ECBC Complaint Building, Microsoft India Development

Centre, Hyderabad

General Information:
Client: Microsoft India Development Centre
City: Hyderabad
Climate: Hot & Dry
Operational schedule 10 hours, 5 working days in a week
Area of the building: 55,741m (out of which 45,057 m - conditioned area, 10,683 m - nonconditioned area)

Green Building Design Features:

Building Design
Orientation

Building orientation NE-SW which helps to reduce

the solar
heat gains in this hot climate region

Window

Double glazing window with 25mm thick

glass
1200mm wide sun shading and internal
roller screens
The external window sun shading cuts off
the direct sunlight which causes glare, keeping out
the suns heat, block uncomfortable direct sun and
soften harsh daylight contrasts
The double glazed window glass, while
allowing light inside, does not allow heat and also
keeps office cool from inside during the day

Walls

All blocks - 400mm block with 25mm thick water repellant coating, 50mm thick air gap & 40mm thick
stone cladding

Roof

U-value: 0.232W/sqm degK

The insulation under the RCC prevents the heat of the sun reaching the inside of the building and
maintains the comfort level of the room by decreasing the AC load

Building Lighting

Day lighting

Glazed Atrium for the natural daylight (U-Value: 5.7 W/sq m deg K and SC of 0.53)
Abundance of daylight is available in the atrium which is completely day lighted zone and no
artificial lights are
required during the daytime in the atrium
Natural light is available in the circulation areas at the periphery of the building

Lighting system

Lighting system accounts for 5.71% of total load

Luminaires used: direct/ indirect lighting luminaires with electronic ballasts and lamps in
workstation areas, CFL with dimmable electronic ballast and lamps in conference areas, CFL recess
mounted down light luminaires with glass at bottom in cafeteria
The lighting scheme in the open office area is divided into general lighting and task lighting
LPD 8.15 W/m2
The LPD (8.15W/m2) is less than the max allowed LPD of ECBC (10.8W/m2) which is very good
According to Energy Star, CFLs provide the same amount of light as ordinary bulb using 75% less
energy
To save energy, the general lighting levels in the office area is reduced and to meet the desired
higher illuminance levels at task pane, task lights have been installed in all the workstations

Daylight controls

Occupancy sensors in the conference room and closed cabins

Dimmable ballast integrated luminaires in the conference room
Reduce energy by turning the lights on when someone enters and switches off when the room is
empty
The dimmable ballast integrated luminaires in the conference room give the flexibility of varying

the
illuminance levels as required

HVAC System Design

Central AC plant with 2372TR (four numbers of 460TR carrier water cooled centrifugal and two
numbers of 265.8TR carrier air cooled screw chillers)

COP of the water cooled chillers is 6.6 at ARI condition and that of the air cooled ones is 3.23,
which is better than ECBC recommended values of 6.3 and 3.05 respectively
Rated Sqmt/TR 19
Air cooling towers and closed circuit fluid coolers have either two speed motors, pony motors, or
variable speed drives controlling the fans

Energy performance of the building

Lighting Energy Performance of the Building

Annual Consumption (lighting) 1095925 KWh

Lighting Performance Index 20 KWh/Sqmt/annum

Space Conditioning Energy Performance of the Building

Annual Consumption (A/C) 5658371 KWh

HVAC Performance Index 126 KWh/Sqmt/annum

Annual energy consumption due to lighting & air conditioning (kWh):6754296

Overall Energy Performance Index due to lighting & air conditioning (kWh/m2): 150
Comparison of various parameters for ECBC compliant Hot & Dry case (Microsoft Building,
Hyderabad) with conventional case

The table below summarizes the calibrated existing ECBC model case, conventional case generated over
the existing building in hot & dry climate zone.

Solar passive Case (Existing Building)

features

Conventional Case (Building

features)

Building orientation : Longer facades of

the building facing East-West

Building orientation: Longer

facades of the building facing
East-West

Windows are shaded while roof is not

shaded

Windows, Walls and Roof are

not shaded

Insulation on roof with air gap for walls

U value for Wall -1.85 W/m2/K
U Value for Roof- 0.2322 W/m2/K

No insulation on wall and roof.

U value for Wall-1.98 W/m2K
U Value for Roof: 1.76 W/m2K

Window glazing : U value of glass -1.66

W/m2/K and Shading coefficient-0.28
WWR : 70%

Window glazing : U value of

glass -6.17 W/m2/K and
Shading
coefficient-0.61
WWR : 70%

Building
Lighting
Power
density

Lighting power density is 8.15 W/m2

Lighting power density 20

W/m2

Controls

Occupancy sensors

No controls or sensors

Water cooled Centrifugal chiller

460*4
kW/TR = 0.558
(COP = 6.6 at ARI conditions)

PTAC units having EER of 8.4

and Fan power as 0.000134
bhp/cfm

Parameters

Building
orientation

Building
Envelope

Building
Chiller

Energy
performance 150
Index

208

Energy Saving Potential

The conventional case defined above was selected to run different energy saving options and to finally
quantify the energy saving potential which can be realized in Hot & Dry climate by incorporating the low
design strategies, ECBC envelope, and the best case (incorporating both low energy strategies and ECBC
measures)
Impact of Low energy strategies

The conventional case was run by incorporating low energy solar passive design strategies on the
annual electricity consumption (kWh), electric load (kW) and cooling demand (TR) of the building.

Parameter comparison

Conventional case

Existing case (Low energy

strategies)

Electrical load

Base case

16.96% less than the

conventional case

Cooling Load

Base case

19.50% less than the

conventional case

EPI

Base case

8.41% less than the

conventional case

Impact of ECBC Envelope

The conventional case was run by incorporating ECBC envelope on the annual electricity consumption
(kWh), electric load (kW) and cooling demand (TR) of the building.

Parameter comparison

Conventional case

ECBC compliant case

34.78% less than the
conventional case

Electrical load

Base case

Cooling Load

Base case

24.06% less than the

conventional case

EPI

Base case

15.35% less than the

conventional case

Overall Impact of ECBC Envelope and low energy strategies

The conventional case was run by incorporating both the low energy solar passive design strategies and
ECBC envelope on the annual electricity consumption (kWh), electric load (kW) and cooling demand (TR)
of the building.

Parameter comparison

Conventional case

ECBC + Low Energy Case

41.46% less than the
conventional case

Electrical load

Base case

Cooling Load

Base case

33.13% less than the

conventional case

EPI

Base case

19.16% less than the

conventional case

Impact of ECBC, Low energy strategies, and ECBC+low energy strategies on conventional
case for Microsoft building, Hot and Dry climate

The above graph shows the variation in the Electrical load (kW), Coil load (TR) and EPI (energy
performance index) for all the cases.
The below table gives the comparison of the impact of ECBC, Low energy strategies, and ECBC + low
energy strategies on conventional case for Microsoft building for a composite climate.

Parameter
comparison
Electrical
load

Coil Load
EPI

Existing case Conventional Low energy

case
strategy
40% less than Base case
the
conventional
case

ECBC+Low
energy
strategy
17% less than 35% less than 41% less than
the
the
the
conventional conventional conventional
case
case
case

5% less than
the
conventional
case

19% less than

the
conventional
case

Base case

28% less than Base case

the

ECBC case

30% less than

the
conventional
case

34% less than

the
convention al
case

17% less than 38% less than 30% less than

the
the
the

conventional
case

conventional
case

conventional
vase

conventional
case