EScholarship UC Item 5087z1zd

eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishing
services to the University of California and delivers a dynamic

research platform to scholars worldwide.
Center for the Built Environment
UC Berkeley
Peer Reviewed
Title:
Shading and Cooling: Impacts of Solar Control and Windows on Indoor Airflow
Author:
Hildebrand, Penapa Wankaeo
Publication Date:
01-30-2012
Series:
Envelope Systems
Permalink:
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5087z1zd
Keywords:
indoor air flow, air velocity, thermal comfort, natural ventilation, solar control, passive solar ,
windows, overhangs
Abstract:
In a suitable climate, winddriven ventilative cooling has the potential to lowerdependence
on fossil fuels in both new construction and building renovations by minimizing theamount of
mechanical cooling energy used. Utilizing exterior shading with windows significantlyreduces the
need for cooling by lowering solar heat gain, thus increasing the chances that lowenergycooling
strategies, like natural ventilation, will work. While the main function of exteriorshading is to
block direct sun, such projections also directly affect the incoming airflow throughopen windows,
interior daylighting, and the buildings form and faade. Thus, exterior shadingis likely to obstruct
airflow into the building3. Screenlike shading systems mounted in front ofoperable windows are
particularly susceptible to this effect.
Given the desire to shade and ventilate naturally, what is the affect of screen shadingsystems
on the indoor airflow in the occupied zone? What combination of window and shademinimizes
obstruction to, or perhaps even enhances, airflow?
This thesis examines these questions via wind tunnel tests of a lowrise classroomlikebuilding
model with interchangeable shades and windows. This first chapter introduces thecore issues
involved in this study: the tropical climate, tropical vernacular and modernbuildings, screen shades
in contemporary architecture, and classroom buildings.
Copyright Information:
All rights reserved unless otherwise indicated. Contact the author or original publisher for any
necessary permissions. eScholarship is not the copyright owner for deposited works. Learn more
at http://www.escholarship.org/help_copyright.html#reuse
ShadingandCooling:ImpactsofSolarControlandWindowsonIndoorAirflow
by
PenapaWankaeoHildebrand
Athesissubmittedinpartialsatisfactionofthe
requirementsforthedegreeof
MasterofArchitecture
inthe
GraduateDivision
ofthe
UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley
Committeeincharge:
ProfessorM.SusanUbbelohde,Chair
ProfessorCharlesC.Benton
ProfessorPeterC.Bosselmann
Spring2011
MS Thesis, Dept. of Architecture, UC Berkeley 2011 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5087z1zd

i
Contents
TableofContents.............................................................................................................................i
ListofSymbols................................................................................................................................iii
CHAPTER1:INTRODUCTION/ARCHITECTUREINTHETROPICALCLIMATE...............................1
1.1 TheTropicalContext..................................................................................................2
1.2 TropicalVernacularandModernBuildings...............................................................4
1.3 ScreenShadesinContemporaryArchitecture..........................................................7
1.4 Classrooms..............................................................................................................11
CHAPTER2:VENTILATION
2.1 TheRoleofVentilationinBuildings.........................................................................15
2.2 ThermalComfortStandards....................................................................................18
2.3 Objectives................................................................................................................20
2.4 Approach..................................................................................................................21
CHAPTER3:PREVIOUSRESEARCH
3.1 ExistingDesignGuidelines......................................................................................23
3.2 Regionspecificguidelines........................................................................................25
3.3 MethodsofTestingWinddrivenNaturalVentilationinBuildingDesign...............25
3.4 AcademicPapersandParametricWindTunnelVentilationStudies.......................29
3.4.1 Consolidationoftheresultsofmultiplewindtunneltests
3.4.2 BoundaryLayerandSiteDensity
3.4.3 Buildingmassingandshape
3.4.4 Roomdepthandproportions
3.4.5 OpeningSizeandLocation
3.4.6 WindowGeometryandDetails
3.4.7 ExteriorProjectionsandShading(OverhangsandWingWalls)
CHAPTER4:EXPERIMENTALMETHODS
4.1 Testingconditions:BoundaryLayerWindTunnel&DataAcquisition...................37
4.2 BuildingModelDescription.....................................................................................38
4.3 VelocityMeasurements...........................................................................................39
4.4 FlowVisualization....................................................................................................41
4.5 SelectionofShadingDevicesandWindowTypes...................................................41
CHAPTER5:RESULTS...................................................................................................................45
5.1 WindTunnelTestResults........................................................................................45
5.1.1 Outletopeningtests.............................................................................................48
5.1.2 Inletwindowtests.................................................................................................53
ii
5.1.2.1 Awningwindowtest..........................................................................................54
5.1.2.2 Casementwindowtest......................................................................................56
5.1.2.3 Doublehungwindowtest.................................................................................58
5.1.3 ShadeScreenTests...............................................................................................60
5.1.3.1 LouverScreenTest............................................................................................61
5.1.3.2 PerforatedPanelTest.......................................................................................63
5.1.4 ShadeandWindowCombinedTests....................................................................65
5.1.4.1 LouverScreenandAwningWindow..................................................................68
5.1.4.2 LouverScreenandDoublehungWindow.........................................................70
5.1.4.3 PerforatedPanelwithAwningWindow............................................................72
5.1.4.4 PerforatedPanelwithDoublehungWindow...................................................74
5.2 ExploringthePotentialforThermalComfort.........................................................76
5.3 LimitationsoftheMethods.....................................................................................81
CHAPTER6:DISCUSSION
6.1 Whatcombinationsofshadescreensandwindowtypescreateuniformlyhigh
velocityratiosacrosstheoccupiedzone?...............................................................82
6.2 Howdoexteriorshadescreensinfrontofoperablewindowsaffectairflowand
shouldtheybeusedifnaturalventilationisagoal?Whatwindowtypeismost
compatiblewithascreenshadeintermsofoccupantcooling?............................82
6.3 Whatcharacteristicoftheshadescreengeometryreducesairvelocity?Howdo
thedifferenttypestestedcompareintermsofchangingthevelocityofairflow? 83
6.4 Howdoestheairflowvarywithwindowtype?......................................................86
6.5 Givenacombinationofshadesandwindowsthateffectivelypromotesair
movementintheoccupiedzone,atwhattimesiswinddrivencoolingacceptable
forthermalcomfort?Whatfactorscanexpandtheuseofnaturalcoolingina
classroomsetting?...................................................................................................91
CHAPTER7:CONCLUSIONS
7.1 Conclusions..............................................................................................................92
7.2 SuggestionsforFutureWork...................................................................................93
BIBLIOGRAPHY..............................................................................................................................94
APPENDIXA:THERMALCOMFORTEXPLORATIONTABLE..........................................................95
APPENDIXB:SENSORCALIBRATION..................................................................................................

iii
ListofSymbols
V
PLAN
= meanspatialvelocityratioinplan,ND
S
PLAN
= standarddeviationofthevelocityratioinplan,ND
V
SECT
= meanspatialvelocityratioinsection,ND
S
SECT
= standarddeviationofthevelocityratiosinsection,ND
C
SV
= coefficientofspatialvariation,ND
V
i
= meaninteriorvelocitylocationi,m/s
V
ref
= meanreferencevelocitylocation,takenintheunobstructedfreestreamupwind
ofthemodelat1.1mseatedheadheight(modelscale)orabovethemodelfloor
level,or5abovethewindtunnelfloor.

1
CHAPTER1 INTRODUCTION
Throughmostofhistory,naturalventilationwasacommonlyusedpassivecooling
strategyinbuildingdesign.Today,inalargepartofthedevelopingworld,naturalventilationis
stillamainformofcooling.Thisisalsothecaseformanybuildingsintendedtobeenergy
conscious.Itiscommonformanybuildingstodaytoheavilyrelyonairconditioningtoachieve
thermalacceptability,ataskthestructureitselfonceperformed.Reinforcingwhatmany
intuitivelyalreadyknow,research
1
andrecentthermalcomfortstandards
2
agreethatincreasing
airflowimprovesthermalcomfortinwarm,humidenvironments.
Inasuitableclimate,winddrivenventilativecoolinghasthepotentialtolower
dependenceonfossilfuelsinbothnewconstructionandbuildingrenovationsbyminimizingthe
amountofmechanicalcoolingenergyused.Utilizingexteriorshadingwithwindowssignificantly
reducestheneedforcoolingbyloweringsolarheatgain,thusincreasingthechancesthatlow
energycoolingstrategies,likenaturalventilation,willwork.Whilethemainfunctionofexterior
shadingistoblockdirectsun,suchprojectionsalsodirectlyaffecttheincomingairflowthrough
openwindows,interiordaylighting,andthebuildingsformandfaade.Thus,exteriorshading
islikelytoobstructairflowintothebuilding
3
.Screenlikeshadingsystemsmountedinfrontof
operablewindowsareparticularlysusceptibletothiseffect.
Giventhedesiretoshadeandventilatenaturally,whatistheaffectofscreenshading
systemsontheindoorairflowintheoccupiedzone?Whatcombinationofwindowandshade
minimizesobstructionto,orperhapsevenenhances,airflow?
1
Givoni1962,Chand1974,Arens1986.
2
ASHRAE552010,section5.2.3.
3
Sobin1981.Aynsley1979.Smith1970.
2
Thisthesisexaminesthesequestionsviawindtunneltestsofalowriseclassroomlike
buildingmodelwithinterchangeableshadesandwindows.Thisfirstchapterintroducesthe
coreissuesinvolvedinthisstudy:thetropicalclimate,tropicalvernacularandmodern
buildings,screenshadesincontemporaryarchitecture,andclassroombuildings.
1.1 THETROPICALCONTEXT
Beforethemid20
th
Century,buildingsinthetropicalclimatesofthisstudydidnotuse
airconditioningtocooltheirinteriors.Incontrastwiththenaturallyventilatedvernacular,
contemporarytropicalcommercialandinstitutionalbuildingshavebecometaller,mechanically
cooledandglazed.Today,airconditioningisusedthroughoutcommercial,institutionaland
someschoolandresidentialbuildingsinmuchofthetropics.Thesebuildingsareoften
conditionedtothesamethermalcomfortstandardsasthoseusedintemperateclimatesand
thusconsumeanenormousamountofelectricityintheprocess.Suchthermalconditionshave
becomecommonplaceinautomobiles,shopsandothertransientspaces.
Inadditiontorequiringmoreelectricalpowertoday,airconditioningseemsto
conditionpeopletorequiremoreofitinthefuture,byloweringourabilitytotoleratehigher
temperatures.
4
Theaddictiontomechanicalcoolingseemsinsatiable.Isthereawaytoundo
someofthisdependenceonfossilfuels?Cooledairneedssealedspaces;sealedspacesisolate
usfromtheoutsideworld.Overtime,thisisolationmakestheoutdoorsseemaforeignplace.
Whilethisdissociationmaybedesirableforaperformancehall,itisarguablylesscrucialfor
classrooms,offices,andotherdailyfunctions.Mightreintroducingnaturalventilationindoors
restoretheawarenessthatairconditioningtookaway?
4
deDearandBrager,2001andBusch,1991.
3

Figure1.Mapoftropicalandsubtropicalzonesintheworld.(HindrichsandDaniels.2007)
Thetropicalandsubtropicalregionstakeupaverysignificantportionofearthsland
massandpopulation.Becauseoftheangleatwhichthesunstrikestheearth,mostareaswithin
thetropicsarehotyearround.AccordingtoWikipedia,Unliketheextratropics[or
subtropics],wheretherearestrongvariationsindaylength,andhence[seasonal]temperature
tropicaltemperaturesremainrelativelyconstantthroughouttheyearandseasonalvariations
aredominatedbyprecipitation.
5
Therearethreetypesoftropicalclimates,basedon
variationsinprecipitation:thetropicalrainforestclimate(dominatedbylowpressure),the
tropicalmonsoonclimate,andthetropicalwetanddry(orsavanna)climate.Forthesakeof
simplifyingthestudy,theclimateselectedisthatofBangkok,Thailand,at13.75Nlatitude.
Bangkoksclimateisacombinationbetweentropicalmonsoonandtropicalsavannah.This
climateisgenerallymarkedbythreeseasons,withthestartandendofeachseasonvarying
slightlyintheNorthernHemispheretropics.Thesummer(orthehottestseason)tendstooccur
aroundMarchthroughJune,withhighdrybulbtemperaturesandmoderatetohighhumidity.
5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_climate
4
Themonsoonseason,fromaboutJuneorJulythroughOctober,isverywarmandhumid,with
relativehumidityfrequentlyapproaching100%,makingevaporativecoolingnearlyimpossible.
Whenthereisprecipitation,temperaturesdropslightly,butquicklyriseagainoncetherain
stops.Skiesduringthemonsoonperiodtendtobecloudyanddiurnaltemperatureswingsare
smallerduringthisseason.Thetropicalwinterseasonismarkedbywarmtemperatureswith
lowerhumiditythantheotherseasons.Diurnaltemperaturestendtovarythemostduring
winter.
1.2 TROPICALBUILDINGS
Onepurposeofbuildingsistoshelterpeoplefromtheelements:sun,windandrain.
Throughoutthecenturies,thepeoplesofthetropics,havebuilt,adjusted,andperfectedan
architecturethat,besidesprovidingadequateshelterfromtheelements,wasshapedtotheir
customsandwassustainedbynaturallyavailableresources.Thisisreflectedinthedistinct
featuresofthevernaculararchitectureoftropicalregions.(Ingeneral,thesolutionsthathave
prevailedarethosethatbestservemultiplepurposes.)
Intheseregions,traditionalhouseswereoftenraisedfromthegroundinordertocatch
thestrongerbreezeshigherup,toreducemoisturemigrationfromthesoil,andtoprovide
protectionfromseasonalflooding.Thespaceunderneaththehousewasusedasashaded
outdoorroom.
Sometimesitwaswithhighpitchedgablesandlargeeavesthattropicalarchitecture
respondedtotheabundantrains:rainwaterflowedquicklyoffthesurfaceoftheroofandthis
protectedtheinteriorfromleaks.Thedeepeavesalsokeptthedriplinefurtherawayfromthe
house,protectingoftenporouswallsfromrain.
T
narrowf
possible
outdoor
additiona
shadedt
In
directlya
roofstha
vernacul
includes
bringing
cleardiff
glasstos
hehighroof
loorplatesa
fornaturalv
spacesliket
alrooms.Ga
heexteriorw
nthetropics
aboveinthe
atgiveprote
ar,thereisn
screeningele
inlightand
ferentiation
separateinsi
fsalsoallow
andtheorga
ventilationa
thecourtyar
alleriesandv
wallsandwi
s,thesunhit
skyresults
ctionfromr
notalwaysa
ements,such
air.Features
betweensh
ideandouts
edthewarm
anizationofu
anddaylight
rd,orterrace
verandahsp
indows,cont
tstheEarth
inhightemp
rainalsosha
cleardistin
hasinwood
slikelatticew
adeandwin
side.
5
mairtoriseo
unitscluster
tingtobem
e,orthegall
rovidedsha
tributingto
atahighang
peratures.In
dethewalls
ctionbetwe
dorstonelat
workandsh
ndowintrop
out,helping
redarounda
oreeffective
leriesandve
detothese
keepingthe
gle.Astrong
nplaceslike
sandprotec
enwallsand
tticework,to
hutterssugge
picalbuilding
gkeepthein
acourtyarda
e.Inthesel
erandahs,w
outdoorroo
eindoorscoo
g,brightsun
eSoutheastA
tfromglare
dwindows.W
oblockdirec
estthatther
gs.Rarelydid
Fi
la
Ag
au
W
op
w
co
Ph
(S
teriorscool.
alsomadeit
atitudes,
ereusedas
oms,andals
ol.
suspended
Asia,thesam
e.Inthis
Windowsoft
ctsunwhile
rewasalson
dbuildingsu
gure2.Left:sto
tticeAgraFort,
gra,India.(phot
uthor)Right:
Woodenlattice
peningabove
wovenbamboow
onstructioninLu
habang,Laos.
Somsanuk,2004
.The
t
o
me
ten
no
use
one
toby
wall
uang
4)
6

Figure3.Left:Arareuseofstaggeredfixedpaneglazedwindowsallowforthepassagelightandairwhileblockingrain.Wat
PhraKaeoMuseum.(photobyauthor).Middle:dualactionwindowswithpanelsashesthatcanopenlikeadoublecasement
orlikeawningwindowsorBahamashuttersatLetsSeaHuaHinResort,Thailand.Windowsashes,whenpresentinthe
tropicalvernacular,tendtobesolidorslattedshutters.(photobySitthaSukkasi).Right:Overhangsandsolidpanelcasement
windowsinHappyHausinQueensland,Australia
6
Theintroductionofglassinthecolonialeraseparatedtheinsideandtheoutsidethat
hadnotbeensoclearlydistinctbefore,asseeninexamplesoftraditionalThaiarchitecture.But
colonialarchitecturealsoobserveditsneighboringtraditionalhousesandadaptedsomeofits
elements.Thewalls,nowmadeoutofbrick,furtherseparatedtheoutsidefromtheinside
environment;thethermallymassivematerialsofbrickandconcreteretaindaytimeheatwell
intotheevening.
Largerwindowsthatcouldstillbeclosedwithshutters,createdanewcoolinterior
space.Verandahsandgallerieswerealsoadaptedtobrick,buttheykeptfunctioningasan
exteriorshadedroomthatalsoprotectedthewallsfromthesun,loweringtheexteriorheat
loads.Thechangeinmaterialscreatedanewcontrolledenvironment,slowertorespondtothe
exteriorconditionsthanthelocalarchitecture.

