AE SENIOR THESIS - Pennsylvania State University · 2010-04-07 · andrew moore –...

AN

DR

EW M

OO

RE

– LI

GH

TIN

G/E

LEC

TR

ICA

L

MIT

KO

CH

INST

ITU

TE

FOR

INT

EGR

AT

IVE

CA

NC

ER

RES

EAR

CH

AE

SEN

IOR

TH

ESIS

PENN STATE UNIVERSITY ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING

LIGHTING ADVISOR: DR. RICHARD MISTRICK ELECTRICAL ADVISOR: MR. TED DANNERTH

4.7.2010

Andrew Moore l Lighting-Electrical Focus

MIT David H. Koch

Institute for Integrative

Cancer Research

Owner Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyArchitect EllenZweigCM William A. Berry & Son, Inc. Structural Lemessurier ConsultantsHVAC/Electrical BR+A Consulting Engineers, LLCLighting Consultant LAM Partners, Inc.PPlumbing/FP/Code R.W. Sullivan EngineeringCivil Nitsch Engineering, Inc.Landscape Architect Reed Hildebrand Associates, Inc.LEED/Sustainability The Green Engineer, LLPTelecommunications Communications Design Group, Inc.

ArchitectureTThe design is in harmony with the existing facilities in the life sciences sector of MIT’s campus. The architect, Ellen Zweig, used the term ‘selective transparency’ to describe what is seen from the outside. Laboratory, conference, multi-use spaces, a cafeteria, and offices make up the inside.

ElectricalMIT MIT Utilities provides an electrical service through their existing 15kV campus loop into two double-ended unit substations, rated at 2000kVA and 1500kVA. A 2000kW/2500kVA generator is tied to the system via a 1600A ATS to feed both emergency and standby power systems. Fluorescent lighting at 277V was used extensively to reduce lighting loads

MechanicalTen 50,000 CFM air handling units provide 100% outdoor air throughout the building. Where spaces are non-critical, such as offices and the cafeteria, a chilled-beam system was implemented. For back-up, a 200 ton chiller supplies the vivariums

StructuralTThe foundation is a combination of concrete columns, walls, and slab-on-grade. The composite deck floor system uses 4.5” of normal weight concrete in tandem with 3” decking made of 18 gauge steel. Structural steel makes up the lateral frame and superstructure.

http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/thesis/portfolios/2010/asm227/index.html

Building InformationLocation Cambridge, MASize 360,000 GSFLevels 8 levels (1 below grade)Cost $190 million (construction)

Start/Finish March 2008 - Winter 2010/2011Delivery Fast-Track

Moore | AE Senior Thesis | David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. 4

BUILDING INFORMATION ............................................................................................................................ 5

LIGHTING DEPTH - REDESIGN OF FOURSPACES......................................................................................... 7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. 7

STREETSCAPE ........................................................................................................................................... 8

DESIGN CRITERIA ................................................................................................................................. 8

SPACE CHARACTERISTICS .................................................................................................................. 11

SCHEMATIC DESIGN ........................................................................................................................... 14

LIGHTING REDESIGN .......................................................................................................................... 15

PERFORMANCE .................................................................................................................................. 19

GALLERY ................................................................................................................................................. 21

DESIGN CRITERIA ............................................................................................................................... 21




PERFORMANCE .................................................................................................................................. 32

FLEXIBLE USE SPACE .............................................................................................................................. 33

DESIGN CRITERIA ............................................................................................................................... 33




PERFORMANCE .................................................................................................................................. 49

6TH FLOOR LABORATORY ...................................................................................................................... 50

DESIGN CRITERIA ............................................................................................................................... 50




PERFORMANCE: ................................................................................................................................. 60

ELECTRICAL DEPTH - LIGHTING BRANCH CIRCUIT REDESIGN ............................................................... 61

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................... 61


STREETSCAPE ......................................................................................................................................... 62

GALLERY ................................................................................................................................................. 74

FLEX USE SPACE ..................................................................................................................................... 81

6TH FLOOR LABORATORY ...................................................................................................................... 90

ELECTRICAL DEPTH - ALUMINUM VS. COPPER FEEDER STUDY ............................................................. 96

ELECTRICAL DEPTH - SKM ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 99

Short Circuit Study ..................................................................................................................................... 99

Arc Flash Study ........................................................................................................................................ 101

Protective Device Coordination ................................................................................................................. 105

ELECTRICAL DEPTH - OVER-CURRENT DEVICE COORDINATION STUDY ........................................... 106

Time vs. Current Curves .......................................................................................................................... 106

Calculations ............................................................................................................................................. 107

ARCHITECTURAL BREADTH - SOUTH FAÇADE SHADING REDESIGN .................................................... 108

Existing Design ........................................................................................................................................ 108

Reason for Redesign ................................................................................................................................. 109

Redesign ................................................................................................................................................. 110

MECHANICAL BREADTH - SOUTH FAÇADE SHADE ANALYSIS ............................................................... 114

Analysis ................................................................................................................................................... 114

Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................. 116

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 117

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................... 118


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The scope of this study and report is a lighting depth, an electrical depth, and two breadths for the MIT Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Each depth and breadth is described in detail in the pages to follow.

The lighting depth will focus on redesigning four spaces within the facility, and calculating how well these designs meet their criteria. Also, documentation of the hardware and rendering of the final designs will be used in the final presentation. The spaces to be redesigned are the Streetscape, Gallery, Flex-Use Space, and Laboratory on the sixth floor.

The electrical depth is comprised of four studies. The branch circuiting for each of the selected lighting spaces will be redesigned. A protective device coordination study will be performed using time-current curves and short circuit analysis. SKM software will be used to perform a full analysis of the electrical system, and a comparison study will be done to see if aluminum feeders would be more economical than copper feeders.

The breadth studies will involve a shading and façade redesign on the southern side of the building. The architecture breadth will focus on blending the shading system into the façade and designing it in harmony with the surrounding buildings in the life sciences sector. A mechanical study will be performed based on this façade to see if the loads will offset the new system.


BUILDING INFORMATION Location: Cambridge, MA

Spaces include:

‐ Research and Core Laboratories ‐ Laboratory Support ‐ Vivarium ‐ Conference Facilities ‐ Meeting Spaces ‐ Cafeteria ‐ Offices ‐ Administrative Functions

Size:

‐ 360,000 GSF ‐ 7 Levels above grade ‐ 1 Level basement

Project Team

Owner Massachusetts Institute of Technology http://web.mit.edu/

Architect ELLENZWEIG http://www.ellenzweig.com/

Construction Manager William A. Berry & Son, Inc. http://www.berry.com/index.php

Structural Engineer Lemessurier Consultants http://www.lemessurier.com/

HVAC/Electrical Engineer BR+A Consulting Engineers, LLC http://www.brplusa.com/

Lighting Consultant LAM Partners, Inc. http://www.lampartners.com/ Plumbing/FP/Code Engineering R.W. Sullivan Engineering http://www.rwsullivan.com/

Civil Engineer Nitsch Engineering, Inc. http://www.nitscheng.com/

Landscape Architect Reed Hilderbrand Associates, Inc. http://www.reedhilderbrand.com/

LEED/Sustainability Consulting The Green Engineer, LLP http://www.greenengineer.com/ Telecommunication Engineering Communications Design Group, Inc. http://www.comdg.com/

Construction:

‐ Start/Finish: March 2008 – Winter 2010/2011 ‐ Construction Cost: $190 million ‐ Project Delivery Method: Fast Track


Architecture:

‐ Design: The design is in cooperation with the existing life sciences sector of MIT’s campus. The materials and mass are designed to be in harmony with the existing buildings surrounding the adjacent courtyard. The architect, Ellen Zweig, describes the organization of the building as having a ‘selective transparency.’

‐ Codes: [Occupancy Group B (Office/Lab), Group A-3 (>50 occupants)] o Massachusetts State Building Code, Sixth Edition (780 CMR) o Massachusetts Electric Code (527 CMR 12.00) (2008 NEC w/ Massachusetts Amendments) o Massachusetts Plumbing Code (248 CMR) o Massachusetts Architectural Access Board Regulations (521 CMR) o Massachusetts Fire Prevention Regulations (527 CMR)

‐ Zone: Residential C-3B ‐ Historical Requirements: N/A

Sustainability Features:

This project is attempting to achieve LEED Gold status, and below are some of the architectural and efficiency considerations:

Architectural:

‐ Exterior Solar Shading ‐ High performance glazing ‐ Light shelves for daylighting ‐ Enhanced building insulation

Efficiency:

‐ System commissioning ‐ Air quality monitoring ‐ Metering for on-going monitoring & verification


LIGHTING DEPTH - REDESIGN OF FOURSPACES

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research will be a cutting edge facility at the leading edge of laboratory science and research. The lighting throughout the space should reflect this and help to emphasize the importance of this space, while also allowing it to blend into the surrounding life sciences sector, per the architect’s desire. The lighting should also be at the leading edge of energy performance as the building pursues LEED Gold Certification, the following report will look into both the quantitative and qualitative issues regarding four spaces: Flexible Use Space, the Laboratory, the Streetscape, and the Gallery. While the laboratory space will adequately reflect the lighting in much of the building, the other spaces are unique and will be amongst the most important individual spaces in and around this facility. Along the main entrance to the David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Main Street and the façade provide boundaries for a tree‐lined streetscape. As one of the focal points in the Cambridge campus and Kendall Square, this area is integral to the presence of the building. The gallery space is sandwiched in between the Streetscape and the Flexible Use Space. It will be a dynamic space with exhibits of work done at the institute, as well as relevant artistic displays. The Flexible Use Space is dynamic in that it can be used as either one large space or three separate spaces. Dividers split the back portion of the space into two smaller conference‐type spaces when the situation deems this necessary. Located on Level 1, the space is enclosed within the building and contains no daylighting or glazing. It borders the Lobby and the Gallery space, which will be discussed later in this report. Laboratories occupy the spaces adjacent to the southern façade throughout the 2nd to 7th floors of the Koch Institute. The spaces are not incredibly deep, but large shelving from floor to ceiling makes daylight penetration and artificial light distribution difficult.


STREETSCAPE

Figure 1.1.1 – Site Plan with Streetscape elements highlighted

DESIGN CRITERIA Program Statement

Bisecting the MIT campus, Main Street also provides an important site barrier for the Koch Institute. The sidewalk along Main Street is the primary artery for pedestrians on campus who have recently stepped off the MBTA station at Kendall Square and have a final destination almost anywhere on campus. Lined with trees and benches, the Streetscape serves as an area to step outside for those working inside the building, or simply as a scenic route for pedestrians coming and going from Kendall Square.

Design Concept

Per the program described above, it is necessary to use light to separate the space into fast and slow areas, with a corridor alongside the building, and a seating area amongst the trees and benches. A canopy stretches along the pathway, and provides an excellent linear element to highlight movement along the building. Closer to the street planter boxes and benches break up the length of the building, and these elements are highlighted to continue that feeling into the night.

Theme/Metaphor

The theme of this space will be fast and slow. As learned in fluid dynamics, fluids, or people in this case, move faster through the center of a pipe or duct. The friction on the surface of the pipe slows the fluid that comes into contact with it. In this case, the benches, and subsequent lighting of them, provide the friction to slow things down on the edge of this flow.

Desired Perceptions


The question is not whether people will be walking along Main Street, it is whether they will walk on the south side of the street or the north side of the street. During the day, it will be hard to influence, and people tend toward the warmer side of the street (north) in cooler months, and tend to get into the shade (south side – our Streetscape) when the mercury rises. At night however, the luminaires will instill a sense of comfort and enclosure, and bring people, as Van Morrison would say, ‘from the dark end of the street to the bright side of the road.’

Target Lighting Performance Metrics

Certain areas of the Streetscape have different characteristics and should be considered separately when discussing lighting performance. The entrance areas, according to the IESNA Lighting Handbook, should fall under the category Building Exteriors: Entrances – Active, which has the following parameters:

- Horizontal Illuminance – 5 fc - Vertical Illuminance – 3 fc

Chapter 22, specifically Figure 22-10, recommends an averaged maintained value of 5 fc horizontally and 5 fc vertically for walkways more than 1.8 meters from a road, which places the area along the building in this category.

The IESNA RP-33 governs light pollution and light trespass parameters. This site, due to its urban environment, falls into Lighting Zone 3, or LZ-3. The requirements for this space are that no more than 0.20 fc horizontal or vertical are present at the site boundary. However, since the site boundary is a road, there is roadway lighting present, which has a contradicting goal of meeting a minimum illuminance values at this point. RP-33 also dictates that no more than 5% of the luminous flux can be emitted at or above 90 degrees from nadir.

Energy requirements for this space are governed by ASHRAE 90.1-2004 Table 9.3.2 – Lighting Power Densities for Building Exteriors. Portions of the Streetscape fall into the following categories and requirements:

- Building Grounds – Walkways 10 feet wide or greater, plaza areas, and special feature areas – 0.2 W/ft2

- Building Entrances and Exits – Main entries – 30 W/LF Other doors – 20 W/LF

- Canopies and Overhangs – Canopies (freestanding and attached and overhangs) – 1.25 W/ft2

The Massachusetts State Building Code, 780 CMR 1308.00 – Lighting Systems, lists the following criteria relevant to the Streetscape: 1308.2.5 EXTERIOR LIGHTING CONTROL: Lighting for all exterior applications not exempted shall be controlled by a photosensor or astronomical time switch that is capable of automatically turning off the exterior lighting when sufficient daylight is available or the lighting is not required.

‐Exception to the mandatory criteria is: Lighting for covered vehicle parking entrances from building or parking structures where required for safety, security or eye adaptation.

1308.5 EXTERIOR BUILDING GROUNDS LIGHTING: All exterior building grounds luminaires which operate at greater than 100 watts shall contain lamps with a minimum efficacy of 60 lumens per watt (lm/W) unless the luminaire is controlled by a motion sensor or qualifies for one of the exceptions. 1308.7 EXTERIOR BUILDING LIGHTING POWER: The exterior lighting power allowances is the sum of the lighting power allowances for all of the applicable exterior applicatiosn permitted, other than building facades, provided the total installed exterior lighting power does not exceed the exterior lighting power allowance.


‐ Building entrance w/ canopy – 3 W/ft2 of canopied area ‐ Building entrance without canopy – 33 W/lineal ft of door width ‐ Building exit – 20 W/lineal ft of door width

Exterior lighting for all other applications, except those included in the exceptions, shall comply with the requirements of 780 CMR 1308.5 EXTERIOR BUILDING GROUNDS LIGHTING.

‐Exception 1: Specialized signal, directional, and marker lighting associated with transportation.


SPACE CHARACTERISTICS

Figure 1.1.2 | Streetscape – Rendering from the architect looking west

Dimensions

The streetscape is comprised of nearly 18000 square feet of concrete and brick pavers along Main Street adjacent to the north façade. From Ames St. to Vassar St., the east and west boundaries of the site, is a distance of 444 feet. However, the portion to be re-lit is that directly in front of the building, along its 295’-5” length, with the additional area covered by the canopies on the side doors. From the main door to the curb of Main Street is 36’6”. Between the façade and the street are three rows of trees creating separate corridors.

Materials

Sidewalk: Concrete pavers against the building and brick pavers against the street

Planter Boxes: Cobblestone fill

Façade at street level: Type B glazing with metal panel canopy and building fin

Flora - The Streetscape includes two types of flora planted in boxes laid with cobblestone. The curb of Main Street is lined with ten Pin Oaks (Quercus palustris), trimmed to a minimum branch height of six feet. In amongst the benches on the streetscape, closer to the building, are columnar Ginkgo trees, trimmed to a smaller diameter and having a minimum branch height of five feet.


Figure 1.1.3 – Quercus palustris – Pin Oak

Figure 1.1.4– Ginkgo biloba columnaris

Figure 1.1.5 – Proximity of MBTA station to building


As one can see in Figure 1.1.5 above, the Kendall/MIT Station on the Red Line of the MBTA is located east of the building site on Main Street (shown as a red rectangle). With the majority of campus located south of the station and to the west, many visitors and everyday employees or students will be passing by the Main Street sidewalk in front of the Koch Institute.

In Figure 1.1.6 below, one can clearly see the relationship of what will soon be the Koch Institute to the adjacent structures. The structure that stands out below is the Stata Center, designed by Frank Gehry, which is a popular attraction on campus and host to various events in the ampitheatre. The Streetscape will be visited by many people on their way to the State Center and its ampitheatre.

Figure 1.1.6 – Surrounding structures


SCHEMATIC DESIGN

Figure 1.1.7– Schematic Lighting Design Along Streetscape from the West

Figure 1.1.7 – Schematic lighting overlayed on architect’s rendering


LIGHTING REDESIGN Luminaire Schedule

Light Loss Factors -

Luminaire E

Maintenance Category: V

Dirt Condition: Medium

Luminaire Dirt Depreciation: 0.87 (6 month cleaning cycle assumed – powerwashing, etc. twice a year)

Room Surface Dirt Depreciation: N/A (RCR is not calculable)

Lamp Lumen Depreciation: 0.7 for 50,000 hours

LLF = 0.609

Luminaire J

Maintenance Category: V

Dirt Condition: Medium

Luminaire Dirt Depreciation: 0.82 (12 month cleaning cycle – harder to reach than type E)

Room Surface Dirt Depreciation: N/A

Lamp Lumen Depreciation: 0.8

LLF = 0.656


Lighting Plan

Figure 1.1.8 – Streetscape Lighting Plan (see Appendix for scale drawing)


Mounting Details

Figure XXX – Bench Luminaire ‘E’ Mounting Detail

Figure 1.1.9 – Canopy Luminaire ‘J’ Mounting Detail


Renderings

Figure 1.1.10 -Rendering using 3ds

Figure 1.1.11 -Rendering using 3ds


PERFORMANCE Using 3D Studio Max’s Light Meter tool to calculate illuminance values in a rectangular area encompassing the twelve foot width between the exterior glazing on the first floor and the edge of the benches on the Streetscape, and exporting these values to excel, the following distribution was determined. The top of the image is plan west, with the building being to the left.

The output from 3DS is in lux, and the average over this area is 134.8 lux, which equates to roughly 12.5 fc. The highest values occur where the luminous flux from the canopy downlights and bench-mounted graze luminaires overlap, near the entrance. The highest value is 448 lux, or 41.6 fc, but the illuminance does not reach 300 lux anywhere else along the length of the building.


Using the same method as with horizontal illuminance above, the vertical illuminance was calculated for a grid near the entrance of the building. The average value was 69.5 lux, or 6.46 fc. These values are slightly higher than the criterion from IESNA, but one can see from the distribution above that these values are greater near the ground, at the bottom of the image, and along the center of the path. The grid is set up at 1’x1’ spacing, and at roughly eye level, 5 ½’, the value in the center of the pathway, by interpolation, is 114 lux, or 10.6 fc.

As seen in the criteria, the lighting power density requirements for this space are a combination of values allowed for areas and linear dimensions. The total allowed lighting power for the Streetscape is 6667 W. The power being used to light this space is 3796 W. The design provides a 43% reduction from the requirement.

The design also complies with the Massachusetts State Building Code requirements from the criteria. The control system includes an astronomical time clock, and the efficacy of the luminaires does not factor due to the power of any individual luminaire not exceeding 100W. The lighting power density requirements listed in the criteria are less stringent than those of ASHRAE 90.1-2004, and have been exceeded by this design.

With regard to IESNA RP-33, no luminaire has any portion of its distribution above 90 degrees from nadir. The mounting diagram for the bench-mounted luminaires show that the 10 degree distribution is entirely beneath this limit. The downlights on the canopy qualify as full cut-off, and the distribution is entirely below 90 degrees from nadir.


GALLERY

Figure 1.2.1 – First floor plan with east Gallery highlighted


The Gallery space may be the most important space inside the building when taking into account the ability to showcase the research capability of the institute. The displays in this area will highlight the progress research makes on the upper floors and demonstrate the effect a generous donation can have on a science and an entire field. Its transparency to the adjacent Streetscape and transition into the main lobby and Flexible Use Space make this space nearly inevitable for any visitor to the building or passerby along Main Street.

Design Concept

The concept throughout the gallery is transparency and spaciousness in the daytime and a more intimate enclosed environment at night. Emphasizing the bright surfaces opposite the glazing during the day and the darker enclosing geometries near the glazing at night will implement this concept.

Theme/Metaphor

A metaphor for the lighting concept in this space is the way a cactus flower in the desert will show off its structure at night time by blooming after or during sunset. The geometry of the Gallery will show itself as the sun descends each evening.

Desired Perceptions

The Gallery is an important transition space for events that will be held in the Flexible Use Space and is also the first area most people enter when coming to the Koch Institute. The lighting should reflect a warm and welcoming environment. The space should welcome one to move into the rest of the building, but also invite one to stick around and peruse the displays.

Target Lighting Performance Measures


Chapter 14 of the IESNA Lighting Handbook discusses the conservation of artifacts in a gallery space. All necessary measures should be taken to prevent damage to artwork in this area, should the owner have the opportunity to display precious items.

According to the IESNA, this space falls into the category of Museums – Lobbies, General Gallery Areas, Corridors. The illuminance recommendations for this type of space are:

- Horizontal Illuminance – 10 fc - Vertical Illuminance – 3 fc

According to ASHRAE 90.1 – 2004 and the required lighting power density for Museum – General Exhibition spaces, the Gallery should comply to 1.1 W/ft2. The Massachusetts State Building Code, 780 CMR 1308.00 – Lighting Systems, lists the following criteria relevant to the Gallery: 1308.2.1 AUTOMATIC LIGHTING SHUTOFF: Interior lighting in buildings larger than 5000 ft2 shall be controlled with an automatic control device to shut off building lighting in all spaces. This automatic control device shall function on either:

‐ Time of day scheduled basis that turns lighting off at specific programmed times. Independent program schedules are required for areas not exceeding 25,000 ft2 but not more than one floor.

‐ Occupant sensing that turns lighting off within 30 minutes of an occupant leaving a space.

‐ Exceptions 1 and 2 to the mandatory criteria are: Lighting intended for 24 hours operation and; Lighting which is part of a required means of egress in corridors, hallways, stairways, and lobbies, and restrooms, mechanical rooms, and electrical rooms. If automatic control is utilized in spaces listed in Exception 2, illumination shall not be reduced below the levels prescribed in 780 CMR 1024.0 MEANS OF EGRESS LIGHTING.

1308.2.2 SPACE CONTROL: Each space enclosed by ceiling height partitions shall have at least one control device to independently control general lighting in the space. Each control device shall be activated either manually by an occupant or automatically by sensing an occupant. Each control device shall:

‐ Control a maximum of 2500 ft2 for spaces 10,000 ft2 or less and a maximum of 10,000 ft2 for spaces greater than 10,000 ft2

‐ Be capable of overriding the automatic shutoff control for no more than two (2) hours.

‐ Be readily accessible and located so the occupant can see the controlled lighting.

‐ Exception 2 to the mandatory criteria is: Means of egress lighting which provides minimum illumination identified in 780 CMR 1308.2.1 Exception 2 including lighting which is part of a required means of egress in corridors, hallways, stairways, and lobbies, and restrooms, mechanical rooms, and electrical rooms.


SPACE CHARACTERISTICS Dimensions

The east wing of the Gallery is approximately 2415 ft2. The distance from the vestibule at the northeast entrance to the vestibule for the main north entrance, which act as boundaries to this space, is 133’7”. The width of the portion of the space that acts solely as corridor is 14’1 ½”.

The area within the Gallery acting as a three dimensional showcase accounts for approximately 802 ft2 of the total space. This polygonal area has a nearly 19’ width, with a angled wall at one end opening into the corridor, as seen in the figure below. The ceiling height is 12’9 ¾” for the majority of the Gallery, the exception being the aforementioned area, where the ceiling drops 6”.

Figure 1.2.2 | Recessed area within Gallery, with drop ceiling shown above

Materials

Floor: CT‐1: Porcelain Ceramic Tile CSI #093000

Base: CT‐1: Porcelain Ceramic Tile CSI #093000

North: GL‐B: Exterior Glass Type B CSI #088120 – Viracon VNE 15‐63

East: GL‐B: Exterior Glass Type B CSI #088120 – Viracon VNE 15‐63

South: PL/SF‐1: Veneer Plaster CSI #092613/Interior Stone Facing CSI #097510

West: GL‐B: Exterior Glass Type B CSI #088120 – Viracon VNE 15‐63


SCHEMATIC DESIGN Two separate scenes were presented in the schematic phase of this design. A scene was constructed for a night time

setting and one for a daytime setting (see Fig 1.2.3 below). The daylight scene enforces the wall opposite the glazing,

as mentioned in the concept section, as well as provides spot downlighting in the display area. The wallwash is

mimicked on the west end of the gallery, as well.

Figure 1.2.3– Plan view with schematic daytime scene

The nighttime scene (see Fig 1.2.4 below) flips the lighting focus to the enclosing geometry along the façade glazing,

in order to create a more intimate environment within the Gallery. The drop ceiling over the gallery is also

emphasized with perimeter illuminance, to give a further sense of closure within this area in the evening.

Figure 1.2.4– Plan view with schematic nighttime scene


Figure 1.2.5– Schematic Design with Photoshop

It is clear from Figure 1.2.5 above that the column and bench luminaires by themselves would not adequately provide

light to this space. Through this exercise it became evident that dimming the daylight wallwashing luminaires would

give this scene the extra light it needed. Also, the panel wall at the entrance is highlighted to provide a boundary for

the east wing of the Gallery.

Figure 1.2.6 – Model study performed during schematic design



Light Loss Factors

Luminaire Type K:

Luminaire Maintenance Category: V

Dirt Condition: Clean

Luminaire Dirt Depreciation: 0.95 (3 month cleaning cycle assumed – more like weekly)

Room Surface Dirt Depreciation: 0.95

Lamp Lumen Depreciation: 0.7 for 50,000 hours

LLF = 0.632

Luminaire Type F:

Luminaire Maintenance Category: IV


Luminaire Dirt Depreciation: 0.88 (12 month cleaning cycle)




LLF = 0.65

Luminaire Type G:






LLF = 0.65

Luminaire Type D:






LLF = 0.66


Layout

Figure 1.2.7 | Gallery – Lighting plan (scale drawing can be found in the Appendix)


Mounting Details

Figure 1.2.8 | Gallery – Luminaire K mounting detail


Renderings

Figure 1.2.9 | Gallery - Pseudo color view looking west through the space

Figure 1.2.10 | Gallery – Rendered view looking west through gallery


Figure 1.2.11 | Gallery - Pseudo color plan view

Figure 1.2.12| Gallery - Pseudo color cut view of the southern wall


PERFORMANCE The average illuminance in the Gallery is 8.1 fc. This metric falls slightly short of the IESNA recommended value of 10 fc. The value falls short due to the design’s focus on highlighting vertical surfaces in the space, as can be seen in the pseudo color renderings above.

The average vertical illuminance for a calculation grid cutting across the widest part of the Gallery is 4.11 fc. This exceeds the IESNA recommendation of 3 fc.

Concering ASHRAE 90.1-2004 requirements, the Gallery exceeds power allowances by almost 1200 W, with an overall lighting power density of 0.6 W/ft2.

The building time clock controls, as well as Lutron GraphikEye scene controls within the space, allow the Gallery to meet Massachusetts State Building Code requirements for interior spaces.


FLEXIBLE USE SPACE

Figure 1.3.1| First floor plan with Flex Use Space highlighted


The Flexible Use Space, per its name, will be used for a variety of functions and events within the Koch Institute. After passing through one of the transitional spaces surrounding this space, most visitors to the building, apart from those working there day-to-day, will find their destination within the Flex Use Space.

Design Concept

The concept within this space is going to be synonymous with the name, flexible. The space has to be considered as a lecture hall, banquet area, entertainment venue, and the dividers within the space require that it be able to accommodate more intimate conference settings toward the east end of the room.

Therefore, there will be three main scene settings for the space, with additional dimming control:

- Presentation Scene - Social Event Scene - Conference Scene

Theme/Metaphor

Functionality. Clean and to the point, but soft enough to hold an event.

Desired Perceptions

The desired perception depends on the type of event taking place here. For a lecture or presentation, it would be great for someone entering the space to feel a sense of excitement, especially at what might be taking place at the front of the room. However, during a night-time event or social gathering, the attendee should feel a sense of warmth and calm, and also like the space opens up to them upon entrance.


Target Lighting Performance Measures From the IESNA Lighting Handbook:

Auditoriums: Assembly :

– Horizontal Illuminance – 10 fc –Vertical Illuminance – N/A

Social Activity: –Horizontal Illuminance – 5 fc –Vertical Illuminance – 3 fc

Lecture Halls: Audience :

– Horizontal Illuminance – 30 fc (on the workplane) –Vertical Illuminance – 5 fc (on the whiteboard)

Conference Rooms:

Meeting: – Horizontal Illuminance – 30 fc –Vertical Illuminance – 5 fc

With respect to energy, not only does the building have to adhere to ASHRAE 90.1 and the stricter Massachusetts State Building Code, it is applying for LEED Gold Certification. The ASHRAE 90.1-2004 lighting power density requirement for Conference/Meeting/Multipurpose spaces is 1.3 W/ft2.

The Massachusetts State Building Code, 780 CMR 1308.00 – Lighting Systems, lists the following criteria relevant to the Flexible Use Space: 1308.1 GENERAL: The lighting criteria (referenced herein as ‘mandatory’ criteria) shall apply to:

‐ Interior spaces of building

‐ Exterior illumination of entrances, exits, and canopies;

‐ Exterior building grounds lighting provided through the building’s electrical service

‐ Exception 1 to the mandatory criteria is: Emergency lighting that is automatically off during normal building operation and is powered by battery, generator, or other alternate power source.

1308.2.1 AUTOMATIC LIGHTING SHUTOFF: Interior lighting in buildings larger than 5000 ft2 shall be controlled with an automatic control device to shut off building lighting in all spaces. This automatic control device shall function on either:




1308.2.2 SPACE CONTROL: Each space enclosed by ceiling heigh partitionsshall have at least one control device to independently control general lighting in the space. Each control device shall be activated either manually by an occupant or automatically by sensing an occupant. Each control device shall:


‐ Control a maximum of 2500 ft2 for spaces 10,000 ft2 or less and a maximum of 10,000 ft2 for spaces greater than 10,000 ft2 ‐ Be capable of overriding the automatic shutoff control for no more than two (2) hours.

- Be readily accessible and located so the occupant can see the controlled lighting.


1308.3 TANDEM WIRING: Luminaires utilizing one or three fluorescent lamps rated greater than 30 watts shall use two lamp tandem wired ballasts in lieu of single lamp ballasts when two or more luminaires are located in the same space and controlled by the same lighting control device.

‐ Exceptions 1 through 6 inclusive to the mandatory criteria for tandem wiring include: Recessed luminaires more than ten

(10) feet apart measured center‐tocenter; Surface and pendant mounted luminaires which are not continuous; Lighting fixtures utilizing single lamp high frequency electronic ballasts; Luminaires utilizing three lamp high frequency or three lamp electromagnetic ballasts; Luminaires on emergency circuits; Luminaires with no available pair.

1308.6 INTERIOR LIGHTING POWER: The installed power shall not exceed the interior power allowance developed in accordance with 780 CMR 1308.6.2 INTERIOR POWER ALLOWANCE. 1308.6.1 INSTALLED INTERIOR LIGHTING POWER: The installed interior power shall include all power used by the luminaires including lamps, ballasts, and control devices.

‐ Exceptions 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e, 3h to the mandatory criteria are: Lighting that is integral to equipment or instrumentation and is installed by its manufacturer; Lighting specifically designed for use only during medical or dental procedures and lighting integral to medical equipment; Lighting integral to both open and enclosed refridgerator and freezer cases; Lighting integral to food warming and food preparation equipment; Exit signs.

1308.6.1.1 LUMINAIRE WATTAGE: Luminaire wattage incoporated into the installed interior lighting power shall be determined in accordance with the following:

‐ Wattage of incandescent or tungsten‐halogen luminaires with medium screw base sockets and not containing permanently installed ballasts shall be the maximum labeled wattage of the luminaire.

‐ Exception: Luminaires for which lower wattage lamps are specified in construction documents, maintenance and operating manuals, and reports.

‐ Wattage of luminaires with permanently installed or remotely installed ballasts shall be the operating input wattage of the specified lamp/ballast combination based on values from manufacturer’s catalogs or values from independent testing lab reports.

‐ Wattage of line voltage track that allow the addition and/or relocation of luminaires without altering the system wiring shall be the lower of:

‐ The specified wattage of the luminaires with a minimum of 30 watts per linear foot (W/lin. ft.) of track, or;

‐ The specified wattage of the circuit protection device.

‐Wattage of low voltage lighting track and other flexible lighting systems that allow for the addition and/or relocation of luminaires without altering the wiring system shall be the specified wattage of the transformer supplying the system.

‐ Wattage of all other miscellaneous lighting equipment shall be the specified wattage of the equipment.


1308.6.2 INTERIOR LIGHTING POWER ALLOWANCE: The interior lighting power allowance for a building or a separately metered or permitted portion of a building shall be determined by either the Building Area Method or the Space‐by‐Space method. Trade‐offs of interior lighting power allowance among portions of the building for which a different method of calculation has been used are not permitted.


Figure 1.3.2 | Flex Use Space – Floor plan

Dimensions

The room is approximately 57’-8” x 43’-9”, with recesses near the entrances to the space.

Square footage: 2497 ft2

Height: 11’-3” in back

14’-3 ¾” in front

*both have 1’-6 ¾” recesses


Materials

Floor: CPT-1: Carpet – Karastan Contract ‘New York, NY’ Style

Base of Wall: WD-1: Maple wood with transparent finish

WD-2: Yellow Poplar wood with opaque paint

Walls: IPS-1: Eggshell paint finish

AP-1: US Gypsum Corp. ‘Micore 160’ acoustic panel

WB-1: Chalk/Marker board

OP: Operable partition


SCHEMATIC DESIGN

Figure 1.3.3 | Flex Use Space – Schematic Lighting – Plan

Figure 1.3.4 | Flex Use Space – Schematic Lighting -Section



Light Loss Factors

Luminaire Type B:






LLF = 0.66

Luminaire Type C:

Luminaire Maintenance Category: VI





LLF = 0.643


Luminaire Type D:






LLF = 0.66

Luminaire Type A:






LLF = 0.66


Layout

Figure 1.3.5| Flex Use Space Lighting Plan (for scale drawing see Appendix)


Mounting Details

Figure 1.3.6 | Flex Use Space – Luminaire C mounting detail


Renderings

Presentation Setting

Figure 1.3.7| Flex Use Space – Presentation Setting – Rendered Plan View

Figure 1.3.8 | Flex Use Space – Presentation Setting – Pseudo Color Plan View


Figure 1.3.9 | Flex Use Space – Presentation Setting – Cut view from back

Figure 1.3.9| Flex Use Space – Presentation Setting – Pseudo Color cut view from back

Figure 1.3.9 | Flex Use Space – Presentation Setting – Cut view across room


Divided Setting

Although dimming and switching do not change between the presentation and divided settings, divider walls do break the space up in area of the room opposite the main bench or panel. The results can be seen in the following images.

Figure 1.3.10 | Flex Use Space – Divided Setting – Plan view

Figure 1.3.11| Flex Use Space – Divided Setting – Pseudo Color plan view


Figure 1.3.12 | Flex Use Space – Divided Setting – Cut view across

Figure 1.3.13 | Flex Use Space – Divided Setting –Pseudo Color cut view across

Figure 1.3.14 | Flex Use Space – Divided Setting –Cut view from back


Figure 1.3.15| Flex Use Space – Divided Setting –Pseudo color cut view from back

Figure 1.3.16 | Flex Use Space – Divided Setting –Cut view from front

Figure 1.3.17 | Flex Use Space – Divided Setting –Cut view from front


Social Setting

By dimming the cove lighting to 50% and the wall wash luminaires to 30% of light output, the social scene was achieved. The furniture was also removed because it is unclear what type of layout would be used for different events.

Figure 1.3.18 | Flex Use Space – Social setting – Plan view

Figure 1.3.19| Flex Use Space – Social setting – Cut view across space

Figure 1.3.20 | Flex Use Space – Social setting – Plan view

Figure 1.3.21 | Flex Use Space – Social setting – Cut view across space


PERFORMANCE Presentation & Conference Scenes

The horizontal illuminance on the workplane throughout the entire space has an average value of 19.31 fc, which is below the IESNA recommendation. However, the use of the lecture hall criteria does not perfectly model how this space is used. In a typical lecture hall, the audience has a surface to write or read. In this area, the audience uses portable seating for lecture-type presentations, and does not have the same need for taking notes and or following along in a textbook. Also, the values drop in the corners and recesses, bring this average value down. The values in the seating area (designated by architectural drawings) do not drop below…

For the scene when the dividers are being used and conference environments are present in the back spaces, the horizontal illuminance was calculated at the level of the conference tables. These values do not reach the recommended 30 fc, but do not drop beneath 26 fc.The difference is nearly imperceivable for most people.

Vertical illuminance values measured in the middle of the space have an average level of 7.6 fc. This exceeds the 5 fc criteria set by the IESNA. The values on the whiteboards are higher due to the placement of the wall wash luminaires and the desire for these areas to be used in critical tasks. The average illuminance on the front whiteboard is 22.53 fc and the back two whiteboards have average illuminances of 13.49 fc and 14.38 fc, respectively.

Social Setting

The average illuminance of the social scene setting for the Flexible Use Space meets IESNA criteria for both assembly and social functions. The average illuminance is 11.1 fc, exceeding the assembly recommendation of 10 fc and the social recommendation of 5 fc. The Lutron GraphikEye controls within the space would allow the occupant to further dim the lighting, if desired, or switch off sets of luminaires altogether.

Again using the calculation grid in the center of the room, vertical illuminances were measured for this scene setting. The average illuminance is 4.45 fc, which exceeds the IESNA recommendation of 3 fc.

According to ASHRAE 90.1-2004, and the requirement of 1.3 W/ft2, the lighting power in this space is 7 watts over the allowed value, but, as seen in the spreadsheet above, the trade-off between spaces compensates for the four spaces that were redesigned. ASHRAE 90.1 -2004 allows an overall space-by-space method for lighting power density, for which the requirements have been exceeded.

The Lutron Quantum control system for the building, and specifically this space, meet the Massachusetts State Building Code requirements for control. Occupancy sensors provide automatic shut-off, while three control interfaces in the room do not exceed 2500 ft2 per control device. The fluorescent lamps that are above 30 W are not continuous and are part of a surface mounted system, which meets the criteria for power per lamp.


6TH FLOOR LABORATORY

Figure 1.4.1| 6th floor plan with lab area for redesign highlighted


Laboratories occupy the spaces adjacent to the southern façade throughout the 2nd to 7th floors of the Koch Institute. The spaces are not incredibly deep, but large shelving from floor to ceiling makes daylight penetration and artificial light distribution difficult.

Design Concept

The design approach for this space is to provide an energy-efficient task-ambient solution that can be mimicked throughout all the lab spaces in the facility. Harnessing daylight, while controlling it for the optimal performance and comfort, is also critical. Automated shades with manual overrides will add to the visual comfort of this space.

Desired Perceptions

The most important perceptions are that of the lab scientist in these spaces. This is a work environment and should be perceived as such. The illuminance on the task plane should be uniform and the ‘alleys’ produced by the rows of shelving should have adequate light on the walking surface in order to move safely throughout the laboratory from task to task. From the outside, the building should seem almost alive, with user controls changing the façade by adjusting shades.

Target Lighting Performance Measures From the IESNA Lighting Handbook:

Educational Facilities – Science Laboratories:

– Horizontal Illuminance – 50 fc –Vertical Illuminance – 30 fc


ASHRAE 90.1 requires that Laboratory spaces have a lighting power density less than or equal to 1.4 W/ft2.

The Massachusetts State Building Code, 780 CMR 1308.00 – Lighting Systems, lists the following criteria relevant to the Laboratory: 1308.2.1 AUTOMATIC LIGHTING SHUTOFF: Interior lighting in buildings larger than 5000 ft2 shall be controlled with an automatic control device to shut off building lighting in all spaces. This automatic control device shall function on either:




1308.2.2 SPACE CONTROL: Each space enclosed by ceiling heigh partitionsshall have at least one control device to independently control general lighting in the space. Each control device shall be activated either manually by an occupant or automatically by sensing an occupant. Each control device shall:

‐ Control a maximum of 2500 ft2 for spaces 10,000 ft2 or less and a maximum of 10,000 ft2 for spaces greater than 10,000 ft2

‐ Be capable of overriding the automatic shutoff control for no more than two (2) hours.

‐ Be readily accessible and located so the occupant can see the controlled lighting.


1308.2.3 UNIFORM REDUCTION: Each perimeter office space enclosed by ceiling heigh partitions shall have a manual control to allow the occupant to uniformly reduce the connected lighting load by at least 50%.

‐ Exception to the mandatory criteria is: Spaces with automatic daylighting controls. 1308.3 TANDEM WIRING: Luminaires utilizing one or three fluorescent lamps rated greater than 30 watts shall use two lamp tandem wired ballasts in lieu of single lamp ballasts when two or more luminaires are located in the same space and controlled by the same lighting control device.

‐ Exceptions 1 through 6 inclusive to the mandatory criteria for tandem wiring include: Recessed luminaires more than ten

(10) feet apart measured center‐tocenter; Surface and pendant mounted luminaires which are not continuous; Lighting fixtures utilizing single lamp high frequency electronic ballasts; Luminaires utilizing three lamp high frequency or three lamp electromagnetic ballasts; Luminaires on emergency circuits; Luminaires with no available pair.

1308.6 INTERIOR LIGHTING POWER: The installed power shall not exceed the interior power allowance developed in accordance with 780 CMR 1308.6.2 INTERIOR POWER ALLOWANCE. 1308.6.1 INSTALLED INTERIOR LIGHTING POWER: The installed interior power shall include all power used by the luminaires including lamps, ballasts, and control devices.

‐ Exceptions 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e, 3h to the mandatory criteria are: Lighting that is integral to equipment or instrumentation and is installed by its manufacturer; Lighting specifically designed for use only during medical or dental procedures and


lighting integral to medical equipment; Lighting integral to both open and enclosed refridgerator and freezer cases; Lighting integral to food warming and food preparation equipment; Exit signs.

1308.6.1.1 LUMINAIRE WATTAGE: Luminaire wattage incoporated into the installed interior lighting power shall be determined in accordance with the following:

‐ Wattage of incandescent or tungsten‐halogen luminaires with medium screw base sockets and not containing permanently installed ballasts shall be the maximum labeled wattage of the luminaire.

‐ Exception: Luminaires for which lower wattage lamps are specified in construction documents, maintenance and operating manuals, and reports.

‐ Wattage of luminaires with permanently installed or remotely installed ballasts shall be the operating input wattage of the specified lamp/ballast combination based on values from manufacturer’s catalogs or values from independent testing lab reports.

‐ Wattage of line voltage track that allow the addition and/or relocation of luminaires without altering the system wiring shall be the lower of:

‐ The specified wattage of the luminaires with a minimum of 30 watts per linear foot (W/lin. ft.) of track, or;

‐ The specified wattage of the circuit protection device.

‐Wattage of low voltage lighting track and other flexible lighting systems that allow for the addition and/or relocation of luminaires without altering the wiring system shall be the specified wattage of the transformer supplying the system.

