Advertisement

Customizable Social Wooden Pavilions: A Workflow for the Energy, Emergy and Perception Optimization in Perugia’s Parks

  • Marco SeccaroniEmail author
  • Giulia Pelliccia
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 24)

Abstract

The research aims to generate a workflow, which subdivides the complex problem of optimizing the buildings energy consumption in smaller problems that can easier be solved. The workflow starts from the definition of the insertion context of the building, which influences it principally regarding the climate, the sun exposure and the shadings. The successive step is choosing one or more optimal wall stratigraphies which show the best combination of different parameters, like cost, transmittance, thickness and emergy. The last step concerns the optimization of the shape as a function of the previously defined stratigraphies and of the energy consumptions for lighting, heating, cooling and electrical equipment.

Keywords

Wall stratigraphy Energy consumption optimization Emergy optimization Context perception 

References

  1. Aravena A (2007) Alejandro Aravena: progettare e costruire. Milano, ElectaGoogle Scholar
  2. Benis K, Reinhart C, Ferrão P (2017) Building-Integrated Agriculture (BIA) in urban contexts: testing a simulation-based decision support workflowGoogle Scholar
  3. Cruz T, Boddington A (1999) Architecture of the borderlands. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010 on the energy performance of buildingsGoogle Scholar
  5. Elbeltagi E, Wefki H, Abdrabou S, Dawood M, Ramzy A (2017) Visualized strategy for predicting buildings energy consumption during early design stage using parametric analysis. J Build Eng 13:127–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Franzese PP (2009) 6—anni di Ecodinamica. In Raccolta di articoli in CD-ROM. Supplemento a Biologi Italiani, A cura di Pier Paolo Franzese. Available online http://www.onb.it/ecodinamica.jsp
  7. Franzese PP, Scopa A, Riccio A, Barone G (2003a) Studio di sistemi complessi: la prospettiva ecodinamica in chimica-fisica ambientale. Biologi Italiani 11:39–45Google Scholar
  8. Franzese PP, Dumontet S, Scopa A (2003b) L’analisi emergetica: una metodica termodinamica per la valutazione della sostenibilità ambientale. In: Biologia Clinica, Ambiente, Sicurezza e Qualità: obiettivi di una professione che evolve. Proceedings of the XVI international conference of the association of Italian biologists, Abano Terme, Italy, Dumontet S, Landi E, Pastoni FGoogle Scholar
  9. Franzese PP, Riccio A, Scopa A (2003c) Valutazione della sostenibilità ambientale: verso un approccio ecodinamico. Biologi Italiani 7:58–60Google Scholar
  10. Franzese PP, Comar V, Russo GF, Ulgiati S (2005) Analisi dei sistemi ecologici: approccio modellistico-ecodinamico. Biologi Italiani 6:41–48Google Scholar
  11. Gonzalez M, Navarro J (2006) Assessment of the decrease of CO2 emissions in the construction field through the selection of materials. Build Environ 41:902–909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Keena N, Raugei M, Aly Etman M, Ruan D, Dyson A (2018) Clark’s Crow: a design plugin to support emergy analysis decision making towards sustainable urban ecologies, Ecological Modelling. vol. 367(C), Elsevier, 42–57Google Scholar
  13. Kuhn T (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  14. Negroponte N (1970) Soft architecture machines. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. OECD (2003) Environmental sustainable building—challenges and policies Paris, France, p 194Google Scholar
  16. Odum HT (1988) Self organization, transformity and information. Science 242:1132–1139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Odum HT (1996) Environmental accounting: emergy and environmental decision making. Wiley, New York, p 370Google Scholar
  18. Pak MH, Smith A, Gill GN (2013) Ladybug: a parametric environmental plugin for grasshopper to help designers create an environmentally-conscious design. Procedia—Soc Behav Sci 216:948–959Google Scholar
  19. Prezzario Regione Umbria (2017)Google Scholar
  20. Prigogine I (1947) Study of thermodynamics of Irreversible Processes. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Pulselli RM, Simoncini E, Pulselli FM, Bastianoni S (2007) Emergy analysis ofbuilding manufacturing, maintenance and use: em-building indices to evaluate housing sustainability. Energy Build 39(5):620–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pulselli RM, Simoncini E, Ridolfi R, Bastianoni S (2008) Specific emergy of cement and concrete: an energy-based appraisal of building materials and their transport. Ecol Indic 8(5):647–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pulselli RM, Simoncini E, Marchettini N (2009) Energy and emergy basedcost–benefit evaluation of building envelopes relative to geographical location and climate. Build Environ 44(5):920–928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schaffer JD (1985) Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms. Genetic algorithms and their applications: proceedings of the first international conference on genetic algorithms. pp 93–100Google Scholar
  25. Sposito C, Scalisi F (2017) Sustainable architecture: the eco-efficiency earth construction. Eur J Sustain Dev 6:246–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Thormark C (2006) The effect of material choice on the total energy need and recycling potential of a building. Build Environ 41:1019–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. von Bertalanffy L (1968) General system theory. George Braziller, New York, p 295Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of PerugiaPerugiaItaly

Personalised recommendations