BMW Zero Energy Dealership Concept

ISA AAK ELIAS S BASHE EVKIN N

STIG G ANDRE CLASON

GLENN ALEXANDE ER HANSEN

NIL LS HENRIK HENN NING GSTAD

ARNE SVEINSVOLL

In recent decades we have discussed, researched and built prototype low-energy-, passive-, zeroenergy- and energy-positive buildings. And finally, in recent years, we have begun building them in full scale. The “Powerhouse-Alliance” is in the final stages of rehabilitating two office buildings at Kjørbo in Sandvika, Norway, which will become the

first life cycle energy-positive buildings in Norway over an estimated lifespan of 60 years.

The background for this paradigm shift is that buildings account for 40 % of global energy consumption. A sustainable society requires that we lower the energy consumption and the carbon

footprint associated with the production and use of buildings. At the same time, the world is entering the second half of the fossil fuel era, and slowly adapting to a necessary sustainable future through massive investments in renewable energy and carbon efficiency is essential for continued progress and prosperity.

ASSIGNMENT INTRODUCTION

bmw, bilia and the commercial typology In this evolving context, Bilia and BWM have an interesting position, with their constant development and expansion of a substantial range of commercial buildings used for the sales and service of the cars they sell. In addition, BMW are lunging into the expanding market for electric

powered cars, with their brand new i3, and soon coming i8-model.

Commercial typologies, that naturally have sales and consumption as main purposes, are facing important challenges in this context. A resource-

efficient architectural framework around the commercial structures is desirable in itself, but can also express and promote ecological awareness among product developers, employees and customers.

AHO / wood be better + BILIA / BMW This project began more than one year ago, when we first got together with a desire to explore the expanding knowledge base surrounding energy efficient architecture. By coincidence, Bilia – dealer of BMW in Norway and Sweden, sent an inquiry to Professor Marius Nygaard at AHO, expressing a desire to cooperate with a group of students in starting the development of a more energy efficient approach for their large portfolio of dealerships.

At the same time, Marius Nygaard was in the initial phase as project manager for the interdisciplinary research project, “WOOD / BE / BETTER”, which

is looking at the entire value chain and actual use of wood in architecture. When all of these paths intersected at the same time, our project was conceived.

It is a self-programmed studio course, closely linked to Marius Nygaard’s “Multifunctional urban wood architecture”-course. We have followed all lectures, the study trip to Germany, Austria and Switzerland, and the rest of the semester schedule.

But the project and semester description is selfwritten and narrated.

We have explored the possibilities to unite architectural quality, profitability, ethical credibility and ecological sustainability in a building for exhibition, sales and service of cars, emphasising the importance of integrating energy strategies with the architectural expression.

We have set ambitious goals with regard to energy efficiency and sustainability, including every power unit used in the entire life cycle of the building, from cradle to grave. We have defined this as “zeroenergy with life cycle costs”.

ASSIGNMENT questions Architecture & Construction • • • • • •

Does the use of wood limit the desired architectural expression and programmatic solutions?

Is the use of wood essential to fulfill life cycle balance?

What is a building and site made for the exhibiton and sales of cars? Historical context / current examples What is the programmatic content and ideal organization of such a building and site?

Does the use of wood limit the flexibility of the building through its life span?

With reference to the building's life cycle, how do we optimize for a specific use/user, but still provide the possibility for an energy, economy and material efficient future transformation/adaptation to other uses/users?

Materials & Transport • • •

What effect does the availability and knowledge of embodied energy in materials have for the life-cycle energy and emissions costs of the project?

How large (geographically) is the "local market" of materials?

What is the energy and emission proportion of transporting the building materials, compared to the production it self?

Design Parameters • • • • • • •

Where does a one sided emphasis on energy and environment intersect or neglect the economy of a project?

Is it possible to combine economy and environment with adjustments to the energy concept?

Can we put a monetary value on environmental costs?

How are the life-cycle costs affected if the concept is implemented on different sites in different scales?

How do we implement BMW's identity and history in an environment design?

Is it possible to use standardized building elements in a complex architectural shape?

To what extent should technology and technical requirements be allowed to affect the architecture and design?

energy production operational consumption

embodied energy in materials

>=

construction

demolition and recycling

zero energy definition

A zero-energy building is a building that through its operational phase generates equal amounts or more energy than was used for the production of building materials, construction, operational consumption, demolition, and recycling of the building.

Through the building’s life cycle, it becomes an integrated part of the energy solution, rather than being a part of the energy problem.

energy production zero energy balance line

production capability

starting point

energy consumption consumption quota

energy efficiency

life cycle stages of a building product stage life span estimated to

1 2

60 years

construction n

flexibility adds a basis for

operational stage

raw material supply transport to factory manufacturing transport to building site building construction use

different uses

maintenance various owners

repair all in

3

one building

end of life

but not expected

refurbishment de-construction / demolition

extended life span possible benefit

replacement

transport

4

waste processing disposal / recycling

design parameters

Design parameters

$

Economics and environment

Pro

Cons

•

Where does a one sided emphasis on energy and environment intersect or neglect the economy of a project?

Innovation equals evolution

Innovation is expensive

More sustainable architecture

What are the actual costs of pollution?

Is it possible to combine economy and environment with adjustments to the energy concept?

Integration of values and actions

How will future changes affect the market?

• •

Can we put a monetary value on environmental costs?

Marketing value

Design parameters

Lifespan and flexibility / reuse

Pro

Cons

•

Versatile buildings have higher resale value.

Does flexibility limit architectural expression?

Standarized spaces are often built with standarized materials.

Is it possible to design for different future uses, when the future is so unknown?

•

Does the use of wood limit the flexibility of the building through its life span?

With reference to the building’s life cycle, how do we optimize for a specific use/user, but still provide the possibility for an energy, economy and material efficient future transformation/adaptation to other uses/users?

Longer lifespan equals lower material consumption

Design parameters

Reduction of embodied energy

Pro

Cons

•

Local materials support local economy

Globalization has made transportation and production cheaper/more cost efficient in far-away world regions.

• •

What effect does the availability and knowledge of embodied energy in materials have for the life-cycle energy and emissions costs of the project?

How large (geographically) is the “local market” of materials?

What is the energy and emission proportion of transporting the building materials, compared to the production it self?

Less travel, less carbon footprint A more sustainable marked, not dependent on other countries.

Using the most energy efficient material can drastically alter the life cycle result of the building.

For some materials there is a higher level of expertise in other countries, allowing solutions that would otherwise not be possible.

Avalability of rare materials.

Design parameters

Solar energy

Pros

Cons

How can you design a building that provides an efficient base, angle and orientation for solar pv-panels?

The sun provides a very stable, predictable and everlasting source of heat and power.

