Daylighting and acoustics parameters are related to each other in terms of material usage, specifically for window openings. However, no study has included acoustics and daylighting as objectives in the multi-objective optimisation models. In this study, this relationship was included to the optimisation process of generating building conceptual form. A model was developed to optimise the form of a building using acoustics, daylighting and floor area as the objectives. Daylight autonomy parameter for daylighting performance and C50 (speech clarity), reverberation time, Speech Transmission Index parameters for acoustic performance were used in the model which was created with visual programming language. Case studies were conducted with the model, and the results were discussed. Maximising speech clarity and maximising annual daylighting in the space were determined as objectives for the building form optimisation process in the case studies.
KämpfJHMontavonMBunyescJBolligerRRobinsonD.Optimisation of buildings’ solar irradiation availability. Sol Energy2010; 84: 596–603.
2.
GagneJAndersenM.A generative facade design method based on daylighting performance goals. J Build Perform Simul2012; 5: 141–154.
3.
MachairasVTsangrassoulisAAxarliK.Algorithms for optimization of building design: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2014; 31: 101–112.
4.
AugenbroeG.Trends in building simulation. Build Environ2002; 37: 891–902.
5.
MalkawiAM.Developments in environmental performance simulation. Autom Constr2004; 13: 437–445.
6.
CrawleyDBHandJWKummertMGriffithBT.Contrasting the capabilities of building energy performance simulation programs. Build Environ2008; 43: 661–673.
7.
AttiaSBeltránLDHerdeAHensenJ. Architect friendly: a comparison of ten different building performance simulation tools. In: Proceedings of eleventh international IBPSA conference, Glasgow, Scotland, 27–30 July 2009, pp.204–211.
8.
AttiaSHensenJLMBeltránLDe HerdeA.Selection criteria for building performance simulation tools: contrasting architects’ and engineers’ needs. J Build Perform Simul2012; 5: 155–169.
9.
LinSEGerberDJ.Designing-in performance: a framework for evolutionary energy performance feedback in early stage design. Autom Constr2014; 38: 59–73.
10.
TurrinMvon BuelowPStouffsR.Design explorations of performance driven geometry in architectural design using parametric modeling and genetic algorithms. Adv Eng Inform2011; 25: 656–675.
11.
LiuYCChakrabartiABlighT.Towards an ‘ideal’ approach for concept generation. Des Stud2003; 24: 341–355.
12.
YiYKMalkawiAM.Optimizing building form for energy performance based on hierarchical geometry relation. Autom Constr2009; 18: 825–833.
13.
GerberDJLinLS. Designing-in performance through parameterisation, automation, and evolutionary algorithms: ‘H.D.S. BEAGLE 1.0’. In: Proceedings of the 17th International conference on computer aided architectural design research in Asia (CAADRIA), Chennai, 25–28 April 2012, pp.141–150.
14.
OxmanR.Performance-based design: current practices and research issues. Int J Architect Comput2008; 6: 1–7.
15.
BogenstatterU.Prediction and optimization of life-cycle costs in early design. Build Res Inform2000; 28: 376–386.
16.
EchenaguciaTMCapozzoliACasconeYSassoneM.The early design stage of a building envelope: multi-objective search through heating, cooling and lighting energy performance analysis. Appl Energy2015; 154: 577–591.
17.
CoxTJD’AntonioP.Acoustic absorbers and diffusers: theory, design and application. London: Spon Press, 2004.
18.
PetersB. Parametric acoustic surfaces. In: Proceedings of ACADIA conference, Chicago, Illinois, 22–25 October 2009, pp.174–181.
GeroJSD’CruzNRadfordAD.Energy in context: a multicriteria model for building design. Build Environ1983; 18: 99–107.
21.
MarksW.Multicriteria optimisation of shape of energy-saving buildings. Build Environ1997; 32: 331–339.
22.
CaldasLGNorfordLK.A design optimization tool based on a genetic algorithm. Autom Constr2002; 11: 173–184.
23.
DelgarmNSajadiBKowsaryFDelgarmS.Multi-objective optimization of the building energy performance: a simulation-based approach by means of particle swarm optimization (PSO). Appl Energy2016; 170: 293–303.
24.
ShahbaziYHeydariMHaghparastF.An early-stage design optimization for office buildings’ facade providing high-energy performance and daylight. Indoor Built Environ2019; 28: 1350–1367.
25.
KheiriF.Optimization of building fenestration and shading for climate-based daylight performance using the coupled genetic algorithm and simulated annealing optimization methods. Indoor Built Environ2021; 30: 195–214.
26.
SawyerAO. Imagining daylight: evaluating participants’ perception of daylight in work environments. Indoor Built Environ. Epub ahead of print 6 January 2021. DOI: 10.1177/1420326X20977600.
27.
HansenEKBjørnerTXylakisEPajusteM. An experiment of double dynamic lighting in an office responding to sky and daylight: perceived effects on comfort, atmosphere and work engagement. Indoor Built Environ. Epub ahead of print 16 February 2021. DOI: 10.1177/1420326X21991198
28.
de Almeida RochaAPReynoso-MezaGOliveiraRCLFMendesN.A pixel counting based method for designing shading devices in buildings considering energy efficiency, daylight use and fading protection. Appl Energy2020; 262: 114497.
29.
Taveres-CachatELobaccaroGGoiaFChaudharyG.A methodology to improve the performance of PV integrated shading devices using multi-objective optimization. Appl Energy2019; 247: 731–744.
30.
GoiaFHaaseMPerinoM.Optimizing the configuration of a facade module for office buildings by means of integrated thermal and lighting simulations in a total energy perspective. Appl Energy2013; 108: 515–527.
BustamanteWUribeDVeraSMolinaG.An integrated thermal and lighting simulation tool to support the design process of complex fenestration systems for office buildings. Appl Energy2017; 198: 36–48.
33.
KirimtatAKrejcarOEkiciBTasgetirenMF.Multi-objective energy and daylight optimization of amorphous shading devices in buildings. Sol Energy2019; 185: 100–111.
34.
YuFLengJ. Quantitative effects of glass roof system parameters on energy and daylighting performances: a bi-objective optimal design using response surface methodology. Indoor Built Environ. Epub ahead of print 27 July 2020. DOI: 10.1177/1420326X20941220.
35.
ShenJZhouZ.Light transmitting performance and energy-saving of plastic optical fibre transparent concrete products. Indoor Built Environ2021; 30: 635–649.
36.
EvinsR.A review of computational optimization methods applied to sustainable building design. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2013; 22: 230–245.
37.
AttiaSHamdyMO’BrienWCarlucciS.Assessing gaps and needs for integrating building performance optimization tools in net zero energy buildings design. Energy Build2013; 60: 110–124.
38.
NguyenAReiterSRigoP.A review on simulation-based optimization methods applied to building performance analysis. Appl Energy2014; 113: 1043–1058.
39.
ShiXTianZChenWSiBJinX.A review on building energy efficient design optimization from the perspective of architects. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2016; 65: 872–884.
40.
WetterMWrightJ.A comparison of deterministic and probabilistic optimization algorithms for non-smooth simulation-based optimization. Build Environ2004; 39: 989–999.
41.
ElbeltagiEHegazyTGriersonD.Comparison among five evolutionary-based optimization algorithms. Adv Eng Inform2005; 19: 43–53.
42.
WrightJAlajmiA. The robustness of genetic algorithms in solving unconstrained building optimization problems. In: Proceedings of the ninth international IBPSA conference, Montreal, Canada, 15–18 August 2005, pp.1361–1368.
43.
Tuhus-DubrowDKrartiM.Comparative analysis of optimization approaches to design building envelope for residential buildings. ASHRAE Trans2009; 115: 554.
44.
HamdyMPalonenMHasanA. Implementation of Pareto-archive NSGA-II algorithms to a nearly-zero-energy building optimisation problem. In: Proceedings of the first building simulation and optimization conference, Loughborough, UK, 10–11 September 2012, pp. 181–188.
45.
KämpfJWetterMRobinsonD.A comparison of global optimization algorithms with standard benchmark functions and real-world applications using EnergyPlus. J Build Perform Simul2010; 3: 103–120.
46.
WortmannTNanniciniG. Black-box optimization methods for architectural design. In: Proceedings of the 21st CAADRIA, Melbourne, 30 March–2 April 2016, pp.177–186.
