April 2014

Artem Polomannyy

Study Of Belarusian Building Regulatians For Possible Conflicts With Sustainable Environmental Design Methodology in

Office Design

Term 2 Research Paper

E+E Environment & Energy Studies Programme

Architectural Association School of ArchitectureGraduate SchoolMSc & MArch Sustainable Environmental Design 2013-14

AA E+E Environment & Energy Studies Programme_Architectural AssociationSchool of ArchitectureMSc+MArch Sustainable Environmental Design 2013-14

AUTHORSHIP DECLARATION FORM

Term 2 Research paperTITLE: Study Of Belarusian Building Regulatians For Possible Conflicts With Sustainable Environmental Design Methodology in Office DesignNUMBER OF WORDS: 4000STUDENT NAMES: ARTEM POLOMANNYY

DECLARATIONI certify that the content of this document is entirely my own work and thatany quotation or paraphrase from the published or unpublished work of others isduly acknowledged.

SIGNATURE:

DATE: 28/04/2014

The research paper addresses the issue of potential con-flicts between sustainable architecture design methods in office developments typology in the Belarusian capi-tal Minsk and Belarusian national building regulations. Some professionals complain that out-dated set points and prescriptions left by the soviet building regulations in Belarus that was a part of Soviet Union till its collapse, do not allow European quality of architecture. Research paper tries to verify how reasonable are this complains.

The paper covers the analysis of general conditions of sustainable design in the country and issues of office design in particular. The study includes an overview and critics of the existing national regulations followed by a range of computer-aided simulations.

In fact regulations were approved as generally appro-priate to attain qualities of sustainable architecture. How-ever they do not lead directly to those features. Neverthe-less they do not lead directly to the failure as it is claimed in professional sphere, but sometimes contain it. It is rec-ommended to add strict regulations with methodology and recommendations to complement prescriptions and restrictions.

Abstract

11. Introduction

2. Key local office design complexities

3. Belarusian building regulation analysis

4. Setpoints studies. Simulations

5. Conclusions

6. References

3

7

8

14

23

25

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2figure 1. Belarus on the map of Europe

Minsk

figure 2. Energy efficient social housing in Minsk

31.INTRODUCTION

Belarus is a developing country with unstable economy. The state is traditionally open to new technologies. Coun-try is promising stable improvement of life quality being residence of the world leading IT companies, research ori-ented industry and strong agriculture. Belarusian capital Minsk(fig.1) is located on 53,54 latitude and has a warm summer and cold winter climate with approximately 200 days of heating period(fig.3-6, pp.5-6). Energy saving is-sue was severely delayed by low prices on Russian energy resources. However now there is a great demand in effi-ciency strategies, due to the new state policy looking for energy self-sufficiency. Current initiatives in the field can be structured in the following groups

1. Fostered by state to promote country indepen-dency and solve economic problems

2. Driven by companies, who promote their prod-ucts like insulation and heat recovery systems

3. Minority of scientists who work individually Generally, main research on sustainability issues is

going in the housing architecture field. To illustrate cur-rent state of affairs it should be noted that the first en-ergy efficient private house was built in 2013 follow-ing the Passivhaus standard. It reached 15 kWh/m2 of heating energy consumption. However the prise per square me-ter is 130% more than average in Minsk. Many academies are involved in the research of social housing energy per-formance. Unfortunately built precedents lack the visual quality (fig.2), but the results are 30 kWh/m2 of heating energy consumption comparing to 90kWh/m2 in an av-erage Minsk dwelling with the increase of price only of 5% above average. There are studies on vernacular archi-tecture in Belarusian national technical university led by dean of the architectural faculty Armen Sardarov, who tries to reintroduce traditional materials and elements. Another prominent Belarusian architect Zhukov devoted his research to renewable energy sources like wind energy.

At times it seems that analysis in the field of sustain-ability are of little interest in the country, as their results are very coherent with the paradigm of the most success-ful European precedents, but one can hardly come across an example of sustainable architecture in Belarus. Re-search results are implemented slowly and an average ar-chitect doesnt know which methods can be used to reach the qualities of sustainable design.

