A multi-objective feedback approach for evaluating sequential conceptual building design decisions

Abstract Conceptual design decision-making plays a critical role in determining life-cycle environmental impact and cost performance of buildings. Stakeholders often make these decisions without a quantitative understanding of how a particular decision will impact future choices or a project's ultimate performance. The proposed sequential decision support methodology provides stakeholders with quantitative information on the relative influence conceptual design stage decisions have on a project's life-cycle environmental impact and life-cycle cost. A case study is presented showing how the proposed methodology may be used by designers considering these performance criteria. Sensitivity analysis is performed on thousands of computationally generated building alternatives. Results are presented in the form of probabilistic distributions showing the degree to which each decision helps in achieving a given performance criterion. The method provides environmental impact and cost feedback throughout the sequential building design process, thereby guiding designers in creating low-carbon, low-cost buildings at the conceptual design phase.

[1]  Gerald Rebitzer,et al.  IMPACT 2002+: A new life cycle impact assessment methodology , 2003 .

[2]  Leslie K. Norford,et al.  A design optimization tool based on a genetic algorithm , 2002 .

[3]  Martin Schoch,et al.  Building-Volume Designs with Optimal Life-Cycle Costs , 2011 .

[4]  Philipp Geyer,et al.  Component-oriented decomposition for multidisciplinary design optimization in building design , 2009, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[5]  Arno Schlueter,et al.  Building information model based energy/exergy performance assessment in early design stages , 2009 .

[6]  Raymond J. Cole,et al.  Life-cycle energy use in office buildings , 1996 .

[7]  Derek Clements-Croome,et al.  Key performance indicators (KPIs) and priority setting in using the multi-attribute approach for assessing sustainable intelligent buildings , 2010 .

[8]  David Coley,et al.  Low-energy design: combining computer-based optimisation and human judgement , 2002 .

[9]  Jonathan A. Wright,et al.  Optimization of building thermal design and control by multi-criterion genetic algorithm , 2002 .

[10]  Michael D. Lepech,et al.  Multi-objective building envelope optimization for life-cycle cost and global warming potential , 2012 .

[11]  Michael D. Lepech,et al.  Application of life-cycle assessment to early stage building design for reduced embodied environmental impacts , 2013 .

[12]  Weimin Wang,et al.  Applying multi-objective genetic algorithms in green building design optimization , 2005 .

[13]  Tarja Häkkinen,et al.  Barriers and drivers for sustainable building , 2011 .

[14]  Alistair G.F. Gibb,et al.  Client drivers for construction projects: implications for standardization , 2001 .

[15]  Bryan Lawson,et al.  Cognitive Strategies in Architectural Design , 1979 .

[16]  Nigel Cross,et al.  Solution driven versus problem driven design: strategies and outcomes , 2006 .

[17]  Nigel Cross,et al.  Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution , 2001 .

[18]  Peter G. Ellis,et al.  Energy Design Plugin: An EnergyPlus Plugin for SketchUp; Preprint , 2008 .

[19]  Tadj Oreszczyn,et al.  Architects need environmental feedback , 2004 .

[20]  Mohammad S. Al-Homoud.  Optimum thermal design of office buildings , 1997 .

[21]  Svetlana Pushkar,et al.  A methodology for design of environmentally optimal buildings by variable grouping , 2005 .