Apollo

Apollo

Rebecca Bires | Scott Brown | Scott Eckert | Jordan Huey | Helen Leenhouts | Andrew Levy | Jeffrey Loeb | Patrick Vogel

Lighting/Electrical

Energy Producing MeasuresSolar Panels on

the Roof • REC 215 AE-US - 3’x5’• About 650 Panels fit on this

roof

• Summer: 325-520kW per day*

• Winter: 163-390kW per day**Depending on cloud cover

• 100% South Facing at a vertical angle of 10◦-20◦

Photovoltaic Glazing on Upper

Floors• Architecturally integrated for

seamless design• Amount of energy produced will

depend on area of PV Glazing

Lighting/Electrical | Mechanical | Structural | Construction

Apollo

Integration

Effects of Solar System

Mechanical

Structural

Construction• Added schedule time for installation• Limited roof access once installed

• Coordinate with cogeneration mechanical rooms on roof

• Glazing changes will effect solar heat gain

• Coordinate to ensure roof will be stable/strong enough


Apollo

ApolloLighting/Electrical


Translucent Partitions

Integration

Effects of Glass Partitions

Mechanical

Structural

Construction• Schedule decrease, easy installation• Quick drop off time

• Coordinate with building energy modeling to accurately measure heat gain/loss between rooms

• Weight of glass partitions should be considered


Apollo



Energy Saving Measures

113 W495 kW-hr/year

10 W44 kW-hr/year

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=kxAV7D1prwsVnM&tbnid=zwpBjF-joc5x6M:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://www.emptynest1.com/2011_05_22_archive.html&ei=oe44Utz7HOPD4AP4voCQDQ&psig=AFQjCNFBoKQI8DwLI04FldKT61L0mjMC7g&ust=1379549209622779



Energy Saving Measuresecova: Commercial Office Plug Load Savings and Assessment;

December 2011




85 Computers per floor39,865 Kw-hr saved$ 9,089 saved per floor$227,230 potential savings

113 W495 kW-hr/year

10 W44 kW-hr/year26 kW-hr/year

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=kxAV7D1prwsVnM&tbnid=zwpBjF-joc5x6M:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://www.emptynest1.com/2011_05_22_archive.html&ei=oe44Utz7HOPD4AP4voCQDQ&psig=AFQjCNFBoKQI8DwLI04FldKT61L0mjMC7g&ust=1379549209622779

Design to 75% Code Mandated LPD~ 0.65 watts/sf



Progressive energy controls systemLighting/Electrical | Mechanical | Structural | Construction



San Francisco New York

Mechanical

Cost of Maintenance and Operation

LOW

HIGH 5

100-500

50

30

Architecture (Site, Mass, Orientation)

Building Envelope (Façade, Roof)

MEP (Passive climate control, equipment)

Alternative Energy Sources (Fuel Cells, PV, Solar)

Lifecycle (Years)

Design Strategy


Apollo

Mechanical

Façade Analysis

Graph Run Run # Description

Cooling (SF/Ton)

Cooling (BTU/hr*SF)

Heating (BTU/hr*SF)

Total (BTU/hr*SF)

U-Factor

Shading Coefficient

1 6 Single Coated 1/8" 301 39.87 66.31 106.18 1 0.852 4 6mm Sgl Bronze 328.6 36.52 62 98.52 1 0.713 1 3mm Tpl Low-E (e5=1) Clr 6mm air 348.9 34.39 51.85 86.24 0.319 0.67

4 33mm Quad Low-E Films Clr 8 mm Krypton 388.6 30.88 46.67 77.55 0.117 0.52

5 2 3 mm Dbl Low-E (e2=.04) Clr 13mm Air 392 30.65 46.29 76.94 0.295 0.5

6 56 mm Tpl Low-E Film (66) Tint 13mmAir 469.3 25.57 38.74 64.31 0.218 0.29

0.85 0.71 0.67 0.52 0.5 0.290

50100150200250300350400450500

Cooling vs. Shading Coefficient

Cooling Load

Shading Coefficient

Cool

ing

Area

(SF

/Ton

)

1 2 3 4 5 60

20

40

60

80

100

120Total Load

Heating LoadCooling Load

Runs

Load

(B

TU/h

r*SF

)


Apollo

Mechanical

Simulated Environment

5 20 35 50 65 80 950

1

2

3

4

5

6Conditioned Envelope Gap (Summer)

23.3 C24.4 C24.97 C26.08 C

Convective Coefficient

Hea

t Tr

ansf

er R

ate

(W/m

^2*

C)

5 20 35 50 65 80 950

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Conditioned Envelope Gap (Winter)

4.44 C

7.2 C

12.8 C

18.3 C

Covective Coefficient

Hea

t Tr

ansf

er R

ate

(W/m

^2*

C)

Summer: Exhaust cooler air to the air gapWinter: Exhaust heated air to the air gap Goal: Create an artificial/simulated environment to retard heat transfer while using

conditioned air that would normally be exhaustedChallenges:Humidity and complicated control scheme


