AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
Powered by AMiner. Clicking this button will take you away from SciOpen.
Home Building Simulation Article
PDF (7.4 MB)
Cite
EndNote(RIS) BibTeX
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Research Article | Open Access

Example-based dynamic façade design using the façade daylighting performance improvement (FDPI) indicator

Luka Akimov1,2( ), Andrey Bezborodov1, Vladimir Badenko1
Peter the Great Saint-Petersburg Polytechnic University, 29 Polytechnicheskaya st., St.Petersburg, 195251, Russian Federation
Politecnico di Milano, 32 Piazza Leonardo da Vinci, Milano, 20133, Italy
Show Author Information

Abstract

It remains challenging to conduct an efficient dynamic façade design. In this article authors try to address this issue introducing the façade daylighting performance improvement (FDPI) indicator aimed to evaluate the performance of a dynamic (adaptive) façade from its daylighting performance point of view. To illustrate the FDPI application the authors introduced the preliminary dynamic façade concept for an office building located in Tel Aviv (Hot-summer Mediterranean Climate Csa) with further shape modification based on the daylighting performance analysis compared to the three alternatives representative of different typologies of dynamic façades. Al Bahr, One Ocean and The University of Southern Denmark façade systems were simulated under the same weather and building conditions of the preliminary dynamic façade concept and were considered as a benchmark for the study. The final dynamic façade concept elaborated by the authors in the preliminary comparative workflow showed noticeable daylight performance improvement with respect to the case studies comparative scenarios. The FDPI metric allowed to estimate a daylighting performance improvement of 43% of the final dynamic façade concept over the case study dynamic façade that showed the best performance in the daylighting simulations.

Keywords

performance evaluationdynamic façadedaylight performanceadaptive façadefaçade daylighting performance Improvement

References

 

Akimov L, De Michele G, Filippi Oberegger U, et al. (2021a). Evaluation of EN15193-1 on energy requirements for artificial lighting against Radiance-based DAYSIM. Journal of Building Engineering, 40: 102698.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
Akimov L, Lvov V, de Martino di Montegiordano D, et al. (2021b). Shading system design and solar gains control for buildings passive energy-efficiency improvement. In: Mottaeva A (ed), Technological Advancements in Construction. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 180. Cham: Springer.
Crossref
 

Akimov L, De Mei K, de Martino di Montegiordano D, et al. (2021c). The material-efficient design of bridges with the use of FRP. Cham: Springer.
 

Al Horr Y, Arif M, Kaushik A, et al. (2016). Occupant productivity and office indoor environment quality: A review of the literature. Building and Environment, 105: 369–389.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Alexander MG (2016). Marine Concrete Structures: Design, Durability and Performance. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
 

Alrubaih MS, Zain MFM, Alghoul MA, et al. (2013). Research and development on aspects of daylighting fundamentals. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 21: 494–505.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
ASHRAE (2006). Architectural design impacts. In: The ASHRAE GreenGuide (2nd edn). Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.
 

Attia S (2018a). Net Zero Energy Buildings (NZEB): Concepts, Frameworks and Roadmap for Project Analysis and Implementation. Hull, Canada: Butterworth-Heinemann.
 

Attia S (2018b). Regenerative and Positive Impact Architecture: Learning from Case Studies. New York: Springer.
Crossref
 

Attia S (2018c). Evaluation of adaptive facades: The case study of Al Bahr Towers in the UAE. QScience Connect, 2017(2): 6.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
Attia S, Bashandy H (2016). Evaluation of adaptive façades: The case study of AGC headquarter in Belgium. In: Proceedings of Challenging Glass 5, https://doi.org/10.7480/cgc.5.2234
Crossref
 

Attia S, Bilir S, Safy T, et al. (2018). Current trends and future challenges in the performance assessment of adaptive façade systems. Energy and Buildings, 179: 165–182.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Attia S, Garat S, Cools M (2019). Development and validation of a survey for well-being and interaction assessment by occupants in office buildings with adaptive facades. Building and Environment, 157: 268–276.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Badenko VL, Bolshakov NS, Tishchenko EB, et al. (2021). Integration of digital twin and BIM technologies within factories of the future. Magazine of Civil Engineering, 101: 10114.
Google Scholar
 

Baranova D, Sovetnikov D, Borodinecs A (2018). The extensive analysis of building energy performance across the Baltic Sea region. Science and Technology for the Built Environment, 24: 982–993.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Battisti A, Persiani SGL, Crespi M (2019). Review and mapping of parameters for the early stage design of adaptive building technologies through life cycle assessment tools. Energies, 12: 1729.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
Bellia L, Cesarano A, Iuliano GF, et al. (2008). Daylight glare: A review of discomfort indexes. Paper presented at International Workshop and the 7th Annex 45 Expert Meeting: Visual Quality and Energy Efficiency in Indoor Lighting: Today for Tomorrow, Roma, Italy.
 

