TECH Analysis Year 3 - semester 2 individual project c1915555
TECH Analysis
Site & Climate
6. The site is adjacent to an area of fre and vehicular activity on the south 7. The Floating harbour water is cont (Fig. 5).
Figure 1
Figure 3
Site Location and Context:
Summer Solstice
The site sits on the west end of Spike Island located in Bristol. The man made island is surrounded at the North by the Floating Harbour and in the South by the new cut of the river Avon. The infrastructure on the site is primarily composed of road networks with a few public and private buildings emerging as you head East.
Designing Along the Site Possibilitie
1. The cafe will exercise a roof light advantage of the natural light 2. While the exterior pool is for wild s interior pool will collect, filtrate an harbour. 3. The lobby compromising of the ce above the gap in the site. 4. The building on the south side of mono-pitched roof to allow direct 5. To increase the limited space on t stilts over the water between the 2 6. The north facing facade will be d views into the building at eye level building. 7. According to the E-coli data give o the site is located) is the only part of counts to make it safe to swim (fig
E-Coli levels in the floatin (Countes per 100ml)
Figure 2
Site Possibilities and Challenges:
300
100
0
1. The west end of Spike Island is underdeveloped with little infrastructure to cast shadows on the site 2. The abundance of water provides the possibility of recycling it for both the interior pool and services. 3. The existing gap between the 2 sites is convenient for vertical circulation around proposal 4. Given the orientation of the harbour in relation to the site, half of the proposed building will sit directly south of the exterior pool casting a shadow over it (fig. 3-4) 5. The presence of a swing bridge greatly limits the available space which can be built on. (fig. 2)
100
300
equent pedestrian activity to the east h creating privacy concerns. taminated by fluctuating E-Coli levels
Public Swimming Pool Regulations (BS EN 15288-1:2018)2: First aid room - Min. floor area of 8m2 - Min. hight 2.5m - Route from room to emergency vehicles min. width 1.2m Circulation - Toilets and showers located at pool access to encourage its use - Entering direction to pool basin min. 3m wide - Exiting direction to pool basin min. 2.5m wide - Pool edge to wall (starting block) min. 3m - Circulation routes around pool basin Min 1.5m
Winter Solstice
Figure 4
es and Challenges:
t with a pitch towards south to take
swimming directly in the harbour, The nd recycle the same water form the
entral circulation node will be located
the harbour will be designed with a t sunlight to infiltrate behind it the site part of the structure will sit on 2 sites designed through shades which block l but allow natural light to infiltrate the
on Gov.UK1 Cumberland Basin (where f the floating harbour with low enough g. 5)
ng harbour
Flooring prone to puddling (adjacent to pool) - Inclination of 2-4% towards drain - Higher than 3% requires attention to slip resistance of surface Lighting - Circulation routes: 100lx - Plant room: 100lx - Changing room/toilet: 100lx - Underwater lights required at pool depths greater than 1.35m
Sustainable initiatives of design • • • • •
Figure 5
Maximise natural light through pitched roof and south facing glazing Minimise heat gains from direct sunlight through shading south glazing Recycle harbour water to cover mechanical ventilation needs Purify harbour water to safety standards set our by BREEAM “minimising watercourse pollution”3 to use in toilet facilities as well as supply the indoor pool water Photovoltaic pannels on the south facing for on site energy production
TECH Analysis
Primary and s
Structural Strategy
Second
ary Struc
tur
Technical Challenges: The internal swimming pool requires an open plan structure which fits a full sized training pool (25m by 10m) plus the additional space regulations regarding circulation around the pool basin highlighted in BS EN 15288-1:20181.
Prim
ary
Stru
ctu
Structural grid Co
A 3x3m grid was implemented in the early stages of design to inform columns and wall placements. Given the building is a timber frame the spans between structural elements was kept short.
lum
ns
Truss system: To support the roof structure, a reverse truss system was designed to support the roof; Thus allowing the open plan layout. Additionally, the truss system emphasises the slope of the roof and complements the direction of natural light infiltrating through the window.
Final column sizes After having calculated the loads and moments applied on the structural elements, the suggested columns size was of 190x190 for edge columns and 140x140 for corner columns. However, in the design 500x200 columns were used to give the structure a more grandiose aesthetic.
Figure
Dead Load of roof structure Material Metal cladding OSB sheeting Mineral wool insulation CLT pannel
Th
Total roof dead load
N/
Imposed load:
The imposed load was derived from 1: actions on structures2. Given the b need to account for any activity loa general maintenance work. The pitc table 2.10 of the regulation the impos is 0.6(Kn/m^2).
