Bioreceptive Façade Design

Improving our harsh urban climates

P5 presentation - Milou Klein – 4389123 – Mentors: Alejandro Prieto, Marc Ottele – Technische Universiteit Delft – Building Technology
 Bioreceptivity

“the aptitude of a material to be colonised by one or several groups of living organisms without necessarily undergoing any biodeterioration ”

(Guilitte, 1995)
Why bioreceptivity?
City climate

Temperature in cities, reproduced from Oke,

Mills, Christen, & Voogt, 2017
Why bioreceptivity?
Facade greening

(DeMilked, 2015)
Why bioreceptivity?
Facade greening

Green facade Living wall Bioreceptive facade

 Research

• Material properties concrete

• Laboratory tests under ‘optimum’ conditions

(Manso & Aguado, 2016)

 Research

• Material properties concrete

• Laboratory tests under ‘optimum’ conditions

(Manso & Aguado, 2016) (Aničić et al., 2009)

 Research

• Material properties concrete

• Laboratory tests under ‘optimum’ conditions

(Manso & Aguado, 2016) (Aničić et al., 2009)

How is bioreceptivity affected by the urban climate and how does it contribute to improve it?
 Focus
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?
 Focus
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?

• Temperature reduction

• Air quality

• Water retainment

• Aesthetical benefits
 Focus
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?

• Temperature reduction

• Air quality

• Water retainment

• Aesthetical benefits
 Restrictions

Precast concrete façade panels

Bioreceptivity: Bryophytes (moss)

Case study area: Rotterdam Façade detail

 Structure
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?
 Structure
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?
 Structure
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?
 Structure
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?
 Structure
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?
 Structure
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?
How to develop a design tool for bioreceptive facade panels to account for
the bryophytes’ habitat conditions in The Netherlands?
 Natural habitat

Conditions

Temperature 15 - 25 °C
Nutrients Low requirement
Water Moist climates
Solar radiation Low light conditions
Humidity High levels >50%
Wind Intermediate
 Natural habitat

Conditions Limits

Temperature 15 - 25 °C • Moisture important factor in their habitat; Bryophytes

Nutrients Low requirement are poikilohydric, this means their hydration state is
Water Moist climates controlled by the environment. (87% - 305%)
Solar radiation Low light conditions
Humidity High levels >50%
Wind Intermediate
 Natural habitat

Conditions Limits

Temperature 15 - 25 °C • Moisture important factor in their habitat; Bryophytes

Nutrients Low requirement are poikilohydric, this means their hydration state is
Water Moist climates controlled by the environment.
Solar radiation Low light conditions • Bryophytes are in a dehydrated, metabolically inactive
Humidity High levels >50% state (dormant)
Wind Intermediate
 Natural habitat

Conditions Limits

Temperature 15 - 25 °C • Moisture important factor in their habitat; Bryophytes

Nutrients Low requirement are poikilohydric, this means their hydration state is
Water Moist climates controlled by the environment.
Solar radiation Low light conditions • Bryophytes are in a dehydrated, metabolically inactive
Humidity High levels >50% state (dormant)
Wind Intermediate • Too much sunlight damages bryophytes (better
resistant when moist)
 Façade implementation; city climate

Conditions

Temperature 15 - 25 °C Increased
Nutrients Low requirement Decreased
Water Moist climates Slight increase
Solar radiation Low light conditions Decreased
Humidity High levels >50% Decreased
Wind Intermediate Decreased
 Façade implementation; city climate

Conditions Limits

Temperature 15 - 25 °C Increased • Water availability not a limiting factor on façade

Nutrients Low requirement Decreased application due to irrigation.
Water Moist climates Slight increase
Solar radiation Low light conditions Decreased
Humidity High levels >50% Decreased
Wind Intermediate Decreased
 Façade implementation; city climate

Conditions Limits

Temperature 15 - 25 °C Increased • Bryophytes are in a dehydrated, metabolically inactive

Nutrients Low requirement Decreased state (dormant)
Water Moist climates Slight increase • Too much sunlight damages bryophytes (better
Solar radiation Low light conditions Decreased resistant when moist)
Humidity High levels >50% Decreased
Wind Intermediate Decreased
 Façade implementation; city climate

Conditions Limits

Temperature 15 - 25 °C Increased • Bryophytes are in a dehydrated, metabolically inactive

Nutrients Low requirement Decreased state (dormant)
Water Moist climates Slight increase • Too much sunlight damages bryophytes (better
Solar radiation Low light conditions Decreased resistant when moist)
Humidity High levels >50% Decreased
Wind Intermediate Decreased
 Façade implementation; city climate

Conditions Limits

Temperature 15 - 25 °C Increased • Bryophytes are in a dehydrated, metabolically inactive

Nutrients Low requirement Decreased state (dormant)
Water Moist climates Slight increase • Too much sunlight damages bryophytes (better
Solar radiation Low light conditions Decreased resistant when moist)
Humidity High levels >50% Decreased
Wind Intermediate Decreased

Design tool
 Façade implementation; city climate

Conditions Limits

Temperature 15 - 25 °C Increased • Bryophytes are in a dehydrated, metabolically inactive

Nutrients Low requirement Decreased state (dormant)
Water Moist climates Slight increase • Too much sunlight damages bryophytes (better
Solar radiation Low light conditions Decreased resistant when moist)
Humidity High levels >50% Decreased
Wind Intermediate Decreased
 Façade implementation; city climate

Conditions Limits

Temperature 15 - 25 °C Increased • The Netherlands 21 days >25°C

Nutrients Low requirement Decreased • +/- 30 days <50% relative humidity in summer
Water Moist climates Slight increase
Solar radiation Low light conditions Decreased
Humidity High levels >50% Decreased
Wind Intermediate Decreased
City climate to city structure
Challenging and potential urban scenario’s in Rotterdam

(Van der Hoeven & Wandl, 2015)

 City climate to city structure
Challenging and potential urban scenario’s in Rotterdam

Building envelope [m2] Sky view factor

 Rotterdam
Challenging and potential urban scenario’s in Rotterdam

Cool district Kralingen

 City climate to city structure

LCZ 1 LCZ 6

LCZ 2 LCZ 7

LCZ 3 LCZ 8

LCZ 4 LCZ 9

LCZ 5 LCZ 10

LCZ’s, reproduced from Oke, Mills,

Christen, & Voogt, 2017
 Rotterdam
Challenging and potential urban scenario’s in Rotterdam

Cool district Kralingen

LCZ 1 – Compact Highrise LCZ 3 – Compact lowrise

LCZ 5 – Open midrise
High building envelope ratio
High sky view factor

Representative neighborhood
typology in The Netherlands
 Rotterdam
Challenging and potential urban scenario’s in Rotterdam

Cool district Kralingen

LCZ 1 – Compact Highrise LCZ 3 – Compact lowrise

LCZ 5 – Open midrise
High building envelope ratio
High sky view factor

Representative neighborhood
typology in The Netherlands
 Kralingen

LCZ 5 – Open midrise LCZ 3 – Compact lowrise

Building plan fraction Building plan fraction

37% 60%

Canyon aspect Canyon aspect

0.5 1

Building height Building height

+/- 13 m +/- 7.5 m
 Field survey

LCZ 5 – Open midrise LCZ 3 – Compact lowrise

Building plan fraction Building plan fraction

37% 60%

Canyon aspect Canyon aspect

0.5 1

Building height Building height

+/- 13 m +/- 7.5 m
 Field survey
Match literature with real life scenario

LCZ 5 – Open midrise LCZ 3 – Compact lowrise

Building plan fraction Building plan fraction

37% 60%

Canyon aspect Canyon aspect

0.5 1

Building height Building height

+/- 13 m +/- 7.5 m
 Field survey
The bryophyte growth in the midrise area will be more abundant.

LCZ 5 – Open midrise LCZ 3 – Compact lowrise

Building plan fraction Building plan fraction

37% 60%

Canyon aspect Canyon aspect

0.5 1

Building height Building height

+/- 13 m +/- 7.5 m
 Field survey
The bryophyte growth in the midrise area will be more abundant.

LCZ 5 – Open midrise LCZ 3 – Compact lowrise

Building plan fraction Building plan fraction

37% 60%

Canyon aspect Canyon aspect

0.5 1

Building height Building height

+/- 13 m +/- 7.5 m
 Field survey
The bryophyte growth in the midrise area will be more abundant.

LCZ 5 – Open midrise LCZ 3 – Compact lowrise

Field survey
Field survey

Solar radiation
 Field survey

Humidity
 Field survey

Water availability
Field survey

Surface angle
Design tool
Designing the panel geometry
 Design tool
Designing the panel geometry

Vertical pattern Horizontal pattern

 Design tool
Designing the panel geometry

Vertical pattern Horizontal pattern

Self shading geometry

 Design tool
Designing the panel geometry

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage
 Design tool

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage

Designer
 Design tool

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage
Section Section
 Design tool

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage Plan view

 Design tool

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage

Radiation analysis design location 21st of June

 Design tool

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility Visibility on bryophytes

[5] Coverage
 Design tool

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage
Design tool
 Design tool

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage
How to design a bioreceptive facade panel in urban environmental
conditions of The Netherlands?
 Design

