1. Trang chủ
  2. » Kỹ Thuật - Công Nghệ

KẾT CẤU MỚI SERVICING THE DOME ENVIRONMENT

8 253 0

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Định dạng
Số trang 8
Dung lượng 1,31 MB

Các công cụ chuyển đổi và chỉnh sửa cho tài liệu này

Nội dung

The idea of holding a celebration for the millennium had been talked about since 1993 and even before. The Greenwich site had always been a possibility but other sites were also under consideration. In the latter part of 1995, the Millennium Commission invited bids with design proposals for several sites. Imagination Ltd joined with the NEC and Birmingham City Council to put forward a proposal for Birmingham. Buro Happold assisted Imagination in that bid. Imaginations proposal for content and design ideas was judged the best and they were subsequently asked to consider how they would transfer it to Greenwich. In the first months of 1996, Imagination, with assistance from Buro Happold, put forward a number of proposals for housing an exhibition in pavilions with a large arena for shows and displays. Richard Rogers Partnership was at that time working with British Gas and English Partnerships on the master plan for the whole of the gas works site. Their master plan had a circular road pattern at the northern end, which Imagination had incorporated into their exhibition plan.

Trang 1

SERVICING THE DOME ENVIRONMENT

Tony McLaughlin BSc C Eng MCIBSE MASHRAE M Inst E

Partner, Buro Happold Consulting Engineers

S Y N O P S I S

The Millennium Dome is a fabric clad structure covering

some 80,000m2 which is to house a spectacular

exhibition for the duration of the Millennium Year This

paper describes some of the constraints on the

environmental engineering design, the servicing strategy

adopted, the cooling and electrical loads determined, and

how the environmental design evolved to meet the

changing development of the exhibit designs

I N T R O D U C T I O N - T H E M I L L E N N I U M

E X P E R I E N C E

The idea of holding a celebration for the millennium had

been talked about since 1993 and even before The

Greenwich site had always been a possibility but other

sites were also under consideration In the latter part of

1995, the Millennium Commission invited bids with

design proposals for several sites Imagination Ltd

joined with the NEC and Birmingham City Council to

put forward a proposal for Birmingham Buro Happold

assisted Imagination in that bid Imagination's proposal

for content and design ideas was judged the best and they

were subsequently asked to consider how they would

transfer it to Greenwich In the first months of 1996,

Imagination, with assistance from Buro Happold, put

forward a number of proposals for housing an exhibition

in pavilions with a large arena for shows and displays

Richard Rogers Partnership was at that time working

with British Gas and English Partnerships on the master

plan for the whole of the gas works site Their master

plan had a circular road pattern at the northern end,

which Imagination had incorporated into their exhibition

plan

The separate pavilions were four generous storeys high

and involved a considerable amount of construction work

leading to a difference between the costs of the designs

produced by Imagination to meet the brief, and the

Millennium Commission's budget The site was very

exposed to wind and rain coming off the river and there

was a worry about the impact of this on visitor

experience in the winter months Imagination was trying

to deal with this by covering the spaces between the

pavilions, which were arranged around a central show

arena

In May 1996, faced with time running out, Gary Withers

of Imagination and Mike Davies of the architects Richard Rogers Partnership suggested covering the whole site with a giant umbrella This would create a protected environment in which exhibition structures could be designed specifically for the exhibitions and be rapidly erected without the necessity for weather tight cladding

We in Buro Happold picked up that idea and suggested a fabric clad stressed cable-net structure supported by 12 masts This concept was welcomed by the client and engineering work got underway

T H E S I T E C O N D I T I O N S

Greenwich peninsula is an exposed site with the river Thames on "three sides "of the Dome site leaving it vulnerable to the winter winds from the east In the depth

of winter it can be an inhospitable place when the wind

is in the wrong direction Mike Davies reminded us many times that to the east there is no ground over 100m between Greenwich and the steppes of Moscow But like most southerly UK sites the met office offers the following synopsis, the prevailing wind is south westerly, the coldest month is January with a mean monthly temperature of 4oC and July is the warmest month with

a mean monthly temperature of 17.5oC As a matter of interest a temperature of 37.8oC was recorded at Greenwich in 1911 Greenwich is 7m above sea level

E N V I R O N M E N T A L E N G I N E E R I N G

THE 'UMBRELLA' CONCEPT

The concept of developing an "umbrella" environment is nothing new, as many of the mainline rail stations demonstrate What makes the Millennium Dome different is its physical scale and its intended purpose The dimensions of the Dome are huge: 320m in diameter, 50m high in the centre, with an enclosing wall structure 10m high and 1km long The contained volume is approximately 2.1 million cubic meters, which leads to a many well published and interesting statistic eg the weight of air inside the Dome is actually greater than that

of the structure that encloses it, not to mention the fact that it could contain 3.8billion pints of beer It is twice the size of Atlanta's Georgia Dome, previously the largest tensile-roofed structure in the world

Trang 2

•mm U

Fig 1A The Environmental Concept

4 320m w>

Fig IB The Problem of Scale

S o l a r Reduction

The Creation of a M e s o E n v i r o n m e n t under the Dome roof from

w h i c h other s t r u c t u r e s ( c o r e & exhibition buildings) c a n s p a w n

F i g l C

design and passive control systems: mechanbal control systems:

• protection from solar radiation in hot weather • fresh air ventilation

• protection from precipitation in wet weather • air movement

• natural ventilation in hot weather • heating in winter

• wind protection in cold weather • comfort cooling in the core

• a smoothing of temperature or humidity accommodation and exhibits

Fig I D

When we first started work on the building services and environmental systems, it is fair to say that the Clients brief

was somewhat lacking, both in terms of what was likely to

happen inside the Dome, and even more so, what its form and operation was likely to be The driving issue was time The only design guidance we had, was to draw on our own previous experience and look at precedents The idea was to provide a services back bone which would give the desired flexibility for an exhibition theme which was still very much

in the melting pot Naturally this flexibility would also have

to have the capacity for the likely energy demands of the future exhibitions, all of which would be unique At the time, Imagination were leading the team, and it was with their extensive knowledge of past and present exhibitions, as well

as a lot of research into utility loads for existing exhibitions that we established the following energy demands:

Power supply 35MW Cooling demand 18MW Heating demand 2.5MW for the Dome air

intake systems

How these were delivered is addressed later in the paper

E N E R G Y B A L A N C E

Initially, one of the design team's primary concerns was the environmental implication of putting such high heat loads together with 35,000 visitors under a transparent roof What were the environmental conditions likely to be experienced

by the visitors? What would visitors expect? Would conditions be acceptable?

The roof is a double skin fabric, which allows 12% light transmission and has a shading coefficient of 0.08 Externally, the fabric is highly reflective (white), whilst internally the fabric is a white "matt" finish Initially, the architects and cost consultants preference was for a single skin structure but this had to be rejected environmentally, due to the need for increased solar protection of the double layer and, just as important, the need to provide some thermal insulative properties for the winter conditions The convincing argument was the much-reduced risk of condensation The inner fabric liner - which is not structurally taut as the outer layer - also assists in "softening" the enclosure's acoustic characteristics

The following energy balance diagram was first used to illustrate the problem and was the first simple step in our environmental analysis of the Domes environment

One of the underlying design objectives for the "umbrella" environment was that it should use the niinimum amount of energy to provide the transient environment within which the exhibition would operate Another advantage of the

"umbrella" is that it allowed the construction of the exhibition and core buildings under cover, free from the extremes of the British climate The downside of this latter point was that construction dust etc was trapped which eventually stained the inner liner

Trang 3

Fig 2 Energy balance diagram

C O N D E N S A T I O N

The thermally lightweight, low insulation, high occupancy

characteristics of the Dome did give the design team some

concerns regarding the risk of condensation The arguments

for the inner liner were almost entirely based upon

environmental issues of which condensation was one The

others being solar protection, heat insulation in winter and

acoustic absorption

Buro Happold's TAS analysis of the volume indicted that

with the installed mechanical ventilation systems operating it

was possible to limit the build up of condensation We

looked at a number of operating scenarios which indicated to

us that the greatest risk of condensation on the internal skin

was late in the evening on a cold winters day with a

reasonable attendance We calculated that the build up of

moisture to be in the order of 30g/m2, this equates to a very

thin wetted surface less than 1mm thick Condensation

dropping is therefor unlikely

To validate our work we commissioned "The Centre for

Research in the Built Environment" at Cardiff University to

carry out an independent check This study made the

following observations;

surface condensation on the inner surface of the roof Whilst some condensation is likely it should not be sufficient to cause drips and will quickly evaporate as conditions improve

