Please enter the following info in the fields above:
- Your Name (just type your name, then click Create to add yourself to the list)
- Paste the link to your BIM 360 folder in the BIM 360 Link field.
Image of My Model
Paste images or screenshots of your original building form and the recommended building form based on your evaluation and analysis
figure 1&2: original building form (top height 750' and top rotation 55deg)
figure 3: alternative#1 with top height 650' and top rotation 5deg
figure 4: alternative#2 with top height 700' and top rotation 5deg
figure 5: alternative#3 with top height 750' and top rotation 5deg
Image of Your Results
Paste images or screenshots of the Summary Tables (created in Word, Excel, Google Sheets, or some other data table tool) showing the input values tested and the values computed for each of the reported parameters.
figure 1: summary table with input and output
figure 2: top 3 recommended design
Description
Enter a brief description outlining:
- your comparison/ranking rationale or approach
- an explanation of why you consider the recommended building form to be the “best” choice
Continuing with the model developed in Module 5, two new custom nodes are created and integrated into the dynamo file. The first custom node is named "BuildingForm.EstimateCostByFloorLevel", which takes the cost per SF at each level and computes the total construction cost, number of floors and the average cost per floor. The average cost per floor is a newly defined parameter, which helps to reflect the tradeoff between higher floor level and construction cost (since it's more costly to construct at a higher floor level). The second custom node is adapted from the class example but has been modified such that it computes the cumulative and average insolation per floor basis. By incorporating the above nodes into "BuildingForm.EvaluationPairsOfInputs", I am now able to create a series of combination cases for testing and get the desired output results (listed in tables above). Once the results are generated, they are passed to "EvaluationResults.ComputeCombinatedEvaluationScore" for getting a weighted score. The rationale behind this evaluation matrix is to optimize the dimension of the building form, to make it have a high space efficiency, high insolation and low construction cost possible. In this case, since a lower cost is desirable, a negative weighting factor is assigned to terms associated with cost. Personally, I think cum insolation is an important factor to consider for the design, so I assign it a heavier weight than the other factors. For this hexagon shaped tower, its space efficiency(1), total cost(-1), ave floor cost(-1), cum insolation per floor(1), and total cum insolation(2) are combined into a weighted score and used for comparing different design alternatives.
As a result, the top three recommended alternatives are: "top height 650' with top rotation 5deg", "top height 700' with top rotation 5deg" and "top height 750' with top rotation 5deg". They are considered better designs than others because they yield relatively lower cost per floor and higher cumulative insolation.
testing range for top height: 650..750..50
testing range for top rotation: 5..55..25
parameter relationship: mid width=base width-200'; top width=base width-100'