Worst case scenario in representative neighborhood

 Design

Worst case scenario in representative neighborhood

 Design

Vertical pattern Horizontal pattern

 Design

Vertical pattern Horizontal pattern

 Panel design 1

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage

(Freepik, n.d.)
 Panel design 1

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage
 Panel design 1

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage
 Panel design 1

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage

Zigzagged
 Panel design 1

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage

Radiation on panel
variations
 Panel design 1

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage

Zigzagged
 Panel design 1

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage

Surface angle
Panel design 1
 Design

Vertical pattern Horizontal pattern

 Panel design 2

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage

Field observations
 Panel design 2

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage
 Panel design 2

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage

Waterflow
 Panel design 2

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage
 Panel design 2

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage

Radiation on panel
variations
 Panel design 2

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage

Section
 Panel design 2

[1] Design concept

[2] Moisture

[3] Radiation measurements / shading assessment

[4] Visibility

[5] Coverage

Radiation on panel
variations
Panel design 2
Panel 1 Panel 2
 Comparison
Panel 1 Panel 2
 Comparison; Moisture
Panel 1 Panel 2
 Comparison; Radiation
Panel 1 Panel 2
 Comparison; Coverage
Panel 1 Panel 2

• Surface area; 0.29 m2 • Surface area 0.25 m2

• Downward facing surface; 0.06 m2 • Downward facing surface; 0.09 m2
 Comparison
Panel 1 Panel 2

• Radiation; panel 1 performs better in terms of

average sun hours on the panel, especially as H
increases.
• The surface area of panel 1 is more than panel 2,
this means the coverage is potentially higher.
• The surface angle of panel 1 is more suiting for
bryophytes; less downward facing surfaces. This
influences the coverage positively.
 Comparison
Panel 1 Panel 2

• Radiation; panel 1 performs better in terms of • Moisture; in terms of moisture panel 2 seems
average sun hours on the panel, especially as H more promising. The panel extends the water
increases. flow and is able to retain water.
• The surface area of panel 1 is more than panel 2,
this means the coverage is potentially higher.
• The surface angle of panel 1 is more suiting for
bryophytes; less downward facing surfaces. This
influences the coverage positively.
What is the impact of bioreceptive facade panels on the urban environment
in The Netherlands?
 Climate simulations

• Goal: Measuring direct factors of bryophytes presence in the urban climate at

street height in the urban canyon

• Temperature and humidity

• ENVI-met climate modelling software

 Climate simulations

• Goal: Measuring direct factors of bryophytes presence in the urban climate at

street height in the urban canyon

• Temperature and humidity

• ENVI-met climate modelling software

• Boundary model of different meteorological parameters

Simulation model
 Climate simulations

• Goal: Measuring direct factors of bryophytes presence in the urban climate at

street height in the urban canyon

• Temperature and humidity

• ENVI-met climate modelling software

• Main 3D model including materials, vegetation and soil

Simulation model
 Simulation input

• Weather data from EPW file (Rotterdam)

• 24 h simulation, starting at sunrise

Simulation model
 Simulation input

• Weather data from EPW file (Rotterdam)

• 24 h simulation, starting at sunrise

• Average summer day in The Netherlands (<25 °C)

°C

Meteorological summer
Simulation day Simulation model
 Simulation input
• LCZ 3 – Compact lowrise
• Middle street
• Receptor (1.5 m)

Simulation model
 Simulation input
• LCZ 3 – Compact lowrise
• Middle street
• Receptor (1.5 m)

N
 Simulation input
• LCZ 3 – Compact lowrise
• Middle street
• Receptor (1.5 m)
• Gardens simplified into grass surface
• Façade greening applied to SE and NW facing facades

Simulation model
 Simulation input
• LCZ 3 – Compact lowrise
• Middle street
• Receptor (1.5 m)
• Gardens simplified into grass surface
• Façade greening applied to SE and NW facing facades
• Simplification model to 3m x 3m grid

Simulation model
 Façade panel properties
• Panel coverage; Panel 1

Coverage ratio =
surface area ratio panel * moss coverage panel *
window-to-wall ratio

1.8 * 0.8 * 0.82 = 1.18

 Façade panel properties; scenario 1
• Facade coverage; 70%

All closed surface covered

 Façade panel properties; scenario 2
• Facade coverage; 40%

Least amount of coverage

 Façade panel properties
• Moss surface area= façade coverage * panel coverage

• Façade coverage in configuration

84%

42%
Bryophyte properties
 Simulations
• Simulation 1: Baseline measurement – no greening present (red brick facades)

• Simulation 2: Measurement scenario 1 - Moss

• Simulation 3: Measurement scenario 2 - Moss

 Simulations
• Simulation 1: Baseline measurement – no greening present (red brick facades)

