interventions for the sustainable development of architectural heritage - the soda fabriek

InterventIons

for the sustaInable Development of archItectural herItage

Graduation ReportMatthaios Zarmpis - 4258827

MentorsCraig L. MartinFrank Koopman

the example of the soDa fabrIek In schIeDam, nl

StudentMatthaios Zarmpis - 4258827

MentorsCraig L. MartinFrank Koopman

External ExaminerEngbert v.d. Zaag

InstituteDelft University of Tecnology

FacultyBouwkunde

ProgramMSc Architecture, Urbanism & Building Sciences

TrackBuilding Technology

StudioSustainable Design Graduation Studio

April 2015

InterventIons

for the sustaInable Development of archItectural herItage

the example of the soDa fabrIek In schIeDam, nl

Interventions for the Sustainable Development of Architectural Heritage v

I would like to thank...

...my mentors C.L.Martin and F. Koopman for their enlightened guidance and immesurable patience in this

graduation project

...P. van Velzen and D. Rijkort from Restauro Architecten for their interest in my project and their invaluable help

Interventions for the Sustainable Development of Architectural Heritage

Table of Contents

vi

Table of Contents

IntroductionIntroduction.......................................................................... 1

Problem Statement............................................................... 3

Research Questions.............................................................. 5

Scope and Boundary Conditions............................................ 6

Backround ResearchOn Dealing with Architectural Heritage.................................. 9Some Definitions 9On Guidelines and Standards 11On Heritage Sustainability 13On Methodology 15On Recent Practice 16

Reference Projects.............................................................. 17De Tempel, Den Haag, 2011 18Huis “de Witte Roos”, Delft, 2011 20Latijnse School, Middelburg, 2010 22

The Soda Fabriek................................................................ 27Location 27Climate 28Building history 30Current and Future Plans 32Description of the building 33Current Condition of the Building 36Significance of the Building and Degree of Intervention 37

Research ElaborationIntervention Possibilities for the Soda Fabriek and the Simulations......................................................................... 41

The Tool.............................................................................. 43

The Soda Fabriek Models.................................................... 45The Zones 45The installations 47

Interventions for the Sustainable Development of Architectural Heritage vii

Model #1 - Control 49Model #2 - Wall Insulation 52Model #3 - Roof, Ground and Window Insulation 56Model #4 - Trombe Wall 60Model #5 - Glass Roof 64

ConclusionsConclusions......................................................................... 71Additional Models 71Comfort 73Installations 75Closing 75

Reflections.......................................................................... 77Theme of the Studio 77Methodology 78Research and Design 78The project within the wider social context 79

ReferencesLiterature............................................................................ 81

Web..................................................................................... 81

AppendixSimulation Data Summaries................................................ 85Model #1 - Control 85Model #2 - Wall Insulation 92Model #3 - Roof, Ground and Windows Insulation 99Model #4 - Trombe Wall 106Model #5 - Glass Roof 113

Table of Contents

Interventions for the Sustainable Development of Architectural Heritageviii


Introduction

1

CO2 emissions from buildings – IPCC High

Growth Scenario [source: UNEP SBCI, Buidings and Climate

Change, 2009]

Introduction

We live in a world that requires an ever increasing amount of energy to function. Particularly in the developed countries, almost every activity of everyday life consumes energy. This is associated mainly with pop-ulation growth and technological advancements. Statistical data show the increase in world energy use per capita has risen by 20 GJ from 1965 to 2005 and are still rising.

This poses an imminent threat to the progress of this world that man-ifests around two key points: the reduction and inadequacy of energy supplies – complemented by the problem of reaching them – and dam-age to the environment which results from the depletion of the existing energy resources.

The International Energy Agency has identified the building sector to be the greatest contributor in this issue of energy consumption showing that in 2010 the buildings of the world consumed 35% of the total en-ergy in order to be constructed and to function1. In respect to the en-vironmental damage, the UN stated in 2009 that the building sector is responsible from more than a third of the world’s greenhouse gas emis-sions2. The environmental impact of buildings becomes clearer if one considers that buildings worldwide use 25% of the virgin wood supply, 17% of water supply, generate waste and take up space from rural areas3.

1 http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/building2013SUM.pdf, accessed on 24-11-2014

2 http://www.unep.org/SBCI/pdfs/SBCI-BCCSummary.pdf, accessed on 24-11-2014

3 Roodman, D. and Lenssen, N. “A Building Evolution: How Ecology and Health Concerns Are Transforming Construction”. World Watch Paper #124, March 1995

historic data

projection to 2030

http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/building2013SUM.pdf

http://www.unep.org/SBCI/pdfs/SBCI-BCCSummary.pdf


Introduction

2

Dutch building stock age[source: CBS]

On the other hand, historic buildings add to the aesthetic value of mod-ern cities and towns. The possibilities of intervening to such a building have often been underestimated and opportunities have been missed, mostly because of the hesitation, ignorance or lack of means of the own-ers.

More and more nowadays the opinions are starting to change in favor building conservation also in relation to sustainability and the reuse of property seams now a more appealing investment. According to Prof Dr Anke van Hal, “the subject of sustainability in relation to buildings of historic and visual significance has long been unjustly ignored. The scales are now starting to turn. We can now show that it is definitely possible to make sustainable modifications to buildings of this type”. In the same direction, the Environmental Change Institute at Oxford University promotes a more radical approach: “Heritage conservation needs to be balanced against climate change mitigation – more inter-ventions should be possible in heritage/conservation buildings than are allowed”.

Sustainability through conservation can be achieved in several fields of modern life. It is usual practice that conservation projects – especially the larger ones - are intended for public use or for public showcasing. This has one strong benefit in an economic and social level that extends to an environmental level: The way the building is being showcased as a piece of art, history or science, the same way the interventions towards

15,10%

14,30%

11,90%

58,70%

1996 - 2005

1986 - 1995

1976 - 1985

<1975

Non-residential Building Stock Age

11,60%

35,40%

30,90%

13,60%

7,30%

>1990

1970 - 1990

1945 - 1969

1919 - 1944

<1919

Residential Building Stock Age


Introduction

3

its energy upgrade can be showcased, acting as a beacon for this type of solutions towards energy efficiency and raising awareness on envi-ronmental issues. Heritage is widely used all over the world as means to cultivate and educate people on their history. Doing the same for the environment seems corollary for this type of buildings in the age of climate change.

Problem Statement

Existing historic buildings, remnants of a past long gone are often still highly operational in our time, most likely at the expense of the envi-ronment. Without interventions, their energy performance is outdated – provided they are used in a contemporary way4 - and they contribute to the over-consumption of energy and the increase of greenhouse gas emissions.

But the world is also emptier than many of us realise. In the Neth-erlands alone there are almost seven million square meters of unused office space and 40,000 empty apartments. The list of disused premises grows by one farm a day, two churches a week, and one monastery a month. Factories, schools, town halls, army barracks and other distinc-tive – and usually of public interest – buildings are also falling empty. Among all these empty premises, over a thousand listed buildings await a new future5.

4 There is no indication that the age of a building has a straightforward relation-ship with its energy efficiency or energy consumption. The type and size of the

building, the build-up of its envelope, the habits of the users, the building services installed and their efficiency are all factors that determine the amount of energy

a building consumes and how efficiently this energy is being handled. For exam-ple older buildings and their occupants had lower standards for comfort or were

outside more and the lack of the modern building services presented them with low energy consumption for that time. Newer buildings have higher efficiency services

but more intense use of the building and besides the envelope build-up [e.g. full glass facades] can lead to higher energy consumption. By saying “an old building used in a contemporary way” it is meant that the old building contains up to date

– used in the last 50 years – building services and is occupied according to contem-porary patterns and standards, e.g. more indoor use for offices and services, main-taining contemporary standard comfort levels. Source - http://portfoliomanager.

supportportal.com/link/portal/23002/23010/Article/36222/Does-building-age-af-fect-energy-use - accessed on 25-11-2014

5 http://www.herbestemming.nu/international/national-redevelopment-pro-gramme accessed on 22-11-2014

http://portfoliomanager.supportportal.com/link/portal/23002/23010/Article/36222/Does-building-age-affect-energy-use



http://www.herbestemming.nu/international/national-redevelopment-programme

http://www.herbestemming.nu/international/national-redevelopment-programme


Introduction

4

The Soda Fabriek in Schiedam, a disused 18th century warehouse which is currently under devel-opment [source: Makkersstraat e.o. Een cultuurhistor-ische analyse en beschri-jving, n.d.]

The upside with abandoned or empty buildings is that they consume minimal or no energy at all. However in the problem remains that they occupy space creating voids in the city that would better be used otherwise.

This project attempts to demonstrate how those voids can be delivered back to the city, reviving the collective memory they are charged with, as energy efficient entities through a series of technological interven-tions. At the same time those interventions can be a beacon of sustain-able development for the local community, improving living conditions in the city in a local scale and raising awareness to the public about all things sustainable.

Such a void is the Soda Fabriek in Schiedam, an example of an aban-doned historic building on which this project will focus on. The in-terventions applicable for its transformation into an energy efficient building are on one hand case specific, but can be used as reference or inspiration for numerous others of the same type, age, condition and importance.


Introduction

5

Research Questions

The previously explained problematic leads to the following research question:

“Which are the more appropriate technical interventions on the en-velope of the Soda Fabriek in Schiedam in order to reduce the energy needed to condition the building?”

Off course to reach an answer to that question one must go through a series of issues that arise and are expressed in the following questions:

What is the definition of sustainable interventions on architectural her-itage?What is the framework in which architectural heritage can be dealt with?What is the general context of the Soda Fabriek?What are the building’s essential characteristics?What is the historical significance of the Soda Fabriek and how does it define the intervention possibilities?What is the current state of the building?Is it possible to upgrade the Soda Fabrik’s energy performance without insulating the walls?How do the different interventions affect energy distribution in the building and ultimately the energy consumption to condition the build-ing?What other impacts do these interventions have for the building?What other factors affect energy consumption in the building?


Introduction

6

Scope and Boundary Conditions

What is important for this project is to expose the possibilities for trans-forming existing shells in an architectural way, and how these contrib-ute to the increase of energy efficiency in buildings and cities. Those interventions – once realized - can in turn provide example/raise aware-ness towards the sustainable future of the already built environment.

Existing buildings, particularly those of historical significance, can be transformed with a wide range of interventions, a process which greatly relies on the peculiarities of each case. From no intervention at all to complete demolition and reconstruction, the designer needs to assess what is best for the building’s and its occupant’s future. Those interven-tions and their result on the energy efficiency of the Soda Fabriek are the primary focus of this project. Determining the more appropriate of those is the primary objective. The historical significance and value of the building is not the subject of this project and only is examined as a restriction parameter to the design process.

Energy will be key in determining the effectiveness of the proposed interventions to the envelope. Energy consumption of the resulting building, energy loss through the resulting envelope and the possibility of energy reuse and generation will be the means for evaluation the ac-tions taken to transform the Soda Fabriek.

Secondary objective of the project will be to investigate and assess pro-posed functions of the new and upgraded Soda Fabriek, again through the viewpoint of energy efficiency, since energy use in a building is greatly affected by its use and the occupancy patterns that it creates. In this way, energy is not only a tool for assessing applied technology on an existing building but can also provide insights on the selection of the appropriate future use, and whether that use can be a viable option for its operation.

To be able to form an educated decision as to what is appropriate for the Soda Fabriek, this project needs to set some further boundary condi-tions and assumptions that will result in comparable findings in respect to the interventions examined:

• Interventions examined will be limited to the transformation of the envelope of the building and its various possible configurations.

• The project will propose a system for the services of the building based on literature research. The performance of this system will be


Introduction

7

evaluated using the above mentioned configuration possibilities of the envelope.

• Financial issues regarding the interventions are not analyzed, although they are taken into account.

• The energy consumption figures are considered decision making tools rather than exact and precise data.

Through the process of achieving the above, the goal is also to learn of those possibilities and of the tools for calculation and design of the in-terventions in existing buildings. These will prove to be tools through which one can approach the reuse and redevelopment of an existing building from the perspective of energy efficiency. Exploring the meth-odology of approaching architectural heritage in this way elevates the concerns for energy efficiency into a design mechanism for sustainable conservation for potentially any building under that category, aiding designers to determine appropriate solutions for architectural heritage with more than the archeological and conservation agendas at hand.


Introduction

8


Backround Research

9

On Dealing with Architectural Heritage

Some Definitions

“Sustainability” and “sustainable development” has been defined in many ways and still remains a vague concept that is better described than defined. Yet the most prominent of these definitions concisely puts it as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromis-ing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”1. This has been associated with the rational and economic use of the environment, the minimizing of the impact of human activity on the environment, the use of renewable resources and at the same time the achievement of economic growth.

In 1972 UNESCO defines architectural heritage in the following way: “Groups of separate or connected buildings which, because of their ar-chitecture, their homogeneity or their place in the landscape, are of outstanding universal value from the point of view of history, art or science”2

In light of the two above definitions it can be argued that treating archi-tectural heritage is inherently sustainable, since many of the components that comprise the end result are already there. And that goes beyond the physical use of the materials and the energy contained in the building itself. The 4rth annual US/ICOMOS Symposium [Philadelphia, 2001] agreed with the above statements, declaring that “conservation has al-ways been much related to sustainability, because of its support in tra-ditional technologies, allowing repair and reuse, instead of the constant and common wasteful cycles of destruction and rebuilding”3.

Taking this a step further, one can define “sustainable development of architectural heritage” as any set of actions that allows a peace of archi-tectural heritage to extend its lifespan without compromising its future and the future of its context – the surrounding city.

To reach that goal there is a multitude of such “sets of actions” that can be taken, which makes their universally accepted classification quite hard. The commonly used terms often describe similar situations, cre-

1 WCED, 1987; Bojo et al., 1992

2 World Heritage Convention, Paris, 1972. Source: http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext/ accessed on 08-06-2014

3 Re-Architecture: Lifespan rehabilitation of built heritage. Pereira, Ana Rita. Ein-dhoven: The 21th Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, 2004.

http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext/

http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext/


Backround Research

10

ating overlap in their definitions or are even used as synonyms. This happens due to the varying degrees of change imposed, ranging accord-ing to the level of invasiveness to the existing fabric, as well as the range of purposes for which these actions are taken [e.g. aesthetic, technical, functional, financial].

The following definitions are presented here to get an overview of the courses of action possible to deal with architectural heritage4.

Conservation/Preservation: the actions taken to physically stabilize, prevent decay of and manage change dynamically of the condition of a historic building. It embraces all acts that prolong the life of our cultur-al and natural heritage. The main reason behind conservation actions is the wish to safeguard for future generations the artistic and human messages that a building might possess. Reconstruction: The act or process of depicting, by means of new con-struction, the form, features, and detailing of a non-surviving site, land-scape, building, structure, or object for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location.

Rehabilitation: The act or process of returning a property to a state of utility through repair or alteration that makes possible an efficient con-temporary use while preserving those features of the property that are significant to its historical, architectural, and cultural values. It is quite similar to refurbishment and is considered the ‘best way of preserving a buildings’5 as it does not only extends its life but defines a new purpose for it according to the demands of modern life and society.

Restoration: actions to accurately repair the form, features and charac-ter of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time. The aim of restoration actions is to preserve, reveal, revive and exhibit the val-ue of the building. The limited and sensitive upgrading of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems and other code-required work to make properties functional is appropriate within a restoration project.

Renovation: The modernization of a historic building in which inap-

4 Definitions given by the U.S. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation in the “Minister of Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitat-ing Historic Buildings”. http://www.achp.gov/Program%20Comment%20and%20Appendices.pdf – accessed on 21 – 11 - 2014

5 http://www.international.icomos.org/Paris2011/GA2011_ICOMOS_TICCIH_joint_principles_EN_FR_final_20120110.pdf - accessed on 21-11-2014

http://www.achp.gov/Program%20Comment%20and%20Appendices.pdf

http://www.achp.gov/Program%20Comment%20and%20Appendices.pdf

http://www.international.icomos.org/Paris2011/GA2011_ICOMOS_TICCIH_joint_principles_EN_FR_final_20120110.pdf

http://www.international.icomos.org/Paris2011/GA2011_ICOMOS_TICCIH_joint_principles_EN_FR_final_20120110.pdf


Backround Research

11

Logos of international and national organiza-

tions for the protection of cultural heritage

[sources: http://en.un-esco.org/, http://www.

icomos.org/en/, http://ticcih.org/, http://www.

cultureelerfgoed.nl/, http://www.english-herit-age.org.uk/, http://www.

achp.gov/]

propriate alterations are made and important features and details are eliminated. A more invasive approach during which elements of the historic fabric are replaced by new ones.

Refurbishment: Refurbishment is the extensive renewal or modification of secondary elements of a building that may be required to adapt the structure to a new purpose. Could be seen as more radical and invasive rehabilitation or a renovation incorporating a new function for the his-toric building.

On Guidelines and Standards

The “technical” definitions discussed previously present a significant amount of overlap, seemingly referring to the same thing: the exten-sion of the life of a historic building. And that is for a reason. They are the outcome of different interpretations of the same set of principles that various national and international organizations and agencies6 have recognized all through the 20th century until today. Those principles have been documented in various doctrinal texts – especially after WW 2 – which expose the result of the increasing concern about the fate of humanity’s built heritage and the various conferences and summits that have taken place for addressing that issue.

The Athens Charter [1937], the Venice Charter [1964], the European Charter of Architectural Heritage [1975], the Nara Document on Au-thenticity [1994], the Charter for the Built Vernacular Heritage [1999], the Dublin Principles [2011], the Valleta Principles [2011]7 all deter-mine, conclude on or discuss the following set of principles that need to characterize interventions on buildings or sites of historic, artistic or cultural value:

• Historic Preservation is a multidisciplinary field bringing togeth-er historians, archeologists, architects, planners, engineers, govern-ments.

• Permanent maintenance of historic buildings is essential to their preservation

• Minimize the amount of intervention as much as possible. Do as little as possible but also as much as is necessary

6 Most notable of those would be UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Sci-entific and Cultural Organization] founded in 1945 and ICOMOS [International

Council on Monuments and Sites] founded in 1964

7 http://icomos.org/en/charters-and-texts - accessed on 21-11-2014

http://icomos.org/en/charters-and-texts


Backround Research

12

• Respect the history of the building or site in question, its periods and previous interventions as they are essential to its value

• All interventions should be reversible

• All replacements or additions should be distinct from the original and/or bare a contemporary stamp

• Any action should lead and/or derive from a site’s reuse. Therefore uses other than the original can be considered [with all their impli-cations]

• Documentation at every step of the intervention process is para-mount to ensure no loss of valuable information and to expand and distribute knowledge on this otherwise empirical field

It is notable that those principles have a rather generic form and always refrain from giving specific examples. The cause for that is given in the Nara Document on Authenticity [Nara Conference on Authenticity in Relation to the World Heritage Convention, Nara, Japan, 1994]8 which emphasizes the importance of authenticity of a building, site, and/or element. Understanding the degree of authenticity means being able to determine its value in relation to heritage. In turn, this judgment on values attributed to cultural properties can vary even within the same culture. It is therefore impossible to base such judgment on fixed and objective criteria. The above listed principles need to be generic, appli-cable in as many cases as possible and open to interpretation, to make possible the understanding of what makes any given piece of heritage valuable to preserve.

Furthermore, these principles have been recognized and accepted by national organizations and an effort has been made through legislations around the world to ensure proper protection of the built heritage. The U.S. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Historic Build-ings and Monuments Commission for England [aka English Heritage], and the Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands for example have all contributed to the legislation regarding monuments in their respec-tive countries [Minister of Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 1967, Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, Monuments and Historic Buildings Act 1988/2011 respectively].

