Building Simulation (Not) in The Studio Max C. Doelling.

iii i
Konferenzraum
Hochsaal
Workshop s
Toilett en
Ga
Auss te
Toil
ett
be
llun
Lag
rd
er
er
en
Foy
er
Dipl.-Ing. Max Dlling 1 Technische Universitt Berlin, Germany
Foy
er
Ballsaa
Auss
tell
ung
Ballsaal
Auss
tell
ung
0
Auss tell ung
ii
Hrsaal
ge r ett e Garder n obe Pumi
La
Toil
Lager Toilet ten Pum i
Auss tell ung
Sustainable Design Classes 2011 - 2013
temperatur
Pe
Lager Pum i
Building Simulation (not) in the Studio

rs
er ag kl mi ne Pu tr Ge
on al ob Gare e ro
Caf
Sho p
Workshop s
BELICHTUNG
o Sh p
obe rder . Ga er Pers nelag r Get
ii
0
Tee k Pum che i Toilet ten Lager
Hrsaal
Auss
Workshop s
Workshop
Toilett en Lager Pum i
tell
ung
ro
s
g llun
Thermal Conditioning & BESUCHER Daylight Zoning Diagram >
Workshops
Teekch Toilette e Lager
Auss
tell ung
Auss te
iii
BESUCHER
Konferenzraum
Occupancy Hours & BELICHTUNG Intensity Sketch > Foyer

Foyer Cafe Robust studio: Cafe shop Karen Krger Philip Winkler shop austellung Philip Rust
Caf
Foy er
Workshop
0 0
Sh op
2 2
4 4
6 6
ung
8 8
10 10
12 12
14 14
16 16
18 18
iii
20 20
22 22
BESUCHER BESUCHER
Foyer Foyer Cafe
Workshop
Bro
0 0
Auss
Cafe shop shop austellung austellung toilette
Ballsaal austellung toilette
Auss
tell
ung
k ch e i Toilet ten Lager
In cooperation with:
0
2
toilette lager lager garderobe garderobe konferenz konferenz workshop
ge r Toil ett e Garder n obe Pumi
La
tell
obe rder . Ga er Pers nelag r Get
ii
Hrsaal
Auss
Workshop s
toilette lager lager garderobe garderobe konferenz konferenz workshop workshop hrsaal
1 2
Workshop
Bro
Digital Processing for Academics (Prof. Schwandt)workshop hrsaal FG Gebudetechnik und Entwerfen (Prof. Steffan) hrsaal bro
bro
Auss
tell ung
Dr. Farshad Nasrollahi Jeffrey Tietze, Cand. BSc 1
Pum
Tee
tell
ung
hrsaal bro
iii
bro

Sustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013 Max Dlling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)
Fassade Fassade
DIVA Day 2013 Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
Fassade Fassade
01 Teaching & Research Goals

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 widescope 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
Students discussing sintered shading geometry prototypes, summer 2012

Sustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013 Max Dlling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt) DIVA Day 2013 Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA
02 Class Iterations (chronological)

A : Parametric Design Climates : 1, 2, 4 Community Center & Offices (mechanical conditioning) B : Performative Design 1, 3, 4 Housing Units & Urban Design (passive & mech. conditioning) C : Robust Studio Integration 5 Multi - Use Exhibition & Office building (mech. cond.)
R. Canihuante, M. El-Soudani Office Bldg. (FL site)
O. A. Pearl, D. Gkougkoudi Housing units (SWE site)
B. Suazo, M. Silva (Berlin site)
Geometric optimization Fixed materials & setpoints Balance thermal & daylight
Hashtgerd, Hashtgerd, Iran Iran
Geometric & material optimization Fixed setpoints & U-Val., custom mat. Thermal performance focus
35.962012 35.962012 N ,50.679533 N ,50.679533 E E
26.047771 N , 80.113513 W 52.498067 52.498067 N ,13.460864 N ,13.460864 E E 0828 7 N,14.610828 E E
Hollywood , FL, USA Berlin, Germany Berlin, Germany nd den , Sweden
Yazd , Iran Yazd , Iran
31.912609 31.912609 N ,54.316458 N ,54.316458 E E
stersund , Sweden 63.176837 N,14.610828 E stersund Hollywood Hollywood , FL, USA , FL, USA, Sweden
Geometric & material optimization Custom setpoints, mat. & behavior Individualized performance tests
Berlin, Germany 52.498067 N Germany ,13.460864 E Berlin,
52.498067 N ,13.460864 E
63.176837 N,14.610828 E 26.047771 26.047771 N , 80.113513 N , 80.113513 W W
Hashtgerd, 35.962012 N Hashtg
35.9620
1 Hollywod, FL, USA
Climate.: Am (Kppen class)
Climate: BSk
2 Hashtgerd, Iran
Climate: BWk
3 Yazd, Iran
Climate: Dfc
4 stersund, Sweden
Climate: Dfb
5 Berlin, Germany

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, bestpractice 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
Student Ralitsa Georgieva presenting daylight simulations, winter 201 1/12

04 Performance Representations (excerpts) a Office / Multi - use building

(Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA)
Daylight metrics model (UDI, DAv)
C. 103 H. 2 UDI 66 % C. 64 H. .1 L. 4
UDI 90 %
L. 6
DAv 20 %
DAv 84 %
Initial Variant 275 kWh/m2
Final Variant 170 kWh/m2
DAv 300 lux, UDI 100 - 2000 lux Heating, cooling, lighting energy use development (kWh/m2) Primary energy demand
Design concepts, Irradiation metrics
Overhang study
Glare without louvers
Final performance section with horizontal louvers

INNENPERSPEKTIVE
b Housing development (Yazd, Iran)

C. Kollmeyer, R. Klmel
HAUS
HAUS
BLICK IN DEN HOF
Early massing stage
Cellular strategy
Housing Units
UDI 100 - 2k axonometric
Final state (RP irrad. model)
Yard perspective (hello, glare... )

FLOORPLAN +2 | 1:100
TOP VIEW | 1:100
05 Performative Design: Sweden Site

a Design & Simulations:
O. A. Pearl, D. Gkougkoudi
Variant A 461 1 14 Variant B 495 1 17
> 2k 43 % 100 - 2k 38 %
> 2k 25 % 100 - 2k 48 % H. 34 27 % Final Variant
Final Var. 467 1 16
Summer Winter
H. 89 19 % Baseline (~A) Unequal unit performance! Shaping Test glazing areas, materials, U-values, and unit overshadowing (conditioned & passive)
Avrg. irradiation (exposed surfaces): kWh/m2 Versioning Compare two site design variants; pick best one. Metrics: average irradiance, H/C energy demand (VIPER)
UDI 100 - 2000, > 2000 & < 100 lux comparison; Heating energy use development (kWh/m2)
In parallel to systematic tests, designs continue to develop in a heuristic & design-driven fashion, on multiple levels
b Design & Simulations:

T. Merickova, P. Jardzioch
Variant B Variant A 529 135 606 140
> 2k 42 % 100 - 2k 40 %
> 2k 23 % 100 - 2k 45 % H. 18 32 % Final Variant
Final Var. 630 154
Summer Winter
H. 37 18 % Baseline (~B)

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
06 Performative Design: Sweden Site

O. A. Pearl, D. Gkougkoudi
a Design & Simulations:
Unit perspective section

Site perspective (looking East)
b Design & Simulations:

T. Merickova, P. Jardzioch
Unit section
Site perspective (looking West)

07 Detailed Design / Simulation Narrative (Florida Site)

Heating (natural gas) Chiller (electricity) Lighting (electricity) Glass Sol. Gains (/occ. area) kWh/m; Primary Glazing Solar Gains (kWh) Useful Daylight Illuminance, 100 - 2000 lux UDI > 2000, < 100 lux Daylight Availability, oces, 300 lux % of occupied hours
Annual H/C/L energy demand, UDI 100-2000, DAv 300