Apollo

Mechanical

Simulated Environment

Summer: Exhaust cooler air to the air gapWinter: Exhaust heated air to the air gap Goal: Create an artificial/simulated environment to retard heat transfer while using

conditioned air that would normally be exhaustedChallenges:Humidity and complicated control scheme

4.44 7.2 12.8 18.30

500000

1000000

1500000

2000000

2500000

3000000

3500000

Heat Transfer With Conditioned Space (Winter)

Hx -5

Hx - 35

Hx - 65

Hx - 95

Temperature (C)

Hea

t Lo

ss (

kW)

23.322 24.426 24.97 26.0820

100000

200000300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

800000

900000

1000000

Heat Transfer With Conditioned Space (Summer)

Hx - 5Hx - 35Hx - 65Hx - 95

Temperature (C)

Hea

t Lo

ss (

kW)


Apollo

Integration

Effects of Double Facade

Lighting/Electrical

Structural

Construction• Schedule increase

• Shading coefficient

• Increase loads


Apollo

Mechanical

Underfloor air distribution<1% of office market in 1995 to 6% in 2004

PROSNo “short cycling” of airEase of renovationBetter air qualityIf done right, same priceFloor-to-floor height can be reduced by 6-12 inches

CONSDesigners, owners, tenants unfamiliarSome designed recently are performing poorlyToo quietNeed to find experienced installer


Apollo

Integration

Effects of Underfloor System

Lighting/Electrical

Structural

Construction• Schedule increase• Find Specialist• More supervision will be needed

• Data/cable moved to under the floor

• Localized movement during earthquake must be examined


Apollo

Mechanical

Natural Ventilation

• Use pressure differences to move air

• Pros• Reduce energy consumption

• Cons• Best in hot, dry climates• Does not remove humidity from the air• Does not remove outside contaminants


Apollo

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=PiUvjNmPrV9keM&tbnid=0Jnc09Owi5xVZM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://vr3qz.wordpress.com/2011/10/23/commitment-to-the-environment/&ei=JPI5Ut6rBbfF4AOS-YCwCw&bvm=bv.52288139,d.dmg&psig=AFQjCNFA_O5WHlc1b08IBg9mDpMyzYpOng&ust=1379615475754012

Mechanical

CogenerationBenefits

Cost savings for host facility/customerPartially independent from utility gridEnvironmental benefitsIncentive programs (Self Generation Incentive Program “SGIP”)


Apollo

Mechanical

Cogeneration Case Study201 Mission Street 350 Mission StreetBuilding Type: Office OfficeFloor Area: 490,000 SF480,000 SFSystem Size: x2 375 kW -Annual Electricity Supply 40% -Annual Steam Demand 90% -


Apollo

Mechanical

CHP Cost BenefitTypical CHP output: 125kWh per Mcf

Source Unit Price CostElectricity: $.126/kWh$15.75Natural Gas: $7.13/Mcf $7.13

(Note: Doesn’t take into consideration additional benefits such as waste heat recycling)

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14Natural Gas Price

Natural Gas ...

Year

Pric

e (D

olla

rs/T

hous

and

Cubi

c Fe

et)


Apollo

Structural

Initial Ideas• Keep Concrete structure and add

stiffness where required to control drift • Base Isolation• Fluid Viscous Dampers• Steel Plate Shear Walls


Apollo

Structural

After MeetingEliminated Ideas:• Keeping Concrete structure• Base Isolation

Ideas Worth More Consideration:• Steel Plate Shear Walls• Fluid Viscous Dampers• Dampers with Outriggers


Apollo

Effects Of Ideas


Apollo

All Options

Construction

Mechanical

• Increased modularization

• Schedule decrease

• Heavy integration with systems

• Building height will increase

• Possible floor plan change• Possible façade changes

Integration

Structural

Steel Plate Shear Walls

• Large energy dissipation

• Very stiff• Ability to assemble off

site• Opens up space • Ability to replace• Time and Cost


Apollo

Structural

Fluid Viscous Dampers• Adds 20-30 percent

damping to structure• Drift Limit• Lifetime Cost• Flexibility of

configuration • Range of Sizes• Load Paths


Apollo

Structural

Damped Outriggers• Decrease

overturning moment

• Reduces column size

• Use of outrigger can be concealed

• Adds redundancy to our passive system

• Our size Building will only need one outrigger


Apollo

Construction

Metro System


Apollo

Construction

Site Constraints


Apollo

Construction

Dewatering System


Apollo

• Design groundwater level at Elevation -3ft

• Excavation to extend at Elevation -52ft

• Maintain at least 3ft below planned max. excavation

• Performance: Number, Depth, Position of wells, & Rate of pump

• Cost for disposing water into City’s wastewater system

Construction

Opportunities to Prefab


Apollo

• Mechanical system• Structural System• Kitchenette/Bathroom Pods

Integration

Lighting/Electrical

Mechanical

Structural

Construction

Meeting Schedule Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday

9:00 9:30 10:00 10:30 11:00

11:30 12:00

12:30 1:00

1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30

4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00


Apollo

Questions?

Apollo

Documents

conditioned air

air gapwinter

exhaust cooler air

exhaust heated air

cogeneration mechanical

air gap goal

heat transfer

heat gainloss