首页> 外文会议>Healthy water environmental of buildings >Comparison of Design Methods for Water Supply Pipework: a Case Study Analysis
【24h】

Comparison of Design Methods for Water Supply Pipework: a Case Study Analysis

机译:供水管道设计方法比较:案例分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Recent years have seen an emergence, internationally, of different methods for the assessment of simultaneous flows for the design of domestic hot and cold water systems for buildings.However, in the UK, the Loading Unit methodology continues to underpin design standards and guidelines.The evolution of these UK-based codes has meant that transparency has eroded, and correspondingly, so too the degree to which discretion and judgement may be exercised by the design engineer.At the same time, it is clear that the types of appliances integrated within buildings and the user-behaviours that determine demand patterns and 'level of serviceability' expectations have also changed significantly.As a result, there is growing,and compelling, evidence that the current methodology results in oversizing of networks and ancillary equipment.Using a case study building, this paper presents a comparison of two standards used within a UK setting.It confirms previous research that illustrates the perceived over-prediction of design flow rate by BS6700relative to BSEN806.
机译:近年来,国际上已经出现了用于评估建筑物的家用热水和冷水系统设计同时流动的不同方法的方法,但是在英国,加载单元方法继续作为设计标准和准则的基础。这些基于英国的法规的发展意味着透明度已经受到侵蚀,相应地,设计工程师也可能在一定程度上行使酌处权和判断力。与此同时,很明显,建筑物内集成的设备类型因此,确定需求模式和“可服务性水平”预期的用户行为也发生了显着变化。结果,越来越多的和令人信服的证据表明,当前的方法论导致网络和辅助设备的规模过大。本文将英国环境中使用的两种标准进行了比较,证实了先前的研究可以说明这一观点。 d。相对于BSEN806,BS6700对设计流量的过高预测。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号