Botti, A (2020) The development of an early stage design tool to assess the risk of overheating for UK residential buildings. PhD thesis, University of Surrey, UK.
Abstract
Evidence demonstrates that tackling indoor overheating is a key priority within the context of climate change adaptation, particularly for residential buildings, whose occupants are more likely to be highly exposed and vulnerable to it. The overarching aim of the research is to provide guidance for building designers on how to minimise the overheating risk of new residential buildings in the UK, to ensure these can be capable of maintaining thermal comfort in a changing climate. The first part of the research involved using two case studies to explore different aspects of the problem. A climate change adaptation study explored and assessed measures for future-proofing an extra-care scheme in the north of England, highlighting the importance of early-stage analysis and client’s engagement through effective communication. A post-occupancy study on a new social housing development helped to gain an understanding of the role of building occupants in perceiving and acting upon overheating, and emphasised discrepancies between design predictions and actual in-use performance. In the second part of the research, the development a Rapid Overheating ASSessment Tool is presented, seeking to encourage practitioners to appropriately consider thermal comfort in a changing climate, by providing rapid feedback on the overheating risk associated with the early-stage design decisions. The focus is on flats in multi-storey buildings located in London. An overheating risk database was populated with the results of a large number of parametric dynamic thermal simulations, which included iterative variations of design aspects corresponding to known over-heating risk factors. Statistical meta-models were developed by means of alternative regression techniques, allowing to quantify the relative importance of each risk factor and make ‘good-enough' predictions with input available at the early-design stages. Finally, the work to develop two types of user interface is presented, with the goal of allowing relevant and meaningful information to be extracted from the engine of the tool by its prospective users.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building design; climate; climate change; communication; design decision; feedback; housing development; multi-storey; occupancy; performance; residential; variations; client; designer; case studies; simulation; thermal comfort; England; London |
| Index terms: | case study, residential building, England, building design, designer, database, adaptation, risk factor, thermal comfort, London, social housing, relative importance, housing development, user interface, overheating, practitioner, evidence, design stage, variation, design decision, climate change |
| Subjects: | housing and residential development, human-computer interaction, environmental hazards, Geography, professional practice, architectural design, evaluation and assessment methods, construction type, user focus, climate science, practitioner, data management, thermal systems, environmental engineering, design practice, contractual condition, data collection methods, profession, risk assessment |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Sustainability, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Urban Studies, Contract Administration |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here