High Flexibility/Low Energy Use Laboratories
Jonathan Friedan and Stephen
Bartlett, Ballinger
Best practice for research building design includes
planning for flexibility in use and occupation to prolong the useful
life of the built project. Anticipating changing research needs
requires a further level of forethought if one also wants to ensure
that the building systems installed to best satisfy first use requirements
remain energy-efficient over time. This presentation will track
the application of four flexibility planning strategies, along with
corresponding considerations for maximizing energy efficiency.
The planning flexibility features considered will include:
- Collective open plan laboratories in conjunction with alcove
spaces.
- Customized laboratory support and linear equipment rooms.
- The ability to flex space between wet and dry research over
time.
- Including appropriate interaction space.
Each of these building planning concepts is considered using case
studies to illustrate the applicability of different systems strategies
for energy efficiency. In each case, specific end user requirements
and equipment needs tipped the balance in favor of one systems response
over another. Techniques used to maximize energy efficiency include:
run around energy recovery loops, total energy recovery wheels,
low flow fume hoods, chilled beams, and others.
Case study projects will include research buildings either recently
completed or currently under design by the presenters for the University
of Pennsylvania, the University of Maryland, Brown University, Johns
Hopkins University, Virginia Commonwealth University, Temple University,
and Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. All of these projects
employ the flexibility features listed above, but each is realized
differently due to specific end user requirements.
From this presentation, audience members will:
- Be exposed to the range of energy efficiency options available
for biomedical research facilities with an emphasis on what makes
one system more appropriate than another for a given situation.
- See comparative life cycle energy cost modeling as a tool to
compare the advantages of different systems applied to case study
examples.
- Get an overall sense of current energy efficiency targets appropriate
to the technology available today.
- Estimate the impact one can anticipate by employing different
systems strategies in their own projects.
Biographies:
Jonathan Friedan
has spearheaded the engineering systems programming, planning, and
design of major corporate, academic, healthcare, and research facilities
for Ballinger over the past sixteen years. Jonathan wrote the engineering
sections of the National Science Foundation guidebook on research
facility planning and has given numerous lectures nationwide on
sustainable HVAC design and retrofit strategies. He has been the
recipient of national technology awards from ASHRAE and regional
awards for campus master planning from the International Society
for Pharmaceutical Engineering.
Stephen Bartlett is
a Ballinger studio leader with extensive experience in both Europe
and the United States, primarily in academic, medical, and corporate
research facilities. As a result of his European experience, Stephen
has developed a keen interest in technologically sophisticated buildings
integrating architecture, engineering, and sustainable design.
Back to Agenda
|
