A comparison between atrium and courtyard cooling efficiency in hot tropical climate,

implementing different passive cooling strategies

Leila Moosavi, Norhayati Mahyuddin, and Norafida Ab Ghafar

Citation: J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015); doi: 10.1063/1.4926760

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4926760
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/rse/7/4
Published by the American Institute of Physics
 JOURNAL OF RENEWABLE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 7, 043108 (2015)

A comparison between atrium and courtyard cooling

efficiency in hot tropical climate, implementing different
passive cooling strategies
Leila Moosavi,a) Norhayati Mahyuddin, and Norafida Ab Ghafar
Urban Conservation and Tropical Architecture (UCTA), Faculty of Built Environment,
University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
(Received 6 April 2015; accepted 26 June 2015; published online 14 July 2015)

This paper identifies the most efficient passive cooling strategies implemented in
atriums and courtyards in the tropics. For this purpose, a field study of a naturally
ventilated atrium building in the tropics is briefly reported upon in which five
different modes are defined based on changing the atrium’s physical behavior and
hybrid evaporative cooling usage. The results are compared with the field study
results of two naturally ventilated courtyard houses with the same climate. The
results indicate that the highest cooling efficiency is achieved when cross
ventilation is coupled with the stack effect in both the atrium and the courtyard
(and with evaporative cooling in the atrium), by implementing large inlet openings
in the atrium different heights and the courtyard adjacent space (preferably on two
opposite sides). In these modes, although the atrium and the courtyard airflow
patterns are similar, the atrium also benefits from reverse airflow in the morning. In
addition, the airflow pattern has a more important role than the airflow rate in the
modification of the indoor thermal condition, in both the atrium and the courtyard.
C 2015 AIP Publishing LLC. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4926760]
V

I. INTRODUCTION
With the recent highlighting of global warming and the high amounts of pollutant emis-
sions, the necessity for utilizing passive design strategies in buildings to achieve indoor thermal
comfort is currently being given serious attention.1 This is highlighted in large modern commer-
cial and office buildings, especially when they tend to benefit more from natural daylight, like
atriums, which result in overheating and additional air conditioning loads.2 Atria (as a feature
of passive design strategies) in modern large buildings are incorporated into the built environ-
ment more, and more frequently,3 in many different building types. The term “atrium” refers to
a sheltered courtyard or glazed garden within a building. They usually have a high interior cov-
ered by a glass roof and walls surrounded by several stories or galleries.4 Courtyards are also
utilized to improve the thermal condition of buildings, and have been in place for millennia as
a climatic modifier in houses in the Middle East and Mediterranean with their hot and dry cli-
mates. Moreover, courtyards have been used in shop houses in the traditional urban areas with
hot and humid climates, such as Malaysia (Malacca and Penang).5
Both atria and courtyards help to optimize the climatic sources in various building scales
and types in different ways, such as utilizing natural ventilation and providing natural daylight,
as well as increasing the cooling capacity especially when it is incorporated with different
assisted techniques. However, neglecting their environmental potential could lead to overheat-
ing, thermal discomfort of the occupants, and a high amount of energy consumption.4,6,7
Indoor air movement as one of the environmental factors influences the thermal sensation
of occupants could improve comfort condition especially in naturally ventilated buildings.8 It

a)
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail: leilamoosavi@yahoo.com.

1941-7012/2015/7(4)/043108/15/$30.00 7, 043108-1 C 2015 AIP Publishing LLC

V
043108-2 Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

could stretch the upper range of comfort in these kinds of buildings,5 which is influential for
the climates with high air temperature and humidity.
Many studies have been conducted in the past decades to improve naturally ventilated atria.
Lin and Linden6 studied the impact of geometry and opening size on the indoor thermal condi-
tion of an atrium and adjacent spaces using the chamber test. Karavaa and Athienitis9 studied
the cooling strategies in an atrium building via hybrid ventilation using a full scale experimen-
tal method. Wang and Huang7 investigated the impact of upper opening control with hybrid
and natural ventilation using a mathematical and experimental model. Furthermore, Tanaka and
Okumiya10 conducted field measurements on the impact of a double-glazed external wall of an
atrium on reducing cooling loads. Bensalem11 compared the effect of different roof geometries
and types on indoor thermal condition in courtyard and atrium-type buildings.
Among all the studies, just a limited number focused on atria in hot and humid climates in
which fully natural ventilation was not addressed. Therefore, a unique atrium case study with
natural ventilation strategy which is also a low energy atrium office building was chosen, and
monitoring and site measurement was conducted. Due to the nature of the field studies and
since the number of the studies in this subject are limited, among similar studies,12–15 two case
studies, Sadafi and Salleh5 and Rajapaksha and Nagai,14 have been investigated previously
about courtyards in hot and humid climates, and were considered in this study to be compared
with the case study atrium.
The main objectives of this study are a comparative study investigating the cooling per-
formance of an atrium and courtyard in order to investigate the effect of different implemented
passive strategies, and consequently, identifying the way to optimize the indoor thermal condi-
tion of both the atrium and the courtyard by utilizing the most influential passive cooling strat-
egies regarding the required design considerations.
In order to achieve the abovementioned objectives, in Sec. II, this study reports briefly
on the field study carried out for 10 days from 15 November until 1 December 2013 on the
four-story high atrium of an office building in the tropics implementing cross ventilation, an
evaporative cooling hybrid system and stack effect. Two previously investigated case studies
are also introduced. Then, the results of the atrium monitoring and examining the outcomes
of the abovementioned studies about courtyards are reviewed and compared in Secs. III
through VII. The most efficient implementing passive cooling strategies in both the courtyards
and the atrium in modifying indoor thermal conditions are identified. Finally, in Sec. VIII
some recommendations about the required design parameters to optimize the atrium/courtyard
cooling efficiency in hot and humid climates are proposed.

II. CASE STUDIES

The case studies are one naturally ventilated atrium office building and two naturally venti-
lated courtyard houses located in a hot and humid climate. In case study A, we investigated the
effect of different compositions of inlet and outlet openings with/without hybrid evaporative
cooling on the indoor environment of the atrium by monitoring and measurement of the build-
ing. On the other hand, in case studies B and C, in addition to the impact of different opening
compositions on the thermal conditions of the courtyards and adjacent spaces, the thermal
impact of introducing the courtyard in case B to the house also was evaluated (see Table I).5,14

A. Case study A (atrium)

1. Ambient conditions (case A)
In this case study (atrium), the premises are located in Putrajaya, which is 70 km to the
south of Kuala Lumpur. Being close to the equator at a latitude of 2 560 N and longitude of
101 410 , The yearly mean air temperature is around 27  C, while its relative humidity (RH) is
reported to be about 70%–90% annually. In addition, the mean of maximum air temperature
per month ranges from 33.5  C in March and April to 31.9  C in December. The average of
minimum air temperature ranges from 23.1  C in January to 24.3  C in May.16 Therefore, the
 043108-3
Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar
TABLE I. Summarized information of the three discussed case studies.

Building Number of Surrounded Implemented Openings’ Opening’s

type floor Material areas Location Climate Method strategies attributes location Geometry

Case A Atrium 4 High-mass Offices Putrajaya, Hot and Field Natural Seven inlets (Inlet) in the west
office Malaysia humid measurement ventilation, (atrium lobby) and south façades,
building stack flue, three inlets In ground,
water wall (bridge), eighteen first and second
outlets (flue) floors, (outlet)
in the east
façade of the flue
Case B5 Terrace 2 Low-mass Living, Kuala Lumpur, Hot and Field Natural Two inlet (Inlet) in the
house dining Malaysia humid measurement, ventilation, openings north west

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

zones ECOTECT solar protecting, (living area) façade, ground floor
thermal mass
Case C14 Courtyard 1 High-mass Living room, Colombo, Hot and Field Natural Two inlet (Inlet) in the
house bedrooms Sri Lanka humid measurement, ventilation, openings north and
two corridors computational fluid stack effect, in the corridors south facades,
dynamics thermal mass ground floor
043108-4 Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

FIG. 1. The internal view of the atrium includes a sitting zone, landscape features (a) and offices and atrium roof (b).

temperature and humidity are fairly high and steady throughout the year in Malaysia,5 which
were considered as the main factors to achieve comfort in a tropical climate in previous
studies.17 These are coupled with considerable rainfall and low wind speed.

2. Atrium building condition

The building is a large low energy office building with an atrium space in the center
attached by a lobby as a common space for meeting in a pleasant space (Figure 1(a)). The
atrium has a single glazed roof surrounded by four-story high airtight offices on three sides and
two-story bridges to the south (Figure 1(b)). It includes an entrance, reception, sitting zones in
the lobby, and landscape features and water features in the atrium. The atrium, lobby, and the
bridges on the upper floors facing the atrium are the only spaces that use natural ventilation to
provide comfort conditions for occupants.

3. Implemented cooling strategies

Natural ventilation in the atrium is mainly provided via four large sliding windows along
the street on the southern façade and four entrance doors on the western façade of the atrium
lobby at ground floor, which measured 5  2 m and 1.7  2 m, respectively; typically all are
left open (Figure 2). This is coupled with two assisted hybrid and passive techniques, namely,
the hybrid evaporative cooling on the internal north wall of atrium and the stack flue (Figures
3(a) and 3(b), respectively).

FIG. 2. Atrium lobby zones and location of sensors (a) and illustrating ventilation pattern in atrium lobby (b).
043108-5 Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

FIG. 3. Internal view of hybrid evaporative cooling system (a) and stack flue (b), a sample of the installed sensor in the
atrium (c).

