Post on 30-Nov-2015
description
transcript
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
Building Simulation (not) in the Studio
Dipl.-Ing. Max Dölling 1
Technische Universität Berlin,Germany
Sustainable DesignClasses 2011 - 2013
0
i
ii
iii
0
i
ii
iii
temperatur
BELICHTUNG
Ausstellung
Shop
Büros
Ballsaal
Foyer
Toiletten
Lager
Garderobe
Personal-Garerobe
Geträneklager
Pumi
Ausstellung
Hörsaal
Wor
ksho
ps
Toile
tten
Lage
r
Workshops
Pumi
Toiletten
LagerPumi
Auss
tell
ung
Auss
tell
ung
Wor
ksho
ps
Toile
tte
Teek
üche
Lage
r
Hoch
saal
AusstellungBallsaal
Foyer
Ausstellung
Hörsaal
Wor
ksho
ps
Workshops
Auss
tell
ung
Auss
tell
ung
Wor
ksho
ps
Teeküche
Konf
eren
zrau
m
Toiletten
Lager
Pers. Garderobe
GarderobePumi
Getränelager
Café
Shop
Toile
ttenLage
r
Pumi
Toiletten
Lager
Pumi
Lage
rPumi
Toile
tten
Büro
0
i
ii
iii
0
i
ii
iii
temperatur
BELICHTUNG
Ausstellung
Shop
Büros
Ballsaal
Foyer
Toiletten
Lager
Garderobe
Personal-Garerobe
Geträneklager
Pumi
Ausstellung
Hörsaal
Wor
ksho
ps
Toile
tten
Lage
r
Workshops
Pumi
Toiletten
LagerPumi
Auss
tell
ung
Auss
tell
ung
Wor
ksho
ps
Toile
tte
Teek
üche
Lage
r
Hoch
saal
AusstellungBallsaal
Foyer
Ausstellung
Hörsaal
Wor
ksho
ps
Workshops
Auss
tell
ung
Auss
tell
ung
Wor
ksho
ps
Teeküche
Konf
eren
zrau
m
Toiletten
Lager
Pers. Garderobe
GarderobePumi
Getränelager
Café
Shop
Toile
ttenLage
r
Pumi
Toiletten
Lager
Pumi
Lage
rPumi
Toile
tten
Büro
BESUCHER
Foyer
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Cafe
shop
austellung
toilette
lager
garderobe
konferenz
workshop
hörsaal
büro
Sommer
Winter
Fassade
BESUCHER
Foyer
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Cafe
shop
austellung
toilette
lager
garderobe
konferenz
workshop
hörsaal
büro
Sommer
Winter
Fassade
Thermal Conditioning & Daylight Zoning Diagram >
Occupancy Hours & Intensity Sketch >
‘Robust’ studio:Karen KrögerPhilip Winkler
Philip Rust
BESUCHER
Foyer
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Cafe
shop
austellung
toilette
lager
garderobe
konferenz
workshop
hörsaal
büro
Sommer
Winter
Fassade
BESUCHER
Foyer
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Cafe
shop
austellung
toilette
lager
garderobe
konferenz
workshop
hörsaal
büro
Sommer
Winter
Fassade
BESUCHER
Foyer
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Cafe
shop
austellung
toilette
lager
garderobe
konferenz
workshop
hörsaal
büro
Sommer
Winter
Fassade
In cooperation with:
Dr. Farshad Nasrollahi 2
Jeffrey Tietze, Cand. BSc 1
1 Digital Processing for Academics (Prof. Schwandt)2 FG Gebäudetechnik und Entwerfen (Prof. Steffan)
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
Students discussing sintered shading geometry prototypes, summer 2012
Building simulation is commonly taught as a specialty class instead of in a • design-centric but still research-oriented framework •
Common doubts about simulation in design: • simulation usability, feasibility of analysis results to positively (if at all) impact wide-scope design decisions; conflict over contents of core studios •
Initial Thesis: • “Design changes everything” • (or does it?)
Our classes attempt the • integration of thermal and daylight simulation into the early stages of architectural design •
Throughout the last two years, we held • three seminar types, all concerned with architectural performance optimization •
Main goals: investigate • process, building form & performance impact, design representations • teaching of energy literacy to architecture students to facilitate interdisciplinary processes •
Design research: • reflect on the means, methods and procedures of design in-process; analyse artefacts from a rational, formal and phenomenological perspective •
01 Teaching & Research Goals
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
A : Parametric Design Climates : 1, 2, 4
02 Class Iterations (chronological)
C : ‘Robust’ Studio Integration 5B : Performative Design 1, 3, 4
• Community Center & Offices • (mechanical conditioning)
• Housing Units & Urban Design • (passive & mech. conditioning)
• Multi - Use Exhibition & Office building • (mech. cond.)