• Simulation 2: Measurement scenario 1 - Moss

• Simulation 3: Measurement scenario 2 - Moss

• Simulation 4: Measurement scenario 1 – Ivy facade

Temperature reduction
Relative humidity
Profiles
Profiles
Conclusion
 Conclusion

• The simulations show the maximum outdoor temperature reduction during an average summer day in an urban canyon at screen height of a
representative urban configuration in The Netherlands is a range between

Minimum coverage Optimum coverage

+/- 0.2 °C +/- 0.55 °C

 Conclusion

• The simulations show the maximum outdoor temperature reduction during an average summer day in an urban canyon at screen height of a
representative urban configuration in The Netherlands is a range between

Minimum coverage Optimum coverage

+/- 0.2 °C +/- 0.55 °C

• The simulations show the maximum outdoor relative humidity increase during an average summer day in an urban canyon at screen height of a
representative urban configuration in The Netherlands is a range between

Minimum coverage Optimum coverage

5.48% 10.21%
 Conclusion

• The bioreceptive façade panels perform better in terms of temperature reduction and humidity increase
compared to competitive green wall Ivy

• The bioreceptive façade panels change the time profiles of the humidity levels,
with the Ivy greening this effect is not present
 Discussion

• The results are an indication for moss facade in one single climatic condition and configuration.

• Orientation
• Different seasons
• Wind direction/speed

• Influence plant properties; Ivy and Moss facade

 Conclusions/discussion
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?
 Conclusions/discussion
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?
Limits of the urban climate

• Dormant bryophytes can lose their aesthetic value (dormant mosses turn brown), their ability to reduce air temperature (evaporation) and partially
their ability to improve air quality(photosynthesis, purify air)

• High levels of solar radiation damages bryophytes

 Conclusions/discussion
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?
The impact of bryophytes

• Outdoor temperature reduction seems little but still many variables of influence, indoor temperature reduction neglected.

• Promising humidity level increase; contributes to their own habitat conditions.

• Temperature and humidity profiles change.

• Mosses seem more promising than Ivy façade.

 Discussion
Are bioreceptive façade panels an effective measure to improve city climates in The Netherlands?
Bryophytes as façade system

Green facade Living wall Bioreceptive facade

 Discussion
Green facade Living wall Bioreceptive facade

Material and system

thickness
 Discussion
Green facade Living wall Bioreceptive facade

Water retainment
Air purification
Humidity increase
 Discussion
Green facade Living wall Bioreceptive facade

Water retainment
Air purification
Humidity increase
Temperature reduction?
 Discussion
Green facade Living wall Bioreceptive facade

Water retainment
Air purification
Humidity increase
But;
Limited by dormancy
 Discussion
Green facade Living wall Bioreceptive facade

Resilient system
Promising for continuing research
Promising for continuing research

• Relationship between exterior/interior temperature and bryophytes

• Physical plant properties of bryophytes and species selection

• Field testing panel geometries, optimize coverage and material

Thank you for listening!
References
Aničić, M., Tomašević, M., Tasić, M., Rajšić, S., Popović, A., Frontasyeva, M., Lierhagen, S., &
Steinnes, E. (2009). Monitoring of trace element atmospheric deposition using dry and wet
moss bags: Accumulation capacity versus exposure time. Journal of Hazardous Materials,
171(1-3), 182-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.05.112
DeMilked. (2015). The Tower of Cedars will be the first vertical evergreen forest in the world
[Render]. https://www.demilked.com/green-apartment-building-tower-trees-tour-des-
cedres-stefano-boeri/
Freepik. (n.d.). Close up of moss on tree [Photograph]. https://www.freepik.com/premium-
photo/close-up-moss-tree-nature-life-background-close-up-tree-bark-with-moss-tree-bark-
texture-with-green-moss_1190061.htm
Guillitte, O. (1995). Bioreceptivity: a new concept for building ecology studies. Science of The
Total Environment, 167(1-3), 215- 220.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-9697(95)04582-l
Manso, S., & Aguado, A. (2016). The use of bio-receptive concrete as a new typology of living
wall systems. Matériaux & Techniques, 104(5), 502.
https://doi.org/10.1051/mattech/2016028
Oke, T. R., Mills, G., Christen, A., & Voogt, J. A. (2017). Introduction. In Urban Climates.
Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139016476
Van der Hoeven, F., & Wandl, A. (2015). Hotterdam: Hoe ruimte Rotterdam warmer maakt,
hoe dat van invloed is op de gezondheid van de inwoners, en wat er aan te doen is.
https://books.bk.tudelft.nl/index.php/press/catalog/book/isbn.9789461865069