Questionable materials used to produce the panels.

The energy is pure, clean and emission-free.

The panel-efficiency is evolving rapidly, making it difficult to estimate the correct time to invest.

Easy and site-independent way of harvesting electricity

Expensive (but price is getting lower)

Possible to harvest thermal energy, as well as electricity.

Need a large amount of unshaded roof area.

No feasible way of storing energy, must be used immediately

Design parameters

Natural ventilation / airflow

Pro

Cons

Can you design a ventilation concept that works with the natural flows of air, lowering energy consumption used to circulate air through the building?

Independent - works without electricity Less power-demanding Affects the total design Natural

Questionable efficiency Need fans for worst-case scenarios Less controllable quality of the air

Can the ventilation “tubes� be an integrated Large ventilation sections allows low air part of the building design? speeds and lower fan RPM

Design parameters

Facade principles N / W / S / E

Pro

Can you lower the energy consumption by Facade-specific solutions gives adapting each facade to its orientation? optimal design.

Reduced excess heating Reduced heat leaking

Cons Complex design process Concept not always appropriate Excess insulation is expensive and energy intensive to produce.

Design parameters

BMW: The dynamic driving machine

Pro

Cons

How can we derive an architectural expression from BMWs values, identity and design language?

Many interesting possibilities

Difficult to balance the dynamic approach with the modern, classic and sleak.

How do we combine the notion of BMW as a dynamic, yet modern, classic and sleak, in an architectural language?

Bilia are open for something different than status quo Lots of inspirational sources

Important not to copy BMWs design language evolves and is changed much more often then their buildings.

Design parameters

Choreographed experience

Pro

Cons

How can the architecture provide a free flowing circulation, at the same time as all the stages of the car-buying process usually happen in the same order?

Buying a BMW should be an exclusive experience

Important to balance the possibility to flow freely through the exhibition, with optimizing the selling and buying process of the cars.

BMW customers often expect something extra

site analysis

Site analysis

1hr 9mins

oslo

Site analysis

N

sandefjord kristiansand

sem

Tønsberg

Site analysis

Site analysis

N N o

10 22

o

3

20

30

o

40

o

o

50

o

60

o

70

80

W

o

18

6

15

E

9

S june 21st

solar irradiation o

average temperature:

7,4

september 21st

c horizontal: o

15 inclination:

1640 hours of sun / year

optimal inclination:

966 kwh / m2 / year 1078 kwh / m2 / year 1148 kwh / m2 / year

december 21st sunrise sunset pv-panels

Site analysis

N N

W

E

S

Site analysis

N

Site analysis 1:2000

110

Hydraulic drill from 40m

The highest sound from traffic in a city apartment

DC9 Airplane at 200m height

90

70

50

On a very busy street

Normal conversation

50, 55 > dB 55, 60 > dB 60, 65 > dB

The hum of a refridgerator

65, 70 > dB

30 The ambient sound of trees 10

70, 75 > dB 75 dB or higher

program

PROGRAM SITE: 9000M2

new cars 1020 m2

customer service & office 675 m2

used cars 660 m2

service & operation 1450 m2

PROGRAM ORGANIZATION & CONNECTIONS

WRAPPING THE ATRIUM & MOVEMENT PATTERNS

3d PROGRAM ROOF ACCENTUATION

project drawings & visualizations

the result Our answer is to combine dealership, exhibition and service-facilities, where our focus and goal has been to provide the customer a different and unique experience. Integration of BMW’s historic values and experience, their notion of a BMW car as a dynamic driving machine, has been important,

and has been maintained in the final architectural expression.

The precision of the BMW engineering and their constant mission to push the limits of what is perceived as possible, meets the dynamic

appearance and experience of the Norwegian landscape and materiality. Wood, rock and landscape are integrated into the architectural concept in a way that highlights the importance of equal emphasis on architectural quality, sustainability and adaptability.

Situation plan

Perspective - from E18-roundabout

Perspective - site entrance

First floor plan

Second floor plan

Exhibition concept diagram

Exhibition concept 1

Exhibition concepts A3 1:200

Exhibition concept 2

Exhibition concept 3

The exhibition area is designed to accommodate different layouts, providing a flexible foundation for future changes in exhibition concepts.

Perspective - new car exhibition

Perspective - across atrium

Section A-A / East-to-West Through new car preparation / employee kitchen > reception area > new car exhibition under mezzanine > exclusive car exhibition

Section B-B / West-to-East Through new car pavillion > atrium / landscape exhibition > used car exhibition > service building

Section C-C / South-to-North Through service parking > delivery area > technical rooms and storage > service area > employee kitchen

Section D-D / North-to-South Through new car exhibition under mezzanine > new car pavillion > car wash

EAST NORTH

1

2

FACADES 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Larvikite cladding on “the machine”.

Single slim window lines for stright appearance Black coloured slats seen from north-east connect the two building programs.

Wood areas for full coverage from inside.

Covered with glass on the outside for glare during daytime.

Triple glazing windows secure low U-values (0,5 W/(m²K). Will be produced in lengths up to nine meters.

NORTH WEST

NORTH 3

4 5

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

6

7

8

Cornice facing the atrium. Will show through windows at night.

Semi-transparent aerogel brings natural light into the building as well as having low U-values.

Meeting point between fasade/ceiling towards the atrium. Will show through windows at night.

Light oak slats seen from north-west divides the two building programs and gives a softer appearance.

The indoor column system is continued on the outside on the west facade. This emphasizes the structural system and gives the facade a more unique expression.

West facade is withdrawn from cornice to provide sun shading.

Pavilions and car wash are non-climatized. The glass stops 500mm under the ceiling to give the roof line a lighter appearance.

9

10

11

12

energy concept

energy production operational consumption

embodied energy in materials

>=

construction

demolition and recycling

zero energy definition

A zero-energy building is a building that through its operational phase generates equal amounts or more energy than was used for the production of building materials, construction, operational consumption, demolition, and recycling of the building.

Through the building’s life cycle, it becomes an integrated part of the energy solution, rather than being a part of the energy problem.

energy production zero energy balance line

production capability

starting point

energy consumption consumption quota

energy efficiency

life cycle stages of a building product stage life span estimated to

1 2

60 years

construction n

flexibility adds a basis for

operational stage

raw material supply transport to factory manufacturing transport to building site building construction use

different uses

maintenance various owners

repair all in

3

one building

end of life

but not expected

refurbishment de-construction / demolition

extended life span possible benefit

replacement

transport

4

waste processing disposal / recycling

Energy concept

Ventilation diagram

used air is led back to the heat exchange system (in winter) and directly out (in summer) via a vacuum air chamber in the roof

fresh air from the heat exchange system is led below the floor in a pressurized air chamber

er, wat round r e g v er der ke o , umm inta ling un ilding ir in s r i a la bu ve tra to the es coo d in i v pro

ventilation principles - Daylight exploited consciously.