Hashtgerd, Iran35.962012° N ,50.679533° E
Berlin, Germany52.498067° N ,13.460864° E
Yazd , Iran31.912609° N ,54.316458° E
Östersund , Sweden63.176837° N,14.610828° E
Hollywood , FL, USA26.047771° N , 80.113513° W
Hashtgerd, Iran35.962012° N ,50.679533° E
Berlin, Germany52.498067° N ,13.460864° E
Yazd , Iran31.912609° N ,54.316458° E
Östersund , Sweden63.176837° N,14.610828° E
Hollywood , FL, USA26.047771° N , 80.113513° W
Hashtgerd, Iran35.962012° N ,50.679533° E
Berlin, Germany52.498067° N ,13.460864° E
Yazd , Iran31.912609° N ,54.316458° E
Östersund , Sweden63.176837° N,14.610828° E
Hollywood , FL, USA26.047771° N , 80.113513° WHashtgerd, Iran
35.962012° N ,50.679533° E Berlin, Germany52.498067° N ,13.460864° E
Yazd , Iran31.912609° N ,54.316458° E
Östersund , Sweden63.176837° N,14.610828° E
Hollywood , FL, USA26.047771° N , 80.113513° W
Hashtgerd, Iran35.962012° N ,50.679533° E
Berlin, Germany52.498067° N ,13.460864° E
Yazd , Iran31.912609° N ,54.316458° E
Östersund , Sweden63.176837° N,14.610828° E
Hollywood , FL, USA26.047771° N , 80.113513° W
1 Hollywod, FL, USA 2 Hashtgerd, Iran 3 Yazd, Iran 4 Östersund, Sweden 5 Berlin, GermanyClimate.: Am (Köppen class) Climate: BSk Climate: BWk Climate: Dfc Climate: Dfb
• Geometric optimization• Fixed materials & setpoints• Balance thermal & daylight
• Geometric & material optimization• Fixed setpoints & U-Val., custom mat.• Thermal performance focus
• Geometric & material optimization• Custom setpoints, mat. & behavior• Individualized performance tests
R. Canihuante,
M. El-Soudani
Office Bldg. (FL site)
O. A. Pearl,
D. Gkougkoudi
Housing units (SWE site) B. Suazo, M. Silva (Berlin site)
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
Student Ralitsa Georgieva presenting daylight simulations, winter 2011/12
03 Metrics & Design / Simulation Tools
Design decisions are guided by energy and comfort metrics, created by DIVA (Daysim, Radiance) & DesignBuilder (E+)
• Total and primary energy demand • of idealized, best-practice cooling, heating & lighting systems
• Discomfort Hours • Operative Temperature
• UDI 100 - 2000 lux Climate-Based Daylight Metrics •• for all spaces (seasonal & yearly occupancy schedules)
• Daylight Availability • (DAv) 300 lux (office spaces)
• Irradiance images • grid calculations (seasonal, yearly)
• Point-in-time luminance metrics • Evalglare calculations •
Yet in an unconstrained design process, technical validity of metrics only does not by default provide good design outcomes: • metrics have to be seen in conjunction with design intent & other (architectural) representations •
• The interpretation of technically invariant metrics shifts depending on typology, climate & design goals •
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
04 Performance Representations (excerpts)a Office / Multi - use building(Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA)
b Housing development (Yazd, Iran)
Design concepts, Irradiation metrics Overhang study Final performance section with horizontal louversGlare without louvers
Daylight metrics model(UDI, DAv)
Early massing stage Housing UnitsCellular strategy UDI 100 - 2k axonometric Final state (RP irrad. model)
HAUS
HAUS
HAUS
HAUS
HAUS
STADT
HOFHAUS
FLOORPLAN +2 | 1:100 TOP VIEW | 1:100
UDI 100 UDI 100-200 UDI 2000
Hofhaustypologie
Doppelte Hülle
Dicke Wand
Wenige Öffnungen
Kleine Öffnungen
Dichte Bebauung
Introvertierte Ausrichtung
INNENPERSPEKTIVE
BLICK IN DEN HOF
Yard perspective (hello, glare... )
C. Kollmeyer,
R. Kölmel
DAv20 %
UDI66 %
C.103
H. 2
L. 6
UDI90 %
DAv84 %
C.64
L. 4
H. .1 DAv 300 lux,UDI 100 - 2000 lux Heating, cooling,lighting energy use development (kWh/m2)Primary energy demand
Initial Variant275 kWh/m2
Final Variant170 kWh/m2
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
05 Performative Design: Sweden Site
b Design & Simulations:T. Merickova, P. Jardzioch
Variant A
a Design & Simulations: O. A. Pearl, D. Gkougkoudi
UDI 100 - 2000, > 2000 &< 100 lux comparison;Heating energy use
development (kWh/m2)
Test glazing areas, materials, U-values,
and unit overshadowing (conditioned & passive)
Compare two site design variants; pick “best” one.
Metrics: average irradiance, H/C energy demand (VIPER)
H. 89 H. 34
> 2k43 %
19 %
100 - 2k38 %
27 %
100 - 2k48 %
> 2k25 %
Baseline (~A) Final Variant
> 2k42 %
H. 37 H. 1818 %
100 - 2k40 %
32 %
100 - 2k45 %
> 2k23 %
Baseline (~B) Final Variant
In parallel to systematic tests,designs continue to developin a heuristic & design-driven fashion, on multiple levels
Variant B
461 114
Summer Winter
Avrg. irradiation (exposed surfaces): kWh/m2
529 135
Summer Winter
Variant A495 117Variant B
Unequal unit performance!
467 116
606 140630 154Final Var.
Final Var.
“Versioning” “Shaping”
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
06 Performative Design: Sweden SitePRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
PRO
DU
CED
BY
AN
AU
TOD
ESK
ED
UC
ATI
ON
AL
PRO
DU
CT
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
PRO
DU
CED
BY A
N A
UTO
DESK
EDU
CA
TION
AL PR
OD
UC
T
Unit perspective section Site perspective (looking East)
Unit section Site perspective (looking West)
b Design & Simulations:T. Merickova, P. Jardzioch
a Design & Simulations: O. A. Pearl, D. Gkougkoudi
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
07 Detailed Design / Simulation Narrative (Florida Site)
• Design: I. V. Crego, D. Cepeda del Toro •
C.103
H. 2
L. 6
BA C D
A B C D
BA C D
A B C D
m² m² m²
m² m²m²
m²
FormFinding:Volumes
FacadeConcepts:Diffusion
Courtyardventilation
Version A: Ventilation & SolarSketch
Version D:Opaque Chimney,
Skylights
Version B:Glazed SolarChimney
EarthPipes Earth Pipe
(exterior)
Heating (natural gas)
Chiller (electricity)
Useful Daylight Illumi-nance, 100 - 2000 lux
Daylight Availability,offices, 300 lux
kWh/m²; Primary
% of occupied hours
Glazing Solar Gains (kWh)
Lighting (electricity)
UDI > 2000, < 100 lux
Glass Sol. Gains (/occ. area)
Heating (natural gas)
Chiller (electricity)
Useful Daylight Illumi-nance, 100 - 2000 lux
Daylight Availability,offices, 300 lux
kWh/m²; Primary
% of occupied hours
Glazing Solar Gains (kWh)
Lighting (electricity)
UDI > 2000, < 100 lux
Glass Sol. Gains (/occ. area)
Offices
Foyer
Circulation
Offices
Meeting &Media Halls
AuxiliarySpaces
Meeting &Media Halls
AuxiliarySpaces
Foyer
Circulation
80Annual H/C/L energy demand, UDI 100-2000, DAv 300 Monthly H/C/L energy demand (final building only), glazing solar gains (all variants)
60
40
20
100
80
60
40
20
0 %
25Annual H/C/L energy demand, UDI 100-2000, DAv 300 Monthly H/C/L energy demand (final building only), glazing solar gains (all variants)
20
15
10
100
80
60
40
20
kWh/m2kWh/m2 occ. hrs.
NORTH
SOUTH
NORTH
SOUTH
5
kWh/m2kWh/m2
0 kWh)2(/m
0 %occ. hrs.
0 kWh)2(/m
Space Use
Space Use
288
385
179 161
339
238223
204
153
Nat. Vent.
149Nat.
Vent.
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
W. J. Batty & B. Swann (‘97): Integration of Computer Based Modelling and an
Inter-Disciplinary Based Approach to Building Design [...], (Building Simulation ‘97)
“The performance parameters related to the design inquiries are extracted from guidebooks due to their clarity, familiarity and popularity amongst architects. The simulation tasks [...] are then defined with respect to each design stage.”
S. Bambardekar &
U. Poerschke (‘09):
The Architect
as Performer of
Energy Simulation
in the Early
Design Stage,
(Building Simulation
‘09)
08 Design / Simulation Process Observations & Models“The basic procedures involved in the design of acommodity are the same whether it be a toaster, supersonic passenger aircraft or a building.”
Process Steps Type of analysis Shad
ing Mask
Ove
rsha
dowing an
alysis
Sunp
ath Ana
lysis
Wind Ro
se ana
lysis
Psycho
metric an
alysis
Clou
d co
ver an
alysis
Day
light ana
lysis
Illum
inan
ce le
vel a
nalysis
Day
light auton
omy
Glare in
dex
Min/M
ax Tem
p rang
ediurna
l Tem
perature variatio
nHDD/C
DD
Balanc
e po
int tem
perature
Incide
nt Solar rad
iatio
nRo
om Tem
perature
Hea
t storage
/rem
oval cap
acity
Occup
ancy
gains
Cond
uctio
n ga
inDirec
t Solar gain
Ligh
ting ga
inHea
t gain av
oida
nce by
Day
lighting
Timelag
in hea
t trans
fer
Hea
t gain/
Loss
Hea
ting load
Cooling Lo
adredu
ction in Hea
ting/Co
oling load
air ch
ange
rate
Infiltration ga
in
base
case en
d us
e en
ergy
break
down
prop
osed
end
‐use
ene
rgy brea
kdow
nen
ergy
con
servation mea
sures
DL su
pplemen
ted Ligh
ting en
ergy
Hea
ting en
ergy
Cooling en
ergy
saving
s in Lighting en
ergy
redu
ction in Hea
ting en
ergy
redu
ction in coo
ling en
ergy
overall e
nergy co
nsum
ption
energy
gen
erated
by PV
Architectural design parameters
A Programming Stage Climate analysis o o o o o o o o oBenchmarking oParametric analysis o o
BSchematic Design Stage
1 BUILDING VLV Orientation o o o o o o o o o o o optimum orientationMassing o o aspet ratio, volumeSite form MassingSpace Zoning o o
2 SPACE LVLoptimize envelope Insulation o o o o o o o o o o o o optimum U, R values, thickness
Materials ‐ opaque o o o o o o o o U, R values, thicknessMaterials ‐ glazed o o o o o o o o o SHGC, VT, U value, optimum WWRGreen/Cool roof o o o o o o o U,R values, thickness
3 Passive heating Thermal Masso o o o o o o o o
Area, location, thickness, heat storage capacityDirect heat gain o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o WWR, SHGCIndirect heat gain o o o o o o o o o o o o o thickness, heat storage capacity
4 Passive cooling Cross Ventilation o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o Inlet/outlet opening area, locationStack ventilation o o o o o o o o o o o o o stack height, location, opening areaMass+night cooling o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o area of thermal mass & openings
5 Shading Shading o o o o o o o o geometry, location
6 Daylighting Daylighting o o o o o o o o o o o o optimum DF, WWRLight shelves o o o o o Glare controlDaylight zoning o oSkylights o o o o o optimum DF
Daylight dimming o o o oOccupancy sensors o o o sensor location
7 Renewables Solar power o o o panel sizingWind PowerGeothermal powerSolar DHW o o o panel sizing
Miscellaneous Lighting Thermal Energy
Figure1 : The framework
-1313-
• Knowledge of architectural design processes (and the implications of full “integration”) advances only slowly in the BPS community, compared to technological innovation •
Instead of aiming to standardize processes, attention is given to recurring patterns in design - specific workflows:
• Processes are not linear • but concurrently erratic, iterative, case-specific and linked to performance / design intent
• Simulation scope • improves through time, usually in phases:• a Heuristic design-seed generation• b Partial / explorative simulations (single / multi-domain)• c Whole-building multi-domain interdependent simulations
• Form / Performance knowledge • steadily accretes throughout individual design steps taken by students
• Individual / tacit knowledge constructed through designerly making • coexists with • quantified, multi-domain performance behaviours (which are objective within their evaluatory scope and, in the case studies, geometrically defined) •
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
Design
AB
DC
Intent
SC
OPE PROCESS
SC
OPE PROCESS
RE
PR
ESE N TA BIL
ITY
RE
PR
ESE N TA BIL
ITY
Building Performance Modeling in Non-simplified Architectural DesignProcedural & Cognitive Challenges in Education
Dr. Farshad Nasrollahi, GtE (Prof. C. Steffan)Dipl.-Ing. Max Dölling, DigiPro (Prof. H. Schwandt)
The 30th International Conference on Education andResearch in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe
September 12th - 14th, 2012, Prague, Czech Republic
AB
CD
N
nn
n
n
04 Multi-Domain Decision-Making & Representability
How are design decisions made in a multi-representational domain that includes parametric performance models?
Individual domain-specific types of knowledge (An etc.) are synthesized by utilizing the semiotic flexibility their multivalent representations (e.g. derived from digital models) enable, and thus continuously update global design intent (N). In return, the field of intent, newly enriched with additional cross-domain knowledge, permanently influences the originally contributing domains, forming a nonlinear knowledge flow framework that relies less on direct hybridization of design and engineering methods, but instead draws potential from the synergistic possibilities rooted in the multivalence of their respective models’ representability.
Multivalent representations encode quantitative descriptors spatially, relate form to projected performance and should be regarded as articulating one possible state of synthesis among many. The shown sections, daylight plans, radiation images and printed daylight models all partially fulfill these requirements.
Florida design conceptual section showing known thermal and daylighting behavior of overhangs / light shelves and ventilated double roof performance.
Daylight map (UDI 100 - 2000) of final design variant as multivalent representation that clearly relates performance to form.
