lnu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Integrating BIM, optimization and a multi-criteria decision-making method in building design process
Linnaeus University, Faculty of Technology, Department of Forestry and Wood Technology.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1835-7158
Jönköping University.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4216-9165
2018 (English)In: Advances in Informatics and Computing in Civil and Construction Engineering: Proceedings of the 35th CIB W78 2018 Conference: IT in Design, Construction, and Management / [ed] Mutis I., Hartmann T., Springer, 2018, p. 359-369Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

European Energy Performance of Building Directive (EPBD) defined a target as all new constructed buildings within the EU region must be a zero-energy building by the end of 2020. Furthermore, all European countries must ensure the minimum comfort threshold in energy calculations. Reducing energy consumption and improving indoor comfort, including visual and thermal com-fort, can contribute to economic benefits. However, the main problem is the exi-tance of conflicts among visual comfort, thermal comfort, energy consumption and life cycle cost. To solve the abovementioned problem and to fulfil the EPBD’s target, this study aims to apply an integration between BIM, optimiza-tion and Analytical Hierarchy Process as a multi-criteria decision-making method on an office building in Sweden. Accordingly, 3 types of windows and 5 types of external wall, ground floor and external roof constructions were specified as op-timization variables. The combination between the optimization variables gener-ated 375 design alternatives. The performance of all 375 design alternatives were evaluated with respect to visual comfort, thermal comfort, energy consumption and life cycle cost. Later, AHP was used to find a trade-off design alternative. The results show that the combination between window type 1, external wall type 5, ground floor type 1 and external roof type 5 is the trade-off design alternative. Furthermore, the results show the integration enables to solve the abovemen-tioned conflicts and to fulfil the EPBD’s target.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2018. p. 359-369
Keywords [en]
Building information modelling, optimization, analytical hierarchy process, decision making
National Category
Building Technologies Architectural Engineering
Research subject
Technology (byts ev till Engineering), Civil engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-78210DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-00220-6_43ISBN: 978-3-030-00219-0 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:lnu-78210DiVA, id: diva2:1254206
Conference
35th CIB W78 2018 Conference IT in Design, Construction, and Management
Funder
Knowledge Foundation, 20130245Available from: 2018-10-08 Created: 2018-10-08 Last updated: 2018-10-10Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Jalilzadehazhari, Elaheh

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Jalilzadehazhari, ElahehJohansson, Peter
By organisation
Department of Forestry and Wood Technology
Building TechnologiesArchitectural Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 73 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf