Rumoer 71: Integration | Bout | TU Delft

periodical for the Building Technologist

71. Integration

Boijmans Van Beuningen Rotterdam

Flow Amsterdam Stations Elizabeth Line London

Façades Infrastructure Interiors Trade Fair Conference Box Düsseldorf

www.sorba.nl

RUMOER 71 - INTEGRATION 3rd Quarter 2019 25th year of publication Praktijkvereniging BouT Room 02.West.090 Faculty of Architecture, TU Delft Julianalaan 134 2628 BL Delft The Netherlands tel: +31 (0)15 278 1292 fax: +31 (0)15 278 4178 www.praktijkverenigingbout.nl rumoer@praktijkverenigingbout.nl instagram: @bout_tud Printing www.druktanheck.nl ISSN number 1567-7699

Credits Edited by: Prateek Wahi Article editing: Erron Estrado

Javier Montemayor

Prateek Wahi

Tania Cortés Vargas

Valeria Piccioni

Yarai Zenteno

RUMOER is the official periodical of Praktijkvereniging BouT, student and practice association for Building Technology (AE+T), at the Faculty of Architecture, TU Delft (Delft University of Technology).

This magazine is spread among members and relations.

Circulation: The RUMOER appears 3 times a year, with more than 150 printed copies and digital copies made available to members through online distribution.

Membership Amounts per academic year (subject to change): € 10,- Students € 30,- PhD Students and alumni € 30,- Academic Staff Single copies: Available at Bouw Shop (BK) for : € 5,- Students €10,- Academic Staff , PhD Students and alumni

Sponsors Praktijkvereniging BouT is looking for sponsors. Sponsors make activities possible such as study trips, symposia, case studies, advertisements on Rumoer, lectures and much more.

For more info contact BouT: info@praktijkverenigingbout.nl If you are interested in BouT’s sponsor packages, send an e-mail to: finances@praktijkverenigingBouT.nl Disclaimer The editors do not take any responsibility for the photos and texts that are displayed in the magazine. Images may not be used in other media without permission of the original owner. The editors reserve the right to shorten or refuse publication without prior notification.

Interested to join?

The Rumoer Committee is open to all students. Are you a creative student that wants to learn first about the latest achievements of TU Delft and Building Technology industry?

Come join us at our weekly meeting or email us @ rumoer@praktijkverenigingbout.nl

71 | Integration

CONTENT General 05

Design and Engineer connections, no seperate islands ! -Thijs Asselbergs

06

Bout Board XXV-Aditya Parulkar

56

Events overview

Articles 08 Integration of Human Aspect in Design FSB-Berthold Dieker 18

12 Multi-functional Facade Module Maria Mourtzouchou 18

School of Design & Environment, NUS Serie + Multiply Architects

26

Boys Hostel, St. Andrews Institute of Technology and Management Zero energy Design Lab

32

Computation Design Workflow for Energy and Cost effective Buildings- Alvaro Garcia

38

Solarlux Comfort Facade - Marcel Billow

Interview

26

4

44

Design Process and Integration Nathalie de Vries

50

Debut Event- Rutger Janseen

Editorial

EDITORIAL Dear reader, With great joy and enthusiasm, I would like to present the first Rumoer issue elaborated under my lead. I took over this role of editor-in-chief from Valeria Piccioni under whom I learned the importance of Rumoer as not just a regular student magazine, but instead, it is a window between academics and practice in the Building Technology field. I want to take this opportunity to thank her for the contribution and efforts of making this magazine a success and wish her best of luck for her future endeavours.

I would also like to thank my committee members Erron Estrado, Javier Montemayor, Tania CortĂŠs Vargas and Yarai Zenteno whose constant feedback and participation made this issue possible.

This issue is our 71st publication and the last publication for the academic year 2018-2019.

For this issue, we aimed at understanding the connection between building technology and its application in architecture. Architecture deals in the intangible human aspects while the tangible field of engineering supports it. However, it is only successful with the INTEGRATION among these tangible and intangible characteristics. Therefore, this issue of Rumoer digs deeper into the element

Rumoer committee 2018-2019

of the integration of architecture, design and technology.

The issue includes articles on various architectural projects and the approach taken to integrate the aspects of architecture, user, climate, and so on.

The issue also includes interviews from academics and practitioners to understand various aspects of integration.

With this issue, I also welcome the new Bout Board and the vision it brings for the upcoming year.

For the same, we are looking for new committee members for the new academic session and are excited to welcome new students.

I hope you enjoy reading it!!!

Prateek wahi Editor-in-chief | Rumoer 2019-2020

5

BouT

Design & engineer connections No separate islands!

Column by Thijs Asselbergs, Architect and Professor of Architectural Engineering at TU Delft

We live in a time of major issues. Issues that concern energy transition, use of materials, scaling down or, on the contrary, scaling up, as well as densification of the city and metropolis and dilution of the countryside. With the help of the internet we share unlimited knowledge and ideas. We design in an international world.

Architects, engineers, clients, investors, municipalities, and government all look for quality solutions for a better living environment. The modern architect thereby acts as a generalist of new ideas and is no longer doing this alone. The twentieth century in which he was the dominant master builder is really over. Ever more complex issues require an integrated approach and not short-term solutions. The total life cycle of built structures requires that the complex, sustainable and culturally well-embedded indoor and outdoor spaces are optimally, efficiently and coherently designed.

Authorship is shared with several.

A few years ago in my own practice, we realized the widening of the river Waal near Nijmegen in the east of the Netherlands with a large team of landscape architects, architects and engineers from all kinds of disciplines and in close cooperation with contractors, the municipality and central government. Flooding has always threatened this oldest city in the Netherlands.

A sustainable and especially safe solution was sought that also had to provide the existing polder, the dikes, the bridges and the river with better use value. Despite the fact that people were forced to leave their homes and a beautiful old polder was partly flooded, an integral plan was realized for miles that worked well spatially

and programmatically. Architecture and engineering enriched the built environment. The enormous differences in height of the water have become the starting point for the total design and engineering process for new bridges, quays, dikes, agricultural land and buildings. This “Space for the Waal� project has since received many international prizes. Designers, builders and users are proud of this sustainable result.

It addresses the need for designers, engineers, government and citizens to work together. This process must be optimally organized and respected, resulting in an integrally designed product. The team is always looking for new solutions. This synergistic process means that the sum is more than the individual parts.

Architecture and engineering in the built environment connects all scales. For example, at the Architecture in the Built Environment faculty at TU Delft, we have to ask ourselves whether our departments work together sufficiently and do not operate too much as a system of separate islands. Do we strengthen each other when we want to realize architecture at all levels, engineering, technology and management integrally and with value?

Islands can develop strongly, but connection with open borders is indispensable. How disastrous will Brexit be for the progress and improvement of the quality of the built environment for England? Integration is a necessity just because segregation has never led to coherent architectural quality. Innovative architecture that attaches itself well to the environment requires teamwork with the input of optimal international connections. That is where the increase in value for our future lies.

7

71 | Integration

BouT Board XXV A new board is installed !!!

by Aditya Parulekar, BouT XXV Chairman

Swing by our office and have a chat with us!

As per April 26th 2019, BouT inaugurated a new board for the Building Technology association. Board 25 was introduced to the BouT community by Dr. Bucky Lab aka Marcel Bilow on a sunny Friday evening. A video of BouT 2017/2018 in review was playing in the background, while the students made a toast to the upcoming Lustrum year.

About 50 BouT and non-BouT members attended the evening, at Professor Schermerhornstraat after which the whole gang moved the party to Delft city center.

BouT is a collection of passionate designers and engineers who want to learn, design and build. What makes BouT so special is that it is a group of people from all around the world, who seamlessly integrate with each other in studio and outside. For several years now, the BouT board and committees consist of a mix of Dutch and non-Dutch as well as male and female members.

This shows the international and diverse orientation of BouT and the willingness of people from various walks of life to contribute to the Building Technology community.

Since it’s inception, 25 years ago, the BouT community has multiplied tenfold and we are excited to keep growing as a specialized discipline in the Faculty of Architecture & the Built Environment.

All seven of the board members of the new 25th board of BouT, joined a committee in October 2018 because we wanted to contribute to all that was being organized for BT students. After doing this for over half a year, we saw the dedication and passion that the 24th BouT board was

8

putting into their work and we were inspired to follow their example. The Symposium on Robotics in Architecture, the Venice trip and the interesting RuMoer magazines are just some of the highlights that got us hooked and we want to continue this legacy in our upcoming year.

What can be said so far is that board 25 consists of enthusiastic, hardworking and fun people with many good ideas. Every meeting is a bombardment of new ideas that we think should be implemented to improve further upon various aspects. To give some structure to this enthusiasm, we have planned a vision trip in a few weeks.

The goal of the trip is to bond as a board and to brainstorm about our year plan for the upcoming year. All the ideas will be documented, and we will also think about how we are going to directly implement them.

Among other things, we want to take the first steps in growing the relations of BouT internationally to reflect the demographic of the BT community; we are looking into connecting companies and students at a new type of event specifically for graduation internships; we want to organize more social events to help the community bond; and finally we are planning a special Lustrum party for the 25 years Lustrum of BouT. After the vision weekend we will publish our concept year plan and ask for any suggestions from the Building Technology students. In this way, the community can have direct impact on the upcoming year of BouT and as the board we will integrate the various ideas into a fantastic Lustrum year.

BouT From left to right: Prateek Wahi – RuMoer , Yarai Zenteno – Events, Divyae Mittal – Secretary and Media, Aditya Parulekar – Chair, Kees Leemeijer – Education, Tom Elands – Finances and Company Relations, Tarang Gupta – Study Trips

9

71 | Integration

Integration of Human Aspect in Design

by Berthold Dieker - Franz Schneider Brakel (FSB)

The abbreviation FSB is synonymous throughout the world for aesthetically and functionally high-quality door and window handles - and much more.

Foundation – History and Mission of FSB FSB originated in Iserlohn, where Franz Schneider founded the company in 1881. In 1909, the company's headquarters were relocated to the East Westphalian town of Brakel. FS proudly added the B for Brakel to his signet and the FSB brand was born.

The rise to an architectural brand begins in the 1950s.

After the closure of the Bauhaus and the turmoil of the war, design and architecture were experiencing a sustained revival. Ray and Charles Eames inspired with their functional furniture designs, Arne Jacobsen designed classics such as the stackable “Series 7” chair.

Dieter Rams design works at Braun are today the blueprint for products from the company with the apple logo. The decade from 1953 to 1963 was a defining moment for FSB: Johannes Potente created his trailblazing and still valid hand-molded design. Posthumously, his anonymous industrial design also received its due appreciation: it was included, among others, in the permanent design collection of the Museum of Modern Art in New York.

In the 1980s, under the intellectual leadership of the designer Otl Aicher (1922 – 91), the very own activities were questioned substantially. Otl Aicher moved as a young man in the immediate vicinity of the “Weisse

10

Rose”, a resistance movement to the siblings Scholl against the Nazi regime in Germany. After World War II, in 1953, together with his wife Inge Aicher-Scholl, he founded the College of Design in Ulm, which in the years of its existence (1953 - 1969) was to decisively influence German and international design up to the present day. Otl Aicher became famous with his work for companies such as ERCO Lichttechnik and Lufthansa, as well as for the visual appearance of the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich.

The result of the collaboration with Otl Aicher was a fundamentally new design culture at FSB that was essentially based on the cultural history of grasping in general and the history of handles in particular.

Figure 1. Iconic FSB 1020 design by Johannes Potente

As an inspiration for the FSB logo, Otl Aicher used a door handle designed by the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein for his sister’s house in Vienna. “Only when used the rod becomes a lever”, Wittgenstein described his simple and elemental design. For Aicher, this grip was a kind of ideal grip, not so much as an optimal hand shape, but rather as the sum of all the handles, the absolute quintessence.

In 1986, FSB invited luminaries such as Mario Botta, Peter Eisenman, Hans Hollein, Alessandro Mendini, Shoji Hayashi, Arata Isozaki and Dieter Rams to a design workshop in Brakel. What was long considered to be a low-interest product suddenly became one of the first “author design” projects and thus a serious design task.

Figure 2-3. “Four Point Guide to Good Grip” and “FSB hand” by Otl Aicher

Concept – Integration of the Human Aspect in the Design Process In the aftermath, many architects from all over the world knocked on FSB, not only to learn more about the good grip, but to lend a hand and to design their own grip program. Not all designs could be realized, but the portfolio of FSB today includes designs by internationally renowned architects and designers such as Jasper Morrison, Hans Kollhoff, Christoph Ingenhoven, David Chipperfield, John Pawson, Ortner & Ortner Baukunst, Santiago Calatrava, Dominique Perrault, Graft, Studio Werner Aisslinger and many more.

Company

This analytical examination produced, among other things, the “Four Point Guide to Good Grip”, which from then on should serve as a guideline for the assessment of good design: thumbrest, forefinger furrow, support for the palm and gripping bulk. The process of questioning was accompanied by a 16-volume book edition, which today is available to the standard repertoire of many scientific libraries - and now also in the library of the TU Delft!

Usually, the actual design process is preceded by a large number of technical clarification talks. First of all, basic requirements are explained that will make the new design compatible with the many standard FSB products, such as substructures of roses and plates for the window and door handles. It is also important to meet the highly complex requirements of legal and normative regulations for door and window handles, especially in the core market of FSB, namely Germany.

The cost-effectiveness of a design is also analyzed very carefully in advance to keep the costs for the necessary production tools as low as possible. Important here is the basic shape, (L or U form) and the symmetry or asymmetry of the handle. To avoid threading a jacket sleeve into the door handle, L-shaped handles are not permitted for emergency exit doors in Germany and closed U-shapes are required. In order to avoid additional costly production tools for L and U shaped grips, it is therefore advisable to design the initial design as a U form. Symmetrical shapes also require a saving in production tools. Taking these aspects into consideration, very efficient designs can be realized with two production tools, while inefficient designs require up to eight tools.

11

71 | Integration

Figure 4-5-6. Joseph Paul Kleihues’ sketches of the bespoke handle design for the Kant Triangle High-rise block

When all these questions have been clarified, the designer can start his work. In further discussions with the employees from the technical department at FSB, the design is further substantiated on the basis of drawings, 3d plastic models and prototypes. Once the final form has been found for the new handle, internal investigations and test series as well as the construction of the tools will follow at FSB. This process from the first interview to the finished latch takes about 6 - 12 months. In some cases, the handles are made only for the projects of the design architect and are not offered as catalog goods. With a marketable design and with the consent of the architect, the inclusion of the grip program in the catalog and thus a series production can start. Depending on the design of the handle and the intended use, four different base materials are available - aluminum, stainless steel, bronze and brass. Since the production of an aluminum handle is comparatively

12

simple in terms of technology, it is usually started with this material and, if required, additional materials are added.

Application As a good example of the design process described above, Joseph Paul Kleihues’ project for the Kant Triangle Highrise Block can serve. The eleven-storey commercial block sited next to an urban railway line in Berlin stands on a triangular plot on Kantstrasse that also gave the building its name. The tower building, which was designed by architect Josef Paul Kleihues and completed in 1995, is notable for a large moving sail on its roof. It demarcates and structures an urban space abutting a Wilhelminian block and acquires the character of a campanile both on account of its classical configuration of plinth, shaft and crown and through the use of larger-than-life pictorial elements. Whereas the architect uses silver bolt-heads to decoratively

Elegant door levers embellish the doors to the commercial block like small sculptures. It immediately becomes evident that Kleihues designed them in 1992 specifically for the Kant Triangle. Their geometrical layout of circles and segments is echoed in enlarged form by the actual building. At the same time, the sequence of curves that go to make up the handle and backplate are a mirrorimage of the high-profile weathervane sail on the roof of the tower block, which in turn embodies the bulbous triangle defining the building’s ground plan. As well as delivering variations on the overall architectural form, however, the stylish door levers, backplates and locking bolt also, when operated, highlight the turning motion of the handle. The product collection also embraced a door knob, window handle, bathroom rose and door stop. This program was available in aluminium and went in serial production for some years. It was also used for several other projects, mainly designed by Joseph Paul Kleihues.

Company

enhance the fixings for the stone slabs in the five-storey plinth area, he piles the building elements above up like containers, structures the stairwells with the aid of portholes and “lashes” everything down with steel bands. The weathervane on top, lovingly referred to by Berliners as the “Shark’s Fin”, points into the distance whilst also greeting passing rail passengers.

Figure 7. The Kant Triangle High-rise block designed by J. P. Kleihues

Dipl.-Ing. Berthold Dieker graduated in 1996 in Architecture at Dortmund University of Applied Sciences. Between 1996 and 2007 he worked as project leading architect in different architecture offices in Germany. After that he started working as architectural consultant for FSB. From 2017 he is Architectural Consultant International at FSB. Source Disclosures: Bettina Rudhoff, Graspable Structures Getting a Handle on Architecture, 2nd Edition, Brakel 2018

13

71 | Integration

Multi-functional Facade Module for different climate conditions Graduation Thesis by Maria Mourtzouchou

My graduation project was focused on Façade and Climate Design in collaboration with “Rollecate”, which is a facade construction company in the Netherlands with worldwide projects. It started with the existing research project “Future Adaptive Facades and Components” with the question from “Rollecate” about the direction the facade industry is heading to.

Figure 1. Example of facade composition constructed with a possible combination of Multi-functional Facade Modules.

14

Graduate Figure 2. Module types delivering different functions.