Design Problem Interlinks(Chermayeff / Alexander)
Domains of Inquisition and Representation in Design Synthesis
M. C. Doelling &.......................
F. Nasrollahi (‘13)
Parametric Design :
A Case - Study in Design-Simulation Integration, (Building Simulation’13)
09 Results : Adapted Model / A Field of Influences
• Hence, linear descriptions of design/simulation processes obfuscate their real inherent complexity - but awareness of this problem is increasing in the literature •
Elements of an adapted process model (Doelling & Nasrollahi, Building Simulation 2013):
• Design intent • is intersubjectively constructed and encapsulates (performance) domains (A - D plus many more)
• Design Synthesis • is achieved by continuously overlapping domain states (e.g., through “multivalent” representations)
Domain crosstalk influences design intent; intent modifies domains • resulting in a non-linear process field •
What are the benefits of thinking in such a model?
• The model unburdens design processes from constant rational analysis synchronicity demands •
• It supports holistic knowledge achieved through complex, physically accurate, output-flexible tools (e.g., DIVA) •
“The focus of simulation is to solve design dilemmas. [...] The identification of three main design stages is not neccessarily a reproduction of the [design] process. ”
systems. Depending on the type of assessment, available information can be ignored (gray bullets) or used as inputs (red bullets) in the simulation model. Simplified simulations involve abstractions or even the stipulation of unknown information. The level of simplification depends on the specific dilemma and the stage of design development. A dilemma would not be pertinent if relevant design definitions, directly related to the dilemma, are unavailable. For instance, the quantification of the insulation impact on heating loads should be compromised if the geometry of the building is completely unknown.
Figure 2 Representation of designerly simulation.
The simulation of a design dilemma should adopt information that is used in the formulation of design problems. This information is strictly related to design constraints (Lawson, 2006) that can be pragmatic or abstract (Figure 2). Both types of dilemma constraints are intended to reduce the scope of the analysis. Information generated by pragmatic constraints is easier to implement in simulation models as it can be directly input in the model. The use of abstract constraints, on the other hand, is indirectly transferred to the model. This information should be processed by the designer and translated to be used in the model. Some examples of this translation process can be mentioned: ¥ Cost constraints related to a given dilemma
allows the elimination of solutions that would be too expensive. In a similar way, the definition of performance goals or design ambitions can lead to a range of acceptable solutions.
¥ An abstract conjecture, concept or design intention, such as ‘transparency’, for instance, can generate pragmatic inputs. A ‘transparent’ wall would have a high WWR (window-to-wall-ratio). Similarly, the design of shading devices according to the premise of ‘transparency’ would have to implement specific features. This
concept would, as a consequence, eliminate solutions that block the visual contact between exterior and interior spaces.
Even though the process of transforming abstract constraints into pragmatic inputs is complex to describe or fully represent, similar techniques are widely used in architectural design. Architects intuitively deal with several conjectures in order to formulate problems and identify parameters for acceptable solutions. During this process, designers can use information as ‘shortcuts’ to facilitate the translation of abstract constraints. In design practice, this information is often related to previous experiences of the architect and is rarely based on quantitative criteria. In designerly simulation, information used as a ‘shortcut’ should allow the identification of some inputs. The concern of using misleading precedents is minimized as they can improve using simulation. Two types of information are approached: ¥ Design principles: the use of guidelines can
reduce considerably the scope of analysis. Such information can be used to focus on specific design strategies.
¥ Precedent solutions: the analogy with specific features extracted from precedent solutions can be useful in the process of transforming abstract intentions into pragmatic definitions.
The process of transferring information from these sources to the model depends highly on what is intended by the designer and how the information used as a ‘shortcut’ represents the intention. Of course, the process of designerly simulation has a strong human component. This is clearly related to cognitive processes and assumptions that are an inherent part of any design activity.
EXAMPLES OF DESIGN DILEMMAS The proposed concept was used to tackle design dilemmas extracted from different case studies. In this paper, we present two examples of dilemmas that were investigated using simulation tools. The case studies presented are more influenced by pragmatic constraints, as both have high performance goals. Processes with more abstract constraints should be approached in future works.
Example 1: residence in Zwolle, the Netherlands The first case study was an ongoing design with high performance goals. The residence, located in Zwolle, the Netherlands, was intended to generate its own energy using PV panels connected to a smart grid and solar collectors for water heating. The leading architect Jamie van Lede (Origins architecten, Rotterdam) was interested in using simulation methods to support the design development. Firstly, simulation tools were used to answer general questions from the design team
Proceedings of Building Simulation 2011: 12th Conference of International Building Performance Simulation Association, Sydney, 14-16 November.
- 525 -
R. Venancio,
A. Pedrini, A.C.
van der Linden, E. van
den Ham & R. Stouffs (‘11):
Think Designerly! Using Multiple Simulation Tools to
Solve Architectural Dilemmas, (Building Simulation ‘11)Chermayeff & Alexander (‘63):
Design Interdependencies
“An integrated process is ......a dynamic field of........related design states ...........and should not be ..............represented...................linearly. ”
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
Student Alan Patrick discussing simulations, ’Robust’ studio, Summer 2013
10 Results : Building Simulation in the Studio
• Continuing success in the stand-alone classes led to an invitation to participate in the ‘Robust’ design studio held by the department of Prof. Regine Leibinger, TU Berlin •
• Goal • Perform design-driven simulations of individualized scope, to aid realization of ‘robust’, heavy bldg. envelopes
• Studio benefits & possibilities •• Students have more time to work on design variants• Interest by design departments is a prerequisite to move• sustainability simulations into the mainstream of practice• More realistic test environment of conflicting influences• Results can be more representative of integrated design &• of high architectural quality (successful in this class!)
• Studio difficulties & pitfalls •• Design staff and students must both be educated• Conflicts of interest can erode intensity benefits• Influencing whole-building morphology can cause friction• If the studio is not primarily sustainability-driven, • performance concerns might become mere addenda
• Process, technology are “ready”. We need positive results!
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
(Seasonal) UDI100 - 2000 lux& DAv 300 luxdaylight studiesfor alternatingzones of light /
dark
Cross Sections
LateralSection
Light intent & Sim.
11 Results : Building Simulation in the Studio
+24,00
+20,00
+14,00
+10,00
+6,00
+0,00
4,35 9,00 3,351234
01.12.
01.06.
Exhibition
Multi-Purpose
Research Center
Exhibition
Event
Section North-South 1:200 Section North-South 1:200
Elevation Friedrichstraße 1:200
Elevation Puttkamerstraße 1:200
Section East-West 1:200 Floor plan
Light studies / Opening North and South UDI 100-2000 Lux UDI 100-2000 Lux Sommer UDI 100-2000 Lux Winter Daylight Avilability 500 Lux
10 20 30 40 50 60
OPENINGS [%]
10
11
12
13
14
15
Chille
r [kW
h/m
2]
16
17 SOUTH
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
OPENINGS [%]
605040302010
HEAT
GEN
ERAT
ION
[kW
h/m
2] SOUTH
NORTH
10 20 30 40 50 60
OPENINGS [%]
10
11
12
13
14
15
Chille
r [kW
h/m
2]
16
17 SOUTH
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
OPENINGS [%]
605040302010
HEAT
GEN
ERAT
ION
[kW
h/m
2] SOUTH
NORTH
+24,00
+20,00
+14,00
+10,00
+6,00
+0,00
4,35 9,00 3,351234
01.12.
01.06.
Exhibition
Multi-Purpose
Research Center
Exhibition
Event
Section North-South 1:200 Section North-South 1:200
Elevation Friedrichstraße 1:200
Elevation Puttkamerstraße 1:200
Section East-West 1:200 Floor plan
Light studies / Opening North and South UDI 100-2000 Lux UDI 100-2000 Lux Sommer UDI 100-2000 Lux Winter Daylight Avilability 500 Lux
10 20 30 40 50 60
OPENINGS [%]
10
11
12
13
14
15
Chille
r [kW
h/m
2]
16
17 SOUTH
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
OPENINGS [%]
605040302010
HEAT
GEN
ERAT
ION
[kW
h/m
2] SOUTH
NORTH
10 20 30 40 50 60
OPENINGS [%]
10
11
12
13
14
15
Chille
r [kW
h/m
2]
16
17 SOUTH
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
OPENINGS [%]
605040302010
HEAT
GEN
ERAT
ION
[kW
h/m
2] SOUTH
NORTH
+24,00
+20,00
+14,00
+10,00
+6,00
+0,00
4,35 9,00 3,351234
01.12.
01.06.
Exhibition
Multi-Purpose
Research Center
Exhibition
Event
Section North-South 1:200 Section North-South 1:200
Elevation Friedrichstraße 1:200
Elevation Puttkamerstraße 1:200
Section East-West 1:200 Floor plan
Light studies / Opening North and South UDI 100-2000 Lux UDI 100-2000 Lux Sommer UDI 100-2000 Lux Winter Daylight Avilability 500 Lux
10 20 30 40 50 60
OPENINGS [%]
10
11
12
13
14
15
Chille
r [kW
h/m
2]
16
17 SOUTH
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
OPENINGS [%]
605040302010
HEAT
GEN
ERAT
ION
[kW
h/m
2] SOUTH
NORTH
10 20 30 40 50 60
OPENINGS [%]
10
11
12
13
14
15
Chille
r [kW
h/m
2]
16
17 SOUTH
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
OPENINGS [%]
605040302010
HEAT
GEN
ERAT
ION
[kW
h/m
2] SOUTH
NORTH
+24,00
+20,00
+14,00
+10,00
+6,00
+0,00
4,35 9,00 3,351234
01.12.
01.06.
Exhibition
Multi-Purpose
Research Center
Exhibition
Event
Section North-South 1:200 Section North-South 1:200
Elevation Friedrichstraße 1:200
Elevation Puttkamerstraße 1:200
Section East-West 1:200 Floor plan
Light studies / Opening North and South UDI 100-2000 Lux UDI 100-2000 Lux Sommer UDI 100-2000 Lux Winter Daylight Avilability 500 Lux
10 20 30 40 50 60
OPENINGS [%]
10
11
12
13
14
15
Chille
r [kW
h/m
2]
16
17 SOUTH
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
OPENINGS [%]
605040302010
HEAT
GEN
ERAT
ION
[kW
h/m
2] SOUTH
NORTH
10 20 30 40 50 60
OPENINGS [%]
10
11
12
13
14
15
Chille
r [kW
h/m
2]
16
17 SOUTH
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
OPENINGS [%]
605040302010
HEAT
GEN
ERAT
ION
[kW
h/m
2] SOUTH
NORTH
+24,00
+20,00
+14,00
+10,00
+6,00
+0,00
4,35 9,00 3,351234
01.12.
01.06.
Exhibition
Multi-Purpose
Research Center
Exhibition
Event
Section North-South 1:200 Section North-South 1:200
Elevation Friedrichstraße 1:200
Elevation Puttkamerstraße 1:200
Section East-West 1:200 Floor plan
Light studies / Opening North and South UDI 100-2000 Lux UDI 100-2000 Lux Sommer UDI 100-2000 Lux Winter Daylight Avilability 500 Lux
10 20 30 40 50 60
OPENINGS [%]
10
11
12
13
14
15
Chille
r [kW
h/m
2]
16
17 SOUTH
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
OPENINGS [%]
605040302010
HEAT
GEN
ERAT
ION
[kW
h/m
2] SOUTH
NORTH
10 20 30 40 50 60
OPENINGS [%]
10
11
12
13
14
15
Chille
r [kW
h/m
2]
16
17 SOUTH
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
OPENINGS [%]
605040302010
HEAT
GEN
ERAT
ION
[kW
h/m
2] SOUTH
NORTH
• Design / Sim.:• L. de Pedro,• C. Sitzler •
+24,00
+20,00
+14,00
+10,00
+6,00
+0,00
4,35 9,00 3,351234
01.12.
01.06.
Exhibition
Multi-Purpose
Research Center
Exhibition
Event
Section North-South 1:200 Section North-South 1:200
Elevation Friedrichstraße 1:200
Elevation Puttkamerstraße 1:200
Section East-West 1:200 Floor plan
Light studies / Opening North and South UDI 100-2000 Lux UDI 100-2000 Lux Sommer UDI 100-2000 Lux Winter Daylight Avilability 500 Lux
10 20 30 40 50 60
OPENINGS [%]
10
11
12
13
14
15
Chille
r [kW
h/m
2]
16
17 SOUTH
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
OPENINGS [%]
605040302010
HEAT
GEN
ERAT
ION
[kW
h/m
2] SOUTH
NORTH
10 20 30 40 50 60
OPENINGS [%]
10
11
12
13
14
15
Chille
r [kW
h/m
2]
16
17 SOUTH
NORTH
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
OPENINGS [%]
605040302010
HEAT
GEN
ERAT
ION
[kW
h/m
2] SOUTH
NORTH
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
Multi-metric daylight study of different facade
configurations for maximum
daylight depth & uniformity(500 lux)
SchnittNord-Süd
1:200
SchnittSüd-Nord
1:200
continous daylight autonomy
ohne lightshelfohne fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelfohne fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelfmit fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelf 10% geneigtmit fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelf 20% geneigtmit fassadeneinschnitt
daylight autonomy
UDI <100 Lux
udi 100-2000 lux
udi >2000 lux
overlit
slicetest
ohne lightshelfohne fassadeneinschnitt
ohne lightshelfmit fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelfmit fassadeneinschnitt
9.00 Uhr
21.09 21.06 21.12
12.00 Uhr
18.00 Uhr
9.00 Uhr
21.09 21.06 21.12
12.00 Uhr
18.00 Uhr
9.00 Uhr
21.09 21.06 21.12
12.00 Uhr
18.00 Uhr
point-in-glare
57%
62% 51% 32%
62%69%
51%51%
32%36%
62%69%64%
51%51%46%
32%36%30%
69%
19%
+8%
+7% 0% +4%
+2%
+1%
57%65%
69%71%
19%20%
- 4%
+2% -5% -2%- 5% -5% -6%
-1%
0%
-12%
-3%
-1%
57%65%53%
69%71%68%
19%20%19%
Schnitt Nord-Süd 1:200 Schnitt Süd-Nord 1:200
Ansicht Friedrichstraße 1:200
Ansicht Puttkamerstraße 1:200
Schnitt West-Ost 1:200 Detailschnitt & Fassadenansicht 1:20
Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D9
D8
D10
D7
B
B
C
C
D
D
E
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
K
K
I
I
J
J
A
A
2,60
5,00
2,60
2,60
2,60
5,00
706,
7525
4,52
254,
3670
7,00
4,53
4,60
13,895 5,42 8,955 5,30 8,07 13,35 5,55 6,60
7,75
2,70
5,00
4,53
2,60
2,70
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D9
D8
D10
D7
B
B
C
C
D
D
E
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
K
K
I
I
J
J
A
A
2,60
5,00
2,60
2,60
2,60
5,00
706,
7525
4,52
254,
3670
7,00
4,53
4,60
13,895 5,42 8,955 5,30 8,07 13,35 5,55 6,60
7,75
2,70
5,00
4,53
2,60
2,70
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D9
D8
D10
D7
B
B
C
C
D
D
E
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
K
K
I
I
J
J
A
A
2,60
5,00
2,60
2,60
2,60
5,00
706,
7525
4,52
254,
3670
7,00
4,53
4,60
13,895 5,42 8,955 5,30 8,07 13,35 5,55 6,60
7,75
2,70
5,00
4,53
2,60
2,70
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D9
D8
D10
D7
B
B
C
C
D
D
E
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
K
K
I
I
J
J
A
A
2,60
5,00
2,60
2,60
2,60
5,00
706,
7525
4,52
254,
3670
7,00
4,53
4,60
13,895 5,42 8,955 5,30 8,07 13,35 5,55 6,60
7,75
2,70
5,00
4,53
2,60
2,70
cafe
foyershop
gard
erob
epe
rson
al
lagercafe
Garderobe
lager
toilettepumi
Ausstellung
workshop
workshop
toilettepumi
lager
konferenz
konferenz
Ausstellung
lager
hörsaalworkshop
workshop
toilettepumi
Ausstellung
leiterbüro
besp
rech
er
toile
tte
pers
onal
teeküche
büro
büro
toilettepumi
lager
Ausstellung
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
M
M
M
M
M M M
M
M
M
M
a
a
a
Austellungsfläche
Veranstaltungsfläche
Personalbereich
Lager
Eingang
Belichtung
Lüftung
Interaktionautomatisch Manuell
Temperatur
Frequentierung
Aufenthaltsdauer
Raumprogramm
0
i
ii
iii
Ausstellung
Shop
Büros
Ballsaal
Foyer
Toiletten
Lager
Garderobe
Personal-Garerobe
Geträneklager
Pumi
Ausstellung
Hörsaal
Wor
ksho
ps
Toile
tten
Lage
r
Workshops
Pumi
Toiletten
LagerPumi
Auss
tell
ung
Auss
tell
ung
Wor
ksho
ps
Toile
tte
Teek
üche
Lage
r
Hoch
saal
AusstellungBallsaal
Foyer
Ausstellung
Hörsaal
Wor
ksho
ps
Workshops
Auss
tell
ung
Auss
tell
ung
Wor
ksho
ps
Teeküche
Konf
eren
zrau
m
Toiletten
Lager
Pers. Garderobe
GarderobePumi
Getränelager
Café
Shop
Toile
ttenLage
r
Pumi
Toiletten
Lager
Pumi
Lage
rPumi
Toile
tten
Büro
0
i
ii
iii
0
i
ii
iii
temperatur
BELICHTUNG
Foyer
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Cafe
shop
austellung
toilette
lager
garderobe
konferenz
workshop
hörsaal
büro
Sommer
Winter
Nutzung
fassadenstudien
sommer
equinox
winter
sommer
equinox
winter
lightshelf
gebäudestruktur
sommer
equinox
winter
sommer
equinox
winter
lightshelf
gebäudestruktur
Grundriss 3 1:200 Grundriss 3 1:200
Grundriss 2 1:200 Grundriss 2 1:200
Grundriss 1 1:200 Grundriss 1 1:200
Grundriss 4 1:200 Grundriss 4 1:200
Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme Konzeptskizzen/Daiagramme
Initial LightShelf Concepts
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D9
D8
D10
D7
B
B
C
C
D
D
E
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
K
K
I
I
J
J
A
A
2,60
5,00
2,60
2,60
2,60
5,00
706,
7525
4,52
254,
3670
7,00
4,53
4,60
13,895 5,42 8,955 5,30 8,07 13,35 5,55 6,60
7,75
2,70
5,00
4,53
2,60
2,70
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D9
D8
D10
D7
B
B
C
C
D
D
E
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
K
K
I
I
J
