Thomas Gaudion part 1 portfolio

GAUDIONTHOMAS ARCHITECTURE PORTFOLIO

Welsh School of Architecture2011- 2014

DOB. 7th May 1993

Tel. +447557 017001 ( UK ) +447781 431906 ( Guernsey )

Email. [email protected]

WSA Year 3

AD3 - NantAT3 - Building Physics

1

NANT

My chosen unit for third year was NANT, which focussed on Nant Gwrtheyrn, a post-industrial region in rural north Wales. The brief asks the question, what can be done with post industrial communities, and how might a com-munity be revived. The unit focussed as a case study for all of Wales, which finds itself currently without a strong architectural identity, following the decline of the industri-al revolution.

My chosen response was to revive the industry entirely, by utilizing existing granite deposits in the quarry, reclaim-ing the embodied energies, and the artefacts of the exist-ing infrastructure from the past quarrying operation. By re-wiring the existing paths and nodes of the site, a new linear process can be created. The end product would be glass, due to the unique chemical nature of granite, being the most naturally abundant mineral type in silica; glass in its purest form.

Glass would become the new identity of Nant, produced as a craft, a unique art, rather than for the industrial quantities. A material of brutalist functionalism transcends physical qualities to become a thing of beauty, a work of art.

2

3

INVESTIGATION

My assigned aspect of the site to investigate was the past industry. Myself and fellow student Michael Hart extensively researched the workings of the original quarry. We wished to convey this information simply, and so took inspiration from the London tube maps, as a meth-od of communicating paths and nodes. In addition to this we created a series of icons, for each process, designed to convey them clearly and make them easily identifia-ble. We then combined these two aspects together, and placed them over a topographic model we created, of a simplified terrain, to create a three dimensional image of the quarry network. The top diagram works as a map, to locate the tramways, and the side diagram works as a section, to show to route taken by the material through the various processes.

I also undertook a site analysis in the style of Kevin Llynch, identifying the sites Nodes, Paths, Edges, Districts, and Landmarks,

A NEW INDUSTRY

SITE ANALYSIS

ORIGIONAL QUARRY -1880

PROPOSAL

THE IMAGE OF THE CITY

FORMULA

ROCK CRUSHER

FORM

COOL

ANNEAL

EXHIBIT

SHIP

The origional site consisted of two working quar-ries - Porth y Nant Quarry to the South, and Caer Nant Quarry to the North. Both quarries were dug into the hillside, rather than into the ground, and had a series of terraces, or banks, which had tramways running along like arteries, which fed into the main winch line. Objective-ly studying the quarry system, we developped a series of diagrams, taking inspiration from the iconic London tube maps, which were inspired from electical wiring diagrams. We identified that the quarry system consited mainly of nodes and connections. The two types of connections being tramways ( horizontal ) and winches ( ver-tical ). These connections went between nodes, which served as locations for stages in the over-all quarrying process.

My proposed scheme acts to create new indus-try, by utilizing existing nodes in the site, and creating new connections between them. The sceme utilizes the existing Porth y Nant quarry, - specifically the bank which is located near to Nant Gwrtheyrn, and was once connected by a tramway. Nant Gwrtheyrn is transformed from an accomodation node, into a part of the pro-cess, by being the factory in which the stages of the process can be carried out. Instead, a new node has been created for accomodation, lo-cated across the strem running through the site, with a new connection nade connecting it with Nant Gwrtheyrn.

Kevin Lynch in his book, The Image of the city, de-scibes how we can break down an urban setting into five main components. He defines these as Nodes, Paths, Edges, Districts, and Landmarks. I have anylised the site with these factors in mind, having chosen to subdivide edges into edges ( non crossable ) and boundaries ( crossable ). This offers an interesting analysis of the site. For example, the edges of the site are formed by the topolgy, being the steep hillside, and the coastline. The paths, which act as boundaries, are man made by the tramways in the site. The stream acts as a natual boundary, that divides the site into seperate districts, and enables a node to be created at the point of crossing the boundary. There is a natural landmark in the waterfall, and two manmade ones in the ruined piers at the end of the tramways.

A NEW INDUSTRY

SITE ANALYSIS


PROPOSAL


FORMULA

ROCK CRUSHER

FORM

COOL

ANNEAL

EXHIBIT

SHIP




ORIGINAL

PROPOSED

4

A NEW INDUSTRY

SITE ANALYSIS


PROPOSAL


FORMULA

ROCK CRUSHER

FORM

COOL

ANNEAL

EXHIBIT

SHIP




PROCESSES

COMPLETED MODEL

5

NANT MASTERPLAN 1:200

SITE PLANRe-inhabiting old village with glass-works, and creating new dwellings inspired by traditional Welsh Vernacular

6

G

G’

H’

H

A

A’

B

B’

C

C’

expert craftsman mould the glass using unique tools, and skills learned over a lifetime, to produce unique pieces of art

GLASS WORKSHOP

Cores accomodate the workers, store the materials. With shower facilites, and bunks if required. The workers begin and end their day.

ATHRO/PRENTIS CORE

Trams transport fin-ished pieces through cooling, and annealing chambers, strength-ening the glass.

PROCESSING

Finished Pieces are put on display for visitors to view. Smaller pieces are put in pochets in the courtyard.

EXHIBITION

Crushed granite is combined with vari-ous chemicals to make up the specif-ic formula necessary for each individual piece

LABORATORY

NANT MASTERPLAN 1:200

MASTERPLANCreating Linear Process within existing Terraces

7

ELEVATION 1:100

LINEAR SCHEMEThe linear nature of the process led to a continuous datum - a new tramway being created, creating ties be-tween the existing nodes of the scheme, transforming it into a linear path of the material.

8

ELEVATION 1:100

9

EXISTING

LOWER CORE

CORRUGATED ROOF STRUCTURE

UPPER CORE

GRANITE PANELS

INFILL PANELS

TRUSSED STEEL FRAME

The design of the main terrace comprises of the intervention of four cores into the terrace. There are two types of core, and each core has a different roof design, re-sponding to the needs of the space. The roof over the terrace is a corrugated steel structure, which is self draining, and creates openings at the hearths. The cores are reinforced concrete in the lower half, with the upper half being a steel frame, with granite cladding pannels hung rom it.

EXPLODED ISOMETRIC

10

EXPLODED ISOMETRIC

EXISTING

LOWER CORE

CORRUGATED ROOF STRUCTURE

UPPER CORE

GRANITE PANELS

INFILL PANELS

TRUSSED STEEL FRAME

The design of the main terrace comprises of the intervention of four cores into the terrace. There are two types of core, and each core has a different roof design, re-sponding to the needs of the space. The roof over the terrace is a corrugated steel structure, which is self draining, and creates openings at the hearths. The cores are reinforced concrete in the lower half, with the upper half being a steel frame, with granite cladding pannels hung rom it.

EXPLODED ISOMETRIC

A B B’

B B’

C C’

C C’

E E’

E E’

F F’

F F’

A’

A

SECTION A:A’ 1:100 SECTION B:B’ 1:100 SECTION C:C’ 1:100 SECTION E:E’ 1:100

SECTION D:D’ 1:100

UPPER ATHRO CORE PLAN 1:100

LOWER ATHRO CORE PLAN 1:100

UPPER PRENTIS CORE PLAN 1:100

LOWER PRENTIS CORE PLAN 1:100

UPPER PRENTIS CORE PLAN 1:100

LOWER PRENTIS CORE PLAN 1:100

UPPER SINGLE DWELLING PLAN 1:100UPPER FAMILY DWELLING PLAN 1:100

LOWER FAMILY DWELLING PLAN 1:100

LOWER SINGLE DWELLING PLAN 1:100

SECTION F:F’ 1:100

A’

11

MODEL MAKINGExploration of design through sketch models

12

The detail shows the section through the northern Athro Core in the workshop terrace. The section is made up of a reinforced concrete lower half, which serves the workshop floor, with storage for materials, and rest facilities. The upper portion of the core, is a steel frame structure, which allows for a roof profile that can respond to the needs of the space. This is then clad with granite pannels hung on brackets, conceaing the different geometries, and unifying the terrace.

