Climate Zone Hot and Dry
Solar Passive Design Building, Dr. Reddy’s Lab. Ltd- IPDO
- Innovation Plaza, Hyderabad
General Information:
Client: Dr. Reddy’s laboratories Ltd- IPDO - Innovation Plaza
City: Hyderabad
Climate: Hot & Dry
Operational schedule – 8h 30 min, 5 working days a week
Area of the building: 25, 682.6m²
Green Building Design Features:
Building Design
Orientation
- The longer façade on N-S orientation and least exposure
on west helped to reduce the solar heat gains in this hot
climate region
- The store and wash Buffer areas act against intense solar
radiation
|
Landscape & water bodies
- Existing landscape preserved and integrated with the built
spaces
-
The built areas are integrated with lot of greenery and water bodies
- Roof A, B and C have skylights made from translucent
asbestos sheet
-
Existing landscape preserved with the built spaces makes all working areas as naturally ventilated areas which do not require any air conditioning.
- The reception areas as well as research building blocks
are surrounded by water bodies, major modifiers of micro-climate
which helps in maintaining thermally comfortable circulation
areas and semi-open areas.
|
| |
Building Envelope |
Walls
Service areas along external walls act as buffer zone and prevent
external conduction gain, thereby reducing the cooling load of the
building |
| |
Roof
150 mm concrete slab with cement tile |
Windows
Single glazed blue grey 6mm windows
Tinted glass with shading on all windows helps
in reducing solar heat gain and also the problem of glare.
|
|
Day light integration
- Natural day light integration through skylights in all the
spaces between the labs and circulation areas which makes the
spaces require no artificial light during day time
- Inner glass partitions also help integrate daylight for outside
circulation areas.
|
Lighting system
- 8.08% of the total connected load for the building.
- Luminaries used mostly – FTLs (Fluorescent tube lights), MHs
(Metal Halides), CFLs (Compact Florescent Lamps), Sodium vapor
lamps
- The LPD (7.28W/m2) is less than the max allowed LPD of ECBC
(10.8W/m2) which is very good.
- According to Energy Star, CFLs provide the same amount of
light as ordinary bulb using 75% less energy.
- Translucent glass for roof A, B & C blocks to make use of
natural lighting and reduce the electricity consumption due
to artificial day light during day time
|
|
HVAC System Design
- 2 water cooled centrifugal chillers
- Total cooling capacity is 1100TR Chiller COP (rated) – 5.58
Operating Sqmt/TR: 21
|
|
Energy performance of the building
Lighting Energy Performance of the Building
- Annual Consumption (lighting) – 428735.2 KWh
- Lighting Performance Index – 17 KWh/Sqmt/annum
Space Conditioning Energy Performance of the Buil
- Annual Consumption (A/C) – 2957292 KWh
- HVAC Performance Index – 231 KWh/Sqmt/annum
|
|
|
Annual electricity consumption due to lighting and cooling
(kWh): 3386027.2
Energy Performance Index of the building (KWh/sq.mts of built up
area/annum): 131
Comparison of various parameters for solar passive building
(Dr. Reddy’s Laboratory) with conventional case
|
|
| Parameters |
Solar passive Case (Existing Building) features |
Conventional Case (Building features) |
| Building design |
Building longer facades are facing North-South
|
Building orientation was changed to longer
facades facing East-West |
| No roof and wall shading |
No roof and wall shading |
| Building Envelope |
No insulation on wall and roof.
U value for Wall - 1.32 W/m2/K
U Value for Roof - 3.35W/m2/K
|
No insulation on wall and roof.
U value for Wall -1.92 W/m2/K
U Value for Roof - 3.35 W/m2/K
|
Single Glazed windows (U value of glass
- 4.1 W/m2/K and Shading coefficient - 0.61)
WWR – 50%
|
Double Glazed windows
WWR – 60%
|
| Building Lighting Power density |
Lighting power density is 7.28 W/m2 |
Lighting power density
Work station: 12.7 W/m2
Cabins: 24 W/m2
|
| Building Chiller |
2 water cooled centrifugal chillers with
COP (rated) of 5.58 |
Air cooled screw chillers with COP (rated)
of 3.05 |
| Energy performance Index (KWh/m2/yr) |
131 |
199 |
Energy Saving Potential
Low energy strategies
The conventional case was run by incorporating low energy solar
passive design strategies on the annual electricity consumption
(kWh), electric load (kW) and cooling demand (TR) of the building.
|
 |
| Parameter comparison |
Conventional case |
Existing case (Low energy strategies) |
| Electrical load |
Base case |
2% less than the conventional case |
| Cooling Load |
Base case |
6% less than the conventional case |
| EPI |
Base case |
2% less than the conventional case |
|
Impact of ECBC envelope
The conventional case was run by incorporating ECBC envelope on
the annual electricity consumption (kWh), electric load (kW) and
cooling demand (TR) of the building.
 |
| Parameter comparison |
Conventional case |
ECBC compliant case |
| Electrical load |
Base case |
6% less than the conventional case |
| Cooling Load |
Base case |
14% less than the conventional case |
| EPI |
Base case |
7% less than the conventional case |
|
Overall Impact of Low energy solar passive design strategies,
and ECBC measures
The conventional case was run by incorporating both the low energy
solar passive design strategies and ECBC envelope on the annual
electricity consumption (kWh), electric load (kW) and cooling demand
(TR) of the building.
 |
| Parameter comparison |
Conventional case |
Existing case Low energy strategies + ECBC recommended
strategies + HVAC controls |
| Electrical load |
Base case |
33% less than the conventional case |
| Cooling Load |
Base case |
19% less than the conventional case |
| EPI |
Base case |
45% less than the conventional case |
|
|