339
100 80
Monthly H/C/L energy demand (nal building only), glazing solar gains (all variants)
25 20 15 10 5 0 kWh (/m2)
238
223
204
153 Nat. Vent.
60 40 20 0% occ. hrs.
kWh/m
kWh/m
NORTH
SOUTH
C. 103 H. 2
Space Use
Oces Meeting & Media Halls Auxiliary Spaces
Form Finding: Volumes
L. 6
Facade Concepts: Diusion
Courtyard ventilation
Foyer Circulation (exterior)

Sustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013 Max Dlling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt) Annual H/C/L energy demand, UDI 100-2000, DAv 300 Heating (natural gas)
Chiller (electricity) 385
Design: I. V. Crego, D. Cepeda del Toro

DIVA Day 2013 Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti July 15th, 2013, New York City, NY, USA Monthly H/C/L energy demand (nal building only), glazing solar gains (all variants)
80
100
08 Design / Simulation Process Observations & Models 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:
The basic procedures involved in the design of a commodity are the same whether it be a toaster, supersonic passenger aircraft or a building.
W. J. Batty & B. Swann (97): Integration of Computer Based Modelling and an Inter-Disciplinary Based Approach to Building Design [...], (Building Simulation 97)
Processes are not linear but concurrently erratic, iterative,

case-specific and linked to performance / design intent
Miscellaneous
Lighting
Thermal M in/M ax Tem p range diurnalTem perature variation HDD/CDD Balance point tem perature Incident Solar radiation Room Tem perature Heat storage/rem oval capacity Occupancy gains Conduction gain Direct Solar gain Lighting gain Heat gain avoidance by Daylighting Tim elag in heat transfer Heat gain/Loss Heating load Cooling Load reduction in Heating/Cooling load air change rate Infiltration gain
Energy base case end use energy breakdown proposed end use energy breakdown energy conservation m easures DL supplem ented Lighting energy Heating energy Cooling energy savings in Lighting energy reduction in Heating energy reduction in cooling energy overallenergy consum ption energy generated by PV o o o
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
- 1313 -
ProcessSteps A ProgrammingStage
Typeofanalysis Climateanalysis Benchmarking Parametricanalysis
Cloud cover analysis Daylight analysis Illum inance level analysis Daylight autonom y Glare index
Overshadowing analysis
Psychom etric analysis
W ind Rose analysis
Sunpath Analysis
Shading M ask
Architecturaldesignparameters
o o o
SchematicDesign B Stage 1 BUILDINGVLV
Orientation Massing SiteformMassing SpaceZoning
o o
o o
o o
o o o
optimumorientation aspetratio,volume
2 SPACELVL optimizeenvelope
Form / Performance knowledge steadily accretes

throughout individual design steps taken by students
Insulation Materialsopaque Materialsglazed Green/Coolroof
o o o
o o o o o
o o o
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
o o o o o o o o
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
optimumU,Rvalues,thickness U,Rvalues,thickness SHGC,VT,Uvalue,optimumWWR U,Rvalues,thickness
3 Passiveheating
ThermalMass Directheatgain Indirectheatgain CrossVentilation Stackventilation Mass+nightcooling Shading Daylighting Lightshelves Daylightzoning Skylights Daylightdimming Occupancysensors
o o
o o o o o o o
o o o
o o o o
o o o o o o o o
o o
Area,location,thickness,heatstoragecapacity WWR,SHGC thickness,heatstoragecapacity Inlet/outletopeningarea,location stackheight,location,openingarea areaofthermalmass&openings geometry,location optimumDF,WWR Glarecontrol optimumDF
4 Passivecooling
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
o o o o o o
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
5 Shading
o o o o
o o
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)
6 Daylighting
o o o o o o o o o o o o o
o o o o o
sensorlocation
7 Renewables
Solarpower WindPower Geothermalpower SolarDHW
o o panelsizing
o o panelsizing
S. Bambardekar & U. Poerschke (09): The Architect as Performer of Energy Simulation in the Early Design Stage, (Building Simulation 09)
Figure1 : The framework
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.

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 & 04 Multi-Domain Decision-Making & Representability Nasrollahi, Building Simulation 2013): encapsulates (performance) domains (A - D plus models? many more) domain that includes parametric performance
instance, the quantification of the insulation impact on heating loads should be compromised if the geometry of the building is completely unknown.
acceptable solutions. During this process, designers shortcuts to facilitate the constraints. In design practi The focus of simulation often related to is previous expe to solve design dilemmas. and is rarely based on quantita [...] The identification In designerly simulation, i of three main design shortcut should allow the The concern of using m stages is inputs. not neccessarily minimized as they can imp a reproduction of the Two types of [design] process. information are
Design intent decisions is intersubjectively constructed and How are design made in a multi-representational Design Synthesis is achieved byof continuously overlapping Individual domain-specific types knowledge (An etc.) are
domain states through multivalent representations) synthesized by(e.g., utilizing the semiotic flexibility their multivalent representations (e.g. derived from digital models) enable, and Domain crosstalk update influences design intent; intent thus continuously global design intent (N).modifies In return, domains resulting a non-linear process the field of intent, in newly enriched with field additional crossdomain knowledge, permanently influences the originally What are the benefits of thinking such a model? contributing domains, forming a in nonlinear knowledge flow framework that relies less on direct hybridization of design and engineering methods,design but instead drawsfrom potential from The model unburdens processes constant the synergistic possibilities rooted in the multivalence of their rational analysis synchronicity demands respective models representability. It supports holistic knowledge achieved through complex, Multivalent representations encode quantitative descriptors physically accurate, output-flexible tools (e.g., DIVA) 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 Building Simulation (not) in the Studio images and printed daylight models all partially fulfill these Sustainable Design Classes 2011 -2013 requirements. Max Dlling, Dipl.-Ing., Assistant Professor
Digi-Pro @ 3d-Labor (Prof. H. Schwandt)
Precedent solutions: the R. Venancio, n features extracted from p A. Pedrini, A.C. be useful in the process o n van der Linden, E. van intentions into pragmatic den Ham & R. Stouffs (1 1): The process of transferring Figure 2 Representation of designerly simulation. n sources to the model depen Think Designerly! Using Multiple Simulation Tools to The simulation of a design dilemma should adopt intended by the designer an Solve Architectural Dilemmas, (Building 1 1) of design nthat information is used in the Simulation formulation Design Problem Interlinks Chermayeff & Alexander (63): represents used as a shortcut problems. This information is strictly related to (Chermayeff / Alexander) Design Interdependencies Of course, the process of desi design constraints (Lawson, 2006) that can be strong human component. Th Domains of Inquisition pragmatic or abstract (Figure 2). Both types of An integrated process cognitive processes and ass and Representation in is dilemma constraints are intended to reduce the scope inherent part of any design act ......a dynamic field of Design Synthesis of the analysis.
Design principles: the reduce considerably the s information can be used design strategies.
........related design states OF DESIG Information generated by pragmatic constraints is EXAMPLES ...........and should not be PRO easier to implementOin models as it can be PE simulation The proposed concept was ..............represented directly input in the model. dilemmas extracted from dif ...................linearly. we present two exa The use of abstract constraints, on the other hand, is this paper, indirectly transferred to the model. This information were investigated using simul SE L B I designer and translated to N TA should be processed by the The case studies presented a be used in the model. Some examples of this pragmatic constraints, as both translation process can be mentioned: goals. Processes with mor Cost constraints related to a given dilemma M. should C. Doelling &....................... in futur be approached Design allows the elimination of solutions Intent that would be F. Nasrollahi (13) Example 1: residence in Zwo too expensive. In a similar way, the definition of Parametric Design : Thesection first case study was an on Florida design conceptual performance or design ambitions can lead Simulation13) A Case - Study goals in Design-Simulation Integration, (Building performance goals. The reside showing known thermal and daylighting to a range of acceptable solutions. the Netherlands, was intende behavior of or overhangs shelves An abstract conjecture, concept design / light energy using PV panels conne and ventilated roof performance.DIVA Day 2013 intention, such as transparency, for double instance, solar collectors for water Solemma LLC @ Thornton Tomasetti heat can generate pragmatic Daylight inputs. Amap transparent (UDIJuly 100 2000) York of City, NY, USA 15th, -2013, TheNew leading architect Jami wall would have a high final WWR design (window-to-wallvariant as multivalent architecten, Rotterdam) wa ratio). Similarly, the design of shading devices representation that clearly relates methods to simulation
SC
SS CE
IT
REPR
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!
Student Alan Patrick discussing simulations, Robust studio, Summer 2013
Exhibition
Section 1:200 Section East-West East-West 1:200
Section East-West 1:200
+24,00
Elevation Friedrichstrae 1:200
11 Results : Building Simulation in the Studio

Floor plan Floor plan
4
4,35
Floor plan
9,00
3,35
Exhibition
+20,00
+14,00
+10,00
+6,00
Design / Sim.: L. de Pedro, C. Sitzler

(Seasonal) UDI 100 - 2000 lux & DAv 300 lux daylight studies for alternating zones of light / dark
114 113 112 114 111 113 110 112 109 111 108 110 107 109 106 108 107 106 NORTH
+0,00
Section North-South 1:200
Elevation Puttkamerstrae 1:200

01.06.
Research Center
Event
Research Center
Elevation Puttkamerstrae 1:200

01.06.
01.12.
01.12.
HEAT GENERATION [kWh/m2] HEAT GENERATION [kWh/m2]
NORTH
SOUTH
SOUTH
10
20
30
40
50
60
OPENINGS [%]
Multi-Purpose
SOUTH SOUTH
Multi-Purpose
114 113 112
NORTH
17 16 15 17 14 16 13 15 12 14 11 13 10 12 11 10
10
20
30
40
50
60
OPENINGS [%]
HEAT GENERATION [kWh/m2] HEAT GENERATION [kWh/m2]
114 111 113 110 112 109 111 108 110 107 109 106 108 107 106
NORTH
SOUTH
SOUTH
Chiller [kWh/m2]
NORTH
Chiller [kWh/m2]
10
20
30
40
50
60
10
20
30
40
NORTH 50
60
OPENINGS [%]
OPENINGS [%]
17 16 15 17 14 16 13 15 12 14 11 13 10 12 11 10
10
20
30
40
50
60
SOUTH
10
20
30
40
50
60
OPENINGS [%]
OPENINGS [%]
Chiller [kWh/m2]
Section East-West 1:200 Light studies / Opening North and South

SOUTH NORTH
Chiller [kWh/m2]
Light studies / Opening North and South

10 20 30 40 NORTH 50 60 OPENINGS [%]
Light intent & Sim.

40 50 60
UDI 100-2000 Lux UDI 100-2000 Lux Elevation Friedrichstrae 1:200
Floor plan UDI 100-2000 Lux Sommer
UDI 100-2000 Lux Winter UDI 100-2000 Lux Winter
Daylight Avilability 500 Lux Daylight Avilability 500 Lux
Exhibition
Exhibition
UDI 100-2000 Lux Sommer
10
20
30
Elevation Friedrichstrae 1:200

4
+24,00
4,35
OPENINGS [%]
9,00
3,35
4
+20,00
4,35
9,00
3,35
Exhibition
+24,00
Exhibition
+20,00
+14,00
114
+10,00 113
NORTH
112
+14,00
HEAT GENERATION [kWh/m2]
+6,00
111 110
+10,00
SOUTH
+0,00 109
114 113 112
NORTH
+6,00
108 107 106
111 110 109 108 107 106
SOUTH

+0,00
Cross Sections
10
20
30
40
50
60
10
20
30
40
50
60
OPENINGS [%] 114 113 112 NORTH
OPENINGS [%]
SOUTH
114 113 112 111 110 109 108 107

10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 60
NORTH
16 15 14 SOUTH
17

17 SOUTH
111 110 109 108 107 106
Chiller [kWh/m2]
13 12 11 10
NORTH
Event
16
10 20 30
SOUTH 40 50
60
OPENINGS [%]
OPENINGS [%]
15 14
17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10
SOUTH
Chiller [kWh/m2]
13 12 11
Chiller [kWh/m2]

