Advertisement

Computer Assistance for Sustainable Building Design

  • Hugues Rivard
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4200)

Abstract

The greatest opportunity for sustainable building design strategies occur in the early stages of design when the most important decisions are taken. Nevertheless, it is the stage with the least computer support. This paper presents recent research efforts at ETS toward the long term goal of developing the next generation of computer assistance to designers of sustainable buildings. Two research thrusts are presented: (1) to provide assistance to designers earlier in the design process, and (2) to provide better means to support collaboration among the various stakeholders. Two research projects are briefly presented that belong to the first thrust: an approach that allows structural engineers to propose feasible structural systems earlier directly from architectural sketches; and another that provides a means to optimize aspects of a building selected by the designer. A new laboratory is presented that will provide the infrastructure to carry out research in the second thrust.

Keywords

Pareto Front Life Cycle Cost Life Cycle Analysis Computer Assistance Building Design 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    IPCC: Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. In: Houghton, J.T., et al. (eds.) The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tucker, S.N., Ambrose, M.D., Johnston, D.R., Newton, P.W., Seo, S., Jones, D.G.: LCADesign. In: Amor, R. (ed.) Proceedings of the CIB W78 20th Int’l Conf. on IT for Construction, Waiheke Island, New Zealand, CIB Report: Publication 284, pp. 403–412 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    NRCAN: Energy Efficiency Trends in Canada, 1990 to 2001, Natural Resources Canada (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bourdeau, L., Huovila, P., Lanting, R., Gilham, A.: Sustainable Development and the Future of Construction, CIB Working Commission W82, CIB Report, Publ. 225 (1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baouendi, R., Rivard, H., Zmeureanu, R.: Use of Life-Cycle Assessment Tools During the Design of Green Buildings. In: Müller, F., Naylor, T. (eds.) 4th Conference of the Canadian Society for Ecological Economics, p. 46. McGill School of Environment, Montreal (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kam, C., Fischer, M., Hänninen, R., Karjalainen, A., Laitinen, J.: The product model and Fourth Dimension project. ITcon 8, 137–166 (2003), http://www.itcon.org/2003/12
  7. 7.
    Rivard, H., Fenves, S.J.: A Representation for Conceptual Design of Buildings. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 14(3), 151–159 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mora, R., Rivard, H., Bédard, C.: A Computer Representation to Support Conceptual Structural Design within a Building Architectural Context. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 20(2), 76–87 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fenves, S.J., Rivard, H., Gomez, N.: SEED-Config: A Tool for Conceptual Structural Design in a Collaborative Building Design Environment. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 14(3), 233–247 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Meniru, K., Rivard, H., Bédard, C.: Specifications for Computer-Aided Conceptual Building Design. International Journal of Design Studies 24(1), 51–71 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meniru, K., Rivard, H., Bédard, C.: Digitally Capturing Design Solutions. In: Rivard, Miresco, Melhem (eds.) Proceedings of the Joint International Conference in Computing and Decision Making in Civil and Building Conference, Montreal, Canada, June 14-16 (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mora, R., Rivard, H., Bédard, C.: Computer-Aided Conceptual Design of Building Structures – Geometric Modeling for the Synthesis Process. In: Gero, J. (ed.) First International Conference on Design Computing and Cognition, July 19-21, pp. 27–55. Kluwer Academic Pub., held at MIT, Boston (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gomez, N.: Conceptual Structural Design Through Knowledge Hierarchies. Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Civil Eng., Carnegie Mellon University (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Parent, S., Rivard, H., Mora, R.: Acquisition and Modeling of Conceptual Structural Design Knowledge. In: Rivard, Miresco, Melhem (eds.) Proceedings of the Joint International Conference in Computing and Decision Making in Civil and Building Conference, Montreal, Canada, June 14-16 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leclercq, P.: Interpretative Tool for Architectural Sketches. In: Gero, J.S., Tversky, B. (eds.) Int’l. Conference on Visual and Spatial Reasoning in Design, pp. 69–80. MIT, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mora, R., Juchmes, R., Rivard, H., Leclercq, P.: From Archictectural Sketches to Feasible Structural Systems. In: Gero, J.S. (ed.) 2nd International Conference on Design Computing and Cognition, Technical University of Eindhoven (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Soibelman, L., Peña-Mora, F.: Distributed Multi-Reasoning Mechanism to Support Conceptual Structural Design. Journal of Structural Engineering 126(6), 733–742 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kumar, B., Raphael, B.: CADREM: A Case-based System for Conceptual Structural Design. Engineering with Computers 13(3), 153–164 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Eisfeld, M., Scherer, R.: Assisting Conceptual Design of Building Structures by an Interactive Description Logic Based Planner. Advanced Engineering Informatics 17, 41–57 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grierson, D.E., Khajehpour, S.: Method for conceptual design applied to office buildings. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 16(2), 83–103 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sisk, G.M., Miles, J.C., Moore, C.J.: Designer centered development of GA-based DSS for conceptual design of buildings. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 17(3), 159–166 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rafiq, M.Y., Mathews, J.D., Bullock, G.N.: Conceptual building design–Evolutionary approach. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 17(3), 150–158 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Packam, I.S.J., Rafiq, M.Y., Borthwick, M.F., Denham, S.L.: Interactive visualization for decision support and evaluation of robustness in theory and practice. Advanced Engineering Informatics 19(4), 263–280 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Miles, J.C., Cen, M., Taylor, M., Bouchlaghem, N.M., Anumba, C.J., Shang, H.: Linking sketching and constraint checking in early conceptual design. In: Beucke, K., et al. (eds.) 10th Int. Conf. on Computing in Civil & Building Eng., p. 11 (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rosenman, M.A., Gero, J.S.: Evolving designs by generating useful complex gene structures. In: Bentley, P.J. (ed.) Evolutionary Design by Computers, pp. 345–364. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1999)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Caldas, L.: Evolving three-dimensional architecture form: An application to low-energy design. In: Gero, J.S. (ed.) Artificial Intelligence in Design 2002, pp. 351–370. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2002)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chouchoulas, O.: Shape evolution: An algorithmic method for conceptual architectural design combining shape grammars and genetic algorithms. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, University of Bath, UK (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bouchlaghem, N.: Optimizing the design of building envelopes for thermal performance. Automation in Construction 10(1), 101–112 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Peippo, K., Lund, P.D., Vartiainen, E.: Multivariate optimization of design trade-offs for solar low energy buildings. Energy and Building 29(2), 189–205 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jedrzejuk, H., Marks, W.: Optimization of shape and functional structure of buildings as well as heat source utilization: Partial problems solution. Building and Environment 37(11), 1037–1043 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wang, W., Rivard, H., Zmeureanu, R.: An Object-Oriented Framework for Simulation-Based Green Building Design Optimization with Genetic Algorithms. Journal of Advanced Engineering Informatics 19(1), 5–23 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wang, W., Zmeureanu, R., Rivard, H.: Applying Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithms in Green Building Design Optimization. Building and Environment 40(11), 1512–1525 (2005)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wang, W., Rivard, R., Zmeureanu, R.: Floor Shape Optimization for Green Building Design. Journal of Advanced Engineering Informatics (in press, 2006)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Finnveden, G.: Methods for describing and characterizing resource depletion in the context of life cycle assessment. Technical Report. Swedish Environmental Research Institute, Stockholm, Sweden (1994)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Moran, M.J.: Availability analysis: a guide to efficient energy use. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1982)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Szargut, J., Morris, D.R., Steward, F.R.: Exergy analysis of thermal, chemical, and metallurgical process. Hemisphere Publishing, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cornelissen, R.L.: Thermodynamics and sustainable development—the use of exergy analysis and the reduction of irreversibility. Ph.D. Thesis. Laboratory of Thermal Engineering, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands (1997)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cera, C.D., Regli, W.C., Braude, I., Shapirstein, Y., Foster, C.V.: A Collaborative 3D Environment for Authoring Design Semantics. IEEE Computer Grapics and Applications, 43–55 (May 2002)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pena-Mora, F., Dwivedi, G.H.: Multiple Device Collaborative and Real Time Analysis System for Project Management in Civil Engineering. ASCE, Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 16(1), 23–38 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cooper, S., Taleb-Bendiab, A.: CONCENSUS: Multi-Party Negotiation Support for Conflict Resolution in Concurrent Engineering Design. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 9(2), 155–159 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Adelson, B.: Developing Strategic Alliances: A Framework for Collaborative Negotiation in Design. Research in Engineering Design 11(3), 133–144 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fruchter, R.: AEC Teamwork: A Collaborative Design and Learning Space. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 13(4), 261–269 (1999)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Liston, K., Fischer, M., Winograd, T.: Focused Sharing of Information for Multidisciplinary Decision Making by Project Teams. ITcon 6, 69–82 (2001), http://www.itcon.org/2001/6
  44. 44.
    Anumba, C.J., Duke, A.K.: Telepresence in Concurrent Lifecycle Design and Construction. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 14, 221–232 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hugues Rivard
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Construction Engineering, École de technologie supérieure (ETS)Canada Research Chair in Computer-Aided Engineering for Sustainable Building DesignMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations