![]() It may be that the client wishes to offer VIP tenants a private waiting area, or that having 10 elevator cars in-line delivers some desired layout need or visual impact. Replacing conventional controls with destination-based systems removes this design constraint, offering architects the freedom to plan the best layout for achieving the client's other project objectives. This is only logical: Having three or four or more cars in line would downgrade service by requiring longer door-hold times to comply with local codes, ADAAG and other accessibility requirements. With this in mind, a four-elevator bank should stand two-facing-two. ![]() Elevator layouts have traditionally been dictated by efficiency of core area, user proximity, and accessibility requirements such as the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG). “With today's personalization and access capabilities, buildings in general have better handling capacities, lower overall wait times and lower traffic times in all modes: up peak, down peak, interfloor and the like.” “These options also improve circulation flow and the way users move through buildings while providing more efficiency for the building owner,” says Schindler's Lippman. The control system can be reprogrammed to suit these needs, which frees the architectural design team from having to predict changing use patterns. For instance, some high-traffic floors may require destination-based dispatching more than others, simply based on the particular occupant's business. The data collection and analysis capabilities of some destination-dispatch systems can also adjust the elevator response to new patterns. The elevator control interface can be located centrally, which then directs the user to a specific car-by letter, for example-among multiple banks.ĭispersing riders among various banks and cars also eases flow of traffic and crowding. This allows the building designers more latitude in where elevator shafts are located: elevators and elevator banks can be spaced farther from one another, if desired, to separate uses-a hotel and condominium, for example-or so they are better positioned to serve the layout needs of upper floors. Unlike standard two-button controls, a destination control terminal assigns a particular car to each rider, alerting them as to which car will serve them. These trip times usually do not include the time end-users spend waiting alone or in clusters for the next car. Typical elevator designs are based on up peak roundtrip time calculations, which describe the volume handled during a peak in trips up the elevators-for example, a morning rush-hour or post-lunchtime maximum in an office building. Alterations both subtle and radical represent increased architectural flexibility to improve upon delivery of project goals, including the following areas: Incorporating destination-dispatch models into project planning can alter the potential design results. User data can be analyzed and weighed against factors such as building code limits on elevator car speed the results will inform such choices as core and bank layouts, number of elevator shafts and cars, as well as shaft heights, express and skip-stop options, as well as dedicated elevators for specific uses or occupants. In project pre-planning and schematic design, studies of intended elevator usage and user behaviors should be considered in developing the core design and circulation scheme. Beyond these benefits for building occupants and owners, there are new trends in architectural design that leverage and exploit the technology.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |