for users, but due to the airtightness of the building it is shown that users feel hot from May to August. In order to reduce Solar gains and to make the studio more comfortable in Summer the clerestory is blocked (Case 3) hence the users feel comfortable throughout March to October. Figure 4.15.1.10 compares the Annual Heating demand of all the Cases considered. The Base Case requires a very high heating energy of 10.5 kWh/m2 in the month of Jan, Case 2 requires only 2.5 kWh/m2 in the coldest month of January, Case 3 requires a slightly higher heating energy demand of 3.5 kWh/m2. Hence, it can be concluded that the proposals will reduce heating energy demands by almost 80%
Case 2
+
Case 3 Case 2
+
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Figure 4.15.1.9 Annual Comfort Analysis of all cases (Source : Energy Plus)
Oct
Nov
Dec
-1=Cold, 0=Comfortable, 1=Hot
Figure 4.15.1.7 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week with 100% Occupants (Source : Energy Plus)
1.00< 0.80 0.60
Heating Demands (kWh/m2)
0.40
Heat Loss
-0.00 -0.20 -0.40 -0.60 -0.80 <-1.00
Barrel Vault Base Case Heating
Heat Gain
Figure 4.15.1 .8 Heat gains and losses in typical winter weeK with 100% occupants (Source : Energy Plus) AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
0.20
AAIS Base Case Heating Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Figure 4.15.1.10 Annual Heating demand comparison of all cases (Source : Energy Plus)
Oct
Nov
Dec 54
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.15 THERMAL SIMULATIONS 4.15.1 BARREL VAULT |ENERGY PERFORMANCE This section studies the solar gains and simulated temperatures in a typical summer and typical winter week. In Figure 4.15.1.11 it is seen that the base case operative temperature falls within the comfort band, while Case 2 and 3 are slightly higher than the base case but fall within the comfort band in a typical Summer week. In Figure 4.15.1.12 it is seen that the Base Case Temperature is much below the comfort band. Case 1 is operative temperature higher than the base case temperature by 3 C. Since the clerestory was blocked to reduce solar gains that leads to high temperature in summer, the Case 2 operative temperature is lower than the Case 1 operative temperature.
Figure 4.15.1.11 Solar gains and simulated temperature for a typical summer week (Free Running) (Source : Energy Plus)
Base Case
Case 2
Case 3
Dry bulb temperature (Outdoor)
Figure 4.15.1.12 Solar gains and simulated temperature for a typical summer week (Free Running) (Source : Energy Plus)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
55
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.15 THERMAL SIMULATIONS 4.15.2 AAIS STUDIO|ENERGY PERFORMANCE
12 AM
The AAIS studio has a much better thermal performance as compared to Barrel Vault. Figure 4.15.2.1 depicts that the AAIS studio is comfortable from the months of May to October.
6 PM
It gets hot for a short period in the month of July. The thermal performance of the AAIS Studio was analysed using simulation results from EnergyPlus and Open Studio. From Figure 4.15.2.2 and Figure 4.15.2.3 it is seen that the heat loss and heat gain through windows and walls is much less than Barrel Vault. Figure 4.15.2.4 compares the heating energy demands of the Barrel Vault studio and the AAIS studio. It can be seen that the heating energy demands of AAIS are half of what is required by the Barrel Vault studio.
-1=Cold, 0=Comfortable, 1=Hot
1.00< 0.80 0.60
12 PM
0.40 0.20 -0.00 -0.20 -0.40
6 AM
-0.60 -0.80 <-1.00
12 AM
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Figure 4.15.2.1 Annual Comfort analysis for AAIS Studio (Source : Energy Plus)
Heat Loss Heat Gain Figure 4.15.2.3 Heat gains and losses in typical winter week with 100% Occupants (Source : Energy Plus)
Heating Demands (kWh/m2)
Figure 4.15.2.2 Heat gains and losses in typical summer week with 100% Occupants (Source : Energy Plus)
Barrel Vault Base Case Heating AAIS Base Case Heating Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Figure 4.15.2.4 Heating demand comparison between barrel and AAIS (Source : Energy Plus) AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
56
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
4. INDOOR STUDY : 4.15 THERMAL SIMULATIONS 4.15.2 AAIS STUDIO|ENERGY PERFORMANCE This section studies the solar gains and simulated temperatures in a typical summer and typical winter week. In Figure 4.15.2.5 it is seen that in a typical summer week the AAIS operative temperature falls well within the comfort band. The indoor temperature is around 2° C higher than the outdoor dry bulb temperature. In Figure 4.15.2.6 it is seen that in a typical winter week the AAIS operative temperature falls almost close to the comfort band. The indoor temperature is around 4° C higher than the outdoor dry bulb temperature.
Figure 4.15.2.5 Solar gains and simulated temperature for a typical summer week (Free Running) (Source : Energy Plus)
Base Case: Operative temperature
Dry bulb temperature (Outdoor)
Figure 4.15.2.6 Solar gains and simulated temperature for a typical summer week (Free Running) (Source : Energy Plus)
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
57
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS : The AA has an ever changing layout where renovations occur annually and each space functions differently every year. The performance analysed here is specific to the current usage and layout in the School. The AA is also an old construction, and the energy performance of the building is poor because of its age. The spaces being studied in this project are 2 indoor and 1 outdoor space. The studios within the AA are directly impacted by their immediate context quite dramatically, both in quality of space and environmental performance. Outdoor studies of Morwell Street indicate that the street is adversely affected by its immediate context. The height to width ratio of the street is unfavourable for solar access also as it is in the east. This translates to poor daylighting on the street. The street is concluded to be thermally uncomfortable also because it performs like a canyon and traps the heat, and wind studies show low wind velocity on the street.
Since AAIS temperatures and energy demands were close to the comfort band, not many proposals were explored. The Barrel Vault studio was analysed in detail, where points of infiltration, solar gains, heat losses and gains were studied. In order to optimise the performance of the Barrel Vault Studio various proposals were analysed using simulations. Simulations and calculations depict that by increasing occupancy, including double glazing, adding extra insulation, increasing thermal mass, and the combinations of the above have the potential to reduce heating requirement from 7% to 80%. The only problem observed was that by making Barrel Vault airtight, the space would get uncomfortable during summers. Our solution to the problem was to add a shading device over the clerestory to reduce solar gains in the summer and allow solar gains in the winter.
The indoor calculations and spot measurements showed that the barrel vault is adequately lit for most of the year, except in winters. AAIS is autonomous for most of the year. Temperature measurements show that the barrel vault behaves like the outdoor condition, and calls for attention to the envelope. Since all initial analysis confirmed that the area of focus would have to be the Barrel Vault and its thermal performance. Thus, the study is focused mainly on the environmental and thermal performance of the space’s lightweight envelope. The Base Case simulations showed that on free-running mode, the Barrel Vault studio overheats for 2 to 3 summer months a year, and requires high heating demands to maintain indoor thermal comfort during the winter. While AAIS remained comfortable almost throughout the year as per the simulations. Typical summer and winter weeks were analysed. The amount of mechanical heating energy demands was analysed and compared between the two spaces. The simulations revealed that neither of the spaces can be comfortable free-running during winters, but the amount of heating needs can be reduced. It was revealed that AAIS required half of the heating energy as compared to Barrel Vault.
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
58
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
Zeel Dhangdharia Term 1 started off with questions, analysis, materiality and a climatic view of how a space performs. In past, working with tropical climate had varied solutions which could be executed annually. While, looking a climatic view globally and also specifically for London, the question arises what criteria you choose for an erratic climate? This term has given me a different dimension of what environmental design could be. Earlier, the words like sustainability or environmental aspects were just noted for a building as a whole. Through this studies, I was instigated with the different ethos of space could have diverse effect on the users. Combining terms, readings, simulations, personal experience and the most important user analysis gave surprising launch to my understanding. Nonetheless, I was intrigued by how much an opening in the envelope makes difference to an internal space. Even though Barrel Vault was the most visually pleasing space considering daylighting, the users experiences extreme temperatures during the summer and winter weeks. However, after analyzing and interviewing the users, I understood the importance of opening and glazing in the space. It not only affects the daylight but thermal mass of the space along with acoustics being hampered. Moreover, the technical simulations and soft computations gave a detailed understanding to observe the spaces with respect to the outdoors and user experiences. Later, various methods and different software programmes were introduced (OpenStudio, EnergyPlus, Ladybug, Honeybee) which were extremely helpful for us to reveal the role of the building’s envelope in the thermal behavior of the internal space and collecting data from it we were able to improve efficiency of the building and identify problem areas. This project proved that a balance can be struck between technical and visual experience. We felt excited to try using the above-mentioned outcome in next term’s design project because of the mix of theoretical and technical knowledge we gathered in the previous months. Term 1 has definitely made look closer to environmental aspects of a building envelope.
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
Neha Kurian
Anagha Vasudevan
Honeyksha Waghela
My interest in climate-responsive buildings started when I questioned various buildings back home. Therefore, Term 1 was an interesting project in understanding real life bioclimatic conditions its real-life application.
It was a great experience to be studying spaces within the AA School for the term 1 project. Primarily, being new to the school, this gave us an opportunity to interact with peers from different programs. It was also an advantage to access the study spaces, to visit frequently and observe them in all the different ways they were being used.
Term 1 started with few questions, how often can one feel comfortable in a space? Is it possible to achieve a space that’s comfortable for all?
The analysis of the spaces to be studied using various temperature and humidity measurement tools was very interesting and insightful as a first approach to environmental study. Our team’s discussions with students and programme directors provided a starting point for understanding the building’s envelope and efficiency in terms of comfort and energy performance. Even though Barrel Vault was relatively a new construction and looked more aesthetically pleasing, the comfortability and thermal performance of the space was less compared to that of the age-old construction of building of AAIS. The AAIS Studio received adequate daylight, but they chose to keep the blinds closed throughout the day as per the usage of the space. They would keep the lights on and hence the energy use would also increase. It was interesting to see how usage of space impacts the energy performance. Furthermore, we were introduced to simulations to get better understanding of data. These simulations also motivated us to try different iterations which helped us to derive useful solutions and conclusions. This project helped us in understanding the importance of thermal insulation. It was tricky to find a balance between heat gain/heat loss and occupant comfort during summers and winters. Even though an airtight building was achieved, it made it comfortable during winters but uncomfortable during summers. Term 1 project has changed the way I analysed buildings. I have learned that sustainability is more than just reducing Energy Consumption, but it also covers a lot of other factors like ensuring occupancy comfort and well-being.
Term 1 has been an interesting journey from being introduced to the basics of sustainability, to progressively getting a deeper and more practical understanding of the concepts. It was very useful to be able to relate the theory lectures being taught by the tutors to the practical analysis of a space. Learning concepts by practical application made it easier to get acquainted with the foundational concepts of sustainable environmental design. Analysis that began with observing the spaces as designers, without the support of any devices or equipment was a simple yet effective way of gathering insightful data. It was extremely helpful to approach environmental analysis by frequently visiting the site, and having a physical contact with the conditions, and learning through the use of measuring tools. To quantify this performance, several simulation tools were taught. The simulations also gave us the ability to be able to experiment with different materials, forms and building elements, to understand the impact of these on building performance. In the barrel vault, it was interesting to observe the contrast between a lightweight and a heavy thermal mass in its energy consumption. Getting familiar with the different theories and practical skills has given immense confidence to take on new challenges. It is also interesting to note how spaces within the AA are negotiated around its Georgian heritage. It was very intriguing for me how intrinsic the ability to adapt to uncomfortable thermal circumstances is for us humans. Adapting by layering clothes or orienting oneself a certain way is something almost not a conscious decision, but can be very telling about the performance of the space.
We were lucky to study two indoor space which had completely opposite user dynamics and one outdoor space. This helped us in understanding how to analysis and consideration of an indoor space differ from outdoor. Coming from tropical climate it was an interesting exercise to understand the adaptability and material functionality in cold climate. Term 1 project started with understanding spaces followed by technical studies, the guidance given to us not only helped us to understand a building as a whole but also focused on its elements to optimize building performance and understand material properties. Various datas from dataloggers were also compared with other team’s spaces to understand how differently a space reacts to its immediate conditions. This helped crucially in understanding microclimate of an urban canyon in comparison to a square or a terrace. Physical and digital tools were introduced to us that helped us with data to understand the envelope even better. It also helped us to understand the space during the other times of the year from which we could draw further understanding of the space. Overall, studying these spaces has made us realize how simple solutions and design considerations can make a space better for user, it also helped us to come out of pre conceived notion of ‘One design fits all’ in an envelope. This project has given us a clear understanding of various environmental variables and brought of one step closer to designing environmental conscious buildings.
59
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
6. REFERENCES : Drawings provided by Wright and Wright Architects: Plans, Section drawings and digital files AA Archive: Original AA drawings Computational Tools: Excel MinT Spreadsheet AutoCad Rhino 3D Ladybug / Honeybee Open Studio & Energy Plus Sketch Up Tools: Spot measurement tools (temperature/ relative humidity/ lux) Data loggers (temperature/ relative humidity) -CIBSE (2007) Environmental Design “CIBSE Guide A. London.” CIBSE Publications. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-240-81224-3.00016-9. -A guide for Designers and Planners - Advance and sustainable housing renovation -Indow- https://windows.com/custom-storm-windows/acousticgrade/ -Solar Shading of Buildings, by Paul Littlefair -Metric Handbook Planning and Design Data- 39 Thermal Environment, by Phil Jones -PLEA Note 2 - Thermal Insulation, by Andras Zold and Steven Szokolay -Insulating Materials- Principles, Materials, Applications, by Margit Pfundstein, Roland Gellert, Martin H. Spitzner and Alexander Rudolphi -Architectural Science and the Sun, by Matt Fajkus & Dason Whitsett -Daylighting - Architecture and lighting Design, by Peter Tregenza, Michael Wiilson - 2011 -Roof Cooling Techniques: A Design Handbook BySimos Yannas, Evyatar Erell, Jose Luis Molina
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
60
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
7. APPENDIX :
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
61
1. INTRODUCTION
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
62
1. INTRODUCTION
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
63
1. INTRODUCTION
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
6. REFERENCES
7. APPENDIX
64
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
CALCULATION OF FREE-RUNNING MEAN INDOOR TEMPERATURE BASE CASE - No occupants 28/09/2021 Building Elements ROOF (if internal CEILING enter zero for U-value) WINDOWS (including frames) EXTERNAL WALLS (net opaque wall area excluding glazing) EXPOSED FLOOR OTHER INTERNAL THERMAL MASS TOTAL OCCUPIED FLOOR AREA SUBTOTAL BUILDING ENVELOPE FRESH AIR DUE TO INFILTRATION (ac/h * space volume * hours /day) FRESH AIR FOR COMFORT/WELLBEING (number occupants * m3/occ hr * hrs/day) NET FRESH AIR DEFICIT ADDITIONAL VENTILATION FOR COOLING (ac/h * space volume * hours /day)
4. INDOOR STUDY
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
m2
W/m2 K
112.80 52.00 88.70 112.80 49.50 112.80
0.00 4.80 2.09 0.00 0.00
No. ac/h
Space Volume (m3)
hrs/day
No. Occupants
m3 /person hr
hrs/day
1
394.80
7. APPENDIX
24
0
30
No. ac/h
Volume (m3)
hrs/day
No. of
Mean Heat Gain Rate, W
hrs/day
0
6. REFERENCES
8
394.80
ac/h
8
0.00 0.00
8
SUBTOTAL VENTILATION & INFILTRATION TOTAL HEAT LOSS RATE Heat Loss Coefficient HLC Occupancy Heat Gains OCCUPANTS APPLIANCES (LCD TV) - When Used APPLIANCES (Projector) - When Used APPLIANCES (Small Speaker) LIGHTS
SOLAR GAINS
0 1 1 2 46
Net Glazing Area 50.00
m2
100 50 130 22 100 Value Incident Solar kWh/m2 per day
0.80
8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00
Transmitted
Absorbed
0.75
0.80
TOTAL HEAT GAINS MEAN INDOOR TEMPERATURE RISE ABOVE OUTDOOR, K CALCULATION OF FREE-RUNNING MEAN INDOOR TEMPERATURE BASE CASE - No occupants 28/09/2021 Building Elements ROOF (if internal CEILING enter zero for U-value) WINDOWS (including frames) EXTERNAL WALLS (net opaque wall area excluding glazing) EXPOSED FLOOR OTHER INTERNAL THERMAL MASS TOTAL OCCUPIED FLOOR AREA SUBTOTAL BUILDING ENVELOPE FRESH AIR DUE TO INFILTRATION (ac/h * space volume * hours /day) FRESH AIR FOR COMFORT/WELLBEING (number occupants * m3/occ hr * hrs/day) NET FRESH AIR DEFICIT ADDITIONAL VENTILATION FOR COOLING (ac/h * space volume * hours /day)
m2
W/m2 K
112.80 52.00 88.70 112.80 49.50 112.80
0.00 4.80 2.09 0.00 0.00
No. ac/h
Space Volume (m3)
hrs/day
No. Occupants
m3 /person hr
hrs/day
1
394.80
24
0
30
No. ac/h
Volume (m3)
hrs/day
No. of
Mean Heat Gain Rate, W
hrs/day
0
8
394.80
ac/h
8
0.00 0.00
8
SUBTOTAL VENTILATION & INFILTRATION TOTAL HEAT LOSS RATE Heat Loss Coefficient HLC Occupancy Heat Gains OCCUPANTS APPLIANCES (LCD TV) - When Used APPLIANCES (Projector) - When Used APPLIANCES (Small Speaker) LIGHTS
SOLAR GAINS
0 1 1 2 46
Net Glazing Area 50.00
m2
100 50 130 22 100 Value Incident Solar kWh/m2 per day
0.80
8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00
Transmitted
0.75
Absorbed
0.80
TOTAL HEAT GAINS MEAN INDOOR TEMPERATURE RISE ABOVE OUTDOOR, K
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
65
1. INTRODUCTION
2. OVERVIEW
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
CALCULATION OF FREE-RUNNING MEAN INDOOR TEMPERATURE (AA SED 2013-21) BASE CASE - No occupants 28/09/2021 Building Elements
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
AU
m2
W/m2 K
91.14 43.00 173.02 88.70 111.48 21.50 111.48
3.09 2.19 4.80 1.15 0.00 0.00
No. ac/h
Space Volume (m3)
hrs/day
No. Occupants
m3 /person hr
hrs/day
ROOF (if internal CEILING enter zero for U-value) ROOF (if internal CEILING enter zero for U-value) WINDOWS (including frames) EXTERNAL WALLS (net opaque wall area excluding glazing) EXPOSED FLOOR OTHER INTERNAL THERMAL MASS TOTAL OCCUPIED FLOOR AREA SUBTOTAL BUILDING ENVELOPE FRESH AIR DUE TO INFILTRATION (ac/h * space volume * hours /day)
2
FRESH AIR FOR COMFORT/WELLBEING (number occupants * m3/occ hr * hrs/day) NET FRESH AIR DEFICIT
W/K
Table 3.51 (a) Table 3.49 (a) Table 3.29 Table 3.5 10(a) Table 3.54 (g) 3.50 ©
350.42
0
8
Volume (m3)
0
281.62 94.17 830.50 102.01 0.00 0.00
W/K W/K W/K W/K W/K
1308.29
W/K
231.28
W/K
0.00
W/K
0.00
W/K
231.28
W/K
1539.57 13.81
W/K
24
30
No. ac/h
ADDITIONAL VENTILATION FOR COOLING (ac/h * space volume * hours /day)
8
0.00 0.00
hrs/day
350.42
6
TOTAL HEAT LOSS RATE Heat Loss Coefficient HLC No. of
