Application of GIZMO on studio design proposal

1. Taylor’s University
School of Architecture, Building and Design
Master of Architecture
Environment and Technology II (ARC 71003)
Teo Kean Hui 0310165
Tutor: Axxu Hoi Jung Wai
Project 2: Gizmo proposal and simulation

2. Table of content
1.0 Project brief
2.0 Site Introduction
2.1 Site analysis- Sun
2.2 Site analysis- Wind
3.0 Methodology
3.1 Daylight factor
3.2 Air Velocity
4.0 Models and simulations
4.1 Baseline model and simulation
4.2 Proposal 1 model and simulation
4.3 Proposal 2 model and simulation
4.4 Proposal 3 model and simulation
4.5 Proposal 4 model and simulation
5.0 Comparison and analysis
5.1 Proposal X model and simulation
6.0 Conclusion

3. 1.0 Project Brief
This project aims to provide an opportunity for students to propose an external device – Gizmo and at the same time, act as building façade.
The application of Gizmo helps to reduce energy consumption by controlling the sunlight penetration into the building and subsequently
reduce solar heat gain inside the building without compromising the Indoor Environment Quality (IEQ). Sufficient amount of wind also help
to achieve thermal comfort without the aid of mechanical ventilation. The following aspects should be taken into considerations;
• To establish a baseline analysis of the proposed building in Urban Design Studio in relation with the surrounding context to set a base
standard in order to have a clear comparison with the implemented gizmo proposals.
• To implement environmental sustainable strategies to achieve indoor thermal comfort using passive design.
• To simulate wind flow and daylight performance using Ecotect on a selected area to measure the efficiency of proposed Gizmo.
• To compare and analyze proposed Gizmo and conclude the best option in order to achieve indoor thermal comfort.

4. 2.0 Site Introduction
Kota Bridge
Jalan Stesen 1
Jalan Tengku Diaudin
Jalan Besar
Jalan Tengku Kelana
Masjid India Klang
Site
Jalan Tengku Kelana
Royal town of Klang has been a place where many great
historical events took place where it can even dates back to
the prehistorically time which some of them still traceable
on site. Klang used to be the administrative quarter of
Selangor before the Shah Alam.
Klang town has been divided into 2 which are the northern
part of the Klang and Southern part of the Klang devided by
Klang river in between.
The southern Klang is the more older part of Klang with
very much celebrated Indian street along Jalan Tengku
Kelana.
As the time passes, people started to move away from the
Klang town to new township where more commercial
activity and happening.
The site (Jalan Stesen 1) is one of the oldest street in Klang,
located right next to the Klang KTM station. Many building
here are from the 60s and earlier.

5. 11
The proposed site is located at
3.0427876°N, 101.4484464°E
Stereographic diagram on the left shows the movement of
the sun throughout the year. The position of the sun is
commonly represented by two angles – altitude and
azimuth. Architect always refer to stereographic diagram
and come up with a better building design in control sun’s
energy and heating into building.
21st June (Summer Solstice) – most sunlight of the year
21st December (Winter Solstice) – least sunlight of the year
Azimuth Lines - Azimuth angles run around the edge of the
diagram. It is the horizontal angle between the sun and
true North.
On 21st June
Sunrise: 66.48° (07:06:58 hour)
Sunset: 293.52° (19:24:56 hour)
On 21st December
Sunrise: 113.42° (07:13:39 hour)
Sunset: 246.57° (19:10:37 hour)
These two periods are the most critical period as the sun
will irradiate on the building North and South facades. This
allow different design strategies to be applied.
Sun Path Diagram
Source: https://www.sunearthtools.com/dp/tools/pos_sun.php#top
2.1 Site Analysis- Sun

6. 12
Altitude Lines - Altitude angles are represented as concentric
circular dotted lines that run from the center of the diagram
out. It is the elevation angle from 0° at sunrise and 90°
when the sun is directly overhead.
The diagram shows the highest and lowest altitude angle
during different hours of the two critical periods. At sunrise
and sunset, the altitude is zero.
At 9am
The highest: 25.03° (21st June)
The lowest: 23.24° (21st December)
At 12pm
The highest: 62.56° (21st June)
The lowest: 58.22° (21st December)
At 6pm
The highest: 18.63° (21st June)
The lowest: 15.24° (21st December)
Sun Path Diagram
Source: https://www.sunearthtools.com/dp/tools/pos_sun.php#top
9am
12pm
6pm

7. 14
Solar Path Cartesian Chart
Source: https://weatherspark.com/y/113818/Average-Weather-in-Klang-Malaysia-Year-Round
The length of the day in Klang does not vary substantially over
the course of the year, staying within 17 minutes of 12 hours
throughout. The diagrams on the left shows the shortest and
longest day, earliest and latest sunrise, earliest and latest
sunset in year 2018.
The shortest day :
22nd December with 11:57 hours of daylight
The longest day :
21st June with 12:18 hours of daylight
The earliest sunrise :
30th October at 6:57 AM
The latest sunrise :
17th February at 7:28 AM
The earliest sunset :
8th November at 6:57 PM
The latest sunset :
17th February at 7:29pm

8. Figure shows the number of hours per year the wind blows from the indicated direction. From the table we can understand that direction East North East has
most frequent wind blowing from (732 hours) with wind speed of 1-5km/h. Stronger wind exceeding 5km/h has been recorded on North East with 157 hours
and wind speed exceeding 12km/h lasted for 25 hours throughout the year. However, south side recorded 129 hours of zero wind speed.
8
Wind Rose showing number of hours per year wind blows from indicated direction.
(Source: https://www.meteoblue.com/en/weather/forecast/modelclimate/kuala-lumpur_malaysia_1735161)
>1km/h (0.33 m/s)
>5km/h (1.40m/s)
>12km/h (3.33m/s)
Direction 0km/h >1km/h
(>0.30m/s)
>5km/h
(>1.40m/s)
>12km/h
(>3.33/s)
N 59 389 21 0
NNE 48 441 89 1
NE 16 516 157 25
ENE 64 732 79 5
E 0 333 28 0
ESE 49 409 48 0
SE 17 337 93 1
SSE 0 348 133 3
S 129 699 134 3
SSW 18 435 64 4
SW 53 659 66 6
WSW 0 505 77 3
W 61 623 106 5
WNW 14 218 21 0
NW 42 206 10 0
NNW 0 156 8 0
Annual Wind Frequency Analysis
(derived from wind rose diagram)
2.2 Site Analysis- Wind

9. 9
Wind Flow Factor Simulation from North East with 5m/s wind speed. (generated from Autodesk Ecotect Analysis and WinAir )
Monthly Wind Flow Direction
Site
The wind simulation is run on 3 metres from
ground level during August with wind speed
of 3.33m/s. It shows how the buildings
surrounding the site affect the wind direction
and magnitude.
As shown in Figure, Site 1 barely has any
wind factor compared to Site 2 which
benefits from the August higher wind speed
and lesser obstruction from site while Site 1
is blocked on all sides.

10. 10
Beaufort Number Description of Wind Speed (m/s) Description of Wind Effects
0 Calm Less than 0.4 No noticeable wind
1 Light air 0.4-1.5 No noticeable wind
2 Light breeze 1.6-3.3 Wind felt on face
3 Gentle breeze 3.4-5.4 Wind extends light flag,
Hair is disturbed,
Clothing flaps
4 Moderate breeze 5.5-7.9 Wind raises dust, dry soil, and loose paper, Hair
disarranged
5 Fresh breeze 8.0-10.7 Force of wind felt on body, Drifting snow becomes
airborne, Limit of agreeable wind on land
6 Strong breeze 10.8-13.8 Umbrellas used with difficulty,
Hair blown straight, Difficult to walk steadily, Wind noise
on ears unpleasant, Windborne snow above head
straight
7 Moderate gale 13.9-17.1 Inconvenience felt when walking
8 Fresh gale 17.2-20.7 Generally impedes progress, Great difficulty with balance
in gusts
9 Strong gale 20.8-24.4 People blown over by gusts.
Effects of Different Gust Wind Speeds
Wind Comfort – Beaufort Scale
(Source: https://www.iawe.org)
Figure shows the wind comfort scale that indicates the wind effects caused on human at different range of wind speeds. The most
desirable wind speed for human comfort is from 1.6 -3.3m/s as studied by Francis Beaufort. According to Malaysia climate analysis, the
average wind speed is 1.8m/s, which falls under the comfort level of this scale.

11. 3.0 Methodology
Site Analysis
Site visit to identify characteristic of sun and wind
Identify Issue
Critical issue on how climate can affect building
Baseline Standard
Analysis on proposed building without application of Gizmo by simulation as baseline
standard for comparison.
Gizmo Proposal
Several Gizmo proposal with different configuration to inform different methods and
strategies.