1:20 DETAIL

Granite Panel

PFC

Bracket

UKB

90mm Hardcore

200mm mineral wool

Timber panels

50mm Gypsum board

150mm in-situ Reinforced Concrete

Comfloor 180

100mm Mineral Wool

Compacted Fill

65mm Screedunderfloor heating100mm insulation500mm Floor slab

13

FINAL PIN UPMy final board for the Welsh School of Architecture part

one exhibition.

14

15

AT3For the technology aspect of the third year, I was working collaboratively with Michael Hart, for everything shown here. There were four tasks.

1. Design a concrete framed office building, to a specific brief

2. Conduct research into comfort aims, i.e. calculating internal gains

3. Design a piece of software to calculate Heat balance information.

4. Propose a facade design and test it using the software in task 3

16

PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


UP

PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

TPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

VERTICAL SERVICES

1:100 Web Design Floor Plan

1:100 Section

PLANS

1:200 Typical Floor Plan 1:100 Section

DN

PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


1:200 Upper Plan - Conference Centre PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


1:500 Site Plan

74

58

13

House

8

PH

CLARENCE ROAD

14

GVC

7.9m

66

RC Church

Wal

ters

65

HU

RM

AN S

TREE

T

7.9m

Mount Stuart

8.5m

Build

ings

Bost

on B

uild

ings

PH

8.8m

11

CLARENCE EMBANKMENT El

68

9

13

St Cuthbert's Court

Warehouse

Slop

ing

mas

onry

Sloping

mas

onry

Works

BethelChurch

BuildingsSalvage

Hall

Ground

Warehouse

67

Baptist

Ocean House

HUNTER

HAR

RO

WBY

LAN

E

STREE

T Sub Sta

8.8m

TCBs

8.5m

Roy

al

BURT PLACE

ADELAIDE PLACE

1

2

50

Slip

way

1

26

6

69

64

17

72

25

1

73

7

62

75

RO

YAL

STU

ART

LAN

E

5 3

48

6872

71

Stua

rt

ADELAID

E STREET

1

Dou

glas

1

Build

ings

War

ehou

ses

1

70

Recreation

56

St Cuthbert's

14

Avondale Court

15 to

17

JAMES STREET

71

69

67

68

NORTH BUTETOWN CYCLE ROUTE

8991

70

90

AVONDALE GARDENS SOUTH

9

13

34

Claren

ce C

ourt

1

10

39

447.9m

Techniquest

34

47

HARROWBY PLACE

Club

El S

ub S

ta

Tunnel

8

12

Mountstuart

Ppg Sta

1

14

1 to

12

Sewage

11

16

10

21

9 Primary

School

Waverley Square

42

STUART STREET / STRYD STUART

11

POMEROY STREET

49

56

27

Baybridge Nursing Home

73

15 to 26

32

2

13

89

43

33

19

30

8

11

18

29

91

11

25

13

87

11

35 to 50

2

5

LB

CLARENCE PLACE

HUNTER STREET

61

74

8.2m

46

16

86

8.2m

BURT

STR

EET

60

63

51

64

72

CLARENCE EMBANKMENT

HAMADRYAD ROAD

Sloping

mas

onry

El Sub Sta

8.2m

8.2m

1 to 8

18

20

20

18 to

20

The Lofts

73 to 87

4

1

5

7

1

5

53

25

43

20

18 to

20

61

30 to

44

2 to 16

62 to

76

46 to

60

Clarence Mews

1 to 7

STRYD

ADELAID

E

63 to 73

POMEROY STREET

BUR

T37

STR

EET

PLAC

E

LOU

ISA

Sloping

mas

onry

78 to 92

The Hamadryad Centre

House1 to

8

TheCanal

SealockWarehouse 1 to 22

HAR

RO

WBY

STR

EET

UP


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T

1:50 Section

250mm Flat Slab

650mm

HVAC Duct

Suspended Ceiling

Cable Tray

600x600mm Compound Ceiling Tiles

600x600mm ‘Power Balance’ Ceiling Light

Diffuser

1:200 Ground Floor PlanPRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T



PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T

17

FoundationsMost of our columns support 18m2 , but the most load bearing ones support 27m2

5 floors x 27 = 135m2 so only 2 piles per pile cap are needed ( table below )

Our site has good access, so 600mm piles are fine, as the pile rig can access the site.The above table is based on 600mm piles, so we dont need to increase the number of piles

so according to the table above our pile caps are going to be 2700 x 900 x 1400

STRUCTURESI PROPOSE ( + V UPDATE )

II IDENTIFY IV COMMUNICATE

III REFINEInfillFlat Slab - typical spans of 4-8m making it ideal for our 6m span

L/d typically 28 - 36, let’s pick 28 so its not working hard at all

d = 6000 / 28 = 214mm , so round this up to 250mm as flat slabs are typically multiples of 50mm for ease of construction

ColumnsCast in Place Concrete Columns

h/d typically 6-15 let’s say 10 so its not working hard, but not too thickfloor to floor height = 4000mm, so d = 4000 / 10 = 400mm

StabilityCast in Place Wall acting as shear walls and stiff cores

h/d typically 18-25 let’s say 20

d = 4000 20 = 200mm

STABILITY

Our design features a Stiff cores which offere good stability in the “ x “ axis on plan. We identified our shear walls in Red in the diagram below. We have our main central core, which offers the primary bracing against racking in the “x” axis, this is shown in blue in the diagram on the right. The aditional cores in the top and bottom of the plan, which serve as our fire stairs, and plant room respectively, are also offering stability in the “x” axis. We are aware that they do not add much stability, as they are close in plan to our main stiff core, but they are there as a design need rather than a struc-tural solution. We identified the need for bracing in the “y” axis, and so added shear walls at the edges of our building, where they would be most effective, shown in red on the diagram to the right. The floor slab also acts as a diaphragm to counteract the lateral wind forces.

COLUMNSWe also identified that with our shear wall placement, we could remove several of the columns in our plan, simplifying it somewhat. We were then able to identify how much floor area each column was supporting, with the column that is working the least being at the corners, supporting only 9m2, and the hardest working column being in the centre of our open plan, shown in blue above, supporting 24m2. This means that the columns around the edges and the corners could potentially be slimmer, but for simplicity, and because it is not a major issue in our design, we have kept them all uniform.

INFILL SLABFor our arrangement of columns, a two way spanning conrete slab is ideal. We chose to use Flat Slab construction, as they typically span 4 - 8 m, which is ideal for our 6m span. The other advantages of Flat Slab contruction, is that it is poured monolithicly, so in places where we have spans of 3m, and spans of 6m, we do not need to install differnt length beams. The Flat Slab is able to span un uniform column placements, making it ideal for our plan.

DEVELOPMENT 2By adjusting the grid in a way that splits one of the 6m squares into two 3m squares, we can generate a form with a central 6m core. This benefiits our design, as we can have two areas being served by a central core containing circu-lation, toilets, plant room etc.