These documents set out the legal framework for protecting historic buildings and sites primarily by establishing legal bodies and assigning

8 http://icomos.org/charters/nara-e.pdf - accessed on 22-11-2014

http://icomos.org/charters/nara-e.pdf


Backround Research

13

them the executing responsibility, establishing official registers where heritage is listed and documented, explaining degrees of protection and the legal procedures for interventions and even the financial possibilities in the form of grants, subsidies or tax relieves. Yet those documents have nothing to do with the way an intervention on historic buildings or sites takes place and no legal obligation is expressed for following through with the conservation principles described above. However they are being taken into account as much as possible within the legal process of intervening in historic properties and are promoted as official guidelines given out as advice to historic property owners or developers through publications, conferences and campaigns.

In conclusion, these principles for historic preservation form a “code of conduct” which although it is not legally binding, it is universally accepted in the historic preservation community as the only reasonable way of approaching interventions in existing historic buildings or sites.

On Heritage Sustainability

Sustainability in Cultural Heritage can be broken down in several lev-els. Undeniably, buildings in particular are the bridges that span the cultural gaps between generations in the everyday life of a place’s inhab-itants. According to Yung and Chang9, addressing the already existing and especially that of historical value, is a sustainable act in itself, as it promotes the reuse of embodied energy, avoids demolition energy and waste, and can provide significant social and economic benefits to a society.

Economics come into dealing with heritage, much like in any other field, in the form of costs and benefits comparison. The finances of a historic building’s redesign can be laid out and compared to economic gains from the end result. Ensuring the financial viability of an inter-vention on a monument can be a defining factor both to its success as well as the process through which this intervention will happen.

Utilizing the historic assets in a place will also have some impact in the social and cultural values of life there. By giving a monument a new life, some historic continuity in the time of that place is ensured that improves quality of life and enhances social cohesion and inclusiveness, especially where the local community is active enough in such matters.

9 Yung E.H.K. & Chan E. H. W, “Implementation challenges to the adaptive reuse of heritage buildings: Towards the goals of sustainable, low carbon cities”,

Habitat International, 36(3), 2012


Backround Research

14

Breakdown of the em-bodied energy that goes into the construction of buildings[source: Mike Jackson, “Embodied energy and historic preservation: a needed re-assessment”, APT Bulletin, 36(4), 2005]

The disciplines and elements that contribute to the sustainability of heritage [source: own work]

As we will see further on, the community in Schiedam for example has been actively participating in the redevelopment of the Soda Fabriek, effectively saving it from demolition.

In terms of the environment and ecology, it was proven by TU Delft’s Pret-a-Loger team that the most sustainable building, is the one that already exists10. Considering also the ecological impact of buildings, it becomes evident that addressing environmental issues when intervening in a historic building enhances the extension of its life while at the same time reduces its impact for the environment.

10 Pret-a-Loger entered the Solar Decathlon Europe 2014 competition with the redesign of a typical Dutch rowhouse from the 1960’s and won among others first place in the Sustainability contest and third place overall

architecturaldesign

history + archaeology

structuraldesign

climatedesign

materialscience

sustainableheritage

economics

strategic

technical

cultural

buildingphysics

+


Backround Research

15

As is further explained later, national and local goverments are key fac-tors in the field of architectural heritage. This adds a political layer to the matter through which politics benefits from heritage and vice versa. Most if not all countries have institutions and authorities promoting and overseeing the processes of historic building conservation and reuse and are partaking in national and international conventions about the protection of cultural heritage. This is evident also in a financial scale: In 2014, the government of the Netherlands made available 2.5 million euros for the redevelopment of historic buildings and sites11.

On Methodology

Dealing with architectural heritage in practice involves some steps that will define both the process of an intervention and its end result. In every such project the goal is to enhance certain aspects of a historic building and alter others in the attempt to extend the building’s life and increase its value through intervention.To reach the decision about the interventions necessary and/or desir-able for a historic building, one should go through three basic steps of research:

• Literature• On site survey• Damage assessment

Literature research involves going through any source that can inform the researcher about different aspects of a building or site. These aspects are its history, functions, history of its time and construction methods, development of its context through time etc. Any available information about the building’s origins, the changes it has undergone through time, its previous functions, its historical and physical context can be a de-termining factor in choices made about how the building is going to be refurbished, what new functions are going to be incorporated and even what goals the refurbishment should strive for. Through this research, one of the most important conclusions that can be drawn is the inherent values that the building in question has acquired over time.

Field work is an equally important undertaking when dealing with ar-chitectural heritage. It helps researchers establish the status quo of a monument, the existing situation and condition that the building is

11 http://www.cultureelerfgoed.nl/nieuws/24-miljoen-euro-voor-herbestem-ming-gebouwen-0 - accessed on 09-02-2015

http://www.cultureelerfgoed.nl/nieuws/24-miljoen-euro-voor-herbestemming-gebouwen-0

http://www.cultureelerfgoed.nl/nieuws/24-miljoen-euro-voor-herbestemming-gebouwen-0


Backround Research

16

in, before the interventions in question. Additionally it informs about the immediate context of the building that can lead to design decisions which will better facilitate the integration of the proposal to the con-temporary setting. This is the phase of the process when all the docu-mentation of the examined case is produced as well as the first assump-tions/statements are made about the condition of the building and the damage that it has sustained through time.

Consequently, damage assessment is the cornerstone of technical inter-ventions in a building. The goal here is to determine the cause of the damage that is affecting the building, which can be a derivative of either or even both of the two previous steps. This is done in both in the mac-ro and micro scale for the whole building and for individual elements and materials respectively.

From here on, design happens. Interventions to the building are be-ing decided, whose purpose can vary according to the definitions given previously. Such interventions generally address the inherent values of the building, the contrast and accentuation of the new construction or function, the elimination of causes of damage and the control of the construction and interior climate so that further damage does not occur. Some of these interventions are bound to be linked to climate design and building physics, whether one needs to create comfortable indoor climate for the new occupants or prevent moisture levels from rising and damaging parts of the building.

This is the whole point of this project, to compare solutions that will address climate design issues for a refurbishment project, while at the same time considering the other aspects that complete such a project.

On Recent Practice

For the past four years Europe has been working on the direction of en-ergy upgrade of historic buildings with a project under the name 3En-Cult and the subtitle Efficient Energy for EU Cultural Heritage. The project involves 21 parties from 10 European countries that include educational and research institutions as well as industry partners12. The goal of this is to bridge the gap between building conservation and climate protection in order to achieve the sustainable future of historic

12 Netherlands participated with TNO, which – together with the Passivhaus Institut – was responsible for research on “Quality Assurance and Design Tools” - http://www.3encult.eu/en/partners/default.html and http://www.3encult.eu/en/project/workpackages/default.html - accessed on 22-11-2014

http://www.3encult.eu/en/partners/default.html

http://www.3encult.eu/en/project/workpackages/default.html

http://www.3encult.eu/en/project/workpackages/default.html


Backround Research

17

left: The case studies used for the 3EnCult Europe-an project in 2010-2014.

from top to bottom:• Faestningens Materi-

alegard, Copenhagen• Industrial Engineering

School, Salamanca• Monumental School,

Innsbruck• Palazzina della Viola,

Bologna• Palazzo d’Accursio,

Bologna• Public Weigh House,

Bolzano• Strickbau, Appenzell

• Warehouse City, Pots-dam

[souce: http://www.3en-cult.eu/en/casestudies/

default.html]

De Tempel, Den Haag[source: http://commons.

wikimedia.org/wiki/File:De_Tempel,_Prins_

Hendrikstraat_39,_Den_Haag..jpg]

buildings and their occupants. According to 3EnCult, energy efficient retrofit is important for structural reasons as well as comfort reasons - comfort for the users and the heritage collections alike.13

Among the proceedings of this project is the evaluation of 8 case studies in Europe in order to demonstrate and verify technical solutions appli-cable to the majority of European historic buildings. Objectives also include the development of passive and active solutions for the conser-vation of heritage and energy with the end result of creating a technical Handbook for conservationists and developers on energy efficient ret-rofit. In collaboration with the German Passive House Institute, a tool has been developed as an extension to the already existing Passive House Planning Package to quickly estimate the climatic and energy benefits for energy efficient solutions applied on historic buildings. Most of the results on the case study monitoring as well as the research on techni-cal solutions are available online, and the creation of an online virtu-al library further disseminates knowledge on the subject and provides structured documentation for researchers and practitioners on building conservation. 14

Reference Projects

Three reference projects have been examined to provide insights to the practical approach in the refurbishment of heritage buildings in respect to climate and energy. The pojects have similarities and differences in their treatment and the interventions applied that affect the goals and outcomes of the buildings’ refurbishment. The selected uilidings have similar construction to the Soda Fabriek in Schiedam and can effectively demonstrate how such a construction performs after its energy upgrade.

13 http://www.3encult.eu/en/project/welcome/default.html - accessed on 22-11-2014

14 http://www.3encult.eu/en/deliverables/default.html - accessed on 22-11-2014


Backround Research

18

left: Exploded detail of the wall treatment according to the “Warm-bouwen” conceptright: The prefabricated panel used on the walls in De Tempel during constuction [source: http://www.bouwwereld.nl/project/energiezuinige-reno-vatie-met-minimale-iso-latie/]

De Tempel, Den Haag, 2011

This building used to be a bank, originally built in 1915, primarily out of stone and wood. It has been refurbished in 2011 to create office spaces and in the attempt to increase the marketability of the property, it was necessary to reach a minimum energy label of C. Therefore, aside from the many functional and architectural interventions needed, there were also extensive application of energy technologies and systems, in order to increace its energy and climatic performance. At present the building is housing the Department of Archeology of The Hague.

To achieve its goal, the project employed the concept “Warmbouwen”15 - meaning “warm construction”. Central feature of this concept is the fact that the construction of the building is not fully insulated in the attempt to make use of the massive stone walls and their thermal mass. Because of the necessity to preserve the original facades, minimal ther-mal insulation is applied to the interior surface of the walls [25mm] and no effort is made to eliminate the cold bridges throughout the build-ing’s envelope. Additionally, the window frames are simply maintained, while the glass panes are replaced with insulation glazing.

Instead of fully insulating and sealing the building, extensive use of the building systems is preferred, to counter the heat loss through the envelope and maintain the interior climate. The main principle of the “Warmbouwen” involves the installation of a water pipe network in the walls, floors and ceilings to facilitate heating and cooling of the spaces. This effectively heats or cools the actual construction of the building with low temperatures for heating and cooling. This has two effects: a) the lower temperatures means less energy consumed for conditioning as

15 http://www.warmbouwen.nl/, accessed on 06-02-2015


Backround Research

19

Climate diagrams for de Tempel

[source: NESK Ein-draportage, De Tempel, Den Haaag, Agentschap

NL, 2011]

well as less energy loss to the outside and b) the envelope of the build-ing actively participates in the conditioning of the space as heat or cold comes from the entirety of its interior surfaces16. This last part does not exclude the thermal mass from the energy flows in the building, improv-ing the system’s performance.

The actual heat or cold comes from a ground source heat pump in com-bination with an ATES [Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage], a proven, ef-fective and efficient system for conditioning. This way, energy from the ground is stored in the walls and utilized for longer periods of time in the winter, whereas excessive heat collected in the walls mass and in the interior in the summer can be stored in the ground for inter-seasonal use. One remark that is necessary here is the fact that this system relies on its long term operation. On the one hand, the thermal mass in the walls needs to adjust to the new status quo of the renovated building and its newly introduced conditioning system. On the other, the ATES system needs also to be balanced over time for the heat and cold storage to become efficient. This is estimated to take three years. For that, and for extreme summers and winters, a back-up system with a dry-cooler is being used to draw heat and cold from the outside air.

16 It is important to note here that this is made possible [or is allowed in terms of building conservation] by the original construction and architectural style of the building, by which the interior wall surfaces were already plastered. Replacing the

plaster with insulation and a prefabricated gypsum board panel that incorporates the water pipes was deemed appropriate for this building and the particular way

that it was refurbished.

De Tempel 5/12 UKPNT01035

3. Uitvoering van het project

Het ontwerp van de techniek

Nadat de doelstellingen waren geformuleerd is het idee verder uitgewerkt naar een ontwerp.

Er is voor gekozen om als eerste gebouw het idee van KBNG architecten uit Den Haag van

WarmBouwen tot te passen. WarmBouwen gaat uit van accumulatie in plaats van isolatie.

Daardoor is er minder noodzaak voor dikke isolatiepakketten. De afgifte van warmte en

koeling vindt plaats via de gevel en de vloeren. Het bijzondere is dat het net van leidingen

voorziet in het isoleren van de gevel en ook het uitstralen van warmte naar de gebruikers in de

winter en van koeling in de zomer. Op deze wijze wordt de massa van het gebouw benut en

wordt er een constant en comfortabel klimaat in het gebouw gerealiseerd. Doordat er op hoge

temperatuur gekoeld wordt en lage temperatuur verwarmd, zijn er minimale

temperatuurverschillen nodig in het watervoerende pakket. Dit draagt mede bij aan de grote

energiebesparing.

Naast de afgifte van warmte en koude via straling in gevel en vloer wordt er gebruik gemaakt

van maximale daglicht toetreding door behoud van de hoge ramen, het buiten houden van

zonnewarmte door terugbrengen van de buitenzonwering, basisverlichting van 200 lux met

slimme schakeling, ventilatie via bestaande gevelopeningen op 3,5 meter ter voorkoming van

tocht en tot slot het opwekken van warmte en koude door middel van bodemwisselaars.

Overzicht van de maatregelen

• gaswarmtepomp van 150 kW

• Bodemlussen tot 50 meter diep als warmte wisselaar

• 100 m² buitenzonwering

• 710 m² gevelisolatie

• 4800 m¹ leidingwerk wandverwarming

• 463 m² vloerverwarming

• 475 m² dakisolatie met Rc waarde 2,0

• totale verlichting circa 6W/m²

• daglichtregeling

• aanwezigheidsdetectie

De maatregelen uitgezet tegen de effecten zijn doorgerekend door DGMR; zie de Bijlage.


Backround Research

20

Huis “de Witte Roos”, Delft left: view from the streetright: view of the glass house from the back yard[sources: http://rijksmon-umenten.nl/monu-ment/11991/de+wit-te+roos/delft/, http://www.envireo.eu/build-ing/30/Huis+De+Wit-te+Roos/theme/2/Ener-gy]

Ventilation has been designed to happen naturally through the central stairwell of the building, but as a backup there is a central ventilation unit installed that incorporates heat recovery to increase the buildings energy efficiency in the winter and prevent overheating in the summer.Following the refurbishment of the Tempel, a yearlong period of mon-itoring the building took place that showed that the building exceeded the engineers’ expectations. According to the measurements taken, the building has an annual energy consumption of 27.7 kWh/m2 for space conditioning, as opposed to the initially estimated 35.1 kWh/m2. As a result, the building was able to achieve an energy label of A17.

Huis “de Witte Roos”, Delft, 201118

This house was originally built in the 16th century with more additions later in its history can be a case study for what makes up most of the historic centers of towns all over the Netherlands. In 2011 it was refur-bished and transformed to be a conference and cultural center with the goal to be as sustainable a monument as it could be, in order to promote sustainable technologies for monumental buildings and become a pro-totype for their redesign.

Overall sustainability was key for this project and for that conserving energy in the building was crucial. Thorough internal insulation is ap-plied here in all surfaces [external walls, roofs and ground floors] and cold bridges have extensively been eliminated. Because of their archi-tectural value, the windows of the building have been preserved intact,

17 Ir. M.H.W. de Gier, “Rapportage Energiemonitoring De Durzame Tempel Den Haag”, Stichting WarmBouwen 2012

18 Aquarius Ingenieursbureau voor Energie & Milieu, “Energetisch Renoveren van Monumentale Panden in Nederland”, for the International Institute for Urban Environment, 1999


Backround Research

21

Huis “de Witte Roos” refurbishment schemes

[source: http://www.wit-teroos.nl/frontend/files/

userfiles/images/]top left: insulation

top right: energy flowsbottom left: ventilationbottom right: sustaina-

bility

but there were insulating dark screens applied on their interior side to control heat loss and the natural lighting for presentation purposes re-quired by the new use.

More radical architectural elements have been employed in this build-ing that help conserve as well as generate energy for the house. The internal patio has been covered with a glass roof creating a buffer space for the surrounding rooms while at the same time collects heat during sunny periods for heating the house. Similarly, a glass house space is added in the back yard adjacent to the house that also provides surface area for solar panels to be integrated for electricity production on site.In terms of installations, an elaborate system for generating and dis-tributing heat and cold throughout the house is being used. A ground source heat pump feeds wall and ground heating pipes in different parts of the building. Solar collectors are used to provide hot water and for backup there is a gas boiler with water heat recovery operating as well. There is a central ventilation system with heat recovery installed supported with individual ventilation units in the main assembly spac-es to cover increased demand. Finally there is a rain water collection and reuse system – albeit without treatment – for use as irrigation and waste disposal. It is notable that a complex automated monitoring and control system is handling the operation of these systems in the most efficient way.

All these interventions, although they have not been verified in actual operation through testing, they have been designed and calculated to


Backround Research

22

General plan of the Lati-jnse School Middelburg, showing the different phases of the building [source: http://www.passiefrestaureren.nl/passiefrestaureren-bou-wkundig.html]

Views of the Latijnse School from the street [left] and the inner yard [right] [source: http://www.passiefrestaureren.nl/passiefrestaureren-fo-tos-voor_verbouw.html]

have significant improvements in the energy efficiency of this house. It is estimated that for conditioning the interior spaces about 45 kWh/m2 is consumed, a number which constitutes approximately 90% reduction in the buildings CO2 emissions.

Latijnse School, Middelburg, 201019

This building is organized in three wings, the oldest of which dates back to 1592. In 2010 the school was refurbished to create residential and office spaces with the ambitious goal to become the first monument in the Netherlands to achieve passive house standards. Due to conserva-tion restrictions the major alterations on the envelope to achieve this happened in the two latest wings [from 1879 and 1922].

Passive house standards require that the building will not consume annually more than 15 kWh/m2 for heating or cooling of the interior space. To achieve this extreme insulation and sealing of the envelope is required, in order to minimise heat gains and losses as much as possible. Therefore, in different parts of the building thick internal or external wall insulation is applied [200 mm] that is supported by an additional timber frame adjacent to the original walls. Similar treatment happens also on the roofs of the refurbished wings, where insulation is applied. Although the original windows are kept and maintained to conserve the appearance of the façade, additional triple glazed windows are applied to the interior surface of the wall to fully insulate and seal the openings. Finally, a covered outdoor corridor is created on the south side of the building to block sunlight in the summer months and avoid overheating of the interior.

19 http://www.passiefrestaureren.nl/documenten/bouwwereld-p12-15.pdf - http://www.passiefrestaureren.nl/documenten/Nieuwsbrief_PR_november2010_lowres.pdf - both accessed on 25-11-2014


Backround Research

23

left: The timber frame that will box thermal

insulationright: Prefabricated

timberframed insulation panels used in other parts

of the building [source: http://www.passiefrestaureren.nl/passiefrestaureren-fo-

tos-casco.html]

left: The the roof is being replaced with prefabricat-

ed panels.right: The additional tri-ple glazed windows used

in the building [source: http://www.passiefrestaureren.nl/passiefrestaureren-fo-

tos-casco.html]

Because of this extensive sealing of the building, most of the condi-tioning of the interior space – if not all – relies on the building systems introduced for heating and cooling. Underfloor heating is applied, fed by a ground source heat pump that allows heating with low temperature water. Cooling also happens using the same system, but with circula-tion of cold water through the pipes. Excessive heat and cold are stored in the soil for inter-seasonal use. Each wing is also fitted with an on-de-mand displacement ventilation system with heat recovery as backup, since natural ventilation is allowed through the still operable windows. Overheating of the interior is prevented because of sun shading incor-porated in the cavities created between the original and the insulating windows.

All these interventions brought the result this project was trying to achieve. The building now consumes approximately 13 kWh/m2 annu-ally for heating or cooling.