12. Gizmo Simulation
Gizmo proposals are put to simulate, data collected as evidence upon performance.
Data Comparison
Data collected as evidence upon performance are to compare with different proposals.
Finalize and Conclusion
A final Gizmo design with best efficiency from the outcome of comparison.

13. 3.1 Daylight factors
3.2 Air Velocity
Daylight factors and impact.
(Source: MS1525)
Impact of air speed on occupants.
(Source: MS1525)

14. 4.0 Simulations
Chosen Area for simulation
Proposed architectural intervention is a performing art institution,
building consist of studios in variety sizes. The studio chosen is the
biggest studio where it is located at the north most part of the
building having big openings facing Northeast and Northwest
receiving prevail sunlight and some wind. The area highlighted
indicates opening of the space.

15. Baseline simulation
Daylight analysis indicating the natural sunlight penetrating into the space
exceed benchmark of 3.5%.
Floor plan
4.1 Baseline Simulation

16. CDF Analysis showing the airspeed at the openings exceed benchmark of 0.5%, the air movement occupying the internal spaces.

17. Proposal 1 simulation
Vertical louvers (400mm width, 500mm gap, 30° angle)
Daylight analysis indicating the natural sunlight penetrating into the space
exceed benchmark of 3.5%.
Floor plan
4.2 Proposal 1 Simulation

18. CDF Analysis showing the airspeed at the openings exceed benchmark of 0.5%, the air movement occupying the internal spaces.

19. Proposal 2 simulation
Vertical louvers (400mm width, 500mm gap, 90° angle)
Daylight analysis indicating the natural sunlight penetrating into the space
exceed benchmark of 3.5%.
Floor plan
4.3 Proposal 2 Simulation

20. CDF Analysis showing the airspeed at the openings exceed benchmark of 0.5%, the air movement occupying the internal spaces.

21. Proposal 3 simulation
Vertical louvers (400mm width, 500mm gap, 45° angle)
Daylight analysis indicating the natural sunlight penetrating into the space
exceed benchmark of 3.5%.
Floor plan
4.4 Proposal 3 Simulation

22. CDF Analysis showing the airspeed at the openings exceed benchmark of 0.5%, the air movement occupying the internal spaces.

23. Proposal 4 simulation
Vertical louvers (400mm width, 500mm gap, -30° angle)
Daylight analysis indicating the natural sunlight penetrating into the space
exceed benchmark of 3.5%.
Floor plan
4.5 Proposal 4 Simulation

24. CDF Analysis showing the airspeed at the openings exceed benchmark of 0.5%, the air movement occupying the internal spaces.

25. P2
(5%)
5.0 Result and comparison
Proposal 1- Vertical louvers (400mm width, 500mm gap, 30° angle)
Proposal 2- Vertical louvers (400mm width, 500mm gap, 90° angle)
Proposal 3- Vertical louvers (400mm width, 500mm gap, 45° angle)
Proposal 4- Vertical louvers (400mm width, 500mm gap, -30° angle)
Proposal 0- Original model
DayLighting Analysis (Benchmark 3.5%)
CFD Analysis (Benchmark 0.25-0.5 m/s)
P4
(3-4%)
P1
(4%)
P3
(4-5%)
P0
(10%)
P0
(0.5-1)
P1
(0.25-0.5)
P2
(0.25-0.5)
P4
(0.25-0.5)
P3
(≤0.25)

26. Proposal X simulation
Vertical louvers (400mm width, 500mm gap, 30° angle + 90° angle)
Daylight analysis indicating the natural sunlight penetrating into the space
exceed benchmark of 3.5%.
Floor plan
5.1 Proposal X Simulation

27. CDF Analysis showing the airspeed at the openings exceed benchmark of 0.5%, the air movement occupying the internal spaces.

28. 6.0 Conclusion
Gizmo proposal 1 and 2 are combined to generate Gizmo Proposal X due to better ventilation. The studio selected for simulation is a dance
studio where activities inside require movement and sweat. Gizmo that allow best ventilation into the building helps to cross ventilate and
cool down the temperature in the building and at the same time removing the scent in it.
From simulation, all proposed gizmo outcome of Lighting Analysis doesn’t have much difference as it is a long façade with big opening facing
towards Northeast and Northwest. The space receive sunlight throughout the day which causing the room to be slightly above benchmark
but its still in the range of tolerable. With the additional mechanical ventilation would further lower down the day lighting factors to achieve
thermal comfort.
Further suggestion, controllable or adjustable louvers would perform better as it can always be adjust according to the users’ comfort.
Different way of rotating forms different pattern to the façade which creates interesting and responsive design.