‐ Wattage of all other miscellaneous lighting equipment shall be the specified wattage of the equipment. 1308.6.2 INTERIOR LIGHTING POWER ALLOWANCE: The interior lighting power allowance for a building or a separately metered or permitted portion of a building shall be determined by either the Building Area Method or the Space‐by‐Space method. Trade‐offs of interior lighting power allowance among portions of the building for which a different method of calculation has been used are not permitted.



Figure 1.4.2 | Floor plan with lab area highlighted

Dimensions

The room is approximately 57’-8” x 43’-9”, with recesses near the entrances to the space.

Square footage: 2497 ft2

Height: 11’-3” in back

14’-3 ¾” in front

*both have 1’-6 ¾” recesses

Materials

Floor: CPT-1: Carpet – Karastan Contract ‘New York, NY’ Style

Base of Wall: WD-1: Maple wood with transparent finish

WD-2: Yellow Poplar wood with opaque paint

Walls: IPS-1: Eggshell paint finish

AP-1: US Gypsum Corp. ‘Micore 160’ acoustic panel

WB-1: Chalk/Marker board

OP: Operable partition


SCHEMATIC DESIGN

Figure 1.4.3| Laboratory Space - Schematic lighting design overlaid on architect’s rendering

Figure 1.4.4 |Laboratory Space - Schematic lighting plan



Light Loss Factors

Luminaire Type H:

Luminaire Maintenance Category: I

Dirt Condition: Very Clean




LLF = 0.875

Luminaire Type L:

Luminaire Maintenance Category: II

Dirt Condition: Very Clean




LLF = 0.857


Layout

Figure 1.4.5 | Laboratory Space – Lighting Plan (scale drawings can be found in the Appendix)


Mounting Details

Figure 1.4.6 | Laboratory Space – Luminaire type ‘H’ mounting detail


Renderings

Figure 1.4.7 | Laboratory Space – Plan view rendering

Figure 1.4.8 | Laboratory Space – Cut view from north end of space

Figure 1.4.9 | Laboratory Space – Plan view pseudo color rendering

Figure 1.4.10 | Laboratory Space – Pseudo color cut view from north end of space


Figure 1.4.11 | Laboratory Space – Cut view from south facade

Figure 1.4.12 | Laboratory Space – Pseudo color cut view from south facade

Figure 1.4.13 | Laboratory Space – Cut view from west wall

Figure 1.4.14 | Laboratory Space – Pseudo color cut view from west wall


PERFORMANCE: Calculation grids were set up on the desks, lab benches, and floor in the Laboratory space. The average horizontal illuminances are as follows:

Desks: 40.37 fc

Benches: 51.85 fc

Floor; 44.37 fc

The illuminance for the benches meet IESNA recommendations. While the desk portion of the bench does not meet recommended levels, it does not fall very short and it is also the area where test values will be inputted to computers, acting more like an open office. An open office with intensive VDT use recommends 40 fc, which this design meets.

To calculate vertical illuminance, calculation grids were set up above the bench/desk plane and parallel to the front edge of the lowest shelf. The average illuminance is 37.47 fc, which exceeds the IESNA recommendation of 30 fc.

Comparing the total power in the Laboratory to the ASHRAE 90.1-2004 requirements shows that the design is 21.5 watts over the allowance for this space. However, by trading off with the spaces that are under the allowed power, the total design of four spaces meets ASHRAE requirements, per the space-by-space method.

The Massachusetts State Building Code requirements for this space have been exceeded. The Lutron Quantum building lighting control system is integrated into the controls of this space. Automatic shut-off occurs on an occupancy sensor controlled basis. GraphikEye wall mounted scene controls independent of the automatic controls are present, and allow uniform dimming to and beyond 50% of power.


ELECTRICAL DEPTH - LIGHTING BRANCH CIRCUIT REDESIGN

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The lighting system for the majority of the Koch Institute is on a 277V system. However, two spaces are powered via 120V dimming panels. These two spaces are part of the branch circuit redesign in this section. The other two spaces are on 277V lighting panels. The entire system is monitored and controlled by a Lutron Quantum building lighting control system. The manual controls in the spaces with dimming are Lutron GraphikEye, and can be seen on the lighting plans as well as the dimming wiring diagrams for these spaces.

Emergency power for the 277V lighting is provided by separate panels and is controlled by emergency lighting relay panels connected to both the Lutron Quantum system and building automation system. Emergency power for the 120V space lighting is provided by separate smaller emergency dimming panels, which are powered through the main dimming panels and again controlled through the Quantum system.

Switching for different zones within each space can be seen on the lighting plan for each space. The plans have been placed in the body of the report, but can be seen as scale drawings in the Appendix. Cut sheets for all lighting equipment used in the redesign can also be found in the Appendix.


STREETSCAPE Introduction

The streetscape is comprised of nearly 18000 square feet of concrete and brick pavers along Main Street adjacent to the north façade. From Ames St. to Vassar St., the east and west boundaries of the site, is a distance of 444 feet. However, the portion to be re-lit is that directly in front of the building, along its 295’-5” length, with the additional area covered by the canopies on the side doors. From the main door to the curb of Main Street is 36’6”. Between the façade and the street are three rows of trees creating separate corridors.

Controls

The streetscape lighting has existing power from the panels in the table below, which is controlled by lighting automation panels separate from the 480Y/277 power panels. The exterior lighting is controlled by an astronomical time clock and has manual overrides located in the electrical room in the basement for maintenance purposes. The controls for this space meet all requirements of the Massachusetts State Building Code, which can be found in the lighting criteria for the Streetscape.

The panels that have been affected by lighting redesign in the Streetscape can be seen in the table below. The panels are not affected by similar changes in other spaces that were redesigned.


Layout

Figure 2.1.1 – Streetscape – Lighting plan


Existing Panelboard Schedules

Figure 2.1.2 | Panelboard Schedule ‘L41A’

Figure 2.1.3 | Panelboard Schedule ‘L4B’


Figure 2.1.4 | Panelboard Schedule ‘E41B’


Existing Lighting Automation Panelboards

Figure 2.1.5 | Lighting Automatic Panel ‘LABA’ schedule from drawing E6.4

Figure 2.1.6 | Lighting Automatic Panel ‘LABA’ schedule from drawing E6.4


Panel L4B


Panel L41A


Panel E41A


Feeder Sizing


GALLERY Introduction

The Gallery space is located in the northeast corner of the building and acts as both a corridor and a display gallery, per its name. In the eastern end of the space is a recessed into the building that accommodates both vertical displays on the walls and three dimensional displays mounted on the floor. This portion of the space is highly adjustable, which is mirrored by the luminaires within it. Two ERCO halogen luminaires provide washing and highlighting components, while a Philips Color Kinetics LED grazing luminaire marks the floor from beneath benches adjacent to the glazing. A T5 fluorescent linear wallwash luminaire adds highlighting effects for walls outside the recessed display area.

Controls

Two distinct control settings appear in this space, varied by night and day, as well as options for allowing the user to set up displays properly within the Gallery. All luminaires in this area receive power from Lutron dimming panels, one for both normal and emergency lighting control.

Astronomical time clock input will determine the scene setting for night and day, while manual overrides and custom display settings will be programmed and inputted on a Lutron GraphikEye interface mounted near the recessed display area.


Layout

Figure 2.2.1 – Gallery – Lighting plan


Existing Panelboard Schedules

Figure 2.2.2 | Existing ‘LD2B’ Lighting Distribution Panel Schedule from Drawing E7.1


Dimming Panelboard Schedules

Figure 2.2.3 | Existing ‘DIM1B’ switching panel load schedule from drawing E8.10

Figure 2.2.4 | Existing ‘EDIM1B’ switching panel load schedule from drawing E8.10


Panelboard Worksheets

Bus and main circuit breaker sizes were not calculated for the electronic dimming panels, but the worksheet was used to calculate the loads on each phase of ‘EDIM1B,’ which is fed by ‘DIM1B.’ These loads ultimately affect the load on the panelboard ‘LD2B,’ which also contains loads from ‘DIM1A,’ and will be revised in the following section upon the revision of the ‘DIM1A’ loads for the Flexible Use Space.


Dimming Wiring

Figure 2.2.5 – Gallery – Dimming wiring diagram


Feeder Sizing


FLEX USE SPACE Introduction

The Flexible Use Space, per its name, will be used for a variety of functions and events within the Koch Institute. After passing through one of the transitional spaces surrounding this space, most visitors to the building, apart from those working there day-to-day, will find their destination within the Flex Use Space.

The lighting redesign in this space took a system composed of halogen downlighting and linear fluorescent uplighting, which was organized in a pattern of square, suspended assemblies, and transformed it into a system of linear fluorescent uplights with three T5 lamps in cross-section, as well as ceiling and wall-wash fluorescent luminaires in the front of the space, to create a hierarchy within the room.