J
A
A
2,60
5,00
2,60
2,60
2,60
5,00
706,
7525
4,52
254,
3670
7,00
4,53
4,60
13,895 5,42 8,955 5,30 8,07 13,35 5,55 6,60
7,75
2,70
5,00
4,53
2,60
2,70
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D9
D8
D10
D7
B
B
C
C
D
D
E
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
K
K
I
I
J
J
A
A
2,60
5,00
2,60
2,60
2,60
5,00
706,
7525
4,52
254,
3670
7,00
4,53
4,60
13,895 5,42 8,955 5,30 8,07 13,35 5,55 6,60
7,75
2,70
5,00
4,53
2,60
2,70
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D9
D8
D10
D7
B
B
C
C
D
D
E
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
K
K
I
I
J
J
A
A
2,60
5,00
2,60
2,60
2,60
5,00
706,
7525
4,52
254,
3670
7,00
4,53
4,60
13,895 5,42 8,955 5,30 8,07 13,35 5,55 6,60
7,75
2,70
5,00
4,53
2,60
2,70
cafe
foyershop
gard
erob
epe
rson
al
lagercafe
Garderobe
lager
toilettepumi
Ausstellung
workshop
workshop
toilettepumi
lager
konferenz
konferenz
Ausstellung
lager
hörsaalworkshop
workshop
toilettepumi
Ausstellung
leiterbüro
besp
rech
er
toile
tte
pers
onal
teeküche
büro
büro
toilettepumi
lager
Ausstellung
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
M
M
M
M
M M M
M
M
M
M
a
a
a
Austellungsfläche
Veranstaltungsfläche
Personalbereich
Lager
Eingang
Belichtung
Lüftung
Interaktionautomatisch Manuell
Temperatur
Frequentierung
Aufenthaltsdauer
Raumprogramm
0
i
ii
iii
Ausstellung
Shop
Büros
Ballsaal
Foyer
Toiletten
Lager
Garderobe
Personal-Garerobe
Geträneklager
Pumi
Ausstellung
Hörsaal
Wor
ksho
ps
Toile
tten
Lage
r
Workshops
Pumi
Toiletten
LagerPumi
Auss
tell
ung
Auss
tell
ung
Wor
ksho
ps
Toile
tte
Teek
üche
Lage
r
Hoch
saal
AusstellungBallsaal
Foyer
Ausstellung
Hörsaal
Wor
ksho
ps
Workshops
Auss
tell
ung
Auss
tell
ung
Wor
ksho
ps
Teeküche
Konf
eren
zrau
m
Toiletten
Lager
Pers. Garderobe
GarderobePumi
Getränelager
Café
Shop
Toile
ttenLage
r
Pumi
Toiletten
Lager
Pumi
Lage
rPumi
Toile
tten
Büro
0
i
ii
iii
0
i
ii
iii
temperatur
BELICHTUNG
Foyer
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Cafe
shop
austellung
toilette
lager
garderobe
konferenz
workshop
hörsaal
büro
Sommer
Winter
Nutzung
fassadenstudien
sommer
equinox
winter
sommer
equinox
winter
lightshelf
gebäudestruktur
sommer
equinox
winter
sommer
equinox
winter
lightshelf
gebäudestruktur
Grundriss 3 1:200 Grundriss 3 1:200
Grundriss 2 1:200 Grundriss 2 1:200
Grundriss 1 1:200 Grundriss 1 1:200
Grundriss 4 1:200 Grundriss 4 1:200
Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme Konzeptskizzen/Daiagramme
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D9
D8
D10
D7
B
B
C
C
D
D
E
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
K
K
I
I
J
J
A
A
2,60
5,00
2,60
2,60
2,60
5,00
706,
7525
4,52
254,
3670
7,00
4,53
4,60
13,895 5,42 8,955 5,30 8,07 13,35 5,55 6,60
7,75
2,70
5,00
4,53
2,60
2,70
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D9
D8
D10
D7
B
B
C
C
D
D
E
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
K
K
I
I
J
J
A
A
2,60
5,00
2,60
2,60
2,60
5,00
706,
7525
4,52
254,
3670
7,00
4,53
4,60
13,895 5,42 8,955 5,30 8,07 13,35 5,55 6,60
7,75
2,70
5,00
4,53
2,60
2,70
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D9
D8
D10
D7
B
B
C
C
D
D
E
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
K
K
I
I
J
J
A
A
2,60
5,00
2,60
2,60
2,60
5,00
706,
7525
4,52
254,
3670
7,00
4,53
4,60
13,895 5,42 8,955 5,30 8,07 13,35 5,55 6,60
7,75
2,70
5,00
4,53
2,60
2,70
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D9
D8
D10
D7
B
B
C
C
D
D
E
E
F
F
G
G
H
H
K
K
I
I
J
J
A
A
2,60
5,00
2,60
2,60
2,60
5,00
706,
7525
4,52
254,
3670
7,00
4,53
4,60
13,895 5,42 8,955 5,30 8,07 13,35 5,55 6,60
7,75
2,70
5,00
4,53
2,60
2,70
cafe
foyershop
gard
erob
epe
rson
al
lagercafe
Garderobe
lager
toilettepumi
Ausstellung
workshop
workshop
toilettepumi
lager
konferenz
konferenz
Ausstellung
lager
hörsaalworkshop
workshop
toilettepumi
Ausstellung
leiterbüro
besp
rech
er
toile
tte
pers
onal
teeküche
büro
büro
toilettepumi
lager
Ausstellung
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
M
M
M
M
M M M
M
M
M
M
a
a
a
Austellungsfläche
Veranstaltungsfläche
Personalbereich
Lager
Eingang
Belichtung
Lüftung
Interaktionautomatisch Manuell
Temperatur
Frequentierung
Aufenthaltsdauer
Raumprogramm
0
i
ii
iii
Ausstellung
Shop
Büros
Ballsaal
Foyer
Toiletten
Lager
Garderobe
Personal-Garerobe
Geträneklager
Pumi
Ausstellung
Hörsaal
Wor
ksho
ps
Toile
tten
Lage
r
Workshops
Pumi
Toiletten
LagerPumi
Auss
tell
ung
Auss
tell
ung
Wor
ksho
ps
Toile
tte
Teek
üche
Lage
r
Hoch
saal
AusstellungBallsaal
Foyer
Ausstellung
Hörsaal
Wor
ksho
ps
Workshops
Auss
tell
ung
Auss
tell
ung
Wor
ksho
ps
Teeküche
Konf
eren
zrau
m
Toiletten
Lager
Pers. Garderobe
GarderobePumi
Getränelager
Café
Shop
Toile
ttenLage
r
Pumi
Toiletten
Lager
Pumi
Lage
rPumi
Toile
tten
Büro
0
i
ii
iii
0
i
ii
iii
temperatur
BELICHTUNG
Foyer
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Cafe
shop
austellung
toilette
lager
garderobe
konferenz
workshop
hörsaal
büro
Sommer
Winter
Nutzung
fassadenstudien
sommer
equinox
winter
sommer
equinox
winter
lightshelf
gebäudestruktur
sommer
equinox
winter
sommer
equinox
winter
lightshelf
gebäudestruktur
Grundriss 3 1:200 Grundriss 3 1:200
Grundriss 2 1:200 Grundriss 2 1:200
Grundriss 1 1:200 Grundriss 1 1:200
Grundriss 4 1:200 Grundriss 4 1:200
Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme Konzeptskizzen/DaiagrammeSeasonal Facade Overshadowing
SchnittNord-Süd
1:200
SchnittSüd-Nord
1:200
continous daylight autonomy
