Multiobjective Design Optimization of Building Space Layout, Energy, and Daylighting Performance

Dino, İpek Gürsel; Üçoluk, Göktürk

doi:10.1061/(asce)cp.1943-5487.0000669

Cited by 46 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lightscape in [42], Ecotect in [68] and IDA ICE 3.0 in [65] were used for daylighting simulation. TAS in [42], EnergyPlus in [64,67,69] and IDA ICE 3.0 in [65] were used for energy simulation. Although different calculation methods and simulation software were used in different articles, it is impossible to compare the accuracy of the calculation methods and simulation software between articles, as the calculation conditions in different articles are different in terms of materials, climates, WWRs, layouts (floor areas, interior partitions and functions), etc.…”

Section: Bep Calculation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, occupancy and distribution of workstations, and lighting and ventilation requirements were also changed in [42,63]. Other parameters were also changed, such as WWRs in [33,65,[67][68][69]71], types and sizes of shading systems in [69] and opening states of windows in [63].…”

Section: Design Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding end uses of energy, most of these articles only simulated the energy use for space heating and space cooling, and half of the studies also included the energy use for lighting [33,42,65,67,71]. The energy use for ventilation has not been included yet, while one study tested the air volume supplied by natural ventilation [63].…”

Section: Energy Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to energy use, some studies also calculated the indicators for thermal and visual comfort. These indicators include predicted mean vote (PMV) in [68], daylight autonomy in [67] and daylight illuminance in [68], which can provide extra information about BEP in addition to energy use. Regarding the system boundary of assessment, most of these articles defined their energy indicators unclearly: three articles described the system efficiency [33,65,71], and we assume that they tested the final energy; the others did not show system information, thus, we assume that they tested energy demands.…”

Section: Energy Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the system boundary of assessment, most of these articles defined their energy indicators unclearly: three articles described the system efficiency [33,65,71], and we assume that they tested the final energy; the others did not show system information, thus, we assume that they tested energy demands. Regarding the calculation period, most studies calculated the energy use for the whole year [33,64,65,68,70,71], and some studies only calculated it for peak days [42,63] or season representative days [67].…”

Section: Energy Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Effects of Architectural Space Layouts on Energy Performance: A Review

Jansen

Turrin

et al. 2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As one of the most important design tasks of building design, space layout design affects the building energy performance (BEP). In order to investigate the effect, a literature review of relevant papers was performed. Ten relevant articles were found and reviewed in detail. First, a methodology for studying the effects of space layouts on BEP were proposed regarding design variables, energy indicators and BEP calculation methods, and the methodologies used in the 10 articles were reviewed. Then, the effects of space layouts on energy use and occupant comfort were analysed separately. The results show that the energy use for heating, cooling, lighting and ventilation is highly affected by space layouts, as well as thermal and visual comfort. The effects of space layouts on energy use are higher than on occupant comfort. By changing space layouts, the resulting reductions in the annual final energy for heating and cooling demands were up to 14% and 57%, respectively, in an office building in Sweden. The resulting reductions in the lighting demand of peak summer and winter were up to 67% and 43%, respectively, for the case of an office building in the UK, and the resulting reduction in the air volume supplied by natural ventilation was 65%. The influence of other design parameters, i.e., occupancy and window to wall ratio, on the effects of space layouts on BEP was also identified.Sustainability 2020, 12, 1829 2 of 23 sufficient daylight and natural ventilation within a building, the building is expected to require less energy demand in total.Although architectural space layout is expected to highly affect BEP, it is rarely included in the studies on energy-efficient building design. Numerous studies exist on energy-efficient design, and most of them focus on geometry [11,14], envelope [15,16], façade [17,18], material [19,20], atrium [21,22] and shading systems [23,24]. On the other hand, researchers have been working on space layout design for decades [25,26]; however, they mainly focused on other design objectives rather than energy performance. These objectives include safety [27,28], logistics [29,30], efficiency [31,32], finance cost [33,34], occupant health and performance [35,36], view connection [37,38] and acoustics [39,40]. These two research domains, space layout design and energy-efficient building design, are shown in Figure 1. The overlapping area of the two domains, i.e., energy-efficient space layout design, is the focus of this paper. This paper aims at the effects on BEP caused by changing space layouts, without considering the possible influence on the indirect cost of the building, such as space usability and workability.

show abstract

Section: Bep Calculation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Design Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Energy Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Energy Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Energy Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effects of Architectural Space Layouts on Energy Performance: A Review

Jansen

Turrin

et al. 2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A review on simulation based multi-objective optimization of space layout design parameters on building energy performance

Harshalatha,

Patil,

Kini

2024

J Build Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improving the energy performance of buildings is crucial for environmental protection, energy savings, and a better living environment. The growing emphasis on sustainable building practices has led to an increased focus on optimizing space layout design parameters to enhance building energy performance. This review explores the application of simulation-based multi-objective optimization techniques in the context of studying the impact of space layout design on building energy efficiency. The integration of advanced simulation tools with optimization algorithms allows for a comprehensive analysis of multiple conflicting objectives like energy performance, user comfort as well as cost factor. The review begins by outlining the key parameters influencing building energy performance, including spatial configurations, orientation, and space perimeter variables. Subsequently, it delves into the various simulation tools employed to model the complex interactions between these parameters and their effects on energy performance. The integration of energy simulation software is highlighted as a crucial step towards achieving accurate and realistic assessments. In summary, this review delivers a comprehensive overview of the state-of-the-art methods in simulation-based multi-objective optimization for studying space layout design parameters and their impact on building energy performance, offering insights for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers in the field of sustainable architecture. There is a requirement for a comprehensive multi-objective framework for complex structures in the investigation of building energy performance giving more focus on reducing the cooling load and optimization of space layout along with envelope parameters.

show abstract