natural ventilation theatre2
TRANSCRIPT
CFD analysis of temperature in the cafe on July 15, from 1-2pmThe temperatures provided by the model were averages of the space. The CFD analysis shows that the temperatures in the occupied zones are different from the areas towards the ceiling of the café. This provides a limitation to our model – the café’s occupied zone was not separated from the unoccupied zones, thereby increasing any tem-perature peaks.
Table 2: Theatre CO2 concentration levels for models 5 - 12CO2 concentrations MODEL 4 MODEL 5 MODEL 6 MODEL 7 MODEL 8 MODEL 9 MODEL 10 MODEL 11
above 1500 576 30 34 25 32 60 61 56 total 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920
% above 19.73% 1.03% 1.16% 0.86% 1.10% 2.05% 2.09% 1.92%
CFD analysis of temperature in the theatre on July 15, from 1-2pmTemperatures in the theatre vary by the same amount, which is expect-ed due to the theatre’s height. There are about 2OC of variation between the temperatures from the lower to the upper levels of the theatre.
CFD simulation of CO2 concentration levels on July 15.CO2 concentrations are above 1500ppm 1.92% of the operating hours in the year, as shown by Table 2. The CFD analysis of CO2 concentrations show that the higher concentrations of CO2 can be found on the higher levels, towards the ceiling of the theatre, in red. The occupied levels of the theatre have CO2 concentrations ranging from about 550 – 950ppm.
These numbers show that lighting loads are very high for the building. The lighting strategy could be improved by light sensors in the switches in the café, as it benefits from significant levels of natural lighting.
SUMMER NIGHT-VENTILATION STRATEGY
1.CROSS VENTILATION in both the cafe and theatre 2.STACK VENTILATION in the theatre for pre-cooling in the morning
±0.00 GROUD LEVEL
CAFE-RECEPTION+3.70
THEATRE-0.20
THEATRE-2.90
STAGEBACKSTAGE
+3.70 CAFE LEVEL
+9.90 TOP ROOF LEVEL
+12.90 TOP STACK LEVEL
-0.20 THEATRE LEVEL
-2.90 THEATRE LEVEL
±0.00 GROUD LEVEL
+3.70 CAFE LEVEL
+9.90 TOP ROOF LEVEL
+12.90 TOP STACK LEVEL
-0.20 THEATRE LEVEL
-2.90 THEATRE LEVEL
CAFE-RECEPTION+3.70
THEATRE-0.20STAFF
CORRIDORGUEST
CORRIDOR
2.
2.
1.
WINTER VENTILATION STRATEGY
1.CROSS VENTILATION in the cafe during the operating time2.STACK VENTILATION in the theatre to decrease carbon dioxcide concentration
1.
2.
1.
±0.00 GROUD LEVEL
+3.70 CAFE LEVEL
+9.90 TOP ROOF LEVEL
+12.90 TOP STACK LEVEL
-0.20 THEATRE LEVEL
-2.90 THEATRE LEVEL
CAFE-RECEPTION+3.70
THEATRE-0.20STAFF
CORRIDORGUEST
CORRIDOR
2.
±0.00 GROUD LEVEL
CAFE-RECEPTION+3.70
THEATRE-0.20
THEATRE-2.90
STAGEBACKSTAGE
+3.70 CAFE LEVEL
+9.90 TOP ROOF LEVEL
+12.90 TOP STACK LEVEL
-0.20 THEATRE LEVEL
-2.90 THEATRE LEVEL
SUMMER VENTILATION STRATEGY
1.CROSS VENTILATION in the cafe during the operating time to ventilate the air and reduce carbon dioxide concentration2.STACK VENTILATION in the theatre to provide cold air and decrease carbon dioxide concentration
1.
1.±0.00 GROUD LEVEL
+3.70 CAFE LEVEL
+9.90 TOP ROOF LEVEL
+12.90 TOP STACK LEVEL
-0.20 THEATRE LEVEL
-2.90 THEATRE LEVEL
CAFE-RECEPTION+3.70
THEATRE-0.20STAFF
CORRIDORGUEST
CORRIDOR
2.
