Lawrence, R; Elsayed, M and Keime, C (2019) Evaluation of environmental design strategies for university buildings. Building Research & Information, 47(8), pp. 883-900. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
This paper examines the performance of environmental strategies in seven recently constructed or refurbished university buildings in the UK. These buildings contain a range of administrative spaces, classrooms, libraries and studios, reflecting their often complex, multi-use, heterogeneous nature. The key features of each environmental strategy are described (including passive, mixed-mode or active systems), in the context of the occupants and spaces they serve and the level of interaction that they afford. Energy performance and occupant thermal comfort (assessed by user surveys) are analysed and compared with studies of other non-domestic buildings, which have typically focused on more predictable single administrative uses (e.g. government offices), and unusually effective operation scenarios (e.g. continuous monitoring by expert building managers). The paper concludes by examining two of the case studies that reflect an increasingly common model of 'flexible' environmental design in more detail, identifying key features of the strategies for each building that have had a significant impact on their performance. The design assumptions leading to these features will be explored, and key lessons identified, contributing towards the development of a more robust evidential basis for choosing appropriate environmental strategies for university and other non-domestic buildings in the UK.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architectural design; energy performance; environmental strategy; post-occupancy evaluation; thermal comfort; university buildings |
| Index terms: | architectural design, monitoring, interaction, post-occupancy evaluation, survey, non-domestic building, thermal comfort, environmental design, studio, case study, classroom, manager, strategy, energy performance |
| Subjects: | practitioner, control systems, design practice, management, sustainability and energy, evaluation methods, behavioral psychology, construction type, environmental engineering, energy systems, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Design Practice, Sustainability, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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