doc. Ing. Daniela Bošová, Ph.D.

doc. Ing. Daniela Bošová, Ph.D., Ing. Michaela Kostelecká, Ph.D., Ing. arch. Dominika Výšková

15124 Ústav stavitelství II

Neodborné zásahy do konstrukce lidových staveb mohou vést ke ztrátě autentických konstrukcí tradičního stavitelství, ztrátě památkově hodnotného architektonického výrazu objektu, ale také ke zhoršení vnitřního mikroklimatu objektu, které může ohrožovat zdraví jeho obyvatel. Příspěvek se zaměřuje na rešerši literatury týkající se dané problematiky a hledání východisek pro další směřování výzkumu. Cílem práce je rozpoznání a popsání rizik, která hrozí při nekoncepčních nebo dílčích stavebních úpravách staveb lidové architektury a hledání nástrojů pro předcházení vzniku problematických stavebních úprav.

Detail

doc. Ing. Daniela Bošová, Ph.D., doc. Ing. Lenka Prokopová, Ph.D., Ing. Michaela Kostelecká, Ph.D.

15124 Ústav stavitelství II

Characterizing the surface of a material or product is important in some industries because roughness control offers the opportunity for further optimization. It is necessary to measure roughness, eg in medical technology, the automotive industry, electronics and semiconductors. It is also necessary to determine the roughness in construction, such as glass or wood, concrete or plaster. Currently, there are a number of conventional 3D measuring systems, which for the most part perform contact profile measurements. However, contact measurement may damage the material being measured or may not be able to provide correct data for some types of materials or surfaces. Among other things, the operation of these devices is difficult and very time consuming, and therefore expensive. The article presents non-contact roughness measurement on selected building materials using a Lext OLS3000 confocal scanning microscope. Measurements on this unique device can be performed in real time, the measurement is fully automatic, the resolution is in nanometers. Said microscope provides the possibility to measure the roughness in two ways. The article describes and compares two measurement methods. The accuracy of the measurement and the factors that affect the measurement itself are also described.

Detail

doc. Ing. Daniela Bošová, Ph.D., doc. Ing. Lenka Prokopová, Ph.D., Ing. Michaela Kostelecká, Ph.D.

15124 Ústav stavitelství II

The paper discusses the use of a modern 3D confocal scanning microscope Lext OLS3000 for the purpose of direct determination of porosity and pore distribution in the structure of silicate composites. The measurement results are determined on the example of a comparison of two methods according to ČSN EN 480-11 and direct optical determination according to the prepared methodology of the LEXT microscope software.

Detail

doc. Ing. Daniela Bošová, Ph.D., doc. Ing. Lenka Prokopová, Ph.D., Ing. Michaela Kostelecká, Ph.D.

15124 Ústav stavitelství II

The article presents the degradation of selected textile fibers. In addition to the degradation of the fibers themselves stored in an aggressive environment, the degradation of these fibers applied in fiber cement boards is also monitored. Fiber failure at the fiber-matrix interface was also monitored.

Detail

doc. Ing. Daniela Bošová, Ph.D.

15124 Ústav stavitelství II

Tools integrated in BIM software enable the evaluation of the indoor environmental quality already in the early stages of design and its optimization in terms of the whole range of requirements, which can prevent costly errors and undesirable compromises in later stages of design. The aim of this paper is to facilitate architects' orientation in the available tools for BIM analysis of the indoor environment during the design of the building. Within the software environment of the two most frequently used BIM software on the market - Revit and ArchiCAD - tools (native program functions and add-ons) are mapped and compared with the specialized software used solely for assessing individual areas of building physics. The evaluation is illustrated on case studies of two residential buildings in the Czech Republic. The most important feature showed to be the ease of use within the software environment and the possibility of applying the feedback obtained from the software analysis to the architectural design.

Detail

doc. Ing. Daniela Bošová, Ph.D.

15124 Ústav stavitelství II

The quality of indoor environment in buildings is one of the key factors of user satisfaction, as it affects their health and well-being. The indoor environment comprises of several components; the chief among them being the thermal and humidity microclimate, lighting, acoustics and indoor air quality. These can also be summed up by the term building physics. The quality of the final indoor environment is largely decided in the initial phases of the building design. The spatial and material configuration of the house determines most of the daylight, acoustics and thermal qualities of the designed spaces. While, to some extent, it is possible to fix the indoor environment of a finished building by installing additional technologies, it is of course costly in terms of both money and energy efficiency. It is therefore a crucial skill for architects to be able to foresee the impact of their decisions in the early design stages on the indoor environmental quality in the finished building. Finding a compromise between the often contradictory demands on individual qualities (for example daylight versus heating) and optimizing the building design in a holistic manner is the other expertise necessary for ensuring a quality indoor environment. This article illustrates the architectural design process and its connection to the building physics on 3 examples/case studies of contemporary residential buildings. The individual factors (daylight, thermal qualities and acoustics) are analyzed mostly using software simulation methods. The factors and their significance for the building design are synthesized, taking into account also the legislative requirements for residential buildings. The article is a part of a larger research project which tries to answer the following set of questions: Which architectural features influence the individual factors of the indoor environment and how? and How do the individual factors of the indoor environment interact and influence each other?

Detail

doc. Ing. Daniela Bošová, Ph.D., doc. Ing. Lenka Prokopová, Ph.D., Ing. arch. Pavla Vrbová

15124 Ústav stavitelství II

Detail

doc. Ing. Daniela Bošová, Ph.D.

15124 Ústav stavitelství II

Nowadays, when the population of the developed world spends more than 90% of their time indoors, the quality of the environment in the interior of buildings is gaining in importance, especially in the case of residential development. How does the architectural concept of residential buildings affect the parameters of the resulting indoor environment? In the article, case studies of three residential buildings in Prague are presented: a tenement house from the late 19th century in a block development in Prague Vinohrady, a precast panel house in a neighbourhood from the late 20th century and a residential complex from the twenty-first century. The light, acoustic and thermal microclimate in the apartments is assessed in the context of current requirements, taking into account the requirements at the time of construction. In the nineteenth century, the requirements for the quality of the indoor environment were not explicitly set, with a few exceptions, but the parameters of the apartments in tenement houses often hold up in the current context. In the second half of the twentieth century, specific criteria for the indoor environment were already laid down in legislation, with demands for daylight and sunlight playing a disproportionate role in the architecture of buildings and the urban design of residential neighbourhoods. At present, the requirements for residential buildings are very complex, not only in terms of the quality of the indoor environment, and are usually met to the minimum necessary extent, with the economic aspect playing a key role. The architect plays the role of coordinator; whose task is to achieve a balance between a number of often conflicting requirements.

Detail

doc. Ing. Daniela Bošová, Ph.D., doc. Ing. Lenka Prokopová, Ph.D.

15124 Ústav stavitelství II

Daylight in buildings is evaluated using the daylight factor DF [%], which is defined as the ratio of the light level inside a structure (Ei = illuminance due to daylight at a point on the indoors working plane) to the light level outside the structure (Eo = simultaneous outdoor illuminance on a horizontal plane from an unobstructed hemisphere of overcast sky). The illuminance values are calculated for the overcast winter sky with Eo=5000 lx. In the Czech republic (and many other European countries), the daylight factor in residential buildings is evaluated in two points in the room, located in the middle of the room’s depth and 1 m from the side walls on a horizontal working plane 0,85 m above the floor. The students of architecture are taught to calculate the daylight factor in the specific points of a room and to determine whether the values fit the legislative requirements. However, they have a hard time imagining what the room and its daylighting actually looks like. Therefore, a practical experimental simulation was performed. Various values of daylight factor were simulated and the participants were asked to perform several task in three different lighting conditions The goals of the experiment were: To demonstrate to the participants what the required daylight factor values actually look like, so that they are able to connect the abstract values to real rooms. To determine whether the architecture student perception of daylight inside of buildings corresponds with the reality. To verify whether the daylight factor values required by the legislative are sufficient for performing certain visually demanding task commonly done at home. The experiment is a part of a larger research project, which aims to improve the teaching of building physics (designing buildings with a good indoor environmental quality) in architecture universities.

Detail

doc. Ing. Daniela Bošová, Ph.D., doc. Ing. Lenka Prokopová, Ph.D.

15124 Ústav stavitelství II

Detail