- Vertical slats along the facade act as sun shading, and prevents unwanted heating.

- The ventilation system uses natural air movement principles for efficient mechanical ventilation.

- Heat recovery of exhaust air.

- Pressurized ventilation systems with large cross-sections and low air speeds, lower the energy consumption of fans.

- Thermal mass in the interior utilized for temperature equalization.

water management & temperature regulation diagram

Energy concept

technical room - recycling of heat - hot water transformed into hot air

technical wall

roof m u d se

sol

roof rainwater retention pond

ar t h

erm sys al tem

ra i re nwa t te nt er ion po nd

rec gre yclin y w g of ate r

geo we therm ll al

Low runoff to the city's storm water management

Energy concept

AHO+BILIA / BMW Zero-Energy Dealership Concept in Norway scenario 1 / Life cycle calculations Energy consumption in operation phase

energy accounting

life cycle calculation

energy consumption TEK15 stipulated Room heating Air heating

8,8

8 kWh/m2/year

13,4

10 kWh/m2/year

Water heating

15,8

5 kWh/m2/year

Fans and pumps

16,7

5 kWh/m2/year

Lighting

44,9

12 kWh/m2/year

Technical equipment

13,9

5 kWh/m2/year

Room and ventilation cooling

11,5

5 kWh/m2/year

total energy consumption regulation / TEK15

125 125

50 kWh/m2/year 125 kWh/m2/year

Total heated area of building Total energy consumption/year

152,6 kWh/m2 2 100 m2

Electricity production

0,08 W/m2K

PV-panel area

0,08 W/m2K

Electricity production

Income from selling electricity to the grid in life span of second generation PV-panels

1 NOK/kWh

36 % 305,3 kWh/m2 2 100 m2 641 088 kWh/year 225 kWh/m2/year

energy balance

1,6 NOK/kWh

30 years until invest

second generation pv-production

U-value ground floor

Average price of electricity in life span of second generation PV-panels

320 544 kWh/year 112 kWh/m2/year

U-value roof

1,1 NOK/kWh

18 %

Electricity production/m2

Electricity production/m2

Average price of electricity in life span of first generation PVpanels

848 kWh/m2/year

PV-panel area

PV-panel efficiency rating

364 m2

142 750 kWh/year

PV-panel efficiency rating

0,11 W/m2K

0,05 W/m2K

2 855 m2

first generation pv-production

U-value outer walls

U-value doors and windows

50 kWh/m2/year

Average solar radiation on PV-panel angle(s)

the life cycle calculations are based on the following energy measures and future assumptions

Thermal Solar Panels for heating

energy accounts

Total energy consumption/m2

338 066 kWh/year 118 kWh/m2/year

the projected production is dependent on the following pv-investment PV-panel price / year 0 PV-investment cost / year 0

sources

PV-panel price / year 30

ZEB / The Research Centre on Zero Emission Buildings

2 750 NOK/m2 1 000 NOK/m2

EPD-Norge.no / Environmental Product Declarations ICE / Inventory of Carbon & Energy, University of Bath

Savings from reduced amount of electricity bought

228 400 NOK/year 30+

Powerhouse projects / Skanska, Entra, Snøhetta, Zero, ZEB & Hydro

Income from electricity sold to the grid

498 338 NOK/year 30+

Sintef Byggforsk & KanEnergi for Enova

Economic result of pv-investment over life span

Life span of building

60 years

Total energy balance

20 283 960 kWh/60 years

embodied material energy Larvikite Granite CLT / Cross Laminated Timber Softwood Oak wood Steel Mineral wool EPS / Expanded Polystyrene Rockwool 3-layered glass 1-layer glass Aerogel Recirculated rubber Sand & gravel Soil displacement Lighting fixtures and bulbs Furniture Technical equipment Solar thermal-panels Solar PV-panels w/Inverters

m2

m3

kg/m3

kgCO2-e/ton

kgCO2-e

117

2 515

50

14 713

kWh/kg kWh/iteration

1,0

294 255

60 years

lifetime f kWh/life cycle

116

2 691

50

15 608

1,0

312 156

60 years

1 961

650

122

155 507

3,4

4 333 810

60 years

46

550

68

1 720

1,20

30 360

30 years

224

700

87

13 642

1,80

282 240

30 years

1,85

7 850

2 830

41 099

11

159 748

60 years

1 048

28

850

24 942

4,6

134 982

60 years

974

35

2 430

82 839

22

749 980

60 years

1 704

32

800

43 622

4,7

256 282

60 years

16

2 579

950

39 470

6

249 286

30 years

1 073

9

2 579

950

21 031

6

132 829

30 years

131

10

20

3 200

620

15

2 908

30 years

0,3

481

1 630

235

19,0

2 742

60 years

2 350

1 442

5

16 944

0,20

677 740

60 years 60 years

895

4

13 440

0,02

67 200

items:

2 100 450

per/item:

1 600

48

21 600

100

45 000

30 years

items:

180

per/item:

60

10 800

1 100

198 000

30 years

items:

48

per/item:

500

24 000

4 200

201 600

30 years

364

kgCO2-e/m2:

45

16 380

359

130 676

30 years

2 100

kgCO2-e/m2:

235

493 500

1 250

2 625 000

30 years

294 255 312 156 4 333 810 60 720 564 480 159 748 134 982 749 980 256 282 498 572 265 658 2 908 2 742 677 740 67 200 90 000 396 000 403 200 261 352 5 250 000

* kgCO2-e/item & kWh/item * kgCO2-e/item & kWh/item * kgCO2-e/item & kWh/item * kgCO2-e/m2 & kWh/m2 * kgCO2-e/m2 & kWh/m2

5 775 000 NOK

PV-investment cost / year 30 Savings from reduced amount of electricity bought

EU JVC PVGIS / EU Joint Research Centre, Photovoltaic Geographical Information System

338 066 kWh/year

Yearly energy balance

total embodied emissions & energy

2 100 000 NOK

1 052 tons co2-e 368 kg co2-e/m2

157 025 NOK/year 0-30

18 637 890 NOK/60 years

life cycle result

5 502 176 kWh/60 years

14 781 784 kwh 86 KWh/m2/year

Energy concept

embodied material energy kwh / life cycle Technical equipment 403 200 kWh 3%

Solar thermal-panels 261 352 kWh 2%

Solar PV-panels w/Inverters 5 250 000 kWh 36 %

Furniture 396 000 kWh 3%

Lighting fixtures and bulbs 90 000 kWh 1% Soil displacement 67 200 kWh 0% Sand & gravel 677 740 kWh 5% Recirculated rubber 2 742 kWh 0%