±0.00 GROUD LEVEL
CAFE-RECEPTION+3.70
THEATRE-0.20
THEATRE-2.90
STAGEBACKSTAGE
+3.70 CAFE LEVEL
+9.90 TOP ROOF LEVEL
+12.90 TOP STACK LEVEL
-0.20 THEATRE LEVEL
-2.90 THEATRE LEVEL
M DOWTH TREVentilation strategy
CFD results: IES results
Model Iterations
Theatre :
Cafe :
IES VE simulation results:
The model was created using IES VE. The structure included the basic outlines of the building form, and surrounding trees, to account for some shading. The site is heavily covered in foliage, and large London plane trees. The team expects that the shading capacity of these trees can help with minimizing solar gains in the summer, and filtration.
EA
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
MODEL 1 MODEL 2 MODEL 3 MODEL 4 MODEL 5 MODEL 6 MODEL 7 MODEL 8 MODEL 9 MODEL 10 MODEL 11
THEATRE - Percentage within and outside the comfort range
within comfort range outside comfort range
MODEL 1 MODEL 2 MODEL 3 MODEL 4 MODEL 5 MODEL 6 MODEL 7 MODEL 8 MODEL 9 MODEL 10 MODEL 11
Number dissa sfied 1726 695 1226 533 653 873 827 840 705 549 536
Number sa sfied 1194 2225 1694 2387 2267 2047 2093 2080 2215 2371 2384
Tota l 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920
Outs ide comfort range 59.1% 23.8% 42.0% 18.3% 22.4% 29.9% 28.3% 28.8% 24.1% 18.8% 18.4%
Within comfort range 40.9% 76.2% 58.0% 81.7% 77.6% 70.1% 71.7% 71.2% 75.9% 81.2% 81.6%
Temperature (˚C)
CO2 MODEL 4 MODEL 5 MODEL 6 MODEL 7 MODEL 8 MODEL 9 MODEL 10 MODEL 11
Above 1500 576 30 34 25 32 60 61 56
Tota l 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920 2920
% Above 19.73% 1.03% 1.16% 0.86% 1.10% 2.05% 2.09% 1.92%
Group 6: Meadow Theatre
THEATRE MODEL
1 MODEL
2 MODEL
3 MODEL
4 MODEL
5 MODEL
6 MODEL
7 MODEL
8 MODEL
9 MODEL
10 MODEL
11 outside comfort zone 59.1% 23.8% 42.0% 18.3% 22.4% 29.9% 28.3% 28.8% 24.1% 18.8% 18.4% within comfort zone 40.9% 76.2% 58.0% 81.7% 77.6% 70.1% 71.7% 71.2% 75.9% 81.2% 81.6%
CAFÉ MODEL
1 MODEL
2 MODEL
3 MODEL
4 MODEL
5 MODEL
6 MODEL
7 MODEL
8 MODEL
9 MODEL
10 MODEL
11 outside comfort zone 62.8% 35.9% 46.1% 42.1% 41.6% 43.2% 44.9% 48.8% 32.2% 24.6% 23.5% within comfort zone 37.2% 64.1% 54.0% 58.1% 58.4% 56.8% 54.9% 51.0% 67.7% 75.3% 76.3%
MODEL 1
Model 1 was a basic shoebox model created to test that the ventilation strategy was working. From this, we were able to confirm that the strategy was working. Peak temperatures in summer were at 25 degrees, however, CO2 concentrations were very high throughout the year. Window controls were based on the air temperature of the theatre. Closed when temperature dropped to 19OC, and fully open when temperatures were above 25OC. Theatre occupancy was expected between 12-2pm, 6-8pm. Lighting schedules coincide with occupancy. Café occupancy was expected between 8-10pm Materials were assigned their respective u-values. Lowest possible u-values were used, and highest possible g-values were used.
MODEL 2
For model 2, we decided to investigate the impacts of reducing the occupancy levels for both the theatre and the café to see its impacts on the performance of the building. All other parameters remained the same. We saw a higher level of times within the comfort range.