Beute F, de Kort YAW (2014). Salutogenic effects of the environment: Review of health protective effects of nature and daylight. Applied Psychology Health and Well-Being, 6: 67–95.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Burggräf P, Dannapfel M, Schneidermann D, et al. (2019). Integrated factory modelling: Using BIM to disrupt the interface between manufacturing and construction in factory planning. WIT Transactions on The Built Environment, 192: 143–155.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Cantin F, Dubois MC (2011). Daylighting metrics based on illuminance, distribution, glare and directivity. Lighting Research & Technology, 43: 291–307.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
CEN/TR (2017). CEN/TR 15193-2: Energy performance of buildings—Energy requirements for lighting—Part 2: Explanation and justification of EN 15193-1, Module M9.
 

Chaloeytoy K, Ichinose M, Chien SC (2020). Determination of the simplified daylight glare probability (DGPs) criteria for daylit office spaces in Thailand. Buildings, 10: 180.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
COST (2014). COST Action TU 1403. Cost Action TU1403—Adaptive Facades Network. Available at http://tu1403.eu.
 

Cuce E, Riffat SB (2015). A state-of-the-art review on innovative glazing technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 41: 695–714.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
DAYSIM (2013). DAYSIM 4.0 plus web-site. Available at https://www.radiance-online.org/pipermail/radiance-daysim/2013-February/000026.html. Accessed 24 Sept 2022.
 
Edwards L, Torcellini P (2002). Literature review of the effects of natural light on building occupants. National Renewable Energy Lab. (NREL), Golden, CO, USA.
Crossref
 

El-Arnaouty H, Azab N, Omar O (2020). Health and wellbeing re-visited; an exploratory study towards a “healthy & wellbeing” university campus. Architecture and Planning Journal (APJ), 25(1): 1.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
EN 12665-2011 (2011). Light and Lighting – Basic Terms and Criteria for Specifying Lighting Requirements.
 
EN 15193-1:2017 (2017). Energy Performance of Buildings; Energy Requirements for Lighting.
 

Fakourian F, Asefi M (2019). Environmentally responsive kinetic façade for educational buildings. Journal of Green Building, 14: 165–186.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Favoino F, Goia F, Perino M, et al. (2014). Experimental assessment of the energy performance of an advanced responsive multifunctional façade module. Energy and Buildings, 68: 647–659.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Freewan AAY (2014). Impact of external shading devices on thermal and daylighting performance of offices in hot climate regions. Solar Energy, 102: 14–30.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Galatioto A, Beccali M (2016). Aspects and issues of daylighting assessment: A review study. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 66: 852–860.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

González J, Fiorito F (2015). Daylight design of office buildings: optimisation of external solar shadings by using combined simulation methods. Buildings, 5: 560–580.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Guenther A, Kniel K, Härtig F, et al. (2013). Introduction of a new bevel gear measurement standard. CIRP Annals, 62: 515–518.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Hosseini SM, Mohammadi M, Rosemann A, et al. (2018). Quantitative investigation through climate-based daylight metrics of visual comfort due to colorful glass and orosi windows in Iranian architecture. Journal of Daylighting, 5: 21–33.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Hosseini SM, Mohammadi M, Rosemann A, et al. (2019a). A morphological approach for kinetic façade design process to improve visual and thermal comfort: Review. Building and Environment, 153: 186–204.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Hosseini SM, Mohammadi M, Guerra-Santin O (2019b). Interactive kinetic façade: Improving visual comfort based on dynamic daylight and occupant’s positions by 2D and 3D shape changes. Building and Environment, 165: 106396.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Hviid CA, Nielsen TR, Svendsen S (2008). Simple tool to evaluate the impact of daylight on building energy consumption. Solar Energy, 82: 787–798.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
IES (2012). IES Approved Method: Spatial Daylight Autonomy and Annual Sunlight Exposure. IES LM-83–12, USA.
 
IESNA (2000). IESNA Lighting Handbook, 9th edn. Illuminating Engineering Society of North America.
 

Jakubiec JA, Reinhart CF (2012). The ‘adaptive zone’—A concept for assessing discomfort glare throughout daylit spaces. Lighting Research & Technology, 44: 149–170.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Jin Q, Overend M (2014). Sensitivity of façade performance on early-stage design variables. Energy and Buildings, 77: 457–466.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Kasinalis C, Loonen RCGM, Cóstola D, et al. (2014). Framework for assessing the performance potential of seasonally adaptable facades using multi-objective optimization. Energy and Buildings, 79: 106–113.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Kassem M, Mitchell D (2015). Bridging the gap between selection decisions of facade systems at the early design phase: Issues, challenges and solutions. Journal of Facade Design and Engineering, 3: 165–183.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Kim H, Clayton MJ (2020). A multi-objective optimization approach for climate-adaptive building envelope design using parametric behavior maps. Building and Environment, 185: 107292.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Kirimtat A, Koyunbaba BK, Chatzikonstantinou I, et al. (2016). Review of simulation modeling for shading devices in buildings. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 53: 23–49.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
Klemens Torggler (2014). Toggler’s door movement. Available at https://www.dezeen.com/2014/02/11/door-reinvented-with-folding-mechanism-by-klemens-torggler. Accessed 24 Sept 2022.
 
Knaack U, Luible A, Overend M, et al. (2015). Adaptive facade network – Europe. Delft, the Netherlands: TU Delft Open
 

Knippers J, Jungjohann H, Scheible F, et al. (2013). Bio-inspirierte kinetische fassade für den themenpavillon “one ocean” EXPO 2012 in yeosu, Korea. Bautechnik, 90: 341–347.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Krarti M (2016). Energy Audit of Building Systems: An Engineering Approach, 2nd edn. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Crossref
 
Kuru A, Oldfield P, Bonser S, et al. (2022). Biomimetic adaptive building skins: Design and performance. In: Gasparri E, Brambilla A, Lobaccaro G, et al. (eds), Rethinking Building Skins. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Crossref
 

Lee K, Han K, Lee J (2017). The impact of shading type and azimuth orientation on the daylighting in a classroom–focusing on effectiveness of façade shading, comparing the results of DA and UDI. Energies, 10: 635.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Le-Thanh L, Le-Duc T, Ngo-Minh H, et al. (2021). Optimal design of an Origami-inspired kinetic façade by balancing composite motion optimization for improving daylight performance and energy efficiency. Energy, 219: 119557.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Li DHW, Cheung GHW, Lau CCS (2006). A simplified procedure for determining indoor daylight illuminance using daylight coefficient concept. Building and Environment, 41: 578–589.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Li DHW (2010). A review of daylight illuminance determinations and energy implications. Applied Energy, 87: 2109–2118.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Loonen RCGM, Trčka M, Cóstola D, et al. (2013). Climate adaptive building shells: State-of-the-art and future challenges. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 25: 483–493.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Loonen RCGM, Favoino F, Hensen JLM, et al. (2017). Review of current status, requirements and opportunities for building performance simulation of adaptive facades. Journal of Building Performance Simulation, 10: 205–223.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
Loonen RCGM (2018). Approaches for computational performance optimization of innovative adaptive façade concepts. PhD Thesis, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
 

Mahmoud AHA, Elghazi Y (2016). Parametric-based designs for kinetic facades to optimize daylight performance: comparing rotation and translation kinetic motion for hexagonal facade patterns. Solar Energy, 126: 111–127.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Manzan M, Padovan R (2015). Multi-criteria energy and daylighting optimization for an office with fixed and moveable shading devices. Advances in Building Energy Research, 9: 238–252.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Michael A, Heracleous C (2017). Assessment of natural lighting performance and visual comfort of educational architecture in Southern Europe: the case of typical educational school premises in Cyprus. Energy and Buildings, 140: 443–457.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Nabil A, Mardaljevic J (2005). Useful daylight illuminance: A new paradigm for assessing daylight in buildings. Lighting Research & Technology, 37: 41–57.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Nabil A, Mardaljevic J (2006). Useful daylight illuminances: A replacement for daylight factors. Energy and Buildings, 38: 905–913.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Ne’Eman E (1974). Visual aspects of sunlight in buildings. Lighting Research & Technology, 6: 159–164.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Peel MC, Finlayson BL, McMahon TA (2007). Updated world map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 11: 1633–1644.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Pilechiha P, Mahdavinejad M, Pour Rahimian F, et al. (2020). Multi-objective optimisation framework for designing office windows: quality of view, daylight and energy efficiency. Applied Energy, 261: 114356.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Rafsanjani H, Ahn C, Alahmad M (2015). A review of approaches for sensing, understanding, and improving occupancy-related energy-use behaviors in commercial buildings. Energies, 8: 10996–11029.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Reinhart CF, Walkenhorst O (2001). Validation of dynamic RADIANCE-based daylight simulations for a test office with external blinds. Energy and Buildings, 33: 683–697.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
Reinhart CF (2002). Effects of interior design on the daylight availability in open plan offices. In: Proceedings of the ACE3 2002 Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, Pacific Grove, USA.
 

Reinhart CF, Andersen M (2006). Development and validation of a Radiance model for a translucent panel. Energy and Buildings, 38: 890–904.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Reinhart CF, Mardaljevic J, Rogers Z (2006). Dynamic daylight performance metrics for sustainable building design. LEUKOS, 3: 7–31.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
Ruck N, Aschehoug Ø, Aydinli S, et al. (2000). Daylight in Buildings—A Source Book on Daylighting Systems and Components. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
 

Sadegh SO, Haile SG, Jamshidzehi Z (2022). Development of two-step biomimetic design and evaluation framework for performance-oriented design of multi-functional adaptable building envelopes. Journal of Daylighting, 9: 13–27.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
Sharaidin K (2014). Kinetic facades: Towards design for environmental performance. PhD Thesis, RMIT University, Australia.
 

Shi X, Abel T, Wang L (2020). Influence of two motion types on solar transmittance and daylight performance of dynamic façades. Solar Energy, 201: 561–580.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
Sood R, Patil AS (2021). Analysis and review of the kinetic façades in Kolding campus, South Denmark University. In: Dubey HM, Pandit M, Srivastava L, Panigrahi BK (eds), Artificial Intelligence and Sustainable Computing. Algorithms for Intelligent Systems. Singapore: Springer.
Crossref
 

Struck C, de Wilde PJCJ, Hopfe CJ, et al. (2009). An investigation of the option space in conceptual building design for advanced building simulation. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 23: 386–395.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Tabadkani A, Valinejad Shoubi M, Soflaei F, et al. (2019). Integrated parametric design of adaptive facades for user’s visual comfort. Automation in Construction, 106: 102857.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Tabadkani A, Roetzel A, Li H, et al. (2021). Design approaches and typologies of adaptive facades: A review. Automation in Construction, 121: 103450.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Taveres-Cachat E, Favoino F, Loonen R, et al. (2021). Ten questions concerning co-simulation for performance prediction of advanced building envelopes. Building and Environment, 191: 107570.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Tian Z, Lin P, He Y, et al. (2021). A study of luminous environment with prism daylight redirecting fenestrations in classrooms. Indoor and Built Environment, 30: 461–475.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Tzempelikos A, Shen H (2013). Comparative control strategies for roller shades with respect to daylighting and energy performance. Building and Environment, 67: 179–192.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
U.S. Green Building Council (2019). LEED v4 for Building Design and Construction.
 

Uribe D, Bustamante W, Vera S (2017). Seasonal optimization of a fixed exterior complex fenestration system considering visual comfort and energy performance criteria. Energy Procedia, 132: 490–495.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Wienold J, Christoffersen J (2006). Evaluation methods and development of a new glare prediction model for daylight environments with the use of CCD cameras. Energy and Buildings, 38: 743–757.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Yang S, Wan MP, Ng BF, et al. (2021). Model predictive control for integrated control of air-conditioning and mechanical ventilation, lighting and shading systems. Applied Energy, 297: 117112.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Yitmen I, Al-Musaed A, Yücelgazi F (2022). ANP model for evaluating the performance of adaptive façade systems in complex commercial buildings. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 29: 431–455.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Yu X, Su Y (2015). Daylight availability assessment and its potential energy saving estimation—A literature review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52: 494–503.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Zapico A, Egiluz Z, García Frómeta Y, et al. (2022). Mechanical characterization of double-skin perforated-sheet façades. Journal of Building Engineering, 56: 104750.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Zaretsky EV, Branzai EV (2017). Rolling bearing service life based on probable cause for removal—A tutorial. Tribology Transactions, 60: 300–312.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Zemitis J, Terekh M (2018). Optimization of the level of thermal insulation of enclosing structures of civil buildings. MATEC Web of Conferences, 245: 06002.
Crossref Google Scholar
 

Zhang X, Zhang H, Wang Y, et al. (2022). Adaptive façades: Review of designs, performance evaluation, and control systems. Buildings, 12: 2112.
Crossref Google Scholar
Building Simulation
Volume 16 Issue 12,
December 2023
Pages 2261-2283
DOI: 10.1007/s12273-023-1073-6
Cite this article:
Akimov L, Bezborodov A, Badenko V. Example-based dynamic façade design using the façade daylighting performance improvement (FDPI) indicator. Building Simulation, 2023, 16(12): 2261-2283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-023-1073-6

454

Views

44

Downloads

6

Crossref

6

Web of Science

6

Scopus

1

CSCD

Altmetrics
Received: 21 November 2022
Revised: 29 July 2023
Accepted: 22 August 2023
Published: 26 September 2023
© The Author(s) 2023

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Return