Aerogel 2 908 kWh 0%

1-layer glass 265 658 kWh 2%

Larvikite 294 255 kWh 2%

3-layered glass 498 572 kWh 3%

Rockwool 256 282 kWh 2%

Mineral wool 134 982 kWh 1%

Granite 312 156 kWh 2%

EPS / Expanded Polystyrene 749 980 kWh 5%

Steel 159 748 kWh 1% Oak wood 564 480 kWh 4%

Softwood 60 720 kWh 0%

CLT / Cross Laminated Timber 4 333 810 kWh 29 %

Energy concept

years / kwh / nok 25 mill NOK

60 yearsª 55 years 50 years ª

20 mill NOK

45 years

economic result over life span of 60 years

$ = 60 years

investment payback period

$ > 0 NOK

40 years 15 mill NOK

ª 35 years 30 years 25 yearsª

10 mill NOK

20 years 15 years ª

5 ªmill NOK

10 years 5 years

m2 PV-panels

0 years / kWh / NOK 200 0

300 0

400 0

500 0

600 0

700 0

800 0

900 0 1000 0 1100 0 1200 0 1300 0 1400 0 1500 0 1600 0 1700 0 1800 1900 0 2000 0 2100 0

936m2 produced energy from first generation pv-panels equals the energy consumption in the operational phase. the income from selling energy to the grid, is lower than what you save by not buying the power in the first place. therefore the profitability is slightly lower after this point

solar pv-panel analysis

Energy concept

years / kwh / nok 25 mill NOK

60 yearsª 55 years 50 years ª

20 mill NOK

45 years

economic result over life span of 60 years

$ = 60 years

investment payback period

$ > 0 NOK

40 years 15 mill NOK

ª 35 years 30 years 25 yearsª

10 mill NOK

20 years 15 years ª

5 ªmill NOK

10 years 5 years

m2 PV-panels

0 years / kWh / NOK 200 0

300 0

400 0

500 0

600 0

700 0

800 0

900 0 1000 0 1100 0 1200 0 1300 0 1400 0 1500 0 1600 0 1700 0 1800 1900 0 2000 0 2100 0

468m2 produced energy from second generation pv-panels equals the energy consumption in the operational phase. the first generation pv-panels delivers some power to the grid, but the owner can not expect to be paid for that service. this results in a prolonged payback period.

solar pv-panel analysis

Energy concept

years / kwh / nok 25 mill NOK

60 yearsª 55 years 50 years ª

20 mill NOK

45 years

economic result over life span of 60 years

$ = 60 years

investment payback period

$ > 0 NOK

40 years 15 mill NOK

ª 35 years 30 years

after 30 years 25 yearsª

10 mill NOK

the life time of the first generation pv-panels is reached, and the second generation is installed.

20 years 15 years ª

5 ªmill NOK

10 years 5 years

m2 PV-panels

0 years / kWh / NOK 200 0

300 0

400 0

500 0

600 0

700 0

800 0

900 0 1000 0 1100 0 1200 0 1300 0 1400 0 1500 0 1600 0 1700 0 1800 1900 0 2000 0 2100 0

1714m2+ the first generation pv-panel investment is not fully payed back before the second generation investment is made. in 30 years we project there to be a stable and viable system for selling surplus energy to the grid with profit, greatly reducing the time it takes to pay back the investment cost of the second generation.

solar pv-panel analysis

Energy concept

years / kwh / nok 25 mill kWh

energy balance over life span of 60 years

' = 60 years

20 mill kWh

surplus energy, payback of embodied energy. at first exported to the grid for free, later sold to the grid for profit.

15 mill kWh

10 mill kWh life cycle result over life span of 60 years

12 = 60 years

5 mill kWh

m2 PV-panels

0 years / kWh / NOK 200 0

300 0

400 0

500 0

600 0

700 0

800 0

900 0 1000 0 1100 0 1200 0 1300 0 1400 0 1500 0 1600 0 1700 0 1800 1900 0 2000 0 2100 0

-5 mill kWh

624m2 produced energy over 60 years equals energy consumption in operational phase. “net-zero� without life cycle costs.

-10 mill kWh

life cycle result still negative 12,1 gwh

-15 mill kWh

solar pv-panel analysis

Energy concept

years / kwh / nok 25 mill kWh

energy balance over life span of 60 years

' = 60 years

life cycle result over life span of 60 years

12 = 60 years

20 mill kWh

15 mill kWh

10 mill kWh

surplus energy, extra production that goes beyond the payback of the Life Cycle Costs.

5 mill kWh

sold to the grid for profit.

m2 PV-panels

0 years / kWh / NOK 200 0

300 0

400 0

500 0

600 0

700 0

800 0

900 0 1000 0 1100 0 1200 0 1300 0 1400 0 1500 0 1600 0 1700 0 1800 1900 0 2000 0 2100 0

1640m2 -5 mill kWh

produced energy over 60 years equals all life cycle cost including embodied energy. zero-energy in accordance with definition.

-10 mill kWh

-15 mill kWh

solar pv-panel analysis

Energy concept

years / kwh / nok 60 years

25 mill kWh

60-46 years 55 years 50 years

the available production area and capacity of our energy concept is 2100m2, potentially reducing the life cycle payback period to 46 years.

20 mill kWh

the time it takes to pay back life cycle costs is reduced quite drastically with increased energy production

45 years

40 years 35 years

life cycle costs payback period

12 > 0 kwh

life cycle result over life span of 60 years

12 = 60 years

15 mill kWh

30 years 25 years

10 mill kWh

20 years 15 years

5 mill kWh

10 years 5 years

m2 PV-panels

0 years / kWh / NOK 200 0

300 0

400 0

500 0

600 0

700 0

800 0

900 0 1000 0 1100 0 1200 0 1300 0 1400 0 1500 0 1600 0 1700 0 1800 1900 0 2000 0 2100 0

-5 mill kWh

-10 mill kWh

-15 mill kWh

solar pv-panel analysis

Energy concept

AHO+BILIA / BMW Zero-Energy Dealership Concept in Norway scenario 1 / Life cycle calculations Energy consumption in operation phase

energy accounting

life cycle calculation

energy consumption TEK15 stipulated Room heating Air heating

8,8

8 kWh/m2/year

13,4

10 kWh/m2/year

Water heating

15,8

5 kWh/m2/year

Fans and pumps

16,7

5 kWh/m2/year

Lighting

44,9

12 kWh/m2/year

Technical equipment

13,9

5 kWh/m2/year

Room and ventilation cooling

11,5

5 kWh/m2/year

total energy consumption regulation / TEK15

125 125

50 kWh/m2/year 125 kWh/m2/year

Total heated area of building Total energy consumption/year

152,6 kWh/m2 2 100 m2

Electricity production

0,08 W/m2K

PV-panel area

0,08 W/m2K

Electricity production

Income from selling electricity to the grid in life span of second generation PV-panels

