midreview presentation

8/2/2019 MidReview Presentation

1/38

C BIP Studio 2012

WIND TURBINE AND COURTYARD COVER

Ayesha Husain

Version 3 - 3/9/12

Mid-Review

TURBINE

ENCLOSURE


2/38

Urban wind is underutilized in the

city because of its unpredictability.

Multi-directional turbines are able to

capture turbulent wind in a productive way.

My element is composed of two parts: the

turbine and the enclosure.

The turbine consists of structure, a motor, and the

multi-directional blades. The location of the turbine is

determined by the highest wind speed in the area. The overall

size of the turbine determines the energy output.

The enclosure consists of a taught ETFE panel with embedded optical

fibers. This enclosure serves to enclose an exterior courtyard. As the heat

builds up, the panel opens and releases heat. At night time, when the turbines

are running during the strongest wind, the panel fibers light up illuminate the courtyard and create a functional

courtyard space.

The module can be instantiated along any surface. It is intended to cover a courtyard, but its scale and

orientation is flexible enough for other proposed uses.

DESIGN INTENT


3/38

Executive SummaryFebruary 2010

NYC GREEN

CODESTASK FORCEA REPORT TO MAYOR MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG & SPEAKER CHRISTINE C. QUINN

Green Code

WIND DEFICIENCIES

The NYC Green Code Task force promotes

multiple environmentally conscientious

proposals to bring the city standard up

near or past the standard created by LEED.

The renewable energy sources in the task

force feature roof-top solar generation; all

other types of energy generation are

ignored.

Dense urban spaces tend to channel wind

into tunnels, at time creating quite a bit of

wind speed. I propose to utilize urban wind

as a source for generating energy. My goal

is to utilize the intent to the green code to

provide renewable energy sources and

propose a new section to be added

regarding wind.


4/38

CITY

CODE

CRITERIA

RANKING

PROPOSAL

PERFORMANCE

PROPOSAL

BREAK

DOWN,

POSITIVES

AND

NEGATIVES

CODE

PROPOSAL

GREEN CODE


5/38

--

100%

Interesting form.

100%

Will require a

combination of

materials.

100%

Will require a

combination of

technologies.

25%

Will reduce some cost,

but is an expensive

installation.

25%

Applicability is unsure.

ELEMENTRANKING

PERFORMANCE

APPLIC

ABILITY

REDUCETE

CHNOLOGYMATERIAL

FORM

My Green Code Proposal

WIND TURBINE AND COURTYARD COVER

FORMinnovation in formal qualities

MATERIALuse of new or different materials

TECHNOLOGYexplore new science and technology

REDUCE

minimize cost impact

APPLICABILITYbe able to apply to multiple buildings

Energy from Wind

Wind is stronger higher up and at night.Building cut and slow down wind, but they

also change the direction of it. As windpasses over buildings or between them, itgets channeled and stronger. Theplacement of wind turbines in urbanenvironments requirements wind flowanalysis.

EF 18

Allow Large Wind Installations

Issue:Current regulations have only promoted use of solarpanels. Research for urban wind turbines needs to be

available to allow users to install wind energy generatingunits in, on, or around their buildings.

Recommendations:Exempt wind-generating units from rooftop coverage,obstructions, and height regulations. Usable areas coveredor enclosed by wind energy units are to be excluded fromFAR and open area regulations.

Benefits Costs

Environment Cost

Health

Savings


6/38

EF 14

Allow Large SolarRooftop Installations

Issue:Current regulations limit the area of roof that solar

panels can cover without counting as another floor.This can increase the effective cost of solar panels,or prevent their installation.

Recommendation:Exempt solar panels from limits onrooftop coverage.

Benefits Costs

Health & Safety

Savings

Environment

Cost

EF 15

Remove Zoning Impedimentsto Alternative Energy

Issue:The Zoning Resolution allows many categories of

mechanical equipment on a roof to exceed theallowable building height. However, equipment usedfor alternative or distributed energy is not treated assuch a permitted obstruction.

Recommendation:Treat alternative and distributed energy equipment,such as photovoltaic and solar thermal collectors, aspermitted obstructions.

Benefits Costs

Savings

Environment

Cost

Health & Safety

-- .

EF 14: Solar panels on the roof of Silvercup Studios in Brooklyn.

.,

.

.

. ,

.

,,

.

STANDARDadapt LEED & Ashrae to raise the city standard

NEWpropose new requirements

REDUCEreduce the cost for changes and increase payback

FIX

bring old buildings up to code

INNOVATEallow for innovation

page 38, executive summary

0%

This is a NYC

restriction issue.

100%

This is a new proposal.

75%

Adds a lot of initial

cost but also a lot of

return.

50%

Gives old buildings an

opportunity to

generate energy.

85%

Allows for more

innovation.

CODE

RANKING

Green Code Task Force

EF 14/15: Allow large solar rooftop installations/Remove zoning impediments to alternate energy

PERFORMANCE

INNOVATE

FIX

REDUCE

NEW

STANDARD


7/38

EnergyFrom AwayEven though NYC generates asignificant portion of its ownenergy, the great majority ofelectrical power is delivered tothe city through a transmission gridthat collects energy from distantpower plants. As much as 70% ofthe fuel consumed in the generationof power for the grid is lost during

generation and transmission.Removing impediments torenewable energy within NYC willmake the power grid more reliable,reducing the risk of blackoutsand brownouts.

EF 16

Remove Landmarks Impedimentsto Alternative Energy

Issue:In historic districts, rooftop equipment including solar panels, wind turbines and micro-turbines -- is not permitted if visible from thestreet without a lengthy review by the LandmarksPreservation Commission.

Recommendation:Treat alternative and distributed energy equipmentthe same as other rooftop mechanical equipment,

which is allowed to be visible from the street.

Benefits Costs

Savings

Environment

Cost

Health & Safety

-

- -

-




FIX




0%

This is a NYC specific

issue.

75%

While not a new

proposal, it is a new

application.

0%

Adds a lot of initial

cost because buildings

are old.

100%

Gives old buildings an

opportunity to

generate energy.

85%

Allows for more

innovation.

CO

DE

RANKING


EF 16: Remove landmark impediments to alternate energy

PERFORMANCE

INNOVATE

FIX

REDUCE

NEW

STANDARD


8/38

Awareness =

EfficiencyNew York State studies have shownthat metering tenant electrical usein a multi-famliy building can reduceapartment electricity consumptionby approximately 17%-27%.

EO 2

Measure Electricity Usein Tenant Spaces

Issue:Because electricity is often unmetered incommercial tenant spaces, tenants are unaware ofthe energy they consume. This, in turn, can lead toexcessive use and waste.

Recommendation:All new commercial tenant spaces of 10,000 squarefeet or larger shall be metered for electricity. Asimilar proposal was incorporated into the Greener,Greater Buildings Plan, which became law prior tothe issuance of this report.

Benefits Costs

Health & Safety

Savings Cost

Environment




FIX




100%

This is an existing

proposal.

75%

While not a new

proposal, it is a new

idea for awareness.

30%

Could reduce

consumption.

75%

Old buildings can be

metered but its more

challenging.

10%

Metering could make

apparent areas

needing change.

CO

DE

RANKING


EO 2: Measure electricity use in tenant spaces

PERFORMANCE

INNOVATE

FIX

REDUCE

NEW

STANDARD


9/38

Executive SummaryFebruary 2010

NYC GREEN

CODESTASK FORCE

A REPORT TO MAYOR MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG & SPEAKER CHRISTINE C. QUINN

C-BIP Process

How to address city and design as inputs and outputs

Can the performative

solution then inform the

green codes?

HIGHLY

PRESCRIPTIVE

SOMEWHAT

PRESCRIPTIVE

FORMinnovation in formal qualities

MATERIALuse of new or different materials

TECHNOLOGYexplore new science and technology

REDUCE

minimize cost impact

APPLICABILITYbe able to apply to multiple buildings

ELEMENTRANKING

PERFORMANCE

PROBLEM

PRESCRIPTIVE

SOLUTION

INPUT

CITY ARCHITECT

INTENT

PERFORMATIVE

SOLUTION

TOOLANALYSIS

PLAYER

S

INPUT


10/38

Kingsdale School

Girasol

PRECEDENTS


11/38

Delight Cloth - woven optical fibers

Watercube - ETFE Construction Media-Tic - Inflatable Solar Shade ETFE Panels

Mycoply - flexible biomaterial

MATERIALS


12/38

Multi-directional turbine Vertical axis turbine

Helix turbinemotorwind roof turbines

URBAN TURBINES


13/38

HORIZONTAL AXIS

Lift

Requires start up energy,

but yeilds higher output

Ideal spacing: greater in wind

direction, tighter perpendicular

No start up energy, but

yeilds lower output

$2000/kw to build

$0.07/kwh to sell$

Ideal for high wind

rural areas

Ideal for urban areas

Drag

VERTICAL AXIS

TURBINE TYPES


14/38

SMALL TURBINE

Max output of 100 kw

Required wind speed = 9.0 - 11.0 mph

Efficiency and aerodynamics are not shown but play a role

= 1.29 kg/m^3

POWER

OUTPUT 1/2= x x x3

REQTS

FACTORS


15/38

MANHATTAN

NYC Average wind speed: 7.5 - 11.0 mph

windiest: March

DATA THROUGH 2002 YRS JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ANN

NEW YORK C.PARK, NY 65 10.6 10.7 11.0 10.2 8.8 8.1 7.6 7.5 8.1 8.8 9.8 10.1 9.3

JFK AP, Ny 44 13.0 13.3 13.5 12.7 11.6 10.7 10.2 10.0 10.4 11.0 12.2 12.7 11.8

LAGUARDIA AP, NY 54 13.7 13.8 13.9 12.9 11.6 11.0 10.4 10.3 11.0 11.6 12.8 13.4 12.2

HOUR OF THE DAY

AVG.WINDS

PEED

00:00 02:00 04:00 06:00 08:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00 24:00