6
Jordana,Sebastian."HappyHaus/DonovanHill"29Jun2010.ArchDaily.Accessed10Dec2010.
<http://www.archdaily.com/66345>
7
1.3 SHADESCREENSINCONTEMPORARYARCHITECTURE
Onceairconditioningbecamemorecommon,buildingsincorporatedmoreglass,bothin
largerwindowsandcurtainwallsystems,anddeeperfloorplates,sinceproximitytowindows
wasnolongerrequiredtolightandcool.Withtheintroductionofglassseparatinginsideand
outside,thedifferencebetweenwindowsashandshadeclearlyemerges.Withoutsufficient
shadingprotectionfromthesun,theseinternalloaddominatedbuildingsquicklyoverheatand
requireevenmoreenergytocool.Somearchitectsandengineersacknowledgedtheallglass
dilemmaandincorporatedexternalshadingintobuildingdesigns.Startinginthe1950s,there
wasanupsurgeinresearchandpublicationsaroundclimateadaptivedesignandmaximizing
passiveheatingandcooling.PublicationsforarchitectsincludedDesignwithClimate(Olgyay
andOlgyay1963),SolarControlandShadingDevices(Olgyay1957),andTropicalArchitecturein
theDryandHumidZones(DrewandFry1964).Beforetheenergyimplicationsoftheallglass
buildingwerethoughttobeimportant,unprotectedglassstructuresbeganappearingin
tropicalclimates.Theyarestillbeingbuilttoday,thoughwithmoreadvancedglass
technologies.
Figure5.VarioustypesofshadingfromFryeandDrew.

Figure4.TheIIMDormitoriesinAhmedabad,India(Louis
Kahn)weredesignedtobeprotectedfromthesunand
permeabletothewind.Imagesfrom<www.flickr.com/photos/
jmordhorst/>and<www.flickr.com/photos/12474755@N07>
8
Anincreasedawarenessofenergydepletion,fuelpricerise,andclimatechangehas
broughtaboutaninterestinloweringallenergyuseandbuildingenergyuseinparticular.Low
energycoolingstrategies,likenaturalventilation,requirecarefulloadcontrolandblockingheat
gainfromthestructure,windowsandinteriors.Intropicalbuildings,minimizingsolarheatgain
isdoneintwomainways:firstbyinsulatingexteriorwalls,(thusrestrictingtheinteriorsurfaces
fromradiatingheattowardtheoccupiedareas),andsecondbyshadingopeningsfromdirect
sunpenetration.Thefirstmethodinvolvesinsulativeandradiantbarriersinthebuilding
enclosure;thoughimportantfortheclimate,thisisoutsidethescopeofthepresentstudy.The
secondmethodshadingopeningsisachievedbyblockingdirectsunfromenteringthe
occupiedspacewithsomesortofinteriororexteriorshadingdevice.
Externalshadingcanblocksignificantlymoresolarheat
7
andtendstobeamorevisually
prominentpartofthearchitecture,ascomparedwithinternalshades.Shieldingthebuilding
anditsoccupantsfromthesunisespeciallyrelevantinclimateswhereourbodieseasily
overheat,asinthetropical,lowlatitudeenvironmentsofinterestinthisstudy.Intheseregions,
thismeanshighangledsunfromthenorthandsouthportionsofabuildingandlowerangled
sunfromtheeastandwest.Formsofexternalshadingincludehorizontaldevices,like
overhangs,andverticaldevices,likeverticalfinsorwingwalls,
8
aswellasarchitecturalfeatures
suchaslargeroofs,loggiasandothervolumetricforms.
Ascanbeseen,manyformsofexteriorshadinghavebeenemployedthroughoutthe
centuries.Whilescreenshadeshavealsobeenutilizedhistorically,suchsystemshavebecomea
7
AccordingtoafieldtestbyLawrenceBerkeleyNationalLaboratory,coolingloadswerereducedby77%with
exteriorVenetianblindsascomparedtoconventionalinteriorVenetianblindsunderthesameconditions.Lee,
2009.InnovativeFaadeSystemsforLowenergyCommercialBuildings.(askpermission)
8
SolarControlandShadingDevicesbyOlgyayandOlgyay,1976(page88)isacomprehensivesourceforexterior
shading.
clearvisu
buildings
(Morpho
CulturalC
Museum
Educatio
Seattle(W
spaces,t
thought
ualtrendinc
s.Exampleso
osis),theTor
CentreinNe
(Herrzog&
nAuthority
WeberThom
heimpacto
hefullexten
contempora
ofscreensys
rreCubeOff
ewCaledonia
deMeuron
inMartiniqu
mpson).Som
fthesescree
ntoftheirim
aryarchitect
stemsinbui
icetowerin
a(RPBW),th
Arkitekten),
ue(Hauvette
meoftheseb
entypeshad
mpactsisunk
9
uraldesign,
ildingsinclud
Guadalajara
heNewYor
,theNewM
e&Associs
buildingsare
dingsystems
known,desp
bothintrop
detheSanF
a(EstudioCa
kTimesBuil
MuseuminN
s),andtheT
eshownbelo
sislikelyhav
pitetheirarc
picalandnon
FranciscoFed
armePins),
ding(RPBW
ewYork(SA
erryThomas
ow.Innatura
vesomeaffe
chitecturalp
Figur
Conte
upof
pane
While
natur
anex
scree
archi
Figur
scree
inarc
right)
Fede
(Mor
(Estu
Tijba
(Renz
Work
ntropical
deralBuildin
,theTijbaou
W),theDeYo
ANAA),the
sbuildingin
allyventilate
ectonairflo
rominence.
re7.NewMuseu
emporaryArt:c
fexpandedmet
el.(SANAA)New
ethebuildingis
rallyventilated,
xampleoftheus
ensinpopular
tecture.
re6:Exampleso
enshadingsyste
chitecture:(left
)SanFrancisco
ralBuilding
rphosis),TorreC
dioCarmePino
louCulturalCen
zoPianoBuildin
kshop).
ng
u
ung
ed
w,
umof
close
al
wYork.
snot
,itis
seof
of
ems
to
Cube
s),
nter
ng
10

Figure10.ToulouCollectiveHousinginNanhai,Guandong.URBANUSArchitecture&Design,Inc.

Figure11.ExamplesoflowandmidrisebuildingsinthetropicalclimateofBrisbane,Australia(DonovanHill).left,W4
Apartments.Right,CornwallApartments.
Figure9.Multiple
exteriorshadingtypesin
MoulmeinRise
ResidentialBuilding,
SingaporebyWOHA
Architects.left:south
faade.middle:north
faade.right:viewout
thenorthfaade.Images
from<archnet.org>and
<www.akdn.org>
Figure8.Rectorate
OfficeBuilding.
Hauvette&Associs.
Cayenne,French
Guyana.Imagesfrom
<http://www.archdaily.com
/21526>
11

Figure12.NishorgoOirobotNatureInterpretationCentre.Teknaf,Bangladesh.VittiSthapatiBrindoandEhsanKhan,2008.

1.4 CLASSROOMS
Thebuildingofinterestinthisstudyisthelowriseschoolbuilding,andspecificallythe
classroomspace.Classroomsaregoodcandidatesforstudy;thesettingtendstobeuniformlyand
denselyoccupiedwithanumberofstudentsseatedatdesks.Exceptforclothingadjustments,students
donottypicallyhavedirectcontrolovertheirthermalcomfortinclassrooms.Thoughitisparticularly
challengingtoevenlycoolwithwinddrivenventilationformultipleoccupants,thechallengesassociated
withthistaskmayhavearoleininformingnaturalventilationstrategiesinothernondomesticspace
types,suchasopenplanoffices,smallretailandclinicsinlowrisebuildings.
Twomainrequirementsbracketedthescaleatwhichtosizethemodelinthisstudy:indoorair
movementstudieswarrantalargermodelforvisualizingtheinterior;tallerbuildingsrequiresmaller
models(oralargerwindtunnel)soasnottoblockmorethan510%ofthewindtunnelcrosssectional
Figure13.ElCamion
Restaurant.
Llona+Zamora
arquitectos+Fernando
Mosquera.Villael
Salvador,Lima,Peru.
Imagesfrom
<http://www.archdaily.
com/94420>
12
area.Fromthepointofviewofwindtunnelstudiesfornaturalventilation,lowrisebuildingsseemed
idealfortestingdetailedfaadecomponentssuchasexteriorshadesandwindows.

Openplanspaces(likeclassroomsorsomeoffices)areparticularlydesirablefromawinddriven
ventilationpointofviewsincetherearefewobstructions.Intermsofventilative(convective)cooling,it
isimportantthatfurnitureobstructaslittleaspossibleinthefirsttwelveinches(30cm)abovethefloor.
Besidesobstructingairflow,furnishingsandfinisheslikeseatsalsoaddtothethermalinsulationatthe
occupantsbodies;conductiveorbreathableseatselectioncanhelptoremoveheatfromthebody.
Thoughthetropicalvernacularbuildingsmentionedintheprevioussectiontendtobehousesof
lightwoodconstruction,thehistoricalbeginningsofformaleducationinThailandexistedintheBuddhist
temples,whichtypicallyhadmassive(sometimes30thick)loadbearingwalls,shading,andground
contacts
9
.Oftenthemainhallwassurroundedonallsidesbyverandas.Templeswereoneofthefew
nondomesticstructureswhereagroupofpeoplewouldregularlygatherforprolongedperiodsoftime.
Todaymostclassroombuildingsareoneroomdeepconcreteandmasonryconstruction.Itiscommon
forstudentstonotwearshoesintheclassroom,furtherfacilitatingheattransferthroughtheirsocks.
Lowriseschoolbuildingshaveexistedforalongtimeandarelikelytocontinuetobebuiltand
retrofittedinthefuture.Fromschoolhousestoschoolbuildings,classroomshaveahistoryofhaving
narrow(1roomdeep)plans,asitiscommonforthemtobedesignedtoaccesslightandair.Lowrise
buildingsingeneralalsoofferanumberofdistinctiveproperties.Suchbuildingsarecommonwithincity
9
Sresthaputra,2003.
Figure14.Planand
sectionofclassroom
model.

centersan
highriseb
Thoughth
makeupa
lowrisec
Figure16.M
Hoerbst.ht
Figure17.L
KathleenH.
courtesyCo
10
EdMaza
reductionin
ndtheyaree
buildings.The
hepercentage
about77%of
classroomsar
METIHandmade
tp://www.akdn
Left:classroomb
.)Right.Classroo
okieStephens)
riaisthefound
ntheclimatecha
speciallytypi
eyareeasier
efortropical
fthetotalcom
ebelow.Exce
eSchool,Dinajpu
n.org/architectu
buildingatChian
ominterior,sho
derofArchitec
angecausinggre
calatacitys
andcheaper
regionsisun
mmercialbuil
eptfortheRo
ur,Bangladesh.
ure/project.asp?
ngMaiInternat
owingjalousiew
cture2030,an
eenhousegas(G
13
sedges,asthe
torenovate,
nknown,itisl
ldingstockin
oyalOaksSch
25.6Nlatitude
?id=3392Access
ionalSchool,Ch
windowsbehind
nonprofitorga
GHG)emissionso
eyarelessco
ascompared
ikelytobehig
theU.S.
10
Ex
hool,theothe
e.AnnaHeringer
sed5January20
hiangMai,Thaila
dinsectscreens.
anizationwhos
oftheBuildingS
ostlytobuildt
dtomidorh
gh,sincelow
xamplesofon
ersareintrop
randElkeRosw
011)
and.18.8Nlatit
(1971CCCClari
segoalitisto
Sector
Fi
O
Ca
la
Ly
(L
Oj
19
thanmidand
ighrisebuild
risebuilding
neroomdeep
picalclimates.
wag,2005.(Kurt
tude.(Stephens
ionCall(yearbo
toachieveadra
gure15.Left:Ro
aksSchool,Dua
alifornia.34.1N
titude.Maynard
yndon,1951.
Lyndon1993)Rig
jaiSection.(Nin
998)
d
ings.
gs
p,
.
s,
ok,
amatic
oyal
arte,
N
d
ght:
ndra
14

Figure18.TransitionalSchool,Jacmel,Haiti.18Nlatitude.JohnRyanandPlanInternational,2010.(JohnRyan)

Figure19.PrimarySchool,Gando,Tenkodogo,BurnikaFaso.11.5NLatitude.DibdoFrancisKr,2001.(FrancisKr
Openarchitecturenetwork.orgAccessed5January2011)
15
CHAPTER2 VENTILATION
2.1 THEROLEOFVENTILATIONINBUILDINGS
Intropical,lowlatituderegions,minimizingheatgainallowsnaturalventilationand
otherlowenergycoolingstrategiestowork.Naturalventilationprovidesmultipleservices:it
removesheataccumulationinthebuildingstructure(600CFM)
11
;itcoolsthespaceby
replacingwarmairwithcoolerair(300CFM).Inaddition,theairmovementonhumanskin
enhancesbodilycooling(300CFM);anditprovidesairforbreathing(roughly10CFM).The
typeofcoolingthatispossibleisalsoafunctionoftheamountofwindavailableandthediurnal
temperatureranges(forstructuralcooling)inaparticularsite.Whiletheprimarypurposeof
naturalventilationinthisstudyisoccupantcooling,theindirectformscoolingoutsidethe
scopeofthisstudyareimportanttoacknowledge.
STRUCTURALCOOLING.Structuralcoolingreferstotheremovalofaccumulatedheatwithinthe
buildingmassattimeswhenoutdoortemperaturesarebelowthecomfortzone;itisdirectly
relatedtothethermalstoragecapacityofthebuildingandtheexposureofthermallymassive
elementstoairflow.Areasbeyondtheoccupiedzonenearceilings,wallsandexposedfloors
tendtobeimportantforindoorspaceandstructuralcooling.Structuralcoolingislesseffective
wherewidediurnaltemperaturerangesarenotsufficient,asisthecaseduringthetropical
monsoonorsummerseasons.Thoughstructuralcoolingisnotaprimarypurposeofnatural
ventilationinthisstudy,itmayhavearoleinthetropicalsavannahclimate.
SPACECOOLING.Occupiedspacesaccumulateheatfromlighting,people,equipmentsolarand
envelopeloads,whichincreasestheambientairtemperatureovertime.Spacecoolingrefersto
11
Brown,G,andUniversityofOregon.;NorthwestEnergyEfficiencyAlliance.;SeattleCityLight.2004.Natural
ventilationinnorthwestbuildings.EugeneOr.:UniversityofOregon.P.11
16
thereplacementofthiswarmairwithcooleroutsideair.Balancinglowsolargainsand
daylightingareverymuchrelatedtothetypeofshadingused,asbothdirectsunandelectric
lightingcontributetothesethermalloads.Spacecoolingisanindirectformofoccupantcooling
andisnotaprimarypurposeofnaturalventilationinthisstudy.
BREATHING.Itwouldbedifficulttoadequatelydiscusstheroleofnaturalventilationin
buildingswithoutfirstacknowledgingitsroleinourbreathing.Respirationisaminorformof
bodilycoolingandabiologicalrequirement.Whiletheamountofairrequiredforbreathingis
muchlessthanthatforcooling,outsideairhasotheramenities.Unlikerecirculatedindoorair,
outdoorairismorediluted,dynamicinspeedandtemperatureandevencarriessoundand
smell.Outsideairisreflectiveofmicroclimate,topography,geographyandotherconditions
12
aroundthegivensite.Whenwegooutsideforair,webecomecorporeallyawareofourbodies
inthesurroundings.Whenoutsideaircomesinside,trancesofthisconnectionarelikelyto
follow.
OCCUPANTCOOLING.Thermalcomfortiselusivelycomplextoquantify.Traditionalcomfort
models(i.e.Fanger)includedsixquantifiablevariables:thetwopersonalvariablesofclothing
levelandactivitylevel,andthefourenvironmentalvariablesofairtemperature,radiant
temperature,airvelocityandhumidity.Variableshardertoquantifythathavebeenshownalso
influencethermalcomfortincludeclimaticadaptation,thermalpreferenceandpersonal
control
13
.
12
Arens,1985.
13
Whenthermalcontroloccursthroughopeningandclosingwindows,theinteractionbetweentheuserandthe
buildingencouragestheoccupanttobeanactiveparticipantinthespace.Thisoccupantbuildinginteraction
visuallyactivatesthefaadeforcomfort.
17
Aspreviouslystated,occupantcoolingistheprimarypurposeofnaturalventilationin
thisstudy.Airmovementworkstocoolthehumanbodyinanumberofways:firstviathe
evaporationofsweatfromtheskin,secondbyconvectivelyreplacingthewarmerairnearthe
skinwithcoolerairandlastbyreplacingwarmexpiredairwithcoolerinspiredair.
Therearelimitationsandcaveatstotheeffectivenessofairmovementforthermal
comfort:evaporativecoolingislesseffectivewhenthehumidityishigher;convectivecoolingis
noteffectivewhentheairtemperatureiswarmerthanbodytemperature;themaximum
allowableairspeedatthewarmhumidendofthecomfortzonedependsonoccupant
preferenceandactivity.Findingsfromrecentresearchandpreviousstudies
14
suggestthatin
bothairconditionedandnaturallyventilatedbuildings,mostoccupantsprefertohavemoreair
movementandveryfewwantless.Howcanthisfindingapplytothedesignofwindowsand
shades?
Whileitispossiblefornaturalventilationtodirectlycooloccupants,thisscenariois
oftenmoreeffectiveforoccupantsclosertothewindowthanforthosewhoarefurtheraway.
Whenthemodeofthermalcontroloccursthroughtheopeningandclosingofwindows,the
requiredinteractionbetweentheuserandthebuildingencouragestheoccupanttobean
activeparticipantinthespace.Thearchitecturebecomesvisuallyrelatedtothermalcomfort
overtimeviathisoccupantbuildinginteraction.Provisionforoccupantcontrolhasalsobeen
showntoexpandthezoneofthermalcomfort.Atthewarm,humidendofthecomfortzone,
themaximumallowableairspeeddependsonoccupantpreferenceandexpectations.
15
14Arens,E.,Turner,S.,Zhang,H.,&Paliaga,G.2009.MovingAirforComfort.
15ASHRAE552010,section5.2.3.Thisstandardalsostipulatesthattherequiredairspeedforlight,primarily
sedentaryactivitiesmaynotbehigherthan0.8m/s.Whenunderlocalcontroloftheaffectedoccupants,theair
18

Figure20.Compoundwindowswithmultipleoperationtypeswithinthesameopening.Leftandmiddle,BoydEducational
Center,GlennMurcutt,2005.34.8Slatitude.Illaroo,NSW,Australia.ImagefromDahl,2010.
2.2 THERMALCOMFORTSTANDARDS
BuildingdesignersusethermalcomfortstandardssuchasASHRAEStandard552010
16
,
ISO7730
17
andEN/DIN152512008
18
todesignbuildingsforhumanoccupation.These
standardsestablishspecificcriteriaforacceptablethermalenvironmentsincludingallowable
rangesforairtemperature,radianttemperature,humidityandairspeeds.Inadditiontothe
narrowlydefined,laboratorybasedresultsonwhichtheywereoriginallybased,thestandards
havecometoincorporatevariousadaptivemodelsforthermalcomfort,whicharemostly
basedonfieldstudies
19
.Thatis,thestandardsnowrecognizethatthermalcomfortand
preferencescandifferforpeopleofdifferentclimatesandhabits.ASHRAE55wasrecently
modifiedtoexpandtheallowablerangeofairspeedsinneutraltowarmconditions.
20
Thisis
importanttonotewhendiscussingwhetherornotnaturalventilationisadequateinproviding
speedmaybeashighas1.2m/s,thoughitisnotexplicitlystated.Thestandardnotesthatthesefiguresare
conservativeforactivitiesabove1.3metsandforclothinginsulationlessthan0.5clo.
16
ThermalEnvironmentalConditionsforHumanOccupancybytheAmericanSocietyofHeatingRefrigerationand
AirconditioningEngineers
17
ErgonomicsoftheThermalEnvironmentbytheInternationalStandardsAssociation
18
IndoorenvironmentalInputParametersforDesignandAssessmentofEnergyPerformanceofBuildings
addressingIndoorAirQuality,ThermalEnvironment,LightingandAcoustics.
19
deDearandBrager2002.Rajaetal2001.Kwok,1997.Busch1992.
20
ASHRAE552010,section5.2.3.ElevatedAirSpeed.Thisstandardalsostipulatesthattherequiredairspeedfor
light,primarilysedentaryactivitiesmaynotbehigherthan0.8m/s.Whenunderlocalcontroloftheaffected
occupants,theairspeedmaybeashighas1.2m/swithoccupantcontrol.Thestandardnotesthatthesefigures
areconservativeforactivitiesabove1.3metsandforclothinginsulationlessthan0.5clo.
19
comfortatthewarmerendofthecomfortzone,suchasthosefoundintropicalenvironments.
Thisencouragesbuildingdesignerstouseairmovementtoimprovebothenergyandcomfort
performanceandalsoopensopportunitiesforimplementinglowenergysystemsthathave
coolingcapacitylimitations.
21
ASHRAE55srecentmodificationincreasestheupperlimitofair
movementto1.2m/s,thoughthenumberisnotclearfornaturallyventilatedspaces.Notethat
theupperlimitofrelativehumidityfornaturallyconditionedspacesisalsonotclearlydefined
forthesespaces.
CRITERIA.Giventhecontextofaclassroominthisstudy,airflowcharacteristicsaredesirable
whentheairflowplan(attheseatedheadheightof1.1m)hasahighvelocitywithalowspatial
variation,orv
PLAN
andc
sv
respectivelyinthewindtunneltestresults.Moreuniformityin
airspeedacrosstheairflowplanisconsideredtobedesirable,asahighvariationinindoor
airspeedcanleadtopointsthataresimultaneouslytoowindy(i.e.neartheinlet)andpoints
thataretoowarm(i.e.farfromwindows)inthesamezone.Thisstudyassumesthatthe
maximumallowableindoorairspeedis3m/s
22
andthatoccupantshavethecanreduceair
velocitybyoperatingwindowsorchangingseatsifspeedsarehigherthanpreferred.Thermal
acceptabilityforourpurposesiswhentheSET*adjustedPMV
23
isbetweenslightlycool(1)and
slightlywarm(1),whichequalsa26%peopledissatisfied(PPD).ASHRAEconsidersaPMV
between0.5and0.5oraPPDof10%tobeacceptable.Airvelocitiesareconsideredtohave
21
Zelenay,K.,Perepelitza,M,Lehrer,D.2010.
22
Basedonadiscussionwiththermalcomfortresearchers,3m/swasconsideredtobeanexuberantnumber;this
numberwasalsothemaximumairvelocityinputallowablefortheASHRAEThermalComfortTool.
23
TheStandardEffectiveTemperature(SET)modelusesathermophysiologicalsimulationofthehumanbody
Thismodelenablesairvelocityeffectsonthermalcomforttoberelatedacrossawiderangeofairtemperature,
radianttemperature,andhumidity.ASHRAE552010,section5.2.3.2.
20
occupantcoolingpotentialwhentheycanoffsethighertemperaturesintheSET*adjustedPMV
thermalcomfortmodel.
2.3 OBJECTIVES
Itisthehopethatthisdocumentshedslightononeofthemanymethodsofstudying
airflowandinspiresarchitects,especiallythosedesigningfortropicalclimates,toconsiderthe
designchallengesassociatedwithnaturalventilationasopportunitiesratherthansimply
acceptingthistobeoutsidetheirscopeandbeyondtheircontrol.
Asdiscussedinsection1.2oftheintroduction,architectshavebeenincreasinglyusing
newtypesofscreensandshadingdevicesthatlikelyaffectairflow.Whileotherformsof
externalshadinghavebeenstudiedintermsofairflowinthepast,screenshadingsystemshave
notbeenanalyzedintermsofairflowbefore.Thepurposeofthisstudyistoassesstheimpact
ofarangeofshadingandwindowconfigurationsonindoorairflowinordertoidentifyhow
specificinletgeometriesaffecttheeffectivenessofwinddrivencoolinginawarmhumid
climate.Whilenaturalventilationcanpassivelycooloccupantsandreduceoreliminatethe
needformechanicalcooling,airflowinbuildingsisinherentlydifficulttoanalyze.Through
examiningofanumberoffaadeinletconfigurations,thisstudyseekstodevelopabasisfor
buildingfaadesdesignprinciplesintermsofnaturalventilation.Itisthehopethatthe
informationpresentedinthisdocumentwillencouragedesignerstoconsiderusingnatural
ventilationintropicalclimateprojectsandhelpthemmaximizethepotentialofnatural
ventilationinbuildingdesign.
21
Theimpactofinletfaadecomponentsmadeupofexteriorshadingdevicesand
windowsonnaturalventilationwillbeassessedintermsofthemeanvelocityanddistribution
oftheairflow.Themainquestionsaskedare:
o Whatcombinationsofshadingdevicesandwindowtypescreateuniformlyhighairflow
acrosstheoccupiedzone
24
?
o Howdoexteriorshadingscreensinfrontofoperablewindowsaffectairflowandshould
theybeusedifnaturalventilationisagoal?
o Iftheshadescreenreducesairvelocity,whatcharacteristicofitsgeometryaffectsthis?
Howdodifferenttypes(e.g.perforatedpanelandthinlouvers)ofshadingdevices
compareintermsofslowingdownorchangingthedirectingofairflow?
o Howdoestheairflowvarywithwindowtype?
o Givenacombinationofshadesandwindowsthateffectivelypromotesairmovement,at
whattimesmightwinddrivenventilationbeacceptableforthermalcomfort?
o Howmightdesignteamsapplythisinaproject?
2.4 APPROACH
Theindependentandinterdependenteffectsofthetwocomponenttypes(shadesand
windows)onairflowareexaminedusingaphysicalscalemodelofaclassroominaboundary
layerwindtunnel.Thedesirableairflowcharacteristicswillhaveahighaveragevelocityratio
withlowvariationacrosstheairflowplan.Thisstudylooksattwotypesofexternalscreen
shades:aperforatedpanelsystemandthinexteriorlouvers;andthreetypesofoperable
windows:awning,casementanddoublehungwindows.Someexamplesofscreenshadesand
windowtypesareshowninFigure21andFigure22.Outofthetestedconfigurations,themost
24
ASHRAE552010,7.2.2:HeightAboveFloorMeasurements.Airtemperatureandairspeedshallbemeasuredat
the0.1,0.6,and1.1m(4,24,and43in.)levelsforsedentaryoccupantsatthelocationsspecifiedinSection7.2.1.
Standingactivitymeasurementsshallbemadeatthe0.1,1.1,and1.7m(4,43,and67in.)levels.Theseheights
correspondtoseatedandstandingankle,waistandheadlevels.
promisin
thermalc
gshadingw
comfortpot
windowcomb
entialisasse
binationisse
essedforthe
22
electedfora
etropicalcli
amoredeta
imateofBan

iledexplora
ngkok,Thaila
Figure22:W
Types.(Arch
Standards1
left:awning
action,hop
combinatio
multipletyp
including,a
andhopper
Bottomleft
jalousie,ve
horizontally
singleand
Figure21.S
systemsare
contempora
Fromleftto
panels,thin
slats.
tion,where
and.
WindowOperati
hitecturalGraph
11thed.p.186)T
g,casement,du
peranda
nwindow,with
pesinoneframe
awning,projecte
rwindows.
t:horizontalslid
rticallypivoted,
ypivoted,and
doublehung.
Screenshading
eprevalentin
aryarchitecture
oright:perforat
nlouversandwo
the
ion
hic
Top
al
h
e,
ed
ding,
,
e.
ed
ood
23
CHAPTER3 PREVIOUSRESEARCH
Applyingthethermalcomfortstandardsmentionedaboveisnotasimpletaskand
architectsaretypicallynotinvolvedintheanalysisrelatedtocomfortstandards.Typically,
consultingengineersaretheoneswhoemploythesestandards.Simplifiedguidelinesfor
architectshaveattemptedtobridgethisgapandhavehistoricallydiscussedvariousformsof
mechanicalequipmentrequiredforheating,coolingandventilating.Intheseguidelines,
ventilationthroughwindowswastreatedmoreasanalternative,nonessentialstrategy.
3.1 EXISTINGDESIGNGUIDELINES
Researchonnaturalventilationhasbeenconductedatboththeacademicand
professionallevels,usingbothphysicalandmathematicalmodels.Whiletherehasbeensome
efforttoconsolidatesuchresearchintodesignguides,muchthisdatesbacktothe1980sor
earlierandisnoteasilyaccessibleformostpracticingprofessionalengineersandarchitects
today.
Existingdesignguidescommoninarchitecturalpracticesdonothavespecific
informationonhowtodesignwindowsandshadesforairflow.Whileitisanexcellent
schematicdesignguideforarchitects,G.Z.BrownsSunWind&Light(SWL)iscursoryinits
mentionoftheeffectsofsunshadesandwindowtypesonairflow;Brownstatesthatshades
canobstructflow.Thisisunderstandable,sincethismightbeofmoresignificanceduringlater
stagesindesign.Thatsaid,BrowndoescitetheRectorateoftheAcademyoftheAntillesand
Guiana(alsoknownastheEducationAuthorityofMartinique),whichhasfinsfordirecting
24
airflowthatalsohelpwithshadingtheopenings.
25
ThereferencesandstudiescitedinSWL
arealsohelpfulforfurtherresearch.
Similarly,MechanicalandElectricalEquipmentforBuildings
26
providesusefulrulesof
thumbforchoosingwindowtypesforairflowbasedonpercentageofeffectiveopeningarea,
whichisnotclearlydefined.Figure23(left)wascitedinEnvironmentalControlSystemsby
FullerMoore,referencingEnergyEfficientFloridaHomeBuildingbyVieiraandSheinkopf).
Similarwindows(butwithdifferenteffectiveopeningpercentages)arealsoofferedbyKnaack
inFaades:PrinciplesofConstruction(Figure3,right).Theauthorsabovedidnotdescribehow
thesepercentageswerederived.(ThoughtherewerenaturalventilationstudiesattheFSECat
thetime,theauthorsdonotreferenceothersourcesforthis.)Whilethismaysufficeforvery
earlydesigncalculations,suchomissionsgivenoclueastowhenthesenumbersarereliablefor
laterdesignphases,whenmoredecisions,likethetypeandnumberofopenings,mustbe
made.

Figure23:(Left)Effectiveopenarea,alsocalledwindowporosity,ofvarioustypesofwindowsfromEnergyEfficientFlorida
HomeBuilding,1988,p.73.Itisunclearhowthesepercentageswerederived.(Right)Notetheverydifferenteffectiveopen
areasfromFaades:principlesofconstruction,p.75.
25
Brown,SunWindandLightp.184.
26
Grondzik,WalterT.,AlisonG.Kwok,andBenjaminStein.2009.Mechanicalandelectricalequipmentforbuildings.
Hoboken,N.J.:Wiley.
25
3.2 REGIONSPECIFICGUIDELINES
Additionalspecific,andoftenobscure,designguidelinesfornaturalventilationare
availablefromconferenceproceedingsandenergyresearchcenters,suchastheFloridaSolar
EnergyCenter(FSEC).ExamplesofthisincludeCoolingwithVentilation
27
forthesoutheastern
UnitedStates,VentilationofWideSpanSchoolsintheHotHumidTropics
28
,NaturalVentilation
inNorthwestBuildings
29
.Exceptforthelastbookmentioned,muchofthisworkwasdonein
thelate1970sandearly1980s;whiletheseeffortshavemuchusefulinformation,itisunlikely
thatarchitectswhodonothaveaccesstomajorlibrariescaneasilyfindthem.
3.3 METHODSOFTESTINGWINDDRIVENVENTILATIONINBUILDINGDESIGN
Thoughwinddrivenventilationinbuildingshasbeenusedforalongtime,methodsof
estimatingitsperformancehavenotbeenaroundaslong.Rulesofthumbforarchitectsinvolve
manipulatinginletandoutletareasasafunctionofthefloorarea.Rulesofthumbareperhaps
acceptableforanapproximatednotionduringveryearlydesignphases,butdonotaddressthe
interactionbetweensunshadingandopeningareas.Formoresophisticatednaturalventilation
testing,architectsusuallyrefertoconsultantengineersfordesignguidance.Inturnthese
mechanicaland/orcivilengineersuseavarietyoftoolsforestimatingairflow.Theseinclude:
1) Thedischargecoefficientmethod
2) bulkairflowmodelsbasedonpressurecoefficients
3) computationalfluiddynamics(CFD)
27
Chandraetal,1986.TheFSEChaspublishedmanydesignguidesandpapers.
http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/index.php
28
Chand,Ishwar,1977.UNESCOsponsoredresearchdoneatCentralBuildingResesarchInstitute,Roorkee,India.
29
Brown,G,andUniversityofOregon,2004.
26
Researchersemployanevenbroaderrangeofassessmentmethods.Forthepurposesof
research,methodsoftestingindoorwinddrivenairflowinbuildingsinclude
30
:
a) fullandmodelscaleoutdoorinvestigations
b) bulkairflowmodeling
c) computationalfluiddynamics(CFD)
d) theuseofwinddischargecoefficientmethod
e) directmeasurementofindoorvelocitiesinascalemodelwithinaboundarylayer
windtunnel
Thedifferencebetweenthetoolpaletteofthedesignengineerandthatofthe
researcherariselargelyfromthecostsinvolvedwithwindtunneltestingandtheabsenceofa
constructedbuilding(asrequiredinfullscaleinvestigations)totestduringthedesignphase.
Bulkairflowmodelingisnotsoeffectivewhenbuildinggeometriesarecomplexorinthecaseof
simplegeometrieswithlargeopenings(asisoftenthecaseinhot,humidclimates).Ofthenon
physicaltoolsinthepalette,onlyCFDcanprovidesomeguidancetotherelativeperformance
ofdifferentwindowsandshades.ItshouldbenotedthatthekindofCFDusedforbuilding
designsimulations(asopposedtothoseforaircraftdesignsimulation),rarelymodelseddiesor
fluctuationsinvelocitythatarecommoninnaturalwind,becausedoingsowouldbetoo
expensive
31
.InadditiontothechallengesofmodelingnaturalwindinCFD,utilizingCFD
effectivelyhasasteeplearningcurveandrequiresmuchoperationalexperiencebeforereliable
resultscanbeobtained.Whileeachoftheevaluativemethodshaspositivefeaturesand
drawbacks,windtunnelmodeltestingwasselectedforthepurposesofthisstudy.
30
Ernest1991
31
Theexcessivecostsincludethatfortechnicallyskilledlabor,manyhoursofworkandhighendsoftware.Based
onaconversationwithDavidBanksofCPPWindEngineeringandAirQualityConsultants
27
Therewereanumberofreasonsforthis:windtunneltestinghasallowsforboth
velocitymeasurementsandflowvisualization;exploringthemethodwasrelativelyaccessible;
oncebuilt,physicalmodelsarerelativelyeasytoadjust;mostsignificantly,theBuildingScience
LabatUCBerkeleyhasafunctionalboundarylayerwindtunnelaswellasresearcherswith
directexperiencewiththisspecificwindtunnel.
Ascanbesaidofeverymethod,windtunneltestinghasitslimitations.Inordertofitthe
testingprogramintothewindtunnelmethods,modelscannotobstructmorethan10%ofthe
crosssectionbeforeresultsbecomeunreliable.(Someresearcherskeeptheirmodelsunder
5%.)Thislimitsthesizeofthetestmodel,causingmidandhighrisebuildingschallengingto
study.Thoughoriginallytheideawastotestaroomaspartofabuildingmass,ithadtobe
modeledasaoneroomboxinordertocapturetheadequatedetailrequiredintheshadesand
windows.Inadditiontothis,thewindtunnelhadnotbeenusedtocollectvelocity
measurementsinaboutadecade,somoretimewasrequiredtogettheequipmentfully
functional.