Force diagram of structure Vertical Dead load (Uniformly distributed) Load transfer through structure Tension Compression Resultant force
Ultimate Area load:
(1.35 * dead load) +
= (1.35 * 0.83 = 1.12 = 2.026 (
Figure 6
secondary structure
re
ure
s
Primary Beams:
The initial proposed structure was sole composed of the primary reverse truss system. However, these alone were not able to support the Ultimate Load of the roof without sacrificing their sleek aesthetic. Initial calculations resulted in a beam size of 810mm by 135mm (d x b). Given on the lower end of the pitched roof the roof height is 2400mm the beam size is impractically large. Therefore a secondary structure was added compromising of 5 batons every 3m. Thus reducing the load on the primary structure.
Area supported = 3 * 3 = 9m^2 W, ult = 9 *2.026 = 18.234 kN Applied moment (given the load of the roof is uniformly distributed throughout the Beam) = (W * l) /8 = (18.234 * 3)/8 = 6.84kN/m W, ult (per m) = 18.234/3 = 6.08kN/m qk (unfactored per m) = 0.6 * 3 = 1.8 The calculations above were used to derive the primary Beam size from Pine Manufacturers3
e7
hickness (mm)
/m^2
0.0005 25 250 150
833.8740
Weight Per Area (kg/m^2) 0.002 15 20 50 KN/m2
0.8339
the UK national Annex to Eurocode building only has one floor, it does not ad happening on the roof other than ch of the roof is 16.8°; According to sed load on roofs with an angle < 30°
Without the addition of the secondary structure the area supported by the primary beams would be 45m^2 which would result in a beam size of 810 x 125mm. Given the structural grid is 3x3, the secondary beams have the same span as the primary beams and therefore experiencing the same load will be of the same dimensions.
Loading Columns
Column sizes
Effective height: 6000mm for the tall side, 2400 for the short side.
Using the calculations the left the column size was derived through Wrightforest Table II7.
Edge column
+ (1.5 * imposed load)
Area supported = 3 * 7.5 = 22.5m^2
34) + (1.5 * 0.6) 26 + 0.9 (kN/m^2)
Total load = 22.5 *2.026 = 45.58 kN Corner Column Total load = 11.25 * 2.026 = 22.79 kN
Edge column - Max allowed point load 90kN Tall column = 190x190 Short column = 140x140 Corner column - Max allowed point load 26kN Tall column = 140x140 Short column = 90x90
TECH Analysis
Construction Detail Materials: Roof 1. Metal cladding - 5mm 2. OSB - 22mm 3. Waterproof layer 4. Mineral wool insulation - 250 5. Vapour barrier 6. CLT panel - with fire resistant coating 100mm 7. Secondary Glulam beam C25 225x65 - with fire resistant coating 8. Primary Glulam beam C25 225x65 - with fire resistant coating (support structures are bolted together)
Figure 9 - roof junction
Wall 1. Cedar battens - 100mm 2. Cedar counter batten - 50mm 3. Cedar cladding - 30mm 4. DFM slab - 50mm inbetween battens - 50mm 5. Cedar counter battens - 50mm 6. Waterproof layer 7. Mineral wool insulation - 250mm 8. Vapour barrier 9. Plywood panel - 12mm - with fire resistant coating 10. Primary Glulam C25 column 500x200mm - with fire resistant coating Floor 1. Cedar deck board - 20mm 2. Cedar Battens - 60mm 3. Concrete slab - 140mm 4. Vapour barrier 5. Mineral wool insulation - 250mm 6. Waterproof layer 7. Sand binding - 30mm 8. Sand blinding hardcore
Figure 10 - Window junctio
Figure 8
Figure 11 - Floor junction
Calculating U values Roof U-value ROOF ROOF
WALL WALL
Calculating U values Material Thickness(m) Thermal Conductivity (W/mK) R-value (m^2K/W) Material Thickness(m) Metal cladding 0.0005 Thermal Conductivity (W/mK)60 R-value (m^2K/W) 0.0000 Metal cladding 0.0005 60 0.0000 OSB 0.022 0.15 0.1467 OSB 0.022 0.15 0.1467 Waterproof layer 0.003 0.17 0.0176 Waterproof 0.003 0.17 0.0176 mineral woollayer insulation 0.25 0.035 7.1429 mineralbarier wool insulation 0.25 0.035 7.1429 Vapour 0.0002 0.026 0.0077 Vapour barier 0.0002 0.026 0.0077 CLT Pannel 0.1 0.13 0.7692 CLT Pannel 0.1 0.13 0.7692 Total R-value 8.0841 Total R-value 8.0841 U-value 0.1237 U-value regulation Part L 0.1237 Building 0.1800 Building regulation Part L 0.1800
