Weather+Locks

=Weather Lock Case Study= Nick Hoch - Fabi Shifflett - Ashley Urbanowich

When trying to decide what to base our semester long case study over, our group was looking into local issues to the Ball State campus that would be interesting to observe and research. We then decided to conduct a study on weather lock systems since every building on campus includes a weather lock system. We wonder if a particular style of weather locks was more successful, so we decided to do a comparison of two buildings. We took into consideration the size and shape may have effects on the success of each weather lock system.
 * Abstract **

Our case study this semester revolved around the study of weather lock systems. We are interested in how affective weather lock systems are on Ball State’s campus, especially with the drastic changing weather the fall semester will bring. We plan to observe two buildings on campus and perform a comparison to evaluate which weather lock system appears to be more successful. Our main __goals__ are to observe the air pressure of the interior space, the weather lock system, and the exterior space. The Noyer and Woodworth Complex will be observed throughout the course of the case study. The Noyer Complex originally was completed in 1962, with a recent remodel in 1996, while the Woodworth Complex originally was completed in 1956, with a recent remodel in 1993. Besides built during different decades, the two complexes also serve different demographics. Noyer (shown in Figure 1) is a co-ed dorm and is the only residential hall on campus equipped to house students with  __disabilities__. Woodworth (shown in Figure 2) is the only all-women residential hall and houses approximately 600 students.
 * Introduction |Context |Background **

//Figure 1 - Noyer Complex//

// Figure 2 - Woodworth Complex //

The Noyer weather lock system is equipped with four doors and one heating source per system (shown in Figure 3). The Woodworth weather lock system is equipped with only two doors and one heating source (shown in Figure 4). We believe the west Woodworth weather lock system is one of the worst on campus because it is not big enough for the high traffic it receives. This space potentially needs to be bigger with more doors and have a bigger area to increase the gap between interior space and exterior space. Due to Noyer being the only residential hall equipped with __housing__ students with __disabilities__, the weather lock systems provide more space and easily moves people from the outdoors to the indoors.

// Figure 3 - View of the north-west weather lock system at Noyer //

// Figure 4 - View of the west weather lock system at Woodworth //

The Woodworth Complex west weather lock system is not big enough for the high traffic it receives during the day and night, resulting in the weather lock system being one of the worst on campus.
 * Hypothesis **

To conduct our study, we will observe the air pressure of the interior space, the weather lock system, and the exterior space through an experiment of blowing bubbles within the weather lock system. We want to see how these opposing pressures affected the weather lock space and how the space was designed to combat these pressure differences from exterior to interior spaces (especially in the winter months). Figures 5 and 6 below show a comparison of the layouts of the Noyer and Woodworth weather locks observed in this study. We are interested in how the weather lock system performs, if it does what it was intended to do, what the maximum  efficiency of the weather lock is, and if it would be possible to make design decisions to raise efficiency.
 * Methodology **

//Figure 5 - Layout of the north-west weather lock system in Noyer//

//Figure 6 - Layout of the west weather lock system in Woodworth//

To measure pressure we will use the bubbles to he paths taken by them in different situations: with no doors open , with just the exterior door(s) open, with just the interior door(s) open, and with all doors open. The comparisons between the interior spaces, weather lock systems, and exterior spaces will be used to formulate conclusions of efficiency and if the weather locks is preforming correctly. //Figure 7 - Exterior doors open// //Figure 8 - Interior doors open//

//Figure 9 - All doors open//

Another measurement would be to observe how fast the series of doors shut behind people. This could be an important factor in air pressure with the design of the weather lock and how heavily it is populated. We will examine if there is a heating/cooling source within the weather lock space and how it will also be a contributing factor.

<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">The bubble experiment was first conducted during busy dinner hours with high indoor/outdoor foot traffic at the Noyer Complex in the northwest entrance and at the west entrance to the Woodworth Complex. The temperature was fairly mild on the evening of the experiment and wind speed was at an average for the Muncie area. Ideally we would have liked the outdoor temperatures to be cooler to garner faster air movement through the weather lock system.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">Data Process |Findings **

<span style="font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">While conducting the bubble experiment, we divided the weather lock system into three separate spaces (outdoor, weather lock space, and indoor). First, we blew bubbles in all three of the spaces with all doors shut. In the interior space and weather lock space, the bubbles fell straight down showing no specific wind flow direction. On the outside of the building the bubbles followed the wind direction taken by the current climate.

<span style="font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">The second step we took was opening the outer doors and blowing bubbles in the weather lock space from the outdoors. The light wind blowing across the open doors created a positive pressure making the bubbles not go very far in the Woodworth entrance. However, in the Noyer complex the bubbles seemed to travel a small distance.

<span style="font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">The third step was opening both the outer and inner doors. In this case we obtain similar results for Noyer and Woodworth. When conducting the experiment, bubbles followed the airflow direction in both complexes. However, experiment in Noyer showed the speed was much slower than the one at Woodworth, resulting in the bubbles flowing very low and near the ground. At Woodworth the speed of the bubbles was very high and the bubbles kept about the same height as when being blown throughout the weather lock space and partially into the interior space (shown in Figure 10).

//Figure 10 - Woodworth weather lock//

<span style="font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">The fourth was by opening the inner doors and keeping the outer doors closed. In this situation we obtained almost the exact same results as the first step. The bubbles did not seem to follow any particular direction as they dropped straight down to the floor, indicating minimal air flow.

<span style="font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">The final step we took was to conduct the experiment without interfering with the regular activity of the doors and taking advantage of the regular pedestrian foot traffic at those hours of the day. The results in the Noyer Complex turned out to be fairly different as opposed to Woodworth. In the Noyer he bubbles did seem to follow a defined airflow direction or rate when students left or entered the building. However, the bubbles near the exterior doors exited the building due to the negative pressure created by the door swinging shut. Also we noticed since this weather lock is of generous size, the first door opened was nearly closed when pedestrian reached to open the second set of doors (entering or exiting the building). The distance between the two sets of doors showed to impact the experiment as there was a brief moment of time between doors being in use (shown in Figure 11). //Figure 11 - Noyer weather lock//

<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">When observing the entrance of the Woodworth, the bubbles reacted almost in the same way when we kept both doors opened as in Noyer. They flew inside at a very fast rate and also kept same the same height. The doors stayed partially open at the same time, more so than the Noyer weather lock doors, when pedestrians walked through the weather lock. This is due to the distance between the two sets of doors being shorter.

<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">After conducting the observations and bubble experiment and analyzing the results closely, we observed both weather lock systems acted in a similar way when we forced a behavior. With the exception of when just the exterior doors were opened, the airflow at Woodworth was slightly stronger. We could tribute this to the layout of the space because there is a big open atrium as soon as you enter the building. Noyer opens to a very tight and enclosed space with turns to smaller spaces. We know from previous assignments air flow slows down due to right angle turns and other angled direction changes, which explains why Noyer’s air flow proved to be slower.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">Analysis **

//Figure 12 - Noyer bubble path//

//Figure 13 - Woodworth bubble path// <span style="font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">However, when we did the experiment without forcing a behavior and just observing normal pedestrian activity in weather lock, we got very different results of the rate and direction of air flow into Noyer and Woodworth. The results suggested outside air does filtrate into Woodworth in larger amounts than into Noyer. We kept into consideration both systems worked very similar with the doors operating regularly. then we can conclude that what forces the different results is the timing difference for the student to get from the first door to the second door, and this is easily managed by the distance in between the two doors that compose a weather lock system, or by controlling the speed of the door swing to close.

<span style="font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">In conclusion our study proved our hypothesis was correct. Due to the size of the west weather lock system in Woodworth, the air flow was not as efficient as Noyer. It is interesting that it is a part of design that often gets over looked, but it is very important and should be designed fairly early in the process. There is a design standard that states a weather lock system must be in a building, but it does not specify what the dimensions should be. This seems to be a very minimal standard to achieve for what should be a big issue in a building envelope. The study has shown what makes a weather lock system successful and what makes it unsuccessful. This is a study that can directly affect our studio work and is something that the group members will insert into current projects.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">Conclusions **

<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">Allen, Edward, and Joseph Iano. //The Architect's Studio Companion: Rules of Thumb for Preliminary Design//. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2007. Print.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">References **

<span style="font-family: 'Swis721 Lt BT',sans-serif;">Kwok, Alison, and Walter Grondzik. The Green Studio Handbook Strategies for Schematic Design. Burlington: Elsevier Science, 2011. Print.