No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hong Kong, 2009. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available online.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hong Kong, 2009. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available in print.

published_or_final_version / Architecture / Master / Master of Architecture

The flexible partition, one of the main components of the flexible housing schemes in West European countries exhibited a comparative technological lack. This research investigated the adaptability of selected commercial flexible partitions available in the North American market to residences since the most realistic way to influence the technological process was to start from the known products and developing them in an innovative direction. The consequences of the proposed sectoral transfer were seen as immediate and long term effects and categorized into three groups of constraints: legal, technological and marketing constraints. The context of evaluation was drawn, and the performance concept was used to form a set of evaluation criteria. Fifty partition systems were reviewed, characterized and mismatched portions were screened out. The analysis with thirteen selected partition systems suggested that the performances of most of them were above the level required for dwelling. The study showed that most of them were economically more feasible as compared to fixed gyproc partitions if life-cycle costs were considered. Since the study showed that the partitions were sound in technical terms, it recommended further studies to look into the matter of modifying them by introducing new materials which would cut down the unnecessary performances and might reduce the initial cost as well.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Victoria University of Wellington, 2010. / Includes bibliographical references.

The attention on green building is driven by the desire to reduce a building’s running cost over its entire life cycle. However, with the use of sustainable technologies and more environmentally friendly products in the building sector, the construction industry contributes significantly to sustainable actions of our society. Different certification systems have entered the market with the aim to measure a building’s sustainability. However, each system uses its own set of criteria for the purpose of rating. The primary goal of this study is to identify a comprehensive set of criteria for the measurement of building sustainability, and therefore to facilitate the comparison of existing rating methods. The collection and analysis of the criteria, identified through a comprehensive literature review, has led to the establishment of two additional categories besides the 3 pillars of sustainability. The comparative analyses presented in this thesis reveal strengths and weaknesses of the chosen green building certification systems - LEED, BREEAM, and DGNB.

It is becoming increasingly relevant that designs address sustainability requirements. The objectives of any sustainable design are: to reduce resource depletion of energy, water, and raw materials; prevent environmental degradation caused throughout the building lifecycle; provide a safe, comfortable and healthy living environment. Currently, the sustainability of a building is judged by standards codified in a rating system. (1) Although compliance with a sustainability rating system is not mandatory, increasingly, it is becoming a goal that many designers and authorities would like to achieve. However, there are impediments to the pervasive use of sustainable design rating systems. 1. Certification is expensive. ( 2 ) It is labor intensive, involving large volumes of data aggregation, information accounting and exchange, which, can be a deterrent to designers and the design process. 2. Ratings systems are periodically reviewed; as our understanding increase and technology improve, sustainability requirements on designs become more extensive and, sometimes, more stringent. (3) 3. Sustainable building design rating tools are not readily integrated into the design process whereby the design solution can be developed by different disciplines. 4. The design information model associated with a building may not contain the data (attributes) necessary to evaluate its design. 5. Information is disparate and distributed—requiring it to be supplemented, augmented from various sources, and managed for the different stages of a building design process In practice, designers tend to employ commercial (and reasonably stable) design tools, making it imperative to develop an approach that utilizes information readily and currently available in digital form in conjunction with rating system requirements. This research focuses on supporting sustainability assessment where designers need to evaluate the information in a design in order to fulfill sustainability metrics. The main research objective is an approach to integrating sustainability assessment with a design environment. This comprises: identifying informational requirements from rating systems; representing them in computable form; mapping them to information in a commercial design tool; and assessing the performance of a design. An overall framework for organizing, managing and representing sustainability information requirements is developed as the demonstrator. Case study of an actual project demonstrates the flow of information from a commercially available building information modeler and a sustainable building rating system. The process developed bridges sustainability assessment requirements with information from the model for preevaluation prior to submission for certification. Contributions include a technical implementation of sustainable design assessment for pre assessment through a process of identifying information availability, augmentation, representation and management focused on two credits (Reduce indoor water use and Minimum energy performance) over evolving rating standards, namely (LEED 2.1, LEED 2009 and LEED v4). These contributions are intended to enable designers, stakeholders, contractors and other professionals to communicate strategies and make informed decisions to achieve sustainability goals for a project from design through to operation. (1) Design choices are validated, by measuring design performance against criteria specified by the rating system. See Chapter 2: Research Background. (2) “Shame on you for perpetuating this myth that green design costs more even if integrated properly. LEED certification does, but green design need not.” (Kats, 2010) (3) “Sustainability is not static–it is iteratively changing, based on knowledge that connects science and design.” (Williams, 2007)

Building fire safety is significantly influenced by building and fire safety regulations (often codes and standards). These regulations specify what fire safety measures should be included in a given building as a minimum requirement. Since fire engineers develop fire safety designs based on the regulations, they are often viewed as the primary agents in ensuring the fire safety of buildings. However, their mission often starts with given building design features, such as interior spatial layout, exterior shape, site plan, and so forth, which are mostly determined by architects (or architects). Although architects design buildings within the boundaries of the regulatory requirements, their focus is not generally on fire safety, but more on visual and spatial aesthetics of buildings. These objectives are linked to building form and functionality, which are not subject to the building and fire safety regulations. These objectives can sometimes compete with fire safety objectives in such a way that buildings can be unsafe in certain situations due to unintended effects of building design features on actual fire safety performance. To determine whether a building has design features which work against fire safety performance, evaluation of building fire safety performance must take into account the effects of building design features. If fire safety performance is significantly decreased by building design attributes, additional fire safety measures or modifications of the building design should be incorporated to provide an appropriate level of fire safety performance. While there have been various building fire safety evaluation tools developed over the last forty or so years, none of them comprehensively considers building design features and their associated effects as key performance parameters. In this context, the current study develops conceptual models for fire safety performance assessment in both qualitative and quantitative manners. After scrutinizing previous fire incidents and the building features which contributed to their outcomes, various fire safety performance attributes, including building design features, are identified and cause-effect relationships among the attributes are established. Then, the attributes are organized hierarchically like a tree diagram such that the performance of one upper level attribute is determined by the combined performance of multiple lower level attributes. In this way, the performance of bottom level attributes propagates upward to the upper level attributes. Two tree diagrams are established for the most common fire safety objectives, life safety and property protection. Each attribute in the tree diagrams has two quantified values: performance value and weighting factor. The current study uses three different performance values (0.01, 0.5, and 1) for bottom level attributes representing poor, average and good performance, respectively. In addition, as each attribute can have different contribution to upper level attributes, a weighting factor between 0 and 1 is assigned to each attribute which represent the relative importance. With these two values, the performance value of an upper level attribute is calculated using the weighted sum method (summation of multiplied values of performance value and weighting factor) which is commonly used in the Analytical Hierarchy Process. As the performance of an attributes is a function of specific designs, building uses, occupants, and site conditions, in the first instance, judgments of the fire engineers can be used to assign weights and performance values, but they can also be determined jointly among stakeholders. Generally speaking, the details of attributes for fire safety performance are not determined at once. Rather they are gradually determined as the building design progresses. This means that in early design building design phase, many of the attributes are unknown as well as fire safety performance. Once appropriate information can be provided to architects by fire engineers at each building design phase, it is likely to avoid possible conflicts between design details and fire safety performance. Using the fire safety evaluation model, weak attributes for fire safety performance can be identified and possible make-up strategy and building design approach can be developed in advance. This provides the potential for the collaboration between fire engineers and architects and at the end for increasing building fire safety performance of buildings.

Dissertation (Ph.D.)--Auburn University,2008. / Abstract. Vita. Includes bibliographic references (p.134-141).