Controls

The luminaires in this space, as well as the rest of the facility, will be controlled by a Lutron Quantum system. In this space, Lutron Eco10 ballasts collect information from a central control system and a GraphikEye user control within the space. Therefore, both line voltage and low voltage will be run to each ballast in the space.


Layout

Figure 2.3.1 – Flex Use Space – Lighting plan


Figure 2.3.2 |Existing ‘LD2B’ panel schedule from Drawing E7.2


Figure 2.3.3 |Dimming Panel ‘DIM1A’ schedule from Drawing E8.9

Figure 2.3.4 |Dimming Panel ‘EDIM1A’ schedule from Drawing E8.9


Panelboard Worksheet

Bus and main circuit breaker sizes were not calculated for the electronic dimming panels, but the worksheet was used to calculate the loads on each phase of ‘EDIM1A,’ which is fed by ‘DIM1A.’ These loads ultimately affect the load on the panelboard ‘LD2B,’ which also contains loads from ‘DIM1B,’ for which the loads were calculated in the Gallery section of this report.


The completion of the panelboard worksheets for these dimming panels and those for the Gallery and Streetscape allowed a worksheet to be completed for panelboard ‘LD2B’:


Revised Panel Schedules


Dimming Wiring Diagram

Figure 2.3.6 – Flex Use Space – Dimming wiring diagram


Feeder Sizes


6TH FLOOR LABORATORY Introduction

A typical southern façade laboratory was chosen for lighting redesign and, subsequently, electrical redesign. Laboratories stretch from the 2nd floor to the 7th floor of the facility, and across the entire southern end of each floor. Each lab consists of rows of lab benches perpendicular to the façade glazing, with a desk directly adjacent to the glazing. The lighting for these labs is on 480Y/277V panels designated for lighting loads. For this report, a lab space was chosen on the sixth floor and analyzed. The changes made here could be made typical throughout the laboratory spaces in the rest of the building.

Controls

As seen in the layout below, the laboratory space, per Massachusetts State Building Code, employs light level reduction on a photo sensor and manual override basis. Also, occupancy sensors provide automatic shut-off on a row-by-row basis. The system is also integrated into the Lutron Quantum building lighting control system.


Layout

Figure 2.4.1 – Lab – Lighting plan


Existing Schedules

Panelboard ‘L46B’


Panelboard Worksheet


Revised Panelboard Schedule


Feeder Sizes


ELECTRICAL DEPTH - ALUMINUM VS. COPPER FEEDER STUDY Introduction

The following study was performed to investigate the current cost of copper feeders in the existing electrical system and determine whether it is feasible to replace these feeders with their aluminum equivalents. The standard for aluminum conductors today is the 8000 series alloy. This alloy has overcome a variety of problems with previous aluminum alloys that were used for conductors, and now that the NEC 310.14 states aluminum conductors ‘shall be made of an AA-8000 series electrical grade aluminum alloy conductor material,’ we will ignore the issues associated with the 1305 series alloy.

The relevance of the study could not come at a better time. Copper has long been the standard in building electrical systems, but the price fluctuates drastically and, as the copper industries largest market by a long shot, the building industry takes the hit. Demand for copper outpaces supply more often than not, but aluminum supply keeps the price growth more stable.

All of this aside, the two parameters used in determining the outcome were price and performance. Price was evaluated from comparing both the cost of equally capable aluminum conductors and the resulting conduit that was required. Investigation of performance involved research involving other installations and the properties of the two elements, and will help determine long term costs related to the two conductor materials.

Cost Analysis

The cost analysis of the two feeder systems was calculated using the comparison of feeder costs and the comparison of conduit costs. For the same load requirements, switching from copper to aluminum conductors requires a larger size conductor (NEC Table 310-16). For instance, if there presently exists a 250 kcmil feeder rated to 90 degrees Celsius, it takes an aluminum equivalent that has an allowable ampacity of 290 A, which is a 400 kcmil.

Other costs are associated with the use of aluminum conductors, such as special cable terminations in equipment or panels, but it is assumed for this study that the equipment specified would be changed to allow aluminum terminations. The inherent reason for comparing the feeders in this facility, and not branch circuiting and conductors in general, is that smaller loads typically require an aluminum-to-copper connection prior to connecting the copper conductor to the load. This does not make the use of aluminum for branch circuiting feasible. However, for feeders and larger equipment there is more space and a variety of terminations available.

Estimated cost per length per conductor information can be found in RS Means Building Construction Cost Data 2010. By cataloging each feeder in the building and using length information from an SKM study done previously, the cost of each feeder was estimated and an overall feeder cost estimate was calculated. Busses in the building were omitted from this study, but would probably have a similar overall outcome to that gained by this study.

Conduit comparisons were done by cataloging the size of the existing conduit for copper feeders, and determining the size conduit for the equivalent aluminum feeders. Aluminum conductors must be sized larger to compensate for their lower ampacity, but one property of aluminum conductors that is absent from copper is that the stranded conductors have the ability to be compacted, taking up less space for a given gauge within the conduit. To find which size conduit could be used for compact conductors, NEC Table C.1(A) was used, because it is assumed that all conduit for feeders is EMT, or electrical metallic tubing. A summary of the values used can be seen in Figure 1.3 below.


Figure 3.1.1 | Input values used in calculations

Due to the relative costs of aluminum and copper, and the ability for aluminum to compact, which minimizes changes to conduit size and related costs, the savings in switching to aluminum feeders was substantial, as seen in Figure 1.4 below.

Figure 3.1.2 | Tabulated results of cost analysis

The table indicates that the savings would be over three-quarters of a million dollars. Given the total building electrical system cost of just over $17 million, this adds up to 4.5% savings over the whole system, and 31.6% for feeders alone.

Performance Comparison

As stated in the introduction, the 8000-AA series aluminum that is currently allowed by the NEC for aluminum conductors has overcome many of the issues that given aluminum a bad reputation in the past. Most notable of these are oxidation and creep. Oxidation of exposed aluminum during installation can be prevented by using the correct tools (wire brush and correct stripping tool) and using an antioxidant joint compound. Creep is the deformation of a material at less than yield strength due to extended periods of stress, which can be compounded by heat. This sounds exactly like what is happening at an electrical connection. However, the newer aluminum alloy has similar properties to copper in this regard. It is advised that different connections be used because of this issue, but for our study it is assumed the proper aluminum connections have been specified and it is not an issue regarding feeders.


Conclusion

Proponents of copper will argue that, despite its cost, power quality cannot be sacrificed for a cheaper product in aluminum feeders. However, due to the advancements made in aluminum alloy and the substantial cost difference at this time, it is recommended that the Koch Institute implement aluminum feeders. There will be increased labor costs, but this is minimal if the crew has experience with aluminum wiring techniques. There will be increased design costs for a change order in connections for equipment using these feeders, but it will undoubtedly be outweight by the cost savings. For those still worried about connections coming lose or increased impedance and arc flash hazards, here is the argument: A building’s electrical system, or at least the main conduits, should be commissioned with infrared cameras when the system is turned on, and after the system has had time to settle. Any issues at this stage would not be a result of faulty aluminum, but of faulty installation, and could be dealt with accordingly.


ELECTRICAL DEPTH - SKM ANALYSIS To ensure the safety of an electrical system design, it is necessary either run a numerous amount of hand or excel calculations, or to model the system in SKM software. The version available for our use limited the number of busses to 100, and a simplified model of the Koch Institute’s existing electrical system was created to perform this analysis.

The model includes the service entrance, typical normal and emergency distribution and branch circuit panels, and a variety of panels and motor loads in the mechanical penthouse, or 8th level.

Short Circuit Study A short circuit analysis was conducted on the Koch Institute electrical system using SKM software. The full results for the analysis can be found in the Appendix. The following table summarizes the results:


Arc Flash Study The output from the SKM arc flash study has been compiled into the following charts and provides us with the danger and related gear that must be worn to work on each piece of equipment.


The last few yellow rows show us the requirement for clothing to be worn when working on electrical equipment of a given incident energy category.


Protective Device Coordination The time-current curve below shows us the relationship of trip times for a path from the main protection device on section 2 of Unit Substation B to Panel LRD2P in the mechanical penthouse:


ELECTRICAL DEPTH - OVER-CURRENT DEVICE COORDINATION STUDY Overview

A path was chosen for over-current protection coordination from a breaker at the main substation (USS-A) through a distribution panel (D4B) and to a lighting branch circuit (L4B-21). Eaton Cutler-Hammer time current curves were used and overlaid in Photoshop to present the coordination. The background is for a 20A CB in the branch circuit, and the time-current curves for a 80A and 800A breaker have been located based on their percentages of this current value.

Time vs. Current Curves


Calculations


ARCHITECTURAL BREADTH - SOUTH FAÇADE SHADING REDESIGN

Existing Design

Figure XXX | Vertical detail of south façade shade

The existing horizontal shading system is coupled with blinds on the interior and extends 3.5’ from the outside face of the aluminum window mullions. The shade is comprised of 6” tall aluminum framing with six airfoil-shaped blades performing the shading. The shades are designed for the laboratory spaces along the south façade and the conference rooms on the southwest corner of each floor from Floor 2 through Floor 6. The façade along the southeast corner of the building lacks shades because is tapers away from the south façade and is somewhat shaded by the building itself.


Figure 5.1.1 | 6th floor plan with existing shade highlighted

Figure 5.1.2 | South façade elevation with existing shade highlighted

Reason for Redesign The shortfalls of horizontal shading in general are present at the Koch Institute, as well. Low sun angles in winter and morning or evening hours throughout the year are nearly impossible to cut off with a horizontal shading system. The remedy in some situations is a vertical element to the shading system, which can shade the low morning and evening sun angles and prevent direct solar penetration.

The current shading system, however, lacks a vertical element and does not extend horizontally past the window, which also creates direct sunlight penetration issues.


Figure 5.1.3 | Rendered view of south façade and courtyard from MIT Facilities website

By looking at the site of the Koch Institute, it would seem that the adjacent Stata Center and Koch Biology Building are, in a way, performing this vertical shading function for the sides of the southern façade of the Koch Institute. However, plan south is approximately 29.8 degrees east of polar south, which means plan south on the drawings face almost 30 degrees to the west. Therefore, the length of the courtyard adjacent to the south façade and the relative position of the Stata Center and Koch Building now allow for direct penetration in the afternoon/evening throughout the year. However, the above picture shows a late morning setting sometime in the middle of the year, as evidenced by the angle of the shadow from the Koch Biology building and the length of that shadow.

The manually controlled interior blinds allow the control of direct sunlight penetration into the lab spaces, but are inefficient in terms of blocking solar gain, which will be analyzed in the Mechanical Breadth, in the next section.

Redesign The goal was to implement some type of vertical louvered shade for the south façade. By searching Sweets Catalog for solar shade manufacturers and those manufacturers catalogs and websites, it was determined that an adjustable vertical louver, or venetian blind, would be the best option to employ. C/S Sun Controls offers a customizable exterior venetian blind that integrates into existing building management or automation systems to track the sun and adjust automatically.


Figure 5.1.4 | Rendering of sunshade demonstrating automatic adjustment

Going through the available options, the trapezoidal blade shape was chosen and integrated into the existing façade by extending the existing curtain wall mullions out further from the glazing.

Figure 5.1.5 | Blade style options from C/S Sun Controls

Using this template, and integrating it into the existing 5” depth of the mullions on the curtain wall, the following design was created. The vertical spacing of the louvers is the same as their individual width, 4”.


Figure 5.1.6 | Vertical detail of curtain wall with new shade design

Figure 5.1.7 | Enlarged elevation detail of new shade design


The design helps give the Koch Institute its own identity, while keeping with the architect’s design goals of harmony with the surrounding life sciences sector of campus. While providing shading capabilities during daylight hours, the shades will create an interesting effect when viewing the Koch Institute from the courtyard at night.

Figure 5.1.8 | Rendered view of a lab space from outside with the new shade system

Figure 5.1.9 | South elevation with new shade system

While the detail of the shades is hard to differentiate in the elevation above, it is clear that they have a dramatic effect on the façade. The horizontal elements seem to blend in with the louvers on the mechanical system on the roof. Although the mechanical penthouse will not be as visible as the louvers, they do give the sense that something methodical and interesting is going on behind them, which is exactly what is happening in the Koch Institute.


MECHANICAL BREADTH - SOUTH FAÇADE SHADE ANALYSIS

Analysis The method of analysis for comparing the existing system to the new solar shade design was evaluating the incident radiation on the vertical glazing plane. By comparing a series of dates and times that would be problem conditions for the original shade with those same times using the new shade design.

Figure 6.1.1 | Profile angles for existing horizontal shade

By analyzing the diagram above, it is clear that any solar profile angle beneath 34.71 degrees will allow direct light into the laboratories and any solar profile angle beneath 48.99 degrees will allow solar penetration beyond the curtain wall. When the profile angle of 34.71 degrees is considered, there is 2’4-3/8” of window area exposed to direct solar radiation.

By using this profile angle and the rotation of the building (29.8 degrees west of south) and approximating the intersection of these values on the chart below, it is easier to get an estimate of when direct sunlight will penetrate the laboratory spaces. Note that the chart is set up for 40 degrees north latitude, and Cambridge is at 41 degrees.


Figure 6.1.2 | Profile angle and sun path graphs overlaid on one another

The problem area, seen in red, is more critical for this report the further to the right it stretches. Since we are analyzing the effect on the cooling load of the lab spaces, the values from the April/August curve and over are the most important. It may seem that this late in the day the cooling loads would not matter, but the chart values hardly surpass 7PM solar time, which is still light outside for most of the dates in question. Occupancy at this time of day would be another question, but it is uncertain in a university laboratory whether graduate students or anyone, for that matter, would be performing studies into the evening and night.

The chart shows us that roughly 5:20PM to sunset in April or August there will be direct solar penetration. From May through July there is not direct penetration until 7PM or later, which should not be of significance due to the proximity to sunset and the extremely low angles, which would likely be blocked by surrounding structures.

As this is a very small portion of the year, it cannot be determined whether the additional cost of a mechanized shading system would benefit in terms of energy consumption and cooling loads based on this profile angle. However, if one refers back to the profile angle diagram at the beginning of this study, it is evident that anything below 49 degrees penetrates beyond the curtain wall into the space. The angle previously used was analyzing direct penetration into the area where the lab benches and usable floor space begins. If we do the same study with a profile angle of 49 degrees, we gain the following chart estimate:


Figure 6.1.3 | Profile angle and sun path graphs overlaid on one another

A significantly larger portion of the year has direct sunlight penetration when you consider the values highlighted in blue. These values contribute to the cooling load of the space in late spring and early fall for a more significant portion of the occupancy hours in the early afternoon.

Conclusion From a mechanical point of view, it does not seem of value to add a more costly mechanized shading system, as it is apparent the benefits are for very small portions of the day during very small portions of the year. The horizontal shading system performs well in this analysis. A further daylighting study would need to be performed to evaluate the shading system from a lighting performance basis. This could have a different outcome as the areas of direct penetration during the winter months would cause disability glare at the desks in the lab spaces, and the tracking aspect of a new shading system would alleviate this. However, it is clear that the horizontal shade performs well, contrary to my original hypothesis.


REFERENCES American Society of Heating, Refridgerating and Air Conditioning. (2004). ASHRAE 90.1-2004 Lighting Requirements. Atlanta, GA: ASHRAE.

Illuminating Engineering Society of North America. (2000). IESNA Lighting Handbook, Ninth Edition. New York, NY: IESNA.

Illuminating Engineering Society. (1999). RP-33-99 Lighting for Exterior Environments. New York, NY: IES.

Massachusetts Department of Safety. (2003). Massachusetts State Building Code. Boston, MA: Board of Building Regulations and Standards.

National Fire Protection Association. NFPA 70 - National Electric Code. 2008 Edition. Quincy, Massachusetts: National Fire Protection Association, 2007. Print.

United States Department of the Interior ‘Aluminum Statistics and Information.’ United States Geological Survey.

<http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/aluminum/>

United States Department of the Interior ‘Aluminum Recycling in the United State in 2000.’ United States

Geological Survey <http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/c1196w/c1196w.pdf>

Kooiman, Brent and Robert Sailer. “Aluminum vs. Copper Conductors A Serious Alternative?” Interstates Engineering. August 2006. <http://www.interstates.com/Resources/Energy_Savings/ aluminumvscopper.html>

Black, William T. “Trends in the Use of Copper Wire & Cable in the USA.” Copper.org. November 1995. <http://www.copper.org/applications/telecomm/trends_cable.html#top>.

Elledge, James and Christel Hunter. “Aluminum versus Copper Electrical Wiring.” Today’s Facility Manager. January 2008. <http://www.todaysfacilitymanager.com/fm_expert171.php>.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Without assistance and encouragement from the following people, this project would not have been possible. The following sacrificed time in order to make my life easier throughout this project, and for that I am truly grateful.

Ron Achin

Bard, Rao + Athanas Consulting Engineers, LLC

Domenico Sinopoli


Bryan Rydingsward


Arne Abramson

Program Manager, Department of Facilities

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Peter Cooper

Manager of Sustainable Engineering & Utility Planning, Department of Facilities

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Bryan Donovan

Penn State University Architectural Engineering – Mechanical Option - Class of 2010


AE SENIOR THESIS - Pennsylvania State University · 2010-04-07 · andrew moore –...

Documents

Transcript of AE SENIOR THESIS - Pennsylvania State University · 2010-04-07 · andrew moore –...