Zapata-Lancaster, G and Tweed, C (2016) Tools for low-energy building design: An exploratory study of the design process in action. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 12(4), pp. 279-295. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
Building designers face increased pressure to design low-energy buildings. Consequently, there is a growing interest in providing computational support for low-energy design via building performance simulation. This article presents an ethnographic study that investigated the design process of five low-energy buildings in England and Wales. The study was informed by design science literature and phenomenology of technology. The investigation analysed the methods deployed by designers to embed low-energy performance during design problem-solving. The findings illustrate how experience-based methods and simulation tools were used to inform low-energy building design. The work identified some of the challenges faced by designers to incorporate simulation methodologies during a routine design process. It illustrates the status of simulation tools as boundary objects that mediate the communication and negotiation between design team members. The work advocates considering the design problem-solving patterns and preferences in the development and improvement of support methods for low-energy design. Building designers face increased pressure to design low-energy buildings. Consequently, there is a growing interest in providing computational support for low-energy design via building performance simulation. This article presents an ethnographic study that investigated the design process of five low-energy buildings in England and Wales. The study was informed by design science literature and phenomenology of technology. The investigation analysed the methods deployed by designers to embed low-energy performance during design problem-solving. The findings illustrate how experience-based methods and simulation tools were used to inform low-energy building design. The work identified some of the challenges faced by designers to incorporate simulation methodologies during a routine design process. It illustrates the status of simulation tools as boundary objects that mediate the communication and negotiation between design team members. The work advocates considering the design problem-solving patterns and preferences in the development and improvement of support methods for low-energy design.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design process; environmental design; design methods; low-energy design; building performance simulation; designers; energy management; product design |
| Index terms: | design method, energy performance, simulation tool, Wales, preference, phenomenology, negotiation, energy management, methodology, investigation, building performance simulation, face, design team, science, low-energy design, environmental design, designer, boundary object, exploratory study, England, routine, low-energy building, product design, low-energy building design, design process |
| Subjects: | design methods, specialized education, data collection methods, profession, analytical methods, professional practice, innovation and technology management, energy systems, sustainability and energy, modelling and simulation, psychology, methods and analysis, sustainable design, Geography, research methods, decision-making and reasoning, energy efficiency, collaborative management, sociology, conflict resolution |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Education, Design Practice, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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