• Condensation risk in the Dome is however very sensitive to the ventilation of the space If ventilation rates do not reach those assumed, particularly in winter, there is a very high risk of severe condensation

on the inner skin As occupancy moisture builds up The simulations described in this report indicate that

ventilation rates should be greater than 0 3 air

changes per hour Thus natural ventilation alone may not be sufficient

• Condensation risk may be significantly reduced by continuous overnight ventilation, even in winter

• Condensation risk may be reduced by reduced by increasing the inner surface temperature

• Condensation risk will be increased by introducing internal water features, planting and other water vapour producing processes

• There is also the risk of condensation on the inner skin of the outer surface this could lead to staining or mould growth

V E N T I L A T I O N S T R A T E G I E S

Initial thoughts were for a totally naturally ventilated building, similar to the railway station environment referred to above, but this alone would never be sufficient because of the scale and usage of the enclosure

MM

This picture was taken from Building Services Journal April 1899

Trang 4

Natural ventilation could not penetrate the depth of the

dome (particularly so in summer) and entering fresh air

would tend to rise a short distance in from the perimeter

as it picked up the internal heat gains Secondly the flow

restrictions imposed by the large scale perimeter

exhibition buildings would prevent air reaching the

centre Next, the team considered the use of underground

air ducts supplying a large displacement system

However, the desire to reduce the amount of ground

excavation to the absolute minimum due to the costs of

excavation in contaminated ground, made this

uneconomic Further, such a major displacement system

imposed on the plan at such an early stage of the design

process could impede the future placement of the

exhibition structures, so this solution was also rejected

The adopted ventilation strategy relies upon the

perimeter zone being naturally ventilated via open doors,

a permanently open strip at the top of the perimeter wall

and the natural leakage of the structure itself To move

air into the centre of the Dome, two 25m3/s air handling

units are located in each of the six core buildings

providing 300m3/s in total These air systems have a

modicum of heating, equivalent to the Building

Regulations uninsulated structure, which allows 25W/m2

of heating input This input is just sufficient to take the

chill off the incoming air The same applies in summer

when again, a modicum of cooling is added primarily to

assist the air in dropping into the occupied central zones

There is no attempt made to control the Dome

environment as a whole It will be a few degrees warmer

than the external environment in both winter and

summer The same large air handling units have variable

speed drives and can operate in full re-circulation mode

The full re-circulation option is used during shut down"

and rehearsal hours during the winter months

The following diagrams illustrate the applied layers of

ventilation

D E S I G N V E R I F I C A T I O N

TWO DIMENSIONAL MODEL

To verify the team's proposal, a three dimensional 360° CFD model was developed with AEA Technology in Didcot, Oxfordshire, acting as a sub-consultant to Buro Happold The model went through a number of refinements as the information on the exhibition structures began to filter through from the exhibition design teams As it stands today, the model has been generated by 700,000 cells, takes 450 MB of memory, and to run one scenario on AEA's most powerful machine takes approximately four days Outputs are air speed, air temperature, resultant temperature and a "Comfort Index" As stated earlier, the question posed by our client was what would the internal environment be like and to what is it comparable Buro Happold set about trying to establish comfort criteria for the space Fangers or Bedfords comfort criteria were not considered appropriate as they related primarily to "static" office

environments Instead criteria established by United

States Department of Transportation called the

"Relative Warmth Index" (RWI) was adopted This was developed for subways and train stations, so it was felt to

be the most relevant and appropriate for the Dome environment

RWI = M(Icw +Ia) + 1.13(t - 95) +RIa

74.2 where:

M = metabolic rate lew = insulation effect of clothing, clo

Ia = insulation effect of air boundary, clo

t = dry bulb temperature t-95 = difference between dry bulb and average

skin temperature

R = mean incident radiant temperature from

surrounding surfaces

The above are all imperial units

Explaining our results and "comfort" to our lay client was not an easy task, so the following diagrams were used to illustrate our results

Trang 5

Fig 4 CFD plots with comfort criteria

Its worth noting, that as the model became more accurate, and our Client became more knowledgeable,

we reverted back to simply stating Resultant temperatures as our measure of the Domes environment The following diagrams illustrate some of the CFD model outputs

Hot S u m m e r Day

Fig 5a,b & c CFD plots

Ventilation tests to date on the installed systems

(Andrew Cripps paper)

Trang 6

3010 302.5 304.0 305.5 307.0

Temperature (K)

E N E R G Y D E M A N D S

PREDICTING THE LOAD

Formulating the Dome's energy demand twelve months

in advance of knowing what was going to happen within

the building, came to down to guesswork, albeit educated

guesswork We talked to a number of organisations who

had done "something" like it before, even if not on the

same scale, we did a lot of reading and research into

major exhibitions throughout the world, including asking

the Disney Corporation, whose advise was particularly

comforting - "Get your exhibition designs first before

establishing your energy loads"

The result is we have an all-electric building, this

decision taken against a brief for a temporary exhibition

(and at the time of the decision, also a temporary ^

building) Other energy supply methods were reviewed,

including Combined Heat and Power (CHP) The CHP

scheme was to be part of the total Greenwich Peninsula

development, initially be used to serve the Dome (this

being first load on-line) before commercial and domestic

loads came on line in the future Time, cost and lack of

funding saw this proposal stranded

Gas heating was excluded because of programme and the

cost of reinforcing the mains for the given demand At

the Dome, gas is only used for catering At first sight the

use of electricity as the Dome's sole energy source is

questionable, but when viewed against the Clients

programme, costs, the temporary exhibition brief and the

post exhibition legacy (an electrical infrastructure in

place for the future development of the Peninsula),

electricity proved the most attractive option

The following figure gives the current break down of areas:

SPATIAL BREAKDOWN OF AREAS WITHIN THE DOME

m?

Exhibition Area 35,000 Central Show Arena 14,750 Catering 3,900 Circulation 11,350 Retail 1,350 Toilets, plant, support 10,300

COOLING LOAD

The 18MW of cooling is split between the following functions as follows:

ELECTRICAL LOAD

The installed capacity of electrical power for the landlords' supplies, at 57.5MVA, is only slightly higher than our original estimate In providing this demand, the team set about standardising the size of transformers, the set up being:

• 2x 1.25MVA transformers for each of the six internal core buildings

• l x l 2 5 M V A transformer per exhibition

• 4x 1.25MVA for the central area buildings

• 4x 2.50MVA for the central show

• 9x 1.25MVA for the external buildings and landscape including "Baby Dome"

PLANT SELECTION

This standardisation of the primary M&E equipment was an early design objective set by the Client and the design team, based on the directive of an exhibition lifetime of two years, and the short design and build times available This directive was fundamental in the selection of services plant Tried and tested technology was used, albeit on a very large scale