6.5

6.6

6.7

6.8

6.9

7.0

7.1

7.2

Typical wind

directions


16/38

TURBINE ENCLOSURE


17/38

WORKFLOW

CATIA SOLIDWORKS PHOTOSHOP EXCEL

Height Velocity

1 96822 10000

3 11064

4 11800

5 12446

6 12600

7 12792

8 13000

9 1325010 13831

SELECT

BUILDING

ANALYZE WIND

FLOW WITH

SURROUNDINGBUILDINGS

DETERMINE

VALUES

ENTER

VALUES


18/38

INPUTS

OUTPUTS

geometry

site info

ground plane

corner points

measure

distance

swept area

module size

height factor1-100

0.01-0.1

30-120

0.5-3.0

0.1-0.3

varies

turbine angle

width ratio 1

width ratio 2

motor factor

open length

parameter

geometry

power

turbine

power

enclosure

INPUTS/OUTPUTS

CATIA

speed data

PROGRAMS

excel

catia

Height Velocity

1 9682

2 10000

3 11064

4 11800

5 12446

6 12600

7 12792

8 13000

9 13250

10 13831


19/38

PROGRAMS

INPUTS

OUTPUTS

excel

catia

geometry

site info

measure

parameter

geometry

power

speed dataheight factorturbine

height1000 ft= x x

1

motor factor

open length

point 1

point 2

4 points and a

plane

point 3

point 4

ground plane

turbine

enclosure

ELEMENT


20/38

turbine udf

PROGRAMS

INPUTS

OUTPUTS

solidworks

excel

catia

geometry

site info

measure

parameter

geometry

power

ground plane

3 lines and their

start points

SURFACE


21/38

TURBINE TIMELINE

HigherW

indSpeeds

Low

Win

d

Sp

eed

s

Turbine

usigne

ne

rg

y

toa

era

teco

urtyard

Ga

in

in

gwin

d

0:00

Generating Energy

Powered Fan

Canopy Lit

Not Generating Energy

6:0018:00

12:00


22/38

OR

ENERGY USAGE


23/38

VARIATIONS

height factor

30

0.05

90 deg

1

0.1

0 ft

turbine angle

width ratio 1

width ratio 2

motor factor

open length

3

vert. divisions

2

hor. divisions

204 kw

41,698

power

yearly profit

$

136 961 2049 3415 4098 961


24/38

VARIATIONS

height factor

50

0.05

90 deg

1

0.1

0 ft

turbine angle

width ratio 1

width ratio 2

motor factor

open length

3

vert. divisions

2

hor. divisions

204 kw

power

41,698

yearly profit

$

136 961 2049 3415 4098 961

VARIATIONS


25/38

VARIATIONS

height factor

50

0.08

90 deg

1

0.1

0 ft

turbine angle

width ratio 1

width ratio 2

motor factor

open length

3

vert. divisions

2

hor. divisions

274 kw

power

56,006

yearly profit

$

182 1287 2742 4570 5484 15234

VARIATIONS


26/38

VARIATIONS

height factor

50

0.08

140 deg

1

0.1

0 ft

turbine angle

width ratio 1

width ratio 2

motor factor

open length

3

vert. divisions

2

hor. divisions

167 kw

power

34,135

yearly profit

$

111 786 1675 2792 3351 2792

VARIATIONS


27/38

VARIATIONS

height factor

50

0.08

140 deg

0.5

0.1

0 ft

turbine angle

width ratio 1

width ratio 2

motor factor

open length

3

vert. divisions

2

hor. divisions

175 kw

power

55,770

yearly profit

$

116 823 1754 2923 3508 9745

VARIATIONS


28/38

VARIATIONS

height factor

50

0.08

140 deg

0.5

0.2

0 ft

turbine angle

width ratio 1

width ratio 2

motor factor

open length

3

vert. divisions

2

hor. divisions

137 kw

power

28,003

yearly profit

$

91 645 1375 2291 2750 7639

VARIATIONS


29/38

VARIATIONS

height factor

50

0.08

140 deg

0.5

0.2

2 ft

turbine angle

width ratio 1

width ratio 2

motor factor

open length

3

vert. divisions

2

hor. divisions

137 kw

power

28,003

yearly profit

$

91 645 1375 2291 2750 7639

VARIATIONS


30/38

VARIATIONS

height factor

50

0.08

140 deg

0.5

0.2

2 ft

turbine angle

width ratio 1

width ratio 2

motor factor

open length

6

vert. divisions

2

hor. divisions

210 kw

power

42,924

yearly profit

$

140 986 2101 3501 4202 11673

VARIATIONS


31/38

VARIATIONS

height factor

50

0.08

140 deg

0.5

0.2

2 ft

turbine angle

width ratio 1

width ratio 2

motor factor

open length

6

vert. divisions

7

hor. divisions

127 kw

power

25,959

yearly profit

$

85 599 1276 2127 2552 7090

STEVENSON SCHOOL


32/38

STEVENSON SCHOOL

IMPLEMENTATION


33/38

IMPLEMENTATION

9400 kw

power

1,921,360

yearly profit

$

1245 kw

5352 kw

2803 kw

CLOSED


34/38

CLOSED

OPEN


35/38

OPEN


36/38

2302 kw

power

470,529

yearly profit

$


37/38

THE END


38/38

THE END

midreview presentation

Documents