Architectural consequences of natural ventilation

Three case buildings have been investigated: two office buildings (the GSW Headquarters and the B&O Headquarters) and one school building (the Media primary school). Their respective design teams (architect and HVAC/energy consultant) were also interviewed. In addition to the three case study buildings, a number of other buildings were also investigated, but in those cases in less detail.

GSW Headquarters

Figure 2 The Gemeinnutzige Siedlungs — und Wohnungsbaugesellschaft (GSW) Headquarters, (1999) in Berlin, Germany was designed by Sauerbruch Hutton Architects and Arup (HVAC/energy consultant). The 22 story tall building is characterised by a double facade towards the west that utilises solar energy to boost the thermal bouyancy in the cavity, which in turn suck air out of the building. Fresh air is provided through a myriad of ventilation inlets in the east facade. The plan of the highrise is narrow (11.5-15 m) to facilitate utilisation of daylight and natural ventilation 4 5 6.

B&O Headquarters

Figure 3 The Bang & Olufsen (B&O) Headquarters, (1998) in Struer, Denmark was designed by KHR AS Architects and Birch & Krogboe AS (HVAC/energy consultant). The naturally ventilated southern office wing is characterised by being elevated as well as having an extremely light appearance from the court (made possible by the absence of suspended ceilings and ducts familiar to mechanical ventilation systems). The north facade of this wing also has a band of narrow openable windows in front of each floor slab serving as ventilation inlets. The interior spaces are used as airpath. Two stairwells are used as extract chimneys.

The ventilation concept is totaly integrated in the building structure, the building appears not to have a ventilation system at all ~7,8 9.