Research framework The building sector is responsible for more than one third of resource consumption globally. Concerning the new construction, new regulations have been set, which impose that by 2020 all new buildings constructed within the EU should reach nearly zero-energy levels. Traditional buildings were built by means of passive systems lacking flexibility. Current high energy consumption in buildings is attributable to non-optimal architectural choices, low performance of the building envelope, low efficiency of HVAC and lighting systems, as well as a still low utilization of renewable energy sources The building envelope plays a strategic role in the energy and environmental performance of the building, significantly affecting the levels of indoor comfort.

The increasing necessity of sustainability in built environments is leading to the need of the adaptive façade adoption. The façade is no longer a mere static element offering just a shelter for users. In reality, the factors that affect a building, its envelope and its ability to serve as an effective system of climate control are multi-dimensional. The future building skin is required to respond dynamically, being able to react to noncontinuous, ever-changing climatic conditions, occupant comfort and energy efficiency requirements. As architect

Jean Nouvel has said: “Constructing generic buildings, to be placed anywhere, not specific to urban areas, is doing things with no value”. It is apparent that building facades need to be transformed to fulfill adapted roles of high performance integration and façade elements need to be designed to provide the necessary flexibility needed in terms of energy flow and thermal comfort.

Companies like “Rollecate” have grasped this change and are interested in creating new products, which reflect the current trend of adaptivity. “Rollecate” wanted to know what the future of adaptive facades is and how this is translated into a new product or a modification of an existing one that could be developed soon and be relevant for the building sector in the next five years and on.

The journey of seeking an answer to this question started with researching adaptive materials, products and buildings with the aim of putting forward the characteristics of these systems and gain knowledge on them. This was achieved by creating a classification approach based on existing ones with the final goal of defining the future trends of adaptive facade design according to the evaluation of the state-of-the-art existing adaptive buildings and mainly to the development

15

71 | Integration

understanding of technology status and addresses the entire innovation chain. Thus, the emerging adaptive facade concepts were defined and put on a timeline estimating which would be applied in the near future and which were further away from actual applications.

The choice of the system, which was developed for this research project, was based on the future trends defined by these classifications and on the conclusions drawn by grouping the case studies according to specific parameters. In addition, it was considered important to conduct research on the market design process, the principles of product development and the facade types evolution and how integrated systems work to provide thermal comfort.

of novel adaptive technologies as presented by research currently conducted.

The Design The aim of my research project was the development of a Multi-functional Façade Module (MFM) (Figure 1) that consists of several functionalized layers that could be separately assembled depending on the architectural design of the building and the corresponding climate. This innovative adaptive facade system consists of different units, being multi-functional as a whole, an aspect which is achieved by making a selection of modules to be used according to each project and its context. Moreover, the proposed design is modular, which gives the possibility to be altered easily throughout its lifecycle, thus being also adaptive to future technological innovations. The modular elements are able to be assembled and placed with different geometric configurations, different types of materials and different colors in order to guarantee customization.

This first research part was conducted in collaboration with Shirin Masoudi, who started her thesis with the same research project but focused on the lighting aspect rather than the thermal comfort. The research projects were evaluated according to the Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs), which is a development in “Horizon 2020� (EU Research and Innovation Programme). This is a measurement system that provides a common

The Facade System comprises three main types of modules: transparent, semi-transparent and opaque (Figure 2). These three types were chosen, in order to provide the necessary architectural design freedom because all the case studies presented consist only of opaque and transparent ones. Transparent modules should maximize thermal insulation, light transmission and protection from summer solar radiation. Therefore,

Figure 3. Elevation and Section of simulated facade example.

16

Graduate

the functions that they offer are solar protection (integrated blinds) and smart glazing (electrochromic glazing). Semi-transparent modules should provide the advantage of combining daylight with energy efficiency.

Therefore, they contribute to the energy production (BIPVs) and provide insulation (translucent PCM).

Opaque modules should maximize inertia and thermal insulation characteristics. In addition, they are a good option to incorporate energy production, since it has a higher efficiency than in semi-transparent modules.

Therefore, energy production (BIPV/T), insulation (PCM) and green facade (Living Wall) are incorporated in this type of modules.

The MFM facade system was tested for an office building in Amsterdam, Netherlands (Figure 3) with the main objective of providing thermal comfort to the occupants, whilst minimizing the energy consumption. A reference project with the same dimensions was simulated, allowing for the Multi-functional Facade System to be compared with a typical construction. The results obtained by the simulations were beneficial and showed a much better energy performance compared to that of the reference project with the typical office construction.

MFMs show more controlled solar gains, thus leading to lower needs for heating and cooling, and offer additionally the benefit of energy production.

Figure 4. Visualisations of an office interior with different module combinations and arrangements.

Nowadays, most offices’ facades are a typical, usually fully-glazed curtain wall, a quite standardized solution which leads to the creation of similar buildings although constructed in different countries with different climates.

The proposed Multi-functional Facade Module (MFM) offers an adaptive solution for this standardized practice lowering the energy consumption, improving the indoor environment and offering more aesthetic variety. A few of the different module combinations tested can be seen in Figure 4, which also demonstrates the different architectural possibilities that can be achieved.

17

71 | Integration

Figure 5. Visualisation of different facade options.

Conclusions In the framework of a decade-long research activity on Advanced Integrated Façades (AIF), MFMs show a considerable potential for building envelopes, being one of the most promising Responsive Building Elements (RBE) in terms of energy reduction potential. In addition, the results of this research project prove that MFMs are performing well, offering considerable energy savings. They are a promising facade concept for future applications, offering not only an adaptive but also a sustainable solution to the construction of office buildings.

Nevertheless, there is still space for future improvement, as well as further research and development. As overall conclusion about the near future of adaptive facades after the completion of this research project, it was deduced

18

that it does not lie on the integration of smart, innovative materials but on traditional ones with the difference that layering and combinations matter.

The adaptability and thus the higher energy efficiency depend a lot on the sequence of layers chosen for a facade but also on the combination of different elements with different layering. Consequently, “Rollecate� is not needed to change the way facade systems are constructed but it should consider collaborating with other stakeholders with knowledge on material science and building physics, in order to achieve synchronisation of these functions and offer systems with long-term cost savings for the client.

Graduate Figure 6. Visualisation of different facade options.

Maria Mourtzouchou Bachelor– Architecture MSc – Building Technology / Architectural Engineering Originally from Greece, currently based in London and working as a Facade Engineer for Mott MacDonald. She is a licensed Architect both in Greece and in the UK. She graduated in July 2018 with Cum Laude from Building Technology. Prior to that, Maria obtained a MSc in Architectural Engineering in Greece and worked for a year as an Architect. She is keen on combining the principles of architectural design with the technical knowledge, which involves applying design skills, architectural detailing and energy efficiency techniques with the aspiration of creating sustainable buildings integrated into the built environment. design and construction.

19

71 | Integration 20

Figure 1. The new SDE4 at the National University of Singapore

Projects

The new School of Design & Environment 4 at NUS a prototype of sustainable design

by Serie + Multiply Architects with Surbana Jurong

SDE4, an inventive educational architecture developed by the School of Design and Environment at the National University of Singapore. SDE4 is the first new-built net-zero energy building in Singapore that combines a stringent net-zero target and a revalidated grammar of tropical architecture.

At its best, faculty buildings that house schools of architecture and design—apart from serving functional needs of its occupants—strive to demonstrate and represent the pedagogical ambitions of the school itself. This is evident in the Bauhaus Building in Dessau that adopted the logic of industrial production; the open studio trays for cross-disciplinary collaboration in Harvard GSD; or the bar and front members rooms as a social condenser in the AA’s Georgian Terrace school.

From the outset, it was clear that SDE intended to use the design and the completed building as a pedagogical tool for tackling the challenges of climate change in the tropics. Here, the focus was on creating a NET Zero energy building—that is to say, the building generates as much if not more energy that it consumes within its building footprint. The second ambition was to use the building as a living laboratory for learning and testing various technologies and architectural responses to the harsh tropical climate.

Located on a hillock along Clementi Road near the southern coastline of Singapore, SDE4 is a new addition to the Design & Environment precinct and it is part of a larger campus redevelopment. The climate-responsive building includes more than 1,500 square metres of design studio space, a 500-square-metre open plaza; a wide variety of public and social spaces; workshops and research centers; a new cafe and a library. The building’s flexible design and high efficiency reflect the School’s ambitions of promoting new forms of teaching spaces as a scaffold for research. Most of the rooms are designed in a variety of sizes to allow a flexible rearrangement of layout for exhibitions, school-specific installations and future change of use.

Lam Khee Poh, Dean of the School of Design and Environment, explained: “Buildings are not isolated entities in their own context. They form an environment, a precinct, or a neighborhood supporting community activities, which is crucial for all educational institutions.

21

71 | Integration

Awarded to Serie + Multiply Architects with Surbana Jurong through an international design competition launched in 2013, the building was envisioned as a porous architecture structured in a juxtaposition of ‘platforms and boxes’ expressing its programmatic content. Christopher Lee, Principal of Serie Architects, described that “One of our ambitions when we started the project was to challenge the notion that a high energy efficient building has to be very opaque. Therefore you see that the completed building is incredibly open. This is where I think it was successful: it is able to reduce its energy demand, but at the same time it doesn’t end up being a very solid building. SDE4’s large platforms are configured in a way that promotes interaction and visual

Figure 2: Longitudinal Section

22

connectivity. We envisioned a very transparent volume in which the outside and the inside spaces are ambiguous; where nature and landscape play an important part, as a backdrop to the building.”

The design carries the principles of vernacular tropical architecture in Southeast Asia. More than 50% of the total area is naturally ventilated and most of the rooms can be opened to prevailing breezes. Air-conditioning is

”

Our students and faculty get the opportunity to learn both inside and outside the classroom, being engaged in an integrated process of designing, developing, constructing, and operating state-of-the-art buildings that will, in turn, influence them to adapt their own behavior when they occupy it.”

“The resulting architecture is transparent, open, and comfortable, while at the same time requiring very little energy. As a whole the design is a revalidation of the grammar of tropical architecture that fuses new technologies and thinking about energy efficiency in the tropics. ”

Projects Figure 3. The permeable facade enclosing the buffer zones

used only when needed while the spaces interspersed between cooled volumes benefits from cross ventilation, acting as thermal buffers/social spaces, emulating the signature tropical verandas.

The architecture is punctuated by an alternation of terraces, landscaped balconies and informal spaces.

There are no formal boundaries between places to study, work and socialize.

An open social plaza together with a circulation system that cuts across the different studios and classrooms is intended to generate chance encounters and foster social

interaction. As study and work become increasingly collaborative and thus social in nature, these spaces compliment the four key learning spaces in the school.

The first of these is the large and continuous open studio space designed to foster collaboration and instil curiosity in the work of others. The second is more contemplative in nature, designed as a series of smaller rooms surrounded by landscape to be used by researchers and masters level students. A central presentation space is highly visible from various approaches to the building and the design studios. It drops down to peer into the social plaza making design dialog a central activity of

23

71 | Integration

learning. The fourth learning space located behind the east and west curtain walls is intended for prototyping and model making.

The interstitial space between the inner and outer skins on the east and west facade is, for instance, designated for research. In these areas, elements of the façade can be dismantled and replaced with new systems depending on the School’s research needs. Therefore, the building serves as a canvas for test-bedding and developing relevant green building technology, becoming, in effect, a living laboratory. Circulation corridors and straight flight staircases link and penetrate these volumetric platforms, allowing spaces to bleed from one learning and research space to another, thereby broadcasting a

Figure 4. The staircase penetrating the platforms

24

Figure 5. The south gardens

Projects Figure 6. One of the collaborative open studios

collaborative nature of design. The large over-sailing roof protrudes along the south elevation embedding a tropical portico, built around mature existing trees.

This openness allows spaces to flow freely across the envelope of the building, bringing the surrounding landscape into close proximity with interior spaces and vice versa. The east and west facades are designed as a veil, an aluminum curtain that filters sunlight and emphasizes a connection to the surroundings.

The south gardens are integral to the pedagogical experience of the building. Designed as a natural

purification system, the landscape improves water quality while encouraging lifestyle activities and teaching around water. Runoff from the roof and hard scape is cleansed by passing through soil, which removes sediments and soluble nutrients. Nearly 50% of the plants selected are native species and most are from the southern tropics, a choice that also provides opportunities for environmental education.

The building has a strong biophilic component in the deliberate use and celebration of the raw and natural characteristics of the materials for steel, perforated metal and concrete. As a result the finished concrete surfaces are unique; some columns resemble marble,

25

71 | Integration

and all possess a tactile quality that enhances the materiality of the architecture.

systemic good—by making the discussion of design fundamentally public.

The building is designed to be climate responsive with net-zero energy consumption featuring a range of sustainable design features and more than 1200 solar photovoltaic panels on its rooftop. SDE4 exceeds standards of health and wellbeing creating new avenues for delivering comfort in the tropics, embracing an innovative hybrid cooling system, designed by Transsolar KlimaEngineering, that supplies rooms with 100% fresh pre-cooled air, albeit at higher temperatures and humidity levels than in a conventional system, and augments this with an elevated air speed by ceiling fans. This cool circulating air creates a comfortable condition in a high energy-efficient system. Therefore, the architecture becomes an agent of systemic enhancement—not just to do less harm, but to do

Giovanni Cossu, Senior Manager at the School of Design and Environment, explained: “The main story of SDE4 is how we progress to net zero through design. During this process, the building has demystified the general perception of spatial quality, comfort, and cost for sustainable buildings. SDE4 changes the argument that green buildings cost more, as it has limited or no extra cost compared to similar, industry-standard models.

Preliminary results of subjective surveys completed by occupants show high levels of user acceptance of the environmental conditions offered by the building.

In doing this, SDE4 speaks to multiple audiences: occupants and users, policy makers and developers.

And this generates a level of significance that cannot be ignored.”

6 4

3

7 5

26

2

1

Figure 7: L2 Plan 1. Green Building Technologies Lab 2. Assembly Workshop & Soft Modelling 3-4. GIS Lab 5. Urban Greenery Lab 6. Admin Office 7. Information Resource Centre

Projects Figure 6. The tropical portico under the over-sailing roof

Serie + Multiply Architects Serie Architects, led by Christopher Lee, is an international architectural practice specialising in architecture, urban design and research, with a portfolio that includes projects in the UK, Singapore, India, China, and the Middle East. Serie has gained a reputation for designing distinctive buildings in the public realm, with a special focus on cultural, civic and educational building, winning a number of high-profile design competitions. In 2013 Serie Architects began to work in close collaboration with Singapore-based architectural practice Multiply Architects and together they have been awarded several prestigious commissions. Multiply Architects LLP began its practice in 2007 and is led by its founding partner, Yap Mong Lin, and assisted by partner, Alvin Foo.

27

71 | Integration 28

Figure 1. West Facade for the New Boys Hostel

Gurugram, India

Projects

Boys Hostel Block

by Sachin Rastogi and Payal Seth Rastogi

We believe in designing remarkable architecture that can simultaneously enhance human experience and minimize resource use. To us, sustainability is not separate from design, but an indispensable component that enhances the experience of the built environment.

The boys’ hostel is designed for St. Andrews Institute of Technology and Management, Gurugram, India.

It was proposed as a linear built mass in the existing master plan of the campus, which posed challenges to create socially active and environmentally sustainable spaces. It houses 360 students with recreational courts and dinning facilities. The dorms are provided with triple height terrace which takes away from the feeling of a conventional dorm, giving them an opportunity to come out and savour the outdoors.

Terraces and activities are layered at multiple levels to boost intercommunication amongst the students.

The contorting central atrium allows natural light to penetrate deeper in the building and also acts as a solar chimney that takes away the stale and hot air within the building through stack effect. The building is also cost effective, built at a rate of Rs. 1400/sqft (18 â‚Ź/sqft) without compromising on construction quality.

The key factor in the design process was to enhance student interaction within the indoor spaces that percolates outward and interacts with the landscape around it.

29

71 | Integration

The linear block was twisted to create, a shaded entrance (summer court) and an open terrace (winter court) on south and north facades respectively to encourage activities at all times diurnally and seasonally. The ramp acts as a transition space between the harsh outdoor and cooler indoors thus protecting students from getting thermal shock. The shaded ramp coupled with the cafeteria and a stationary shop creates a comfortable space which is enough to sustain long conversations amongst the students. In addition, the terrace upstairs enables one to enjoy the weather during summer evening and winter afternoons. The terrace overlooks the playing field and establishes a visual dialogue with the overall context of the campus greens and other buildings.

Design Strategy Climate sensitivity has been an important parameter in our process, which followed analysis of solar radiation and air movement to develop a second skin on the façade that allows for thermal insulation and light permeability at all time. A brick jali, circumscribing the building adds a unique character and texture to its façade. The rotation angles of each brick were stimulated using software (Ecotect, Grasshopper) to minimize solar radiations and direct heat gain on the façade. The brick skin also accommodates balconies(4’ wide) which act as a buffer zone between indoor and outdoor spaces designed to remain at mean temperatures between the inside and outside throughout the year.

Legend:

Figure 2. Ground Floor Plan

Figure 3. First Floor Plan

30

1.

Landscape Ramp

2.

Foyer

3.

Reception

4.

Cafeteria

5.

Kitchen

6.

Gym

7.

Rooms

8.

Medical room

9.

Laundry

10.

Toilets

11.

Terrace

12.

Dormitory

13.

Gaming Room

14.

Outside Seating

15.

Atrium

Projects Figure 4. Climate strategies

Figure 5. Main entrance and landscape ramp.

31

71 | Integration

Figure 7. Parametric Radiation Analysis : Direct radiations on the primary facade were analysed. The balconies and brick jali were integrated as a buffer space between the building and the external environment to provide shade.

Figure 8. Daylight Analysis : Daylight levels in the living units were constantly checked to ensure that the jaali does not reduce it beyond accepted standards.

Figure 6. Triple height terraces

32

Figure 9. Different brick stacking patterns

Construction Methodology 21 feet high, 1” thick steel bars were fixed on the R.C.C beams using Hilti chemicals. Bricks were specially manufactured with single holes so that they could be stacked one on top of each other by inserting a single piece steel bar through the single whole. Based on the grasshopper script the brick were individually rotated on a specific angle, to reduce solar radiation, to provide adequate daylight and ventilation to the living units behind the skin.

No cement mortar was used to construct the jail spanning 21 feet in height and 250 feet in length.

Facade Design Strategy Using Rhino, Grasshopper and Ladybug, a parametric script was written to analyse the level of direct and diffused radiation on the primary façade. The radiation value of each grid cell on the primary façade then became the input for the rotation angles of the brick in front of it. By doing this, direct and diffused radiations were reduced by 70% on the principle façade. Hence, reducing the heat gain on the principle habitable spaces behind the jali wall. Day lighting levels in the living units were also constantly checked to ensure that the jali does not reduce it beyond 250 lux.

Projects

The jali also creates a unique character of light and shadow that renders a separate and a truly different imagery for each of the rooms used by the students. All local materials used for this project and were procured within the radius of 500 km from the site.

Sachin Rastogi B.Arch- School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi Msc – Architectural Association, London LEED AP ZED Lab design studio is determined to create exceptional, comfortable indoor and outdoor spaces with a positive environmental impact. It was founded in 2009. Our diverse educational backgrounds, with ten years of combined international experience in U.K and New Zealand, helped in reinterpreting the Indian vernacular architecture and developing ideas which are more relevant to the present time & techniques.

Payal Seth Rastogi Dip. – Architectural Design MSc – Interior Design We are vision facilitators, idea generators, and design integrators. The team is not just experts in basic physical principles; their creativity enables the necessary collaboration necessary to develop deeply integrated comfort and energy concepts. Our vision is ever growing with simulation models, custom software, tailored engineering analysis and physical experiments used to develop and validate these ideas.

33

71 | Integration

Computational Design Workflow for Energy and Cost Effective Buildings Graduation Thesis by Alvaro Rodríguez García

“Architecture is the will of an epoch translated into space” - Ludwig Mies van der Rohe One of the cutting-edge interests gaining relevance among design offices, notably in the sphere of Architecture firms, is computational design. With its inception embedded in the 60s and later reformed through the CAD revolution that boomed in the 80s, the use of the computer as a design tool has evolved to such lengths that it became indispensable to contemporary practices. Nowadays, under the bright prospect of a challenging future and considering the sustainability hypothesis - sophisticated computational approaches and parametric design can genuinely be considered a most promising alternative for exceeding

outcomes in the fields of performance and efficiency.

The research focused on investigating the evolution of the aforementioned tools, through understanding the current user experience and interface in prevalent architectural offices. Consequently, through the use of existing computational tools - simulations, optimization and design exploration techniques – The aim of this Graduation Project was to put forward a new method and use pattern that would also project the potential and the future of these technologies specifically applied to a sustainable, energy-efficient and cost-effective vantage.

Figure 1. Design options generated through computational design.

34

In the first part of the research, the current issues of the common architectural practice were outlined, stressing out the lack of design exploration techniques and optimization strategies. By reviewing a large amount of literature and conducting interviews to knowing not only about the scientific approach but also about the actual practice and the current overall educational approach in architecture schools, it can be said that there is a general absence of the application of computational technologies inside the design practice in comparison with other industries, such as the automotive or aerospace. This is especially true when talking about the first phases of the design which, have the most important influence on the total overall cost and energy use of the building.

Several novel techniques such as parametric design, computational design, generative design and design optioneering together with optimization strategies represent a good solution. However, these strategies are commonly implemented in the last stages of the designs, and usually not by architects leading to the exploration of several design options without knowing the effect of specific design decisions.

Proposed Workflow After reviewing and analyzing all the gathered information from the background and literature research, the objective was to determine a methodology which could support the early decision making during the design process. Taking into account the fact that it is during this initial stage of the process when the decisions that have the main influence in terms of energy and costs during the entire life span of the building are taken. In this way, the proposed method is based on a simulation-based multiobjective and multi-disciplinary optimization to improve energy efficiency and costs. In this scope, the proposed workflow considers several new implementations to the current traditional optimization design procedure, enabling the designer to sort and filter designs based on

Graduate

Computational Design and Current Design Issues Designing buildings at these days is a very complicated task. As architects, we have the great responsibility to design constructions that are capable of dealing with the environmental issues that nowadays aggrieve society’s quality of life, and it is by saving energy and reducing the CO2 emissions that this can be accomplished. For this, passive measures such as modifications in the building shape, saving materials, defining the right building orientation and fenestration strategies together with efficient active systems for indoor comfort are combined holistically. However, applying these strategies to the project results in an even more complicated assignment when talking about economic trade-off decisions.

Unfortunately for this, the majority of designers and clients do not have a technical background to know about energy and environmental aspects, and most of the times they develop several design options and shape variations being completely unaware of the impact that a particular design could have, especially when talking about energy efficiency and cost effectiveness.

Figure 2. General overview of the proposed workflow and its implementations

35

71 | Integration

performance metrics while at the same time evaluating the aesthetics of the diverse solutions. However, this not only limits to the designer or namely the architect’s exploration, but also to the possible clients, stakeholders or specialists by giving the possibility to filter the information according to the individual interests of the people involved. After some paperwork and an extensive sketching process based on a “trial and error” strategy in combination with a deep and extensive exploration of the available computational tools, a general workflow was established and later on tested on a real case study consisting on a Sports Hall.

The overall workflow consists of a PerformanceBased Design Method, with the objective of linking the information generated by previously BPS (Building Performance Simulation) tools with a design exploration platform.

Figure 3. Sequential strategy general diagram

Figure 4. Integrated strategy general diagram

36

v10

v3

v1

v4

v2

v17 v11

v9

v8 v5

v7 v12

v18

v16

v6

v13

v14

v15

Figure 5. Overview of design variables for integrated strategy parametric model (shape, structure, climate and systems variations)

Starting by selecting the optimization objectives (saving energy / reduce costs) to later on choosing the design variables (shape / size / orientation / WW Ratios / material properties) the workflow proposes the flexibility to choose among two possible approaches, the first one is called “Sequential strategy” which consists of a linear strategy that gathers information from the different phases of the design and the diverse disciplines involved, considering them individually regarding the design as a system composed by different “subsystems”, organized on a hierarchical order (figure 3).

The second design process is called “Integrated strategy”, which consists of a combined multidisciplinary design optimization technique. In this approach, all the stages will be merged and evaluated at the same time using a multi-objective and multi-disciplinary approach.

It provides the designer with an overall view of the entire design space and the relation among the different disciplines involved.

Other important features of the proposed workflow (figure 4) is from one side, an optimal selection of tools based on a deep study and comparisons with the commercial availability, the possibility to get user support, the reliability, a user friendly interface, and

High construction costs

Low construction costs

Low energy costs

Figure 6. Design variables, optimization results and design exploration of integrated strategy

the interoperability among the diverse applications.

These were considered in order to overcome to the current problems that come with the normal optimization procedures.

From another side, the strategy to develop a database that involves costs is proposed. This consists of two main aspects: research about local and typical materials applied to this kind of buildings with different energy and costs performances and an investigation about its costs in addition to local energy fees.

Case Study and Parametric Modelling The proposed case study was an indoor Sports hall located in the south of Mexico City. This building typology was selected because of the complexity that involves in terms of energy and costs, especially when talking about trading off costs with energy savings.

In this way, the requirements, models, properties and costs analysis were fitted to prove the intended design workflow. To test the proposed workflow and the optimization process, several parametric models were developed as defined by the selection of the design variables previously stated. In this way, a general geometric parametric model, a structural model, and a climate and systems parametric model were built in combination with a costs database filled with similar sports buildings and materials benchmark costs.

Results Sequential strategy For the sequential strategy, four stages were proposed: shape, structure, climate and systems. Each one of them was explored individually selecting accordingly the optimal option for each phase, following this process through the following different design stages.

At the end of this strategy, once all the stages were held, a final integrated design was achieved by looking for optimal well-balanced decisions in terms of energy performance in combination with costs effectiveness coupling personal and design choices along with the selection of the different design alternatives.

Graduate

High energy costs

Integrated strategy For the design selection of the integrated design strategy, the filters where set with the intention of looking for a balanced option which could be energy efficient by the combination of the right passive measures (orientation, daylight) with the adequate active ones (AC and artificial lighting systems) to achieve a low energy use while searching for an option which also represented a good alternative as a financial case. Structural efficiency and an aesthetic and visual factor were also considered.