1 NOK/kWh

36 % 305,3 kWh/m2 2 100 m2 641 088 kWh/year 225 kWh/m2/year

energy balance

1,6 NOK/kWh

30 years until invest

second generation pv-production

U-value ground floor

Average price of electricity in life span of second generation PV-panels

320 544 kWh/year 112 kWh/m2/year

U-value roof

1,1 NOK/kWh

18 %

Electricity production/m2

Electricity production/m2

Average price of electricity in life span of first generation PVpanels

848 kWh/m2/year

PV-panel area

PV-panel efficiency rating

364 m2

142 750 kWh/year

PV-panel efficiency rating

0,11 W/m2K

0,05 W/m2K

2 855 m2

first generation pv-production

U-value outer walls

U-value doors and windows

50 kWh/m2/year

Average solar radiation on PV-panel angle(s)

the life cycle calculations are based on the following energy measures and future assumptions

Thermal Solar Panels for heating

energy accounts

Total energy consumption/m2

338 066 kWh/year 118 kWh/m2/year

the projected production is dependent on the following pv-investment PV-panel price / year 0 PV-investment cost / year 0

sources

PV-panel price / year 30

ZEB / The Research Centre on Zero Emission Buildings

2 750 NOK/m2 1 000 NOK/m2

EPD-Norge.no / Environmental Product Declarations ICE / Inventory of Carbon & Energy, University of Bath

Savings from reduced amount of electricity bought

228 400 NOK/year 30+

Powerhouse projects / Skanska, Entra, Snøhetta, Zero, ZEB & Hydro

Income from electricity sold to the grid

498 338 NOK/year 30+

Sintef Byggforsk & KanEnergi for Enova

Economic result of pv-investment over life span

Life span of building

60 years

Total energy balance

20 283 960 kWh/60 years

embodied material energy Larvikite Granite CLT / Cross Laminated Timber Softwood Oak wood Steel Mineral wool EPS / Expanded Polystyrene Rockwool 3-layered glass 1-layer glass Aerogel Recirculated rubber Sand & gravel Soil displacement Lighting fixtures and bulbs Furniture Technical equipment Solar thermal-panels Solar PV-panels w/Inverters

m2

m3

kg/m3

kgCO2-e/ton

kgCO2-e

117

2 515

50

14 713

kWh/kg kWh/iteration

1,0

294 255

60 years

lifetime f kWh/life cycle

116

2 691

50

15 608

1,0

312 156

60 years

1 961

650

122

155 507

3,4

4 333 810

60 years

46

550

68

1 720

1,20

30 360

30 years

224

700

87

13 642

1,80

282 240

30 years

1,85

7 850

2 830

41 099

11

159 748

60 years

1 048

28

850

24 942

4,6

134 982

60 years

974

35

2 430

82 839

22

749 980

60 years

1 704

32

800

43 622

4,7

256 282

60 years

16

2 579

950

39 470

6

249 286

30 years

1 073

9

2 579

950

21 031

6

132 829

30 years

131

10

20

3 200

620

15

2 908

30 years

0,3

481

1 630

235

19,0

2 742

60 years

2 350

1 442

5

16 944

0,20

677 740

60 years 60 years

895

4

13 440

0,02

67 200

items:

2 100 450

per/item:

1 600

48

21 600

100

45 000

30 years

items:

180

per/item:

60

10 800

1 100

198 000

30 years

items:

48

per/item:

500

24 000

4 200

201 600

30 years

364

kgCO2-e/m2:

45

16 380

359

130 676

30 years

2 100

kgCO2-e/m2:

235

493 500

1 250

2 625 000

30 years

294 255 312 156 4 333 810 60 720 564 480 159 748 134 982 749 980 256 282 498 572 265 658 2 908 2 742 677 740 67 200 90 000 396 000 403 200 261 352 5 250 000

* kgCO2-e/item & kWh/item * kgCO2-e/item & kWh/item * kgCO2-e/item & kWh/item * kgCO2-e/m2 & kWh/m2 * kgCO2-e/m2 & kWh/m2

5 775 000 NOK

PV-investment cost / year 30 Savings from reduced amount of electricity bought

EU JVC PVGIS / EU Joint Research Centre, Photovoltaic Geographical Information System

338 066 kWh/year

Yearly energy balance

total embodied emissions & energy

2 100 000 NOK

1 052 tons co2-e 368 kg co2-e/m2

157 025 NOK/year 0-30

18 637 890 NOK/60 years

life cycle result

5 502 176 kWh/60 years

14 781 784 kwh 86 KWh/m2/year

scenario 1 / Maximum production energy consumption: first generation pv- production: second generation pv-production: average energy surplus: total energy exported/sold to the grid: life cycle result after 60 years: initial pv-investment: second generation pv-investment: economic result of pv-investment over life span: investment payback period: life cycle payback period:

143 mwh / year 320 mwh / year 641 mwh / year 338 mwh / year 20,3 gwh / 60 years 5,5 gwh / 60 years 5,8 mill nok 2,1 mill nok 18,6 mill nok 35 years 46 years

2100

m2 p

aver age sola first r irr gen adia erat seco tion ion p nd g : 84 v-pa ener 8 kw nel atio h/m effic n pv 2/y ienc -pan ear y ra el ef ting ficie 18 % ncy ratin g 36 %

v-pa nels

ion:

sumpt

h 50 kw

/ m2 /

year

ene

y con energ

50% 50%

rati ons

of p

v-

pan e

of p

ls

v-

pan e

ls

pv-panel diagrams

in bo th g

fac ing

fac ing

So

uth

-w est so : 10 o lar inc eas irr lin ad t: 1 o ati iat 0 on i o so i n: nc , lar lin 9 00 45 oor irr ati ien kw ad on iat tat h/ , -1 ion m2 ion 35 o : 7 / ye or 97 a i e r nta kw h/ tio m2 n / ye ar

no rth -

pro jec ele ted ctr inc icit ome y to fr pro the jec grid om sel ted ling pro 30pric jec su 60: eo ted 1 ,0 N rplus f el pric O K /k ect eo wh ric f el ity ect ric yea ity r0 -y -30 sou ear : 1, rce 3 1 NO 0-6 : en K /k 0 : ova 1 wh ,6 / Si NO nte K /k f by wh gg for sk

