Jalilzadehazhari, E; Johansson, J and Mahapatra, K (2019) Applying a decision-making framework for resolving conflicts when selecting windows and blinds. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 15(5), pp. 382-401. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
The selection of the most appropriate window and blind design is a challenging task due to the existence of potential conflicts between visual comfort, thermal comfort, energy consumption and life cycle cost. Resolving these conflicts relies on a trade-off window and blind design. This research applied a decision-making framework to select a trade-off window and blind design for an office room in Sweden. The decision-making framework was developed based on integrating the non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm-II and the analytical hierarchy process. The first step in the application of the framework was to generate a model of the office room using EnergyPlus. Six types of window and four types of blind; an internal venetian blind, an internal roller curtain, an external venetian blind and an external overhang panel, were modelled in EnergyPlus. The second step was to run an optimisation using non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm-II. For this purpose, various window and blind design variables were specified in modeFRONTIER platform. The third and last step in the application of the decision-making framework was to select a trade-off window and blind design using analytical hierarchy process. The results show the strength of the decision-making framework in selecting a trade-off design, and thereby the ability to resolve conflicts through intelligent use of simulation in analyzing big-data in built environment, energy and cost sectors. Since, the computation and processing power for performing simulations is constantly increasing, architects and designers can exploit the decision-making framework and locate a trade-off design in a relatively short period of time.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytical hierarchy process; big data; decision-making; non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm ii; optimisation; trade-off design |
| Index terms: | decision-making, computation, designer, window, energy consumption, genetic algorithm, platform, big data, energyplus, thermal comfort, architect, life cycle cost, built environment, Sweden, analytical hierarchy process, visual comfort |
| Subjects: | decision analysis, algorithms, infrastructure and transport systems, Geography, profession, research methods, environmental engineering, computational methods, digital design, information systems, environmental science, decision-making and optimization, energy systems, architectural elements |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Digital Applications, Risk Management, Sustainability, Urban Studies, Geographical Context |
| 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