NORTH
UDI 100-2000 Lux

NORTH
UDI 100-2000 Lux Winter
Daylight Avilability 500 Lux
Event
106
OPENINGS [%]
10
10
20
30
40
50
60
10
20
30
40
50
60
OPENINGS [%]
OPENINGS [%]

17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 SOUTH
Floor plan
Lateral Section
Floor plan
Chiller [kWh/m2]

NORTH

10 20 30 OPENINGS [%]
UDI 100-2000 Lux
UDI 100-2000 Lux
40 50 60
25
G lightshelf
4,52
4,53
I
5,00 D1 D2
J
D3
K
5,00 D4 D5 D6
12 Results : Building Simulation in the Studio

bro bro
M M
6,75
Grundriss 4 1:200
bro bro
a a
M M
leiter leiter
M M
toilette toilette personal personal
Hochsaal Hochsaal
toilette toilette
pumi pumi
a a
a a
Schnitt West-Ost 1:200
sommer sommer
70
2,70
5,00
Detailschnitt & Fassadenansicht equinox 1:20

Wor Wor ksh ksh ops ops
13,895
5,42
8,955
5,30
8,07
equinox
besprecher besprecher
lager lager bro bro
workshop workshop toilette toilette

pumi pumi
a a
2,60
2,60
2,60
a a
2,60
workshop workshop
6,75
workshop workshop lager lager

a a
toilette toilette
pumi pumi
workshop workshop
lager lager
lager lager cafe cafe
a a
a a
toilette personal
Au Au ss ss te te ll ll un un gg
Hochsaal
Workshop
pumi pumi
a a
Ansicht Friedrichstrae 1:200

udi >2000 lux
Fo yer Foy er
Toilett
en Lager
Pumi
toilette toilette
garderobe garderobe personal personal
Multi-metric daylight study of different facade configurations for maximum daylight depth BELICHTUNG & uniformity (500 lux)
M M a a
hrsaal hrsaal
s ro os B r B
Daylight Autonomy workshop workshop

hrsaal hrsaal bro bro
18.00 Uhr
4,52
konferenz konferenz
25
lager lager
Ansicht Puttkamerstrae 1:200
Auss Au tell sste llun ung g
Workshops Wor kshops

Toi Toilet letten ten Lager La ger Pu Pumi mi
19%
garderobe garderobe
25
62%
4,53
51%
32%
UDI <100 Lux
21.09
2,70
5,00
M M
Tee Tee kc kc he he Toil Toil ette ette Lager Lager
konferenz konferenz
Workshops Workshops
a a
M M
lightshelf
9.00 Uhr
5,00
21.06
21.12
iii i
UDI < 100 lux

fassadenstudien
sommer sommer equinox equinox
ohne lightshelf mit fassadeneinschnitt
13,895
5,42
8,955
57% 65%
+8%
5,30 8,07
70
M M
M M
konferenz konferenz
udi 100-2000 lux
Konfere Konfere nzraum nzraum
Wo Wo rks rks hop hop ss
Grundriss 4 1:200
a a
12.00 Uhr
Grundriss 4 1:200
equinox equinox
sommer sommer
Initial Light Shelf Concepts

D E
69% 71%
5,00
D1
D2
D3
D4
D5
2,60
Design / Sim.: K. Krger P. Winkler P. Rust

M M M M
Toi Toi let let ten ten La La ge ge rr
temperatur
ohne lightshelf ohne fassadeneinschnitt
teekche teekche
a a
continous daylight autonomy

Foye Fo yer r
Pe P rs on Ga ers G al ard on a Lag rde -Gar erob l-G La er e ar er rob ge e e ro ob e Toil r be To ette ilet n ten
mit lightshelf ohne fassadeneinschnitt

erer agag klkl mimi nene PuPu trtr GeGe
mit lightshelf mit fassadeneinschnitt
Grundriss 3 1:200
op op Sh Sh
mit lightshelf 10% geneigt mit fassadeneinschnitt
Pu Pu mi mi
21.09
21.06
21.12
Nutzung
Foyer Foyer Cafe Cafe
D 2
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
9.00 Uhr
Grundriss 3 1:200
winter winter
57%
D
69%
M M
Ballsaal Bal lsaal
Auss Au tell sste ung llun g
shop shop
daylight autonomy
ii
Hrsaal Hrsaal
austellung austellung toilette toilette lager lager
12.00 Uhr
2,70 70 4,36
D2
D3
D4
D5
D6
D6
light
+2%
UDI 100 - 2k lux

bro
a
bro
a
winter M winter
leiter
a a
cafe cafe
Caf C af
toilette
pumi
a
i
s
winter winter
19% 20%
besprecher
op op Sh Sh
+1%
iii
ee ob ob er er rd rd Ga er . . Ga gr rs rs ae Pe Pe lg el ea n rn t er Ge Gt
Auss Au sste llun tell g ung
lager
a
temperatur
M
18.00 Uhr
Pe r Ga son rd alLage erob Gar er e r o
la
Nutzung
Lager Lager To To ile ile tt tt en en Pu Pu mm ii
tellu
shop shop
a a
foyer foyer
Austellungsflche Austellungsflche Veranstaltungsflche Veranstaltungsflche Personalbereich Personalbereich Lager Lager Eingang Eingang
Regular facade A 0 Schnitt Light shelf only B Shelf + plateNord-Sd cut C Shelf 10 rotated D
Frequentierung Frequentierung
Ballsaal Bal lsaal
La L ag ger Toil er T oile ett tte en n Ga rderob Gard erobe e Pumi Pumi
overlit
Aufenthaltsdauer Aufenthaltsdauer
Belichtung Belichtung
Lftung Lftung
automatisch utomatisch Manuell a Manuell
Interaktion Interaktion Temperatur Temperatur
lager
a
Teekche Toilette Lager
konferenz
Workshops
1:200
Schnitt ii Daylight Sd-Nord Ausstellung Availability 1:200

Lager Lager Toile To tten ilett en Pum P umii
Hrsaal Hrsaal
UDI > 2k lux

ii
Auss
a a
bro
teekche
Toil
ette
be
ng
Garderobe Garderobe
Ausstellung
Sommer Sommer
Foye
M
gebudestruktur
Foyer Cafe
62% 69%
2
21.09
8
51% 51%
10
0%
21.06
12
14
16
32% 36%
18
20
22
mi nek Pu r Get
+7%
+4%
ger
Shop
21.12
workshop
a
Ballsaal
Auss
shop
tellu ng
austellung
9.00 Uhr ii
Hrsaal
toilette
pumi
a
TeTe ek ek c c hh Pu Pu mm i i ee To To ile ile tt tt en en Lager Lager
Auss Au sste llun tell g ung
Workshop Wo rkshops s
0
Auss tellu ng
M a
toilette lager garderobe konferenz workshop
57% 65% 53%
- 4% -12%
lager
ro s
ng
Workshop
Toilett en Lager Pumi

tellu
workshop
hrsaal
workshop
a M
Winter Winter
12.00 Uhr
hrsaal bro
Auss
69% 71% 68%
-1% -3%
lightshelf
Wo Wo rks rks hop hop ss
Bro Bro
Konzeptskizzen/Diagramme
Schnitt Nord-Sd 1:200
toilette
iii
M M
Schnitt Sd-Nord 1:200
iiiAusstellung
workshop
a
pumi
konferenz
i
Konferenzraum
Workshops
fassadenstudien Konzeptskizzen/Daiagramme 18.00 Uhr
Seasonal Facade Overshadowing

sommer
62% 69% 64%
19% 20% 19%
0% -1%
BELICHTUNG
lager
lager cafe
a a
tell ung
point-in-glare
+2% - 5%
equinox
51% 51% 46%
-5% -5%
32% 36% 30%
-2% -6%
winter
Sh
op
toilette
pumi garderobe personal
cafe
Foye r
Caf
slicetest
Final South Facade (configuration C)
Ansicht Puttkamerstrae 1:200
0
Ausstellung
a
Auss
Garderobe
a
Lager Toile tten Pum i
shop
foyer
Auss
Ballsaal
tell
ung
gebudestruktur
Frequentierung Austellungsflche Veranstaltungsflche Personalbereich
Pumi
La ge r Toil ette Garder n obe
Sommer
geb
obe rder . Ga er Pers nelag Getr
ii
Toile
0
Tee k Pum che i Toile tten Lager
Lager tten Pum i
Hrsaal
Auss
Workshops
continous daylight autonomy
mit lightshelf ohne fassadeneinschnitt
21.09 21.06
Bro
Schnitt West-Ost 1:200
Detailschnitt & Fassadenansicht 1:20
Workshops
Raumprogramm
Lager Eingang
automatisch Manuell
South Facade Cutaway (conf. C)

Aufenthaltsdauer Belichtung Lftung Interaktion Temperatur
21.12
tell
ung
tell
ung
Auss
Winter
iii
57%
9.00 Uhr

69%
12.00 Uhr
Konzeptskiz
daylight autonomy
19%
gebudestruktur
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.
Student Majd Murad discussing simulations, Robust studio, Summer 2013

Thank you, DIVA DAY!

Off-conference questions? max@spacesustainers.org
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)
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. Universittsverlag 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.
Student Philip Rust co-presenting, final crit of Robust studio, Summer 2013


Building Simulation (Not) in The Studio Max C. Doelling.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Building Simulation (Not) in The Studio Max C. Doelling.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

iii i

Dipl.-Ing. Max Dlling 1 Technische Universitt Berlin, Germany

ge r ett e Garder n obe Pumi

Lager Toilet ten Pum i

Auss tell ung

Sustainable Design Classes 2011 - 2013

Building Simulation (not) in the Studio

obe rder . Ga er Pers nelag r Get

Thermal Conditioning & BESUCHER Daylight Zoning Diagram >

Teekch Toilette e Lager

Occupancy Hours & BELICHTUNG Intensity Sketch > Foyer

Cafe shop shop austellung austellung toilette

Ballsaal austellung toilette

k ch e i Toilet ten Lager

toilette lager lager garderobe garderobe konferenz konferenz workshop

ge r Toil ett e Garder n obe Pumi

Lager Toilet ten Pum i

obe rder . Ga er Pers nelag r Get

Dr. Farshad Nasrollahi Jeffrey Tietze, Cand. BSc 1

Building Simulation (not) in the Studio

01 Teaching & Research Goals

Building Simulation (not) in the Studio

02 Class Iterations (chronological)

R. Canihuante, M. El-Soudani Office Bldg. (FL site)

O. A. Pearl, D. Gkougkoudi Housing units (SWE site)

B. Suazo, M. Silva (Berlin site)

26.047771 N , 80.113513 W 52.498067 52.498067 N ,13.460864 N ,13.460864 E E 0828 7 N,14.610828 E E

Hollywood , FL, USA Berlin, Germany Berlin, Germany nd den , Sweden

Yazd , Iran Yazd , Iran

31.912609 31.912609 N ,54.316458 N ,54.316458 E E

63.176837 N,14.610828 E 26.047771 26.047771 N , 80.113513 N , 80.113513 W W

Hashtgerd, 35.962012 N Hashtg

1 Hollywod, FL, USA

Climate.: Am (Kppen class)

Building Simulation (not) in the Studio

03 Metrics & Design / Simulation Tools

Building Simulation (not) in the Studio

04 Performance Representations (excerpts) a Office / Multi - use building

Initial Variant 275 kWh/m2

Final Variant 170 kWh/m2

Design concepts, Irradiation metrics

Glare without louvers

Final performance section with horizontal louvers

b Housing development (Yazd, Iran)

BLICK IN DEN HOF

Early massing stage

UDI 100 - 2k axonometric

Final state (RP irrad. model)

Yard perspective (hello, glare... )

Building Simulation (not) in the Studio

05 Performative Design: Sweden Site

> 2k 25 % 100 - 2k 48 % H. 34 27 % Final Variant

Final Var. 467 1 16

b Design & Simulations:

> 2k 23 % 100 - 2k 45 % H. 18 32 % Final Variant

Final Var. 630 154

Building Simulation (not) in the Studio

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

06 Performative Design: Sweden Site

a Design & Simulations:

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

Unit perspective section

Site perspective (looking East)