State-of-the-art in Facade Engineering

Andy Lee

Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Ltd.

Arup Facade Engineering

1
 Cable Net Glass Wall System

Advanced Facade Engineering and Technology 2006

State-of-the-art in Facade Engineering

Andy Lee

Blast Resistant Facade

Is Double Skin Facade the way forward?

Evolution……..

Why Double Skin Façades (DSF)? Common DSF types

Double Skin Facade is a generic name but

Common reasons EACH BUILDING IS DIFFERENT:-

• Architectural Trend – Clear glazing Orientation, Building Services System, Climate, Performance
• Utilize natural daylight expectation.
• Increase energy efficiency of buildings – Low energy building Which type to use?
• Occupants in comfortable environments, increase productivity
• Increase value of the building when it carries a Green label
In broad terms –
Passive Systems and Active Systems
Common key feature is sunshading devices
 Light Redirection Device
Passive System - Naturally Ventilated DSF Passive DSF Systems

Catwalk

Passive systems not ideal in HK - Active DSF Systems

Forced ventilation by mechanical means
• Take up GFA (may not be able
to obtain exemption)
• Pollution – frequent cleaning
• May not meet fire regulations
• More suited for cold climate
• Ventilation easily short circuited
by external wind
• Both layers subject to wind load
• Long payback period – over 20
years

What we aim to achieve: Concept Design considerations – Daylighting and Glare Control
• Allow daylight but control glare
• Create thermal comfort zone
around building perimeter
• Save energy and running cost

Through Glass Point

Fixing at Head

Sill Retention of Glass

Panels West Elevation Summer Sun
 Horizontal lux-level distribution at workplane without blind under overcast sky at 12.00pm noon on
21-June (Summer)
3000
Otherwise……
Daylight Zone
2500

L u x -le v e l (lu x )
2000

1500

No Blinds Blinds at 30°

1000

500

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
Distance from inner w indow (m )

If designed correctly:
•Enjoy natural daylight
•Save in electricity for lighting
•Save in cooling load against heat
Blinds at 0° Blinds at 70° generated by artificial lighting

Daylight and Glare Control Design considerations – Thermal Comfort

• Control amount of diffused daylight Outlet temperature =

33°C

• Artificial lights controlled by light sensors (via BMS)

• Centralised mechanical blind controlled by BMS
• Unified exterior appearance
• Saving of electricity for artificial lights (significant amount)

Inlet temperature
= 24°C

Utilising pre-conditioned air – no extra cost

Design ventilation rate – not too high, not too low

Cooling load reduction Ventilated
10am
600
Inner pane temp
500 Outer pane = 25°C
temp = 50°C
400
kWh/m2

300

200

100
PPD Level
0 DGU
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Outer pane Inner pane temp
Air flow rate [m3/s/w indow] temp = = 35°C
Design Flowrate
50°C

East South West North

 Thermal Comfort Design considerations – Energy Saving
P PD (July)

35
Double Glazing
Comparison for different glazing (summer time)
30
25
PPD Level Potential savings on: Low-e Double Glazing
Ventilated façade w/o blind
350
Ventilated facde w/ blind
PMV

20
15
10 •Cooling Energy 300
North
East
5
South

•Heating Energy
0
West
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Tim e 250

•Lighting Energy

W in d o w G a in s (W /m 2 )
A c tiv e Window Double Glaz ing w / blind (400W/m2)
200

Surface Temperature
35 150

30
25 100
Temp (oC)

20
15
50
10 Active Window
5 Double Glazing
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Tim e Solar load Time

Energy saving
Economic Analysis
Summer – Annual Cooling Energy Saving
Energy Cost Saving ($ per year)
(Winter – Annual Heating Energy Saving)
180 169
140 Cooling Saving
133 132
160 167 120
140
Ventilated 100 97 96
Cooling + Heating
120 Saving
facade
$ per m2

102
kWh/m2

80
100
70 69.2 60
80 60 60 Cooling + Heating
60 60 60
40 + Lighting Saving
40 25
36.2
20 20
0 Baseline: DGU 0

East South West North

Façade Façade Façade Façade East South West North
Façade Façade Façade Façade

So what about $$$ - more or less? On average – increase capital cost by 50% - 100% !
Payback (years) Typical 10-15 years in HK
• Increase in capital cost (material, fabrication, transportation, installation….)
¾Glass (and accessories) 40 38

¾Extrusions (bigger, heavier, more) 35 Cooling Saving

¾Mechanical blinds & control systems 30
¾Mechanical extraction (fans, ducting etc) 25
26 Cooling + Heating
Year

20 Saving
• Increase in maintenance cost 16
16
15 14
¾Cleaning 16 16 Cooling + Heating
10 10 10
¾Maintenance cost 7 7 + Lighting Saving
5
• Cost saving 0
¾Lower fuel bills (less running cost)
¾Smaller plant (cheaper), more rentable areas East South West North
Façade Façade Façade Façade
• Increase in building value
(Excluding maintenance cost & increase in building value)
(Assume current energy price, no way of telling future price)
Other considerations Conclusions
• Open plan office required to maximise benefits
• Partially blocked views, tenant may not want to be living behind blinds, it is • Active system is considered to be a viable DSF system in
only human to want to be in “control”, but the benefits can diminish soon as HK – reasonable payback period, appropriate performance
manual override is allowed
• The system needs to be designed holistically with the
• Maintenance could be problematic, the perimeter band next to glass have to building services and interior planning
be accessible
• Difficult to incorporate operable vents • We are living in a commercially driven world, developer will
look to maximise return of investment, hence DSF will not
• Additional weight on structure, more structural cost (albeit minor effects)
be an attractive option, especially when tenants are paying
• Developer may not be concerned about running cost (e.g. cooling and for energy cost
lighting energy) as tenants will pay
• “Green” facade is being promoted but consider the embodied energy
• Building professionals can promote Green facades but
¾Aluminium – 221 MJ/kg need the push from government (e.g. Germany) to make it
¾Steel – 45 MJ/kg a success
¾Concrete – 1 MJ/kg
¾Glass – 1 MJ/kg

Contact:
Andy Lee
Arup Facade Engineering
andy.lee@arup.com