Rare attempts are unsuccessful as they either possess good architectural quality, but exceed the reasonable price, or attain good performance, but are visually unat-

tractive. This condition reduce return of investment what consequently prevents good theories to spread. As in the majority of European states housing is the main consum-er of heating energy. However now housing is of great demand making energy efficiency issue in the dwelling of low priority in terms of time. Therefore to introduce new technics and methods in state, commercial buildings typology including offices, administrative and comple-menting retail and leisure functions seem to be far more promising. Office spaces are of less demand. This provides a greater competitiveness between developers pushing them to cooperate with architects with an idea to excel on the market. As it was stated by Fergus Nickol on the lecture at the Architectural Association School of Archi-tecture in 2013 on the lecture given for the SED course his research on adaptive thermal conflict was connected with offices for the same reason. Office developers provided more financial freedom for the research. Nevertheless the knowledge acquired from studies of commercial build-ings potentials for sustainability might become the most direct opportunity to introduce new design methods that hopefully will be spread on other civic typologies. So far the development of sustainable offices in Minsk is mainly constrained by two conditions:

1. Volatile economy makes building life cycle un-predictable. Average developer doubts in success of in-vestment in unclear future

2. Usual complain on national regulations, that are argued to be still adjusted to soviet precast concrete con-struction

Whereas the first aspect is a matter of time and soon-er or later initiatives will prove the potentials of strategy, the second point has to be scientifically justified. It has become a strange vogue among professionals to com-plain on regulations. This condition has a serious ground in many cases. It is true in terms of revision of multiple values. However regulations have never been clearly ana-lysed and complains are based just on the fact of the dif-ference with European code, as if the replace the out dated Belarusian regulations will instantly change everything and architects will start producing European quality of architecture the following day.

Therefore this paper covers the analysis of Belarusian building regulations wondering if they have an actually destructive influence on office design or this is just a scep-tic rumour.

Minsk

4figure 3. Minsk Climate Summary

figure 4. Seasonal Air temperature frequency distribution in Minsk

5figure 5. Global horizontal illuminance (9.0018.00). Source: Satel-light

figure 6. Frequency of Night, Sunny, Intermediate and Cloudy skies (%). Source: Satel-light

6

7The research task is the demarcation of building code lev-els of freedom that will prove or disclaim the conviction of regulations in all architectural troubles. This will clari-fy whether Belarusian building regulations that receive so many complains, actually prevent or foster architecture to attain qualities of sustainability. However firstly, local issues that arise in Belarus preventing possibility to gain sustainable office design should be clarified. Currently Be-larusian offices drop in their rank according to the office classification almost right after they were built. This fact that upsets developers who blame architects in all troubles can be explained in two key points:

1. Classification is not standardized and changes rapidly with appearance of new materials, technics and life quality standards.

2. Majority of companies rent offices. Thus the user becomes unpredictable in the design process. This makes it difficult to satisfy various demands of different tenants by standardized qualities.

At the end of the day the first point is rather positive as it shows the constant growth of economy. The second becomes of interest as it is directly connected with the na-tional building code.

Office architecture can be split into two distinctive el-ements which are a shared circulation area and a rentable fit-out(Leupen, 2005). Obviously this particular research paper will focus solely on rooms design as they make on average 80% of a typical Minsk office building. Concern-ing the rooms, Belarusian practice in office design can be described by three common strategies:

1. Design of all spaces including fit-out and circula-tion with the assumption of some standardized user.

2. Design of circulation areas. Each tenant employs his or her own designer privately for fit-out design.

3. Developers invest money to adapt spaces precisely for the first client according to their technical task

The first strategy makes it hard to predict if the tenant will be satisfied with conditions, consequently trying to adapt the space, or in the worst case will look for another space to rent.

The second case success depends on the level of coop-eration between the architect and the designer who may

ignore some preconceived rules. This relation is not de-scribed in any official document. It is a common situa-tion when something goes wrong with the conditions in the office architect and designer would rather blame each other then solve the problem. Secondly there is a problem of design coherence. Developer may allow the tenants to change the space for designer wishing to attract and keep the client without taking into account the original archi-tectural or engineering idea. The second strategy now prevails as it is more transformable and suits the majority of tenants. It might seem that the mentioned weak points of the strategy could be solved by official law, that would describe relations between architect and fit-out designer, by obligations of the latter to use some particular design approach, prescribed details and preconceived materials. However a common developer may be afraid at times that obligations may simply frighten a tenant off.

The last strategy is similar to the second. The only dif-ference is that the architects do the fit out themselves. This can provide coherence. But normally when the tenant change the highly adapted design, which was suitable for one, might not be suitable for another client. This makes the developer either to wait for an appropriate client or to change the design with the help of architect or with the help of another designer.

All in all it can be concluded that all approaches can be professionally characterised by a low level of office space embodied resilience. Is this a consequence of bad design, lack of knowledge or bad values preconditioned by regula-tions that constraint variability of users and make build-ings so sensitive to any minor change?

It is assumed that the first strategy could be the most successful if it provides resilience. But usually it is not. Specified research question appears to be the sensitivity of office fit-out according the set points provided by the national regulations.

2.KEY LOCAL OFFICE DESIGN COMPLEXITIES

8OverviewBelarus has its own state building regulations. They

are based on the vast heritage of former USSR building code. Some of those regulations are still in use. Majority of the documents were adapted for the local conditions. There are different types of building code documents, which are the Technical Codex of Practice, Belarusian Building Regulations, State Standards, Sanitary Norms and Rules. All regulations connected with commercial office design were studied to find values, set points and recommendations that deal with sustainable design issues in office rooms (table 1, p.11).

ClimateThere is a well-developed document on climatology.

However it is not updated on daily or yearly basis and ex-ists in a published static form. It is periodically renewed approximately once 5 years. The lack of dynamics pro-vides some discrepancies comparing to the electronic weather databases.

Data organisation of the document is adjusted for the equations of the other documents like heating calcula-tion. See outlines of the dociment in table 2, p.12.

LayoutDistances between the buildings are designed to pro-

vide access for fire brigade trucks, specified width accord-ing to the street loads and ensure necessary distance be-tween buildings of different fire resistance class. There are no recommendations on distances between the buildings that could help to gain good solar access. However, it is stated that buildings should receive 2,5 hours of direct sun insolation, with an idea to provide sufficient daylight for hygienic purpose. The value has to be calculated for the equinox. First and last hour of sun has to be excluded from the calculations.

It is frequently argued by professionals (Litskevich, 2007) that this direct recommendation may lead to glare. Secondly the presence of direct sun can become a source of overheating in some periods.

DaylightThe document inscribing the daylight and artificial

light requirements exists but is not compulsory for ad-ministrative buildings like offices. The required illumi-nance of 300 lux is sufficient and reasonable. To provide day-light the minimum of 1 daylight factor is required. According to the regulations it should be calculated not as an average as it is asked in multiple European guides (Yannas, 1994), but in the middle point of the space on

the working level of 700m. This method could be revised, as it doesnt ensure daylight at the rear of the room. The wall reflectance for the inscribed manual calculation is set to 0.5 and nothing is explained of what will happen if the wall reflectance will change.

Building elementsThe maximum thermal transmittance of the building

elements varies for different typologies. There is a pre-cise methodology of its calculation, which includes three con-nected values. One is the required transmittance. Anoth-er one is an actual calculated transmittance, which should be not more than the required. The third value is provided by an equation that has to help in verification of economi-cally efficient transmittance working as recommendation in reasonable choice. This equation includes two values, which are literally the current price for heating and price for thermal insulation. This equation is not obligatory to use but its wording might become misleading for inexpe-rienced professionals as it doesnt take into account the growth of price for energy source and therefore doesnt il-lustrate efficiency of the building throughout its life cycle.

Brief analysis of the market showed that the most com-mon offers of the window have thermal transmittance close to 1.5 W/m2K. Therefore required glazed element U-value of 1 W/m2K seems to be too optimistic.

Infiltration rates are restricted through the value of building elements permeability. For example, for 36m2 square room with one exposed wall that has one opening of 20% window to floor ratio infiltration rate should be not more than 0.6 ach.

Thermal comfort The required internal conditions values are very mod-

est. There are two documents that cover them. One reg-ulates the values for calculation of heating and cooling systems. Another one regulates the internal conditions parameters. It should be noted that the temperatures for the winter seem to be low. It can be guessed that the ex-pected clo should be very high(fig.8, p.10).

Adaptive thermal comfort is not mentioned anywhere. On the image (fig.7, p.10) you can see the difference in comfort band of adaptive thermal comfort and the one described in Belarusian regulations. This again draws at-tention to the winter temperatures comfort band which upper limit now seem to be to law comparing with the adaptive comfort band.

Finally it has to be noted that all heating and cooling emitters in rooms have to be adjustable in the allowed am-plitude. This ensures some level of adaptive opportunities.

9Internal gains calculationThe document used for heating and cooling system

calculations states that for 21 W/m2 should be assumed as an average internal gain.

The other document that has been published in 2013 promises more. It states that to assess the building for en-ergy efficiency passport precise values for internal gains should be used.

It should be noted that both of this documents are cur-rently mandatory. HVAC engineers normally use the first one for the first stage of design. Project architect uses the latter in final calculations for the energy efficiency pass-port submission. Luckily, nothing prevents the in-verse order of use. Nevertheless both calculation methods can be criticized.

The first one is generalised and doesnt have the de-scription of density adequate for the set value. The obvious critic is that casual gains load can be different. The value of 21W/m2 is evidently not random but nowhere is men-tioned how value should be reinterpreted if the designed space will be occupied with different density, intensity or frequency. Brief manual calculation shows that 21W/m2 in the office is approximately equivalent to the occupancy of 12m2 per person.

DensityA common density in Belarusian offices coincides

with 6m2/pp mentioned in regulations for administrative buildings as minimal. This value has nothing to do with calculations of internal conditions as it was mentioned before, but is mentioned here as it actually describes the current state. Recalling the previously mentioned value of internal gains load we can see a contradiction where heat-ing is calculated for an absolutely another density.

VentilationVentilation requirement in m3/ppph is not mentioned

in compulsory regulations. The value that is set as obliga-tory is 1.5 ach. However sufficiency of this value obviously depends on density. This can lead to unexpected intensive window use with the following heat loss.

Ventilation requirement provision strategies are de-scribed only in regulation for mechanical ventilation. There are no recommendations on how to provide natural ventilation. Nothing regulates the sizing of the operable window parts, however it is recommended to keep them operable.

Glazing to floor ratioRequired glazing to floor ratio is not mentioned any-

where. Among all civic typologies only housing used to be constrained by 18% w/f ratio in past. Currently this type of parameter heavily restricts only sport facilities and in-dustrial building design.

There is a specific constraint on openings sizing and design. Vertical distance between openings between lev-els has to be 1.2m or more. Distance between window top and slab bottom should be not less then 0.2m. Alterna-tively floor slabs have to be projected 0.2m.

Heating energy consumptionMaximum heating energy consumption for admin-

istrative building has to be not more than 36 kWh/m3 annually. Heating period for administrative buildings coincide with the cold year period, which as defined by the daily average of 8C and lasts for approximately 198 days. Brief calculation shows that if the coolest daily av-erage temperature when the heating is not yet supplied is 9C then mean indoor temperature rise above outdoors should be not less than 9K. Consequently when the tem-perature rise up to 22C of July average this can lead to overheating of 3K degrees above allowed 28C.

General critics General critics can be summarised in the following

key points1. Regulations obviously should be restrictive. How-

ever they could include some basic recommendation for the preliminary design. The precise performance assess-ment with complex manual calculation will hardly lead to successful design.

2. There are values, which lack association with ac-tual user. This prevents design to be human oriented.

3. It seems that sanitary regulations are in general less important then fire safety.

4. There are minor contradictions between some documents

Eventually it should be noted that regulations never mention adaptability for the future. Yet nothing shows directly that buildings will not be adaptable and will per-form badly. But are the set points reasonable or can lead to some kind of trouble? Maybe standardised set points are already good? A range of tests were undertaken to analyse whether this assumption has solid grounds.

3. BELARUSIAN BUILDING REGULATIONS ANALYSIS

10

figure 7. Comparison of Adaptive Comfort Band and temperatures allowed by Belarusian building regulations

figure 8. Psychrometric chart for operative tem-perature of 18 C, 3 m/s air speed, 1.2 met, 1 clo.Source: Berkeley online comfort tool

11

TCP 45-02-201 compulsory minimal floor to ceiling height 3 mAdministrative

buildingsdensity of auditoriums of less then 150 people per

person 1.25 m2TCP 45-3.02-209-

2010 compulsory minimal area for executive worker > 4Public buildings minimal area for typical worker > 6

Ventilation rate for rooms > 1.5 ACHMinimal ventilation rate for auditoriums > 20 m3/h

TCP 45-2.02-92-2007 compulsory Vertical distance between openings between two levels > 1.2 mFire prevention Distance between window top and slab bottom > 0.2 m

Alternatively floor slabs have to be projected > 0.2 mSanitary Norms 2006 compulsory Direct sun insolation in equinox > 2.5 h

InsolationFirst and last hour of insolation can not be included in

calculations.

TCP 45-2.04-153-2009

DF is calculated without furniture. Regulations are for a middle point of the room on the height of the table. DF

can differ by 10% from regulated.Daylight and artificial

light Surface reflection should be 0.5typical room illuminance 300 lx

typical room Daylight factor 1 %Sanitary Norms 2013 Daily temperatures amplitude < 2 CMicroclimate in office

buildings Max vertical assimetry (difference) of temperatures < 3 CState standard 30494 compulsory Resultant temperature assimetry < 3.5 C

Microclimate parameters in public

buildings for required internal conditions consult below

BBR 4.02.01-03 compulsory Internal gains for heating system calculation = 21 W/m2

HVAC Heating and cooling temperature should be operableHeating period starts when average daily external

temperature drops below < 8 CWindows are recommended to be operable

TCP 45-2.04-43-2006 compulsoryMinimal required heat transmittance for administrative

buildings

Heating systems Exposed floor slabs and roofs < 0.17 W/m2K

Slabs above unheated basement < 0.8 W/m2K

Glazed elements < 1 W/m2K

Walls < 0.31 W/m2KRequired maximum building elements permeability

Walls < 0.5 kg/m2h

Doors < 10 kg/m2hWindows < 1.5 kg/m2h

TCP 45-2.04-196-2010 compulsory Maximum heating energy consumtion < 36 kWh/m3

Building perfomance

DBT, C Resultant T, C Relative humidity % Wind speed m/srecommended allowed recommended allowed recommended allowed recommended allowed

cold period rooms 19-21 18-23 18-20 17-22 45-30 60 0.2 0.3auditoriums 16-18 14-20 15-17 13-19 - - -

hot period both 23-25 18-28 22-24 19-27 60-30 60 0.3 0.5

table 1. Outline of sustaiability related data in Belarusian Building regulations

12

average monthly tempJa

n

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec year

5,9 4,8 0,5 6,6 13,1 16,3 17,8 17,0 11,7 6,2 0,5 3,8 6,2

average monthly amplitudes

5,3 6,1 7,1 9,3 10,7 10,1 9,8 10,1 8,6 6,5 4,3 4,7 7,7

hours of direct sun

43 67 131 178 256 265 268 243 166 98 37 29 1781

Summer air temperature

0,95 0,96 0,98 0,99

22,0 23,0 25,0 26,5 23 35 58

Winter air temperatureabsolute min coldest period

0,98 0,92 0,98 0,92 0.94

39 33 28 28 24 9,5 15,0

0 8

period temp period temp beginning end

122 3,9 198 0,9 6.1 21.04

prevailing wind in Dec-Feb

average wind speed of heating period

maximum Jan wind speed

average number of days with wind speed >10m/s with negative daily average temp

average Jan wind speed

S 3,0 3,1 0,1 3,0

35 30 25 25 30 34

0,2 1 33 3 0,1

period the temperature is not exceeded and the average of the period

average start and end heating period

average yearly number of days with temperature equal or below

average yearly number of days with temperature equal or above

coldest 5 dayscoldest day

sum of average monthly negative

temperatures

Average maximum in

July

Absolute maximum in

July

averageRH at 15:00 in July

table 2. Outline of climate related data from Belarusian Building Regulationsdocument Building Climatology.BBR 2.04.02-2000

13

14

rotation from South 0 30 60 90

w/f ratio, %

depth, m

height, m

width of exposed surface3 6 9 12 15 18 3 6 9 12 15 18 3 6 9 12 15 18 3 6 9 12 15 18

15 6 3.63.33

9 3.63.33

12 3.63.33

20 6 3.63.33

9 3.63.33

12 3.63.33

25 6 3.63.33

9 3.63.33

12 3.63.33

DF

15

4. SETPOINTS STUDIES. SIMULATIONS

Day lightingFor daylight simulation a notional building with various parameters was modelled (fig#) to analyse the qualities of day lighting ensured by regulations. The rotation of the model is constrained to ensure 2.5 hours of direct sunlight in equinox according to the regulations (0, 30, 60, 90 de-grees rotation from the South direction). The model has a variety of rooms width (3,6,9,12,15,18m), depth (6,9,12m), window to floor ratio (15,20,25%) and height (3, 3.3, 3.6 m) covering the most popular parameters spectrum. The most common quality of glazing used in practise was as-sumed for all cases. It is a one camera with 16 mm spacing with 4mm Low-e glass sheets that can provide U value of 1.5 W/m2K.

Only diffused light was used in calculation (fig.11) to exclude possibility of the glare. The typical room should have 300 lux on the working plane (700mm) in the centre of the room with reflection of 0.5 of all room surfaces(TCP 45-2.04-153-2009). This means that to reach these levels during all year various daylight factors are needed.

Test results were generalised to the grades and are pro-vided in a form of matrix (fig. 9). The grades are based on illuminance availability during the year. The maximum grade (red dot) is equivalent to the values of daylight factor more then 6%, which ensures daylight light for the longest available period.Grey dots show the values which satisfy the requirements of the regulations. Black dots mark the cases with daylight factor with less than 1%.

ConclusionIt should be recalled that the document (TCP 45-2.04-

153-2009) that impose internal illuminance values is not mandatory for public buildings. Officially to meet the reg-ulation requirements it is enough to satisfy the document that impose to ensure 2.5 hours of direct sun insolation. As we can see some positions do not receive sufficient light. However they satisfy a mandatory document. It can be argued that the compulsory document (Sanitary Norms, Insolation) is not reliable in the task of daylight provision. Moreover the fact that it requires direct sun for administrative function is dangerous in terms of glare.

figure 10. Minsk sun path diagram. (Satel light)

figure 11. Diffuse Horizonal illuminance in Minsk (Satel light)

16

figure 12. Notional simulation model

17

ConclusionsAs you can see on the figure 13 the consumption in

the notional model turns out to be approximately 40% less then the maximum allowed by the building code (108 kWh/m2). Yet as it was mentioned before the internal gains load of 21W/m2 doesnt illustrate typical office density of 6 people. Moreover considerable periods of overheating of 20% of occupied hours on average were detected.

The second test showed how heating load can dif-fer with different occupancy. Obviously simulation is over-simplified and does not take into account frequency of space use when we can guess that if we have 1 person on 36m2 that should probably be an executive who will have meetings from time to time or a team of 6 in the same room might use some appliances like large office print-ers that produce heat even in a stand by mode. However it should be noted that the type of occupancy could vary the consumption significantly in a range from 30 to more than 100 kWh/m2.

Finally the comparison of internal temperatures for three chosen cases has shown that the notional building is already overheated. Evidently the lowest density is least endangered in the summer period. The best orientation appears to be the one with rotation of 30 degree from South in the Western direction. The same directions seem to be preferable for the autumn period. In the autumn case executive room occupied by 1 person will stay out of comfort till the midday. The presence of summer over-heating proves the assumption provided by manual cal-culation of mean indoor temperature rise above outdoors. The room optimised for cold period performs badly what can lead to use of air conditioning in a mild climate. This fact actually illustrates the reality.

Ultimately it should be noted that value of recom-mended casual gains load of 21W/m2 for the calculation of heating and performance is not optimal and is inappro-priate for actual typical density of office occupation.

Energy consumption and thermal comfortTest was done to address the issue of sensitivity of space to the density. As it was noted before it is hard to predict density, intensity and frequency of the office use therefore this test is a key in assessment of resilience provided by regulations.

For the notional simulation the most typical configu-ration of a square cell of 36 m2 with the minimal recom-mended floor to ceiling height of 3m was modelled. Re-quired condition values are resumed in table 3 (p.18.) On the figure 12 you can see a model representing a variety of simulated configurations.

Firstly the model was tested in prescribed conditions with internal gains of 21W/m2. Ventilation including in-filtration was set as in regulation to be 1.5 air changes per hour. Heating energy consumption and percentage of hours of overheating are plotted in figure 13.

The second test was undertaken in order to verify heat-ing energy consumption sensitivity to the various densi-ties. Tests were done with various occupations of 1, 2, 3 and 6 people in the room (table 4, p.18). The series of tests were done in two conditions. In one case only density pa-rameter was changed. Second case took into consideration change of ventilation requirement of 30m3/ppph to illus-trate what might happen with energy consumption when occupants will start to adapt space them selves by opening windows or reducing the unnecessary ventilation in case of 1 person in particular. The results of the test are plotted in figure 14.

The third test verifies if the value of 21W/m2 precon-ceived by regulations is optimal and ensures comfort for various densities in allowed comfort band. This test data was reduced to analysis of 20% windows to floor ratio case only. On the figures 15-16 you can see the comparison of internal resultant temperatures during occupied hours on a typical summer day (+22C daily average) and a typi-cal midseason day when the centralised heating is not yet supplied but the temperatures are already critical (+9C daily average).

General recommendationsTest showed that Belarusian regulations generally cover sustainability paradigm. They do not prevent good design by

themselves but unfortunately do not provide methodology to attain sustainable architecture. Test results can be summarized in the following recommendations1. Regulations are not user oriented but they do not constraint the possibility to provide a resilient space. Architect

should not expect that regulations would ensure good design. Yet one should not think that they prevent the best choice. To cover this lack of recommendations more precise methodology should be introduced or in the form of ad-dition for regulations or in a form of literature recommended for professionals.

2. Some set points claimed optimal like 2.5 hours of direct sun insolation and 21 W/m2 of casual gains load are inap-propriate to provide resilient comfortable space and should be revised.

3. More coherence between light and thermal performance should be studied.

18

notional model inputs sensitivity test inputswidth 6 m people 1depth 6 m occupancy load 80 W 2 W/m2

height 3 m light 4x24 W 4 W/m2

window to floor ratio 20 % appliances 45 W 1 W/m2

window size 3.6x2 m people 2window sill height 0.8 m occupancy load 160 W 5 W/m2

curtain transparency 0.5 light 6x24 W 7 W/m2

Ventilation 1.5 ACH appliances 90 W 3 W/m2

Internal gains 21 W/m2 people 3wall U value 0.31 W/m2K occupancy load 240 W 7 W/m2

glazing U value 1 W/m2K light 8x24 W 9 W/m2

heating temperature 18 C appliances 140 W 5 W/m2

natural ventilation people 6half of the window is operable occupancy load 80 W 15 W/m2

occupied from 9 to 18 light 10x24 W 15 W/m2

no cooling appliances appliances 300 W 8 W/m2

notional model inputs sensitivity test inputswidth 6 m people 1depth 6 m occupancy load 80 W 2 W/m2

height 3 m light 4x24 W 4 W/m2

window to floor ratio 20 % appliances 45 W 1 W/m2

window size 3.6x2 m people 2window sill height 0.8 m occupancy load 160 W 5 W/m2

curtain transparency 0.5 light 6x24 W 7 W/m2

Ventilation 1.5 ACH appliances 90 W 3 W/m2

Internal gains 21 W/m2 people 3wall U value 0.31 W/m2K occupancy load 240 W 7 W/m2