Results Comparison and Analysis Both strategies have their own features and disadvantages : the first one guides the designer in a more educational way by narrowing the design space as the process goes further which gives the possibility to think in a more detailed/focused way.

Figure 7. Final overview of the design choices across the different design stages of the sequential strategy

37

71 | Integration

Besides, splitting the process into phases gives the chance to choose among the diverse time lapses of the simulation/optimization processes, avoiding unnecessary waiting times. Another benefit of applying this strategy is that more parameters regarding a specific discipline can be added since when applying this methodology and using the proposed tools, there are some time and computer power limitations.

The main disadvantage is that without having a larger vision about what happens with the other building aspects when modifying or altering a parameter sometimes decisions are taken unconsciously. So it is important to consider in each of the different stages a design space big enough to explore all the different possibilities. When talking about the second strategy, it is considerably more difficult to set it up at the beginning because everything should be included and connected, however from a designer point of view it is more useful to see “the larger picture” when taking design decisions. With this approach, it is more feasible to make conclusions and evaluate the overall performance of the building in a holistic manner.

STAGE

NUMBER OF PARAMETERS 10 Parameters

STAGE

• The definition of the problem (Setting up the parametric model and the possible design variables) • The complexity and long times for the simulation and optimization procedures In this thesis, it was analyzed the fact of using the computer not only as a tool but as a design supporter when taking decisions by having the possibility of getting real-time feedback about the performance of several design alternatives.

NUMBER OF DESIGN SPACE DOMINATED/ COMPUTATIONAL TIME GENERATIONS NONDOMINATED 7 Generations 100 Population

313-576

13 Parameters

50 Generations 100 Population

3200 from 118125000

10 Parameters

7 Generations 100 Population

980 from 277544800

3 Parameters

1 Generations 100 Population

24-24

NUMBER OF PARAMETERS

NUMBER OF GENERATIONS

DESIGN SPACE

18 Parameters

10 Generations 100 Population

245 Dom 72 Non-dom 60 Dom 140 Non-dom 64 Dom 60 Non-dom

106 Dom 23 Non-dom

1.5 Hours

2.5 Hours

1.5 Days

5 Hours

DOMINATED / COMPUTATIONAL NON DOMINATED TIME

1200 1 Dom from 88 Non-dom 97820835840000

3 Days

Figure 8. Comparison among the Sequential strategy and the Integrated strategy

38

Conclusions Building design is a process of searching the best solutions based on a long list of several factors at the same time. Architects and designers need to consider diverse optimization objectives to get a balance between them. For this, multi-objective and multidisciplinary optimization together with design exploration techniques represent a good solution. However, these processes have several difficulties such as the complexity regarding certain computational knowledge mainly during two parts of the process:

Figure 9. Workflow validation by different kinds of potential users.

Nevertheless, personal design intentions should also be involved in the design process and for this last aspect,

there is a still need to be done from a technological and educational point of view.

However, with the further development of artificial Intelligence and machine-learning techniques, those barriers will certainly be tackled in the near future.

Graduate

During this process, it could be clearly observed that it is also fundamental to involve the aesthetical factor (nonquantitative) inside an optimization-performance based workflow since an “optimal” solution is not necessarily the one that performs better in terms of non-numerical assessment. As it could be seen during the case study application, from one side the performance quantitative aspects such as UDLI , WWR ratio and the application of active systems play a determinative factor on the design of this kind of venues.

As a final reflection, architects and designers should be more involved in the use of new technologies; the technology already exists, we only need to improve the way we use it and apply it. It is by mixing intuition and logic in combination with having the right information at the right time that the best decisions can be made.

DANIEL LAREDO ARCHITECT THIS SHAPE FITS THE STRUCTURE I CHOSE.

I WAS LOOKING FOR A STRUCTURE WITH THE LOWEST AMOUNT POSSIBLE OF SUPPORTS.

THE BUILDING WILL BE MOSTLY USED ON DAY TIME, SO IT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF SOLAR ENERGY AND SUN LIGHT.

LOW COST .

THIS SYSTEM COMBINES FUNCTION, ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND THE LOCATION OF THE BUILDING.

Alvaro Rodríguez García ISRAEL HERNÁNDEZ ARCHITECT

Bachelor– Architectural Design SHAPE WITH AVERAGE VOLUME

AVERAGE COST OF STRUCTURE WITH THE FIRST SHAPE.

LOWER COST OF ENERGY FOR ORIENTATION

ONLY NEED LIGHTING SYSTEM, AND COOLLING SYSTEM.

MSc – Building Technology

THE MOST SIMILAR BETWEEN SHAPE AND STRUCTURE WITH A AVERAGE ENERGY COST.

JAYANTI JUÁREZ ARCHITECT I WAS LOOKING A TALL PEAK

I WAS LOOKING FOR FEW FRAMES AND DIVISION OF THE BEAMS

I PREFER AN OPTION WITH LITTLE USE OF ENERGY

I DON´T UNDERSTAND IF THE SYSTEMS ARE NATURAL, IF THEY´RE NOT I PREFER I TRIED TO COMBINE ALL THE ASPECTS BEFORE WRITTEN USE COOLING SYSTEM THAN HEATING AND LIGHTING SYSTEM

Born in Mexico City in 1987. He graduated with honors from The

MONSERRAT MARTÍNEZ ARCHITECT

BY FORM H

EIGHT AND NUMBER OF FRAMES

ORIENTATION AND LOWER USE OF ENERGY

LOW USE OF COOLING AND LIGHTING

COMBINES ALL THE ASPECTS

National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) in 2011 after studying abroad at Politecnico di Milano. He graduated Cum Laude from the MSc. Building Technology in June 2018 with a

SELENE GUERRA ARCHITECTURE STUDENT IRREGULAR FORM

LOW COST

LOW ENERGY CONSUMPTION

LOW ENERGY COST

LOW ENERGY CONSUMPTION

thesis focused on computational design and how optimization can help architects to design more efficient and sustainable buildings.

SEBASTIÁN NAVARRO ARCHITECT

BY FORM

LOW COST

ORIENTATION AND LOW COST

ONLY USE OF COOLING AND LIGHTING

I CHOSE FOR THE LIGHTING, STRUCTURE, SHAPE AND HEIGHT.

Alvaro is now the Director of an architecture firm based in Mexico City called Pabellón de Arquitectura, focused on design and

HÉCTOR FUENTES ARCHITECT

construction.

BY FORM

STRUCTURE ACCORDING TO FORM

LOWER ENERGY USE

LOW COST

LOW COST

Figure 10. Table showing the design options selected by users

39

71 | Integration 40

Figure 1. Solarlux campus , Nijverdal, Netherlands Š Solarlux

Projects

Rethinking the double-skin façade of the future

by Marcel Bilow

The Co2mfort Façade was conceived with the idea of a passive building with active users. Essentially, the concept of a building acting like a sailboat, where the natural resources are the real fuel.

We were commissioned to develop a climate concept for the new subsidiary of Solarlux in the Netherlands with the goal of achieving a close interplay of the building, the façade, and the building services components. The Co2mfort Façade posed a challenge and a different way of approaching the design, a design that had up and front the user experience. Me and my office of Imagine Envelope were the façade consultants, working alongside the client/owner and producer of the façade itself, Solarlux.

In our case, we were already involved very early in the design process. The idea of creating a sailboat was presented, as opposed to a motor boat. In principle, everyone can drive a motor boat. You just have to learn how to read a map and then will arrive to your destination, but at the end of the trip you always have to pay for the fuel. On the other side you can also learn how to sail. It’s not that easy but if you know how to, you can use nature in your favour. Sometimes it means you have to wait a day or two, if there’s no wind. However, using properly nature and its forces to your advantage, you’ll get somewhere.

Figure 2. Facade concept © Solarlux

When presenting the idea, the client was really enthusiastic with the sailboat concept. That was defined from the very beginning.

41

71 | Integration

Figure 3. Facade concept © Imagine Envelope

We then started to develop the façade concept and its aim. In this case the company was the owner, the user, and the investor. Not only that, it was also the main producer of the façade itself. At Solarlux, they build sliding doors, balustrades, and various components related to façade, which made the project a wonderful opportunity to experiment. They wanted their building to be their showcase, representing what they do best.

So, it was not just about showing the different systems and products but also showing the possibilities offered with sliding and open-folding doors, and the maximum performance they can actually have.

Having everything at our disposal, we had the idea of the CO2mfort Façade. It consists of two layers: the inner space is closed by the thermally insulated SL65 folding glass door with a wooden frame while the transparent SL 25 XXL slide-and-turn system forms an uninsulated glass layer on the outer side. Using these two layers we were able to create the optimal settings between a

42

double closed cavity façade, a single layer façade hybrid ventilation and an outer layer that works as a buffer.

