1 / 34

Tulane, Louisiana

Tulane, Louisiana. Cornerstone Design Project Group: C09004 Matt Piatkowski – Foundation Engineer Don Lucas – Structural Engineer Dan Scannell – Architectural Engineer Ian Donahue – Building Thermal Engineer Evan Brent – Fluid System Engineer. Structural Analysis. Raw Materials

thanos
Télécharger la présentation

Tulane, Louisiana

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Tulane, Louisiana Cornerstone Design Project Group: C09004 Matt Piatkowski– Foundation Engineer Don Lucas – Structural Engineer Dan Scannell– Architectural Engineer Ian Donahue – Building Thermal Engineer Evan Brent – Fluid System Engineer

  2. Structural Analysis • Raw Materials • Wooden Truss vs. Steel Truss • Asphalt Shingles vs. Clay Tiling • Underlayment • Truss Design • Accommodate ‘Great Room’ • Provide some storage space • Manufacture Style • Prefabricated • Custom built

  3. Structural Analysis • Prefabricated Room-in-Attic • Ideal angle: 36° • Usable Area: 972 ft2 • Maximum Height: 12 ft • Load from shingles: ~6,000 lbs http://www.northlandtrusssystems.com/images/room_in_attic_big.gif

  4. Foundation Analysis • General Information: • Full, walkout basement • Storage and living space • Stepped footing • Waterproofing • Backfilled to promote drainage

  5. Foundation Analysis • Material options: • Wood, Poured Concrete, Cinderblock, Metal, Brick, Stone • Considerations: • Strength, durability, cost, appearance, installation time

  6. Foundation Analysis • The relative advantage of each material in each area needing consideration is analyzed. • Materials are ranked from 1 to 6, with 6 being best. • Results are tabulated for easier comparison.

  7. Foundation Analysis

  8. Foundation Analysis • Final Material Choice: Cinderblock • Due to its excellent strength and durability, cinderblock framing will provide a good foundation for the house. • Relatively lower pricing and easier installation provide homeowner with savings in cost and time. • Cinderblocks will be reinforced to increase tensile strength.

  9. Architectural Engineering • House Construction: • 2x6 construction or 2x4 construction for exterior walls • 2x6 has more potential for insulation than 2x4 • Ceiling height, 8ft or 10ft • 10ft ceilings allow for better circulation of hot air during summer • House Layout: • Atrium: • in center of house or offset • if center than two wings to house typical colonial layout • if offset than layout is unique • 1st floor: • Rooms: living room, bathroom, kitchen, office, atrium • Bathroom has to exit to hallway: building code • 2nd floor: • Rooms: 2 bedrooms, master bedroom, bathroom

  10. Evan B. Brent Fluid Systems Engineer Source: piping3.dwg, courtesy Glen Brent, P.E. Fluid Systems Design

  11. Purpose of System • To quietly, efficiently move heat from the solar thermal panels to the storage system. • To provide adequate storage of heat for the general operating of the domestic hot water and space heating needs of the house.

  12. Rough System Overview • Water is pumped to the collectors on the roof and gains heat there. • Hot water flows into a heat exchanger in a heat storage tank in the basement, and is then begins the cycle again. • Heat is pulled from the heat storage tank via two other coils, one for DHW, one for space heating, and pumped/zoned as specified by homeowner.

  13. Heat Storage Tank • Provides long term storage for overnight/multi-day use of space heating and DHW • Can be heated from multiple sources easily, without changing SH or DHW side of system. (Solar, Conventional, Geothermal, Wood Boiler, etc) • Downside: Can take up a lot of space. Sources: Personal experience, interview with Glen Brent, P.E.