glazing U value 1 W/m2K light 8x24 W 9 W/m2

heating temperature 18 C appliances 140 W 5 W/m2

natural ventilation people 6half of the window is operable occupancy load 80 W 15 W/m2

occupied from 9 to 18 light 10x24 W 15 W/m2

no cooling appliances appliances 300 W 8 W/m2

table 3. Setpoints of the notional model, ac-cording ti the Belarusian building regulations

table 4. Sensitivity test inputs for various densities

19

figure 13. Heating energy consumption and percent of hours of ovevheating for a notional model (Source: EDSL TAS)

figure 14. Heating energy consumption. Sensitivity test results (Source: EDSL TAS)

20

figure 15. Typical summer day (190) resultant temperatures for a notional model with different occupancy

21

figure 16. Typical midseason day (290) resultant temperatures for a notional model with different occupancy

22

23

Office typology has been found as the most appropriate to promote sustainable design methodology in Belarus. The main complexity of this task appeared to be the demand of resilience feature for commercial spaces that currently tend to change a lot.

The paper studied if the national building code pre-vents resilience and lead to bad qualities of office space. These assunption appeared groundless.

As a result of critical building code analysis and justifi-cation tests following statements can be done.

1. The regulations are generally helpful as they ex-tensively cover all aspects of the design flow. However they lack recommendations on methodology that can lead to sustainability features.

2. The regulations themselves do not prevent sus-tainable design. But they contain some values that can be revised and updated. Multiple values that normally should be human oriented are standardised.

Possible solution can be a further more extensive and intensive study of the sustainability related values, their revision and ultimately provision of localised sus-tainable design methodology.

At the end of the day to make building more resposible is to make them more responsive to polit-economical con-ditions, climate and people.

5. CONCLUSIONS

24

25

1. Building regulations of the Republic of Belarus 2. 04. 02 - 2000 (2000). Construction climatology.

2. Building regulations of the Republic of Belarus 4. 02. 01 - 03 (2003). Heating, Ventilation and Air Condi-tioning.

3. Building regulations of the Republic of Belarus 45-2.02-279-2013 Technical Codex of practice. Evacuation in Public buildings

4. Building regulations of the Republic of Belarus 45-2.02-92-2007 Technical Codex of practice. Fire safety

5. Building regulations of the Republic of Belarus 45-2.04-153-2009 (02250) Technical Codex of practice. Daylight and artificial light

6. Building regulations of the Republic of Belarus 45-2.04-43-2006 (02250) Technical Codex of practice. Heating systems

7. Building regulations of the Republic of Belarus 45-3.01-116-2008 (02250) Technical Codex of practice. Urban planning

8. Building regulations of the Republic of Belarus 45-3.02-113-2009 Technical Codex of practice. Thermal insulation of exposed structures for public buildings

9. Building regulations of the Republic of Belarus 45-3.02-209-2010 (02250) Technical Codex of practice. Administrative and Servise buildings

10. Building regulations of the Republic of Belarus 45-3.02-290-2013 Technical Codex of practice. Public buildings

11. Building regulations of the Republic of Belarus. San-itary Norms and regulations. Requirements for resi-dential and public buildings insolation

12. Building regulations of the Republic of Belarus. State Standard 30494. Residential and public buildings. In-door microclimate

13. Environmental design of urban buildings.

14. Leupen B., R. Heijne, J. van Zwol (2005). Time based architecture. 010 Publishers. Rotterdam

15. Litskevich V., L. Makrinenko, I. Migalinina, N. Obo-lensky, A. Osipov, N. Schepetkov (2007) Architectural physics. Arhitektura-S. Moscow

16. Moe K. (2013). Convergence: An architectural agenda for energy. Routledge

17. Nicol J.F., M. Humphreys, S. Roaf (2012). Adaptive thermal comfort. Principles and and practice. Rout-ledge.

18. Szokolay, S (2004). Introduction to Architectural Sci-ence: The basis of sustainable design. Architectural Press.

19. Yannas S. (1994) Solar energy and housing design. AA publications.

6. REFERENCE

RP2_1RP2_2