Davies, M; Jackaway, A; Hardy, R; Dewey, E and Littler, J (2000) A translucent louvre system: Design concepts, modelling work and monitored data. Building Research & Information, 28(1), pp. 42-50. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
A building has been constructed at the Building Research Establishment in the UK which is intended as a model for office buildings of the future. The study enabled a research team to assist with refining an element of this building at design stage and monitor it in use. The element was the glass louvre itself within a system of automatically-controlled louvres that were intended to provide solar shading to reduce heat gains. Initially it was anticipated that a secondary set of blinds would be used to control glare. However in the revised brief, the primary louvred shading system was designed to perform both functions and also, if possible, aid the penetration of daylight into the interior parts of the building. This paper considers some of the factors examined by the designers and describes a study undertaken by the researchers to investigate the shading devices using physical models. Comparisons are made between the conditions within the scale model and those experienced in the finished building. The implications of using scale models in future design studies are discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design; feedback; glazing; louvres; models; shading; UK |
| Index terms: | shading, office building, glare, modelling, glazing, designer, building research, design stage, penetration, physical model |
| Subjects: | manufacturing engineering, architectural elements, analytical methods, profession, professional practice, building design, construction type, building performance, market analysis, research management |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Research Practice, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here