Backround Research

24

Case Goals

Energy Label C

minimal insulation 25mm

thorough internal insulation

Extreme internal and external insulation

Lower Car-bon Emis-sions

Energy Neu-trality

Overall Sus-tainability

R e n o v a t i o n with Passive House Stand-ards15 kWh/m2 per year

Insulation

De Tempel, The Hague

Huis de Witte Roos, Delft

L a t i j n s e School, Mid-deleburg

Table comparing the three reference projects [source: own work]


Backround Research

25

Energy Label A

frames maintained - glazing replaced

Heat PumpFloor and Wall HeatingNatural VentilationBackup system with Heat Recovery

Heat PumpWall HeatingDecentralized Ventilation system with Heat Recovery

90% Carbon E m i s s i o n s reduction

13 kWh/m2

39.9 kWh/m2

45.7 kWh/m2

27.7 kWh/m2Conditioning

System Tot

System Tot

HeatingHeat PumpFloor HeatingCentralized Ventilation system with Heat Recovery

frames and glazing maintained

frames and glaz-ing maintained - triple glazed window added

Openings Instalations Results


Backround Research

26


The Soda Fabriek - Schiedam

27

Location of the Soda Fab-riek in Schiedam [source:

Google Maps]

View of the Soda Fabriek from the Buitenhaven

[source: own work]

The Soda Fabriek

Location

The Soda Factory is an industrial building from the late 18th century, located in the municipality of Schiedam, a small town to the West of Rotterdam. The factory itself is located on a thin strip of land bordered by the Nieuwe Haven in the South-West and the Buitenhaven in the North-East.

This piece of land was annexed to Schiedam between 1613 and 1614, when the Nieuwe Haven was dug. The earth won from digging the new canal was used to build up the ground and make it usable. Originally the land was meant to be used for business space, with plots facing the canals convenient to load and unload goods coming from the water ways. When the area was still relatively empty in 1766, the city decided to refashion it as a luxury living neighborhood, and built a long park through the middle to attract buyers. The park was laid between the Lange Nieuwstraat and the Tuinlaan. The only side street coming off of these streets was the future Makkerstraat, also the future location of the buildings. This street was probably used to access the plots on the water side. At this time, the municipality decided to take the look of the park into consideration when evaluating applications for buildings. Malt houses, distilleries, and breweries were turned away, as were appli-cations for small houses.1

1 https://www.schiedam.nl/BIS/Gemeenteraadsvergaderingen/22_septem-ber_2011/Brief_historische_vereniging_Schiedam_15augustus2011_Makker-

straat_3en5.pdf - accessed on 27-11-2014

https://www.schiedam.nl/BIS/Gemeenteraadsvergaderingen/22_september_2011/Brief_historische_vereniging_Schiedam_15augustus2011_Makkerstraat_3en5.pdf





28

left: View of the Soda Fabriek from Makker-straatright: View of the Soda Fabriek from Tuinlaan[source: own work]

left: Temperature and precipitation diagrams for Schiedamright: Prevailing winds diagram for Schiedam [sources: http://en.climate-data.org/loca-tion/50988/ and http://www.windfinder.com/windstatistics/rotterdam_airport]

Today the Soda Fabriek stands on the canal front of the Buitenhaven surrounded on all the other sides by residential buildings, which almost hide it from the passers-by of the park in Tuinlaan. Only access is from Makkerstraat, through the residence of the original owner, which is now incorporated in the Factory and used to function as the office spaces during the 20th century. The only view one can have is from accross side the canal [North East], where the canal street is still publicly acces-sible and hosts more industrial buildings, some seemingly of historical significance.

Climate

The climate in Schiedam, as in the Netherlands in general is described as temperate marine climate, characteristic of which are the cool summers and mild winters. The climate patterns in the Netherlands are strongly influenced by the prevailing winds, especially those originating from the sea. As a result, the coastal areas tend to have cooler summers than the mainland but also milder winters.



29

top left: yearly average of rainy days

top right: yearly average of sunny days

bottom left: yearly aver-age of irradiation

bottom right: yearly aver-age of sunshine hours[source: https://data.knmi.nl/portal/KN-

MI-DataCentre.html#lo-cation=nl]

Note:Sciedam seems to be

in a favorable location in terms of sunshine,

compared to the rest of the Netherlands, which

increases the potential for the use of passive and active solar technologies



30

Evolution of the Soda Fabriek site [source: Makkersstraat e.o. Een cultuurhistor-ische analyse en beschri-jving, n.d.]

View of the Soda Fabriek from the Buitenhaven in 1919 [source: http://sodafab-riek.nl/geschiedenis/]

Building history

The two main buildings have come to be called Coerland (Northern building) and Lijfland (Southern building). Jan Nolet built the ware-house which would later be known as Lijfland in the early 19th century probably as a grain storage facility, since he was a gin brewer. It was built behind his own house, but probably at a later time. He also owned the plot next to these buildings where he had his garden and yard. The warehouse was accessed by the street along the canal, which in turn was accessed by the Makkerstraat.

The second warehouse was built in the end of the 18th century, and probably functioned originally as a malt house for the family van der Schalk. In 1832 the building Coerland (or Courland) was property of Christina Johanna Tromer.

In 1893 the company Durij and Hammes applied for a permit to start a Soda Factory in Lijfland, which was granted in 1894 (Mac Lean, 1982). In 1895 they applied to annex Coerland to Lijfland and gave the divi-sion of the space as follows:

Ground floor: storage space and reservoir1st floor: crystallization vats2nd floor: crystallization vats and press3rd floor: boiling attic and kettle. (Schiedam Archive, 1895)



31

Soda purification through crystallization in open

containers. This is indic-ative of a possible cause

of damage in the interior of the Soda Fabriek

[source: J.Mac Lean, “Soda Fabrieken in de

19e eeuw, Chemisch Magazine, May 1982]

At this time the two separate buildings were joined by a narrow hallway. One year later the building at Makkerstraat 3 and 5 was built, as an office and living space (Schiedam Archive, 1896).

Throughout the twentieth century the buildings on the Makkerstraat were further adapted to the function of soda factory. The courtyard next to the house was roofed to create more storage space, a transformer house was built, and the street running along the canal was made into a shelter. In the end all the open space around the buildings vanished.2

From 2005 onwards, a legal dispute spurred out between the owner of the property Fortress Beheer VI BV and the Historical Society of Schiedam [a local independent citizen organization] which originated from the former’s request for a demolition permit. The locals were re-questing the demolition permit to be denied and the Soda Fabriek com-plex to be included in the listed monuments register. It took a few years but in 2011 the court decided not to issue the demolition permit and ordered the rehabilitation of the property. At the same time though the listing of the Soda Factory as a monument was rejected on the grounds that there are more buildings of the same type and age listed throughout the Netherlands and there was no need for another one.3

2 http://sodafabriek.nl/geschiedenis/ - accessed on 27-11-2014 https://www.schiedam.nl/BIS/Gemeenteraadsvergaderingen/22_september_2011/Brief_histor-

ische_vereniging_Schiedam_15augustus2011_Makkerstraat_3en5.pdf - accessed on 27-11-2014

3 https://www.schiedam.nl/BIS/Gemeenteraadsvergaderingen/22_septem-ber_2011/Brief_historische_vereniging_Schiedam_15augustus2011_Makker-

straat_3en5.pdf - accessed on 27-11-2014

http://sodafabriek.nl/geschiedenis/









32

Construction works in the Soda Fabriek in 2014 to replace the roof of the Coerland building [source: own work]

The architectural practice currently working on the Soda Fabriek [source: http://www.restauro.nl/]

The organisation founded for the development and management of the Soda Fabriek [source: http://sodafab-riek.nl/]

Still the Soda Factory was “rescued” and sold to the “Soda Fabriek Co-operation”, a coalition of the Restauro Architecten office and Schiedam citizens. The Cooperation is working on the project as we speak, with the complete rehabilitation of the two industrial buildings by 2019. Despite the fact that the Soda Fabriek is not a listed monument, the Cooperation is determined to treat it as such.

Current and Future Plans

As already mentioned there is a plan in the pipeline about the devel-opment of the Soda Fabric, set in motion by the “Soda Fabriek Co-operation” and the architectural firm Restauro Architecten. The pro-cess has been going on since 2011 and some interventions have already been completed [e.g. the roof of the Coerland building]. The proposed scheme for the functions to be housed within the old factory takes into account the exposure the building needs to have, the contribution to the local society as well as to the local economy. Therefore it includes an exhibition space, an event/conference hall, places for catering and gathering, workshops, office spaces, retail spaces, residences and an ex-tension to a local bed and breakfast business4. However nothing is fixed right now, as the project is self-funded at the moment and functions are largely going to be determined by the respective investors that can be found to actually occupy the building after the fact5.

So far all the interventions that have been done on the building have been the absolute necessary to stop rain water penetration, the pro-gression of damage and to prevent the collapse of already irreparable elements.

4 http://sodafabriek.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/201405_acquisitieboek-je-website_resize.pdf accessed on 27-11-2014

5 Oral conversation with Restauro Architecten – May 2014

http://sodafabriek.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/201405_acquisitieboekje-website_resize.pdf

http://sodafabriek.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/201405_acquisitieboekje-website_resize.pdf



33

The basic materials of which the Soda Fabriek is

constructedfrom top to bottom:

brick loadbearing wallswooden interior parts for

the roof and floorswooden fixed single

glazed windowscorrugated asbestos roof-

ing sheets [source: own work]

Description of the building

The factory consists of two main buildings connected by a narrow hall-way. Later additions included an office and living area on the Makker-straat adjoined to the main warehouse buildings by a garage in 1948. To the East of the plot is a canal connecting the River Maas with the Schie. To the South is an old residence which is now part of the group of buildings which belongs to the factory. North and West are residences of the owners who built the factories. Directly surrounding the building there is a residential neighbourhood.

Lijfland is a rectangular building three beams wide and five columns deep. The main structural elements are load bearing brick walls and an interior timber construction with timber roof construction. The build-ing is five stories high and covered by three parallel hip roofs following the length of the builidng.

The floor plan of the building is open. The beams under the floors are supported by the walls on one end and primary beams stretching from one end of the building to the other, these in turn supported by thick wooden columns. There are two sets of columns, dividing the floor into three spaces. The inside walls are either plastered or tinned. The floors are made from pine with the exception of the ground floor, which is concrete. The beams are also made from pine.

The warehouse Coerland was built in the late eighteenth or early nine-teenth century. It stands to the North of Lijfland and has a rectangular floor plan, divided into two beams by five columns. The main structural elements are load bearing brick walls and an interior timber construc-tion with timber roof construction. The building is four stories high and covered by two parallel hip roofs perpendicular to the canal.

The floor plan of the building is open, with the exception of the ground floor, where there are a number of interior walls. The beams under the floors are supported by the walls on one end and primary beams stretch-ing from one end of the building to the other, these in turn supported by thick wooden columns. There are two sets of columns, dividing the space into three spaces. The inside walls are either plastered or tinned. The floors are made from pine with the exception of the ground floor, which is concrete. The beams are also made from pine.

The two warehouses are connected by means of a small annex, placed in the space between the buildings. This annex has a window on each floor at the side of the canal.



34

top: Ground floor planmiddle left: 1st floor planmiddle right: 2nd floor planbottom left: 3rd floor planbottom right: 4th floor plan[source: Restauro Architecten]

0

0,5 2,5

1 5

0 0,5 2,5

Coerland Building

Lijfland Building



35

top left: Transversal sectiontop right: Longditudinal section

middle left: NE elevationmiddle right: SE elevationbottom left: SW elevation

botom right: NW elevation[source: Restauro Architecten]

0 0,5 2,5

Coerland

Building

Lijfland

Building



36

other page:Characteristic photos of the interior of the Soda Fabriek, indicative of the extensive salt, alcaline, moisture and rot dam-age on the wooden parts [source: own work]

Diagram of the Soda Fab-riek showing the degree of intervention possible and allowable in terms of conservation and in respect to the damage the building has sustained [source: own work]

Current Condition of the Building

It is rather evident that the Soda Factory buildings are in terrible con-dition. Although they have been in use until relatively recently, those last ~40 years of abandonment have really taken a toll on the buildings. Damage causes of course predate the vacancy period, but the lack of maintenance is what has brought it to the ruined state of today.

Both buildings have sunk away from the canal towards the southwest. The problem is extremely noticeable in the Lijfland building where the entire south-western façade is as much as 60 cm lower than the north-eastern one. On top of that the interior finishing, brick walls and wooden parts show severe deterioration due to salt and alkaline damage, most likely caused by the soda production process that took place in there and the fumes and spillage of substances that came with it6.

The situation only worsens with the existing roof of wooden sheathing and asbestos sheets which can no longer hold the rain out and the ex-tensive damage to the existing wooden window frames. This situation is resulting in high levels of RH in the space and the moisture content in the elements of the building. Consequently mould and rot growth has inflicted most of the structural wooden parts quite irreparably.

6 Marialena Kasimidi, Saskia Hesselink, Matthaios Zarmpis, Report on the Soda Factory for the TUDelft RMIT MSc2 course Building Conservation Assessment, April 2013

components neces-sary to be replacedcomponents that could be replaced with new ones in the same form

components that should be conserved to remain in place



37

The survey conducted by Restauro Architecten has shown that due to this extensive damage nearly 70% of the building’s wooden parts [floors, roofs, window frames] will eventually need to be replaced.

The two buildings have not been in use for a while now and the previ-ous storage and industrial use did not require any building services for interior space conditioning. There is no integrated system for heating, cooling or ventilation installed in the building.

Significance of the Building and Degree of Intervention

Before any intervention on a historic building can take place, its signif-icance in terms of preservation needs to be determined. Through on site surveys, literature research and thorough element documentation of the building, one can pinpoint the defining elements that carry its monumental values to this day. Here it is discussed what is considered significant and therefore kept for the Soda Fabriek for the purposes of this graduation project.

The significance of the Soda Fabriek is closely related to the condition of the building. Ideally all parts that can be salvaged, repaired and con-served, should be. However most of the structural and interior elements are beyond repair due to the extensive damage that is described before. For the purposes of this project, the only salvageable physical element of the building is the load bearing brick facades. It seems that with proper conservation techniques the damage can be reversed and the walls can keep on providing an adequate envelope for the resulting Soda Fabriek. All other parts [wooden or otherwise] are deemed too far gone and are considered replaced with new ones. This includes internal floors, parti-tion walls, windows and doors, roof structure.

With all the other interior and structural elements removed the brick facade remains an empty shell, ready for any designer or developer to imagine and realize his refurbishment dream in the Soda Fabriek. How-ever, keeping in mind the extensive efforts taken to save the building from demolition and the reasons behind it, it seems that the building organization and structure should be preserved and remembered. If this cannot be done using the original elements and materials used in the building [which is the case with the Soda Fabriek], the new construc-tion introduced should carry the memory of its past through following its form and structure. Hardly any original material will be kept in the Soda Fabriek through this process, but what will continue to exist is its form and structure. This would be also a way to preserve the ambiance of the interior space with large minimal spaces described only by the



38

The new functions pro-posed for the Soda Fab-riek by Restauro Archi-tecten in 2013 [source: own work]

exterior facades and the rhythm of the windows and the structural col-umns.

The use of the building is also an element that is hardly of any signifi-cance for the area. History itself rendered it obsolete when the facto-ry shut down in the 1970s. That is why the redevelopment that has been planned for the building proposes noumerous new functions to be housed in the Soda Fabriek, more in line with the later developments of that part of Schiedam as a residential area. The proposed uses will need a certain degree of interior space division, and that comes in conflict with the realization that the industrial ambiance of the space needs to be preserved. There has been an effort to minimize this division of spaces and leave the majority of the interior intact. However, the needs of the new functions have been taken into account and a schematic layout has

been drafted to accommodate them. This serves in a later stage of the project as these functions and the corresponding layouts are taken as givens for the simulations that follow.

As a piece of industrial heritage, its original function is not only in-dicated by the space organization, but also from the industrial equip-

wellness center/yoga

bed & breakfast

o�ce space

o�ce space

workshops

horeca

P

exhibition space



39

Some of the industrial equipment still remaining

in the Soda Fabriek[source: http://sodafab-

riek.nl/fotos/]

ment that is still present in the Soda Fubriek. TICCIH7 includes this equipment to the significance of a monument of industrial heritage and recommends its integration into the intervention plans. And the people dealing with the Soda Fabriek in practice are trying to do exactly that. However, for this project the equipment will be considered removed from the building.

Taking all of the above into account, it is evident that the result of the reuse of the Soda Fabriek - as far as this project is concerned - is in fact the reuse of its brick facades. Since these external walls are the only original material left from the existing building, an effort is being made to actually propose no intervention on them if possible. Hence the re-search question: can this building have its energy performance upgraded without insulating the brick walls?

7 International Committee for the Conservation of Industrial Heritage - See the “Dublin Principles”: http://www.international.icomos.org/Paris2011/GA2011_

ICOMOS_TICCIH_joint_principles_EN_FR_final_20120110.pdf - Accessed on 22-11-2014

http://www.international.icomos.org/Paris2011/GA2011_ICOMOS_TICCIH_joint_principles_EN_FR_final_20120110.pdf%20

http://www.international.icomos.org/Paris2011/GA2011_ICOMOS_TICCIH_joint_principles_EN_FR_final_20120110.pdf%20



40


Research Elaboration

41

Intervention Possibilities for the Soda Fabriek and the Simulations

Most people consider thermal factors almost exclusively when thinking of comfort but in fact our general feeling of wellbeing is governed by a myriad of other factors. In many cases comfort considerations are re-duced to the simple matter of air temperature as a guide to our comfort feeling.

Because of the fact that feeling comfortable in a space depends on all aspects of a building’s physics – and the respective human senses that make it possible for us to feel – this project will not focus on comfort but rather on energy. The energy consumed by the building in order to maintain certain standards of temperature within the building. It is important to understand though that this has relatively little to do with actual comfort which will also be clear through the results of the simulation.

As mentioned before, intervention possibilities for historic buildings are numerous and highly dependent on a case by case approach. For this and for the purpose of this project, only technical solutions for the energy performance upgrade of the Soda Fabriek’s envelope in respect to its historical significance will be discussed. Yet even for this aspect of a redesign, it is imperative to keep in mind the original elements or characteristics of the building in question. It is usually the case that interventions on a historic building are determined by the conservation value[s] of the building and vice versa. Those values of a building are being emphasized or suppressed because of the interventions undertak-en for its redesign.

The goal of this project is to determine the effects that various config-urations of the Soda Fabriek’s envelope have in the building’s energy consumption. These configurations are chosen according to the deter-mined values of the building that are worth to be preserved, as they have been discussed in previous chapters. In other words, the explanation that follows, is limited to the envelope alterations that are “allowed” for the Soda Fabriek, according to historical, architectural, structural and damage assessment that precedes this project. Consequently and con-currently, the resulting energy consumption can be the defining factor for the interventions chosen to be finally applied on the building, which will in the end affect its appearance and thus its value and character that is going to be preserved and/or altered.

Five different configurations of the building’s envelope will be examined



42

The configurations of the Soda Fabriek elements that are going to be eval-uated through simulation [source: own work]

for the Soda Fabriek that range from minimal and conventional inter-vention, to radical alteration of the envelope’s build-up:

1. Control Configuration – the existing situation without any inter-vention

2. Wall Insulation – the building with only the exterior brick walls insulated

3. Roof, Ground and Windows Insulation – the building with the roof and the ground floor insulated and the windows replaced with contemporary double glazed operable windows

4. Trobe Wall Configuration – the building without any insulation but with the addition of a glass façade on three sides that creates a ventilated cavity between the new and the original construction

5. Glass Roof Configuration – the building without any insulation but with the replacement of the roof with a glass house construc-tion

1 2 3 4 5



43

The Tool

The simulations have been performed using Design Builder. This is an energy modeling and simulation software that allows for both steady-state and dynamic simulations in an overall simple and user friendly interface.