Energy concept

AHO+BILIA / BMW Zero-Energy Dealership Concept in Norway scenario 2 / Life cycle calculations Energy consumption in operation phase

energy accounting

life cycle calculation

energy consumption TEK15 stipulated Room heating Air heating

8,8

8 kWh/m2/year

13,4

10 kWh/m2/year

Water heating

15,8

5 kWh/m2/year

Fans and pumps

16,7

5 kWh/m2/year

Lighting

44,9

12 kWh/m2/year

Technical equipment

13,9

5 kWh/m2/year

Room and ventilation cooling

11,5

5 kWh/m2/year

energy accounts

Total energy consumption/m2 Total heated area of building Total energy consumption/year

50 kWh/m2/year 2 855 m2 142 750 kWh/year

first generation pv-production Average solar radiation on PV-panel angle(s)

848 kWh/m2/year

PV-panel efficiency rating Electricity production/m2

18 % 152,6 kWh/m2

PV-panel area

total energy consumption regulation / TEK15

125 125

50 kWh/m2/year 125 kWh/m2/year

Electricity production

PV-panel efficiency rating

0,11 W/m2K

Electricity production/m2

U-value roof

0,08 W/m2K

PV-panel area

U-value ground floor

0,08 W/m2K

Electricity production

0,05 W/m2K 552 m2

Average price of electricity in life span of first generation PVpanels

1,1 NOK/kWh

Average price of electricity in life span of second generation PV-panels Income from selling electricity to the grid in life span of second generation PV-panels

1 NOK/kWh

36 % 305,3 kWh/m2 1 912 m2 583 695 kWh/year 204 kWh/m2/year

energy balance

1,6 NOK/kWh

30 years until invest

second generation pv-production

U-value outer walls

U-value doors and windows

142 871 kWh/year 50 kWh/m2/year

the life cycle calculations are based on the following energy measures and future assumptions

Thermal Solar Panels for heating

936 m2

220 533 kWh/year 77 kWh/m2/year

the projected production is dependent on the following pv-investment PV-panel price / year 0 PV-investment cost / year 0

sources

PV-panel price / year 30

ZEB / The Research Centre on Zero Emission Buildings

2 750 NOK/m2 1 000 NOK/m2

EPD-Norge.no / Environmental Product Declarations ICE / Inventory of Carbon & Energy, University of Bath

Savings from reduced amount of electricity bought

228 400 NOK/year 30+

Powerhouse projects / Skanska, Entra, Snøhetta, Zero, ZEB & Hydro

Income from electricity sold to the grid

440 945 NOK/year 30+

Sintef Byggforsk & KanEnergi for Enova

Economic result of pv-investment over life span

Life span of building

60 years

Total energy balance

13 231 992 kWh/60 years

embodied material energy Larvikite Granite CLT / Cross Laminated Timber Softwood Oak wood Steel Mineral wool EPS / Expanded Polystyrene Rockwool 3-layered glass 1-layer glass Aerogel Recirculated rubber Sand & gravel Soil displacement Lighting fixtures and bulbs Furniture Technical equipment Solar thermal-panels Solar PV-panels w/Inverters

m2

m3

kg/m3

kgCO2-e/ton

kgCO2-e

117

2 515

50

14 713

kWh/kg kWh/iteration

1,0

294 255

60 years

lifetime f kWh/life cycle

116

2 691

50

15 608

1,0

312 156

60 years

1 961

650

122

155 507

3,4

4 333 810

60 years

46

550

68

1 720

1,20

30 360

30 years

224

700

87

13 642

1,80

282 240

30 years

1,85

7 850

2 830

41 099

11

159 748

60 years

1 048

28

850

24 942

4,6

134 982

60 years

974

35

2 430

82 839

22

749 980

60 years

1 704

32

800

43 622

4,7

256 282

60 years

16

2 579

950

39 470

6

249 286

30 years

1 073

9

2 579

950

21 031

6

132 829

30 years

131

10

20

3 200

620

15

2 908

30 years

0,3

481

1 630

235

19,0

2 742

60 years

2 350

1 442

5

16 944

0,20

677 740

60 years 60 years

895

4

13 440

0,02

67 200

items:

2 100 450

per/item:

1 600

48

21 600

100

45 000

30 years

items:

180

per/item:

60

10 800

1 100

198 000

30 years

items:

48

per/item:

500

24 000

4 200

201 600

30 years

552

kgCO2-e/m2:

45

24 840

359

198 168

30 years

1 424

kgCO2-e/m2:

235

334 640

1 250

1 780 000

30 years

294 255 312 156 4 333 810 60 720 564 480 159 748 134 982 749 980 256 282 498 572 265 658 2 908 2 742 677 740 67 200 90 000 396 000 403 200 396 336 3 560 000

* kgCO2-e/item & kWh/item * kgCO2-e/item & kWh/item * kgCO2-e/item & kWh/item * kgCO2-e/m2 & kWh/m2 * kgCO2-e/m2 & kWh/m2

2 574 000 NOK

PV-investment cost / year 30 Savings from reduced amount of electricity bought

EU JVC PVGIS / EU Joint Research Centre, Photovoltaic Geographical Information System

220 533 kWh/year

Yearly energy balance

total embodied emissions & energy

1 912 000 NOK

901 tons co2-e 316 kg co2-e/m2

157 025 NOK/year 0-30

20 305 111 NOK/60 years

life cycle result

5 224 kWh/60 years

13 226 768 kwh 77 KWh/m2/year

scenario 2 / economy & ecology energy consumption: first generation pv-production: second generation pv-production: average energy surplus: total energy exported/sold to the grid: life cycle result after 60 years: initial pv-investment: second generation pv-investment: economic result of pv-investment over life span: investment payback period: life cycle payback period:

h / m2

yc energ

n: mptio onsu

143 mwh / year 143 mwh / year 584 mwh / year 221 mwh / year 13,2 gwh / 60 years 0 gwh / 60 years 2,6 mill nok 1,9 mill nok 20,3 mill nok 17 years 60 years aver age 936 sola first r irr gen m adia e s r e 2 atio con 1912 tion p n pv d ge v : 84 -pan -pan nera 8 kw m2 p el ef tion h/m f p icien 2/y v-pa els v-pa ear cy r nel atin effic in fi nels g 18 ienc % r y ratin st g in se g 36 en % con d ge eration ner atio n

