[BLDG-SIM] getting the whole design team into the performance assessment game.

Wilde, Pieter de P.deWilde at bouw.tno.nl
Thu Feb 13 02:19:56 PST 2003


Dear list members,

With interest I see how the discussion on 'bridging the gap between design and simulation' instantly brings the list to life. It seems this is still a hot topic. Please let me add to the discussion by asking a few questions, on which I add my own personal opions and reasoning:  


* should architects conduct simulation efforts themselves, or should that be carried out by 'domain experts' cq consultants?

As Monjur Mourshed and Murray Milne clearly show, architects *are* interested in simulation. I think all design teams are perfectly interested in obtaining relevant performance information that helps them increase (or at least guarantee) the quality of their building designs. However, that is not equivalent to always having architects carry out simulations themselves. I think there is an argument for seeing building design as a team effort, where experts collaborate (the architect as design expert, working together with a structural engineer, HVAC-consultant, building physics expert, ....). Fried Augenbroe points out in his keynote paper for BS01 that no architect will take the risk of not involving domain experts when designing a large and complex buildings such as the Sony Center. My personal feeling is that with increasingly stringent requirements (like the new performance based building codes) this trend will continue. 


* how is the current cooperation between architects and consultants, and how do simulation tools help or hinder that cooperation?

I strongly support the take of Roberd Lord and Jeffrey Calbert, who observe that HVAC engineers and architects have difficulties in sharing responsabilities and concerns. For my own PhD-project (still ongoing, in this very field) I have done a couple of case-studies and a survey in order to investigate the use of simulation tools to support the selection of energy saving technologies in 70 high-profile energy efficient buildings here in the Netherlands. From this work it becomes clear that the selection of such technologies is mostly based on intuition and analogy, even when consultants/simulation experts are involved in the decision making and tools (as well as experienced users) are available when the decision is to be made. 
I therefore believe that 'process' and 'tools' interact in creating the integration problem: as long as design decisions take place in an intuitive manner, computational results will not have much impact on those decisions; on the other hand, when relevant computation results are not at hand when the decision is to be made, this forces the decision-maker to use intuition. Both problems need to be addressed simulataneously.


* is the development of 'intuitive tools' indeed the best way to bridge the gap, or do we need to explore other paths as well?

I think 'intuitive tools' are helpful when it comes to help an architect in making design decisions **in situations where there is no simulation expert** in support. Intuitive tools however also carry a risk: hiding functionalities etc in order to make tools easy to use also turns them into a kind of "black boxes", which decreases the trust non-expert-users have in these tools.

Supporting design teams is another game, with it's own problems. In this field, the approach of SESG is one road; other options are the continued efforts on the IAI-IFC, work embedding design-simulation interaction in a (process)context-sensitive interface (like for instance Fried Augenbroe's  DAI-Initiative in which I particpated last year), or complete redevelopment of simulation tools 'a la' SEMPER. 

Overall, I have the feeling we should be working towards very flexible, configurable tools (or rather interfaces to a whole set of tools!) that allow to capture the context of the analysis work, thereby guaranteeing that we gain access to the right type and granularity of building analysis for each specific design question that pops up. Which is definitely NOT an easy goal to reach!


Looking forward to your reactions and opions, 

Pieter de Wilde


   TNO Building and Construction Research (TNO Bouw)
   Department of Sustainable Energy and Buildings (DEG)
   van Mourik Broekmanweg 6
   P.O.Box 49
   2600 AA Delft		
   The Netherlands

   TNO: 		http://www.tno.nl
   TNO Bouw:	http://www.bouw.tno.nl/




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Hand [mailto:jon at esru.strath.ac.uk]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 9:08 PM
> To: BLDG-SIM at gard.com
> Subject: [BLDG-SIM] getting the whole design team into the performance
> assessment game.
> 
> 
> 
> I have been following the dialog on getting Architects 
> interested in and
> competent with simulation. Members of the list might like to 
> see another
> way design professionals in Europe are exploring simulation 
> by visiting
> the Scottish Energy Systems Group site 
> <http://www.sesg.strath.ac.uk>. 
> SESG is the Scottish affiliate of IBPSA. 
> 
> We do this via supported technology deployments which put computers 
> with relevant simulation software and simulation staff into design 
> practices (from one-man-bands to multi-national practices) so that 
> practitioners can better evaluate simulation and/or increase their 
> skills in simulation in the context of actual projects. 
> 
> Last year we managed dozens of deployments for our members, provided 
> training for even more practitioners on a range of simulation tools. 
> Not only is simulation is getting used, vendors are selling quite
> a bit of software. If you are interested, the web page has 
> instructions
> for getting the SESG newsletter. 
> 
> -Jon Hand, SESG
> 
> ======================================================
> You received this e-mail because you are subscribed 
> to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe 
> from this mailing list send a blank message to 
> BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM
> 
> 

===========================
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed 
to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe 
from this mailing list send a blank message to 
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM



More information about the Bldg-sim mailing list