47.
BonwetschTBaertschiROesterleS. Adding performance criteria to digital fabrication: room-acoustical information of diffuse respondent panels. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual conference of the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA), Minneapolis 16–19 October 2008, pp.364–369.
48.
WalkerJ, andFogedI. and Robotic methods in acoustics: analysis and fabrication processes of sound scattering acoustic panels. In: Proceedings of the 36th eCAADe conference, Lodz University of Technology, Lodz, Poland, 19–21 September 2018, pp.835–840.
49.
TurcoMLZichUAstolfiAShtrepiLPoaolaMB. From digital design to physical model – Origami techniques applied to dynamic paneling shapes for acoustic performance control. In: Proceedings of the 35th eCAADe conference, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy, 20–22 September 2017, pp.77–86.
50.
BelangerZMcGeeWNewellC. Slumped glass: auxetics and acoustics. In: Proceedings of the 38th of the ACADIA conference, Mexico City, Mexico, 18–20 October 2018, pp.244–249.
51.
TabanEKhavaninAOhadiAPutraAJafariAJFaridanMSoleimanianA.Study on the acoustic characteristics of natural date palm fibres: experimental and theoretical approaches. Build Environ2019; 161: 106274.
52.
LimJ. Let’s work together: a stigmergic approach to acoustic design. In: Proceedings of the 31st Annual conference of the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA), Banff (Alberta), 13–16 October 2011, pp.396–403.
53.
ParigiDSvidtKMolinEBardD. Parametric room acoustic workflows – review and future perspectives. In: Proceedings of the 35th eCAADe conference, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy, 20–22 September 2017, pp.603–610.
54.
HongistoVMakilaMSuokasM.Satisfaction with sound insulation in residential dwellings – the effect of wall construction. Build Environ2015; 85: 309–320.
55.
RasmussenB. Why is sound insulation between dwellings in renovated housing not upgraded like other qualities? In: Proceedings of EuroRegio, Porto, Portugal, 13–15 June 2016, pp.1–8.
56.
AlonsoAPatricioJSuárezREscandónR.Acoustical retrofit of existing residential buildings: requirements and recommendations for sound insulation between dwellings in Europe and other countries worldwide. Build Environ2020; 174: 106771.
57.
BREEAM UK New Construction. Technical manual SD5078 BREEAM new construction 2018 3.0, www.breeam.com/NC2018/ (accessed 10 March 2020).
58.
AlambeigiPChenCBurryJChengE. Shape the design with sound performance prediction: a case study for exploring the impact of early sound performance prediction on architectural design. In: Proceedings of CAAD futures conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 12–14 July 2017, pp.115–127.
59.
FogedIWPasoldAJensenMBPoulsenES. Acoustic environments: applying evolutionary algorithms for sound based morphogenesis. In: Proceedings of the 30th eCAADe conference, Czech Technical University in Prague, 12–14 September 2012, pp.347–353.
60.
Grasshopper, algorithmic modeling for Rhino, www.grasshopper3d.com/ (accessed 27 April 2021).
ZitzlerE, Laumanns M and Thiele L. SPEA2: improving the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm. TIK-Report 103, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zürich, 2001.
BaderJZitzlerE.HypE: an algorithm for fast hypervolume-based many-objective optimization. Evol Comput2011; 19: 45–76.
68.
SunCLiuQHanY.Many-objective optimization design of a public building for energy, daylighting and cost performance improvement. Appl Sci2020; 10: 2435.
69.
RoudsariMSPakM. Ladybug: a parametric environmental plugin for grasshopper to help designers create an environmentally- conscious design. In: Proceedings of the 13th international building performance simulation association conference, Chambery, France, 26–28 August 2013, pp.3128–3135.
70.
ReinhartCFWalkenhorstO.Validation of dynamic RADIANCE-based daylight simulations for a test office with external blinds. Energy Build2001; 33: 683–697.
71.
ReichardtWAbdel AlimOSchmidtW.Definition und Messgrundlage einnes objectiven Masses zur Ermittlung der Grenze zwischen brauchbarer und unbrauchbarer Durchsichtigkeit bei Musikdarbeitung. Acustica1975; 32: 126–137.
