HOSPITAL PATIENT ROOM DESIGN FOR
DESERT CLIMATES:
EFFECT OF ROOM SHAPE ON
WINDOW DESIGN FOR DAYLIGHTING
by
AHMED SHERIF, HANAN SABRY, RASHA ARAFA and AYMAN WAGDY
Presented by:
AHMED SHERIF
Doctor Arch., Intl. Assoc. AIA
Professor of Architecture, The American University in Cairo, Egypt
Alternative Inpatient Room Plans
Outboard Bathroom
Introduction
Problem Definition
Nested Bathroom
Objective
Methodology
Inboard Bathroom
Results
Conclusion
Desert Environment
High Solar Exposure
Desert Environment
High Solar Heat Gain
Non-Uniform Lighting
High Potential for Glare Occurrence
Objective
Address the influence of hospital
patient room layout on the
achievement of acceptable
daylighting performance and
visual comfort.
The aim is to identify the range of
Window-to-Wall Ratios that suit
each room design.
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Methodology
A Typical Assumed Patient Room,
Facing South Orientation, In Cairo, Egypt.
Measure at Working Planes (300 Lx – 3000 Lx)
- Bed level Surface
- Bed Area Surface
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Methodology
Seventeen Window-to-Wall Ratios (10% : 90%) (WWR)
Sun breaker at a protection angle of 45°
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Daylight Availability
Methodology
Simulation Analysis
Rhino, Diva (Radiance- Daysim- EverglareEnergyPlus)
Daylight Availability Criteria
“Daylit” area: Recommended illuminance (300 Lx on
tested sruface) ≥ 50% of the occupied hours in the
year.
“Over lit” area: Illuminance levels above 10 (300 Lx)
times the recommended illuminance ≥ 5% of the
occupied hours in the year.
“Partially Daylit” area: Recommended illuminance <
50% of the occupied hours in the year.
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Results
Results
Design A: The Outboard Bathroom
Criteria: Daylit area
< 50% 0f the space and
100% of the bed area
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Results
Design B: The Nested Bathroom
at a protection angle of 45°
Criteria: Daylit area
< 50% 0f the space and
100% of the bed area
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Results
Design C: The Inboard Bathroom
Criteria: Daylit area <
50% 0f the space and
100% of the bed area
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Results
Comparison between Glazing Types and Shading System:
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Prevention of Disturbing Glare
Results
Glare Probability
Analysis
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Results
Glare Probability Analysis
Design B: The Nested Bathroom WWR 75%
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Results
Glare Probability Analysis
Design C: The Inboard Bathroom WWR 70%
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Balancing Daylighting and
Energy Performance
Results
Comparison of Thermal performance for design A, B and C:
Highest 190 Kwh/m2 – Lowest 172 Kwh/m2 - 8% difference
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Results
Comparison of Thermal performance for design A, B and C:
Highest 182 Kwh/m2 – Lowest 145 Kwh/m2 - 21% difference
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Results
Comparison of Thermal performance for design A, B and C:
Highest 185 Kwh/m2 – Lowest 155 Kwh/m2 - 17% difference
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Results
Balance between Daylight and Thermal performance for design A:
Accepted WWR for Design A:Daylighting:
Thermal :
balance:
Introduction
70% : 90%
40% : 90%
70% :90%
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Results
Balance between Daylight and Thermal performance for design B:
Accepted WWR for Design B:Daylighting: 30% : 90%
Thermal : 25% : 45%
Balance : 30% :45%
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
Results
Balance between Daylight and Thermal performance for design C:
Accepted WWR for Design C:Daylighting: 30% : 90%
Thermal : 30% : 40%
Balance : 30% :40%
Introduction
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Results
Conclusion
ONGOING RESEARCH
Balancing Daylighting
and External View
Design of Patient Room Wall and Window Openings
by Performative Design Optimization
Optimization by use of
Grasshopper + Galapagos Software
Consideration of View Exposure
Modeling cone of vision
Parametric Modeling With Grasshopper Software
Result 1
View Factor = 25.34%
Result 2
View Factor = 27.54%
Result 3
View Factor = 30.67%
Result 4
View Factor = 32.17%
Result 5
View Factor = 38.26%
Conclusion
Accepted Window to Wall Ratios
Design A:
Daylighting:
Thermal :
Balance:
Introduction
Design C:-
Design B:
70% : 90% Daylighting: 30% : 90%
40% : 90% Thermal : 25% : 45%
70% :90% Balance : 30% :45%
Problem Definition
Objective
Methodology
Daylighting: 30% : 90%
Thermal : 30% : 40%
Balance : 30% :40%
Results
Conclusion
Potential for innovative designs based on performance
Conclusions
•
Simulation can
help designers
arrive at most
efficient window
size and shape.
•
There is great
potential for
performative
design tools in
generating
innovative designs
THANK YOU
Ahmed Sherif
[email protected]