DEVELOPMENT 3We needed to pick an infill for our grid. We saw our two main options as a one way hollow-core slab, and a two-way flat slab. The hollow core would be more complex to fit our grid, as we now have several different span lengths, some of which are 3m, which is too small for hollowcore. A two way span suits our grid much better, and flat slab contstruction is extremely flexible in column placement, meaning it is ideal for the grid that we have in place.

UPDATE 1When we got into the design stage, we eventually decided to adjust the footprint so that the cut off corners at the bottom were moved up, to allow more light to penetrate what would be a central open plan working space. We also discovered that the top cen-tral space was not necessary, so we removeid it as-well. We adjusted the core, to make it bigger in the centre, to imrpove circulation between two halves of the building, aswell as making the space work better

UPDATE 2After further developing our design, we decid-ed on two protected stairs, which will be built as stiff cores. These need to be on the outside of the building. We also adjusted the shape of the core to allow increased circulation, due to fire regulations. This results in our final structur-al layout, which utilizes an overarching 6 metre grid, shown left.

OPTION 1Our design calls for a footprint of 600m2, and our sturctural system must be a concrete frame, so our first proposal was a 5m grid, with a central core. This gave us the exact footprint, but the 5m grid does not sub-divide easily into modular units We did however like the layout of the core, and the rough depth and width of the design.

OPTION 2The second idea was to use a 4m grid. This al-lows us to sub-divde the grid very easily into modules. The problem with this grid, is that it is a reletively low span, resulting with a lot of columns. It also means that the central core is either 4m wide, or 12m wide - too narrow or too wide if it is to fit within the grid.

OPTION 3The third consideration was a 6m grid. This grid also sub-divides very easily, but it gives less columns than the 4m grid. 6 meteres is also a good width for our core, however, it is not central in this layout. The main problem with the 6m grid, is that it cannot generate a rectangular shape that fits our footprint of 600m2 .

DEVELOPMENTBy sub-dividing the bottom corners of the grid, we removed some of the footprint, bringing it closer to our “ aim “ of 600m2. We initially chose to remove them at these corners think-ing of more surface area to take advantage of southern views of Cardiff Bay

Diagram showing Lateral Bracing

Location of Foundations Load Path Diagram Structural Components

Bore Hole Sample for the site

Shear wall locations, and areas supported by columns

Elevation A

The end shear walls brace the building against wind loads at Elevation A

The bore hole samples for our site, shown right indicate that there is poor ground for our site. The sample only goes down 15m, and at this stage, the ground is still soft grey organic clay. Therefore our piles are going to have to be more than 15m to reach hard ground

18

FIRE REGULATIONS- Approved Document Part BOur design complies with approved document part B, for the means of escape from a building. Along with the following tables, which dictate travel distance, stair widths, and other things, our design also provides emergency lighting as dictated by BS 5266. The fire resistance time is in according with BS 476.

Diagram 13 ( Left ) and the statement above state that our two fire stairs can not be served by the same landing. As such we had to alter our design, in a way that places two fire doors below them ( see plan below ). The fire doors also compartmentalise the lift shafts so they are not in the same lobby as either stair.

Table 7 left states the width of stairs needed for our building. Our building has 5 sto-reys, so the stairs serve 4 of those. We have two stairs, but we assume that one of them must be able to have capacity for the whole building, which we are estimating at up to 100 people per floor. Therefore our stairs need to be 1300mm wide, shown in diagram below.

Daigram 21 states that we must have a refuge space in our stairways for a wheelchair user. Therefore our landings are sized accordingly, with 1300mm allowed for the passageway of the stair, and then a further 1050mm as refuge space for a wheelchair user ( shown Left )

Diagram 50 indicates that where a fire service vehichle has to access a site down a one way street, it should not have to reverse more than 20 metres, and a turning circle should be provided. Below is a site plan showing the placement of our building on site. Two of the building’s elevations are directly accessible, while the remaining two elevations can be accessed via side streets. The lengts of these streets are indicated on the plan, and they are both more than 20 metres. A turning circle is therefore provided, and this is indicated in red on the plan below.

Table 3 ( Left ) states that each of our storeys must have 2 exits, as there are more than 60 people per storey. Our ex-its are two fire protected stairways, which are on the out-side of the building, so once the fire stair is reached there is no need to exit the protected area back into the building on any floor, as on the ground floor there will be a direct exit out of the building from the protected stair.

Table 2 above states the travel distances for our building as 18m in one direction, which to us is a fire door that compartmentalises a plan, and 45m in more than one direction, which to us is the remaining distance to the storey exit, down the fire protected stairs. The diagram below shows this in our plan. At any given point in the plan, you are no more than 18m from either the storey exit, or the lower fire door which is seen as an exit to your half of the building. If this route is taken, than the total distance to the fire stair is never more than 45m

Table 4 ( left ) states that where there are 60+ people in each storey, that the width of each door and escape route must be at least 850mm. All of the doors in our plan for each room which holds less that 60 people, are 800mm wide, which is more that 750mm. All of our main doors, ( shown below in green ) which will be used as an escape route, are at least 1010mm wide, with the primary circula-tion routes having 1810mm double doors and the second-ary circulation having 1510mm double doors.

Diagram 11 ( Left ) states that if the able between two exits from a given point is less than 45 degrees, than the further of the two exits is discounted. In some places the angle between the two primary exits to each half of the building is less than 45 de-grees, but this is acceptable, as it is always less that 18m to one of the exits.

0.6m Grid Travel DistancesFire Protected Stairway Fire Protected Stairway

16.5m to Next Compartment

16.5 + 25.2 = 41.7m41.7m < 45m

17.8m < 18 m Route ARoute B

A

B

Fire Door

17.8m to Fire Protected Stairway

Fire Protected Stairway Fire Protected Stairway

A Further 25.2m to Fire Protected Stairway

1050mm

1010mm

Fire Protected Stairway

19

GROUP 15 Tom gaudion michael hart glenie hoAng

worked example

INPUTS

OUTPUTS

Annual Heating and Cooling Hours

Heating

Cooling

Passive

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Hour

s

Monthly Heating and Cooling Hours

Heating Hours

Cooling Hours

20

21

0 N E W S NE NW NS EW ES WS NEW NES NWS EWS NEWS81% whole façade 41292.92 61183.89 48901.60307 51587.2 67076.61215 71191.62398 73852.44261 89069.87 62755.25 82781.84846 82501.7576 84495.57 104545.8 104275.3 98017.71 119887.2381 % without plant room 60791.57784

50% whole façade 41292.91724 53422.69 44815.78 46711.59 52895.1141 58346.80513 60531.55002 53422.69 51700.53013 62707.07431 62572.60807 66232.83 76728 76399.16 72177.82 85896.2286150% without plant room 49546.94189

FAÇADE glazing SHGC U Value Heating Load Cooling Load Total Load Heating Hours Cooling Hours Passive Hours

0% 32,399 ‐8,893 41,293 1849 416 1020

3.1 41,418 ‐10,062 51,481 1929 401 9552.5 39,558 ‐10,392 49,950 1884 424 9772.3 38,944 ‐10,552 49,497 1869 435 9813.7 41,431 ‐12,582 54,013 1847 489 9493.4 40,580 ‐12,805 53,385 1839 504 9423.3 40,290 ‐12,829 53,120 1835 506 9443.7 40,180 ‐14,976 55,156 1795 573 9173.4 39,320 ‐15,173 54,493 1784 587 9143.3 39,046 ‐15,196 54,242 1782 589 9142.4 39,243 ‐10,465 49,707 1875 429 9811.9 37,794 ‐10,726 48,520 1856 448 9811.8 37,499 ‐10,780 48,279 1851 452 9822.9 39,146 ‐13,041 52,186 1820 521 9442.6 38,272 ‐13,224 51,495 1807 534 9442.5 37,994 ‐13,323 51,317 1805 541 9392.9 37,900 ‐15,406 53,306 1765 604 9162.6 37,036 ‐15,565 52,601 1750 616 9192.5 36,759 ‐15,664 52,423 1747 623 915