Standard off-the-shelf plant was selected and positioned around the site

Trang 7

The London International Financial Futures and Options

Exchange (LIFFE) was consulted by Buro Happold to

evaluate resale values of plant on the futures exchange, and

items were selected on this basis The type of transformer

specified, for example, was changed as a result of this input

as was the rated output of the packaged air-cooled chillers

Equipment is standardised throughout in order to increase

the likelihood of resale and minimise downtime if repairs are

required

S E R V I C I N G S T R A T E G Y

FUTURE F L E X I B I L I T Y

At the beginning, it seemed that we were faced with a

seemingly impossible task The site was a barren and

formless landscape, with little, if any, infrastructure, and

there was increasing public debate as to what to put in it

and if it should be built at all But with an immovable

completion date looming, design and construction work

on the Millennium Experience had to start

Faced with the uncertainty on the exhibition form and

content, the design team had to make some fundamental

decisions on how the services should be planned so that

the design and construction could progress well in

advance of any exhibition designers been appointed

There was much discussion and debate on the servicing

strategy and its intended flexibility as it was soon

realised this would have a major influence on the

exhibition layout and size A number of scenarios were

tested, including services within raised floors or above

ground service beams The adopted solution takes a very

pragmatic approach The dome is split into six equal

'pie' segments, each a mirror image of the other, the core

building being the 'heart' of each segment, with plant in

a pair of cylinders feeding into each segment External

plant such as the air cooled chillers, HV switchgear,

standby generators and water tanks are contained in the

twelve prominent service pods, or cylinders, around the

perimeter, these operate in pairs to service each of the six

segments All segments have equal capacities although

each pair of pods holds slightly different plant

From the cores, the services are distributed into a series

of six radial trenches, each six meters wide and 900mm

deep, and three circumferential trenches which run under

the Dome's ground slab and carry all cable and piped

services, including drainage The radial trenches are

generally arranged so an exhibition lies on either side

with an access route directly overhead Two major

exhibits are serviced from each, with any excess

continuing around the circumferential trenches to pick up

any secondary loads The radial trenches continue into

the centre of the Dome to supply the demands of the

central arena

As the siting of exhibits and public services was devised during construction, it was necessary to ensure that services would be available throughout the site when required Despite the uncertainties, the entire M&E services were designed in only nine months and their installation is now complete and commissioning started

in March 1999

Fig 6 Services Strategy

Fig 7 Early concept diagram for the service pods

T H E E X T E R N A L S E R V I C E P O D S

Included in all views of the exhibition since they first entered the public domain, the cylindrical pods surrounding the Dome are now entrenched in the minds

of everyone who has seen any photographs or models of the structure Housed within these aluminium-finned cylinders are all the primary services for the Millennium Experience Originally intended to be spherical, creating

a futuristic space-station look to the structure, they were

to hold part of the exhibition However, space constraints meant that the plant had to be moved outside

of the Dome The team liked the idea of using the now defunct exhibition spheres However, it became increasingly difficult to fit square plant into a round space, so the spheres are now cylindrical

Trang 8

Fig 8 Architectural image

Fig 9

Each pod is split into three levels, plant not requiring

weather protection was left open to the elements, the

remainder was enclosed in packaged plantrooms

assembled off site by GEL and AC Engineering and

installed complete The contents of each pod varies due

to the way the required capacities have been apportioned

Where plant is not required, the space is left empty for

future expansion of exhibition demands

Two 750kW air cooled chillers are located on the top

level of each pod These are connected in parallel and

grouped onto a common header A chiller system (i.e a

'pie' segment) consists of four units, the pods working as

a pair, giving six systems in total to service the Dome and

site All systems run totally autonomous from each other

On floor two of the pods, one of each pair holds a

prefabricated packaged plantroom, which contain

close-coupled end-suction chilled water pumps to give a flow

of 132 1/s at a head of 200kPa to a common pipe system

which distributes around the Dome to null headers A

pressurisation unit and a controls system is also included

in this plantroom In eight pods London Electricity

packaged HV switchrooms are sited at this level

On the bottom level, a 92.5m3 sprinkler water tank is

sited in two pods, the volume required for the Category 3

Special system being too large for a single pod Separate

pump rooms have been installed as the tanks are more

than 30m apart A 500kW standby generator has been

installed in three pods, each generator servicing two

sectors

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

Client:

The New Millennium Experience Company

Jennie Page, David Trench, Richard Coffey, Peter English

Architect:

Richard Rogers Partnership

Richard Rogers, Mike Davies, Andrew Morris, Stuart Forbes, Steve Martin, Adrian Williams, Mike Elkan, Laurie Abbott

Construction Manager:

MacAlpine Laing Joint Venture

Bernard Ainsworth, Gary Nash

Our sub-consultants:

Central Area:

Cundall Johnston and Partners

Ric Carr, Peter O'Halloran, Mike Golding

Lighting Designers:

Speirs and Major

Jonathan Spiers, Mark Major

Lift Consultants:

Dunbar + Boardman

Peter Boardman, Chris Meering

and most of all, to all my numerous colleagues at Buro Happold who have contributed to this project

R E F E R E N C E S

1 Constructing the Millennium Dome

Ian Liddell, Lecture to the RA, September 1997

2 The Design and construction of the Millennium Dome

Ian Liddell and Peter Miller The Structural Engineer, 6 April999

3 Servicing the Dome

Various, The Building Services Journal, April 1999

4 Subway Environmental Design Handbook Vol 1

U.S Dept of Transportation

Ngày đăng: 09/06/2015, 17:22

TỪ KHÓA LIÊN QUAN