4. Monitoring process
The sensors are mounted on ten stands inside the lobby and atrium ground floor at 1.1 m
and 1.8 m height above the floor level, as shown in Figures 2(a) and 3(c), to measure the tem-
perature and air velocity, whilst one weather station is located at about 3 m height above the
highest roof to monitor the outdoor conditions. In order to compare the efficiency of each mode
without the impact of the outdoor conditions interfering, the MANCOVA test in SPSS software
is implemented. Since the case study is an office building, the time of monitoring is from 8 am
to 5 pm when the building is occupied, i.e., mentioned as day time.
Five different modes during 10 days have been chosen, as below:
Mode 1: With opened ground floor openings, an evaporative cooling system and opened stack
flue outlets.
Mode 2: With opened ground floor openings, an evaporative cooling system and semi-opened
stack flue outlets and opened bridge openings.
Mode 3: With closed ground floor openings, an evaporative cooling system and opened stack flue
outlets.
Mode 4: With opened ground floor openings, the evaporative cooling system turned off, opened
stack flue outlets and opened bridge openings.
Mode 5: With closed ground floor openings, the evaporative cooling system turned off, and
closed stack flue outlets and closed bridge openings.
Each mode is designed to test the significance of a particular strategy like the impact of
cross ventilation, stack effect, evaporative cooling, or a combination thereof.

B. Case study B
In this case study, the premises are located in Kuala Lumpur. The weather condition is the
same as Putrajaya, which was described in Sec. II A 1. As shown in Table I and Figure 4, case
study B analyzes a two-story terrace house, measuring 219 m2. The front façade has big windows
to increase cross ventilation. Two different modes, the existing house (mode 1), and the house
with an internal courtyard adjacent to the living and dining zones (mode 2) are evaluated.5

C. Case study C
Case study C is a house in the suburb of Sri Lanka (Ceylon) with a latitude of 6.5 N. High
levels of humidity and relatively high temperatures characterize the ambient climate with a
mean monthly temperature from 27.2  C in November to 30.3  C in April and relative humidity
043108-6 Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

FIG. 4. The plans and section of the terrace house (case B). Reprinted with permission from Sadafi et al., Energy Build. 43,
887–893 (2011). Copyright 2011 Elsevier.

FIG. 5. The plan, section, and perspective of courtyard house with location of openings (case C). Reprinted with permission
from Rajapaksha et al., Renewable Energy 28, 1755–1778 (2003). Copyright 2003 Elsevier.

ranges from 70% to 80% throughout the year (Table I). As Figure 5 shows, the courtyard is
surrounded by a living room, sans partition in the west, and bedrooms in the east. It is also
linked to the outdoor spaces via two perpendicular corridors. Two modes are focused upon in
this study: closed openings in the façade (mode 1) and opened openings 1 and 2 throughout the
day (mode 2). Opening 1 and opening 2 are located on two opposite sides of the corridor and
measure 4.3 m2 and 3.6 m2, respectively.14

TABLE II. Average indoor and outdoor point’s temperature and air velocity through different modes in case A.

Variable Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5 Range

Temperature (  C) Indoor points (average) 27.29 27.04 27.99 27.63 26.55 26.55–27.99
Outdoor point 28.05 28.58 30.84 29.37 26.81 26.81–30.84
Air velocity (m/s) Indoor points (average) 0.14 0.13 0.08 0.20 0.09 0.08–0.20
Outdoor point 0.04 0.71 0.97 0.98 0.33 0.04–0.98
043108-7 Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

III. GENERAL INDOOR THERMAL CONDITION OF ATRIUM AND COURTYARD

In general, by introducing an atrium/courtyard, the thermal condition of a building in the
Tropics can be improved via (a) heat loss through ventilation and conduction and (b) decreasing
and time-lagging the maximum temperature through the high-mass walls. As Table II shows, in
the atrium, by implementing different passive cooling strategies in all modes, the indoor tem-
perature of the atrium and lobby is more constant than the outdoor temperature with a reduction
of around 0.3–3  C. However, the indoor air velocity is lower than the outdoor wind speed and
stable in the range of 0.08–0.20 m/s.
Introducing courtyards also confirms this result, as by introducing a courtyard, in case B,
the temperature of the living room is reduced by almost 0.5  C. However, it also increases the
temperature of other adjacent areas (dining area, 0.7–0.9  C).5 The different impacts of the
atrium/courtyards on adjacent spaces are based on various factors, such as different opening
compositions and assisted cooling strategies, which are discussed in the subsequent sections.

IV. NATURAL VENTILATION IN COURTYARD AND ATRIUM

The efficiency of natural ventilation in modifying the thermal conditions of the atrium/
courtyard and their adjacent spaces depends on the type of airflow pattern and the composition
of the openings. As Figure 6 illustrates by implementing ground floor openings in the atrium,
the average indoor air temperature reduces slightly by about 0.2  C (comparing modes 3 and 1),
whereas by just increasing the inlet openings on the different atrium floors, the temperature
reduction is twice, 0.35  C (modes 1 and 2). The air velocity increase is also significant from
0.07 to 0.12 m/s on average (modes 3 and 4). This indicates the important role of cross ventila-
tion (inlet openings), especially when the inlet openings are located at different atrium floors,
to improve the indoor thermal condition.
The thermal response courtyard to change the composition of the openings is similar to the
atrium. For example, in case C, the courtyard without any inlet openings (openings 1 and 2)
experiences a temperature modification of only 0.7  C, which is a maximum of about 32  C,
whereas in the courtyard mode with inlet openings (openings 1 and 2), the maximum air tem-
perature is lowered by 2  C, with a 2-h time lag.14 This shows an increase in the courtyard effi-
ciency in reducing the daytime temperature benefiting from cross-ventilation.