3.1 46,173 ‐10,993 57,166 1947 406 9322.5 43,233 ‐11,496 54,728 1896 439 9502.3 42,277 ‐11,739 54,016 1882 455 9483.7 46,397 ‐14,952 61,350 1857 527 9013.4 45,006 ‐15,377 60,383 1842 553 8903.3 44,528 ‐15,400 59,928 1834 555 8963.7 44,393 ‐19,171 63,563 1777 666 8423.4 43,044 ‐19,531 62,575 1765 690 8303.3 42,586 ‐19,608 62,194 1760 695 8302.4 42,756 ‐11,668 54,424 1889 450 9461.9 40,356 ‐12,114 52,470 1850 481 9541.8 39,864 ‐12,165 52,029 1838 485 9622.9 42,654 ‐15,769 58,423 1809 580 8962.6 41,256 ‐15,968 57,224 1790 594 9012.5 40,805 ‐15,989 56,794 1786 596 9032.9 40,753 ‐20,095 60,848 1735 728 8222.6 39,356 ‐20,342 59,697 1712 745 8282.5 38,919 ‐20,391 59,310 1709 748 828

3.1 32,852 ‐12,020 44,872 1635 518 11322.5 31,889 ‐12,364 44,253 1608 543 11342.3 31,590 ‐12,488 44,078 1601 552 11323.7 30,399 ‐17,137 47,536 1458 760 10673.4 29,956 ‐17,306 47,262 1448 772 10653.3 29,801 ‐17,348 47,149 1443 775 10673.7 28,219 ‐22,514 50,733 1338 981 9663.4 27,848 ‐22,749 50,597 1333 999 9533.3 27,718 ‐22,821 50,540 1330 1004 9512.4 31,736 ‐12,417 44,153 1604 547 11341.9 30,999 ‐12,588 43,588 1590 560 11351.8 30,860 ‐12,643 43,502 1589 564 11322.9 29,209 ‐17,437 46,646 1429 781 10752.6 28,784 ‐17,605 46,388 1420 793 10722.5 28,640 ‐17,650 46,290 1417 796 10722.9 27,217 ‐23,078 50,295 1322 1022 9412.6 26,841 ‐23,249 50,090 1315 1035 9352.5 26,719 ‐23,373 50,092 1313 1044 928

3.1 33,257 ‐14,859 48,116 1545 629 11112.5 31,796 ‐15,181 46,977 1511 655 11192.3 31,329 ‐15,389 46,718 1502 670 11133.7 30,455 ‐24,281 54,736 1350 1002 9333.4 29,832 ‐24,538 54,370 1339 1018 9283.3 29,640 ‐24,733 54,373 1338 1031 9163.7 28,041 ‐34,361 62,403 1229 1328 7283.4 27,442 ‐34,612 62,054 1216 1341 7283.3 27,246 ‐34,773 62,018 1212 1351 7222.4 31,567 ‐15,336 46,903 1507 666 11121.9 30,422 ‐15,718 46,140 1485 697 11031.8 30,198 ‐15,793 45,992 1481 703 11012.9 28,828 ‐25,073 53,901 1326 1052 9072.6 28,199 ‐25,441 53,640 1315 1077 8932.5 28,003 ‐25,524 53,526 1313 1082 8902.9 26,465 ‐35,243 61,708 1199 1383 7032.6 25,894 ‐35,587 61,481 1190 1405 6902.5 25,720 ‐35,727 61,447 1189 1415 681

30% Shading

3.1 33,012 ‐11,722 44,734 1644 505 11362.5 32,054 ‐11,991 44,045 1617 525 11432.3 31,764 ‐12,072 43,836 1613 531 11413.7 30,670 ‐16,488 47,158 1475 733 10773.4 30,236 ‐16,571 46,806 1465 739 10813.3 30,104 ‐16,609 46,713 1464 742 10793.7 28,492 ‐21,527 50,019 1352 947 9863.4 28,093 ‐21,633 49,726 1345 953 9873.3 27,953 ‐21,704 49,656 1341 958 9862.4 31,903 ‐12,016 43,919 1614 527 11441.9 31,164 ‐12,319 43,483 1599 549 11371.8 31,009 ‐12,342 43,351 1596 551 11382.9 29,519 ‐16,816 46,334 1450 757 10782.6 29,096 ‐16,952 46,049 1442 768 10752.5 28,950 ‐17,006 45,956 1438 772 10752.9 27,465 ‐21,965 49,430 1335 976 9742.6 27,098 ‐22,150 49,248 1330 990 9652.5 26,974 ‐22,265 49,240 1328 999 958

3.1 33,541 ‐14,276 47,817 1563 603 11192.5 32,106 ‐14,730 46,837 1534 638 11132.3 31,610 ‐14,856 46,466 1521 647 11173.7 30,746 ‐23,084 53,830 1364 959 9623.4 30,127 ‐23,347 53,475 1356 976 9533.3 29,889 ‐23,431 53,320 1349 983 9533.7 28,336 ‐32,266 60,602 1243 1248 7943.4 27,767 ‐32,770 60,538 1234 1282 7693.3 27,583 ‐32,889 60,472 1232 1289 7642.4 31,862 ‐14,753 46,615 1528 640 11171.9 30,645 ‐15,227 45,871 1498 676 11111.8 30,416 ‐15,272 45,688 1493 680 11122.9 29,086 ‐23,954 53,040 1339 1019 9272.6 28,451 ‐24,228 52,679 1326 1036 9232.5 28,255 ‐24,310 52,566 1324 1041 9202.9 26,779 ‐33,363 60,141 1216 1321 7482.6 26,176 ‐33,774 59,950 1204 1348 7332.5 25,992 ‐33,870 59,861 1202 1355 728

3.1 34,288 ‐11,112 45,400 1763 481 10412.5 33,559 ‐11,302 44,861 1750 495 10402.3 33,294 ‐11,398 44,693 1741 502 10423.7 33,028 ‐13,696 46,723 1663 579 10433.4 32,673 ‐13,773 46,446 1657 585 10433.3 32,567 ‐13,784 46,350 1657 586 10423.7 31,470 ‐16,348 47,818 1582 688 10153.4 31,105 ‐16,424 47,528 1572 694 10193.3 31,002 ‐16,476 47,478 1572 698 10152.4 33,419 ‐11,358 44,777 1744 499 10421.9 32,786 ‐11,457 44,243 1727 507 10511.8 32,657 ‐11,482 44,140 1723 509 10532.9 32,097 ‐13,828 45,925 1649 590 10462.6 31,766 ‐13,890 45,656 1647 595 10432.5 31,646 ‐13,887 45,534 1645 595 10452.9 30,526 ‐16,568 47,094 1560 705 10202.6 30,165 ‐16,603 46,768 1551 708 10262.5 30,043 ‐16,642 46,685 1548 711 1026

3.1 35,445 ‐12,690 48,135 1725 529 10312.5 34,238 ‐12,913 47,152 1701 546 10382.3 33,828 ‐13,008 46,835 1692 553 10403.7 33,632 ‐17,076 50,708 1587 688 10103.4 33,046 ‐17,184 50,229 1576 696 10133.3 32,869 ‐17,224 50,092 1575 699 10113.7 31,373 ‐21,857 53,230 1464 873 9483.4 30,813 ‐22,070 52,883 1452 889 9443.3 30,643 ‐22,178 52,820 1450 897 9382.4 34,046 ‐13,013 47,059 1699 553 10331.9 33,046 ‐13,060 46,105 1680 558 10471.8 32,846 ‐13,112 45,958 1676 562 10472.9 32,061 ‐17,378 49,439 1556 711 10182.6 31,452 ‐17,579 49,032 1541 726 10182.5 31,263 ‐17,604 48,867 1538 728 10192.9 29,893 ‐22,341 52,233 1433 909 9432.6 29,334 ‐22,562 51,896 1420 926 9392.5 29,121 ‐22,580 51,701 1413 927 945

Glazed façade(s)

0.5

0.7

triple glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

0.27

0.5

0.7

EAST & WEST

50%

double glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

triple glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

81%

double glazed

0.27

SOUTH

50%

double glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

triple glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

81%

double glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

triple glazed

0.5

0.7

triple glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

0.27

0.5

0.7

SOUTH

50%

double glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

triple glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

81%

double glazed

0.27

NORTH

0.27

double glazed

0.27

triple glazed

50%

0.5

0.7

0.5

0.7

81%

double glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

triple glazed

GROUP 15 Tom gaudion michael hart glenie hoAng

initial investigationsGLAZING PER FACADE CONCLUSIONS

From initial investigations into individual facades, it

became clear that with our initial values, adding more glazing anywhere

on the facades had a negative effect, due to the greater conduction

losses, compared to the solar gains added

Higher heating loads due to low solar heat gains,

due to low irradiance on North Facade.

However Low e glass preferable as reduced

cooling loads outweigh increased heating loads.

Increasing Glazing ratio proportionally increases

both heating and cooling loads

Decreasing the U value of the glass decreases the energy demand for

the same SHGC

Southern facade has higher cooling loads due

to increased solar heat gains.

Using low E glass greatly reduces the cooling load,

and the overall energy load despite slightly in-

creasing heating load

Potentially the high SHGC value glass could

be used to allow more heat into the building, to offset conduction losses

elsewhere.

Adding shading to the southern facades slightly reduces the cooling load

further, by reducing the solar heat gains

The East and West fa-cades have a higher

heating load than cooling load. Adding low e glass

increases the heating load further, but lowers

the cooling load enough to lower the total energy

demand.

Because of the overall heating demand, the

high solar gains from the South facade could be

used to offset this.

TO SUMMARISE

To cool the building we can add more glazing

on the North, East, and West facades, and de-

crease the SHGC

To heat the building add more glazing on the

South facade, and in-crease the SHGC

TESTING CONTROLS: QC , GLAZING RATIO, SHGC, U VALUE

TESTING CONTROLS: SHADING ( 30%)

TESTING CONTROLS: EAST AND WEST FACADES 0

0

10000

10000

Total Loads (kW)

Total Loads (kW)

20000

20000

30000

30000

40000

40000

50000

50000

60000

60000

It is of note that we achieved 100% in task 3, as our soft-ware was extremely sophisticated for the given exercise. We were able to create a dynamic simulation, whereby we could change any part of our facade design, such as glass U values, wall make-ups, the amount, and position of glazing, or even aspects such as the working hours of the day, and the software would give us monthly, and annual heating and cooling loads, along with estimated energy costs,

Façade Glazing SHGC Heating Load Cooling Load Total Load Heating Hours Cooling Ho Passive Hours

SOUTH 81% 0.5 28,828 ‐25,073 53,901 1,326 1,052 907

SOUTH 81% 0.27 31,567 ‐15,336 46,903 1507 666 1112

SOUTH 50% 0.27 31,736 ‐12,417 44,153 1604 547 1134

SOUTH 81% 0.27

EAST & WEST 50% 0.27SOUTH 81% 0.27EAST & WEST 50% 0.5SOUTH 81% 0.27EAST & WEST 50% 0.27SOUTH 81% 0.5EAST & WEST 50% 0.27SOUTH 50% 0.27EAST & WEST 50% 0.27SOUTH 50% 0.27EAST & WEST 81% 0.27

SOUTH 81% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.7SOUTH 81% 0.5NORTH 50% 0.7

SOUTH 81% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.7EAST & WEST 50% 0.7SOUTH 81% 0.5NORTH 50% 0.7EAST & WEST 50% 0.7SOUTH 81% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.5EAST & WEST 50% 0.5SOUTH 81% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.5EAST & WEST 81% 0.27SOUTH 81% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.7EAST & WEST 81% 0.27SOUTH 81% 0.27NORTH 81% 0.27EAST & WEST 81% 0.27SOUTH 81% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.27EAST & WEST 50% 0.27

SOUTH 81% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.27EAST & WEST 50% 0.27INDENTS 81% 0.27SOUTH 81% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.27EAST & WEST 50% 0.27INDENTS 81% 0.7SOUTH 81% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.27EAST & WEST 50% 0.27INDENTS 81% 0.5SOUTH 50% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.27EAST & WEST 50% 0.27INDENTS 81% 0.5SOUTH 50% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.27EAST & WEST 50% 0.27INDENTS 81% 0.27SOUTH 50% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.7EAST & WEST 50% 0.27INDENTS 81% 0.27

SOUTH 50% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.27EAST & WEST 50% 0.27INDENTS 81% 0.27SOUTH 50% 0.27NORTH 50% 0.27EAST & WEST 50% 0.27INDENTS 81% 0.27NORTH INDENTS 81% 0.7

optimise floor plan 35,185 ‐17,853 53,038 1,556 689 1,040

1,048

41,811 ‐20,374 62,185 1,572 697 1,016

42,012 ‐18,750 60,762 1,590 647

1,051

38,646 ‐25,058 63,704 1,487 856 942

42,494 ‐18,585 61,079 1,597 637

811 985

41,880 ‐20,656 62,536 1,556 703 1,026

41,870 65,785‐23,915 1,489

1,021

41,161 ‐26,195 67,357 1,462 891 932

41,912 ‐21,796 63,708 1,518 746

39,619 ‐19,281 58,900 1,529 1,059697

920

43,797 ‐22,045 65,842 1,534 730 1,021

39,708 ‐26,893 66,602 1,454 911

951

40,675 ‐24,011 64,686 1,490 971824

38,911 ‐25,387 64,299 1,452 882

805

34,883 ‐42,868 77,751 1,260 1,417 608

37,012 ‐32,094 69,107 1,377 1,103

971

34,302 ‐32,040 66,342 1,330 1,160 795

37,356 ‐22,028 59,384 1,511 803

1,119

33,930 ‐16,738 50,668 1,525 671 1,089

33,139 ‐14,908 48,048 1,552 614

1,067

30,670 ‐28,349 59,019 1,321 1,129 835

33,120 ‐18,192 51,312 1,471 747

900

32,376 ‐21,543 53,918 1,418 871 996

31,369 ‐25,085 56,454 1,370 1,015Façade Glazing SHGC Heating Load Cooling Load Total Load Heating Hours Cooling Ho Passive Hours

