Methods to Discover the Optimum Building Envelope in the Context of Solar Data

Abstract

This study deals with present optimum building envelope design methods and designate the pros and cons in built environments while managing the solar parameters using the modern software that enables digital, performance-based design. Performance-based design process is detailed; designs based on sun rays with various methods are reviewed; and the relationship between building envelope and energy is specified. It is the objective of the study that determination of methods used to decide alternative forms to avoid excessive heat gains during the summer season while providing maximum benefit from the sun's rays during the winter season. Therefore, samples that can generate input are selected. Each sample is determined to belong to a different group of design methods and these methods are classified. As a result of the samples investigated, the advantages and disadvantages of the methods used in comparison with using the comparing method by figures and tables. Then, with the SWOT analysis method, the methods' strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats are identified. Accordingly, Method 3- The Solar Rays Method has a faster and easier design process than the other two methods. Shortly, it has the optimum solution in other design methods with is three potential factors and one problem. With these proposed methods, it is aimed to reach an optimum solution by considering the potential to creating shadows on the building

Keywords

• Performance-Based Designing,Building envelope,Solar energy,Design method

References

1. Oxman, R., “Performance-based Design: Current Practices and Research Issues”, International Journal of Architectural Computing, 6, 1-17, (2008).
2. AIA, “Architecture 2030”, Commitment Progress Report, (2013).
3. Bundy, A., “Computational Thinking is Pervasive”, Journal of Scientific and Practical Computing, 1 (2), 67-69, (2007).
4. Schumacher, P., “Parametricism: A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design ”, 79:4, 14-23, (2009).
5. Burry, M.,“Scripting Cultures. Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming”, AD Primers, Wiley, (2013).
6. Araya, S., “Performative Architecture”, Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), (2011).
7. Sayın, S., “A Model Recommendation for Performance-Based Building Design”, Ph.D. Thesis, Selçuk University, Institute of Science, Konya, (2014).
8. Schewede, D. A. , “A Digital Bridge for Performance-Based Design”, Design Computing and Cognition, 6, 23-40,(2006).

9. Kolarevic, B. and Malkavi, A., “Performative Architecture: Beyond Instrumentality”, Spon Press, NY and London, (2005).
10. Akipek Ö.F., İnceoğlu N., “Use of Computer Assisted Designing and Manufacturing Technologies in Architecture”, Megaron YTU Fac. of Arch. E-Journal, Vol.2, No.4, 245-247, (2007).
11. Ofluoğlu, S., “Bim ve Bina Yaşam Döngüsünde Kullanımı”,İTÜ, Fen Bilimleri Enstütüsü, İstanbul, (2016).
12. Erbaş S., K., “Parametric Designing and Education in Architecture”, Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, Volume: 2 Issue: 4 Article No: 14 ISSN: 2146-9199,(2013).
13. https://medium.com/@amanraiagrawal/genetic-algorithm-on-grasshopper-95ac65869414
14. Altın, M. and Orhon, A., V., Smart Building Fronts and Sustainability, 7th National Symposium of Roof and Front, Yıldız Technical University, Beşiktaş – İstanbul, (2014).
15. Bozkurt, C., A Biomimetic Urban Equipment Design Working with Kinetic Systems – Urbancot, Master’s Thesis, ITU, İstanbul, (2010).
16. Tselas, E., Architectural Design and Form Inspired by Nature, University of Huddersfield School of Art, Design and Architecture, Module: THA 1121-1213, S:22-23, (2013).
17. Adriaenssens, S., Barbarigos, L., Kilian, A., Baverel, O., Charpentier, V., Horner, M., and Buzatu, D., “Dialectic Form Finding of Passive and Adaptive Shading Enclosures”, Energies, 7(8), 5201-5220. DOI: 10.3390/en7085201, (2014).
18. Ercan, B., “A Method For Performance Based Design Exploration: Generating External Shadi9.1ng Units For An Office Building In Nicosia, Cyprus”, Master’s Thesis, METU, Ankara, (2013).
19. Renner, G.,&Ekárt, A., Genetic algorithms in computer aided design. Computer- Aided Design, 35(8), 709-726. doi: 10.1016/s0010-4485(03)00003-4, (2003).
20. http://www.iaacblog.com/programs/building-os-university-housing-solar-analysis/
21. Beaman, M., L., ve Bader, S., Responsive Shading and Intelligent Façade Systems, In LIFE in: formation, On Responsive Information and Variations in Architecture: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA), 263-270. ACADIA. New York, New York: Cooper Union, Pratt Institute, (2010).
22. Ramilo, R., Rashid, R.,” Critical analysis of key determinants and barriers to digital innovation adoption among architectural organizations”, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Built Environment University of Technology Malaysia, Johor Malaysia, (2013).
23. Ofluoğlu, S., 2015, “Bim ve Performative (Performance-Based) Architectural Design”, Autodesk Construction Design Atelier 5, İstanbul, (2015).
24. https://iaac.net/research-projects/responsive-architecture/chromatic-skins/