28
Figure24.Previousnaturalventilationresearchconductedinthewindtunnel.

29
3.4 ACADEMICRESEARCHANDPARAMETRICWINDTUNNELVENTILATIONSTUDIES
Forthisstudy,asurveyofpreviousresearchwasconductedinanefforttoidentifythe
significantparametersaffectingindoorairflow.Bowen(1981)consolidatedthegeneralfindings
ofvariouswindtunnelstudiespriorto1981intoaconferencepaper
32
.Windtunnelstudieson
naturalventilationinbuildingswerebeguninthe1950s,atTexasEngineeringExperiment
Station(Smith,1951andHolleman1951)andcontinuedintotheearly1990s. Variousbuilding
parametersaffectingindoorairmotionwereinvestigatedwithinthisbodyofwork.
BOUNDARYLAYER/SITEDENSITY.Boundarylayerdescribeslayersofwindneartheground
whicharealwaysturbulentduetoroughnessinthesurfaceoftheearth.Thewindspeediszero
atgroundlevel;theamountitincreaseswithheightdependsonthetypeofterrainandiscalled
aboundarylayerprofile.Thepresenceofneighboringbuildingsreduceswindspeeds.Inthe
windtunnel,theboundarylayerroughnessisgeneratedbyusingwoodblocks.Ernesttested
theeffectsofthreeboundarylayers(terrainscorrespondingtoflatfarmland,villagesand
suburbs)onalowrisebuildingmodelandfoundvirtuallynodifferencesinpressurecoefficients
33
.Healsonotedapreviousstudy(AkinsandCermak1976),whereintheaffectofdifferent
boundaryconditionshadmuchmoreofaneffectonhighrisebuildings.
32
Bowen1981.
33
Ernest1991.p.4041
Figure25.Sobin'sdiagram
describingvariousincidentwind
angleshetested.

30
WINDDIRECTION.Givoni(1962)foundthataverageindoorairvelocitywashigherforthe
incidentwindanglesof45thanfor0(Figure25).Sobintestedmultiplewindowproportions
andfoundthisonlytobetrueforhorizontalwindows,whilesquarewindowsperformedbetter
at0.Inhis1977studies,Chandconcludedthatwinddirectioncannotbestudied
independentlyofothervariables.
BUILDINGMASSING.Inhisreportontheventilationoftropicalschoolbuildings,Chand(1977)
comparedvariousbuildingfloorplanshapes;hefoundwindshadowscouldbeminimizedwith
Lshaped(orreentrantcornered)plans.Inasimilarmanner,Aynsley(1979)studiedsixtypesof
freestandinghousesforhothumidclimatesinthecontextofQueenland,Australia.He
concludedthatbothelevatedandgroundlevelhouseswithextendedverandasandendwalls
(types4and2respectivelyinFigure27)couldprovidethehighestcoolingpotentialinthetest
set.Thesearchitecturalfeatures,notsurprisingly,arealsocommontoAustraliashothumid
tropics.ThroughCFDtests,Tantasavasdietal(2001)cametoasimilarconclusion.Hefound
houseselevatedonstilts,ratherthanongroundlevel,tobemoreeffectivefornatural
ventilationintheBangkoksuburbanclimate.

Figure26.Chand
(1976)studied
concludedthatwind
shadowscouldbe
remediedwithre
entrantcorners.

31

Figure27:(Left)HousetypestestedbyAynsley(1979).Types2and4(witheavesandendwalls,withandwithoutstilts)
showedthemostcoolingpotential.(Right)DesignstrategybasedonfindingsfromCFDsimulations(Tantasavasdietal,2001)
Atamorebasiclevelofmassing,Ernest(1991)testedtheadditionofmassontohis
baselinebuilding.Headdedonsupplementaryblocksaboveandbesidethebaselinemodel,
althoughnotsimultaneouslyinbothplaces,aswouldbethecaseinamidrisebuilding.When
addingablocktoincreasetheheightofthebuilding,hefounda5%increaseinaverageinterior
airvelocityatsomeangles(between30and75).Therewaslittledifferenceat0,15and30
anglesofincidence.Whenablockwasaddedtoonesideofthebuilding,hefoundlessthana
5%increaseatsomeangles.(Theinteriorairvelocitywasveryclosetothesingleblockexcept
between3075,wheretherewaslessthana5%increase.)Whentwoblockswereaddedtothe
rightandleftsideofthebaseline,theaverageairvelocitiesdecreasedslightly,ascompared
withthesingleblock.

Figure28(left).Addedheightincreasedaveragevelocityslightlyinbaselinebuildingatincidentanglesbetween3075.
Figure29(right).Addedwidthinplandecreasedairvelocityexceptwhenatobliqueanglesbetween3070
32

ROOMDEPTHandPROPORTIONS.BothSobin(1983)andChand(1966and1977)testedthe
affectsofroomdepthproportionsonindoorairflow.Inhisstudyonventilationintropical
schools,Chand(1977)concludedincreaseinthespandepthofabuildingreducesthe
achievablewindspeedsatallpointsinsidethebuildingandthatthisreductionwasmore
pronouncedbelowsilllevel,suchasforstudentsseatedonthefloor.Sobins(1983)data
similarlysuggestedthattheairflowinshallowanddeeproomsislargelydependentonwindow
geometry.Inaroomwithvertical,floortoceilinginletandoutletopenings,theairvelocities
significantlydecreasedinthedeeperroomfurtherawayfromthewindow.Forthehorizontal
windowsinSobinsstudies,however,roomdepthdidnotgreatlyaffecttheaverageindoorair
velocitiesinplanorsection;inplantheaverageairvelocityactuallyincreased4%whileit
decreased5%insectionbetweentheshalloweranddeeperrooms.
OPENINGSIZE,SHAPEandLOCATION.Sobin(1983)didanextensivestudyofvariousopening
shapes,sizesandgeometries.Heconcludedthatwindowopeningshapewasthesinglemost
importantwindowdesignparameterindeterminingtheefficacyofwinddrivenventilative
cooling.
34
Hisfindingssuggestthathorizontalwindowsproducemoreroomairflowatawider
rangeofanglesthansquareorverticalwindows(Figure30).Chand(1968)foundthattheheight
34
Sobin,1981.
Figure30.Theimpactofwindow
shapeonairvelocity.(Sobin1981,
modifiedbyChandra1986.)
33
ofthewindowsillhadasignificanteffectintheairmovementinthelivingzonebetween0.6
and1.2m;asillheightof0.9mor85%ofthedesk(workingplane)heightwasidealforachieving
maximumairmotioninthebreathingzone.
WINDOWGEOMETRYandDETAILS.Manypastwindtunnelventilationstudiesweredoneon
thinwalled,oneroommodelswithasingleinletandasingleoutlet,abasicgeometrythat
mightbefoundinschoolroomsandresidentialstructures.Withfewexceptions,onlyrough
Figure32.Drawingsof
fullscaleandmodel
studiesofdifferent
windowoperationtypes.
Chandra1986,
preprintedfrom
Holleman1951.
Figure31.Smith,1951.
Thebuildingmodel
showedonlyasmall
differenceindetail
comparedtothetest
facility,causingtheflow
patterntobevery
differentfromthatinthe
actualbuilding.The
discrepancyresulted
fromadifferenceinsash
andframedetail.
Figure33.CFDtestofan
extrusiondetailatthe
bottomofanawning
windowforflow
redirectionintothe
occupiedzone.

openings
sillwere
detailsha
studies(F
theSFFe
Figure34.L
Wall.Below
EXTERIOR
concerne
cooling.
including
studiedt
thatsem
weremo
35
Carter,Bri
Universityo
36
Sobin,19
sweremode
notmodele
avepotentia
Figure31an
ederalbuildi
Left:semiboxty
w.EffectofLouv
RPROJECTIO
edwithwind
36
BothSobi
gvariousfor
theimpacts
miboxtype
osteffective
ian.2008.GSA/M
ofBuffalo,TheS
981p.195
eledthatis
dwithrealis
altoenhanc
ndFigure32)
ngbelow).
35
ypeprojectionte
vers(orhorizont
ONSandSHA
dowsystem
inandChand
msofshadin
ofhorizonta
projections
promotinga
Morphosis/Arup
StateUniversity
s,withouta
sticthicknes
eorobstruc
)aswellasi
5
estedbyChand.
talshade).Chan
ADINGDEVIC
selectionon
d(1971,197
ngdeviceso
alandprojec
(Figure34r
airmotionin
:SanFranciscoF
ofNewYork.(in
34
windowafr
ses.Asasig
ctairflowto
naCFDtest
.Middle&right
nd,1976.
CES.Inhise
nthebasiso
75,and1977
ofdifferentg
ctionsonind
right),made
ntheoccupie
Federalbuilding
nsertimageinto
rameormov
nificantpart
theoccupie
teddesigno
t:EffectofVerti
extensivestu
fthepoten
7)testedmu
geometries.C
doorairmov
upofanove
edzonefor
g.Buffalo,NY:Sc
odocument)
veablesash.
tofthegeom
edzone,ass
fthewindow
calProjectionso
udies,Sobin
ntialforpass
ultiplefenest
ChandandK
vement.The
erhangand
allanglesof
choolofArchitec
Oftenwalls
metry,these
howninear
wframedet
ontheWindwar
(1983)was
siveventilati
trationfeatu
Krishak(197
studyfound
averticalfin
fincidence
ctureandPlanni
and
e
rly
tailat
rd
ive
ures,
1)
d
n,
ng,
35
between0and90.Chandra(1983)studiedtheeffectsofwingwallsonenhancingnatural
ventilation.
Testsontheeffectofshadingdevicesonindoorairflowhavebeenaddressedthrough
meansotherthanwindtunneltests.Intheexamplesfound,themethodsinvolvedmeasuring
thepressuredifferenceacrossfullscalelouversinapressurizedtestschamberandcomparing
resultswithmathematicalmodels.Tsangrassoulisetal(1997)testedmoveableverticaland
horizontallouversonanoutdoortestcellwithsinglesidedventilationforthepurposeof
improvinganetworkflowbasedmethodoftestingairflowthroughshading.Pittsand
Georgiadis(1994)testedVenetianblindanglesandwindowopeningdegreesinawindtunnel.
Nomentionwasmadeoftheparticulartypeofwindowsusedinthetest.Theyobservedthat
thinlouversatthepartiallyclosedangleof45showedlittleflowreductionandcouldenhance
airflowthroughpartiallyopenedwindows.Whensetat85,however,theblindssignificantly
blockedairflow.Thefindingsinthethreestudiesabovearelimitedtotheregionimmediately
behindthelouvers.Thisinformationishelpful,butlimitedinapplicabilityinthecontextof
tropicalclimateswheremuchmoreflowisneededtoachievethermalcomfort.
Alargeconcentrationofwindtunnelbasednaturalventilationstudiesisconcernedwith
howtocoolbyconvectioninhothumidandhotdryclimates(Chand,Givoni1962).Itisfrom
thesetropicalregionsthatmuchofthisresearchoriginates.IshwarChandworkedinIndiaand
Thailand;RichardAynsleyresidedinPapuaNewGuineaandQueensland;BaruchGivonispenta
significantamountoftimeinHaifa,Israel;HarrisSobindidhiswindtunnelstudiesattheCentre
forTropicalArchitectureattheArchitecturalAssociation,inLondonandtaughtandpracticedin
Arizona.
36
Thegoalofwinddrivenventilationinhot,humidclimatesistoprovideadequateair
movementprimarilyforbodilycooling.Itisparticularlyinthenonresidentialbuildingsinsuch
climatesthatthefindingsforsuchresearchcanpotentiallyhaveanimpact.

37
CHAPTER4 METHODS
Thischaptercoversthemethodsinvolvedwiththetestingofascalemodelandits
componentsinaboundarylayerwindtunnel.Eachconfigurationinvolvedtakinginteriorair
velocitymeasurementsinsidethemodelatthreeanglesofincidence:0,45,and90.Testing
beganwithconfigurationsofindividualcomponentsfirstandthenmovedontocombinations
ofcomponentslater.Airvelocitiesarespatiallydescribedthroughisovelocitycontourmapsin
planandsection.Flowpatternsarethendescribedinairflowplansandsectionsdrawnfrom
smokestudiesobservedfirsthandandcapturedonvideo.
4.1 BOUNDARYLAYERWINDTUNNEL
Velocitymeasurementsandsmokestudieswerecarriedoutintheboundarylayerwind
tunnel(BLWT)housedinUCBerkeleysBuildingScienceLaboratory.Thewindtunnelisanopen
circuitdesignwithinteriorcrosssectionaldimensionsof1.5mhighby2.1mwideandan
overalllengthof19.5m.Thefirst12.8mofthewindtunnel,fromthebellmouthinlet,isthe
flowprocessingareaandcontainsacombinationofturbulencegeneratingblocksacrossthe
floortosimulatecharacteristicsofflowapproachingthebuildingmodel.Immediatelyfollowing
theboundaryelementsisa3.7mlongtestsectioninwhichscalemodelsaretestedona2m
diameterturntable.Theturntableisusedtostudytheincidentwindanglesof0,45and90
movingcounterclockwiseinplan.