SOUTH 81% 0.5 28,828 ‐25,073 53,901 1,326 1,052 907

SOUTH 81% 0.27 31,567 ‐15,336 46,903 1507 666 1112

SOUTH 50% 0.27 31,736 ‐12,417 44,153 1604 547 1134

SOUTH 81% 0.27







1,048

41,811 ‐20,374 62,185 1,572 697 1,016

42,012 ‐18,750 60,762 1,590 647

1,051

38,646 ‐25,058 63,704 1,487 856 942

42,494 ‐18,585 61,079 1,597 637

811 985

41,880 ‐20,656 62,536 1,556 703 1,026

41,870 65,785‐23,915 1,489

1,021

41,161 ‐26,195 67,357 1,462 891 932

41,912 ‐21,796 63,708 1,518 746

39,619 ‐19,281 58,900 1,529 1,059697

920

43,797 ‐22,045 65,842 1,534 730 1,021

39,708 ‐26,893 66,602 1,454 911

951

40,675 ‐24,011 64,686 1,490 971824

38,911 ‐25,387 64,299 1,452 882

805

34,883 ‐42,868 77,751 1,260 1,417 608

37,012 ‐32,094 69,107 1,377 1,103

971

34,302 ‐32,040 66,342 1,330 1,160 795

37,356 ‐22,028 59,384 1,511 803

1,119

33,930 ‐16,738 50,668 1,525 671 1,089

33,139 ‐14,908 48,048 1,552 614

1,067

30,670 ‐28,349 59,019 1,321 1,129 835

33,120 ‐18,192 51,312 1,471 747

900

32,376 ‐21,543 53,918 1,418 871 996

31,369 ‐25,085 56,454 1,370 1,015


SOUTH 81% 0.5 28,828 ‐25,073 53,901 1,326 1,052 907

SOUTH 81% 0.27 31,567 ‐15,336 46,903 1507 666 1112

SOUTH 50% 0.27 31,736 ‐12,417 44,153 1604 547 1134

SOUTH 81% 0.27







1,048

41,811 ‐20,374 62,185 1,572 697 1,016

42,012 ‐18,750 60,762 1,590 647

1,051

38,646 ‐25,058 63,704 1,487 856 942

42,494 ‐18,585 61,079 1,597 637

811 985

41,880 ‐20,656 62,536 1,556 703 1,026

41,870 65,785‐23,915 1,489

1,021

41,161 ‐26,195 67,357 1,462 891 932

41,912 ‐21,796 63,708 1,518 746

39,619 ‐19,281 58,900 1,529 1,059697

920

43,797 ‐22,045 65,842 1,534 730 1,021

39,708 ‐26,893 66,602 1,454 911

951

40,675 ‐24,011 64,686 1,490 971824

38,911 ‐25,387 64,299 1,452 882

805

34,883 ‐42,868 77,751 1,260 1,417 608

37,012 ‐32,094 69,107 1,377 1,103

971

34,302 ‐32,040 66,342 1,330 1,160 795

37,356 ‐22,028 59,384 1,511 803

1,119

33,930 ‐16,738 50,668 1,525 671 1,089

33,139 ‐14,908 48,048 1,552 614

1,067

30,670 ‐28,349 59,019 1,321 1,129 835

33,120 ‐18,192 51,312 1,471 747

900

32,376 ‐21,543 53,918 1,418 871 996

31,369 ‐25,085 56,454 1,370 1,015


SOUTH 81% 0.5 28,828 ‐25,073 53,901 1,326 1,052 907

SOUTH 81% 0.27 31,567 ‐15,336 46,903 1507 666 1112

SOUTH 50% 0.27 31,736 ‐12,417 44,153 1604 547 1134

SOUTH 81% 0.27







1,048

41,811 ‐20,374 62,185 1,572 697 1,016

42,012 ‐18,750 60,762 1,590 647

1,051

38,646 ‐25,058 63,704 1,487 856 942

42,494 ‐18,585 61,079 1,597 637

811 985

41,880 ‐20,656 62,536 1,556 703 1,026

41,870 65,785‐23,915 1,489

1,021

41,161 ‐26,195 67,357 1,462 891 932

41,912 ‐21,796 63,708 1,518 746

39,619 ‐19,281 58,900 1,529 1,059697

920

43,797 ‐22,045 65,842 1,534 730 1,021

39,708 ‐26,893 66,602 1,454 911

951

40,675 ‐24,011 64,686 1,490 971824

38,911 ‐25,387 64,299 1,452 882

805

34,883 ‐42,868 77,751 1,260 1,417 608

37,012 ‐32,094 69,107 1,377 1,103

971

34,302 ‐32,040 66,342 1,330 1,160 795

37,356 ‐22,028 59,384 1,511 803

1,119

33,930 ‐16,738 50,668 1,525 671 1,089

33,139 ‐14,908 48,048 1,552 614

1,067

30,670 ‐28,349 59,019 1,321 1,129 835

33,120 ‐18,192 51,312 1,471 747

900

32,376 ‐21,543 53,918 1,418 871 996

31,369 ‐25,085 56,454 1,370 1,015


SOUTH 81% 0.5 28,828 ‐25,073 53,901 1,326 1,052 907

SOUTH 81% 0.27 31,567 ‐15,336 46,903 1507 666 1112

SOUTH 50% 0.27 31,736 ‐12,417 44,153 1604 547 1134

SOUTH 81% 0.27







1,048

41,811 ‐20,374 62,185 1,572 697 1,016

42,012 ‐18,750 60,762 1,590 647

1,051

38,646 ‐25,058 63,704 1,487 856 942

42,494 ‐18,585 61,079 1,597 637

811 985

41,880 ‐20,656 62,536 1,556 703 1,026

41,870 65,785‐23,915 1,489

1,021

41,161 ‐26,195 67,357 1,462 891 932

41,912 ‐21,796 63,708 1,518 746

39,619 ‐19,281 58,900 1,529 1,059697

920

43,797 ‐22,045 65,842 1,534 730 1,021

39,708 ‐26,893 66,602 1,454 911

951

40,675 ‐24,011 64,686 1,490 971824

38,911 ‐25,387 64,299 1,452 882

805

34,883 ‐42,868 77,751 1,260 1,417 608

37,012 ‐32,094 69,107 1,377 1,103

971

34,302 ‐32,040 66,342 1,330 1,160 795

37,356 ‐22,028 59,384 1,511 803

1,119

33,930 ‐16,738 50,668 1,525 671 1,089

33,139 ‐14,908 48,048 1,552 614

1,067

30,670 ‐28,349 59,019 1,321 1,129 835

33,120 ‐18,192 51,312 1,471 747

900

32,376 ‐21,543 53,918 1,418 871 996

31,369 ‐25,085 56,454 1,370 1,015


SOUTH 81% 0.5 28,828 ‐25,073 53,901 1,326 1,052 907

SOUTH 81% 0.27 31,567 ‐15,336 46,903 1507 666 1112

SOUTH 50% 0.27 31,736 ‐12,417 44,153 1604 547 1134

SOUTH 81% 0.27







1,048

41,811 ‐20,374 62,185 1,572 697 1,016

42,012 ‐18,750 60,762 1,590 647

1,051

38,646 ‐25,058 63,704 1,487 856 942

42,494 ‐18,585 61,079 1,597 637

811 985

41,880 ‐20,656 62,536 1,556 703 1,026

41,870 65,785‐23,915 1,489

1,021

41,161 ‐26,195 67,357 1,462 891 932

41,912 ‐21,796 63,708 1,518 746

39,619 ‐19,281 58,900 1,529 1,059697

920

43,797 ‐22,045 65,842 1,534 730 1,021

39,708 ‐26,893 66,602 1,454 911

951

40,675 ‐24,011 64,686 1,490 971824

38,911 ‐25,387 64,299 1,452 882

805

34,883 ‐42,868 77,751 1,260 1,417 608

37,012 ‐32,094 69,107 1,377 1,103

971

34,302 ‐32,040 66,342 1,330 1,160 795

37,356 ‐22,028 59,384 1,511 803

1,119

33,930 ‐16,738 50,668 1,525 671 1,089

33,139 ‐14,908 48,048 1,552 614

1,067

30,670 ‐28,349 59,019 1,321 1,129 835

33,120 ‐18,192 51,312 1,471 747

900

32,376 ‐21,543 53,918 1,418 871 996

31,369 ‐25,085 56,454 1,370 1,015

GROUP 15 Tom gaudion

optimising designGLAZING EXPERIMENTS

OPTIMISE GLAZING POSITIONING

The above investigations were calculated using a ba-sic wall make up. For the design, I am using a ma-sonary infill sytem, which is detailed on the next page. Changing the wall make up to this masonary section lowered the energy load further. The average U value for the wall makeup is 0.13 , which is in compliance with approved document part L. Due to this there is no need to add further insulation, as the bricks and blocks themselvs are slightly insulative. Therefore my insulation can stay at 50mm thick

After running our initial investigations, into the effects of different glazing options on different facades, i started to investigate the outcomes of having glazing on multiple facades. NOTE the east and the west facades go together, as as a design rule, the building must be symmetrical. The values for G for the East and west facades are very similar anyway. My findings at this initial stage, were that reducing the amount of glazing, reduced the cooling load, and so reduced the total load. In addition to this, contrary to my assumptions, having low solar heat gain coefficents on all of the glazing resulted in the lowest energy demand. This is because doing so reduces the cooling load significantly. Overall however, adding glazing has a negative effect on the heating loads. I had thought that there would be a configuration where there is overall a reductino of the total load, but this is not the case.

Follwing these findings, i then stared to investigate the effect of adding glazing to the indents in the plan. As a design requirement, these indents had to have a large proportion of glazing, as their primary purpose is to allow light into the centre of the open floor plan.

I was experimenting with changing the solar heat gain coefficents for these spaces. I reasoned that due to the lower G value, due to shading from the rest of the building, that it would be viable to have higher solar heat gain coefficents, to heat the space a little and re-duce the heating loads. But as I found with all the oth-er glazing in the plan, increasing the SHGC increases the cooling loads by a larger amount that in decreases the heating loads, and so increases the total energy load overall. By the end of this round of testing i had concluded that the best option was to have 50% glaz-ing everywhere, with a SHGC value of 0.27, with the exception of the indents which would have a require-ment for large glazing areas. This seems like a simple conclusion, but it is only after testing all possibilities that i have arrived at this as the best solution.

Finally, I tested whether the indents in the Northern facade could have a higher Solar heat gain coefficient, due to the especially low G value. Once again, it has a detrimental effect on the total energy load. Thus affirming my concllusion that all glazing in the building should be low emissivity, and have a solar heat gain coefficent of 0.27

I then optimised glazing positions by manually changing individual panels one by one. The diagrams to the left show where the glaz-ing is on the plan, and what type of panel it is. Panel A has 81% glazing, and panel C has 50% glazing. Panel E is a solid panel. The floor plan shows where the columns are, and so solid panels are either side of these, as well as the internal partition walls. Aside from this every panel is glazed, with the exception of the plant room. I could further reduce the glazing to reduce the total energy laod further, however my current load, 53 000 is not that much higher reletively than our control of 41 000, and so i feel this is an acceptable amount of glazing

With the glazing position opti-mised, I turned my attention to the wall make up. This table shows the K values for the vari-ous types of insulation we have in our software. For the initial tests i was conduction, i had the insu-lation set to “ Mineral fibre slab”, but the best insulation, ( with the lowest K-value) is the Polyure-thane board. I therefore changed the wall makeup to include this, with the results shown below. Overall it made a slight difference to the energy load.

This table shows all of the glazing values we have in our software. During initial investigations, we con-cluded that triple glazing was better in every scanrio that double glazing, as it reduces the conduction losses significantly, due to lower U values. The U values here depend on the width of the air gap between the panes. During the above tests i had been using the highest U values, ( where the air gap is 6mm) I then ad-justed them to an airgap of 16mm, ro decrease the U values This fur-ther reduced the energy load.

I then investigated the effects of combining the north facade with the south facade, as due to the low solar heat gains on the north facade, i thought i might be able to balance the gains and losses through the glazing, by increasing the solar heat gains on the south facade. This once again was not the case, and contrary to my hypothesis, adding glazing on the north facade in addition to the south, actually further increases the cooling loads, regard-less of any combination of glazing amounts or solar heat gain coefficients.

The next step was to investigate the effects of all three facades together. I tested a range of scenarios, and came to the conclusion that having low E glass on all facades was the way to go, as it dramatically reduces the cooling demands. in addition to this, by having 50% glazing instead of 81% glazing, i had lower values. While these percentages may change, it seems there is a linear correlation between the amount of glazing and the energy load, that being that more glazing has a higher energy load.

Low E glass has a special coating, that reflects infrared radiation from the sun, but allows the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum to pass through the glass. low E glass results in a lower SHGC value. The diagrans to the left show the effect of different SHGC values on the wavelengths of radiation transmitted through the glass.

Insulation K Value

Cork 0.038Cotton fibre 0.042EPS 0.035Glass fibre quilt 0.04Glass fibre batt 0.035Mineral fibre slab 0.035Phenolic foam 0.04Polyurethane board 0.025Urea formaldehyde foam 0.04Strawboard 0.037Eel grass 0.046Textile blanket 0.035Wool wool slab 0.1Rubber sheet 0.16Rubber cellular 0.04

Insulation K Value

Cork 0.038Cotton fibre 0.042EPS 0.035Glass fibre quilt 0.04Glass fibre batt 0.035Mineral fibre slab 0.035Phenolic foam 0.04Polyurethane board 0.025Urea formaldehyde foam 0.04Strawboard 0.037Eel grass 0.046Textile blanket 0.035Wool wool slab 0.1Rubber sheet 0.16Rubber cellular 0.04

change to polyurethane board 35013.99629 ‐17864.57818 52878.57447 1556 690 1039

Change wall makeup 34417.86272 ‐17944.81026 52362.67299 1539 696 1050

made panel A smaller 33917.27087 ‐17079.1184 50996.38927 1558 679 1048

Optimize U Values 31,689 ‐17,579 49,268 1,514 717 1,054

E C C C E E C C C E E C C E E A A A A A A A A A E E A A A A A A A A A E E C C E E C C C E E C C C E

E E E E

C C C C

C C C C

C C C C

C E A A A A A A A A E C

C C

E E

E E

C CE E

E C C C E E C C C E

A A

A A

A A

A A

A A

A A

A A

A AE C C C E E C C C E

E E

C C

E E

E E

C C

C C

C C

C C

C CE E

E C C C E E C C C E E C C C C C C C C E E C C C E E E E E E E E E E E E C C C E E C C C C C C C C E E C C C E E C C C E

143

53

65

143

142

240 5336

53143

17853

0196

119 182

53

143 89

56

241

Glazing SHGC U Value

3.12.52.33.73.43.33.73.43.32.41.91.82.92.62.52.92.62.5

0.27

0.5

0.7

triple glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

double glazed


3.12.52.33.73.43.33.73.43.32.41.91.82.92.62.52.92.62.5

0.27

0.5

0.7

triple glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

double glazed


3.12.52.33.73.43.33.73.43.32.41.91.82.92.62.52.92.62.5

0.27

0.5

0.7

triple glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

double glazed


3.12.52.33.73.43.33.73.43.32.41.91.82.92.62.52.92.62.5

0.27

0.5

0.7

triple glazed

0.27

0.5

0.7

double glazed

23

HVAC + LIGHTING- CIBSE concise handbook

GROUP 15 Tom gaudion

REFining design Active scenarioCONSTRUCTION WORST CASE SCENARIO

HEATING

COOLING

CONCLUSIONS

QUESTIONS FOR M&E

1:20 SECTION

TRIPLE GLAZING BRICK 50mm AIR GAPTIES 450mm HORIZONTAL CENTRESBLOCKWORK20mm GYPSUMDPMDPMLINTELFLOOR SLAP

50mm POLYURETHANE BOARD

SUSPENDED CIELING

The construction system uses masonary infill between the concrete frame. This system is advantagous, as it is not reliant on a universal panel design, meaning that openings for the windows can be made po-tentially anywhere. It also is easier to build as it uses more traditional skills. The system uses a block wall on the edge of the floor slab. Insula-tion is fixed to the exterior face of this, and then a brickwork wall is hung off lintels away from the floor slab. This system is however prone to cold bridging through the lintel, and it can be tricky to insulate around.