Wall U-value
Material Thickness(m) Thermal Conductivity (W/mK) R-value (m^2K/W) Material Thickness(m)0.1 Thermal Conductivity (W/mK) Cedar battens 0.14 R-value (m^2K/W) 0.7143 battens 0.1 0.7143 Cedar cladding 0.03 0.14 0.2143 Cedarslab cladding 0.03 0.14 0.2143 DFM 0.05 0.036 1.3889 DFM slab 0.05 0.036 1.3889 Cedar battens 0.06 0.14 0.4286 Cedar battens 0.06 0.14 0.4286 Waterproof layer 0.003 0.17 0.0176 Waterproof 0.003 0.17 0.0176 mineral woollayer insulation 0.25 0.035 7.1429 mineralbarier wool insulation 0.25 0.035 7.1429 Vapour 0.0002 0.026 0.0077 Vapour barier 0.0002 0.026 0.0077 Plywood pannel 0.012 0.13 0.0923 Plywood pannel 0.012 0.13 0.0923 Total R-value 10.0065 Total R-value 10.0065 U-value 0.0999 U-value regulation Part L 0.0999 Building 0.2800 Building regulation Part L 0.2800
Floor U-value Material Thickness(m) Thermal Conductivity (W/mK) R-value (m^2K/W) Cedar deck board 0.02 0.14 0.1429 Cedar battens 0.06 0.14 0.4286 Concrete slab 0.14 2 0.0700 Vapour barrier 0.002 0.026 0.0769 Mineral wool insulation 0.25 0.035 7.1429 Waterproof layer 0.003 0.17 0.0176 Sand blinding 0.03 0.25 0.1200 Sand blinding hardocre Total R-value 7.9989 U-value 0.1250 Building regulation Part L 0.2200
on
Sustainable initiatives of Construction • • • • •
The use of concrete was minimized to the essential (foundations) Softwood timber was used over hardwood as it takes less time for softwood trees to grow, reducing the deforestation impact of the construction British Western Red Cedar is highly sustaiable timber produced in Britain reducing CO2 emissions through the transportation of the timber. Timber is supplied by Timbersource an FSC and PEFC certified company which operates with fully managed sustainable forests1. The U-values are lower than those stated in Building regulation Part L reducing the cooling and heating demands of the structure
TECH Analysis
Lighting
Ventilation
Technical Challenges:
The swimming pool has a large south facing facade resulting in the possibility of abundant natural light. However, glare caused by light reflection on the water surface can reduce visibility of lifeguards making it a hazard which has to be avoided.
Technical Challenges:
Quantitative needs:
Swimming pools are environm temperatures therefore require suit temp. Levels (23-26 °C)3, minimise c timber from mold formation.
Qualitative needs:
Bcise Guide A3 recommend 0-15 a swimming pool’s comfort criter swimming pool is approximatly 37 maximum duct velocities for low p 7.5m2-1 for main ducts 6.0m2-1 fo
Following the indications on the SLL lighting handbook, the swimming pool is categorized as a class III sporting facility as1 it is designed for “general training [...and] recreational activity” rather than competition. Consequently the lighting recommendation is of 200lx. Additionally, BS EN 15288-1:20182 states circulation areas in a public pool must be min. 100lx The pitched roof with inverted trusses creates a funnel for daylight to infiltrate all the way through the building with minimum interferences. Additionally, the light tones of the Cedar timber cladding would be greatly enhanced by direct sunlight.
Quantitative needs:
Duct size ca
Wet area
Air supp
15 * 420 = = 6.45
Cross-sectional ar Jun 21st 12:00 Figure 12
Dec 21st 12:00
Main duct = 6.4 Branch = 6.4 Run-out = 6.45
Figure 13
Sustainable strategy:
Jun 21st 12:00 Figure 14
Dec 21st 12:00
Figure 15
Limitations:
Velux daylight visualizer does not have an option to render water surfaces. Therefore although the lighting study gives a good approximation of the lighting qualities, it can be assumed that in reality the space would have higher lux levels due to the reflective index of water
Given the pitched roof of the s different heights the stack effect ca reducing the air supply rate load pr (fig. 16). Additionally, the shading south glazing (discussed in the lig heat gain of the room thus further r required to meet comfort temp.