Figure35.B
4.2 M
T
withina
modeled
purposes
(describe
expectin
ceilingan
toreceiv
opening
fullyope
twowalls
thevario
mm)hole
sealinth
themeas
Basemodelwith
MODELDESC
hemodel,at
lowrisebui
dassinglero
sofmeasuri
edearlier)w
ntropicalclim
ndafloor.Th
einterchang
amountsfor
n.Theexter
sweremade
ousheightso
escorrespon
hegapbetwe
surements.
hroughopening
CRIPTION
tthescaleo
lding.Inord
oom.Themo
ngandvisua
whileseeming
mates,assh
hetwowalls
geablewind
reachofthe
riorshadesw
eofclearac
oftheoccup
ndingtothe
eentheprob
gs,photographa
of1=10
ertoworkw
odelhasreco
alizingairflow
glyabstract,
owninthei
swithwindo
owstypesa
ewindows,t
wereoffset3
rylicandsco
iedzone.Th
pointsofve
beandthea
38

anddrawing.
IPunits(o
withinthem
onfigurablew
w.Theoccu
,asingleroo
introduction
owopenings
ndexterior
thewindow
30model
oredatthem
heclearacry
elocitymeas
acrylichole.
r1:8),repre
methodsofth
windowsan
pancytypea
omspaceis
n.Themode
sweredesig
shades.Whi
configuratio
scalefromt
measuremen
licceilingof
surements.A
Unusedhole
sentsasing
heBLWT,the
dexteriorsh
andmethod
notfarfrom
lconsistsof
nedasroug
ileitispossi
onswerealw
theexterior
ntheightsco
f themodelh
Arubberwas
esweretape

leclassroom
eclassroom
hadingforth
dsinducedlim
mwhatonec
fourwalls,a
hopeningss
bletoadjust
waystesteda
wall.Theot
orresponding
has3/8(9.5
shercreated
edshutdurin
m
was
he
mits
can
a
soas
tthe
as
her
gto
5
da
ng
39
ThistestisReynoldsnumberindependent,asthemodelpartshavesharpedgesandthe
smallestdimensionsexceedthoseallowable.Atthisscale,openingscanbenosmallerthan1/8
(or3mm)actualsizebeforetheReynoldsnumberbecomesproblematic.Theperforationshad
tobeenlargedinordertonothaveholessmallerthan1/8.Theactualperforationsscaledto
modelsizewouldhaveresultedin1/16diameterholes,whichistoosmallfordynamic
similarity.Thesmallestdimensioninthemodelwasfortheholesintheperforatedpanel
shade,whichare5/32indiameter.(SeeFigure37foravisualcomparison.)
4.3 VELOCITYMEASUREMENTS
VelocitymeasurementsweretakenwithaTSIModel1266hotwireanemometer.The
hotwiresensoratthetipoftheanemometerismostaccurateatmeasuringairflownormalto
thewire
37
,whichinthiscasemeanslocationsinhorizontalplanesparalleltothewindtunnel
floor.
Velocitymeasurementpointsweretakenintwoplanes.Ahorizontal5x5grid
38
of
points37(or1.1m)abovethemodelfloor,correspondingtoseatedheadheight,was
establishedtocharacterizeairflowacrosstheroomplan,creatinganairflowplan.Avertical
gridofpointswasalsotakenat4,24,and67(0.1,0.6,and1.7mrespectively)alongthe
centerlineofthemodelfrominlettooutletopenings,creatinganairflowsection
39
.Itis
expectedthatthecomponentswillbetestedat0,45and90relativetotheincidentwind,
with0beingheadonfrominlettooutletand45and90turnedinthecounterclockwise
directionfromabove.Withtwentyfivepointsinplanandtwentyinsection(and5thatoverlap
37
Cermak,1984[findpage]
38
The5x5horizontalgridintheoccupiedzonecorrespondstotheworkofGivoni,SobinandChand.Sobinalso
useda5x5gridofpointsinsection.
39
Sobinusedthistermtodescribethesemeasurementplanes.
40
both),fortydifferentpointsweremeasuredinsidethemodelforeachsetupateachangleof
incidence.
AirflowintheBLWT,likenaturalwind,exhibitsmuchfluctuationinvelocity.Innatural
wind,especiallyinurbanconditions,thereisyetahigherdegreeoffluctuation,aslargereddies
arepossible.Tominimizetheeffectsoffluctuationduringthevelocitymeasurements,each
pointwasmeasured900timesoveroneminute.Themeanwindvelocityduringthatminute
wascalculatedbyacustomizeddataacquisitionprograminLabView8.Themeanvelocityat
eachpoint(v
i
)isthendividedbythereferencevelocity(v
ref
),takenfromanunobstructed
locationtheapproachflow,inordertoobtainvelocityratios.Inthiscase,thereferencevelocity
wastakenfromapointmorethanthreetimesthemodelheightandatthesameelevationas
theplanmeasurementsintheunobstructedstreambetweenthemodelandturbulenceblocks.
Velocityratiosaredimensionlessvaluesthatalonehavenotmeaning;itisonlywhentheyare
usedwithwindanddatathattheybegintosuggestinactualairvelocitiesandthussignificance
foraspecificcase.
Therearemanyfactorsthataredifficulttocontrolinthewindtunnel.ItisImportantto
identifywhatismorecontrolledandwhatislesscontrolled.Inthiscase,havingaboundary
profilewasdeemedmoreimportantthanhavinganappropriatelyscaledboundarylayer
profile,sincelittledifferenceexistedbetweenvelocityandpressuremeasurementsatdifferent
boundarylayerscalesforpreviouslowrisebuildingstudies
40
.
40
Ernest,1991.p.4041
4.4 F
F
attached
photogra
ThoughI
footagew
physically
observat
smokeha
quickly;t
againonc
Figure36.Im
conditionsa
visualizatio
4.5 S
Oftheex
screenar
41
Thispart
forhuman
LOWVISUA
lowvisualiza
dtoacompr
aphswascap
magesalone
washelpful
ychangevie
ionswithin
adtobeintr
thisrequired
cethemode
magestakenfro
at45.Thewoo
nofthinlouver
ELECTIONof
xteriorshadi
refrequently
ticularbounda
breathing.Tit
LIZATION
ationwasob
essedairho
pturedfrom
earenotve
inreviewing
ewingangles
intheoccup
roducedfor
dfillingthem
elwasfilled.
omflowvisualiz
dblocksusedth
sandroughope
fSHADINGD
ingstrategie
yvisibleinc
rylayerwindt
taniumtetrach
bservedwith
oseandlater
thesestudi
rydescriptiv
gwhatwase
sattimes.)F
piedzone.Fo
instantaneo
modelwiths
ationusingultra
hatcontributet
eningat0.
DEVICES&W
esdiscussed
contemporar
tunnelwithina
hloride,themo
41
hsmokecr
ratheatrical
esinordert
veasthefog
empiricallyo
Fogisdenser
orobserving
ousobservat
smokewitht
asonicfog.(Left
otheboundary
WINDOWTY
inChapter1
ryhighperfo
asharedoffice
orecommonty
reatedwith
lsmokemac
toobservein
gdoesnotph
observedins
rthanairan
gflowinthe
tions.Often,
thefanoffa
t)Modelwithaw
ylayerarevisible
YPES
1,theperfor
ormancebui
space,sothe
ypeused,istox
anultrasoni
chine.Video
nteriorflow
hotographw
space.(Itwa
ndthiswass
upperportio
thefogwou
andswitchin
wningwindowi
einthebackgro
ratedscreen
ildings.Asth
typeofsmoke
xictobreathe.
cfogger
41
footageand
direction.
well,video
asimportant
atisfactoryf
onsofthero
ulddissipate
gitbackon
innearstillair
ound.(Right)Flo
nandlouver
herecanbea
eusedhadtob
d
tto
for
oom,
e
ow
a
besafe
42
widevariationinshadingdevices,thoseselectedfortestingweredesignedandconstructedto
haveaporosityof53%.WhiletheperforatedpanelwasmodeledaftertheSanFrancisco
FederalBuilding(SFFB),thelouverscreenwasnotmodeledafteraparticularbuildingexample,
thougharevisuallyrelatedtotheTerryThomasbuildingandNew42
nd
StreetStudios.
Combinationsofshadingdevicesandwindowtypeswerealsoselectedonthebasisoftheiruse
inhighprofilegreenarchitecture,suchasthosepreviouslynoted.Theperforatedpanelsystem
basedontheSFFB,wasmadewithperforationsscaledupforwindtunnelmodeling,as
mentionedinsection4.2.Thethinlouveredscreenismadeupof4xlouverstilted22.5
downwardandspaced3and7oncenter(forviewandtoequalizeporositywiththe
perforatedpanel).Thedimensionsofthelouversarecomparabletothatofcommercially
availableexteriorVenetianblinds.

Figure37.Perforatedpanelscreen.Left:viewofperforatedscreenasconstructed.Middle:detailviewofactualscreentested
withlargerholes,butequalporosity.Right:screenasdrawninelevation(Murray2009).

Figure38.Thinlouverscreen.Left:Generalviewofthinlouverscreenasconstructed.Right:detailviewofactuallouver
screentested.
43

Figure39.Left:theSanFranciscoFederalBuildinghasawningwindowsbehindsaperforatedpanelscreen.(Murray2009).
Figure40.Right:TheNew42ndStreetStudios,NewYork.PlattByardDovelWhite,2000.Elevationandsection.(Murray
2009)

Figure41.(Left)TerryThomasBuildinghasawningwindowsbehindsexteriorvenetianblinds.Imagefrom
<www.weberthompson.com>.Figure42.(Right)Windowopeningtypestested.(Chandra1986)
*
44
THISPAGEISINTENTIONALLYLEFTBLANK
45
CHAPTER5 RESULTS
Thissectionincludesresultsfromthewindtunnelstudiesdescribedearlieraswellasan
exploratorythermalcomfortexerciseusingthewindtunnelresults.Thefirstsectiondescribes
themeasuredandobservedairvelocityresultsfromthreesetsofwindtunnelstudies.Thefirst
setestablishestheeffectsofthebasemodelwithandwithoutvariousoutletwindowson
indoorairflow.Thefirstsetalsohelpstocharacterizetheeffectoftwooutletconditionsprior
toselectingoutletconditionforallthefollowingtests.Thesecondsetstudiestheeffectsof
individualfaadecomponentsonthebasemodel;theseincludetheinletwindowtestandthe
shadetest.Thethirdandfinalsetshowstheresultsofthecombinedeffectsofthemultiple,
previouslytestedcomponents.
Thevelocityresultsfromthemosteffectivecombinedconfigurationwithrespectto
thehighestmeanairvelocitywithleastvariationacrosstheoccupiedzoneinplan(v
PLAN
)are
thenusedtoexaminewhenbothseasonallyandtimeofdaywinddrivencoolingmightbe
acceptableforthermalcomfortinasuburbanBangkokclassroom.Inthisexploratorythermal
comfortexercise,theindoortemperaturefloatswiththeoutdoortemperatureandthebuilding
isassumedtobethermallyverylight.
5.1 WINDTUNNELTESTRESULTS
Thefollowingresultsapplyonlytothespecificconfigurationtested.Eachtestis
characterizedbyanallpointsmeanvelocityratioinplanandinsection(v
PLAN
andv
SECT
respectively),planandsectioncontourmapsdescribingvelocityspreadinspace,andbythe
spatialvariationinvelocitywithineitherplanorsection,asnotedbythecoefficientofspatial
variationc
sv
,whichisalsousedbySobin(1983)andErnest(1991).
46
Atrendcommontoallthetestswasthattheflowstreamwouldexpandanddecelerate
asitmovedpastthewindowframe,mostclearat0.Eddieswouldformaroundtheopenings
insidethewindows.Thelowestvelocityratiostendedtooccurbelowtheinletwindow.Not
surprisinglyata90incidentwind(paralleltothewindow),v
PLAN
andv
SECT
werethelowestas
comparedtotheotheranglestested.
Withtheexceptionoftheawningwindow,themaximumv
PLAN
andv
SECT
tendedtooccur
atthe45obliqueincidentwindangleallfaadeconfigurationstested,astheroughopening
shapeishorizontal
42
.(Fortheawningwindow,thoughthemaximumv
PLAN
andv
SECT
occurredat
0incidentwindangle.)At45and90,theangledincidentwinddirectionresultedina
clockwiserotationintheindoorairstream.
Generally,v
SECT
tendedtobegreaterthanv
PLAN
at0and45.Theexceptiontothiswas
thedoublehungwindowtest,whichhadconsistentlyhighervaluesforv
PLAN
atallangles.The
dimensionofthisinletopeninginsectionwasalsoabouthalfoftheotherinletwindowstested.
Thetestresultswereinfluencedbytheratiobetweeninletandoutletsize(whichvary
fromabout2:1or1:1).Itisdifficulttoseparatetheeffectsofinletwindowgeometry
obstructionsfromtheinfluencesofthisparticularexperimentalsetup(whentheoutletareais
lessthanorequaltotheinletarea)
43
.Itiscommoninlargeandespeciallywideopeningsto
havesimultaneousinflowandoutflowatthesameopening
44
,acharacteristicofsinglesided
ventilation.

42
ThisisconsistentwithSobinsfindingsassociatedwithhorizontalwindows.
43
BasedonaconversationwithDavidBanksofCPPWind.
44
Sobin(1981)alsonoticedthisphenomenoninhisstudyofhorizontalwindows.
47
Table1.Resultsfromtestsperformed.V
PLAN
=meanvelocityratioforoccupiedareasinplan;V
SECT
=meanvelocityratiofor
occupiedareasinsection.Yellowhighlightindicatesthehigherallpointsmeanvelocity,eitherinplanorsection,foratestat
agivenangleofincidence.Orangehighlightandboldtextindicatethehighestairallpointsmeanvelocitywithina
configurationatthethreeanglestested.S
PLAN
andS
SECT
arethestandarddeviationofthevelocityratiosinplanandsection
respectively.Csv=coefficientofspatialvariation.
Shade InletWindow OutletWindow Test Angle
V
PLAN
S
PLAN
Csv
V
SECT
S
SECT
Csv
none none none RO+RO 0 57.5 24.1 0.4 73.9 39.6 0.5
none none DoubleHung,LO RO+VSLO 0 25.1 13.0 0.5 34.2 16.9 0.5
none none DoubleHung,UO RO+VSUO 0 21.9 12.1 0.6 32.5 20.1 0.6
none Awning DoubleHung,UO AW+VSUO 0 50.9 25.8 0.5 77.3 44.1 0.6
none Casement DoubleHung,UO CA+VSUO 0 22.6 11.6 0.5 32.4 17.8 0.5
none DoubleHung,LO DoubleHung,UO VSLO+VSUO 0 46.7 32.5 0.7 44.6 23.3 0.5
LouverScreen none DoubleHung,UO LSRO+VSUO 0 12.3 3.8 0.3 25.6 14.3 0.6
PerfPanel none DoubleHung,UO PFRO+VSUO 0 10.6 2.8 0.3 21.7 13.4 0.6
LouverScreen Awning DoubleHung,UO LSAW+VSUO 0 17.7 7.5 0.4 30.6 19.3 0.6
LouverScreen DoubleHung,LO DoubleHung,UO LSDHLO+VSUO 0 30.9 13.6 0.4 39.5 22.0 0.6
PerfPanel
Awning*60%
complete
DoubleHung,UO PFAWLO+VSUO 0 12.0 2.4 0.2 25.9 22.2 0.9
PerfPanel Awning DoubleHung,UO PFAWLO+VSUO 45 36.7 14.0 0.4 45.6 24.0 0.5
PerfPanel Awning DoubleHung,UO PFAWLO+VSUO 90 13.7 12.0 0.9 12.0 9.4 0.8
PerfPanel DoubleHung,LO DoubleHung,UO PFVSLO+VSUO 0 32.2 16.6 0.5 33.3 18.4 0.6

47a
Distributon of all inlet tests -
window, shade and combined
- in terms of the mean velocity
ratos in plan (Vplan) and the
coefcient of spatal variance
(Csv) for all angles of incidence
tested.
Ideal conditons would have a
high Vplan and a low Csv.
Distributon window tests at
each of the incident angles.
Other tests are shown greyed
out. Note the three diferent
changes in Vplan at 0
o
, 45
o
and
90
o
.
48
5.1.1 OUTLETOPENINGTESTS
Whatqualitiesaredesirableinanoutletopeningforstudyingfaadeinletconditions?
Thepurposeoftheoutletopeningtestistocharacterizetheoutletopeningintermsofindoor
flowinordertodeterminewhichoutletwindowtousewithallfollowingfaadeinlettests.The
outletopeningareaaffectshowairflowsthroughtheinletwindow;thisinturnimpactsthe
characterizationoftheinletfaadecomponents.Selectinganoutletwindowthatproduced
conditionsofwiderapplicabilitywasconsideredtobeimportant;inthiscase,thismeanthaving
ahigherandsmalleroutletopeningarearelativetotheinletopeningarea.(Thepatternofflow
insidetheroomwasofmoreinterestthantheaveragevelocity,astheformerbetterdescribe
flowdistribution.)Thethreeoptionstestedwere(1)roughopening(basemodel),(2)double
hungwithlowersashopenand(3)doublehungwithuppersashopen.
Figure43.Modelconfigurationsforstudyingtheoutletopening.Left:roughopeningsonly.Middle:roughopeningatinlet,
doublehungwithlowersashopenatoutlet.Right:roughopeningatinlet,doublehungwithuppersashopenatoutlet.
Notethatallthreetestsperformedwithhigherv
SECT
ratherthanv
PLAN
inplanexcept
whentheincidentwindanglewas90,whenv
PLAN
wasgreater.Notsurprisinglyinthisset,the
basemodel(leftabove)hadthehighestv
PLAN
andv
SECT
,witharounddoubletheaveragevelocity
ratiosastheothertwotests.Ofthetwodoublehungwindowstestedattheoutlet,the
configurationwiththelowersashopenperformedwithslightlyhighervaluesforv
PLAN
andv
SECT
at0and90,whilethevaluesat45werelowerthanitscounterpart(theuppersashopen).
49
Whilethedoublehung(uppersashopen)testdidnothaveairvelocitiesashighaswith
thelowersashopen,exceptat45,otherfactorssuggestedthatitmightbemorewidely
applicable.Thoughthisconditionisnotoptimalforhighairvelocitiesgiventhe2:1inletto
outletratio,
45
thistypeofconditionissimilartothenonidealconditionsinrealbuildings,such
asthosewithfurnitureobstructions,adjacencytocirculationorauxiliaryspacesandother
conditionswhentwoequallylargeopeningsarenotpossible.Thisconditionalsocauses
turbulencetodominateindoorflow.(Obviously,iftheoutletwindowwereverylarge,the
indoorairflowwouldbehigher.)Basedonthiswiderapplicability,itwasdeterminedthatthis
outletopeningconditionwouldbeusedforallsubsequenttests.Figures43,44and45describe
thevelocitydistributionsofthefirstsetoftests.

45
Sobin1981,Givoni1962suggestthatairspeedsarehighestwheninlettooutletratiosarebetween1:1and
1:1.5.itismoreidealforinletandoutletratiostobecloserto1:1.25to1:5,accordingtoGivoniandSobin
respectively.Twooftheinletwindowsinthisstudyhaveapproximatelydoubletheareaoftheoutletopening.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 45 90
v

P
L
A
N
(
V
p
t
/

V
r
e
f
)
Incident Wind Angle
Outlet Opening Test (Plan)
base mode
dbl hung
LO
dbl hung
UO
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 45 90
v

S
E
C
T
(
V
p
t
/

V
r
e
f
)
Incident Wind Angle (in plan)
Outlet Opening Test (Section)
base model
dbl hung
LO
dbl hung
UO
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90
o
45
o
0
o
50
v
PLAN
=20.9
v
SECT
=19.3 v
SECT
=79.3
v
PLAN
=69.8
v
SECT
=73.9
v
PLAN
=57.5
inlet:
rough opening
outlet:
rough opening
Rough Openings Test
Figure 44. Top: three incident wind angles tested indicated in
axonometric drawing. The tnted planes indicate the locatons of the
airfow plan and secton.
Below: airfow velocity plan and secton contour maps at 0, 45 and 90
incident wind. Colors indicate velocity ratos at for each locaton (v
i
/v
ref
),
expressed as a percentage of the unobstructed free stream air velocity
(v
ref
). Lighter tones at the perimeter are inferred velocites outside the
measurement zone.
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90
o
45
o
0
o
51
v
SECT
=13.1
v
PLAN
=17.7
v
SECT
=34.2
v
PLAN
=33.0
inlet:
rough opening
outlet:
double-hung, lower
sash open
Outlet Test: Double-hung, Lower Sash Open
v
SECT
=34.2
v
PLAN
=25.1
i
/v
ref
),
(v
ref
measurement zone.
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90
o
45
o
0
o
52
v
SECT
=32.6
v
PLAN
=21.9
v
SECT
=46.0
v
PLAN
=40.9
v
SECT
=10.4
v
PLAN
=14.3
inlet:
rough opening
outlet:
double-hung, upper
sash open
Outlet Test: Double-hung, Upper Sash Open
i
/v
ref
),
(v
ref
measurement zone.
53
5.1.2 INLET WINDOW TEST
The next tests done were to determine the patern and average velocity on indoor
airfow created by each of the inlet window types. The inlet windows tested here were the
awning window, the casement window and the double-hung window (with lower sash open).
Each of the three windows performed with maximum v
PLAN
and v
SECT
values at diferent angles of
incidence. The awning window had maximum values for v
PLAN
and v
SECT
at 0; the double-hung
at 45; the casement window and at 90. As the double-hung has about half the opening area
as the other windows, its inlet to outlet rato was 1:1. This resulted in relatvely high average
speeds. These results agree with Sobin and Givonis fndings that a 1:1 or 1:1.25 rato results in
the maximum average air velocity across the plan.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 45 90
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

R
a
t
i
o

(
V
p
t
/

V
r
e
f
)
Inlet Window Test (Plan)
dbl hung UO
awning
casement
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 45 90
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

R
a
t
i
o

(
V
p
t
/

V
r
e
f
)
Inlet Window Test (Section)
dbl hung UO
awning
casement
53a
Distributon awning window
tests at each of the incident
angles. Other tests are shown
greyed out. Note the dramatc
diference of Vplan when
combined with the shade
screen at 0
o
.
Distributon double-hung
window tests at each of the
incident angles. Other tests
are shown greyed out. Note
the incremental decrease of
Vplan when combined with
the shade screen at t.
54
5.1.2.1 AWNING WINDOW TEST
In the awning window test, the window sash acts as a blade that directs and accelerates
fow immediately above and below it. This window confguraton had its highest average
velocity rato in secton when normal (0) to the incident wind. This might be due to the long
contnuous opening width and window sash depth reducing at angles oblique to the faade.
Once past the inlet awning window, the fow splits into a jet at standing head height
and above with major and minor eddies within the occupied zone. The major secondary eddy
is a result of the sashes blocking the lower half of the outlet window. At 45 incident wind,
conditons are similar but swirl around the room while deceleratng; a distnct wind shadow
with velocity ratos of 10% or less begins to form on one side. At 90, a large, very slow eddy
forms in the room; the wind shadow becomes grows larger and the v
PLAN
(average velocity at the
airfow plan) is at about 9%.
While this window was tested as fully open, in real buildings it is typically partally
open, in which case the breeze would be directed toward the ceiling. The directon of fow is
dependent on the degree of opening. The sash size also plays a role in the open sash angle.
Depending on where and how high it is placed, this type of window might be more appropriate
for space or structural cooling, rather than people cooling.
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90
o
45
o
0
o
55
v
SECT
=47.8
v
PLAN
=44.8
v
SECT
=9.0
v
PLAN
=10.7
v
SECT
=77.3
v
PLAN
=50.9
inlet:
awning window
outlet:
double-hung, upper
sash open
Awning Window Test
Lef: directonal airfow plan and secton describing predominant fows,
as observed at 0 incident wind. Smooth lines represent regions of less
turbulence while rough lines indicate regions of more turbulence.
i
/v
ref
),
(v
ref
measurement zone.
56
5.1.2.2 CASEMENT WINDOW TEST
Relatve to the other windows tested, the casement window exhibited the most
similarity in average velocity ratos (v
PLAN
) at the three diferent incident angles. The casement
window is the only asymmetrical window confguraton amongst the window tests. In the plan
at 0, the higher air speed (or green triangle in Figure 44 lef) behind the casement window
has no counterpart on the other side, suggestng that the series of projectng vertcal sashes
obstruct fow much more fow than did the awning window sashes; this is most clear at 0
and 45. (The awning windows are 2 by 2, while the casement windows are 1 by 4.) At 45 and
90, the casement windows redirect and distribute the fow more evenly as compared to the
other windows at the same angle, as noted in the absence of a distnct wind shadow at these
incident angles.
As the fow moves past the windows, it separates into two main groups. Most of the
lower level wind (below 1.7 m) seems form a well-dispersed collecton of major and minor
eddies in the occupied zone. Above that, the some of the fow streams skip over the major
eddy and exit, while some stll collide and dissipate into the space. The higher level fow (above
standing head height) runs smoothly along the ceiling and jets out.
As the upper porton of fow did not seem to stck to the ceiling much, this window may
be more appropriate for occupant and space cooling than structural cooling. With the highest
value for v
PLAN
at only 27.8%, this confguraton would be less appropriate in locatons with litle
to no wind. This test likely may have higher velocity ratos with wider sashes and clear openings
and thus fewer drag elements.
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90
o
45
o
0
o
57
v
SECT
=17.2
v
PLAN
=18.0
v
SECT
=42.2
v
PLAN
=27.8 v
PLAN
=22.6
v
SECT
=32.4
inlet:
casement window
outlet:
double-hung, upper
sash open
Casement Window Test
i
/v
ref
),
(v
ref
measurement zone.
58
5.1.2.3 DOUBLE-HUNG WINDOW TEST (WITH LOWER SASH OPEN)
A number of factors make this test distnctly diferent from the other window tests:
1) the inlet and outlet rato are 1:1, (while the other two are about 1:2,) 2) the inlet and outlet
are ofset in secton from one another, and 3) the absence of a direct jet from inlet to outlet and
the shape of the resultant fow was unique to this test.
The predominant fow consisted of a horizontal blanket of air that moved down into
the occupied zone and then up the outlet wall and out. A large eddy forms over this low-level
stream. At 45, this test had its highest velocity ratos. These high ratos are created by a large,
three-dimensional clockwise eddy in plan. The approximate center of this whirlwind or large
eddy is indicated by the region with the lowest v
PLAN
(or the dark blue slit). At 90, the wind
shadow common to other tests at this angle emerges.
This window appears to have good merit for people cooling. Since double-hung windows
can also open from the top down, it also should be further explored for space and structural
cooling. As sliding a window utlizes the jambs, sill and head of the opening to direct fow, the
design of these elements may also aid fow distributon.
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90
o
45
o
0
o
59
v
SECT
=7.2
v
PLAN
=11.9
v
SECT
=53.9
v
PLAN
=58.9
v
SECT
=44.6
v
PLAN
=46.7
inlet:
double-hung, lower
sash open
outlet:
double-hung, upper
sash open
Double-hung Window Test
Figure 49.Top: three incident wind angles tested indicated in
i
/v
ref
),
(v
ref
measurement zone.
60
5.1.3 SHADE SCREEN TESTS
The purpose of this test was to study the diferent velocity and paterns associated with
the two screen-like exterior shades described in Secton 4.5: the perforated panel and the thin
louver screen. To get a sense of the isolated impact of each shade, no window was used at the
inlet opening during these tests. The (rough opening) inlet to outlet rato is about 2:1 It was
expected that the perforated panel would constrict fow more than the thin louvers since it has
more surface perpendicular to oncoming fow; the results support this, though the diference in
terms of velocity ratos was not as great as expected; the ratos were within 6% of one another.
The extent of the screen edge seemed to afect the fow shape, as shown in the asymmetrical
contours for both screen shades at 0.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 45 90
%

A
i
r

V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y
Shading System Test (Plan)
perf panel
thin louvers
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 45 90
%

A
i
r

V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y
Shading System Test (Section)
perf panel
thin louvers
61
62
5.1.3.1 THIN LOUVER SCREEN TEST
In most respects the louver screen tests did not seem very diferent from the perforated
panel, except that the amount of drag was slightly less and the fow spread was not as narrow
as in the perforated panel at 0 and fow was directed upwards. As the case with the perforated
panel, all three incident wind angles tested possessed low velocity regions with ratos of 20% or
less.
The louver screen difuses and directs the oncoming air upwards at the angle of its
tlt. Once inside, the lower layer of the air sinks back down, creatng an eddy under the outlet
window, while the upper layer of air rolls over this eddy and through the outlet.
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90
o
45
o
0
o
63
inlet:
exterior venetan blind
over rough opening
outlet:
double-hung, upper
sash open
Louver Screen Test
v
SECT
=13.9
v
PLAN
=18.7
v
SECT
=49.8
v
PLAN
=41.2 v
PLAN
=12.3
v
SECT
=25.6
i
/v
ref
),
(v
ref
measurement zone.
64
5.1.3.2 PERFORATED PANEL TEST
The perforated panel system slowed oncoming airfow signifcantly. At 0 incident wind,
this confguraton seemed constrict and straighten the general patern of fow dispersion inside
as well as decelerate the speed dramatcally; this is more visible at seated head height (1.1m)
than at standing head height (1.7m). All three incident wind angles tested possessed regions of
low velocity ratos of 20% or less.
Once the fow passes the perforated screen, the smoke quickly dissipated, suggestng
that this combinaton creates high turbulence with small eddies. The fow in the form of small
eddies pushes across the room toward the outlet. Some of this fow collides with the outlet wall
and forms a gentle eddy below the outlet opening. Though the fow path is not distnct, the
upper half of the fow pushes across the room at standing head height and higher and exits the
outlet window.
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90
o
45
o
0
o
65
v
PLAN
=19.3
v
SECT
=14.7 v
SECT
=46.4
v
PLAN
=34.3
v
SECT
=21.7
v
PLAN
=10.6
inlet:
perforated panel over
rough opening
outlet:
double-hung, upper
sash open
Perforated Panel Test
i
/v
ref
),
(v
ref
measurement zone.
66
5.1.4 SHADE AND WINDOW COMBINED TESTS
When combined together, window type, rather than screen type, seemed to have more
of an efect on fow shape, likely due to the greater its geometric variety in this study. Though
the velocity ratos of the two screen types were not dramatcally diferent when tested without
windows, the diference became more apparent when tested with windows. Even though the
awning window as tested independently had a high v
PLAN
and v
SECT
compared to its counterparts,
this efect diminished signifcantly (from about 51% to 18%, at 0) with an exterior screen is
placed in front of it. In contrast, the performance of the double hung window diminished only
slightly (from about 47% to 32%) when obstructed by screen shades. This may be due to the
diference in the way (less turbulent) larger eddies and (more turbulent) smaller eddies move
across the plane of the awning windows sash. Larger eddies and jets seem to stck to smooth
surfaces (i.e. the awing window sash) much more so than the smaller, more turbulent eddies
do. Unfortunately, the casement window was not tested in combinaton with shades due to sen-
sor failure.
67
68
5.1.4.1 LOUVER SCREEN WITH AWNING WINDOW
At the 0 incident angle, the shape and magnitude of fow speed was signifcantly
diminished (from 51% to 18%) with the louver screen in front of the awning window (relatve to
the awning window alone).
Both the velocity measurements in secton and the smoke studies indicate that the
louvers seem to direct fow upwards into the space, which explains why the velocity ratos
in plan (at 0) are so low and dramatcally diferent to the awning windows alone. At the 45
incident angle, the fow seems nearly the same as that without the louvered screen, with v
SECT

less than 2% lower than the awning window alone. At 90, the fow seems to actually increase
slightly (up to 3%) with the additon of the louver screen. This may be because the louver
screen does not wrap around the corners of the model and the plane of the louver screen itself
somewhat directs and assists fow.
With the higher velocity ratos at 1.7 m and 0.1 m above the foor, this confguraton
does not seem ideal for occupant cooling at the 1.1 m seated head height breathing zone.
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90
o
45
o
0
o
69
inlet:
ext. venetan blinds +
awning window
outlet:
double-hung, upper
sash open
Louver Screen + Awning Window
v
SECT
=11.3
v
PLAN
=13.7
v
SECT
=46.6
v
PLAN
=43.5
v
SECT
=30.6
v
PLAN
=17.7
Below: airfow velocity plan and secton contour maps at 0, 45 and
90 incident wind. Colors indicate velocity ratos at for each locaton
(v
i
/v
ref
), expressed as a percentage of the unobstructed free stream
air velocity (v
ref
). Lighter tones at the perimeter are inferred velocites
outside the measurement zone.
70
5.1.4.2 LOUVER SCREEN WITH DOUBLE-HUNG WINDOW (LOWER SASH OPEN)
As mentoned earlier, the shape of the fow stream for this window is diferent than
that of the other windows. The additon of a shade seems to dramatcally alter the shape of the
airfow, most notably at 0. The thin louvers seem to direct the fow up as it enters the space,
covering both seated head height and higher. The double-hung window alone had more air
velocity at standing head height and lower into the occupied zone. The asymmetry of the fow
at 0 suggests that this fow was impacted by the edges of the louvered shade screen. At 45 &
90, the shape of the fow seemed to be a lower-velocity version of the double-hung window
alone.
As the fow passes the louver screen, much of it is projected upwards past the window
into the space and begins to fall. As it descends, Some of this upward fow exits the back
window, while some forms a large eddy adjacent to the outlet wall. As the louver screen difuses
the air in additon to directng it, the added turbulence creates a fuctuatng stream into the
space; in additon to the fow path initally described, at tmes this stream shoots up to the
ceiling and forms a minor eddy above head height, other tmes this fow jets across and forms
another minor eddy below sill height.
With the higher velocity ratos at 1.7 m and 1.1 m above the foor, This confguraton
may be appropriate for occupant cooling at the 1.1 m seated head height breathing zone.
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90
o
45
o
0
o
71
inlet:
ext. venetan blind +
double-hung, lower
sash open
outlet:
double-hung, upper
sash open
Louver Screen + Double-hung Window
v
PLAN
=

12.6
v
SECT
=7.6 v
SECT
=54.9
v
PLAN
=

50.0 v
PLAN
=

30.9
v
SECT
=39.5
(v
i
/v
ref
air velocity (v
ref
72
5.1.4.3 PERFORATED PANEL WITH AWNING WINDOW
This test at 0 has only 60% of the velocity ratos due to sensor failure. The data that is
available seem to suggest a similar patern to the louver screen and awning test. Though the ve-
locity ratos are lower, the tests at 45 and 90 also seem to also be very similar to correspond-
ing louver screen with awning window test. Not surprisingly, the perforated panel signifcantly
reduced and narrowed the shape of indoor fow as compared with the awning window alone.
At 45 incident angle, the fow seems very similar to its counterpart without the shade screen,
but slower and more evenly distributed velocity ratos. (The maximum velocity rato in plan was
60-70% with the mean v
PLAN
around 37%.)
Once the fow passes the perforated screen and awning window, the smoke quickly dis-
sipated, suggestng that this combinaton creates high turbulence with small eddies; this turbu-
lent fow then creates larger, slower paterns in the space. The fow travelling through the upper
windows seems to cross the ceiling, through the outlet, and produces eddies at the outlet wall.
The fow through the lower inlet windows is also very turbulent; some of it forms into eddies
between the 0.6 and 1.7 lines, while some fows over the eddies either exits the outlet window
or and falls down the outlet wall, recombining with the larger eddy there.
Based on the data that exists, it is assumed that this test would be similar to its louver
screen counterpart, but with less momentum as the fow moves toward the outlet. With the
higher velocity ratos at 1.7 m and 0.1 m above the foor, this confguraton is less appropriate
for occupant cooling at the 1.1 m seated head height breathing zone.
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90
o
45
o
0
o
73
inlet:
perforated panel +
awning window
outlet:
double-hung, upper
sash open
Perforated Panel + Awning Window
v
SECT
=45.6 v
SECT
=12.0
v
PLAN
=

13.7 v
PLAN
=

36.7 v
PLAN
=

12.0*
v
SECT
=25.9*
Figure 54. Top: three incident wind angles tested indicated in axono-
metric drawing. The tnted planes indicate the locatons of the airfow
plan and secton.
(v
i
/v
ref
air velocity (v
ref
74
5.1.4.4 PERFORATED PANEL WITH DOUBLE-HUNG (LOWER SASH OPEN)
This test produced results very similar to its thin louver counterpart, though with slightly
lower velocity ratos and less variaton; v
PLAN
and v
SECT
also were slightly lower than the louvered
screen counterpart. The iso-velocity plan at 0 indicates The edges of the shade seem to impact
the fow shape less than in the thin louver and double-hung test, suggestng that the presence
of the screen itself has more of an impact than where its edges are. As with the other perfo-
rated panel tests once past the screen, this test showed turbulence and fow deceleraton.
The predominant fow path changed directon a fair amount; from more to less frequent,
the turbulent stream would move 1) up toward the ceiling and then curl down toward the
outlet wall and window, 2) straight across the space and curl into an eddy mid way, or 3) along
the foor and up to the window. Two of the paths observed up toward the ceiling and across
the room - swirled into an eddy before exitng and as paths fuctuated. Each dominant fow path
created its own a large, slow eddies in the remainder space.
With the higher velocity ratos at 1.7 m and 1.1 m above the foor, This confguraton
may be appropriate for occupant cooling at the 1.1 m seated head height breathing zone.
90
o
45
o
0
o
75
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
90 - 100%
80 - 90%
70 - 80%
60 - 70%
50 - 60%
40 - 50%
30 - 40%
20 - 30%
10 - 20%
0 - 10%
inlet:
perforated panel +
awning window
outlet:
double-hung, upper
sash open
Perforated Panel + Double-hung Window
v
SECT
=

8.5
v
PLAN
=14.0
v
SECT
=

50.4
v
PLAN
=44.1
v
SECT
=

33.3
v
PLAN
=

32.2
Figure 55. Top: Top: three incident wind angles tested indicated in
(v
i
/v
ref
air velocity (v
ref
76
5.2 EXPLORINGTHEPOTENTIALFORTHERMALCOMFORT
Givenashadeandwindowcombination,whenmightwinddrivenairmotionhave
potentialtoworkinsuburbanBangkok?Howmuchoftheyearmightsuchaconfiguration
work?Thefollowingexerciseestimatesthecoolingpotentialofwinddrivenventilationfor
thermalcomfort.
First,TypicalMeteorologicalYear(TMY)BangkokweatherdatawasstudiedviaClimate
Consultant5inordertodeterminethemonthswherethermalcomfortmightbepossible
accordingtotheadaptivemodel.InapreviousstudyonnaturalventilatedhousesinBangkok
46
,
itwasestimatedthatnaturalventilationmightbepossibleduringthemonthsofNovember
throughFebruary.TheresultsofClimateConsultant5forthisexerciseexpandeduponthistime
frame,sinceaccordingtothebuiltinadaptivemodel,therearemoreoccupiedhourswithinthe
comfortzoneforthemonthsofJuly,August,SeptemberorOctoberthanthereareinJanuaryor
February,asshowninTable2below.(Inthecaseofclassrooms,theThaiacademicschoolyear
hassummervacationfromlateFebruaryorearlyMarchthroughearlyMay;thisalsocoincides
withthehottestmonths.)
VelocityratiosfromthewindtunneldatawereappliedtowinddataforBangkok,
Thailand.
47
Theurbandensity(andcorrespondingterrainroughness)wasassumedtobe
suburbanataheightof5mabovegroundlevel,whichresultsinareductionfactor
48
of0.56.
Thiswasappliedtothewindspeedfromtheweatherdataat10maboveground.Withweather
tapewindanddatainputs,theaveragevelocityforthebestperformingcombinationalouver
46
Tantasavasdi,2001.
47
Weatherdataacquiredfromhttp://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/weatherdata_about.cfm
48
Thefollowingassumptionsweremadeforscalingdownlocalwinddatafrom10mweatherdata:Thebuilding
wasassumedtobesituatedinsuburbanBangkokandtheclassroomwasassumedtobeonthesecondstory,or
5mabovegroundlevel.Thereductionfactoristhecoefficientwithwhichwinddatafroma10mhighweather
towerisscaleddownsoastomorecloselyrelatetoaspecificterrainconditionandheightaboveground.This
factorwasretrievedfromChandra1986.
screenov
Bangkok
In
dividedin
weather
thatthe
occupanc
wasassu
temperat
heatbala
similarto
T
coolingim
49
ASHRAE
CharlieHu
50
0.4andn
verdoubleh
climate.
nordertosim
nto3hourb
data.Each3
hoursofthe
cyof7aman
medtobe0
turesfloatw
anceofthei
obuildingst
hisversiono
mpactsofai
ThermalComf
izengaandMa
n0.6cloisbase
hungwindow
mplifythep
blocksandav
3hourblock
edayconside
nd6pm,ast
0.4,0.6or0.
withoutside
ndoortherm
hathaveligh
oftheASHRA
rvelocitygiv
fortToolversio
arcFountain.
edonKwok,199
wwithuppe
rocessofstu
veragedove
kwasthenin
eredforthe
heprogram
9clo,thelat
temperatur
malloadsan
htconstruct
AEThermal
ven(radiant
on2.0.03,Imp
7,p.89,whostu
77
ersashopen
udyingclima
erthemonth
nputintothe
studyonlyi
isthatofa
ttertwofor
res.Asanex
dthermalm
ion.)
ComfortToo
tandair)tem
lementedinac
udiedthermalco
wastested
atedata,eac
h,resultingi
eASHRAETh
includedtho
classroom.T
wintermorn
ploration,th
mass.(Thisco
olhasthepo
mperaturea
ccordancewith
omfortinHawaii
dfortherma
chdayofam
nmeanmon
hermalComf
oseinexpect
Theclothing
nings
50
andi
hisdoesnot
onditionmo

otentialtoac
ndrelativeh
hASHRAE552
iclassrooms.
Fi
sh
Co
alcomfortin
monthwas
nthly3hour
fortTool
49
.N
tedhoursof
ginsulationv
interior
includeatr
deledismor
ccountforth
humidity.W
2010developed
gure56.Screen
hotoftheASHRA
omfortTool.
nthe
r
Note
f
value
ue
re
he
Within
dby
AE
78
thistool,thePMVwithElevatedAirSpeed(alsocalledSET*adjustedPMV)wasthethermal
comfortmodelselectedforthisexercise,asithasthemostpotentialforstudyingthecooling
effectsofairmotion.PMVutilizesasevenpointthermalsensationscale,where3=hot,
2=warm,1=slightlywarm,0=neutral,1=slightlycool,2=cool,and3=cold.Aftereach3hour
blockofweatherdatawithadjustedvelocitiesbasedonthewindtunnelstudieswasinput,the
modeloutputaseriesofPredictedMeanVotes,orPMV.Thesummarizedresultsofthis
exerciseareshowninTable2below.DetailedportionsareshowninAppendixA.Toreiterate
fromsection2.2,ASHRAEconsidersaPMVbetween0.5and0.5,or10%peopledissatisfied
(PPD),tobeacceptable.Forthepurposesofthisstudy,PMVvaluesbetween1to1,or26PPD,
arealsoconsideredtobeacceptable.Theresultsofthisexerciseforeachwindangleare
graphedinFigures57,58and59.Forcomparison,thesameexercisewasperformedforthe
fixedairvelocitiesof0.5m/s,asgraphedinFigure60.
PercentageofOccupiedHourswithinBangkokComfortZone
Adaptive
Model
(assumes
personal
adjustment)
SET*PMVbetween0.5and
0.5(elevatedairmotion)
SET*PMVbetween1and1
(elevatedairmotion)
month
0 45 90
0.5
m/s
FAN
0 45 90
0.5
m/s
FAN
Jan 38% 50% 75% 25% 50% 100% 100% 50% 100%
Feb 37% 50% 75% 25% 50% 100% 100% 50% 75%
Mar 30%
thesummerandearly
monsoonmonthswerenot
tested
thesummerandearly
monsoonmonthswerenot
tested
Apr 23%
May 29%
Jun 32%
Jul 42% 50% 75% 25% 25% 100% 100% 25% 75%
Aug 47% 75% 100% 25% 50% 100% 100% 25% 100%
Sep 46% 75% 75% 25% 50% 100% 100% 25% 75%
Oct 58% 100% 100% 25% 75% 100% 100% 50% 100%
Nov 51% 75% 100% 25% 50% 100% 100% 25% 100%
Dec 53% 100% 75% 50% 75% 100% 100% 50% 100%
total 47% 72% 84% 28% 53% 100% 100% 38% 91%
Table2.Resultsof
thermalcomfort
explorations,
showing
percentageof
timecomfortable
withAdaptive
Comfort
Ventilationand
theSET*adjusted
PMVforvarious
speedsofair
movementboth
naturally
ventilated(with
shadesand
windows)andas
fanpowered.

79
THERMALCOMFORTATTHEDIFFERENTINCIDENTWINDANGLES.Atthe0incidentwindangle,
thePMV(adjustedtoSET*)isbetween0.5(slightlycool)to0.5(slightlywarm)for72%ofthe
occupiedtime;for100%oftheoccupiedtimeatthesameangleofincidence,thePMVvalues
fellbetween1(slightlycool)and1(slightlywarm).
Valuesfora45incidentwindanglelookevenmorepromising,withPMVbetween0.5
and0.5for84%ofthetimeandbetween1and1for100%ofthetime(Figure58).
Figure57.Thermal
comfortforroomwith
louverscreenover
doublehungwindowat
0incidentangle.72%of
thehourswerewithin
therangeof0.5to0.5,
fromslightlycoolto
slightlywarm.100%of
thehourswerewithin1
and1,fromcoolto
warm.
Figure58.Thermal
comfortforspacewitha
louverscreenover
doublehungwindowat
45.84%ofthehours
werewithintherangeof
0.5to0.5,fromslightly
cooltoslightlywarm.
100%ofthehourswere
within1and1,from
cooltowarm.

80
Notsurprisingly,ata90incidentwindangle,thepercentageofacceptablehoursdrops
significantlyto28%oftheoccupiedhours;evenwhencomfortparametersareexpandedto
PMVbetween1and1,theacceptablehoursonlyreach38%.
Forthe0.5m/sfixedairvelocity,the53%ofthehoursfellwithinPMVvaluesof0.5and
0.5and91%ofthehoursfellwithinvaluesbetween1and1.Notethatfortheafternoonblock
of13pm,themonthsofFebruary,JulyandSeptemberexceededthePMVvalueof1atthisfan
speed.ExceptforDecember,thisafternoonblock(13pm)alsoexceededPMVvalueof0.5.
Figure59.Thermal
comfortforspacewitha
louverscreenover
doublehungwindowat
90.28%ofthehours
werewithintherangeof
0.5to0.5,fromslightly
cooltoslightlywarm.
Only38%ofthehours
werewithin1and1,
fromcooltowarm.

81
Atthislevelofgranularity,theresultsofthethermalcomfortexercisesuggestthatthis
configurationat0and45totheincidentwinddirectionmayhavepotentialtooffsetoutdoor
airtemperaturesduringoccupiedhoursandmaywarrantfurtherstudiesformorespecific
scenarios.
5.3 LIMITATIONSOFTHEMETHODS
Themethodsutilizedhaveinvolvedsimplifyingmanyfactorsinordertoproceed.This
includedsummarizingsomedataintomeanvalues,suchasv
plan
andv
sect
,andalsomonthly3
hour(mean)weatherdataforthethermalcomfortexploration.Whilesimplifyingthedatathis
waymaybehelpfulforgeneralexamination,thisprocesslosesdetailthatmaybeusefulwhen
appliedtoanactualbuildingorforthosewhowanttodrilldown.

Figure60.Thermal
comfortforspacewith
fanspeedsof0.5m/s.
53%ofthehourswere
consideredtobe
thermallycomfortable
withintherangeof0.5
to0.5,fromslightlycool
toslightlywarm.91%of
thehourswerewithin1
and1,fromcoolto
warm.
82
CHAPTER6 DISCUSSION
Theobjectivesofthisstudyweretocharacterizetheimpactsofarangeofshadingand
windowconfigurationsonindoorairflowandtodevelopprinciplesfordesigningwindowsand
shadesforwinddrivenoccupantcooling.Theresultsemphasizedthesignificantimpactofthe
shadeandwindowinletgeometryonairflow.Thefollowingchaptersummarizestheresultsand
evaluatestheminthecontextofclassrooms.Scenariosotherthanthosespecificallytested,
suchaswithdifferentoutletwindowlocations,mayyielddifferentresults,thusadditionaltests
shouldbeperformedforscenarioswherenaturalventilationplaysacriticalroleindirect
occupantcooling.
6.1 Whatcombinationsofshadingdevicesandwindowtypescreatehighvelocityratios
acrosstheoccupiedzone(0.11.7m)?
Ofthosetested,themosteffectiveshadeandwindowconfigurationintermsofhigh
planandsectionvelocityratioswithlowspatialvariationwasthelouverscreenwithadouble
hungwindow.Moreover,ifincludingtheinletwindowtests,thefollowingfacadeinlettests
showedthehighestvelocityratiosfor0incidentwind:
1)awningwindowonly (v
PLAN
=50.9%andv
SECT
=77.3%),
2)doublehungwindowonly (v
PLAN
=46.7%andv
SECT
=44.6%),
3)doublehungwindowwithlouverscreen (v
PLAN
=30.9%andv
SECT
=39.5%),and
4)doublehungwindowwithperforatedpanel (v
PLAN
=32.2%andv
SECT
=33.3%).
6.2 Howdoexteriorshadescreensinfrontofoperablewindowsaffectairflowandshould
theybeusedifnaturalventilationisagoal?Whatwindowtypeismostcompatiblewitha
screenshadeintermsofoccupantcooling?
Asmentionedearlier,naturaloccupantcoolingcanbequantifiedintermsofahigh
meanvelocityratio(inplan)v
PLAN
withalowcoefficientofspatialvariationc
SV
.Exteriorshade
screenscreateturbulenceanddecelerateairflowtovaryingdegrees,dependingonthesizeof
83
thegapsbetweenobstructionelements.Some,likeperforatedpanel,limittheflowspread
whileothers,likelouverscreen,disperseit.Louverscanhelpdirectflowawayfromortowards
occupants,dependingontheirtiltangle,whilewindowswithoutshadesgenerallyprovided
highervelocityratiosthanthosewithshades.
Ifmaximizingflowspeediscritical,exteriorshadescreensshouldbeavoidedorreplaced
withanotherformofshadingonethatminimizesflowobstructionatcriticaltimes(e.g.
shadingthatisretractableormoved).Horizontaloverhangsareyetanotheralternative;they
areaerodynamicallylessobstructiveandcanbeagoodoptionprovidedthattheymeetthe
projectsshadingneedsanddetailedinawaythatwillensurethatwindisnotdivertedaway
fromtheoccupiedzone.
Basedontheresults,doublesinglehungwindowsaremostcompatiblewithscreen
shadesfromthepointofviewofmaximizingvelocityratios.Otherwindowswithnonprojecting
sashessuchashorizontalslidingwindowsshouldalsobefurtherinvestigated.
6.3 Whatcharacteristicoftheshadescreengeometryreducesairvelocity?Howdothe
differenttypestestedcompareintermsofchangingthevelocityofairflow?
Thesizeandorientationoftheobstructingelements(likeindividuallouvers)andthe
gapsbetweenthemcontributetothedegreeofflowdeceleration.Theindoorairflowismost
hinderedbyanarrowopenarea(asbetweentightlyspaced,versuslooselyspacedlouvers)and
obstructionsurfacesperpendiculartoflow.Theperforatedpanelandscreensthatblockequally
inplanandsectiontendtostraightenwhiledeceleratingflow.Inthelouverscreen,thelong,
widegapsframedbythelouversandframeresultinadeceleratedvelocityratiowithout
limitingplanspread.Forthetwoscreenstestedhere,thedifferencesinvelocityratioswereless
than7%withandwithoutawindow.Withintheroom,smallereddiesfromthesmallergapsin
theperforatedpaneldissipatedtheflowclosertotheinletwallthandidthelouverscreen.
v
PLAN
=

30.9
v
SECT
=39.5 v
SECT
=30.6
v
PLAN
=17.7 v
PLAN
=12.3
v
SECT
=25.6
6.3.2 Louver Screen Comparisons
84
85
v
SECT
=21.7
v
PLAN
=10.6
v
SECT
=

33.3
v
PLAN
=

32.2 v
PLAN
=

12.0*
v
SECT
=25.9*
6.3.1 Perforated Panel Comparisons
86
6.4 Howdoestheairflowvarywithwindowtype?
Windowsoperablearea,sashsizeandthedegreeofopeningimpactflowdirectionand
henceeffectivenessintermsofcoolingintheoccupiedzone.Therewasgreaterdifference
betweenthemeanvelocityratiosforthethreewindowtypesthanbetweenthetwoshading
typestested.Ofcourseintermsofairflow,thewindowsandshadestestedaresimplydifferent
typesandscalesofphysicalflowobstructions.
Fortheawningwindow,flowappearstorunalongtheplaneoftheprojectedsashand
intothespaceatthesameangleofthesashposition.Thecasementwindowinseries(orfourin
arowastestedinthisstudy)resultsinlowervelocityratios,yetdistributeairevenly,alsoatthe
angleasthesash.Theasymmetricalflowpatterninplanat0incidenceanglesuggeststhat
theirarrangementallopenedinseriestothesamerightsideplaysarole.Forthedouble
hungwindow,asheetofairfollowingthegeometryoftheopenwindowsteadilymeanders
throughthespacetofinditsoutletandcreateslargesecondaryeddiesalongtheway.Thesill,
jambsandsashedgearepredominantpartsoftheopeninggeometryandaffecttheshapeand
directionofflow.Incontrasttoprojectingwindows,theangleofindoorflowinslidingwindows
isnotasdependentonthedegreeofopening.