/ year

50 kw

50% 50%

rest space used for solar thermal panels, reducing energy consumption for heating

of p

v-

pan e

of p

ls

v-

pan e

ls

pv-panel diagrams

fac ing

fac ing

So

uth

-w est so : 10 o lar inc eas irr lin ad t: 1 o ati iat 0 on i o so i n nc , : 9 lar lin 00 45 oor irr ati ien kw ad on iat tat h/ , -1 ion m2 ion 35 o : 7 / ye or 97 a i e r n kw tat h/ ion m2 / ye ar

no rth -

pro jec ele ted ctr inc icit ome y to fr pro the jec grid om sel ted ling pro 30pric jec su 60: eo ted 1 ,0 N rplus f el pric OK / e ctr kwh eo f el icit y ect ric yea ity r0 -y -30 sou ear : 1, rce 3 1 NO 0-6 : en K /k 0: ova 1 wh ,6 / Si NO nte K /k f by wh gg for sk

scenario 1 vs 2 / comparison energy consumption: first generation pv- production: second generation pv-production: average energy surplus: total energy exported/sold to the grid: life cycle result after 60 years: initial pv-investment: second generation pv-investment: economic result of pv-investment over life span: investment payback period: life cycle payback period:

pv-panel diagrams

STRUCTURE & DETAILS

Structure & details

Structure & details 1:10 Massivtretak, gesims mot nord

1:10 Massivtretak 1. 50mm sedum 2. 50mm sedummatte 3. 150mm+300mm Rockwool 4. 100mm CLT massictredekke 5. 100mmx400mm limtrebjelke 6. Nedsenkbar LED-lampe 7. Vinsj

Utvendig kledning 1.

Hunton Vindtett 25mm 2.

98+98+198mm Isolasjon 3.

150+300mm Rockwool 4.

ISO3 kuldebrytende bjelke 5.

Trelags isolerglassvindu 6.

250x600mm søyle 7.

1:10 Massivtretak, klimaskille

1:10 Massivtretak - Gesims mot atrie 1. 50mm sedumtak 2. 50mm sedummatte 3. 150mm Rockwool 4. 25mm Hunton Vindtett 5. 48mmx198mm bjelke

300+150mm Rockwool 1.

100mm trykkfast isolasjon(XPS) 2.

25mm Hunton Vindtett 3.

Kanal for ventilasjonsluft 4.

98x198mm bjelke 5.

Details main volume A3 1:5

Structure & details

1:10 Massivtretak, langsnitt bjelke 1. 50mm Sedumtak 2. 50mm Sedummatte 3. Membran 4. 150mm Rockwool 5. 250x900mm limtrebjelke

1:10 Sammenføying av bærende ramme

1:10 Massivtretak, gesims mot atrie 1. 50mm Sedumtak 2. 50mm Sedummatte 3. 150mm Rockwool 4. 250x900mm limtrebjelke 5. Lekt for kledning 6. Utvendg kledning 7. Membran 8. Stålbeslag 9. Horisontal ytterkledning

250x900mm limtrebjelke 1.

Stålplater innslisset for sammenføyning 2. med søyle...

Trykkfast isolasjon(XPS) 3.

Vinduskarm med kuldebryter av kompositt 4.

200mm Rockwool 5.

Langsgående ytterkledning 6.

3-lags isolerglass 7.

250x400mm limtresøyle 8.

1:10 Massivtretak over vaskehall

Structure & details

1:20 Tverrsnitt massivtretak 1. 900x250 limtrebjelke 2. Hull for luftstrøm 3. Sedumdekke 4. Sedummatte 5. 150mm+300mm Rockwool 6. 100mm CLT massivtredekke 7. Hulrom for luftstrøm 8. Hull for luftstrøm

Horisontal ytterkledning 1.

Beslag 2.

98x198mm c-c 300mm 3.

50mm sedummatte 4.

50mm sedum 5.

Ytterkledning 6.

250x600mm søyle 7.

1:10 Massivtretak, naturlig ventilasjon 1. Utløp ventilasjon 2. Spjeld for styring av luft 3. Luftstrøm 4. Ventilasjonskanal i massivtretaket 5. Membran

1:10 Massivtretak 1. 50mm sedum 2. 50mm sedummatte 3. 150mm+300mm Rockwool 4. 100mm CLT massictredekke 5. 100mmx400mm limtrebjelke 6. Ventilasjonskanal

1:10 Massivtretak - Gesims

1. 50mm sedumtak 2. 50mm sedumma 3. 150mm Rockwoo 4. 25mm Hunton Vin 5. Nedløp regnvann

Structure & details 1. M16 Umbrakobolt 2. Treprofil 3. Aerogel 4. Kompositt 5. Akustisk absorb.

6. Perforert finér

1:5 Vindusinnfestning

1. Glassjikt 2. CLT-skive 3. Isolasjon

1:5 Fasadesystem

Vertikal sammenføying av fasadeelementer

Aerogel 1.

Kompositt 2.

Fuge 3.

CLT-skive 4.

3-lags glass 1.

Kompositt 2.

Fuge 3.

CLT-skive 4.

1:5 Fasadesystem

1. M16 Umbrakobolt 2. Treprofil 3. Aerogel 4. Kompositt 5. Akustisk absorb.

6. Perforert finér

Structure & details 1:10 Gesimsdetalje 1. Kledning av Larvikitt 2. Stålbeslag 3. Isolasjon, 98+98mm 4. Hunton Vindtett 25mm 5. Solcellepanel 6. Vanndam, termisk magasin 7. Rør med væske, for termisk energi 8. Membran 9. 300mm Rockwool

1:10 Vaskehall utløp gråvann 1. Vaskehall 2. Toppdekke naturstein 3. Settelag 0-20mm 4. Bærelag 22-63mm 5. Avløp 6. Oljeskiller 7. Avløp olje 8. Avløp gråvann 9. Organisk vannrensing 10. Gabion for avgrensing av parkering

Sedumdekke 1.

Sedummatte 2.

Ytterkledning, larvikittfliser 3.

150mm+300mm Rockwool 4.

100mm CLT massivtredekke 5.

Hulrom for ventilasjonsluft 6.

Membran 7.

Hunton vindtett 25mm 8.

198mm+98mm+98mm isolasjon 9. Åpning for utsug av luft 10.

Brannsikker kledning i verksted 11.

Ventilasjonssjakt ned til gulv 12.

1:10 Tak salgsdel møter verkstedvegg

1:10 Verkstedgulv 1. Verkstedgulv av naturstein 2. Settelag, 0-20mm 3. Bærelag, 22-63mm 4. Forsterkningslag 60-100mm 5. Trykkfast isolasjon, XPS 6. Forsterkningslag 60-100mm 7. Drenering 8. Oljeutskiller

Structure & details 1:10 Fasade mot nord 1. Utløp ventilasjon 2. 100mm CLT massivtredekke 3. 400m Hunton I-bjelke 4. Datagulv/sjakt for ventilasjon 5. 198mm + 98mm + 98mm isolasjon 6. Hunton vindtett 25mm 7. Lekt 8. Lekt 9. Ytterkledning 10. Membran 11. XPS/trykkfast isolasjon 12. Bærelag 13. 150mm matjord/gress

1:10 Gulv, klimaskille 1. Utløp ventilasjon 2. 100mm CLT massivtredekke 3. 400m Hunton I-bjelke 4. Datagulv/sjakt for ventilasjon 5. 300mm trykkfast isolasjon(XPS) 6. Bærelag(23-65mm) 7. 25x600mm limtresøyle 8. Trelags isolerglass 9. Stålplater innslisset i søylen 10. 100x400mm limtrebjelke 11. Utvendig dekke, Kebony 12. Kuldebryter av kompositt 13. Membran 14. Kobberplate/krympeplast (Fürstenberg Permadur)

Verkstedvegg 1.

