Design Studies: Daylight factor 11.4 m Ti e fj rst tests on the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

East facade North facade South facade West facade Inner yard - East Inner yard - West

Typical fm

• orplan 1:200

Top fm

• orplan 1:200

South facade 1:200 Section 1:200

Design Studies: Daylight factor

Ti e fj rst tests on the south facade of the building version with full tilt on the facades 23 degrees showed that daylight factor is too low. Solar radiation is poor, as you can see on the radiation map images, so in such a case energy consumption would dramatically

• increase. Ti

e rest of the daylight factor calculations are on the chosen design (reduced tilt). Ti ey show the daylight situation in a room at the exterior facades, as well as at the part facing the inner core. Note: Ti e daylight factor can vary depending on the rotating position of the lamellas. It is calculated for the south facade and it ranges from 1.35 to 2.32 percent. South facade fully tilted.

Plan Layout:

Each fm

• or provides plenty of private

and more open work spaces, conference rooms and dining areas. Ti e central core brings light down to the lowest fm

• or and

spreads it inside. Installations rooms and communications are situated around the core for convenience. Glare and illuminance interior calculation 82 m 35 m

Radiation map visualization: initiually calculated facade tilt, half of the tilt and no tilt

+ 0.00 + 4.80 + 8,60 + 12.40 + 16,30

11.4 m 29.4 m MEAN DAYLIGHT FACTOR 2.58 % MEAN DAYLIGHT FACTOR 2.58 % MEAN DAYLIGHT FACTOR 1.78 % MEAN DAYLIGHT FACTOR 4.65 % MEAN DAYLIGHT FACTOR 9.61 % MEAN DAYLIGHT FACTOR 8.52 %

Detail section 1:20

EAST WEST NORTH SOUTH WINTER SUMMER YEAR

Facade:

We wanted a fm exible shading that relates to the difg erent light conditions throughout the year and the day. Using a grasshopper tool we analyzed the difg erent opportunity of tilting the east, west and south facades to avoid excessive amounts of direct sunlight and the possibility of glare

• problems. Ti

e point where the summer sun is at its highest peak was found and a facade angle was calculated, one parallel to that of the sun rays hitting the ground. Ti e combination of analyzing and attempting to maximize daylight factors while in the same time minimizing the degree of tilt and thus making the facade more feasible, led to a reduction of the tilts by 50%. Ti e slanted facade walls are then to be supplemented by the shading envelope. We decided to stick to simple lamellas, using hydraulic machinery to shifu their angles in the warm- er days, depending on the solar gain. In freezing tempera- tures they remain fj xed, to avoid deterioration. Fully clad- ding the facades, the lamellas are being punched through numerous times. Ti is replaces 50% of the surface area with holes, creating a certain transparency and visibility from the interior to the outside.

Max PPD, % 30,56 Max PPD, % 6.864 Max PPD, % 13,37 Max PPD, % 7,655 Max PPD, % 8.438 Max PPD, % 8,916 Max PPD, % 15.05 Max PPD, % 5.519 Max PPD, % 27,18 Max PPD, % 5,519 Max PPD, % 5.215 Max PPD, % 19,1

3.48 m

Energy consumption and indoor comfort calculations on each facade.

DELIVERED ENERGY Cooling 59.3 kWh/m2 Heating 9.9 kWh/m2 DELIVERED ENERGY Cooling 16.2 kWh/m2 Heating 18.1 kWh/m2 DELIVERED ENERGY Cooling 49.5 kWh/m2 Heating 14.0 kWh/m2 DELIVERED ENERGY Cooling 33.4 kWh/m2 Heating 15.9 kWh/m2

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 1 2 3 4 Series1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 Series1 5 10 15 20 25 30 1 2 3 4 Series1

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Series1 Series2 Cooling Heating

Tracing the optimum tilt Lamellas, perforated 50% of the surface Hydrolic lamella module system Half tilt