Mean Heat Gain Rate, W
0 2 1 42
Net Glazing Area 165.00
SOLAR GAINS
hrs/day
100 50 130 50 Value Incident Solar
Transmitted
0 0 0 438
Absorbed
24-hr Mean Gain, Watts
W
TOTAL HEAT GAINS
1907
W
MEAN INDOOR TEMPERATURE RISE ABOVE OUTDOOR, K
1.2
K
0.75
0.95
for an Outdoor Temperature of : PREDICTED MEAN INDOOR TEMPERATURE, oC
18.1 19.3
o
21.8
o
Adaptive Thermal Comfort Band after EN15251 o C Low Limit 27.8
Upper Limit
294
ROOF (if internal CEILING enter zero for U-value) ROOF (if internal CEILING enter zero for U-value) WINDOWS (including frames) EXTERNAL WALLS (net opaque wall area excluding glazing) EXPOSED FLOOR OTHER INTERNAL THERMAL MASS TOTAL OCCUPIED FLOOR AREA SUBTOTAL BUILDING ENVELOPE
AU W/m2 K
91.14 43.00 90.00 88.70 111.48 21.50 111.48
FRESH AIR DUE TO INFILTRATION (ac/h * space volume * hours /day)
0.30 0.30 1.80 0.39 0.00 0.00
ADDITIONAL VENTILATION FOR COOLING (ac/h * space volume * hours /day)
Table 3.51 (a) Table 3.49 (a) Table 3.29 Table 3.5 10(a) Table 3.54 (g) 3.50 ©
No. ac/h
Space Volume (m3)
hrs/day
No. Occupants
m3 /person hr
hrs/day
1
FRESH AIR FOR COMFORT/WELLBEING (number occupants * m3/occ hr * hrs/day) NET FRESH AIR DEFICIT
40.24
350.42
40
24
30
No. ac/h
8
Volume (m3)
W/K W/K W/K W/K W/K
236.84
W/K
115.64
W/K
8
3.42 2.42
93.45
W/K
0.00
W/K W/K
TOTAL HEAT LOSS RATE Heat Loss Coefficient HLC
445.93 4.00
W/K
SOLAR GAINS
Mean Heat Gain Rate, W
40 2 2 1 1 40 42
Net Glazing Area 80.00
12
2
m
100 50 1 130 1 1 50 Value Incident Solar 2
kWh/m per day
hrs/day
1333 25 2 43 1 27 700
Transmitted
Absorbed
24-hr Mean Gain, Watts
TOTAL HEAT GAINS
3131
W
MEAN INDOOR TEMPERATURE RISE ABOVE OUTDOOR, K
7.0
K
0.80
for an Outdoor Temperature of :
Upper Limit
2.10
K
C
kWh/m2 year 32831 kWh Annual Total
VHC Wh/m3 K
DHC Wh/K
483 283 200 374 250 50 0 DHC
4402 1217 1800 3317 2787 108 0
9229
2130.50 W
0.75
Swing
W W W W W W
1000
0.50
C
W/K m2
24-hr Mean Watts
8.00 6.00 18.00 8.00 16.00 16.00 8.00
PREDICTED MEAN INDOOR TEMPERATURE, oC
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
27.34 12.90 162.00 34.59 0.00 0.00
209.09
No. of
10889
ac/h
hrs/day
350.42
W/K
SUBTOTAL VENTILATION & INFILTRATION
Occupancy Heat Gains OCCUPANTS APPLIANCES (LCD TV) - When Used APPLIANCES (LCD TV) - Energy Saving APPLIANCES (Digital Projector) - When Used APPLIANCES (Digital Projector) APPLIANCES (Laptop) LIGHTS
0
4402 1217 3460 3317 2787 108 0
C
o
Additional annual heating energy that may be required for occupant thermal comfort
CALCULATION OF FREE-RUNNING MEAN INDOOR TEMPERATURE (AA SED 2013-21) CASE 2 - 80% occupants 28/10/2021 m2 Building Elements
483 283 200 374 250 50 0 DHC
W W W
1470
0.30
DHC Wh/K
W/K m2
24-hr Mean Watts
8.00 0.00 0.00 5.00
kWh/m2 per day
m2
VHC Wh/m3 K
7. APPENDIX
ac/h
SUBTOTAL VENTILATION & INFILTRATION
Occupancy Heat Gains OCCUPANTS APPLIANCES (LCD TV) - When Used APPLIANCES (Digital Projector) - When Used LIGHTS