Limtrebjelke 2.

Trykkfast isolasjon, XPS 3.

Drenerende masser, 22-63mm 4.

150mm matjord, for gress 5.

1:10 Østfasade møter bakke

1:10 Verksted og bruktbilgulv 1. Verkstedgulv 2. Avløp, oljevann 3. Avløp, renset vann 4. Larvikittfliser 5. Gulv bruktbil 6. Membran

Structure & details 1:10 Fundamentering av billøfter 1. Verkstedgulv av naturstein 2. Settelag, 0-20mm 3. Bærelag 22-63mm 4. To-søylers lift 5. Massiv blokk av naturstein

1:20 Grunn dam 1. Utvendig dekke, Kebony 2. Toppdekke, stabilisert grus 3. Silt 4. Morenemasser 5. Vannspel 6. Vegetasjon i vannet

1:10 Fundamentering 1. Kobberplate/krympeplast (Fürstenberg Permadur) 2. Drenerende løsmasser(20-60mm) 3. 250x600mm impregnert limtrebjelke 4. 300mm CLT-skive av Kebony 5. Finmasser(0-4mm) 6. Drenerende løsmasser (20-60mm) 7. Grove masser

1:10 Vannkant dyp dam 1. Blokker av naturstein 2. Bærelag 22-63mm 3. Eksisterende undergrunn 4. Vannspeil 5. Sløyfer for termisk magasin 6. Naturlig bunn, bestående av silt, morenemasser, og sand.

1:10 utvendig utstilling, fundament 1. Toppsjikt (0-20mm) 2. Bærelag (0-32mm) 3. Forstewrkningslag (22-63mm) 4. 150mm matjord, gress 5. Gabioner

Structure & details 1:10 Nedløp vann 1. Løsmasser(20-60mm) 2. Vann fra tak 3. Drensrør 4. Rist

1:10 Paviljong, steindekke 1. Dekke av naturstein 2. Settelag 0-20mm 3. Bærelag 22-63mm 4. Duk 5. Innfestning svingbar glassdør 6. Utvendig tredekke 7. Settelag 0-20mm 8. Bærelag 22-63mm 9. Svingbar glassdør

1:10 Utlevering nybil, dekke over vannspeil 1. Utvendig dekke, Kebony 2. Larvikittblokk 3. Vannlinje 4. Settelag (0-20mm) 5. Bærelag (22-63mm)

1:10 Paviljong, svingbar glassdør 1. Kebony tredekke 2. 48mmx198mm bjelke 3. 25mm vannfast kryssfiner 4. Komprimerte finmasser(0-20mm) 5. Innfestning svingbar glassdør 6. 48mmx198mm tverrgående bjelke 7. Bærelag (0-32mm) 8. Forsterkningslag (22-63mm) 9. Svingbar glassdør

process

process We began the semester with a substantial research phase, where we gather relevant information for the task at hand, including technologies, reference projects, material data, design principles and what a car exhibition actually is and has been, and a site analysis.

and main design strategies. We used a conceptual system we called the IBOP, standing for Infrastructure/urban context, Building placement, Outdoor/landscape and Program/function. Sketch models, and programmatic modules in both 2D and 3D were important parts of this phase.

Then followed the initial concept phase, where we explored a wide variety of different approached

This then led to the initial design phase, were we approached the design and energy-principles

in a more direct and interdependent way. Being a five-person group, we found it wise to split up occasionally, to speed up the process and provide a broader basis for taking decisions. There have been several parallel focus fields that have inflicted unique design parameters on the project. The challenge has been to combine these in the best possible way, where they enrich each other and exist in synergy.

Process

PHASE 1

PHASE 2

PHASE 3

PHASE 4

LIBRARY DISCUSSION

PROGRAM ANALYSIS CONSTRUCTION PRINS. CONCEPT

DESIGN CONSTRUCTION

DETAILING VISUALIZATION PRESENTATION

IBOP

INFRASTRUCTURE

adaption to urban context

BUILDING PLACEMENT on site

OUTDOOR AREAS landscape

PROGRAM/FACADES interior and function

DESIGN

Process

Facing highway

Facing both roads

Open structure

• • • •

• • •

• • • •

•

All function under one roof.

Sales and service divided.

Arriving site from north-west.

Main facade facing the highway to the north.

Driving past entrance before parking.

•

All functions under one roof.

Focus on facades.

Division between public and non-public outdoor areas.

Arriving site from north.

All functions under one roof.

Focus on green areas Arriving site from north.

Semi sharad space for parking and green areas.

Divided space

Shared space

Tight structure

• • •

• •

• •

Sales and service clearly divided Building devides site Arriving site from north

•

All function under one roof.

Shared space for parking and green areas Arriving site from north west

• • •

All functions under one roof.

Clear division between sales and service areas.

Arriving site from north.

Outdoor “showroom” alongside arrival route.

Division between public and non-public outdoor areas.

Process

Stage 1: Conclusions -

Devide workshop and sales.

Functions devided by arrival space.

Arrival to parking pasing by entrance.

Green area between parking and building Clear devision between parking for BMW/Bilia, visitors and service.

Service entry not facing entrance area.

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

CONSTRUCTION PRINSIPLES

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process 1:500

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

KONSTRUKSJONSPRINSIPP

TAK OG FASADEKONSEPT MOT ATRIUM

Process

./$5*-Â¥z5,1* $16$77,11*$1*

8767,//,1*1<%,/[[ %,/(5

5(6(36-218767,//,1*

29(5/(9(5,1*

6(59,&(

DELELAGER

9$1163(,/

3$9,/-21*1<%,/ 9$5(/(9(5,1* DEKKLAGER

9$6.(+$//(5

8767,//,1*/$1'6.$3 %,/(5

8767,//,1*%58.7%,/ %,/(5

9$6.(+$//

3$5.(5,1*6(59,&( 3/$66(5

5(6(36-216(59,&(

3$5.(5,1*.81'(5 3/$66(5

3$5.(5,1*6(59,&(.81'(5 3/$66(5

INNKJÃ&#x2DC;RING

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Concept v1 Modellbilde/skisse av konseptet med innvendig rampe fra forrige delgjennomgang

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Process