87
v
SECT
=77.3
v
PLAN
=50.9 v
PLAN
=22.6
v
SECT
=32.4 v
SECT
=44.6
v
PLAN
=46.7
6.4.1 Window Comparisons
88
v
SECT
=53.9
v
PLAN
=58.9
v
SECT
=42.2
v
PLAN
=27.8
v
SECT
=47.8
v
PLAN
=44.8
v
SECT
=7.2
v
PLAN
=11.9
v
SECT
=17.2
v
PLAN
=18.0
v
SECT
=9.0
v
PLAN
=10.7
6.4.2 Window Comparisons at 45
o
and 90
o
89
v
SECT
=77.3
v
PLAN
=50.9
v
SECT
=30.6
v
PLAN
=17.7 v
PLAN
=

12.0*
v
SECT
=25.9*
6.4.3 Awning Window Comparisons
90
v
SECT
=44.6
v
PLAN
=46.7 v
PLAN
=

30.9
v
SECT
=39.5 v
SECT
=

33.3
v
PLAN
=

32.2
6.4.4 Double-hung Window Comparisons
91
6.5 Givenacombinationofshadesandwindowsthateffectivelypromotesairmovement
intheoccupiedzone,atwhattimesiswinddrivencoolingacceptableforthermalcomfort?
Whatfactorscanexpandtheuseofnaturalcoolinginaclassroomsetting?
WhilethisstudydidnotconsiderthetropicalSoutheastAsiansummermonthsofMarch
throughJune,theresultsdosuggestthatbothseasonsconsideredwinterandmonsoonhave
potentialforwinddrivenoccupantcoolinginsuburbanBangkok.Afternoonperiodsare
challengingintermsofnaturalcoolingasoutdoorindoorandtemperaturesreachtheirdaily
maximum.Whetherornotwinddrivenventilationmightbeacceptableforthermalcomfort
willdependlargelyonsitefactors(suchasdiurnaltemperaturerangesandwindavailability,)
andbuildingusefactors(occupantschedules,dresscode,internalloadsandtemperatures).
Whileinfluencingusefactorsareoutsidethetypicalscopeoftraditionalbuildingdesign
practice,somefactorsarewithinthescopeofwhatschoolstypicallydictate.
Recommendationscanalsobeincorporatedthroughbuildingsignageandintoabuilding
tenantmanualthatwouldhelpaddressthesepatternsinthecontextofthebuilding'snatural
ventilationscheme.Furnishingsandotherobstructionsshouldbeselectedcarefullysoasto
minimallyobstructairflowpath.Seatsandchairsontheotherhand,canaddtotheclothing
insulationlevelandcontributetofeelingtoowarm.Backupcoolingsystemsshouldbe
consideredforwhenthereisnowind,ortimeswhennaturalventilationisnotanoption.
Occupantcontrolofshades,windowsand/orfanscanhaveasignificantimpactonthethermal
comfortinaspace.Otherconsiderationsoutsidetheimmediatescopeofthisstudythathave
impactsonnaturalventilationincludedaylighting,acousticcontrol,pollution,weatherproofing
andmaintenance.

92
CHAPTER7 CONCLUSIONSandFUTUREWORK
7.1 CONCLUSIONS
Thisworkalsoproposesonewayofusingclimatedataandwindtunnelstudiesto
informdesignfromschematicdecisionslikefaadeorientationtoconstructiondetailsofinlet
openingsandhelpstorelatethephysicalphenomenaofairmovementtodesigndecision
making.Ifonethingistakenfromthiswork,itisthatthereareaerodynamicimplications
associatedwithshadesandwindowswhichshouldbeconsideredwhenweighingdifferent
options.
Themainconclusionofthisstudyisthatshadesandwindowscanminimallyor
significantlydiminishthevelocityanddistributionofindoorflowandthedegreeofthis
obstructionisnotobvious.Thisissignificantifwinddrivenventilationistobeusedtoachieve
comfortandoffsetsomeoftheenergyandresourcesrequiredforairconditioning.Thelist
belowcoverskeyconclusionsdrawnfromthisstudyandthefollowingsectionoffers
suggestionsforfuturework.
1. Whileexteriorshadescreensdonoteliminatethepossibilityofusingnaturalventilationfor
occupantcooling,airvelocitythroughwindowsishigherwithoutthem.
2. Inscreens,theorientation,sizeandshapeoftheelementsandgapsbetweenthem
contributetotheamountofflowthatisreduced,whereitisdirectedandiftheresultant
flowhasenoughenergytodistributeacrossthespace.Theclearopeningsbetweenflow
obstructions(suchasshadingelementsorwindowsashes)havemoreinfluenceoverthe
resultantindoorvelocitythandowindoworshadeporosityalone.
3. Whenshadescreensareinstalledinfrontofaprojectingwindow(suchasawningwindows)
ataninletopening,airspeedanddistributionaresignificantlyimpeded;thus,this
combinationisnotidealfordirectoccupantcooling.
4. Openingsizeisonlypartiallyinformative;anyshades,windowopeningtype,sashsize,
openingamount,windowconstructiondetails,andothersuchaspectsofconstructed
buildingsmustbeconsideredwhileassessingfacadesfornaturalcooling.Windowoperation
typedeterminestheshapeofindoorairflowandthuswheretheairtravels.
93
7.2 SUGGESTIONSforFUTUREWORK
Therearemanydirectionsinwhichfutureworkcouldproceed.Thesestudies,as
groupedbysimilaritymightinvolve:
o Addingmoremasstothemodel,astomorecloselysimulatealowrisemultistory
building.Atsomeangles,thereattachmentzonesarecriticalforairmovement.
o Testingmoreshades,suchasshadingsystemsthatwraparoundcorners.Howdo
perforatedlouverscomparetosolidlouvers?Roughlouverscomparedwithsmooth
louvers?
o ComparingwindtunnelandCFDresults,highlightingthedifferentinputsandoutputs
required.
o Foranactualclassroom,calculatingthethermalcomfortbasedonactualinternalloads
andthermalmassandthenrunningabuildingenergysimulationbasedonthis.

94
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Arens,Edward,Turner,Stephen,Zhang,Hui,&Paliaga,Gwelen.2009.MovingAirforComfort.
UCBerkeley:CenterfortheBuiltEnvironment.http://escholarship.org/uc/item/6d94f90b
Arens,EdwardA.1985.Siteclimate:aprogramtocreatehourlysitespecificweatherdata.
Berkeley,Calif:CenterforEnvironmentalDesignResearch,UniversityofCalifornia.
Arens,EdwardA.,andNoraS.Watanabe.1986.Amethodfordesigningnaturallycooled
buildingsusingbinclimatedata.Berkeley,calif:CenterforEnvironmentalDesignResearch,
UniversityofCalifornia.
Arens,Blyholder,Schiller.1984.Predictingthermalcomfortofpeopleinnaturallyventilated
buildings.ASHRAETransactions,Vol.90,Part1.
Aynsley,R.M.1980.WindgeneratedNaturalVentilationofHousingforThermalComfortinHot
HumidClimates.ProceedingsoftheFifthInternationalConferenceonWindEngineering:813
July1979,ColoradoStateUniversity,FortCollins,Colorado.Oxford.PergamonPress.
Aynsley,Richard.1999.Estimatingsummerwinddrivennaturalventilationpotentialforindoor
thermalcomfort.JournalofWindEngineeringandIndustrialAerodynamics83,no.1
(November):515525.doi:10.1016/S01676105(99)000987.
Aynsley,RichardM.1982.NaturalVentilationModelStudies.InWindTunnelModelingforCivil
EngineeringApplications,ProceedingsoftheInternationalWorkshoponWindTunnelModeling
CriteriaandTechniquesinCivilEngineeringApplications.,465485.Gaitherburg,MD,USA:
CambridgeUnivPress.
Banks,David.Interviewbyauthor.Berkeley,CA.21April2011.
Bowen,Arthur.1981.ClassificationofAirMotionSystemsandPatterns.InPassiveCooling,
InternationalPassiveandHybridCoolingConference.,743776.MiamiBeach,FL,USA:AmSect
oftheIntSolEnergySoc.
Brown,G.andMarkDeKay.2001.Sun,Wind&Light:ArchitecturalDesignStrategies.2
nd
ed.
NewYork:Wiley.
Brown,G,andUniversityofOregon.;NorthwestEnergyEfficiencyAlliance.;SeattleCityLight.
2004.Naturalventilationinnorthwestbuildings.EugeneOr.:UniversityofOregon.
Busch,JohnF.1992.Ataleoftwopopulations:thermalcomfortinairconditionedandnaturally
ventilatedofficesinThailand.EnergyandBuildings18,no.3:235249.doi:10.1016/0378
7788(92)90016A.
Carter,Brian.2008.GSAMorphosisArup:SanFranciscoFederalbuilding.Buffalo,NY:Schoolof
ArchitectureandPlanning,UniversityofBuffalo,TheStateUniversityofNewYork.
Chand,Ishwar,andN.L.V.Krishak.1971.Laboratorystudiesoftheeffectoflouversonroomair
motion.BuildingScience6,no.4(December):247252.
Chand,I.,P.K.Bhargava,andN.L.V.Krishak.1975.Studyoftheinfluenceofapelmettypewind
deflectoronindoorairmotion.BuildingScience10,no.4(December):231235.
95
Chand,Ishwar.1977.VentilationofWideSpanSchoolsintheHot,HumidTropics.Educational
BuildingReport6.Unipub,Inc.,P.O.Box433,MurrayHillStation,NewYork,NY10016($11.00).
Chandra,Subrato,PhilipW.Fairey,andMichaelM.Houston.1986.Coolingwithventilation.
Golden,Colo:SolarEnergyResearchInstitute.
http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/publications/pdf/FSECCR165886.pdf
Chandra,Subrato.1983.ADesignProceduretoSizeWindowsforNaturallyVentilatedRooms.
InProceedingsofASESPassive83,Glorietta,NM,September79.
ClimateConsultant5.0.Build1,Jun9,2010.http://www.energydesigntools.aud.ucla.edu/
Dahl,Torben.2010.Climateandarchitecture.MiltonPark,Abingdon,Oxon:Routledge.
Drew,JandFry,M.1982.TropicalArchitectureintheDryandHumidZones2nded.,Malabar,
Florida:R.E.KriegerPub.Co.
Ernest,DavidRegis.1991.Predictingwindinducedindoorairmotion,occupantcomfort,and
coolingloadsinnaturallyventilatedbuildings.Thesis(Ph.D.inArchitecture).UCBerkeley.
Givoni,B,andFordFoundation.1962.Basicstudyofventilationproblemsinhousinginhot
countries:finalreport.Haifa:BuildingResearchStation.
Givoni,Baruch.1994.Passiveandlowenergycoolingofbuildings.NewYork:VanNostrand
Reinhold.
Grondzik,WalterT.2010.Mechanicalandelectricalequipmentforbuildings.Hoboken,N.J.:
Wiley.
Haase,M.andA.Amato.2009.Aninvestigationofthepotentialfornaturalventilationand
buildingorientationtoachievethermalcomfortinwarmandhumidclimates.SolarEnergy23.
Hauvette,Christian,andDenisPondruel.2000.ChristianHauvette:dwellings,monuments,
machines:truth,metaphor,narrative.Boston:Birkhuser.
Hindrichs,DirkU.,andKlausDaniels.2007.Plusminus20/40latitude:sustainablebuilding
designintropicalandsubtropicalregions.Stuttgart:EditionA.Menges.
Holleman,TheoR,andTexasEngineeringExperimentStation.1951.AirFlowThrough
ConventionalWindowOpenings.CollegeStation,Tex:TexasEngineeringExperimentStation.
Irving,Steve,DavidEtheridgeandBrianFord.2007.AM10:NaturalVentilationinNondomestic
Buildings.CIBSE
KleivenT.2003.Naturalventilationinbuildings:architecturalconcepts,consequencesand
possibilities.Dissertation.Instituttforbyggekunst,historieogteknologi.Doktoravhandlinger
vedNTNU.
Knaack,Ulrich.2007.Faades:principlesofconstruction.Basel:Birkhuser
Lauber,Wolfgang,PeterCheret,KlausFerstl,andEckhartRibbeck.2005.Tropicalarchitecture:
sustainableandhumanebuildinginAfrica,LatinAmerica,andSouthEastAsia.Munich:Prestel.
Lyndon,Maynard.1993.Contemporarybackgrounds:theworkofarchitectMaynardLyndon
FAIA:aretrospectiveexhibition,theCollegeofEnvironmentalDesign,theUniversityof
California.Berkeley,February16March5,1993.Berkeley.
96
Murray,Scott.2009.Contemporarycurtainwallarchitecture.NewYork:PrincetonArchitectural
Press.
Nindra,Ameet.1998.TheOjaiSection:DaylightingStrategiesinSchoolsbyMaynardLyndon.
1998VitalSignsStudentCaseStudyCompetition.
Olgyay,Aladar.1976.Solarcontrol&shadingdevices:Olgyay&Olgyay.Princeton:Princeton
UniversityPress.
Pitts,A.C.&Georgiadis,S.,VentilationAirFlowThroughWindowOpeningsinCombinationwith
ShadingDevices.InDOCUMENTAIRINFILTRATIONCENTREAICPROC.
Ramsey,Charles,andAmericanInstituteofArchitects.2007.Architecturalgraphicstandards.
11thed.London:JohnWiley&Sons.
Smith,Elmer,andTexasEngineeringExperimentStation.1951.Thefeasibilityofusingmodels
forpredeterminingnaturalventilation.CollegeStationTex.:TexasEngineeringExperiment
Station.
Sobin,HarrisJ.2010.Interviewbyauthor.Telephone.15March2010.
Sobin,HarrisJ.1981.WindowDesignforPassiveVentilativeCooling:anExperimentalModel
ScaleStudy.InPassiveCooling,InternationalPassiveandHybridCoolingConference.191119.
MiamiBeach,FL,USA:AmericanSectionoftheInternationalSolarEnergySociety.
Sobin,Harris.1983.AnalysisofWindTunnelDataonNaturallyVentilatedModels.Tucson,AZ,
HarrisSobin&Associates.
Sresthaputra,Atch.2003.Buildingdesignandoperationforimprovingthermalcomfortin
naturallyventilatedbuildingsinahothumidclimate.Dissertation.TexasA&MUniversity
Stein,Benjamin.2006.Mechanicalandelectricalequipmentforbuildings.Hoboken,N.J.:Wiley.
SomsanukMsai.2004.LuangPhabang,anarchitecturaljourney.Vientane,LaoPDR:Ateliersde
laPninsule
Tantasavasdi,Chalermwat,JelenaSrebric,andQingyanChen.2001.Naturalventilationdesign
forhousesinThailand.EnergyandBuildings33,no.8(October):815824.doi:10.1016/S0378
7788(01)000731.
Ubbelohde,M.Susan,GeorgeALoisos,andSantoshV.Philip.ACaseStudyinIntegrated
Design:ModelingforHighPerformanceFaades
Tsangrassoulis,A.,Santamouris,M.&Asimakopoulos,D.N.,1997.Ontheairflowandradiation
transferthroughpartlycoveredexternalbuildingopenings.SolarEnergy,61(6),355367.
Vieira,RobinK.,KennethG.Sheinkopf,andJeffreyK.Sonne.1988.EnergyEfficientFlorida
HomeBuilding.CapeCanaveral,Florida:FloridaSolarEnergyCenter.
http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/publications/html/fsecgp3388/.
Yakubu,G.&Sharples,S.,1991.Airflowthroughmodulatedlouvresystems.BuildingService
Engineering,12(4),151155.
Zelenay,K.,Perepelitza,M,Lehrer,D.2010.HighPerformanceFaades:DesignStrategiesand
ApplicationsinNorthAmericaandNorthernEurope.CaliforniaEnergyCommission,PIER.
PublicationnumberCEC50006049.
97
APPENDIXA:THERMALCOMFORTEXPLORATIONRESULTS

EScholarship UC Item 5087z1zd

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

EScholarship UC Item 5087z1zd

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishing

services to the University of California and delivers a dynamic

MS Thesis, Dept. of Architecture, UC Berkeley 2011 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5087z1zd

MS Thesis, Dept. of Architecture, UC Berkeley 2011 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5087z1zd

MS Thesis, Dept. of Architecture, UC Berkeley 2011 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5087z1zd

MS Thesis, Dept. of Architecture, UC Berkeley 2011 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5087z1zd

MS Thesis, Dept. of Architecture, UC Berkeley 2011 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5087z1zd

MS Thesis, Dept. of Architecture, UC Berkeley 2011 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5087z1zd

MS Thesis, Dept. of Architecture, UC Berkeley 2011 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5087z1zd

MS Thesis, Dept. of Architecture, UC Berkeley 2011 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5087z1zd

MS Thesis, Dept. of Architecture, UC Berkeley 2011 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5087z1zd

MS Thesis, Dept. of Architecture, UC Berkeley 2011 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5087z1zd

Você também pode gostar