Input is given in the software in the form of both geometric representa-tion and data entry. Modeling involves generating the actual geometry of a building using surfaces characterized according to their position and function in the building as external walls, partition walls, floors, roofs, windows, doors etc. This allows the user to represent the geome-try of the space as well as visualize it. A strict hierarchy in the geometry and its attributes is followed so that modeled buildings are separated in zones and zones are defined by the surfaces that surround them.

Following the generation of the geometry, input must be given about any construction, activity, systems etc. that occur in the building. The layers of construction associated with the generated surfaces determine the build-up of a zone’s physical boundaries and the relationship be-tween the zone and the outside or adjacent zones. Data about activities and systems are associated with the zones themselves and determine how the zones are used - occupancy patterns affect the energy perfor-mance of the zone off course.

The entire modeling process is rather detailed, however some limitations apply. The modeled building is best modeled in an abstract way, because less detail means less simulations time. In that light the resulting model is an approximation of the building. In addition, the software has been designed to model and simulate the building as a whole and to evaluate the spaces and constructions performance in a macro scale. Therefore there is little information to be handled on details that might become problematic to a construction [e.g. where condensation will happen on a detail of the construction].

For an architect the software can work for both evaluating and verifying a completed design in order to optimize it further - with the help of more specialized engineers - and to incorporate energy information in the early stages of design.

The simulation method that Design Builder uses is the EnergyPlus model, the industry’s standard Building Energy Simulation tool. Main



44

features of this tool involve the following1:

• EnergyPlus is tightly integrated within this module providing advanced dynamic thermal simulation at sub-hourly timesteps.

• Provide environmental performance data such as energy con-sumption, carbon emissions, room comfort at annual, monthly, daily, hourly, and sub-hourly intervals.

• Report solar gains on surfaces, surface temperatures and radiant exchanges.

• Access an extensive range of results for buildings and systems.• Assess passive performance, thermal mass, and temperature dis-

tribution.• Export surface temperatures and airflow rates as boundary condi-

tions for detailed CFD analysis [computational fluid dynamics].• Size heating and cooling systems.

1 http://www.designbuilder.co.uk/content/view/154/226/ - accessed on 06-12-2014

http://www.designbuilder.co.uk/content/view/154/226/%20%20



45

The Soda Fabriek Models

Considering only one technical system for conditioning indoor space [installations as a constant] and a single set of activities taking place in the building, different actions will be simulated individually to im-prove the performance of the building envelope. The energy lost/gained through the envelope and energy consumed for the conditioning of the indoor space and the maintenance of the indoor climate will be the indicators for how these different actions affect the performance of the building.

The Zones

In order to accurately simulate an actual scenario closer to reality, the building has been divided into zones following the proposed schedule of the architecture and conservation firm currently working on the build-ing. However, since the aim of this project is not to redesign a new Soda Fabriek, the arrangement of the interior spaces is rather basic and dia-grammatic, serving only to represent a typical organization of a larger space according to the mandates of the proposed function.

The proposed program offers a diverse range of functions to be incor-porated in the Soda Fabriek, turning into a multifunctional space open to the community for the biggest part of the day both winter and sum-mer. It will in the end contain an exhibition space, workshops, offices, a restaurant, a small Bed and Breakfast facility and a fitness center in an attempt to attract as many people as possible and create a center of attraction for this once industrial neighborhood of Schiedam.

The following diagram shows how the functions are arranged within the building itself. The exhibition space, the workshops and the restaurant are positioned in the two first floors of the building for maximum access to the public, while the offices, B&B and fitness center on the upper floors, more secluded and with greater privacy.

For this project the expo and workshops are considered unified large spaces with flexible plan, able to be modified according to the needs of various users that they may attract. Only on the first floor of the Co-erland building, a space is reserved and separated physically from the expo for gatherings, lectures and other events. The same is appropriate for the restaurant dining space, located in the first floor of the Lijfland building, with a small part of that space closed off for the food prepara-tion area. For the second floor of both buildings, where the offices are located the division of space is more intense, offering open office spaces



46

The arrangement of the new functions in the Soda Fabriek as it has been done in the simula-tion software.bottom to top:ground floor - work-shops, entrance and expo1st floor - restaurant and expo2nd floor - office spaces3d floor - B&B recep-tions, bedrooms and fitness center4th floor - B&B bed-rooms[source: own work]



47

for everyday collaborative work as well as smaller rooms for business meetings or people requiring more privacy for their work. The B&B located on the two top floors of the Lijfland building needs to be keenly fragmented to generate enough bedrooms accessed by a central corridor along the length of the building. On the third floor only a larger space is reserved to house the reception of the B&B and a small common room. On the top floor of the Coerland building, the fitness center is arranged again in open plan able to facilitate different fitness schedules and groups of people, with some smaller spaces reserved for dressing rooms and more private additional related functions.

This arrangement remains constant for all the models and constitutes the zone division in the building for each variation of the building envelope that has been tested. These functions affect the result of the simulation with input concerning temperature and humidity setpoints, levels of lighting required, occupancy density, occupancy schedules, equipment situations and schedules, even metabolic rates of the occupants that determine how people affect the thermal conditions in the space. The diversity of the functions and their position in the building will show whether different functions allow the building to perform differently with different configurations of its envelope.

The installations

The building services constitute yet another constant for the different models that have been examined. The software used allows for a de-tailed modeling of the systems that condition the various zones, some-thing that is very useful especially in the more advanced model of the glass roof.

There is an incredible variety of building systems available in the market and in the software for heating, cooling and ventilating a space. More and more, contemporary techniques come into the building conserva-tion field from general contemporary practice in the attempt to mod-ernize the buildings’ function, increase their energy performance and/or meet contemporary regulations related to energy in buildings.

As is evident from the reference project examined before, conventional heating means like gas are gradually replaced by heat pumps usually combined with an underground ATES [Aquifer Thermal Energy Stor-age] for storing heat and cold through the seasons. Ventilation systems are installed most likely with heat recovery units to minimize heat losses through ventilation.



48

For the purposes of this project, all the models will be tested using a ground source heat pump [water to water] that feeds warm water to two different systems: underfloor heating tubes for the large open plan spaces and low temperature radiators for the small enclosures. These two systems are selected for the efficiency they can provide for heating a space, as examined in the previous chapters. The underfloor heating is ideal for large spaces as it turns the entire floor into a huge radiator able to function with lower water temperatures. The radiators chosen for the smaller rooms will provide concentrated heat adequate for the smaller size, but need to be operating at low temperatures as well, since they are connected to the same heat pump. Otherwise the heat generated by the heat pump would be that required by the higher water temperature, thus needlessly feeding water to the underfloor system at higher tem-peratures than required.

To facilitate adequate ventilation in the Soda Fabriek, a constant vol-ume [CAV] ventilation unit is included in the system that feeds fresh air into the zones through ducting. No heating or cooling is incorporated in this system except the heat recovery coil that captures heat from out-going air and transfers it to the ingoing air. The unit is chosen to be constant volume – meaning that volume of air that is supplied to the

ground heat source

Zones bigger than 30m2 use underfloor heating [water temperature inside in-floor tubes between 30 and 50 oC]

Zones smaller than 30m2 use water radiators [water tem-perature inside radiator 45oC

ground source heat pump [COP ~4]

Air Handling Unit [Me-chanical Fresh Air Supply with Heat Recovery sys-tem - HR COP 0.7]

Glass Roof System Variation

Diagram of the condi-tioning system for the Soda Fabriek as it has been done in the simu-lation software [source: own work]



49

zones is at a constant rate and the temperature of the air is what varies – because the unit only serves to facilitate ventilation requirements of the zones and no other conditioning. However, to maximize the effects of heat recovery, the ventilation unit is set to be sized according to the sensible loads occurring in the building zones, which leads to bigger air handling units, so in a sense it does after all contribute to heating.

The only difference that occurs in the installation system between the models is for the glass roof configuration. While the heating system remains the same, the ventilation system changes slightly to incorporate the roof spaces as sources of supply air for the zones. This facilitates the main climatic purpose of incorporating a glass roof in such a building – to collect heat throughout the year and feed it into the conditioned spaces, as will be described in detail further on.

In all models, the system works in the same way, constantly running to reach the temperature and ventilation set-points specified by the activ-ities during the times that the respective schedules dictate. Once the set points are reached the system is shut off, until the affected levels of temperature fall again outside the tolerance of 2 degrees that is required for the system to start conditioning the building again.

This system does not incorporate any active cooling for the summer months, under the assumption that because the Dutch climate is rela-tively cold most of the year, there is little need for cooling even during the summer months. For those months any cooling is achieved by ven-tilation – natural or mechanical.

Model #1 - Control

The control model is basically a representation of the existing situation of the Soda Fabriek’s construction in the simulation software. Solid brick walls, fixed single glazed wooden windows, a concrete slab for the ground floor, wooden internal floors and a wooden uninsulated roof with asbestos sheet cladding comprise the existing envelope of the building.

This is used as the control condition against which all subsequent mod-els are going to be compared – as well as against each other – to measure the improvements of the building’s envelope.

In terms of conservation, this would be the ideal state in which a his-toric building like the Soda Fabriek would be best suited to continue its contemporary life, after having undertaken the series of actions that



50

would eliminate damage to the building and its materials over time and prevented further damage. This is because it is the closest the building will get after rehabilitation to its original state. Hardly any new mate-rials and/or constructions would alter its appearance and therefore the character people have come to admire as part of architectural heritage.However, in terms of climate design, this construction performs rather poorly. Even through the massive brick walls that measure 25 cm thick-ness, the building loses heat fast during winter and summer.

asbestos sheet

timber sheathing

timber floor boards

timber floor structure

timber roof structure

fixed wooden window [single glazing]

solid brick wall [external]

concrete ground floor slab

#1 Results

Energy Consumption per Surface Area [Heating]: 39.70 kWh/m2

Auxiliary System Energy: 21.21 kWh/m2

Heat Recovered: 39.60 kWh/m2

Set point not met during Heating: 6209.5 h

Set point not met during Cooling: 1343 h

left: Interior view of the model #1right: Exterior view of model #1[source: own work]

Breakdown of the enve-lope configuration for model #1[source: own work]



51

Energy flows for model #1

top: winderbottom left: summer day

bottom right: summer night

[source: own work]

-27.7 kW

-35,6 kW

-15,5 kW

-60,5 kW

-1,2 kW

-9 kW

292,1 kW

-154,7 kW

-9 kW

-4 kW

10,9 kW

-9,9 kW

-8,5 kW

14 kW

-12.4 kW

3.9 kW

4,6 kW

-6,7 kW

3.5 kW

10,2 kW

-6,4 kW

-1,1 kW

-1.3 kW

-17.4 kW

-14 kW

25,7 kW

16.1 kW

-13,7 kW

-6,6 kW

9.5 kW



52

Model #2 - Wall Insulation

One of the key interests of this project is to examine the effects of wall post-insulation on a historic building. This is done with the wall insu-lation model, where the only thing that changes in the previous control model is the wall configuration to incorporate internal insulating ma-terial.

asbestos sheet

timber sheathing

timber floor boards



fixed wooden window

[single glazing]



#2 Results

Energy Consumption per Surface Area [Heating]:39.18 kWh/m2

Auxiliary System Energy:19.34 kWh/m2

Heat Recovered:52.06 kWh/m2

Set point not met during Heating:6001.5 h

Set point not met during Cooling:1708.5 h

XPS insulation 100mm





53

Insulating the envelope elements to reduce thermal transmittance through them is the first intervention that is considered for the energy upgrade of any building. Thermal insulation reduces the amount of heat that flows through the envelope, resulting in reduced heating de-mands in the winter and cooling demands in the summer.

For the Soda Fabriek this means potentially insulating the brick facades, the roof construction, the ground floor concrete slab and the internal floor structures. As discussed before, roof and internal floors will be treated as new components in this projects, and thus insulating them will follow contemporary conventions.

In respect to the brick facades of the Soda Fabriek there are two possibil-ities for post-insulation: Either external [to the outside of the building] or internal [to the inside of the building]. External insulation will not be examined as it completely covers perhaps the only original material that can remain in the building, as well as the appearance of the build-ing which is considered key to both its historic character and that of its environment.

Internal insulation has the same architectural result for the interior spac-es, but it is necessary to be examined, in order to make an educated de-cision on whether the walls can be left un-insulated. This project needs to compare the two possibilities [walls with and without insulation]. Internal insulation in general has the following advantages:

• It eliminates surface condensation for the interior surface of the finished wall

• It reduces or even eliminates infiltration through the exterior walls

• It can be applied selectively to various parts of the building

• It can be cheaper than external insulation

• The treated surface is easily accessible for maintenance

• The intervention is durable as it is not affected by exterior condi-tions and weathering

However its application also entails the following risks:

• There will be cold bridging where the floor and roof beams meet the walls

• There is the risk of interstitial condensation between the existing wall and the insulation layer

• The thermal mass of the solid brick wall is isolated from the inte-



54

rior space and has no longer any effect on it

• It can be difficult to apply it around the wall openings to avoid thermal bridging

In terms of conservation, internal insulation can also be reversible, de-pending on the way it is applied. For larger thicknesses, an additional timber frame can be created, as in the case of the Middelburg School, without permanently attaching the new material to the existing wall. For smaller thicknesses a lime mortar can be used as an adhesive or even a loam mortar for even greater reversibility and the new material is di-rectly attached on the existing wall2.

The amount of insulation applied for testing the Soda Fabriek is a con-servative 100 mm of XPS material, so as not to take up too much from the interior space. This space that is attempted to be saved would be rather insignificant in the larger spaces created in the building like the workshops or the exhibition, but rather noticeable in the smaller rooms created for the office functions or the B&B bedrooms.

Direct consequence of the application of internal insulation is the change in finishing of the interior spaces. The bricks of the walls will no longer be visible creating a cleaner and uniform wall surface. In the model this is represented by gypsum board. Additionally the perceived thickness of the wall at the openings will be bigger.

The results of the simulations are not very encouraging however, as insu-lation by itself, although it significantly reduces the transmission losses through the exterior facades, does not result in a significant reduction of the energy consumed for heating the space.

2 http://www.3encult.eu/en/newsevents/all/Pages/NewsDetails.aspx?entry-id=142501 – accessed on 08-04-2015

http://www.3encult.eu/en/newsevents/all/Pages/NewsDetails.aspx?entryid=142501

http://www.3encult.eu/en/newsevents/all/Pages/NewsDetails.aspx?entryid=142501



55

-28,3 kW

-35,1 kW

-15,7 kW

-11,9 kW

0,1 kW

-8,5 kW

232,5 kW

-141,9 kW0,4 kW

-8,3 kW

-3.9 kW

3.2 kW

11.4 kW

-10 kW

-7.6 kW

-10.4 kW

4.5 kW

4,9 kW

-6,7 kW

8.6 kW

8.8 kW

-6,1 kW

-0,9 kW

-16.3 kW

-15.3 kW

16.1 kW

-11.6 kW

24.1 kW -5.8 kW

0.6 kW

8.6 kW




[source: own work]



56

Model #3 - Roof, Ground and Window Insulation

Insulating the building envelope includes - apart from its structural el-ements [walls, roof, floors] - dealing with the windows on the walls. Depending on the significance, the form and the degree of damage of those parts, there is a range of possibilities involving the frames and the glazing of the existing windows. Maintaining both frame and glaz-ing, maintaining the frame and replacing the glazing, adding secondary windows or replacing the entire window in which case all options for

#3 Results


Auxiliary System Energy:17.69 kWh/m2

Heat Recovered: 66.09 kWh/m2

Set point not met during Heating:5162.5 h

Set point not met during Cooling:1682.5 h

timber floor boards




zinc coated steel sheet cladding

prefab roof panel with 200 mm of XPS insula-tion and waterproofing

layer

operable wooden window double glazing 6-13-6 mm

filled with air


XPS insulation 200mm

sand-cement finishing screed





57

contemporary window frames and glazing types are available for imple-mentation.

Maintaining the original window frames in a historic building will ful-fill the aesthetic and historic requirements of building conservation but will impact the buildings performance in terms of energy flows, moisture resistance and acoustics of the envelope. Nevertheless this is considered to be a sustainable approach since existing material is not wasted. Treating the frame and replacing the glazing can be a sufficient solution in terms of performance, but there might be problems with the frame being too narrow, or the new glazing being too heavy for the ex-isting frame. Finally adding a second window can cause problems with the operation of the original ones and still bears the risk of condensa-tion on the original frame and glazing if ventilation of the created cavity is not thought through.

Despite all this, the windows of the Soda Fabriek are deemed irreparable and considered replaced for this project. This is done due to two facts: the window frames’ extremely degraded current condition [high mois-ture content, salt and alkaline damage, rot, most of them have damaged glazing and some are even missing entirely] and the fact that most of them are inoperable and that would cause problems with the introduc-tion of the new functions in the building as the new occupants will generally prefer operable windows. In the simulations, double glazed windows with wooden frame atr tested on the Soda Fabriek, despite the fact that any other type of window frame would work as well, maybe even better. This decision is made because of conservation reasons, so that the new windows will give an indication of the original ones, both in terms of appearance and material.

For the ground slabs 200mm of XPS material are applied, covered with a 50 mm sand-cement finishing screed to replicate the uniform floor finish of the existing concrete. Admittedly this would be also a suitable finishing for the functions placed in the ground floor – especially the workshops. To avoid replacing the entire existing ground floor slab the reduction of the indoor space height in the ground floor is allowed and accepted as inevitable, as the additional layers are placed directly on the existing floor.

The roof is considered to be altogether replaced by a similar wooden roof structure, though the rafter filling is going to be more complex than what it is now. What is considered in this model is a prefabricated timber frame panel incorporating 200mm of XPS insulating material and water proofing membrane. The finishing of the roof to the out-



58

side is considered as zinc coated corrugated steel sheets, similar to the asbestos sheets that exist there now. The result is what is called a warm roof3 - the thermal insulation of a roof at rafter level. This is done part-ly because the Soda Fabriek seemingly never had a ceiling and the roof structure was always visible from the top floors as part of the interior space. Additionally a warm roof can better reduce excessive heat loss and solar gains through the roof as well as minimize infiltration of that part of the building. If properly designed and applied, the new roof can have no effect on the appearance of the interior space, while from the exterior only the finishing may signify the roof ’s replacement. The fact that anything but its structure can be made prefabricated is also an ad-vantage, as it can be removed at any time for another or better solution.

The windows, like the roof are also considered entirely replaced with wooden double glazed operable windows. The fact that the windows are operable is a choice based on the need for natural ventilation and the fact that the occupants of any building are known to be generally more comfortable in a space whose openings they can manipulate. In addi-tion to the better performance of the glazing surfaces, there are rubber gaskets along the edges of the operable parts as well as the fixed frame, to minimize infiltration from the cracks around the windows. The new frames can be made as replicas to the old ones so as not to alter the appearance of the façade. However a new double glazed window frame made from wood will have bigger profiles and will look bulkier than its predecessor to be able to support the increased weight of the glass panes and to be able to accommodate the various gaskets along its profiles. Therefore the image of the openings will be modified from both the in-side and the outside. But again, as the window frames are a completely separate element from the wall and are only attached on it, they can be removed at any time for another solution.

Insulating everything but the walls has a significant effect in the how the envelope is functioning in terms of thermal transmittance. Losses through the roof and ground are significantly reduced and the heat loss through infiltration is minimized. That is clearly shown also in the amount of heat needed to condition the space in the winter, as the ener-gy consumed in the building for heating the zones has been reduced by 13%. The amount is still small but not negligible this time.

3 English Heritage, “Energy Efficiency and Historic Buildings – Insulating Roofs at Rafter Level”, March 2012, available on http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/professional/advice/ad-vice-by-topic/climate-change/energy-efficiency/building-regu-lations/ [accessed on 25-11-2014]

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/professional/advice/advice-by-topic/climate-change/energy-efficiency/building-regulations/





59

-2.4 kW

-14.7 kW

-8.6 kW

-61,5 kW

0.4 kW

4.9 kW

245.8 kW

-160,1 kW

-4.9 kW

0.5 kW

-4.69

-3.4 kW

6.4 kW

-7.5 kW

-0.8 kW

4.7 kW

-7.6 kW

4.3 kW

5.7 kW

-0.2 kW

-3.1 kW

1 kW

-1.4 kW

-10 kW

-4.5 kW

24.5 kW

11.3 kW

-15.7 kW

-2.2 kW

2 kW




[source: own work]



60

Diagramatic shading study to determine how much sun the facades recieve during an average day and whether it makes sence for a trombe wall to be created.from top to bottom:NE: 4/11 hSE: 8/11 hSW: 2/11 hIn the simulation, the building is considered free standing. Because reality is much different the results on the cavities’ heat gain are presented per facade surface area. As is evident though the NE and SE facades can be approximated as free standing as the surrounding buildings are far enough to leave them exposed to the sun.[source: own work]

Model #4 - Trombe Wall

In this model a radical addition to the envelope is being tested. A new glass façade in the form of a curtain wall is being introduced on three of the facades of the building. On the Northeast, Southeast and South-west Facades of the building. This is done to create a cavity between the existing and the glass facades on the sides most oriented towards the sun, in an attempt to capture heat passively and circulate it in the building. To test the effects of this installation in particular, all other construction in the model remains unchanged as in the control model.A shading study on the three facades has shown that despite the fact that the building is situated in a seemingly dense urban block, there is sufficient sunlight reaching the Northeastern and Southeastern fa-cades during an average of the year [21st of March]. That is because the Northeastern façade is facing the Buitenhaven canal and has no phys-ical obstructions and on the Southeastern façade there is a warehouse hangar in the place of the old courtyard of the building, again leaving a large part of the façade unobstructed.

However the model is tested without any obstructions on any of afore-mentioned facades to determine a best case scenario from which results can be normalized in per m2 of façade. This can give insights for any shape and area that the additional glass façade can take up, rendering also the Southwestern façade capable of assuming this addition.

Working in an additive manner on the exterior of the building has also significant advantages on the complexity of the work, in relation to working on the interior [as with the wall insulation model]. On the covered facades, a buffer space is uniformly created [as opposed to in-ternal insulation, where every beam is a cold bridge], moderately insu-lating the wall and protecting it from the weather conditions.

However, this solution comes with significant issues to consider. First-ly, the appearance of the building will be radically changed by adding this new element on the exterior. Despite the transparency of that el-ement – which will allow for the original wall to be visible under spe-cific circumstances – the view of the façade will resemble more a new contemporary building. Maintenance of the glass façade and cavity is also something that needs special consideration. More importantly however, a significant amount of vent holes is required to service all the adjacent zones. This means a considerable destructive intervention in the building, which on one hand can be camouflaged to be seamlessly incorporated in the brick façade arrangement but on the other is rela-



61

timber floor boards





#4 Results


Auxiliary System Energy: 60.80 kWh/m2

Heat Recovered: None

Heat collected in the cavities[per façade surface area] NE 263.70 kWh/m2

SE 471.83 kWh/m2

SW 380.58 kWh/m2

Set point not met during Heating:7582 h

Set point not met during Cooling:725 h

asbestos sheet

timber sheathing


single glazing curtain wall with aluminum structure

curtain wall reinforced concrete foundation

top left: Interior view of the model #4

top right: Exterior view of model #4

[source: own work]

bottom: Breakdown of the envelope configura-

tion for model #4[source: own work]



62

tively irreversible4 compared to the rest of the intervention.

The structure of the cavity wall will need to reach the ground floor so the added weight is not carried directly by the walls, although not the cavity, as in the lower level of the building there is little or no light. Some attachment though of the structure to the wall will be necessary to ensure stability of the new façade and take up the wind loads.

The results of this configuration however are rather contradictory. The expected outcome would be that the heat accumulated in the created cavities would reduce the heating demand in the adjacent zones and consequently the energy consumed for heating of the spaces. However that is the case only when the sun is shining in the winter, which in the Netherlands does not happen so often.

In the design conditions however this is the case and the sizing of the in-stallation is smaller than the control situation for some of the zones, es-pecially the ones facing to the southeast. However, the limited amount of sun in the winter overall in combination with the smaller size of the resulting installations have the adverse effect in the overall annual performance of the heating system. The internal ventilation happening between the cavities and the conditioned zones seems to be the opposite from what is intended when the sun is not shining, resulting in excessive heat loss from the zones to the cavities, effectively heating up the latter needlessly. Consequently, the heating system presents greater operation times trying to compensate which leads to higher energy consumption for heating over a period of a whole year compared to the control mod-el5.

On the other side, the Trombe wall configuration helps maintain the required interior set points in the summer better that all other models. This happens partly because of the great amount of natural ventilation happening through the cavities. However, because cooling in the con-ditioned spaces relies only on ventilation, there is also an increase of the operating time of the ventilation system to compensate for the great transmission gains from the cavities to the interior zones through the brick facades, which basically absorb heat during the day and keep emit-ting it during the night as well. This constitutes a great increase also to the auxiliary system energy consumed to operate fans.

4 It would be possible to patch the vent holes after the fact yet this would be done with new material made to resemble the original rather the original itself.

5 The results might be far from the expected due to mistakes made during the modelling phase that still remain unsolved



63

-14.3 kW

-46.3 kW

-18.2 kW

-15.3 kW

-24.5 kW

0.5 kW

1.8 kW

314.3 kW

-198.3 kW

-3 kW

-3 kW

-2.1 kW

27.6 kW

4.9 kW

-17.2 kW

-4.7 kW

4.6 kW

-12.6 kW

12.1 kW

-13.1

2.8 kW

-9.1 kW

8 kW

2 kW

-7.9 kW

0.1 kW

-22 kW

-10.6 kW

21.7 kW

-17.1 kW

6.6 kW




[source: own work]



64

Model #5 - Glass Roof

For this model a radical transformation of part of the envelope is ex-amined. With the entire building remaining the same as the control model the only difference is the creation of a glass roof [on both Lijfland and Coerland buildings]. This is meant to work in a similar way as the Trombe wall model. The goal is to create a glass house space at the top of the building – where solar gains are highest – in order to collect heat that will be introduced in the zones to reduce the operation of the heat-ing system and therefore the energy consumed by it.

The configuration chosen for the glass roof is relatively basic, using a steel structure in place of the wooden one and aluminum gables that hold the glass in place and seal of the volume of the roof. This consti-tutes a rather impressive change in the appearance of the building from both the exterior and the interior – if the interior space, namely the top floor, has no ceiling towards the roof. However, the nature of this construction which is again prefabricated and only assembled on site as well as its position on the building as whole, make it a virtually separate element from the rest of the construction that can be altered or removed if deemed necessary.

In the model tested, the roof volumes need to be separated from the top floors with a ceiling, if the heat collected there is to be distribut-ed throughout the entire building. This is a restriction posed by the software used and the method it uses to facilitate this function of the system. The roof needs to be characterized as a plenum zone – a collec-tor – which by default means it is unoccupied and unconditioned. The plenum zone is then incorporated in the supply side of the ventilation system as an additional source of air for the zones that it facilitates. Basically the software mixes the air in the roof with the air in the zones at a rate determined by the ventilation of the zones whenever that air is of higher temperature than the air coming from the air handling unit.




65

As expected this model presents a significant drop in the energy con-sumed by the heating system to condition the interior zones – aprox 17% - rendering the solution of the glass roof quite effective. Howev-er, despite the ventilation openings placed in the roof to facilitate its cooling during the summer months, it seems that this is not achieved effectively and heat from the roof is still transferred into the zones both through the ventilation system and the ceiling of the top floor. This re-sults in an increase of the ventilation system operation for the zones to handle this additional cooling demand which dramatically increases the auxiliary system energy consumed to a degree that it exceeds the benefits from the heating effect of the roof [by 89%].

A slight variation of this model has also been tested and presents itself with even better overall results. In this variation the ventilation unit uses a different sizing method to cover only the ventilation requirements and not the sensible loads occurring in the zones. This results in an even bigger contribution of the heat collected in the glass roof that reduces energy consumed by heating by 32% with relatively little increase in the auxiliary energy used by the ventilation unit [only 110% compared to 89% previously].

#5 Results

Energy Consumption per Surface Area

[Heating]:33.20 kWh/m2

Auxiliary System Energy:

39.63 kWh/m2

Heat Recovered:277.23 kWh/m2

Heat Collected in the Glass Roofs

Lijfland: 349.4 kWh/m3

Coerland: 164.20 kWh/m3

Set point not met during Heating:

5661.5 h

Set point not met during Cooling:

2553.5 h

timber floor boards





single glazed aluminum gables

steel roof structure

Breakdown of the enve-lope configuration for

model #5[source: own work]



66

Sun study made to determine the viability of the glass roof propos-al. Despite the dence construction surrounding the Soda Fabriek, the roofs are not shaded by any other building. To be expected since the Soda Fabriek is the tallest building on the block and the buildings in the general area dont get much higher.from top to bottom:21-1221-0321-06[source: own work]

09:00

09:00

06:00

12:00

12:00

12:00

16:00

18:00

18:00



67

-14.15 kW

-25.4 kW

-33.7 kW

-15,5 kW

-60,5 kW

5.3 kW

3.3 kW

328.7 kW

-208 kW

-19.6 kW

-24.5 kW

-13.5 kW

-6.5 kW

-5.4 kW

-13.3 kW

-6.7 kW

4.4 kW 13.6 kW

11.4 kW

-48.51 kW

112.6 kW

-10 kW

-3.1 kW

-11.9 kW

-17.1 kW

-16.6 kW

35.5 kW

15.9 kW

-28.2 kW

-6.8 kW

44.9 kW




[source: own work]



68

Model #1 Model #2

Electricity for Heating - kWh/m2

Improvement - %

Auxiliary System Energy - kWh/m2

Heat Recovered - kWh/m2

Zone Cooling - kWh/m2

Discomfort - Hours

39.18

1.3%

39.70

19.3421.21

52.0639.60

-74.78-67.78

23432641

Comparison of the five modelsWith red the min & max values suggesting the fa-vorable scenarios for the Soda Fabriek[source: own work]



69

Model #3 Model #4 Model #5

34.61

12.8%

33.20

16.4%

42.72

-7.6%

17.69 39.6360.80

66.09 277.230.00

-75.07 -68.13-142.83

2219.5 26513201.6


Conclusions

71

Conclusions

The different technical interventions on the building envelope have a variety of impacts on the energy consumption for conditioning of the building when they are applied separately. Insulation by itself has no significant change on the annual energy con-sumption although it does alter the way energy is being transferred through the external walls of the building.

Alternative architectural approaches to the buildings envelope can have great effects if designed and incorporated properly on the building and the building installations but can significantly alter the appearance of the building. The envelope of the building assumes a more active role – yet still with passive means - in the interaction that the building has with its physical environment which effectively reduces the condition-ing load the building installations have to cover and thus reducing the energy they consume [mainly in the winter].

Additional Models

Further from the five models assessed previously in detail, there was a number of other models tested for the Soda Fabriek that help demon-strate the effects of various interventions on the building. These models were essencially combinations of the five separate solutions or variations in the conditioning system that show clearly that the more you intervene on a buliding, the grater the results will be to its energy consumption.

A fully insulated model of the Soda Fabriek has been tested, where the effects of wall insulation are much more evident in lowering the build-ing’s energy consumption. Using the same parameters as model #2 and #3 the annual energy consumption for heating is reduced by approxi-mately 25 %. Here, wall insulation accounts for ~12% reduction in heating energy, as opposed to 1.3 in model #2.

Furthermore, model #5 [glass roof ] has been tested in combination with models #2 [wall insulation], #3 [roof, ground and windows insula-tion] and both. The results follow the previous patern, with the energy consumption of model #5 being reduced more and more as envelope alterations keep stacking. Model #5+#2 improves energy consumption by 18% [32.6 kWh/m2], model #5+#3 by a significant 42.6% [22.8 kWh/m2] and model #5+#2+#3 by an impressive 71.3% [11.4 kWh/m2]. This is impressive if one also considers that auxiliary system energy for fans and pumps is not significantly altered from model #1 [control].


Conclusions

72

This graph shows the resulting total energy consumed in the Soda Fabriek, when different envelope configurations are simulated. The red line corresponds to a fully insulated Soda Fabriek [25% improve-ment in energy consump-tion from the model #1][source: own work]

Model variations and en-ergy consumption [kWh/m2]left: model #4right: model #5[source: own work]

The same does not apply however for model #4 [Trombe Wall]. Al-though the model was tested in combination with models #2 and #3, it was found that energy consumption for heating is not affected. It is estimated that this is a result of internal ventilation happening between the conditioned zones and the cavities, which also remains relatively constant in all the respective models.

A model of the Soda Fabriek with the glass house was tested where heating is supported only by the ventilation system, by incorporating a heating coil fed by the heat pump. This system showed by far the least energy consumption in the building for heating even without any inter-ventions on the envelope other than the replacement of the roof with a glass house [21.9 kWh/m2]. However, there was a tremendous increase in the system auxiliary energy [77.6 kWh/m2] which on one hand is

39,70

33,20

32,56

22,77

11,39

Control

Glass Roof

GR_Wall Ins

GR_RGW ins

GR_Full Ins

39,70

42,72

44,62

39,99

41,65

Control

Trombe Wall

TW_Wall Ins

TW_RGW Ins

TW_Full Ins


Conclusions

73

Heating energy and auxiliary system energy in

variations to the instala-tion system of models #1,

#4 and #5 [source: own work]

to be expected, but on the other it renders the option unviable, as the building consumes overall much more energy for its conditioning.

Additionally it was noticed that the method used for sizing the various equipment of the installations also has impact on their energy consump-tion and the way the building performs. Testing model #5 with such a variation of the conditioning system changes the results significantly.

Sizing the ventilation unit according to heating load means that the unit is considered a heating factor in the building and that any air it will sup-ply to the zones will be warm enough to cover the heating load of the zone. Because the ventilation unit used in the models does not incor-porate any other heating means but the heat recovery coil the air sup-plied will be in relatively low temperatures and thus more air will need to be supplied to the zones. This will result in a ventilation unit with much greater capacity than that which is sized according to ventilation requirement and will therefore consume a lot more energy to operate.

Comfort

The comfort levels resulting from the various interventions when those are applied separately are not adequate and do not meet current stan-

35,0

2/6,

06

39,2

2/9,

96

23,7

1/6,

77

39,7

0/20

,50

42,7

1/60

,80

33,2

0/38

,88

ControlT rombeWall

Glass Roof ControlT rombeWall

Glass Roof

Ven la on Requirement Design Heat Load

Energy for Fansopera on kWh/m2

Energy consumedfor Hea ngkWh/m2


Conclusions

74

Thermal comfort graphs according to ASHRAE 55/2014 standard[source: http://www.designbuilder.co.uk/helpv2/Content/Com-fort_Analysis.htm]

Resulting discomfort hours in the various models tested[source: own work]

dards [ASHRAE 55]. On top of this, the chosen system for condi-tioning the building is struggling to keep up with the temperature set in the building resulting in great amounts of time over a year that the indoor temperature is not met. It becomes quite evident that combi-nations of the interventions together with optimization of the building installations are required for the Soda Fabriek to meet the requirements in terms of indoor climate and that individual solutions simply do not suffice.

Thermal comfort according to ASHRAE standard 55/2004 is defined by the combination of temperature and relative humidity within the space in question. Both figures need to be in a specific range in order for the majority of people to find the space thermally comfortable. In the simulations, there has been no attention to the resulting comfort, or the equipment necessary to maintain it. That is why the thermal comfort results are so far off the desirable, and great periods of discomfort are being observed.

2.641,00

2.343,00

2.219,50

3.201,60

2.651,00

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

1.404,002.381,00

2.909,00

#2 + #3#2 + #3 + #5#2 + #3 + #4


Conclusions

75

Soda Fabriek internal gains compared to solar

gains in the summer[source: own work]

Installations

The building system installed plays a big part in the energy consumed [since it is the element that actually consumes the energy for condi-tioning the building]. The way it is designed to cover the conditioning needs impacts greatly on the energy it is consuming. When aiming for the lowest consumption possible, separating heating and ventilation systems seems the way to go. In terms of conservation however, this is not the best option, as it practically means greater intervention and alteration to the buildings fabric to incorporate both heating and venti-lation systems separately.

Furthermore, in terms of installations, cooling seems to be required in most of the models [the Trombe Wall Model seems to be an exception to this, probably due to excessive passive ventilation that happens through the added cavities and the overworking of the ventilation system]. As expected the solar gains the building receives in the summer are relative-ly small due to the small openings on the brick facades. However due to all the functions incorporated in the building and the equipment those require, it seems that there are great internal gains in the Soda Fabriek that raise the temperature in some cases above 35 degrees. It is notable that those internal gains are generally 5 times higher than the solar gains of the building in the summer.

Closing

Interventions are always appropriate to the goals of each project. Lowest energy consumption, energy neutrality, over-all sustainability, conserva-tion are different approaches to the issue of upgrading or redeveloping architectural heritage and can lead to different degrees of intervention on such a building. The approach taken to achieve those goals also plays a big role. Simplicity of interventions, budget, extravagance, appear-ance can have significant impact on how an existing peace of architec-tural heritage is being redeveloped for a new purpose.

Solar Gains16%

Internal Gains [Equipment,

Occupancy]84%


Conclusions

76

This project shows clearly that partial intervention, although it can achieve some improvement on the energy consumed for conditioning the building, it simply is not sufficient. More holistic approaches on all aspects and elements of an existing building are necessary already from the initial stages of re-design, if a historic building is to answer to the issue of energy and sustainability of architectural heritage.


Conclusions

77

Reflections

Theme of the Studio

Early on in my previous studies I have dealt with architectural heritage from the perspective of conservation, preservation and reuse. That is from the perspective of the “architect”. I have always been fascinated by historic buildings and environments. Often it is in their history, the effort and technique that was put into constructing them or sometimes in the atmosphere they have acquired over the years where I find their value to us now. This time, doing the Sustainable Design Graduation Studio, I have had the opportunity to explore my favorite architectural subject from a more practical perspective. Energy has been a central theme of the entire BT track, from Bucky Lab to SWAT studio and now in this graduation studio. Energy reduction, use, reuse and generation have been in the center of all the projects this past two years. And now it has been the prism through which I have re-evaluated the way I see and approach architectural heritage. Reusing an existing building, and one of historical significance at that, is a sustainable act in itself. How-ever, that cannot happen without the appropriate means. This project, has been for me a way to define those means in an effort to make history sustainable. Bearing that in mind, for this project I focused on techni-cal interventions on the envelope of a historic building with the inten-tion to examine the effect these would have on its energy performance. For that purpose I chose the Soda Fabriek in Schiedam as a case study, a pair of historic 18th century warehouses currently under development by a local initiative that also saved it from demolition in 2011. This has already helped me process a technical “toolkit” of interventions which can be applied in historic buildings of this type and age and relates to energy in the built environment. The evaluation of this toolkit has been performed using Design Builder, an energy simulation software. To learn this software and be able to use its functions has been another personal goal from the beginning of my graduation for two reasons: to develop a new skill [not just knowledge and data] through a research project and more importantly to assess whether climate design and en-ergy driven approach can be of significance in building conservation and architectural design in general. This usually contradicts architec-tural practice, where function, form, aesthetics, history and/or context determine a design and climate and energy considerations occur after the fact. However this is the approach mostly encouraged in the Sus-tainable Design Graduation Studio and in the BT track as a whole. And it seems that it is the most appropriate one, if buildings are to become less of a burden to the environment.


Conclusions

78

Methodology

Following the proposed methodology within the studio, I have gone from research to design and back again. Literature research, research on precedence and on the practice of building conservation have provided the basis of my design proposals followed by research by design nar-rowed down to the specific case study of the Soda Fabriek. I have looked into what makes an intervention appropriate for a historic building, as defined by various national and international organizations formed for that purpose [ICOMOS, TICCIH, English Heritage, Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed]. In conjunction with this, it was greatly interest-ing to see what some of those organizations have been working on, and what they propose for the upgrade of the energy performance of historic buildings. Reference projects that I investigated, provided me with a good qualitative and quantitative insights on the contemporary practice in building conservation. Most, if not all of the interventions I propose have been tried in the past and their positive effect on the performance of the envelope has been proven. However, given the somewhat empiri-cal nature of the building conservation field and techniques, it has been difficult to pass objective judgment on all interventions. What works on one historic building, might not work for another, or at least not as well. Hence the comparative study of the “toolkit” has been my main focus in this project. Stemming from the aforementioned research, those solu-tions have been tested with energy simulation software [Design Builder] in order to be assessed from the perspective of climate design. These simulations provide quantitative data on the energy performance of the building, as well as qualitative information about how those solutions would work on other similar buildings of historical significance. Research and Design

As mentioned before the design part of the project relies more on indi-vidual solutions for historic buildings all applied on the same case study [the Soda Fabriek in Schiedam] but examined and evaluated individual-ly. It is not the goal of the project to provide a complete redesign of the case study building but rather to investigate various possibilities for the upgrade of its energy performance. Keeping in mind the research into contemporary practice in building conservation I have tried through this investigation to determine which technical modifications have the greatest impact in improving the envelope of historic buildings. In order to provide comparable quantitative results for the different solu-tions, I have defined a set of constants [assumptions] and variables for the design that have helped me to keep the focus of the project. To start with, the way the Soda Fabriek would function after its redevelop-


Conclusions

79

ment has been kept constant - a predefined set of activities that would take place in the building and a system design for maintaining thermal comfort provide the boundaries of the design. By changing the con-figuration of the envelope - keeping in mind appropriate interventions based on building conservation conventions and the peculiarities of the specific building - I can clearly determine which of those configurations deliver the best outcome. Indicator for this is the data that the simula-tions return on energy. Energy that is consumed to maintain thermal comfort, energy lost or gained through the envelope and potential for energy generation in order to further reduce the energy consumed.

The project within the wider social context

Historic buildings are often still highly operational in our time, most likely at the expense of the environment. Without interventions, their energy performance is outdated and they contribute to the overcon-sumption of energy and the increase of greenhouse gas emissions. Es-pecially in places with long history and intense practice for its conser-vation, like the European cities. It is undeniable that historic buildings are of great value to any society. Not only do they relate to the history and culture of a place and often through past use and function they are quite significant to the development of peoples but also add to the aesthetic value of modern cities and towns. The possibilities of inter-vening in such a building have often been underestimated and oppor-tunities have been missed, mostly because of the hesitation, ignorance or lack of means of the owners. Sustainability through conservation can be achieved in several fields of modern life. It is usual practice that conservation projects – especially the larger ones - are intended for public use or for public showcasing. This has one strong benefit in an economic and social level that extends to an environmental level: The way the building is being showcased as a piece of art, history or science, the same way the interventions towards its energy upgrade should be showcased, acting as beacons of sustainability and energy efficiency and raising awareness on environmental issues. Heritage is widely used all over the world as means to cultivate and educate people on their history. Doing the same for the built environment seems to me corollary for this type of buildings in the age of climate change.


Conclusions

80


References

81

Relevant LiteratureAquarius Ingenieursbureau voor Energie & Milieu, “Energetisch Renoveren van Monumentale Panden in Nederland”, for the International Institute for Urban En-vironment, 1999

Ir. M.H.W. de Gier, “Rapportage Energiemonitoring De Durzame Tempel Den Haag”, Stichting WarmBouwen 2012

Marialena Kasimidi, Saskia Hesselink, Matthaios Zarmpis, Report on the Soda Fac-tory for the TUDelft RMIT MSc2 course Building Conservation Assessment, April 2013

Pereira, Ana Rita. “Re-Architecture: Lifespan rehabilitation of built heritage. Eind-hoven: The 21th Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture”, 2004.

Roodman, D. and Lenssen, N. “A Building Evolution: How Ecology and Health Concerns Are Transforming Construction”. World Watch Paper #124, March 1995

J.Mac Lean, “Soda Fabrieken in de 19e eeuw, Chemisch Magazine, May 1982

Makkersstraat e.o. Een cultuurhistorische analyse en beschrijving, author n.d.

Mike Jackson, “Embodied energy and historic preservation: a needed re-assessment”, APT Bulletin, 36(4), 2005

NESK Eindraportage, De Tempel, Den Haaag, Agentschap NL, 2011

UNEP SBCI, Buidings and Climate Change, 2009

WCED, 1987; Bojo et al., 1992

Yung E.H.K. & Chan E. H. W, “Implementation challenges to the adaptive reuse of heritage buildings: Towards the goals of sustainable, low carbon cities”, Habitat International, 36(3), 2012

Webhttp://portfoliomanager.supportportal.com/link/portal/23002/23010/Arti-cle/36222/Does-building-age-affect-energy-use - accessed on 25-11-2014

http://www.achp.gov/Program%20Comment%20and%20Appendices.pdf – ac-cessed on 21 – 11 - 2014

http://icomos.org/charters/nara-e.pdf - accessed on 22-11-2014

http://icomos.org/en/charters-and-texts - accessed on 21-11-2014

http://sodafabriek.nl/geschiedenis/ - accessed on 27-11-2014 https://www.schiedam.nl/BIS/Gemeenteraadsvergaderingen/22_september_2011/Brief_historische_ve-


References

82

reniging_Schiedam_15augustus2011_Makkerstraat_3en5.pdf - accessed on 27-11-2014

http://sodafabriek.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/201405_acquisitieboekje-web-site_resize.pdf accessed on 27-11-2014

https://www.schiedam.nl/BIS/Gemeenteraadsvergaderingen/22_september_2011/Brief_historische_vereniging_Schiedam_15augustus2011_Makkerstraat_3en5.pdf - accessed on 27-11-2014

https://www.schiedam.nl/BIS/Gemeenteraadsvergaderingen/22_september_2011/Brief_historische_vereniging_Schiedam_15augustus2011_Makkerstraat_3en5.pdf - accessed on 27-11-2014

http://www.3encult.eu/en/deliverables/default.html - accessed on 22-11-2014

http://www.3encult.eu/en/newsevents/all/Pages/NewsDetails.aspx?entryid=142501 – accessed on 08-04-2015

http://www.3encult.eu/en/project/welcome/default.html - accessed on 22-11-2014

http://www.cultureelerfgoed.nl/nieuws/24-miljoen-euro-voor-herbestemming-ge-bouwen-0 - accessed on 09-02-2015

http://www.designbuilder.co.uk/content/view/154/226/ - accessed on 06-12-2014

http://www.herbestemming.nu/international/national-redevelopment-pro-gramme accessed on 22-11-2014

http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/building2013SUM.pdf, accessed on 24-11-2014

http://www.international.icomos.org/Paris2011/GA2011_ICOMOS_TICCIH_joint_principles_EN_FR_final_20120110.pdf - accessed on 21-11-2014

http://www.passiefrestaureren.nl/documenten/bouwwereld-p12-15.pdf - http://www.passiefrestaureren.nl/documenten/Nieuwsbrief_PR_november2010_lowres.pdf - both accessed on 25-11-2014

http://www.unep.org/SBCI/pdfs/SBCI-BCCSummary.pdf, accessed on 24-11-2014

http://www.warmbouwen.nl/, accessed on 06-02-2015

http://www.international.icomos.org/Paris2011/GA2011_ICOMOS_TICCIH_joint_principles_EN_FR_final_20120110.pdf - Accessed on 22-11-2014

http://www.3encult.eu/en/partners/default.html - accessed on 22-11-2014

http://www.3encult.eu/en/project/workpackages/default.html - accessed on 22-11-2014


References

83

http://www.3encult.eu/en/casestudies/default.html

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:De_Tempel,_Prins_Hendrikstraat_39,_Den_Haag..jpg

https://data.knmi.nl/portal/KNMI-DataCentre.html#location=nl

http://sodafabriek.nl/

http://sodafabriek.nl/fotos/

http://sodafabriek.nl/geschiedenis

http://www.bouwwereld.nl/project/energiezuinige-renovatie-met-minimale-isolat-ie/]

http://www.designbuilder.co.uk/helpv2/Content/Comfort_Analysis.htm

http://www.passiefrestaureren.nl/passiefrestaureren-bouwkundig.html

http://www.passiefrestaureren.nl/passiefrestaureren-fotos-casco.html

http://www.passiefrestaureren.nl/passiefrestaureren-fotos-casco.html

http://www.passiefrestaureren.nl/passiefrestaureren-fotos-voor_verbouw.html

http://www.restauro.nl/

http://www.witteroos.nl/frontend/files/userfiles/images/

http://en.climate-data.org/location/50988/

http://www.windfinder.com/windstatistics/rotterdam_airport

http://en.unesco.org/

http://www.icomos.org/en/

http://ticcih.org/

http://www.cultureelerfgoed.nl/

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/

http://www.achp.gov/

http://rijksmonumenten.nl/monument/11991/de+witte+roos/delft/

http://www.envireo.eu/building/30/Huis+De+Witte+Roos/theme/2/Energy

http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext/ accessed on 08-06-2014


References

84


Appendix

85

Rep

ort:

Inpu

t Ver

ifica

tion

and

Res

ults

Sum

mar

y

For:

Ent

ire

Faci

lity

Tim

esta

mp:

201

5-04

-14

16:0

4:30

Gen

eral

Val

ue

Prog

ram

Ver

sion

and

Bui

ld

Ener

gyPl

usD

LL-3

2 8.

1.0.

009,

14/

04/2

015

16:0

2

Run

Perio

d SO

DA

FAB

RIE

K_C

ON

TRO

L

Wea

ther

File

AM

STER

DA

M -

NLD

IWEC

Dat

a W

MO

#=06

2400

Latit

ude

[deg

] 52

.30

Long

itude

[deg

] 4.

77

Elev

atio

n [m

] -2

.0

Tim

e Zo

ne

1.00

Nor

th A

xis A

ngle

[deg

] 33

1.00

Rot

atio

n fo

r App

endi

x G

[deg

] 0.

00

Hou

rs S

imul

ated

[hrs

] 87

60.0

0 E

NV

EL

OPE

W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

Simulation Data Summaries

Note: This is only a very small part of the data generated during the simulations. The large amount of data made it impossible to place them here. For more detailed simulation data and the full scope of the model’s summaries please contact [email protected].

Model #1 - Control


Appendix

86

To

tal

Nor

th (3

15 to

45

deg)

Ea

st (4

5 to

135

de

g)

Sout

h (1

35 to

225

de

g)

Wes

t (22

5 to

315

de

g)

Gro

ss W

all A

rea

[m2]

139

2.45

38

7.18

31

0.76

38

5.62

30

8.90

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

all A

rea

[m2]

139

2.45

38

7.18

31

0.76

38

5.62

30

8.90

Win

dow

Ope

ning

Are

a [m

2]

141.

51

32.9

9 27

.21

27.1

9 54

.12

Gro

ss W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%]

10.1

6 8.

52

8.76

7.

05

17.5

2

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%

] 10

.16

8.52

8.

76

7.05

17

.52

Con

ditio

ned

Win

dow

-Wal

l Rat

io

To

tal

Nor

th (3

15 to

45

deg)

Ea

st (4

5 to

135

de

g)

Sout

h (1

35 to

225

de

g)

Wes

t (22

5 to

315

de

g)

Gro

ss W

all A

rea

[m2]

133

4.11

38

7.18

27

7.89

38

5.62

28

3.42

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

all A

rea

[m2]

133

4.11

38

7.18

27

7.89

38

5.62

28

3.42

Win

dow

Ope

ning

Are

a [m

2]

116.

18

32.9

9 24

.80

27.1

9 31

.20

Gro

ss W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%]

8.71

8.

52

8.92

7.

05

11.0

1

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%

] 8.

71

8.52

8.

92

7.05

11

.01


Appendix

87

Skyl

ight

-Roo

f Rat

io

To

tal

Gro

ss R

oof A

rea

[m2]

833

.31

Skyl

ight

Are

a [m

2]

0.00

Skyl

ight

-Roo

f Rat

io [%

] 0.

00

PER

FOR

MA

NC

E

Zone

Sum

mar

y

Are

a [m

2]

Con

ditio

ned

(Y/N

)

Part of

To

tal

Floo

r A

rea

(Y/N

)

Vol

ume

[m3]

Mul

tiplie

r s

Gro

ss

Wal

l A

rea

[m2]

Win

do w

Gla

ss

Are

a [m

2]

Ligh

tin g [W

/m2 ]

Peop

le

[m2

per

pers

on]

Plug

an

d Pr

oces s

[W/m

2 ]

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

WO

RK

SHO PS

25

9.68

Y

es

Yes

76

6.06

1.

00

141.

50

8.82

10

.200 0

20.0

0 5.

0000

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:C

OR

RID

OR

22

3.34

N

o Y

es

684.

59

1.00

58

.34

20.8

0 3.

4000

8.

52

1.85

00

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:C

OER

LAN

D%

EXPO

30

0.75

Y

es

Yes

10

29.7 7

1.00

23

5.97

15

.56

6.80

00

10.5

6 6.

1900


Appendix

88

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%EV

ENTH

ALL

51

.70

Yes

Y

es

152.

51

1.00

44

.60

3.69

10

.200 0

6.67

1.

5200

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%K

ITC

HEN

53

.33

Yes

Y

es

157.

32

1.00

53

.09

4.41

17

.000 0

9.09

42

.240 0

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%D

ININ

G

206.

36

Yes

Y

es

608.

75

1.00

88

.41

5.04

5.

1000

5.

00

18.8

80 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

5 10

.86

Yes

Y

es

32.0

3 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

4 10

.82

Yes

Y

es

31.9

3 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%O

PEN

OFF

IC E 18

3.13

Y

es

Yes

54

0.23

1.

00

115.

21

8.19

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

3 11

.15

Yes

Y

es

32.9

0 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

2 10

.94

Yes

Y

es

32.2

6 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

1 10

.90

Yes

Y

es

32.1

5 1.

00

11.5

1 1.

26

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

7 10

.51

Yes

Y

es

31.0

0 1.

00

14.7

8 1.

26

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

6 11

.38

Yes

Y

es

33.5

6 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

7 13

.29

Yes

Y

es

39.2

0 1.

00

24.1

3 1.

26

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0


Appendix

89

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

6 11

.06

Yes

Y

es

32.6

4 1.

00

11.2

4 0.

63

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

5 10

.01

Yes

Y

es

29.5

2 1.

00

10.1

7 0.

63

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

4 10

.55

Yes

Y

es

31.1

3 1.

00

10.7

2 0.

63

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

3 9.

49

Yes

Y

es

27.9

9 1.

00

9.64

0.

63

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

2 12

.64

Yes

Y

es

37.2

8 1.

00

12.8

4 1.

26

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

1 10

.74

Yes

Y

es

31.6

8 1.

00

21.8

7 0.

63

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%O

PEN

OFF

IC

E 12

2.61

Y

es

Yes

36

1.71

1.

00

39.6

9 2.

52

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%G

YM

CO

RR

ID

OR

9.

08

Yes

Y

es

26.7

9 1.

00

17.6

0 0.

63

3.40

00

9.09

2.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%G

YM

2 19

4.27

Y

es

Yes

57

9.57

1.

00

76.1

6 5.

67

10.2

00 0 21

.33

1.68

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%D

R2

15.8

5 Y

es

Yes

46

.75

1.00

0.

00

0.00

3.

4000

8.

79

4.21

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%PR

IVA

TE

24.3

5 Y

es

Yes

71

.83

1.00

35

.37

2.52

13

.600 0

9.44

9.

2000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

2 18

.46

Yes

Y

es

54.4

7 1.

00

14.8

0 1.

26

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

1 18

.59

Yes

Y

es

54.8

5 1.

00

27.8

5 2.

52

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

3 14

.27

Yes

Y

es

42.0

9 1.

00

11.5

0 0.

63

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000


Appendix

90

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

4 15

.01

Yes

Y

es

44.2

8 1.

00

12.1

7 1.

26

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

5 13

.60

Yes

Y

es

40.1

3 1.

00

23.7

1 1.

89

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

6 28

.35

Yes

Y

es

83.6

4 1.

00

21.8

9 1.

89

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

7 28

.03

Yes

Y

es

82.6

9 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LJF

LND

%B

%B

CR

RD

R1

82.3

2 Y

es

Yes

25

9.27

1.

00

21.9

6 1.

26

3.40

00

8.72

2.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LJF

LND

%B

%B

RC

PTN

76

.50

Yes

Y

es

225.

67

1.00

20

.56

1.26

6.

8000

9.

56

4.72

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%D

R1

15.8

5 Y

es

Yes

46

.75

1.00

11

.15

0.63

3.

4000

8.

79

4.21

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D8

23.1

3 Y

es

Yes

68

.22

1.00

30

.40

2.52

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D7

29.1

2 Y

es

Yes

85

.89

1.00

14

.31

1.26

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D6

27.3

7 Y

es

Yes

80

.73

1.00

13

.43

0.63

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D5

35.4

8 Y

es

Yes

10

4.68

1.

00

14.8

0 1.

26

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D4

26.4

8 Y

es

Yes

78

.12

1.00

33

.48

1.89

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D2

13.6

0 Y

es

Yes

40

.12

1.00

10

.04

0.63

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D3

16.7

5 Y

es

Yes

49

.41

1.00

25

.61

1.89

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D1

16.5

7 Y

es

Yes

48

.89

1.00

12

.23

1.26

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D9

14.8

9 Y

es

Yes

43

.93

1.00

24

.35

1.26

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D10

20

.85

Yes

Y

es

61.5

0 1.

00

15.3

9 1.

26

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F1:Z

ON

E1

80.2

1 N

o Y

es

82.3

1 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

5.10

00

0.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F3:Z

ON

E1

81.7

2 N

o Y

es

85.0

3 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

5.10

00

0.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F2:Z

ON

E1

81.1

9 N

o Y

es

84.1

2 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

5.10

00

0.

0000


Appendix

91

Tota

l 25

77.1 0

7327

.9 2

1392

.4 5 11

2.49

7.

6320

11

.43

7.08

00

Con

ditio

ned

Tota

l 21

10.6 5

6391

.8 8

1334

.1 1 91

.69

8.37

15

10.6

0 8.

4489

Unc

ondi

tione

d To

tal

466.

45

936.

04

58

.34

20.8

0 4.

2860

17

.80

0.88

58

Not

Par

t of T

otal

0.

00

0.00

0.00

0.

00


Appendix

92

Rep

ort:

Inpu

t Ver

ifica

tion

and

Res

ults

Sum

mar

y

For:

Ent

ire

Faci

lity

Tim

esta

mp:

201

5-03

-24

16:1

5:24

Gen

eral

V

alue

Prog

ram

Ver

sion

and

Bui

ld

Ener

gyPl

usD

LL-3

2 8.

1.0.

009,

24/

03/2

015

16:1

3

Run

Perio

d SO

DA

FAB

RIE

K_I

NSU

LLA

TED

WA

LLS

Wea

ther

File

AM

STER

DA

M -

NLD

IWEC

Dat

a W

MO

#=06

2400

Latit

ude

[deg

] 52

.30

Long

itude

[deg

] 4.

77

Elev

atio

n [m

] -2

.0

Tim

e Zo

ne

1.00

Nor

th A

xis A

ngle

[deg

] 33

1.00

Rot

atio

n fo

r App

endi

x G

[deg

] 0.

00

Hou

rs S

imul

ated

[hrs

] 87

60.0

0 E

NV

EL

OPE

W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

Model #2 - Wall Insulation


Appendix

93

To

tal

Nor

th (3

15 to

45

deg)

Ea

st (4

5 to

135

de

g)

Sout

h (1

35 to

225

de

g)

Wes

t (22

5 to

315

de

g)

Gro

ss W

all A

rea

[m2]

139

2.45

38

7.18

31

0.76

38

5.62

30

8.90

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

all A

rea

[m2]

139

2.45

38

7.18

31

0.76

38

5.62

30

8.90

Win

dow

Ope

ning

Are

a [m

2]

141.

51

32.9

9 27

.21

27.1

9 54

.12

Gro

ss W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%]

10.1

6 8.

52

8.76

7.

05

17.5

2

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%

] 10

.16

8.52

8.

76

7.05

17

.52

Con

ditio

ned

Win

dow

-Wal

l Rat

io

To

tal

Nor

th (3

15 to

45

deg)

Ea

st (4

5 to

135

de

g)

Sout

h (1

35 to

225

de

g)

Wes

t (22

5 to

315

de

g)

Gro

ss W

all A

rea

[m2]

133

4.11

38

7.18

27

7.89

38

5.62

28

3.42

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

all A

rea

[m2]

133

4.11

38

7.18

27

7.89

38

5.62

28

3.42

Win

dow

Ope

ning

Are

a [m

2]

116.

18

32.9

9 24

.80

27.1

9 31

.20

Gro

ss W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%]

8.71

8.

52

8.92

7.

05

11.0

1

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%

] 8.

71

8.52

8.

92

7.05

11

.01


Appendix

94

Skyl

ight

-Roo

f Rat

io

To

tal

Gro

ss R

oof A

rea

[m2]

833

.31

Skyl

ight

Are

a [m

2]

0.00

Skyl

ight

-Roo

f Rat

io [%

] 0.

00

PER

FOR

MA

NC

E

Zone

Sum

mar

y

A

rea

[m2]

C

ondi

tione

d (Y

/N)

Part of

To

tal

Floo

r A

rea

(Y/N

)

Vol

ume

[m3]

Mul

tiplie

r s

Gro

ss

Wal

l A

rea

[m2]

Win

do w

Gla

ss

Are

a [m

2]

Ligh

tin g [W

/m2 ]

Peop

le

[m2

per

pers

on]

Plug

an

d Pr

oces s

[W/m

2 ]

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

WO

RK

SHO PS

25

9.68

Y

es

Yes

76

6.06

1.

00

141.

50

8.82

10

.200 0

20.0

0 5.

0000

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:C

OR

RID

OR

22

3.34

N

o Y

es

684.

59

1.00

58

.34

20.8

0 3.

4000

8.

52

1.85

00

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:C

OER

LAN

D%

EXPO

30

0.75

Y

es

Yes

10

29.7 7

1.00

23

5.97

15

.56

6.80

00

10.5

6 6.

1900


Appendix

95

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%EV

ENTH

ALL

51

.70

Yes

Y

es

152.

51

1.00

44

.60

3.69

10

.200 0

6.67

1.

5200

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%K

ITC

HEN

53

.33

Yes

Y

es

157.

32

1.00

53

.09

4.41

17

.000 0

9.09

42

.240 0

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%D

ININ

G

206.

36

Yes

Y

es

608.

75

1.00

88

.41

5.04

5.

1000

5.

00

18.8

80 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

5 10

.86

Yes

Y

es

32.0

3 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

4 10

.82

Yes

Y

es

31.9

3 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%O

PEN

OFF

IC E 18

3.13

Y

es

Yes

54

0.23

1.

00

115.

21

8.19

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

3 11

.15

Yes

Y

es

32.9

0 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

2 10

.94

Yes

Y

es

32.2

6 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

1 10

.90

Yes

Y

es

32.1

5 1.

00

11.5

1 1.

26

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

7 10

.51

Yes

Y

es

31.0

0 1.

00

14.7

8 1.

26

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

6 11

.38

Yes

Y

es

33.5

6 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

7 13

.29

Yes

Y

es

39.2

0 1.

00

24.1

3 1.

26

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0


Appendix

96

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

6 11

.06

Yes

Y

es

32.6

4 1.

00

11.2

4 0.

63

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

5 10

.01

Yes

Y

es

29.5

2 1.

00

10.1

7 0.

63

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

4 10

.55

Yes

Y

es

31.1

3 1.

00

10.7

2 0.

63

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

3 9.

49

Yes

Y

es

27.9

9 1.

00

9.64

0.

63

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

2 12

.64

Yes

Y

es

37.2

8 1.

00

12.8

4 1.

26

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

1 10

.74

Yes

Y

es

31.6

8 1.

00

21.8

7 0.

63

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%O

PEN

OFF

IC

E 12

2.61

Y

es

Yes

36

1.71

1.

00

39.6

9 2.

52

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%G

YM

CO

RR

ID

OR

9.

08

Yes

Y

es

26.7

9 1.

00

17.6

0 0.

63

3.40

00

9.09

2.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%G

YM

2 19

4.27

Y

es

Yes

57

9.57

1.

00

76.1

6 5.

67

10.2

00 0 21

.33

1.68

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%D

R2

15.8

5 Y

es

Yes

46

.75

1.00

0.

00

0.00

3.

4000

8.

79

4.21

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%PR

IVA

TE

24.3

5 Y

es

Yes

71

.83

1.00

35

.37

2.52

13

.600 0

9.44

9.

2000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

2 18

.46

Yes

Y

es

54.4

7 1.

00

14.8

0 1.

26

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

1 18

.59

Yes

Y

es

54.8

5 1.

00

27.8

5 2.

52

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

3 14

.27

Yes

Y

es

42.0

9 1.

00

11.5

0 0.

63

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000


Appendix

97

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

4 15

.01

Yes

Y

es

44.2

8 1.

00

12.1

7 1.

26

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

5 13

.60

Yes

Y

es

40.1

3 1.

00

23.7

1 1.

89

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

6 28

.35

Yes

Y

es

83.6

4 1.

00

21.8

9 1.

89

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

7 28

.03

Yes

Y

es

82.6

9 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LJF

LND

%B

%B

CR

RD

R1

82.3

2 Y

es

Yes

25

9.27

1.

00

21.9

6 1.

26

3.40

00

8.72

2.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LJF

LND

%B

%B

RC

PTN

76

.50

Yes

Y

es

225.

67

1.00

20

.56

1.26

6.

8000

9.

56

4.72

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%D

R1

15.8

5 Y

es

Yes

46

.75

1.00

11

.15

0.63

3.

4000

8.

79

4.21

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D8

23.1

3 Y

es

Yes

68

.22

1.00

30

.40

2.52

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D7

29.1

2 Y

es

Yes

85

.89

1.00

14

.31

1.26

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D6

27.3

7 Y

es

Yes

80

.73

1.00

13

.43

0.63

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D5

35.4

8 Y

es

Yes

10

4.68

1.

00

14.8

0 1.

26

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D4

26.4

8 Y

es

Yes

78

.12

1.00

33

.48

1.89

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D2

13.6

0 Y

es

Yes

40

.12

1.00

10

.04

0.63

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D3

16.7

5 Y

es

Yes

49

.41

1.00

25

.61

1.89

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D1

16.5

7 Y

es

Yes

48

.89

1.00

12

.23

1.26

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D9

14.8

9 Y

es

Yes

43

.93

1.00

24

.35

1.26

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D10

20

.85

Yes

Y

es

61.5

0 1.

00

15.3

9 1.

26

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F1:Z

ON

E1

80.2

1 N

o Y

es

82.3

1 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

5.10

00

0.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F3:Z

ON

E1

81.7

2 N

o Y

es

85.0

3 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

5.10

00

0.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F2:Z

ON

E1

81.1

9 N

o Y

es

84.1

2 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

5.10

00

0.

0000


Appendix

98

Tota

l 25

77.1 0

7327

.9 2

1392

.4 5 11

2.49

7.

6320

11

.43

7.08

00

Con

ditio

ned

Tota

l 21

10.6 5

6391

.8 8

1334

.1 1 91

.69

8.37

15

10.6

0 8.

4489

Unc

ondi

tione

d To

tal

466.

45

936.

04

58

.34

20.8

0 4.

2860

17

.80

0.88

58

Not

Par

t of T

otal

0.

00

0.00

0.00

0.

00


Appendix

99

Rep

ort:

Inpu

t Ver

ifica

tion

and

Res

ults

Sum

mar

y

For:

Ent

ire

Faci

lity

Tim

esta

mp:

201

5-03

-24

17:0

3:59

Gen

eral

Val

ue

Prog

ram

Ver

sion

and

Bui

ld

Ener

gyPl

usD

LL-3

2 8.

1.0.

009,

24/

03/2

015

17:0

1

Run

Perio

d SO

DA

FAB

RIE

K_I

NSU

LLA

TED

RO

OF_

GR

OU

ND

_WIN

DO

WS

Wea

ther

File

A

MST

ERD

AM

- N

LD IW

EC D

ata

WM

O#=

0624

00

Latit

ude

[deg

] 52

.30

Long

itude

[deg

] 4.

77

Elev

atio

n [m

] -2

.0

Tim

e Zo

ne

1.00

Nor

th A

xis A

ngle

[deg

] 33

1.00

Rot

atio

n fo

r App

endi

x G

[deg

] 0.

00

Hou

rs S

imul

ated

[hrs

] 87

60.0

0 E

NV

EL

OPE

W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

Model #3 - Roof, Ground and Windows Insulation


Appendix

100

To

tal

Nor

th (3

15 to

45

deg)

Ea

st (4

5 to

135

de

g)

Sout

h (1

35 to

225

de

g)

Wes

t (22

5 to

315

de

g)

Gro

ss W

all A

rea

[m2]

139

2.45

38

7.18

31

0.76

38

5.62

30

8.90

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

all A

rea

[m2]

139

2.45

38

7.18

31

0.76

38

5.62

30

8.90

Win

dow

Ope

ning

Are

a [m

2]

141.

51

32.9

9 27

.21

27.1

9 54

.12

Gro

ss W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%]

10.1

6 8.

52

8.76

7.

05

17.5

2

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%

] 10

.16

8.52

8.

76

7.05

17

.52

Con

ditio

ned

Win

dow

-Wal

l Rat

io

To

tal

Nor

th (3

15 to

45

deg)

Ea

st (4

5 to

135

de

g)

Sout

h (1

35 to

225

de

g)

Wes

t (22

5 to

315

de

g)

Gro

ss W

all A

rea

[m2]

133

4.11

38

7.18

27

7.89

38

5.62

28

3.42

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

all A

rea

[m2]

133

4.11

38

7.18

27

7.89

38

5.62

28

3.42

Win

dow

Ope

ning

Are

a [m

2]

116.

18

32.9

9 24

.80

27.1

9 31

.20

Gro

ss W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%]

8.71

8.

52

8.92

7.

05

11.0

1

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%

] 8.

71

8.52

8.

92

7.05

11

.01


Appendix

101

Skyl

ight

-Roo

f Rat

io

To

tal

Gro

ss R

oof A

rea

[m2]

833

.31

Skyl

ight

Are

a [m

2]

0.00

Skyl

ight

-Roo

f Rat

io [%

] 0.

00

PER

FOR

MA

NC

E

Zone

Sum

mar

y

Are

a [m

2]

Con

ditio

ned

(Y/N

)

Part of

To

tal

Floo

r A

rea

(Y/N

)

Vol

ume

[m3]

Mul

tiplie

r s

Gro

ss

Wal

l A

rea

[m2]

Win

do w

Gla

ss

Are

a [m

2]

Ligh

tin g [W

/m2 ]

Peop

le

[m2

per

pers

on]

Plug

an

d Pr

oces s

[W/m

2 ]

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

WO

RK

SHO PS

25

9.68

Y

es

Yes

76

6.06

1.

00

141.

50

6.72

10

.200 0

20.0

0 5.

0000

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:C

OR

RID

OR

22

3.34

N

o Y

es

684.

59

1.00

58

.34

20.3

5 3.

4000

8.

52

1.85

00

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:C

OER

LAN

D%

EXPO

30

0.75

Y

es

Yes

10

29.7 7

1.00

23

5.97

11

.99

6.80

00

10.5

6 6.

1900


Appendix

102

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%EV

ENTH

ALL

51

.70

Yes

Y

es

152.

51

1.00

44

.60

2.88

10

.200 0

6.67

1.

5200

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%K

ITC

HEN

53

.33

Yes

Y

es

157.

32

1.00

53

.09

3.36

17

.000 0

9.09

42

.240 0

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%D

ININ

G

206.

36

Yes

Y

es

608.

75

1.00

88

.41

3.84

5.

1000

5.

00

18.8

80 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

5 10

.86

Yes

Y

es

32.0

3 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

4 10

.82

Yes

Y

es

31.9

3 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%O

PEN

OFF

IC E 18

3.13

Y

es

Yes

54

0.23

1.

00

115.

21

6.24

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

3 11

.15

Yes

Y

es

32.9

0 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

2 10

.94

Yes

Y

es

32.2

6 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

1 10

.90

Yes

Y

es

32.1

5 1.

00

11.5

1 0.

96

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

7 10

.51

Yes

Y

es

31.0

0 1.

00

14.7

8 0.

96

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

6 11

.38

Yes

Y

es

33.5

6 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

7 13

.29

Yes

Y

es

39.2

0 1.

00

24.1

3 0.

96

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0


Appendix

103

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

6 11

.06

Yes

Y

es

32.6

4 1.

00

11.2

4 0.

48

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

5 10

.01

Yes

Y

es

29.5

2 1.

00

10.1

7 0.

48

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

4 10

.55

Yes

Y

es

31.1

3 1.

00

10.7

2 0.

48

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

3 9.

49

Yes

Y

es

27.9

9 1.

00

9.64

0.

48

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

2 12

.64

Yes

Y

es

37.2

8 1.

00

12.8

4 0.

96

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

1 10

.74

Yes

Y

es

31.6

8 1.

00

21.8

7 0.

48

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%O

PEN

OFF

IC

E 12

2.61

Y

es

Yes

36

1.71

1.

00

39.6

9 1.

92

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%G

YM

CO

RR

ID

OR

9.

08

Yes

Y

es

26.7

9 1.

00

17.6

0 0.

48

3.40

00

9.09

2.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%G

YM

2 19

4.27

Y

es

Yes

57

9.57

1.

00

76.1

6 4.

32

10.2

00 0 21

.33

1.68

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%D

R2

15.8

5 Y

es

Yes

46

.75

1.00

0.

00

0.00

3.

4000

8.

79

4.21

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%PR

IVA

TE

24.3

5 Y

es

Yes

71

.83

1.00

35

.37

1.92

13

.600 0

9.44

9.

2000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

2 18

.46

Yes

Y

es

54.4

7 1.

00

14.8

0 0.

96

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

1 18

.59

Yes

Y

es

54.8

5 1.

00

27.8

5 1.

92

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

3 14

.27

Yes

Y

es

42.0

9 1.

00

11.5

0 0.

48

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000


Appendix

104

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

4 15

.01

Yes

Y

es

44.2

8 1.

00

12.1

7 0.

96

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

5 13

.60

Yes

Y

es

40.1

3 1.

00

23.7

1 1.

44

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

6 28

.35

Yes

Y

es

83.6

4 1.

00

21.8

9 1.

44

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

7 28

.03

Yes

Y

es

82.6

9 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LJF

LND

%B

%B

CR

RD

R1

82.3

2 Y

es

Yes

25

9.27

1.

00

21.9

6 0.

96

3.40

00

8.72

2.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LJF

LND

%B

%B

RC

PTN

76

.50

Yes

Y

es

225.

67

1.00

20

.56

0.96

6.

8000

9.

56

4.72

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%D

R1

15.8

5 Y

es

Yes

46

.75

1.00

11

.15

0.48

3.

4000

8.

79

4.21

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D8

23.1

3 Y

es

Yes

68

.22

1.00

30

.40

1.92

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D7

29.1

2 Y

es

Yes

85

.89

1.00

14

.31

0.96

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D6

27.3

7 Y

es

Yes

80

.73

1.00

13

.43

0.48

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D5

35.4

8 Y

es

Yes

10

4.68

1.

00

14.8

0 0.

96

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D4

26.4

8 Y

es

Yes

78

.12

1.00

33

.48

1.44

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D2

13.6

0 Y

es

Yes

40

.12

1.00

10

.04

0.48

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D3

16.7

5 Y

es

Yes

49

.41

1.00

25

.61

1.44

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D1

16.5

7 Y

es

Yes

48

.89

1.00

12

.23

0.96

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D9

14.8

9 Y

es

Yes

43

.93

1.00

24

.35

0.96

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D10

20

.85

Yes

Y

es

61.5

0 1.

00

15.3

9 0.

96

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F1:Z

ON

E1

80.2

1 N

o Y

es

82.3

1 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

5.10

00

0.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F3:Z

ON

E1

81.7

2 N

o Y

es

85.0

3 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

5.10

00

0.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F2:Z

ON

E1

81.1

9 N

o Y

es

84.1

2 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

5.10

00

0.

0000


Appendix

105

Tota

l 25

77.1 0

7327

.9 2

1392

.4 5 90

.41

7.63

20

11.4

3 7.

0800

Con

ditio

ned

Tota

l 21

10.6 5

6391

.8 8

1334

.1 1 70

.07

8.37

15

10.6

0 8.

4489

Unc

ondi

tione

d To

tal

466.

45

936.

04

58

.34

20.3

5 4.

2860

17

.80

0.88

58

Not

Par

t of T

otal

0.

00

0.00

0.00

0.

00


Appendix

106

Tabl

e of

Con

tent

s

Rep

ort:

Inpu

t Ver

ifica

tion

and

Res

ults

Sum

mar

y

For:

Ent

ire

Faci

lity

Tim

esta

mp:

201

5-03

-25

18:2

6:55

Gen

eral

Val

ue

Prog

ram

Ver

sion

and

Bui

ld

Ener

gyPl

usD

LL-3

2 8.

1.0.

009,

25/

03/2

015

18:2

2

Run

Perio

d SO

TA F

AB

RIE

K

Wea

ther

File

AM

STER

DA

M -

NLD

IWEC

Dat

a W

MO

#=06

2400

Latit

ude

[deg

] 52

.30

Long

itude

[deg

] 4.

77

Elev

atio

n [m

] -2

.0

Tim

e Zo

ne

1.00

Nor

th A

xis A

ngle

[deg

] 33

1.00

Rot

atio

n fo

r App

endi

x G

[deg

] 0.

00

Hou

rs S

imul

ated

[hrs

] 87

60.0

0 E

NV

EL

OPE

Model #4 - Trombe Wall


Appendix

107

Win

dow

-Wal

l Rat

io

To

tal

Nor

th (3

15 to

45

deg)

Ea

st (4

5 to

135

de

g)

Sout

h (1

35 to

225

de

g)

Wes

t (22

5 to

315

de

g)

Gro

ss W

all A

rea

[m2]

141

9.07

39

4.52

31

5.02

39

4.52

31

5.02

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

all A

rea

[m2]

141

9.07

39

4.52

31

5.02

39

4.52

31

5.02

Win

dow

Ope

ning

Are

a [m

2]

739.

83

38.5

8 22

5.33

25

1.25

22

4.67

Gro

ss W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%]

52.1

3 9.

78

71.5

3 63

.68

71.3

2

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%

] 52

.13

9.78

71

.53

63.6

8 71

.32

Con

ditio

ned

Win

dow

-Wal

l Rat

io

To

tal

Nor

th (3

15 to

45

deg)

Eas

t (45

to 1

35 d

eg)

Sout

h (1

35 to

225

deg

) W

est (

225

to 3

15 d

eg)

Gro

ss W

all A

rea

[m2]

582

.92

348.

61

61.6

9 11

0.94

61

.69

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

all A

rea

[m2]

582

.92

348.

61

61.6

9 11

0.94

61

.69

Win

dow

Ope

ning

Are

a [m

2]

57.7

8 36

.66

5.76

6.

72

8.64

Gro

ss W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%]

9.91

10

.52

9.34

6.

06

14.0

1

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%]

9.91

10

.52

9.34

6.

06

14.0

1 Sk

ylig

ht-R

oof R

atio


Appendix

108

To

tal

Gro

ss R

oof A

rea

[m2]

885

.20

Skyl

ight

Are

a [m

2]

0.00

Skyl

ight

-Roo

f Rat

io [%

] 0.

00

PER

FOR

MA

NC

E

Zone

Sum

mar

y

Are

a [m

2]

Con

ditio

ned

(Y/N

)

Part of

To

tal

Floo

r A

rea

(Y/N

)

Vol

ume

[m3]

Mul

tiplie

r s

Gro

ss

Wal

l A

rea

[m2]

Win

do w

Gla

ss

Are

a [m

2]

Ligh

tin g [W

/m2 ]

Peop

le

[m2

per

pers

on]

Plug

an

d Pr

oces s

[W/m

2 ]

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:S

WLC

AV

ITY

3.

06

No

Yes

8.

91

1.00

39

.78

32.3

3 0.

0000

0.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R8

23.7

8 Y

es

Yes

69

.26

1.00

0.

00

0.00

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R7

24.1

4 Y

es

Yes

70

.30

1.00

0.

00

0.00

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R6

24.9

8 Y

es

Yes

72

.75

1.00

0.

00

0.00

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R5

35.5

5 Y

es

Yes

10

3.52

1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R4

35.1

6 Y

es

Yes

10

2.37

1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000


Appendix

109

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:N

ECA

VIT

Y

3.06

N

o Y

es

8.91

1.

00

39.7

8 32

.27

0.00

00

0.

0000

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R9

20.0

4 N

o Y

es

58.3

7 1.

00

14.5

0 0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R10

21

.28

No

Yes

61

.96

1.00

15

.19

1.54

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R1

13.1

6 Y

es

Yes

38

.31

1.00

9.

54

0.77

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R2

12.0

5 Y

es

Yes

35

.10

1.00

8.

78

0.77

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R3

15.8

6 Y

es

Yes

46

.17

1.00

11

.59

0.77

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:S

ECA

VIT

Y

5.60

N

o Y

es

16.3

1 1.

00

69.7

9 59

.47

0.00

00

0.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F1:Z

ON

E1

61.6

4 N

o Y

es

52.4

0 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

0.00

00

0.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F2:Z

ON

E1

61.5

3 N

o Y

es

52.2

3 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

0.00

00

0.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F3:Z

ON

E1

61.5

8 N

o Y

es

52.3

0 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

0.00

00

0.

0000

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:SW

CC

AV

ITY

2.

04

No

Yes

5.

67

1.00

27

.81

20.6

4 0.

0000

0.00

00

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%EV

ENTH

ALL

48

.00

Yes

Y

es

139.

77

1.00

18

.16

2.14

10

.200 0

6.67

1.

5200

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:NEC

AV

ITY

5.

71

No

Yes

15

.84

1.00

71

.02

57.3

2 0.

0000

0.00

00

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:SW

LCA

VIT

Y

3.06

N

o Y

es

8.49

1.

00

39.7

8 30

.57

0.00

00

0.

0000

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%K

ITC

HEN

46

.82

Yes

Y

es

136.

34

1.00

0.

00

0.00

17

.000 0

9.09

42

.240 0

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%D

ININ

G

225.

65

Yes

Y

es

657.

10

1.00

0.

00

0.00

5.

1000

5.

00

18.8

80 0

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:SEC

AV

ITY

5.

60

No

Yes

15

.55

1.00

69

.79

56.4

2 0.

0000

0.00

00

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:SW

LCA

VIT

Y

3.06

N

o Y

es

8.91

1.

00

39.7

8 32

.32

0.00

00

0.

0000


Appendix

110

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%7

11.1

0 Y

es

Yes

32

.32

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%6

11.3

2 Y

es

Yes

32

.97

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%5

11.3

2 Y

es

Yes

32

.97

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%4

11.3

2 Y

es

Yes

32

.97

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%O

PEN

OFF

IC E 19

0.39

Y

es

Yes

55

4.41

1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%3

9.23

Y

es

Yes

26

.87

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%2

8.68

Y

es

Yes

25

.28

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%1

14.2

0 Y

es

Yes

41

.36

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:NEC

AV

ITY

5.

71

No

Yes

16

.62

1.00

71

.02

60.4

1 0.

0000

0.00

00

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:SEC

AV

ITY

5.

60

No

Yes

16

.31

1.00

69

.79

59.3

5 0.

0000

0.00

00

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%O

PEN

OFF

IC

E 13

6.16

Y

es

Yes

39

6.50

1.

00

11.0

3 0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%1

11.2

3 Y

es

Yes

32

.72

1.00

9.

08

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:SW

CC

AV

ITY

2.

04

No

Yes

5.

95

1.00

27

.81

21.5

3 0.

0000

0.00

00


Appendix

111

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%7

8.52

Y

es

Yes

24

.82

1.00

10

.29

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%6

10.7

0 Y

es

Yes

31

.15

1.00

12

.60

1.54

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%5

9.74

Y

es

Yes

28

.37

1.00

11

.51

0.77

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%4

10.5

2 Y

es

Yes

30

.63

1.00

12

.40

0.77

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%3

10.9

8 Y

es

Yes

31

.97

1.00

12

.92

1.54

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%2

7.61

Y

es

Yes

22

.16

1.00

9.

08

0.77

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:SW

CC

AV

ITY

2.

04

No

Yes

5.

95

1.00

27

.81

21.5

3 0.

0000

0.00

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%G

YM

PRIV

A TE

24.2

0 Y

es

Yes

70

.46

1.00

24

.81

2.31

13

.600 0

9.44

9.

2000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%G

YM

18

9.38

Y

es

Yes

54

5.29

1.

00

53.0

6 4.

62

5.10

00

7.56

2.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:NEC

AV

ITY

5.

71

No

Yes

16

.62

1.00

71

.02

60.4

5 0.

0000

0.00

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%D

R1

15.3

4 Y

es

Yes

44

.66

1.00

0.

00

0.00

3.

4000

8.

79

4.21

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%D

R2

15.5

5 Y

es

Yes

45

.29

1.00

0.

00

0.00

3.

4000

8.

79

4.21

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%G

YM

CO

RR

ID

OR

8.

11

Yes

Y

es

23.6

1 1.

00

11.0

3 0.

77

3.40

00

9.09

2.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:SW

LCA

VIT

Y

3.06

N

o Y

es

8.91

1.

00

39.7

8 32

.32

0.00

00

0.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

6 26

.33

Yes

Y

es

76.6

8 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000


Appendix

112

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

7 26

.68

Yes

Y

es

77.6

9 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%B

%B

CO

RR

ID OR

66

.09

Yes

Y

es

205.

15

1.00

7.

24

0.00

3.

4000

8.

72

2.00

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LJF

LND

%B

%B

RC

PTN

77

.08

Yes

Y

es

224.

47

1.00

0.

00

0.00

6.

8000

9.

56

4.72

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

5 17

.31

Yes

Y

es

50.4

0 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

4 17

.56

Yes

Y

es

51.1

2 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

3 16

.27

Yes

Y

es

47.3

8 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

2 18

.61

Yes

Y

es

54.2

0 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

1 26

.15

Yes

Y

es

76.1

5 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:SEC

AV

ITY

5.

60

No

Yes

16

.31

1.00

69

.79

59.2

7 0.

0000

0.00

00

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:C

OER

LAN

D%

EXPO

27

0.82

Y

es

Yes

10

75.3 3

1.00

20

9.34

17

.50

6.80

00

10.5

6 6.

1900

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:C

OR

RID

OR

16

0.07

N

o Y

es

492.

37

1.00

31

.93

15.2

5 3.

4000

8.

52

1.85

00

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

WO

RK

SHO PS

26

2.59

Y

es

Yes

77

4.65

1.

00

140.

50

11.5

5 10

.200 0

20.0

0 5.

0000

Tota

l 25

03.3 4

7235

.8 6

1419

.0 7 69

9.59

6.

8428

10

.70

7.30

31

Con

ditio

ned

Tota

l 20

56.2 5

6290

.9 8

582.

92

46.5

9 8.

0114

9.

65

8.64

65

Unc

ondi

tione

d To

tal

447.

09

944.

88

83

6.15

65

3.01

1.

4687

21

.45

1.12

45

Not

Par

t of T

otal

0.

00

0.00

0.00

0.

00


Appendix

113

Tabl

e of

Con

tent

s

Rep

ort:

Inpu

t Ver

ifica

tion

and

Res

ults

Sum

mar

y

For:

Ent

ire

Faci

lity

Tim

esta

mp:

201

5-03

-25

18:2

6:55

Gen

eral

Val

ue

Prog

ram

Ver

sion

and

Bui

ld

Ener

gyPl

usD

LL-3

2 8.

1.0.

009,

25/

03/2

015

18:2

2

Run

Perio

d SO

TA F

AB

RIE

K

Wea

ther

File

AM

STER

DA

M -

NLD

IWEC

Dat

a W

MO

#=06

2400

Latit

ude

[deg

] 52

.30

Long

itude

[deg

] 4.

77

Elev

atio

n [m

] -2

.0

Tim

e Zo

ne

1.00

Nor

th A

xis A

ngle

[deg

] 33

1.00

Rot

atio

n fo

r App

endi

x G

[deg

] 0.

00

Hou

rs S

imul

ated

[hrs

] 87

60.0

0 E

NV

EL

OPE

Model #5 - Glass Roof


Appendix

114

Win

dow

-Wal

l Rat

io

To

tal

Nor

th (3

15 to

45

deg)

Ea

st (4

5 to

135

de

g)

Sout

h (1

35 to

225

de

g)

Wes

t (22

5 to

315

de

g)

Gro

ss W

all A

rea

[m2]

141

9.07

39

4.52

31

5.02

39

4.52

31

5.02

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

all A

rea

[m2]

141

9.07

39

4.52

31

5.02

39

4.52

31

5.02

Win

dow

Ope

ning

Are

a [m

2]

739.

83

38.5

8 22

5.33

25

1.25

22

4.67

Gro

ss W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%]

52.1

3 9.

78

71.5

3 63

.68

71.3

2

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%

] 52

.13

9.78

71

.53

63.6

8 71

.32

Con

ditio

ned

Win

dow

-Wal

l Rat

io

To

tal

Nor

th (3

15 to

45

deg)

Eas

t (45

to 1

35 d

eg)

Sout

h (1

35 to

225

deg

) W

est (

225

to 3

15 d

eg)

Gro

ss W

all A

rea

[m2]

582

.92

348.

61

61.6

9 11

0.94

61

.69

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

all A

rea

[m2]

582

.92

348.

61

61.6

9 11

0.94

61

.69

Win

dow

Ope

ning

Are

a [m

2]

57.7

8 36

.66

5.76

6.

72

8.64

Gro

ss W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%]

9.91

10

.52

9.34

6.

06

14.0

1

Abo

ve G

roun

d W

indo

w-W

all R

atio

[%]

9.91

10

.52

9.34

6.

06

14.0

1 Sk

ylig

ht-R

oof R

atio


Appendix

115

To

tal

Gro

ss R

oof A

rea

[m2]

885

.20

Skyl

ight

Are

a [m

2]

0.00

Skyl

ight

-Roo

f Rat

io [%

] 0.

00

PER

FOR

MA

NC

E

Zone

Sum

mar

y

Are

a [m

2]

Con

ditio

ned

(Y/N

)

Part of

To

tal

Floo

r A

rea

(Y/N

)

Vol

ume

[m3]

Mul

tiplie

r s

Gro

ss

Wal

l A

rea

[m2]

Win

do w

Gla

ss

Are

a [m

2]

Ligh

tin g [W

/m2 ]

Peop

le

[m2

per

pers

on]

Plug

an

d Pr

oces s

[W/m

2 ]

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:S

WLC

AV

ITY

3.

06

No

Yes

8.

91

1.00

39

.78

32.3

3 0.

0000

0.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R8

23.7

8 Y

es

Yes

69

.26

1.00

0.

00

0.00

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R7

24.1

4 Y

es

Yes

70

.30

1.00

0.

00

0.00

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R6

24.9

8 Y

es

Yes

72

.75

1.00

0.

00

0.00

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R5

35.5

5 Y

es

Yes

10

3.52

1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R4

35.1

6 Y

es

Yes

10

2.37

1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000


Appendix

116

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:N

ECA

VIT

Y

3.06

N

o Y

es

8.91

1.

00

39.7

8 32

.27

0.00

00

0.

0000

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R9

20.0

4 N

o Y

es

58.3

7 1.

00

14.5

0 0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R10

21

.28

No

Yes

61

.96

1.00

15

.19

1.54

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R1

13.1

6 Y

es

Yes

38

.31

1.00

9.

54

0.77

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R2

12.0

5 Y

es

Yes

35

.10

1.00

8.

78

0.77

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

R3

15.8

6 Y

es

Yes

46

.17

1.00

11

.59

0.77

2.

7200

20

.00

5.00

00

4.FO

UR

THFL

OO

R:S

ECA

VIT

Y

5.60

N

o Y

es

16.3

1 1.

00

69.7

9 59

.47

0.00

00

0.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F1:Z

ON

E1

61.6

4 N

o Y

es

52.4

0 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

0.00

00

0.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F2:Z

ON

E1

61.5

3 N

o Y

es

52.2

3 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

0.00

00

0.

0000

LIJF

LAN

DR

OO

F3:Z

ON

E1

61.5

8 N

o Y

es

52.3

0 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

0.00

00

0.

0000

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:SW

CC

AV

ITY

2.

04

No

Yes

5.

67

1.00

27

.81

20.6

4 0.

0000

0.00

00

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%EV

ENTH

ALL

48

.00

Yes

Y

es

139.

77

1.00

18

.16

2.14

10

.200 0

6.67

1.

5200

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:NEC

AV

ITY

5.

71

No

Yes

15

.84

1.00

71

.02

57.3

2 0.

0000

0.00

00

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:SW

LCA

VIT

Y

3.06

N

o Y

es

8.49

1.

00

39.7

8 30

.57

0.00

00

0.

0000

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%K

ITC

HEN

46

.82

Yes

Y

es

136.

34

1.00

0.

00

0.00

17

.000 0

9.09

42

.240 0

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%D

ININ

G

225.

65

Yes

Y

es

657.

10

1.00

0.

00

0.00

5.

1000

5.

00

18.8

80 0

1.FI

RST

FLO

OR

:SEC

AV

ITY

5.

60

No

Yes

15

.55

1.00

69

.79

56.4

2 0.

0000

0.00

00

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:SW

LCA

VIT

Y

3.06

N

o Y

es

8.91

1.

00

39.7

8 32

.32

0.00

00

0.

0000


Appendix

117

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%7

11.1

0 Y

es

Yes

32

.32

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%6

11.3

2 Y

es

Yes

32

.97

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%5

11.3

2 Y

es

Yes

32

.97

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%4

11.3

2 Y

es

Yes

32

.97

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%O

PEN

OFF

IC E 19

0.39

Y

es

Yes

55

4.41

1.

00

0.00

0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%3

9.23

Y

es

Yes

26

.87

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%2

8.68

Y

es

Yes

25

.28

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%1

14.2

0 Y

es

Yes

41

.36

1.00

0.

00

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:NEC

AV

ITY

5.

71

No

Yes

16

.62

1.00

71

.02

60.4

1 0.

0000

0.00

00

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:SEC

AV

ITY

5.

60

No

Yes

16

.31

1.00

69

.79

59.3

5 0.

0000

0.00

00

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%O

PEN

OFF

IC

E 13

6.16

Y

es

Yes

39

6.50

1.

00

11.0

3 0.

00

13.6

00 0 9.

01

11.7

70 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%1

11.2

3 Y

es

Yes

32

.72

1.00

9.

08

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:SW

CC

AV

ITY

2.

04

No

Yes

5.

95

1.00

27

.81

21.5

3 0.

0000

0.00

00


Appendix

118

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%7

8.52

Y

es

Yes

24

.82

1.00

10

.29

0.00

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%6

10.7

0 Y

es

Yes

31

.15

1.00

12

.60

1.54

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%5

9.74

Y

es

Yes

28

.37

1.00

11

.51

0.77

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%4

10.5

2 Y

es

Yes

30

.63

1.00

12

.40

0.77

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%3

10.9

8 Y

es

Yes

31

.97

1.00

12

.92

1.54

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

2.SE

CO

ND

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%2

7.61

Y

es

Yes

22

.16

1.00

9.

08

0.77

13

.600 0

9.01

11

.770 0

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:SW

CC

AV

ITY

2.

04

No

Yes

5.

95

1.00

27

.81

21.5

3 0.

0000

0.00

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%G

YM

PRIV

A TE

24.2

0 Y

es

Yes

70

.46

1.00

24

.81

2.31

13

.600 0

9.44

9.

2000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%G

YM

18

9.38

Y

es

Yes

54

5.29

1.

00

53.0

6 4.

62

5.10

00

7.56

2.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:NEC

AV

ITY

5.

71

No

Yes

16

.62

1.00

71

.02

60.4

5 0.

0000

0.00

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%D

R1

15.3

4 Y

es

Yes

44

.66

1.00

0.

00

0.00

3.

4000

8.

79

4.21

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%D

R2

15.5

5 Y

es

Yes

45

.29

1.00

0.

00

0.00

3.

4000

8.

79

4.21

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:CO

ERLA

ND

%G

YM

CO

RR

ID

OR

8.

11

Yes

Y

es

23.6

1 1.

00

11.0

3 0.

77

3.40

00

9.09

2.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:SW

LCA

VIT

Y

3.06

N

o Y

es

8.91

1.

00

39.7

8 32

.32

0.00

00

0.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

6 26

.33

Yes

Y

es

76.6

8 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000


Appendix

119

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

7 26

.68

Yes

Y

es

77.6

9 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%B

%B

CO

RR

ID OR

66

.09

Yes

Y

es

205.

15

1.00

7.

24

0.00

3.

4000

8.

72

2.00

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LJF

LND

%B

%B

RC

PTN

77

.08

Yes

Y

es

224.

47

1.00

0.

00

0.00

6.

8000

9.

56

4.72

00

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

5 17

.31

Yes

Y

es

50.4

0 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

4 17

.56

Yes

Y

es

51.1

2 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

3 16

.27

Yes

Y

es

47.3

8 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

2 18

.61

Yes

Y

es

54.2

0 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:LIJ

FLA

ND

%R

1 26

.15

Yes

Y

es

76.1

5 1.

00

0.00

0.

00

2.72

00

20.0

0 5.

0000

3.TH

IRD

FLO

OR

:SEC

AV

ITY

5.

60

No

Yes

16

.31

1.00

69

.79

59.2

7 0.

0000

0.00

00

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:C

OER

LAN

D%

EXPO

27

0.82

Y

es

Yes

10

75.3 3

1.00

20

9.34

17

.50

6.80

00

10.5

6 6.

1900

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:C

OR

RID

OR

16

0.07

N

o Y

es

492.

37

1.00

31

.93

15.2

5 3.

4000

8.

52

1.85

00

0.G

RO

UN

DFL

OO

R:L

IJFL

AN

D%

WO

RK

SHO PS

26

2.59

Y

es

Yes

77

4.65

1.

00

140.

50

11.5

5 10

.200 0

20.0

0 5.

0000

Tota

l 25

03.3 4

7235

.8 6

1419

.0 7 69

9.59

6.

8428

10

.70

7.30

31

Con

ditio

ned

Tota

l 20

56.2 5

6290

.9 8

582.

92

46.5

9 8.

0114

9.

65

8.64

65

Unc

ondi

tione

d To

tal

447.

09

944.

88

83

6.15

65

3.01

1.

4687

21

.45

1.12

45

Not

Par

t of T

otal

0.

00

0.00

0.00

0.

00


Appendix

120

interventions for the sustainable development of architectural heritage - the soda fabriek

Documents