A. Airflow pattern
Changing the opening composition affects the airflow pattern in both the atrium and the
courtyard, and consequently, leads to a different indoor thermal condition. This can occur based

FIG. 6. Average atrium points temperature and air velocity for different modes from 0800 to 1700 h (case A).
043108-8 Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

FIG. 7. The simulation of airflow patterns in two modes of case C, “(a) ‘up wind air funnel’; (b) a top vortex.” Reprinted
with permission from Rajapaksha et al., Renewable Energy 28, 1755–1778 (2003). Copyright 2003 Elsevier.

on the interaction between the wind and buoyancy driven natural ventilation in buildings,18 which
is not very easy to predict and control.19 Rajapaksha and Nagai14 defined two airflow patterns for
courtyard: an “upwind air funnel” with inlet openings (1 and 2), which discharge the stagnant
warmed air out, and the “suction zone” without inlet openings, allowing the fresh air in and out
from the sky via the same opening (see Figure 7).14 These patterns are also seen in atrium during
the day. When the inlet openings are opened, the different temperatures between the inlet and
outlet drive the fresh air in and exhaust the warm air accumulated beneath the atrium roof out. In
this case, the atrium, acts as an “air funnel.” On the other hand, in modes with closed inlet open-
ings (like mode 3), heat disperses just from the flue outlet openings, which clearly is not enough
to exhaust warmed air accumulated in the atrium and lobby. Furthermore, a little fresh air enters
from the atrium roof (flue), and returns to the outdoor space without affecting the points in the
atrium and lobby ground floor, as the “suction zone,” which causes the atrium and lobby to
remain at high temperature the rest of the day.
Therefore, generally, better modification of the indoor thermal conditions in both the atrium
and courtyard can occur when they mirror an air funnel driving the indoor air to outdoor spaces
(see Figure 2(b)). This is only made possible by installing appropriate inlet openings in the
atrium/courtyard space and their adjoining space.

B. Airflow rates during daytime

The airflow rate increases in tandem with the maximized opening size. However, the indoor
thermal condition of the atrium does not improve linearly with the increasing airflow rate. As
Figure 6 shows, generally, the indoor airflow generated by natural ventilation is too weak.
Among the different opening modes, the atrium experiences its highest air velocity in mode 4 in
which all the atrium lobby and two upper adjacent bridges openings are opened (0.14 m/s in aver-
age). However, this mode (mode 4) has the second highest temperature (27.58  C) among all
modes. This means that despite its higher air velocity, the thermal condition of the atrium lobby
is not improved. This result addresses the recommendation of Ref. 7, who said that to avoid the
influence of heated external air in indoor thermal conditions, upper-openings should be limited.
Case C addresses a similar condition with the atrium. In this case, the best thermal modifi-
cation (1  C) occurs with air change rates (ACHs) of about 1.5–2.0 ACH, when two outside
openings are utilized, whereas in the mode of courtyards with four openings, although the ACH
is 2.5, the temperature modification is invariably lower.14 This phenomenon may address the
results in the study of Ref. 2, which claimed that direct ventilation of the atrium can be detri-
mental to the ventilation of adjacent spaces in the atrium building. They proposed an optimum
inlet-to-outlet opening area ratio, intermediate size for upper openings, and smaller size for
lower openings to enhance flows in the adjacent areas. However, it can also be achieved by
using controllable flaps in indoor and outdoor openings during the day and night.20
On the other hand, it indicates that in the design of the atrium and courtyard building, the
airflow pattern has more effect on modification of the indoor air temperature in comparison to
the airflow rate measure.
043108-9 Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

FIG. 8. The trend of average points temperature and air velocity compared with outdoor from 0800 to 1700 h in mode 2, as
best mode (case A).

C. Stack effect
For the stack effect to occur, different air pressure densities due to various air temperatures
between the indoor and outdoor building are necessary. This is helpful in creating airflow,
exhausting hot and stagnant air, and improving the indoor thermal environment of the atrium dur-
ing the day. Based on the atrium monitored data, generally, the highest indoor and outdoor tem-
perature discrepancy during the day and night is from 12 pm to 4 pm, when at the same time the
outdoor temperature is in the highest value, and stack flue is also in its highest performance due
to the maximum solar heat absorbed via the flue surface and atrium glazed roof (see Figure 8).
Comparing the different modes indicates that despite the impact of outlet opening on both the in-
ternal temperatures and the airflow through the atrium building21 without implementing full cross
ventilation, the influence of maximizing the outlet opening size in the stack flue is not significant
(when mode 2 changes to mode 3, it increases the temperature about 1  C). In contrast, the stack
effect in the courtyard is mostly reported during the nighttime. However, it is useful for the provi-
sion of comfort conditions in the adjacent spaces in the beginning of the night, when the humidity
is high.14 The main reason for the different stack effect time in the atrium and courtyard is due
to the existing thermal stack flue on top of the atrium roof, as mentioned.
To create a stronger stack effect in the atrium/courtyard, the inlet openings in their adjacent
spaces, the availability of wind near the openings and lower temperature of the inlet openings
to outlet openings in the atrium/courtyard is required. This can be achieved by utilizing solar
assisted ventilation strategies, such as a stack flue, in case A, and solar chimney on top of the
atrium roof,22 as well as providing shaded verandahs or wide roof eaves on all of the courtyard
facades,14 in case C, to decrease the solar heat gain of the inlet openings. This leads to a tem-
perature gradient, and consequently, provides the necessary pressure difference between the
inlet and outlet opening areas of atrium/courtyard to create a stack effect.

V. EVAPORATIVE COOLING
As the recorded data indicates, an evaporative system can cool down the atrium indoor
environment. Despite using a hybrid evaporative system, the indoor relative humidity in the
atrium lobby is lower than the outdoor humidity most of the day (indoor range 79%–84%,
outdoor range 83%–85%). Comparing mode 4 with mode 2 (in case A) shows that omitting
evaporative cooling when coupled with more flue openings leads to a constant increase in the
indoor temperature (0.46  C) (see Figure 6; modes 2 and 4). Whereas, with no ventilation,
omitting evaporative cooling does not affect the indoor temperature negatively (mode 5).
However, the lack of air movement in this mode can lead to increasing indoor relative
043108-10 Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

humidity even in the mode without using evaporative cooling (4.3% more than mode 2 on av-
erage), which can result in a sensation of discomfort to the occupants. As a result, to take
benefit from the evaporative cooling, incorporating full cross ventilation and a semi-opened
stack flue outlet is recommended.

VI. SOLAR HEAT GAIN CONTROL

The heat gain received from the solar radiation depends on the time of year, climatic con-
ditions, and the configuration of the atrium/courtyards.13 Introducing an atrium/courtyard
increases the temperature of their adjacent spaces due to receiving much more solar heat from
the atrium glazed roof and windows located on the courtyard walls. This phenomenon is more
serious when the space receiving the solar radiation heat gets overheated and there is not
enough fenestration to disperse the heat.5 As is evident, the indoor temperature in the dining
room, in case B, will increase constantly to a range of 0.7–0.9  C all day and night due to the
introduction of a courtyard.5 To prevent this event, providing openings to the outside or to the
spaces with outside access to exhaust the warmed and stagnant air in the courtyard adjacent
spaces,5 while in the atrium, limited outlet openings in the atrium roof to prevent driving
warmed air, caused by thermal stratification, back to the atrium lobby at lower levels (like
modes 2 and 5), are recommended.
Installing internal blinds at atrium roof4,23 (Figure 9(a)), using different glazing types24 or
even utilizing an intelligent shading system in the atrium25 are different solutions that can
screen direct and diffused solar radiation from the top. In addition, utilizing shading roofs on
the courtyards, in case B,5 which, consequently, improves the thermal conditions of the adjoin-
ing spaces, as shown in Figure 9(b). Since the roofed courtyard can be regarded as an atrium, it
can be concluded that the performance of the atrium is superior to the courtyard in a small and
naturally ventilated building (case B). However, in the case of fully air conditioned surrounding
spaces, the thermal and energy performance of the courtyards and atriums differ. While the
open courtyard performs better in shorter buildings, the enclosed atrium performs better for
higher buildings.15
Thermal stratification as the main problem occurs from solar heat penetration to atriums
has been considered by researchers.6,23,26 One of the solutions is to design an appropriate size
of wall to roof area in atriums and roofed courtyards. For example, in case A, the wall-to-roof
height of about 3.5 m was implemented to control thermal stratification in the atrium space.
This is in line with the study of Ref. 23, which recommended a 2.5 m wall-to-roof height (with
the same proportion) for a three story side-lit atrium with natural ventilation to guarantee a
superior thermal and ventilation performance in the atrium building. In case B also, by imple-
menting a height of 500 mm in the courtyard roofs, the adjoining zone (living zone) experiences

FIG. 9. Atrium retractable shading device (a) (case A) and courtyard with shading roof (b) (case B). Reprinted with permis-
sion from Sadafi et al., Energy Build. 43, 887–893 (2011). Copyright 2011 Elsevier.
043108-11 Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

the lowest temperature5 (see Figure 9(b)). The veranda along the facade in the atrium and lobby
ground floor and retractable shading device on the atrium roof, in case A, are the other solar
control strategies implemented. However, the blinds are now out of service.

VII. THERMAL MASS

The material and thickness of the atrium and courtyard walls affect their thermal efficiency.
It can improve their passive cooling efficiency, especially by proving night ventilation,9,27,28
and it can be more effective when the high mass walls are exposed to the airflow. The conven-
ient interaction between the high mass atrium/courtyard wall and airflow not only lowers their
temperature but can also result in a delay of the maximum value (a longer time lag) in compar-
ing the ambient value, as a 1  C reduction of courtyard temperature with a time lag of 4 h in
critical hours at noon was reported. However, it can cause a slight increase in the temperature
in the mornings and afternoons.14
Changing the courtyard wall material, from brick to concrete with a lower U-value, also
has a significant effect on reduction of the adjacent area temperature during the critical hours at
noon time.5 In case A, the internal surfaces located in the atrium heat zones in upper levels,
like atrium roof west wall, receive more solar radiation during the daytime. For the above men-
tioned atrium roof west wall surface, thick concrete wall with high thermal mass was imple-
mented to minimize overheating during the critical time and lessen the possibility of thermal
stratification throughout the atrium space.

VIII. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

As Tables III and IV show, the cooling performance of the atrium/courtyard basically
depends on the strategy implemented, the inlet and outlet openings area, the location and the
composition. In the atrium, the highest cooling performance occurs when incorporating full
cross ventilation, stack effect (with limited flue outlet), and hybrid evaporative cooling during
the day (mode 2).

TABLE III. Thermal condition of atrium lobby among different modes during working time (case A).

Average Best mode implemented

Variable Best mode Worst mode discrepancy Range strategies

Temperature (  C) Mode 2 Mode 3 0.55 26–28.9 Fully cross ventilation/semi

stack flue/water wall
Air velocity (m/s) Mode 4 Mode 3 0.1 0.03–2.52 Fully cross ventilation/fully
stack flue

TABLE IV. Comparing the impacts of using courtyard on thermal condition of the courtyard and adjoining spaces in differ-
ent conditions.

Adjacent spaces Courtyard

High thermal
mass Cross ventilation Stack effect
(cases B and C) (case C) (case C)

Cross ventilation Solar protector

Variables (cases B and C) (case B) Day Night Day Night

Max. Temperature 0.5–2.9 0.6 1 0.5–1.0 2 0.5–1.0

reduction (  C) 1–3.4
Time lag (h) 2 … 4 1 2 1
Air velocity/ACH 1.5–2 (ACH)on ... ... ... 2 (ACH) ...
day, 0.4 m/s at night
 043108-12
TABLE V. Recommendation about atrium and courtyard design to optimize the efficiency of implemented different passive strategies.

Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar

Implemented Space Openings type/assisted Connected Roof/wall Assisted strategy
strategy type techniques Location spaces properties needed Recommendation

Natural Atrium Window/door Ground floor/first Set in air flow passage Semi glazed roof Water wall Adding upper level inlet
ventilation (opened) and second floors openings changing furniture
arrangement
Courtyard Window/door Large envelope openings Narrow and Porous roof with Stack effect, Geometry with same proportion
(opened) on two opposite sides long corridors convenient thermal mass with the building, to decrease
height/wall set in the depth of the adjacent spaces
airflow passage
Stack effect Atrium Flue Atrium roof Large glazed High thermal mass Cross ventilation Large inlet and
(full/semi opened) atrium roof wall (concrete) outlet opening size

Courtyard Window/door Two opposite sides Narrow and Shaded verandahs and Cross ventilation Highly connecting adjacent space
(opened) long corridors wide roof eaves for night to corridors for better heat

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

stack effect lose during the night
Solar heat Atrium Retractable Beneath the atrium High wall Light colored walls Stack flue Internal blind for the
gain control internal blind glazed roof to roof area glazed roof and walls

Courtyard Shading Envelope openings North-south Light colored roof, a porous Stack effect Shaded verandahs in the east and
devices, louvers longitudinal axis material structure, west sides or wide roof
with suitable height eaves on all of the facades
Evaporative Atrium Water wall Atrium north wall Exposed to air … Cross Changing the operating
cooling (on from 8 am till 5 pm) flow passage ventilation/stack flue time (2 h lag)

Thermal mass Courtyard Window/door Envelope openings High thermal mass Low mass roof material Stack effect High-mass internal walls
(opened) in airflow with convenient height and low-mass external walls
passage to have a
better interaction
043108-13 Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

In this mode, the indoor temperature reduces by about 0.55  C (compared to worst mode;
mode 3). Whereas in the courtyard, the highest performance occurs by implementing cross ven-
tilation in the adjacent space, the stack effect at night and high thermal mass for internal walls.
It can reduce the courtyard temperature by 1.3  C and 1–3  C during the day and night, respec-
tively, and the temperatures of adjacent spaces by about 3  C, and increase the ACH of the
courtyard (case C).
Despite the similar thermal behavior of both the atrium and the courtyard, the highest dis-
crepancy between the indoor and outdoor environment is not observed in the same time period.
In the atrium it is during the daytime whereas, in the courtyard it occurs during the night.
Furthermore, the critical time due to increasing humidity in the atrium and courtyard is differ-
ent. It is observed in the morning for the atrium and in the afternoon for the courtyard.
For the optimum implementation of each strategy, some design considerations should be
taken into account (see Table V). To improve the cooling efficiency of both the courtyard and
the atrium, incorporating cross-ventilation in these spaces and their adjacent spaces is required.
This can improve on the stack effect and thermal mass function in both the atrium and the
courtyard and the evaporative cooling function in the atrium. To achieve this result, implement-
ing large inlet openings at different heights and locations in the atrium, and on two opposite
sides of the adjacent spaces to the courtyard at a lower height is required. This can also lead to
an “air funnel,” which Rajapaksha and Nagai14 indicated as being the most efficient airflow pat-
tern, in both the atrium and the courtyard. However, the size of outlet openings in the flue is
critical, since, by implementing an inconvenient (extra) outlet size, the reverse airflow pattern
can occur during the afternoon time, which is detrimental for the indoor thermal condition.
To create a better airflow distribution throughout the adjacent spaces, the geometry of the
courtyard and atrium needs to be set according to the surrounding space geometry (proportion),
which will invariably decrease the depth of the adjacent spaces.
For example, although the courtyard roof decreases the solar heat gain throughout the day,
it can prevent the heat loss to the surroundings, especially during the early afternoon.
Therefore, application of a porous material structure for the roof or situating the roof at a suita-
ble height with a large opening area beneath it is recommended. Implementing an internal solar
blind for the atrium glazed roof and surfaces exposed to solar radiation, like the glazed walls of
the offices, is recommended to reduce the possible thermal stratification inside the atrium,
decrease overheating in the atrium lobby, and also reduce the cooling load of the adjacent air-
conditioned spaces.
Despite the usefulness of the water evaporative system in improving the cooling potential
of the atrium, it is entirely different in the courtyard, in which, without convenient openings,
there is an inadequate breeze. Therefore, due to the high level of humidity, especially in the
afternoon, utilizing water as a natural evaporative cooling strategy is not recommended as it
may cause discomfort in both the courtyard and its adjacent spaces. In order to reduce the
unfavorable high indoor humidity for the morning time (from 0800 to 1000 h) in the atrium,
changing the operation time of the evaporative system (turn it on by delay) in the atrium can
be influential (advise to study in the future).
Furthermore, utilizing high mass walls in the atrium and courtyard is recommended in hot
and humid climates despite the slight discomfort it may cause in the courtyard during the after-
noons, since it is coupled with excess humidity. Nevertheless, a slight breeze via outside open-
ings is imperative in solving this problem.5 The high mass wall is best located in the airflow
passage, which allows it to use the thermal mass effect with better exposure during the night-
time.14 Providing internal surfaces with high thermal mass in the airflow passage not only
improves the night ventilation performance in both the atrium and courtyard but also provides
appropriate indoor thermal conditions for the occupants, especially during the daytime.

IX. CONCLUSION
In this paper, the effects of three passive cooling strategies, namely, cross ventilation, stack
flue and hybrid evaporative cooling on the internal thermal environment of an atrium in a hot
043108-14 Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

and humid climate were reported and compared with the cooling potential of two courtyards
located in a similar climate. The results of the study indicate that the incorporated strategies
have a noticeable impact on improving the indoor thermal condition, especially when these
strategies are coupled with cross ventilation. However, the performance time of some strategies
is different, for example, the stack effect for the atrium occurs during the daytime (due to the
presence of the stack flue), whereas for the courtyard it occurs in the nighttime.
In both the atrium and courtyard, the airflow pattern in comparison with the airflow rate
has a greater effect on the modification of the indoor air temperature. The “air funnel” airflow
pattern has the most impact on providing superior indoor thermal conditions in both the atrium
and courtyards. It occurs by implementing large inlet openings at different heights in the
atrium, limited stack flue outlet openings in the atrium and inlet openings located on two oppo-
site sides in the adjacent spaces connected to the courtyard. In order to optimize the atrium and
courtyard cooling performance, coupling cross ventilation with a stack effect in both the atrium
and courtyards, as well as hybrid evaporative cooling in the atrium are recommended.
Implementing high thermal mass for the atrium and internal walls of the courtyard together
with shading roofs for the courtyards can also significantly diminish the possible overheating.
Increasing the airflow rate in both the atrium and the courtyard does not necessarily
improve the indoor thermal conditions of the adjacent spaces; therefore in addition to monitor-
ing the building for a longer time, special consideration for the design of the opening area ratio
is required to determine the optimum airflow rate in these spaces. Furthermore, the impact of
the atrium and courtyard size, geometry and insulated outdoor walls in respect to their cooling
efficiency (as future study) also needs to be evaluated.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study has been made possible through research funding from the University of Malaya
Research Grant (UMRG) scheme, reference No. RG166/12SUS commenced from 15/06/2012.
1
B. Givoni, Passive Low Energy Cooling of Buildings (John Wiley & Sons, 1994).
2
J. M. Holford and G. R. Hunt, “Fundamental atrium design for natural ventilation,” Build. Environ. 38, 409–426 (2003).
3
R. Saxon, Atrium Building: Development and Design (The Architectural Press Ltd., London, 1983).
4
A. H. Abdullah, Q. Meng, L. Zhao, and F. Wang, “Field study on indoor thermal environment in an atrium in tropical
climates,” Build. Environ. 44, 431–436 (2009).
5
N. Sadafi, E. Salleh, L. C. Haw, and Z. Jaafar, “Evaluating thermal effects of internal courtyard in a tropical terrace house
by computational simulation,” Energy Build. 43, 887–893 (2011).
6
Y. Lin and P. Linden, “Buoyancy-driven ventilation between two chambers,” J. Fluid Mech. 463, 293–312 (2002).
7
X. Wang, C. Huang, and W. Cao, “Mathematical modeling and experimental study on vertical temperature distribution of
hybrid ventilation in an atrium building,” Energy Build. 41, 907–914 (2009).
8
P. O. Fanger, Thermal Comfort: Analysis and Applications in Environmental Engineering (McGraw-Hill, New York,
1970).
9
P. Karavaa, A. K. Athienitis, T. Stathopoulos, and E. Mouriki, “Experimental study of the thermal performance of a large
institutional building with mixed-mode cooling and hybrid ventilation,” Build. Environ. 57, 313–326 (2012).
10
H. Tanaka, M. Okumiya, G. Young Yoon, and K. Watanabe, “Thermal characteristics of a double-glazed external wall
system with roll screen in cooling season,” Build. Environ. 44, 1509–1516 (2009).
11
R. Bensalem, Wind Driven Natural Ventilation in Courtyard and Atrium-Type Buildings (University of Sheffield, 1991).
12
N. A. Al-Hemiddi and K. A. Megren Al-Saud, “The effect of a ventilated interior courtyard on the thermal performance
of a house in a hot–arid region,” Renewable Energy 24, 581–595 (2001).
13
A. S. Muhaisen and M. B. Gadi, “Effect of courtyard proportions on solar heat gain and energy requirement in the tem-
perate climate of Rome,” Build. Environ. 41, 245–253 (2006).
14
I. Rajapaksha, H. Nagai, and M. Okumiya, “A ventilated courtyard as a passive cooling strategy in the warm humid
tropics,” Renewable Energy 28, 1755–1778 (2003).
15
C. Ratti, D. Raydan, and K. Steemers, “Building form and environmental performance: Archetypes, analysis and an arid
climate,” Energy Build. 35, 49–59 (2003).
16
MMD, Records of Meteorological Data, Malaysian Metrological Department, Petaling Jaya Station, Kuala Lumpur,
2007.
17
J. F. Busch, “A tale of two populations: Thermal comfort in air-conditioned and naturally ventilated offices in Thailand,”
Energy Build. 18, 235–249 (1992).
18
G. Gan, “Interaction between wind and buoyancy effects in natural ventilation of buildings,” Open Constr. Build.
Technol. J. 4, 134–145 (2010).
19
K. J. Lomas, “Architectural design of an advanced naturally ventilated building form,” Energy Build. 39, 166–181
(2007).
20
J. Pfafferott, S. Herkel, and M. Wambsganß, “Design, monitoring and evaluation of a low energy office building with pas-
sive cooling by night ventilation,” Energy Build. 36, 455–465 (2004).
043108-15 Moosavi, Mahyuddin, and Ghafar J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 043108 (2015)

21
L. Moosavi, N. Mahyuddin, N. Ab Ghafar, and M. Azzam Ismail, “Thermal performance of atria: An overview of natural
ventilation effective designs,” Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 34, 654–670 (2014).
22
S. Hussain and P. H. Oosthuizen, “Numerical investigations of buoyancy-driven natural ventilation in a simple atrium
building and its effect on the thermal comfort conditions,” Appl. Therm. Eng. 40, 358–372 (2012).
23
A. H. Abdullah and F. Wang, “Design and low energy ventilation solutions for atria in the tropics,” Sustainable Cities
Soc. 2, 8–28 (2012).
24
D. P. Rojas, “Atrium building design: Key aspects to improve their thermal performance on the Mediterranean climate of
Santiago de Chile,” Int. J. Low-Carbon Technol. 9, 327–330 (2014).
25
C. Chen, Developing an Intelligent Shading System for Atria in Subtropical Climate with Extreme Hot Summer and Cold
Winter (Heriot-Watt University, 2011).
26
S. Hussain and P. H. Oosthuizen, “Numerical study of buoyancy-driven natural ventilation in a simple three-storey atrium
building,” Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. 1, 141–157 (2012).
27
S. Hussain, “Numerical investigations of the indoor thermal environment in atria and of the buoyancy-driven ventilation
in a simple atrium building,” Ph.D. thesis (Mechanical and Materials Engineering), Queen’s University, 2012.
28
E. Mouriki, “Solar-assisted hybrid ventilation in an institutional building [MR63175],” Master’s thesis, Concordia
University (Canada), Canada, 2009.