Within the different seasons you are either able to use for benefits of a double façade or get rid of the glass in the second layer during the midterm seasons. The versatility the concept offered stuck directly.

As the concept developed, the technical air handling installations initially proposed seemed unnecessary, shifting towards a manually controlled ventilated building. To have more certainty about the natural ventilation concept and making sure it would work, the client included Transsolar, a climate consultant. They made sure through simulations that the ventilation was enough, assuring a functional façade. They also helped with the mechanical devices and the concrete core activation strategy. Additionally, a heat pump was used both in summer and winter to help with the temperature regulation. It also incorporates PV panels in the atrium, which at the end produce enough energy to render it almost self-autonomous.

Projects Outside temperature 0° C I Outer and inner façade closed I Intermittent ventilation I Optimal heat insulation I Use of solar energy gains

Outside temperature 10° C I Outer façade closed I Inner façade opened I Use of solar energy gains I Working in a wintergarden

Outside temperature 20° C I Outer façade opened I Inner façade opened I Working on a balcony I Enjoy nature

Outside temperature 30° C I Outer façade opened I Inner façade closed I Intermittent ventilation I Overheating prevented

Figure 4. Different facade strategies depending upon the comfort requirements © Solarlux

As part of the user experience, we had to explain the clients and employees how to use the façade and its different configurations. We arrived two days later after the moving-in, and we came to the surprise that everyone in the building was unhappy. We then found out they hadn’t set the façade into the proper mode (it was in winter mode, in a sunny summer day) which in turn heated the building tremendously. But we changed the configuration and the change was almost immediate.

It was within two weeks that the team get acquainted with the façade system and they really embraced it.

Actually, they even used the cross-ventilation principle, which had to be adapted to the office conditions, using lowered trolley-desks to prevent the paperwork from flying away. They even have a system to communicate

and let the people know which window should be opened to let the air in, in a regulated manner. A monitoring system stating the average energy use, the temperature and humidity, also helped the building to become truly adaptable.

Now, if you ask me, this design would be highly unlikely to be applied in a larger scale. The CO2mfort Façade succeeds because all the variables aligned: the client was also the user and producer of the façade. It was also a low-rise building which connected spaces that made cross ventilation possible. However, in a larger building with different users, the same dynamic would not work as the connection is lost between the spaces, and the training on how to use the façade would have to be too extensive to be realistic.

43

are able to actively influence the room climate and temperature using the façade. With this project, the focus is put back on the individual: an active user in a passive building.

For us, we knew our contribution was done when the climate simulations fitted the requirements and the conditions we wanted to achieve. It also has to do with the budget: for the façade we spent 40% more of the destined budget but at the same time we saved 80% on the installation costs. The staff are the sailors who

“The building sets new sustainable development standards; in terms of ecology, economy, as well as from the human point of view. ”

Figure 5. Indoor comfort strategies © Solarlux

44

”

71 | Integration

Besides, if motorized systems were to be included, the complexity of the project would not only increase, but regulations would almost cancel the versatility of the system as any accident by misuse resides in the designer and not in the user.

Projects Figure 6. Opening day of the building Š Solarlux

Marcel Bilow formed part of Imagine Group, a network of builders, structural planners and climate designers, working on conceptual and experimental solutions for structural and climate-related challenges. He studied architecture in Detmold at the University of Applied sciences in Detmold Germany and finished with honours in 2004. Since 2006 he joined the Façade Research Group at the TU Delft. Marcel is known as a collector of skills, author of several books and head of the Bucky Lab in which he teaches students to develop and build full scale prototypes. He was also awarded as teacher of the year 2014-2015 in the Faculty of Architecture at the TU Delft.

45

71 | Integration

Interview with Nathalie de Vries

Design Process and Integration

by Erron Estrado and Tania Cortés Vargas

Nathalie de Vries is a co-founder and principal architect and urban designer of MVRDV. De Vries is renowned for a diverse body of work in a variety of scales and typologies that are grounded in

connecting

individuals,

communities

and

environments. She also engages as Professor of Architectural Design at Delft University of Technology and is the former Chairman of the Royal Institute of Dutch Architects (BNA).

What prompted you and your partners to start MVRDV? What were you looking to achieve?

At the time [my partners and I] all had jobs at other offices after graduating in 1990. After one or two years things started to itch a little bit. You’re working for someone else so you’re working basically with the ideas of the office and we had the urge to also do something with our own ideas. So we decided to collaborate on the Europan competition. Teams for Europan are sometimes friends, sometimes almost accidental. But in our case, we were three people who knew each other and thought we could contribute to the future of housing through this competition and give our statements. That didn’t start

46

Between now and the time that you started how has architecture changed in terms of integrating different disciplines?

At the time when we started to design it was all about energy saving. It was about preventing loss of energy and to build in a different way that was almost seen a bit as a niche of people who are really into nature. Although at the time we also realized that there were more holistic ways to look at the building process and for us apart from all these energy saving issues, which were usually even embedded by law, we were very much interested in land use. This is because we noticed that there was a densification going on not only in the Netherlands but worldwide.

So, we figured out we would soon lose buildable area and also, with ever denser areas, quality of life. So, we did a lot of work on researching how we could make double use of land; Activate every possible façade also the fifth elevation of our buildings in order to make liveable environments, liveable cities. For us that was a very important thing. Our very first designs already make use of elevations, we studied densities, how to densify as much as possible making use of all the available roofs and to develop new development typologies for that. Our very first buildings were porter lodges; tiny buildings. But the reason why we started our office was the VPRO office building which had a green roof and usable elevations and very neutral floor plans that were very flexible.

Interview

MVRDV officially yet, but we were very lucky to have won the competition. But then actually other people started to think that we were an office though officially we still had our jobs. So, it was luck and accident that started the office and us looking for a way to work on our own ideas as architects.

Can you give an example of a project at MVRDV where you had to work in an integrated way such as coordinating with a lot of different disciplines?

We made one project in 2000 that was quite emblematic.

This was the Dutch pavilion for the EXPO Hanover where we had windmills on roof and water retainment and

Figure 1. Villa VRPO © Rob ‘t Hart

47

71 | Integration

Figure 2. Dutch Pavilion at EXPO Hanover 2000 © Joop van Reeken

then it would seep out at the bottom in dunes where the water would be cleaned again, water would fall from the sides of the facades and give water to plants, trees, etc.

But you also know of course that it was only an image of that cycle. I think more and more in recent years we tried to take up as much as possible of these elements and really integrate them into the building.

So while our very first designs were more about classic integration, nowadays we really try to figure out if our buildings can be more productive. That’s different, going

48

from passive to more productive solutions. For instance, we try to make as much as possible use of materials in a circular way in that we either reuse materials or make parts of the building demountable.

We had this green in the Dutch pavilion which for us was a sign that we can make green on different levels of the building. It doesn’t always have to be on the floor since there’s not much space anymore. Later we started to think about CO2 reduction and how many trees and plants should you put on the facades and on the rooftops

So, like I said, that’s this productivity. It’s much more active actually the way we deal with sustainability nowadays. And we never stopped thinking about the density issues. We still try to make high rises with optimized shapes to maximize the floor area. We like hybrid buildings a lot. What I also try to apply, for example, is to really start a discussion with the clients about the floor to ceiling height because when they’re

minimized for one function, or the depth of the floor is very particular, it makes it more difficult to reuse or transform the building when the first function is maybe not needed anymore. So there we are much more actively starting the conversation.

Interview

of buildings to help with that problem. So more and more we have buildings where we put in greenery on the balconies and on the roofs. We have to design systems whereby the green is really integrated into the facade design for example. So, there’s Ravel Plaza [The Valley] which is a big building we’re going to make in Amsterdam on the south axis that has mixed use program inside.

There will be a lot of green all over the building. Also, the housing project in Arnhem at the Hoge Veluwe National Park [Buitenplaats Koningsweg].

Is this knowledge within your firm or do you work with outside consultants as well?

Well you have to keep on educating yourself so indeed we have a lot of outside consultants but nowadays we also have in-house consultants. We have people who are LEED and BREAM assessors. We now had for the second year the MVRDV Planet Week in which everybody in the office tries to engage each other in sharing information offering workshops, courses, and lectures inside the office to motivate everybody because actually it only works if everybody does it and if at every step in the design process you at least think about it.

Figure 3. Buitenplaats Koningsweg © MVRDV

49

71 | Integration

living room

bedroom living room

Views Views

Views

Privacy Privacy Figure

Privacy

Daylight

Green

Green 4. The Valley housingDaylight principles diagrams © MVRDV

But we’re still living in a time where economization of building is at the forefront. So there’s a lot to do also in mentality change on the client side. In general, there’s been an awareness of what’s going on. But it’s another thing if it influences costs and investments. So sometimes, not always, it’s just a different way of doing things. So, in the projects in Arnhem, for example, we noticed that the client says let’s see where this can go. But then we noticed that for some products there were no guarantees yet and in order for people to buy the house or get a mortgage they want us to use certain certified materials. But how do you certify a second-hand building material? But even the certification office said, well this is new, it is interesting, we realize we have to think about it. You have to ask the question. I think the more people ask these questions the more things can improve.

From your experience as chairman of the BNA how important do you think it is to have integration in the built environment especially since the regulations are changing toward circularity or sustainability?

At the BNA we are totally aware of this. It is also one of the main focuses of the organization in the sense that in the last years a lot of events have been organized with lectures, workshops, and trainings. Last year we launched the circular manifesto and we actively encourage our members to sign that manifesto which doesn’t say we are circular architects but that we want to be circular. It gives the most basic rules for how you can become circular.

50

A10

bedroom

Daylight

Green

Sound+wind protection Sound+wind protection

Sound+wind protection

So our aim is to have as many as possible offices sign that manifesto because we want this discussion to start inside the offices but also between architects, clients, and builders. We have to make a change. No doubt about it.

As the chair of Public Building for the Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment how do you instil this idea of integration within education and how do you think it will benefit the students but also the future of architecture?

Public building focuses mostly around buildings that are funded with public money. I actually put in this extra layer of design thinking which is a more active approach of dealing with building for sustainability. I call it Multiplicity. From the way you build to being more productive with your building elements and materials and the whole building up to this multi-functionality or change of functionality.

It has to be more. We have introduced this notion of being aware that it is not enough to just make a design.

We are responsible for a large part of CO2 production with the way we build. Building differently can really make a difference in this whole discussion. So it doesn’t matter what you make, a public or commercial building or dwelling, you can make a change. You are now learning how to design. So if you start to do that in a proper way you can start in the right way right away.

Interview Figure 5. The Valley © Vero Visuals/MVRDV

51

52

71 | Integration

2019 Debut . Event

Interview

Interview with Debut Committee

The company case day

By Prateek Wahi

Debut is an annual event organised by Praktijkvereniging BouT. The event focuses on enabling communication between market leaders and students from the Building Technology field.

This year’s main event focused on emerging trends like Façade engineering, innovation in glass technology, building physics, fire safety, and so on.

Rumoer interviewed the current Debut Chair Rutger Janssen to dig deeper for more insight about the event. Here is an excerpt from the interview.

How would you introduce Debut to the people as an event to people who do not know about it?

The Debut event acts as a platform to develop an interest in the practicality of building technology field.

Since the Building Technology course does not include opportunities for doing an internship, Debut provides the first connection between students and these new and innovative companies. This platform is also especially for international students to understand what these companies do, and after your graduation, what the Netherlands has to offer. However, this event also plays a significant role in training the students about how to approach and introduce oneself to such companies as the first step into a career.

53

71 | Integration

Explore, Innovate, connect – How does the Debut Team make sure that students explore, innovate and connect with these companies?

Exploration: Thinking about something unknown. Debut is never the same as previous event. It is always fresh, even for the participants from last year. We try to get a variety of companies, different student work groups and of course, unique cases. So, we think in this way we are exploring the world over the various technologies.

Therefore, this exploration of “unknown” is deemed to happen.

Innovation: Our Building environment is changing continuously; there is always some new problems which are need to be solved. That’s the part of innovation, and we always try to search for specific companies in different fields. Like this year we had general engineering, facade engineering, building physics, glass engineering companies. They all have innovation themselves, which they will bring with the cases they introduce. We can only choose different varieties in companies and then again; innovation will come by itself.

Connection: The third and most important is connecting.

I think the connection within the Building Technology student group is essential and yeah!! I see it as a big group separated from the rest of the architecture faculty. We have some good friends, and I appreciated their participation during the event. That’s a meaningful connection, and the second connection is with the companies while you are talking or meeting them.

I think one of the most useful suggestion I gave yesterday to whomsoever I was talking in private was to go there and ask your interests. Ask them what they do ,How do you do it, Where their offices are, What projects are they working on? That’s important to connect and build your network. We as a Debut team can only provide opportunities and space to make connections, but like the other two, the connection part is also bound to happen.

54

Interview Therefore, I would say that this event is meant for students to explore the possibilities of the new companies present, innovate during the case solving exercises and finally connect by standing out. These three activities are the foundation of not just Debut, but I think for a great professional career also.

Well, that’s quite an explanation about Debut.

However, could you reflect upon how the committee works to give us a background idea of the hard work which is put in for such a great event?

Well, I think I will start from the day when Akash, a fellow student, came to me with a former Debut 2018 booklet and asked me about the event to which I said no. The second question he asked, “Do you know any of these companies”. Yeah, I know them all. I’m a Dutch guy, so I know them all by name and some in private. Therefore,

he asked me if I was interested in organising 2019’s Debut event. So, I was like yeah perhaps we can talk about it. We went to the office with the old board. It was five of us, and we didn’t know anything about DEBUT or how to organise it. After some explanation and a lot of confusion, we divided our tasks. Due to my contacts with different companies I became the chair, Tom Elands became finances, Tarang Gupta was handling media, Maximilian Mandat managed all the logistic, and Akash Changlani was looking into student affairs.

We started with a blank slate but,with consistent efforts, it grew bigger. However, it was an arduous effort. We had to plan everything from the morning coffee until all the company contracts. From the registration process until the flowers to thank companies for participation. After all, I think we did well, and we are proud of the Debut 2019th edition.

55

71 | Integration

What changes did you make compared to last years Debut event?

The significant change came when we looked at the schedule of last year, and we asked ourselves “Do I want to join this event ?” Therefore, the first significant change was the pre-event. Last year, Enginear had this event during the lunch, but lunchtime is a precious moment to network and reflect on what you did so far during the day. Also, it is a critical moment to recharge the human batteries. So we spoke with Enginear, and together we came up with the idea to organise a preevent, four weeks before the main event. It contained a workshop for students to prepare themselves and have their CV checked. We also arranged a photographer to make professional photos.

The second change was about the schedule. We felt the company’s general presentation could be a bit boring, so instead, we changed it to the meet and greet rounds.

Where the students visited multiple companies and were encouraged to gather as much knowledge as possible: It’s about connecting and exploring.

56

Well, I believe Debut was a successful event, and it did help participants to connect with companies and explore further possibilities. However, what would you suggest for the next year’s participants or Debut event in general?

For the next debut event what I would suggest is to have someone from the old board as a constant advisor to explain how to go about planning this event. I believe we as a committee worked a lot, but if we would have known a few things earlier we could have improved few more

Tom Elands Finances

Rutger Janssen Debut Chair

things, such as communication towards the students to attract participants.

For the students, I would say that this event is meant for you. It is like a significant opportunity for them to showcase their talent and these platforms are much more than grading, so utilise it to full potential. The other would be to come with a clean slate. You might be with a company, group or a case you do not like but these things happen in professional life as well. So, show your strength and perform in any situation by improvising it for your benefit. So, that would be my suggestions for next year. I am sure that Debut can act as the start of your career!

Interview

The third significant change was I think the Bouwpub dinner and drinks. If I don’t exaggerate, Bouwpub is a holy place for us students. So, it’s essential to involve everyone and even companies. The most important thing is that all employees of the companies were once students and at the Bouwpub, that was the form of equality that we were looking for. All the companies who worked there were students ones as we are now and at the Bouwpub we are at the same level. It’s not Oh!! that’s the director or the head of engineering. It’s just that guy who works for a company, and I’m a student, and I say hi, and he says hi, and we have a conversation.

Participating Companies: 1. ABT B.V. 2. Inbo 3. De Groot en Visser B.V. 4. Neiman B.V. 5. Scheldebouw B.V. 6. Hilti Nederland B.V. 7. Sorba Projects B.V. 8. Interior Glassolutions B.V. Saint-Gobain,

Akash Changlani Student Affairs

Tarang Gupta Media

Maximilian Mandat Logistics

57

71 | Integration

Events

Past & Upcoming

09.05.2019 Bouwen met Staal workshop: Bouwen met Staal prepared a workshop on solving facade construction details

05.06.2019 Debut: BT students in collaboration with companies solved study cases and presented their work in this event.

13.06.2019 Delft Company Visit day: BT students visited Cepezed, 3M, ABT and Octatube. The companies presented their projects and proposed collaboration opportunities to BT students 09.05.2019 Lunch Lecture by Octatube: the company presented their projects and gave a small tour around their factory for the BT students

06.09.2018 BT Summer Grills: BouT and second year students will welcome the new BT students

20.05.2019 Lunch Lecture by Deerns: the company presented their projects and proposed collaboration opportunities to BT students 58

REALIZING CHALLENGING ARCHITECTURE Check out our latest projects and jobopportunities at www.octatube.nl!

BOUT CONNECTS! Diamond Sponsor:

Gold Sponsors:

Silver Sponsors:

Bronze Sponsors: