Fernández-Sols, J L; Pathak, R; Lavy, S; Beltrán, L O; Son, K and Kim, K (2011) Framework for selecting performance assessment tools for achieving LEED 3.0 credits. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 7(4), pp. 236-250. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
Architects, designers and engineers involved in a sustainable design project often require information and tools beyond energy simulation software. They look for tools to support their decisions and to assess the risk involved in decision making. This research presents a framework that links building performance assessment tools with the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system. The objective is to bridge the gap between architects, engineers, contractors, facility managers and LEED professionals. This work provides information about performance tools that can be used in the different phases of design, construction and operation of a LEED-rated building. This research presents a three-dimensional matrix of the right tool for the right job at the right time by linking LEED credits, software tools and phases of building design, construction and operation. Overall, the findings of the research demonstrate that the framework can be used to achieve 21% of total possible LEED 3.0 credits by providing about 36% of total possible points.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | decision making tools; LEED 3.0 credits; performance tools; risk assessment |
| Index terms: | building performance, architect, designer, engineer, energy simulation, environmental design, risk assessment, building design, decision-making, sustainable design, manager, performance assessment |
| Subjects: | architectural design, practitioner, assessment methods, profession, quality assurance, sustainability and energy, design process, decision analysis, modelling and simulation, financial risk |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Digital Applications, Roles and Professions, Design Practice, Human Resources, Cost Management, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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