6. REFERENCES
Adaptive Thermal Comfort Band after EN15251 o C Low Limit 24.4
8.0 15.0
o
18.4
o
C
o
C
Swing
4.07
K
Min
Max
10.9
19.1
C
66
1. INTRODUCTION Run No.
2. OVERVIEW Purpose
3. OUTDOOR STUDY
4. INDOOR STUDY
Occupied Window- Windows Infiltration Heat Loss Daily Floor Area to-Floor Mean 24& Coefficient Internal Ratio Heat Ventilatio W/K m2 hour m2 Gains, W n W/K U-value, 2 W/m K
5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
Daily Mean 24- Outdoor Air Mean Daily Mean Indoor Daily Incident hour Solar Temperatur Temperature Temperature Temperature o o Solar Rise above Heat Gain MInT C Swing about e C 2 Outdoor K the Mean K W kWh/m
6. REFERENCES
Additional Notes Space Heating Energy for Comfort kWh/m2 year
1
Base Case, outdoor temperature (measured) as on 28/09/2021
111
1.47
4.80
231.28
13.81
438
0.50
2449
17.0
1.2
18.2
2.1
384.0
Studio space as is with no occupants. The predicted MInT value is slightly lower than comfort value.
2
Case 2, outdoor temperature (measured) as on 28/10/2021
111
1.47
4.80
239.98
13.89
1654
0.50
2449
17.0
2.7
19.7
4.5
214.0
Studio space as with 26 occupants present. Calculations show that the predicted MInt is lower than comfort value
2
Increase attendance to maximum (40 occupants)
111
1.47
4.80
286.18
14.30
2130
0.50
2449
17.0
2.9
19.9
5.1
193.0
Studio space as with all 40 occupants present. Calculations show that the predicted MInt lies below comfort value.
3
Lower outdoor air temperature to winter average of 8oC
111
1.47
4.80
286.18
14.30
2130
0.30
1470
8.0
2.3
10.3
4.0
1025.0
Studio space as with all 40 occupants present. Calculations show that the predicted MInt lies below the comfort value during a lower winter outdoor temperature
4
Summer conditions with mean outdoor temperature 25oC and higher solar.
111
1.47
4.80
286.18
14.30
2130
1.20
5878
25.0
5.0
30.0
8.8
0.0
Studio space as with all 40 occupants present. Calculations show that the predicted MInt lies above the comfort value during a higher summer outdoor temperature
3
Proposal 1: Double-glazed, air filled, low-E: εn = 0.05 (soft coat) with wood frame and 16mm gap. 1 ac/h. Summer.
111
1.47
1.80
209.00
8.96
2130
1.20
5878
25.0
8.0
33.0
8.8
0.0
Studio space as with all 40 occupants present.
3
Proposal 1: Double-glazed, air filled, low-E: εn = 0.05 (soft coat) with wood frame and 16mm gap. 1 ac/h. Summer. With additional 8 ac/h for 12 hrs
111
1.47
1.80
671.65
13.10
2130
1.20
5878
25.0
5.5
30.5
8.8
0.0
Studio space as with all 40 occupants present.
3
Proposal 1: Double-glazed, air filled, low-E: εn = 0.05 (soft coat) with wood frame and 16mm gap. 1 ac/h. Winter
111
1.47
1.80
209.00
8.96
2130
0.30
1470
8.0
3.6
11.6
4.0
536.0
Studio space as with all 40 occupants present. Calculations show that the predicted MInt lies below the comfort value during a lower winter outdoor temperature but requires half of additional heating energy for comfort
3
Proposal 2: Double-glazed + insulation added to walls.95 mm studding, 95 mm mineral wool insulation between studs. U value- 0.39. Summer
111
1.47
1.80
209.00
8.35
2130
1.20
5878
25.0
8.6
33.6
8.8
0.0
5
Proposal 2: Double-glazed + insulation added to walls.95 mm studding, 95 mm mineral wool insulation between studs. U value- 0.39. With additional 8 ac/h for 12 hrs Summer
111
1.47
1.80
671.65
12.50
2130
1.20
5878
25.0
5.7
30.7
8.8
0.0
5
Proposal 2: Double-glazed + insulation added to walls.95 mm studding, 95 mm mineral wool insulation between studs. U value- 0.39. Winter
111
1.47
1.80
209.00
8.35
2130
0.30
1470
8.0
3.9
11.9
4.0
481.0
AA SED | MSc + MArch | 2021-22
7. APPENDIX
67