Marco Conceptual

For high performance building design, it is critical to understand which performance criteria can be achieved and to what degree, through what strategies and the implementation of available and appropriate (active, passive and hybrid) building system components. A review of the state of art and established approaches has shown various ways of combining design and performance based working methodologies.

The “Ecological Circle of Buildings” (Daniels, 2003) demonstrates the methodology to correlate design considerations with performance criteria and system interactions. The graphical principle of the “Ecological Circle of Buildings” depicts a way of systematically organizing and correlating the expected or demonstrated performance relationships between exterior space, building fabric and technical installations.

13

The ongoing development of the “Ratcliff Green Matrix” (Ratcliff, 2007) elaborates on the relationships between areas of design consideration and standard US project stages. The

“Green Matrix” shown in Figure 2-1 is designed to cross-reference topics of sustainability with standard phases of the project design, thereby illuminating appropriate strategies for a particular phase of work. Within the “Green Matrix” there is a horizontal heading for the five introduced sustainable topics: site, water, energy, materials, and indoor environment. Vertically are listed seven design phases: pro-forma, master planning, pre-design, schematic design, design development, construction documents, and construction/post occupancy. At the intersection of topics and phases are listed design strategies particular to that condition. The user “clicks” the intersection under consideration and is led to more specific information about the strategies and further resource links – some of which may reside on the web site itself, or may be linked to independent web sources. The “Green Matrix” therefore correlates four relevant areas: design stage, design consideration and suggested procedures, as well as internal and external references.

However, there are not quantitative simulation capacities for the “Green Matrix”.

14

Figure 2-1 Green Matrix (Ratcliff, 2007)

Harputlugil and Hensen (Harputlugil & Hensen, 2006) discusses a similar approach that adds another dimension to the described organization of a two dimensional matrix. As in previous examples, the proposed methodology relates design criteria (in form of performance rating systems like LEED, BREEAM and BG-tool) to Building Process Phases and Design Stages in a project matrix. The structure correlates Pre-Design, Design, Construction, Operation and Renovation stages and sub-stages to respective assessment stages (Pre-design assessment, design assessment, construction assessment and operation assessment). The authors argue that

“Since buildings are so diverse, serving many different types of occupancies or functions, any attempt to develop a single system to define and rate performance of these buildings will not be perfect and will even be unsatisfactory for many potential users (MacDonald 2000). Hence, it might be one strategy to at least define a flexible system that can have many possible configurations for dealing with the issues created by the diversity. MacDonald (2000)

15

emphasized that major issues were related to: who will be the users of such a rating system; how any rating results will impact actions of building owners, operators, and other building industry actors; how such abilities will be deployed and maintained; and how quality will be assured.”

In addition to the relationship of performance criteria and an appropriate assessment during all design stages, the user diversity should also be considered as a third important aspect.

In relation to the list of typical “standard” design team services, various specialists from different fields need to be involved depending on the complexity and building program, required planning input, as well as the expected building performance and environmental quality according to established industry and rating standards. As a result, all three categories (design stage, design factor and involved actor) need to be correlated and facilitated by an integrated platform.

An example for such an attempt is the “Sustainable Toolkit” (Parsons Brinckerhoff, 2013) that Parsons Brinckerhoff, a global consulting firm, has developed for different project types like Buildings, Highways, Transit and Ports. Also organized in a “Buildings Matrix” format, the

“Sustainable Toolkit” structure provides guidance throughout the design stages by asking “What to do if you are…” a member of the project team working on a particular area. The actors are hereby categorized by client / project management, various architectural team members, and a range of consulting engineering parties. In addition to the way all participating parties can now find their way through the process, a detailed overview of sustainability measures for all areas is provided. Next to this project specific and task related guidance, multiple links to external resources and references are provided in the different sections of the toolkit.

The design methodologies reviewed in this section organized the knowledge (design strategies, design guidance, and/or associated resources and references) for high performance

16

building design by performance criteria, design teams, design factors, design stages, and/ or project types. However, there are not quantitative simulation capacities for these design methodologies.

For the assistance of an integrated and coordinated multi-disciplinary building design process of a given project type, VDS needs to also include three dimensions in representing respective steps: design team, design factors and design stages. For each task performed by a specific design team, at a specific design stage and for a specific design factor, all aspects of the building performance need to be assessed both qualitatively and quantitatively. There are five aspects of the building performance in VDS, including Site Sustainability, Water Efficiency, Energy & Atmosphere, Materials & Resources, and Indoor Environmental Quality (Table 2-3).

This outcome constitutes a basic requirement and structure for the VDS platform development.