This section inclueds a 50mm air gap. This is taken into acount in our panel makeup ( below )w

options • air based system • water based system• refridgerant based system

I could potentially utilize the existing HVAC system ( right ) to use air as a transport fluid, however this would mean increasing the ventilation rate to 5 air changes an hour, which would have a huge effect on the energy loads, and the balance equations. The graph top right shows the effect this has. It is therefore preferable to use a system based on water or refridgerant, separate to the HVAC system. The fuel used for the heating is also a prime concern. Gas, electricity, oil, and solid fuels all have different costs per kWh, and so it may end up that if heating or cooling is greatly cheaper than the other, thst it is better to design the building to require only heating or cooling, despite not working passively, as it will be cheaper to run overall.

options • air conditioning• local cooling

once again it is preferable for me not to use air conditioning, as this would require the ventilation rate to be in-creased to 5. The current number of air changes is specified for hygiene, per individual room. This means a local cooling option would be preferable, such as a reversible heat pump, or a cool cieling. The advantages of a revers-ible heat pump, is that it could also be used for heating the space. However it is hard to predict the exact hours where it would be used for heating and for cooling, as we have no way in our software of calculating the effects of thermal mass in passive design. A reversible heat pump may be used for cooling in the middle of the day, and for heating the rest of the day. This may or may not have negative consequences. The potential advantage of a cool cieling or similar system, is that it is separate from the heating system, and so they can be controlled independantly.

• HOW CAN I FURTHER CALCULATE THE CAPABILITIES OF THE PAS-SIVE DESIGN - IF I UNDERTOOK A DYNAMIC BUILDING SIMULATION WOULD MY OPTIMIZED DESIGN DIFFER GREATLY?

• HOW VIABLE ARE THE SYSTEMS I HAVE IN PLACE? ARE THE AS-SUMPTIONS AND ESTIMATIONS CORRECT?

• ARE THERE ANY ISSUES WITH THE CHOSEN CONSTRUCTION SYSTEM I AM UNAWARE OF?

Through exploring and optimizing the design i can draw these conclusions

• HAVING MORE GLAZING OVERALL INCREASES THE ENERGY LOAD, INCREASING BOTH HEATING AND COOLING LOAD

• ALL GLAZING SHOULD BE LOW E - SHGC OF 0.27 - THIS REDUCES THE SOLAR HEAT GAINS, AND THE COOLING LAODS

• QC SHOULD BE REDUCED BY HAVING AN APPROPATE WALL MAKE UP• THE DESIGN COULD BE MADE TO REQUIRE LESS ENERGY, BY REDUCING THE GLAZING FURTHER• HEATING AND COOLING SHOULD NOT BE DELIVERED THROUGH AIR

NORTH ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION

PANEL SPECIFICATION

Panel (600mm Width) Panel Description Wall Layers% ofGlazing Area (m2) SHGC U value Perimeter Inside Surface Depth (mm) Layer 1 Depth (mm) Layer 2 Depth (mm) Layer 3 Depth (mm) Ouside Surface Depth (mm)

A Glazed panel 64% 1.536 0.27 1.8 6.3 Plasterboard 20 Concrete block (light) 200.00 Air 50 Polyurethane board 50 Brickwork (inner leaf) 102.5B Glazed 0.7 81% 1.944 0.7 2.5 15.6 Plasterboard 20 Concrete block (light) 200.00 Air 50 Polyurethane board 50 Brickwork (inner leaf) 102.5C Window 50% 1.2 0.27 1.8 6.8 Plasterboard 20 Concrete block (light) 200.00 Air 50 Polyurethane board 50 Brickwork (inner leaf) 102.5D Window 0.7 50% 1.2 0.7 2.5 6.8 Plasterboard 20 Concrete block (light) 200.00 Air 50 Polyurethane board 50 Brickwork (inner leaf) 102.5E Solid Infill 0% 0 0 0 0 Plasterboard 20 Concrete block (light) 200.00 Air 50 Polyurethane board 50 Brickwork (inner leaf) 102.5

Transparent

CURRENT SCENARIO

5 AIR CHANGES AN HOUR

Qi Qs Qc Qv Qinf Qmec

15974 2382 ‐4692 ‐11818 ‐7425 557952473768.75 20897019.85 ‐44,860,801.85 ‐151,351,259.14 ‐75675629.57

Tn Tn Low Tn High Result Peak Heating Load (W) Peak Cooling Load (W)28.42 25.92 30.92 Heating 55975.68892 ‐46522.66416

Heating Cooling Passive1514 717.00 1054.00

Month Heating Load(kWh) Cooling Load Heating Hours Cooling Hours Passive HoursJanuary 7721 0 279 0 0February 7027 0 252 0 0March 4077 0 256 0 23April 1622 ‐60 119 4 166May 342 ‐1936 28 82 270June 7 ‐3229 1 113 315July 0 ‐5789 0 218 347August 0 ‐4881 0 206 348September 83 ‐1258 10 69 336October 738 ‐427 57 25 233November 3890 0 242 0 54December 6182 0 270 0 9

Annual Load (kWh) 31689.10 ‐17579.04Kwh/m2 52.12 ‐28.91

Total Loads (kWh) 49268.14

Total Hours Annual

Sizing Calculations ‐ Worst CaseRequired Tout

Hourly Data Annual DataQi Qs Qc Qv Qinf Qmec

15974 2382 ‐4692 ‐11818 ‐7425 557952473768.75 20897019.85 ‐44,860,801.85 ‐151,351,259.14 ‐75675629.57

Tn Tn Low Tn High Result Peak Heating Load (W) Peak Cooling Load (W)28.42 25.92 30.92 Heating 55975.68892 ‐46522.66416

Heating Cooling Passive1514 717.00 1054.00

Month Heating Load(kWh) Cooling Load Heating Hours Cooling Hours Passive HoursJanuary 7721 0 279 0 0February 7027 0 252 0 0March 4077 0 256 0 23April 1622 ‐60 119 4 166May 342 ‐1936 28 82 270June 7 ‐3229 1 113 315July 0 ‐5789 0 218 347August 0 ‐4881 0 206 348September 83 ‐1258 10 69 336October 738 ‐427 57 25 233November 3890 0 242 0 54December 6182 0 270 0 9

Annual Load (kWh) 31689.10 ‐17579.04Kwh/m2 52.12 ‐28.91

Total Loads (kWh) 49268.14

Total Hours Annual

Sizing Calculations ‐ Worst CaseRequired Tout

Hourly Data Annual Data

24

25

26

Documents

Thomas Gaudion part 1 portfolio