ohne lightshelfohne fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelfohne fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelfmit fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelf 10% geneigtmit fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelf 20% geneigtmit fassadeneinschnitt
daylight autonomy
UDI <100 Lux
udi 100-2000 lux
udi >2000 lux
overlit
slicetest
ohne lightshelfohne fassadeneinschnitt
ohne lightshelfmit fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelfmit fassadeneinschnitt
9.00 Uhr
21.09 21.06 21.12
12.00 Uhr
18.00 Uhr
9.00 Uhr
21.09 21.06 21.12
12.00 Uhr
18.00 Uhr
9.00 Uhr
21.09 21.06 21.12
12.00 Uhr
18.00 Uhr
point-in-glare
57%
62% 51% 32%
62%69%
51%51%
32%36%
62%69%64%
51%51%46%
32%36%30%
69%
19%
+8%
+7% 0% +4%
+2%
+1%
57%65%
69%71%
19%20%
- 4%
+2% -5% -2%- 5% -5% -6%
-1%
0%
-12%
-3%
-1%
57%65%53%
69%71%68%
19%20%19%
Schnitt Nord-Süd 1:200 Schnitt Süd-Nord 1:200
Ansicht Friedrichstraße 1:200
Ansicht Puttkamerstraße 1:200
Schnitt West-Ost 1:200 Detailschnitt & Fassadenansicht 1:20
Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme
Daylight Autonomy
UDI < 100 lux
UDI 100 - 2k lux
UDI > 2k lux
Daylight
Availability
SchnittNord-Süd
1:200
SchnittSüd-Nord
1:200
continous daylight autonomy
ohne lightshelfohne fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelfohne fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelfmit fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelf 10% geneigtmit fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelf 20% geneigtmit fassadeneinschnitt
daylight autonomy
UDI <100 Lux
udi 100-2000 lux
udi >2000 lux
overlit
slicetest
ohne lightshelfohne fassadeneinschnitt
ohne lightshelfmit fassadeneinschnitt
mit lightshelfmit fassadeneinschnitt
9.00 Uhr
21.09 21.06 21.12
12.00 Uhr
18.00 Uhr
9.00 Uhr
21.09 21.06 21.12
12.00 Uhr
18.00 Uhr
9.00 Uhr
21.09 21.06 21.12
12.00 Uhr
18.00 Uhr
point-in-glare
57%
62% 51% 32%
62%69%
51%51%
32%36%
62%69%64%
51%51%46%
32%36%30%
69%
19%
+8%
+7% 0% +4%
+2%
+1%
57%65%
69%71%
19%20%
- 4%
+2% -5% -2%- 5% -5% -6%
-1%
0%
-12%
-3%
-1%
57%65%53%
69%71%68%
19%20%19%
Schnitt Nord-Süd 1:200 Schnitt Süd-Nord 1:200
Ansicht Friedrichstraße 1:200
Ansicht Puttkamerstraße 1:200
Schnitt West-Ost 1:200 Detailschnitt & Fassadenansicht 1:20
Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme
A B C D
Regular facade ALight shelf only B
Shelf + plate cut CShelf 10° rotated D
Final South Facade (configuration C) South FacadeCutaway (conf. C)
12 Results : Building Simulation in the Studio
• Design / Sim.:• K. Kröger• P. Winkler
P. Rust •
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
Student Majd Murad discussing simulations, ’Robust’ studio, Summer 2013
13 Conclusion
• Simulation, if used properly, has a massively positive influence on ‘integrated’ processes designers undertake; it also is craft •
• ‘Designerly’ simulations do not weaken form and can be• applied even in a non-sustainability driven creative context •
• Inclusive performance research must happen in a strongly • design-driven framework, to stay generally applicable •
• In this context, individual domains should adapt:• Tools: complex & usable, not simple, to mirror design reasoning• Process: Fluid, adaptable, individual; with rational components• Representations, Metrics: Problem-specific, spatially defined
• “Design changes everything” ...? • Not quite.
Design changes simulation, which in turn influences design.
Architects deal with early-stage unstructured information in a synthetic manner, which shapes design intent and is used to gauge the social and behavioural impacts of space; this gives BPS performed by designers great future potential.
Building Simulation (not) in the StudioSustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)Max Dölling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
DIVA Day 2013Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti
July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
Student Philip Rust co-presenting, final crit of ’Robust’ studio, Summer 2013
A special “Thank You!” to all the students who participated in our classes throughout the last 2.5 years. None of this would have been possible without you.
With deep thanks to:Cecilia, Farshad Nasrollahi, Jeffrey Tietze, Alstan Jakubiec, Christoph Reinhart, Matthias Graf v. Ballestrem, Bogdan Strugar, Jan Kunze, Regine Leibinger (everyone I forgot, apologies)
Thank you, DIVA DAY! Off-conference questions? max@spacesustainers.org
References
Doelling, M.C. & Nasrollahi, F. 2012. Building Performance Simulation in Non-Simplified
Architectural Design. Proceedings of the 30th eCAADe conference, Prague, Czech Republic.
Doelling, M.C. 2012. Hybrid Daylight Models in Architectural Design Education. Proceedings of
DIVA Day 2012, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston.
Doelling, M.C. & Nasrollahi, F. 2013. Architektur, Simulation und Intention. In: Claus Steffan (Hrsg.),
Parameter des Entwerfens: Architektur und Nachhaltigkeit. Universitätsverlag der TU Berlin.
Doelling, M.C. & Jastram, B. 2013. Daylight Prototypes: From Simulation Data to Four-Dimensional
Artefact. Proceedings of the 18th CAADRIA conference, National University of Singapore, Sing.
Doelling, M.C. & Nasrollahi, F. 2013. Parametric Design: a Case Study in Design-Simulation
Integration. Proceedings of Building Simulation 2013, Lyon, France.