  14. Design Method • Idea: Solar Only system • Requirements: Maintain normal use of DHW and SH even in coldest weather (33 F), using only the BTU's supplied by the solar thermal system. • A 625 gallon storage tank (estimated) with a working temperature range of 120 F to 190F has 8.34*625*(190-120) BTUs of energy stored, which is 364875 BTU's, which is less than 4.5 hours of just space heating for the house, based on estimated Heat Load (86339 BTU/hr) • Conclusion: Solar Only system not viable unless solar thermal system can put out significant BTU/hr even under design temp., and storage tank BTU capacity can be increased. 1993 ASHRAE Handbook Fundamentals Climatic data for New O. the winter design temp is 33 deg. F., median annual extreme low temp is 27. Basic heat load estimated from calculator found at http://www.heatload.com/unico/heatloadpreform.htm (10/19/09)

  15. Options, Given No Solar Only • Integration of a simple conventional oil furnace or gas furnace, for heating the heat storage tank via a separate heat exchanger. (hands off system, works without any effort by homeowner) • Integration of a wood/coal fired boiler (more effort, but inexpensive) • Integration of a geothermal system (highly expensive, but green) Photo: http://www.daigleoil.com/images/Tarmsoloplus.gif

  16. Component choices • Pump: Taco 00 controlled circulator pump series, or similar. Also considering Taco Solar Pumping Station. Decision will be made based on cost analysis and final system layout/head value. • Heat Storage Tank: Size and type to be determined by final Heat Load and Solar Thermal BTU/hr, given design method discussed. • Pipe: Most likely 1” or 3/4” copper. Safe in an overheat situation, cost is not prohibitive, all major system components are built to mate with it, no plastic taste. • Miscellaneous components such as Check Valves, Expansion tanks, Zone Valves, Air Purgers, Aqua Stats, etc will be determined as final house and solar design is nailed down. Sources: Personal experience, interview with Glen Brent, P.E. Photos:http://www.taco-hvac.com/en/products/Water%20Circulation%20Pumps%20%26amp%3B%20Circulators/products.html?current_category=18 10/21/09

  17. Building Thermal By: Ian Donahue

  18. Home Backround • The framing and insulation contribute to the buildings energy efficiency. • Home is located in Tulane, LA and is a Zone 2 hot-humid climate. • The location encounters hurricanes and storms, along with having pest issues. • The highest average temperature: 90.6°F • The lowest average temperature: 41.8°F • Design temperature differential: 23°F

  19. Design Considerations • Since Tulane is located in an area that sees hurricanes and other tropical storms a strong house is probably needed. • Cheap/efficient construction should be utilized. • The ability resist moisture damage as well as pest problems is a plus in this region of the country.

  20. Designs • Wood Framing • 16” oc construction • Conventional Siding • 2x6” Wood Studs • Metal Framing • 24” oc construction • Poured Concrete • Cold Formed Steel C-Channels

  21. Recommended R-Values

  22. Proposed Materials

  23. More Design • This is a preliminary design and the floor and ceiling are yet to be completed. • This design will need to be checked and verified from a computer model.

  24. References • http://www.steelframing.org/PDF/IssuePapers/InteriorWalls.pdf • http://www.steelframing.org/PDF/FinalDesignGuideSept82008.pdf • http://www.coloradoenergy.org/procorner/stuff/r-values.htm • http://www.huduser.org/Publications/pdf/sfmh_rpt.pdf • http://www.steelframing.org/PDF/SFA_Framing_Guide_final%202.pdf • http://www.oikos.com/esb/36/Corrfact.html • http://www.efficientwindows.org/glazing_.cfm?id=8 • http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/building_america/34560.pdf • http://www.ornl.gov/cgi-bin/cgiwrap?user=roofs&script=ZipTable/ins_fact.pl

  25. Solar Thermal

  26. Viessmann Manufacturing Company Inc.

  27. Apricus Solar Company, Ltd.

  28. Optimal Collector Angle Apricus Viessmann 300

  29. Viessmann 300-T(3m) N = 12, Φ= 38o, U = 255 gal

  30. Apricus AP-22N = 16, Φ = 29o, U = 255 gal

  31. Viessmann 100-F C = $30.24/ft2, U = 255 gal

More Related