MODEL 3
We experimented the impacts of adding heating to the building. The building would be heated once temperatures reached 18OC. Windows were also constantly open. Occupancy was back at 100%, and the café operation hours were changed from 7am-7pm. Comfort criteria was only achieved at the 50% level.
MODEL 4
Heating was removed. Window controls depend on the air temperature – closed at 19OC and below, and fully open when 25 OC and above. We also assumed a gradual increase in occupancy during the operating hours. Results showed a significant improvement in the thermal comfort in the theatre, but not in the café.
MODEL 5
High CO2 concentrations were yet to be addressed. In model 5, thermal mass was assigned to each of the materials. There are 4 different types of window controls were employed to address CO2 concentrations and maintain thermal comfort criteria.
MODEL 6
Internal blinds were added to address overheating in the summer. Blinds are open from September – May, and closed during the summer months, when solar gains are above 50w/m2
MODEL 7
Night ventilation was added, and stack ventilation, and cross ventilation windows were fully open from midnight to 7am, from June 15 to October 1.
MODEL 8
The material of the chimney was changed. We originally planned for a transparent chimney to provide views to the sky. However, the team has decided to use a concrete instead.
MODEL 9
More changes were made to the window schedules in an attempt to address the low levels of thermal comfort in the café. Heating was added to the model, which resulted in significant improvements to the thermal comfort in the café.
MODEL 11
Windows were added to the interior glass wall to allow for the movement of hot air from the theatre into the café, as necessary, during the winter months.
MODEL 10
It became apparent to the group that there was a significant amount of heat that was moving from the theatre to the café. A glass wall was installed to separate the café and the stack, to better direct the heat towards the chimney. Significant improvements to the model were realized.
Temperature (˚C) MODEL 1 MODEL 2 MODEL 3 MODEL 4 MODEL 5 MODEL 6 MODEL 7 MODEL 8 MODEL 9 MODEL 10 MODEL 11
Number dissa sfied 2978 1702 2185 1994 1215 1261 2132 2316 1526 1165 1117
Number sa sfied 1767 3036 2560 2751 1705 1659 2605 2421 3211 3572 3620
Tota l 4745 4738 4738 4738 2920 2920 4745 4745 4745 4745 4745
Outs ide comfort zone 62.8% 35.9% 46.1% 42.1% 41.6% 43.2% 44.9% 48.8% 32.2% 24.6% 23.5%
Within comfort zone 37.2% 64.1% 54.0% 58.1% 58.4% 56.8% 54.9% 51.0% 67.7% 75.3% 76.3%
CO2 concentra on (ppm) MODEL 5 MODEL 6 MODEL 7 MODEL 8 MODEL 9 MODEL 10 MODEL 11
Min 405 403 403 0 400 400 400
Max 2721 1379 1382 1420 1844 2020 2015
Above 1500 151 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tota l 4745 4744 4744 4744 4744 4744 4744
% Above 3.18% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
MODEL 1 MODEL 2 MODEL 3 MODEL 4 MODEL 5 MODEL 6 MODEL 7 MODEL 8 MODEL 9 MODEL 10 MODEL 11
CAFE - Percentage within and outside the comfort range
Within comfort zone Outside comfort zone
Comfort Criteria
Month Lower bound Upper bound
January 16.5 22.5
February 17 23
March 18 24.5
April 19.5 25.5
May 20.5 26.5
June 21.5 27.5
July 22 28.5
August 22 28.5
September 19 26
October 19.5 25.5
November 18 24
December 16.5 22.5
Modeling results: Energy Demand and Resulting Carbon Emissions
ACH-Cafe ACH-Theatre
TEMPERATURE results
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
tem
pera
ture
(oC
)
Outdoor temperatures and theatre temperatures, annual at 11:30-14:30, 18:30-21:30
Outdoor temperatures (DSY) Theatre temperature
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Janu
ary
Febr
uary
Mar
ch
Apr
il
May
June July
Aug
ust
Sept
embe
r
Oct
ober
Nov
embe
r
Dec
embe
r
Outdoor temperatures and cafe temperatures, annual at 7:30-19:30
Outdoor temperature (DSY) Café temperature
tem
pera
ture
(oC
)