Lighting strategy used:
Initial designs for the pool facade resulted in large amounts of direct sunlight infiltrating the room and directly shining on the water surface(fig. 12-13). Given the safety risks associated with glare in BS EN 15288-1:2018. Direct sunlight had to be reduced in favour of daylight. A shading device was introduced by using timber battens(100x100mm) with a gap between them increasing in factors of 20mm for a maximum gap of 200mm. This blocked the majority of direct sunlight from reaching the water surface while still achieving Lux level regulations (fig. 14-15)
Figure 16
ments with high moisture and table ventilation to reach comfort condensation and protect internal
5ls-1 per m-2 of wet area to reach ria. The typical noise rating of a 7NR therefore the reccomended pressure ductwork system are: or branches 3.5m2-1 for run-outs
Acoustics Technical Challenges:
The community room is designed to be a multi use space to host various activities organized by the community these can range from yoga classes, dance classes, poetry readings etx. Therefore the acoustic properties need to allow for both speech and musical oriented activities. Additionally the space is surrounded by the reception to the north, staff room/ office space to the south and a cafe on top, therefore minimizing sound distribution to these areas is important.
Quantitative needs:
According to BS 8233:20144, community halls “used for events that involve speech and music [...] should normally be designed for speech” Table 6 of the same regulation states that typical noise levels for non-domestic buildings must be between 45-55dB LAeq, T to allow speech activities. Additionally stating reverberation time of 500Hz if frequent un-amplified musical events are expected. Reverberation time for multi purpose auditoriums (speech and music), Architectural acoustics: A guide to integrated thinking provided a taget range of 1.6-1.8s5.
alculations:
a = 430m2
ply rate:
= 6450l/s 5m3/s
rea of duct work:
45/7.5 = 0.86m2 45/6 = 1.08m2 5/3.5 = 1.84m2
swimming pool with windows at an be utilized for natural ventilation rovided by mechanical ventilation g mechanism integrated over the ghting analysis) reduces the solar reducing the amount of ventilation
Figure 17
Noise level from surroundings:
The community hall has an external wall facing a busy main road through a residential area to the East producing an average of 1000Hz of noise.
Noise level from activity:
Speech had a Hz range of approximately 500-4000Hz while music uses a standard reference of 440Hz to tune instruments. Considering low frequency sounds are classified as 500Hz or below, the sound insulation applied has to prioritize absorption of mid to high tones as these are prevalent in the room.
Adjusting design to meet regulations:
The room design without any specific sound insulation or sound absorbing materials resulted in a RT60 of 2.6s. This was too long to comply with the 1.6-1.8s regulation. Therefore 25mm of fibreglass insulation was added to the cavity behind the plywood to absorb the higher tones while acoustic insulated timber panels were placed on the north and south surface to reduce reverberation time without compromising the timber materiality of the room. Thus reducing RT60 to 0.6s which meets regulations.
TECH Analysis
Fire Safety Limitations on travel distance (Table 2.1)
Minimum number of escape rout
Swimming pool, staff room and bathroom = group 5 Cafe = group 4 Swing bridge office = group 3
Cafe - Capacity: 60 - Requirement: 1 exit
The spaces in the proposal can be classified into purpose groups Swimming pool and therefore the limitations on travel distance is given according to - capacity: 83 Approved document B1: - Requirement: 2 exits 45° apart
All the given groups limitations on travel distance is 18m for one Swing bridge office direction or 45m for multiple directions. - Capacity: 1 - Requirement: 1 exit
Inner room:
The changing room’s bathrooms are classified as an inner room given that “escape is possible only by passing though another room (the access room)”1 in this case the changing rooms. According to Approved Document B the access room has to be fitted with an automatic fire detection alarm system to warn occupant in the bathroom if a fire starts in the changing rooms. Route
1
2
3
4
5
Travel Distance (m)
14.5 14 13 16
6
7
8
9
10 11
10.8 21* 20* 23.5* 27.5* 5
16
Staff room: - Requirement: 1 exit Bathroom -Requirement: 1 exit
12 13
14 15 16
17 18
13 4
5
18 24* 2
5
13
1
9 10 11
14
15 16
12
17
13
1
Figure 19 - Bottom floor
6
Fig
5 2
7
3 4
8
Figure 18 - Ground floor
* The travel distance to the main exit for route 7,8 and 6 (bathroom routes) were <18m, therefore additional fire escapes were provided along the back wall of the bathrooms. Similarly for route 9, a fire escape was provided directly from the staff room. Route 18(a,b) are <45 ° apart therefore since there are 2 escape routes the travel distance can be up to 45m
fire-fighting stair escape - 1100mm wide
Fig
Building Performance
tes (Table 2.2)1:
Quantitative needs:
The Riba 2030 Climate challenge was used as a benchmark to compare the building performance of the proposal. This states targets for operational energy use, water use and embodied carbon. The goal to achieve being 55-60Kwh/m2.yr2
Initial attempt:
The parameters of the initial attempt resulted in 108.6KWh/m2.yr which surpasses the Riba 2030 target. Therefore some changes had to occur to improve the performance of the structure and reduce the energy demands.
Changes made:
The most important factor to a building’s performance is its envelope. therefore to reduce the U-Values of the structure 50mm of extra mineral wool insulation were added to the envelope. Additionally, the use of concrete was minimized in favour of timber to capture CO2. Thus lowering the U-Values from 0.2-0.3 to 0.1-0.2. Additionally, given the extensive South facing glazing. The performance of the glass was increased by adding argon gas in-between the double glazing. Lowering its U-value to 1.1. The use of the shading mechanism (as analysed in the lighting study) further reduces the heat gain of the room from direct sunlight.
19
Lastly, the opening hours were reduced from 09:00 - 18:00 to 15:00 - 18:00. Since the proposal compromises of an exterior public Lido, the internal pool only has to be open during the hours where the external pool would not be used due to external temperatures.
20 21 22
22.5* 10 17 17
21
19
22
47°
18a 18b 20
gure 20 - First floor
Solar panels
gure 21
Further Sustainable considerations: On site energy production will be effectuated through photovoltaic panels placed on the roof of the cafe structure; which south facing with a incline of 20 degrees and minimal shading makes it an opportune solar panel placement. (Fig. 21) The system is estimated to generate 5,128kWh/year. This would further decrease the energy demands of the building which already meet the Riba 2030 target.
References Page 1 1.
Bristol.gov.uk. n.d. Water quality - harbour and rivers - bristol.gov.uk. [online] Available at: <https://www.bristol.gov.uk/pests-pollution-noise-food/water-qualityand-pollution> [Accessed 3 November 2021]. 2. British standards Ltd, 2018. Swimming pools for public use. Safety requirements for design. London: British Standards Institute.
Page 2 1.
British standards Ltd, 2018. Swimming pools for public use. Safety requirements for design. London: British Standards Institute. 2. British Standards Ltd, 2008. UK National annex to Eurocode 1: Actions on structures. General actions. London: British Standards Ltd. 3. 2008. NEW ZEALAND GLULAM SPAN TABLES. 1st ed. [ebook] New Zealand: New Zealand Pine Manufacturers Association, p.8. Available at: <http://www.pine.net. nz> [Accessed 19 January 2022].
Page 3 1.
timbersource. n.d. Timbersource. [online] Available at: <https://www. timbersource.co.uk/?gclid=Cj0KCQjw1ZeUBhDyARIsAOzAqQIHWu92zOwr5dXg7N39iYgGJjCSPMqwi8j4E-FCdxY4GldsaepH00aAi0LEALw_wcB> [Accessed 10 February 2022].
Page 4 1. Butcher, k., 2019. The SLL lighting handbook. london: CIBSE Bookshop. 2. British standards Ltd, 2018. Swimming pools for public use. Safety requirements for design. London: British Standards Institute. 3. CIBSE, 2021. Environmental design. london: CIBSE. 4. Building standards ltd, 2014. Guidance on sound insulation and noise reduction for buildings. London: British standards. 5. Patel, P., 2020. Architectural Acoustics. 1st ed. London: RIBA.
Page 6 1. Building regulations, 2019. Fire safety - Volume 2: Buildings other than dwellings. London: gov.uk. 2. 2021. R I B A 2030 CL IMATE CHALLENGE. 2nd ed. [ebook] London: Royal Institute of British Architects. Available at: <https://www.architecture.com/-/media/files/ Climate-action/RIBA-2030-Climate-Challenge.pdf> [Accessed 12 March 2022].