# Toru Watanabe

Journal Entry For
Module 6 - Evaluate Your Alternatives

# The form of building

My approach was changing the rotation angle of the plane in the top and middle level. The results obtained by the parametric analysis showed the original model, 0 degree in the middle and 0 degree in top, was the best option and the recommendation in the second place was 40 degrees in the middle and 10 degrees in the top.

• Original and recommended shape
• Recommendation in the second place

# Overview of my approach in the analysis

The process of the analysis is shown in the pictures below. Parameters used in the analysis were grouped in the dark green area, including the parameters of the building, the information of surrounding obstacles, and the categories of outcomes. Building parameters, angles in the top and middle, were combined in list in the light green area, the list of outputs was created in the pink and orange area, and then the output list was exported in bule area.

The calculations for each output, gross floor area, gross surface area, gross volume, construction cost, and obstacles to the view from the building were conducted in the custom node shown in the pictures below.

Output of gross floor area, gross surface area, and gross volume was designated in the orange part, construction cost was calculated in the pink parts, the obstacles of view from the building were counted in the bule part.

# My single-objective optimization scheme

To determine the best building shape, the single-objective optimization scheme was used. Five outcomes could be obtained in the analysis shown above, which were gross floor area, gross surface area, gross volume, construction cost, and the obstacles to the view from the building. While the larger number was preferable in gross floor area and gross volume, the smaller figure was desirable in gross surface area, construction cost, and the number of obstacles. Scoring gross floor area and gross volume was conducted in the way below. The highest value got 1.0 and the lowest got 0.0 in the calculation.

Score = (The Value - Minimum) / (Maximum - Minimum)

On the other hand, the formula shown below was used in scoring gross surface area, construction cost, and the number of obstacles. The lowest value got 1.0 and the highest got 0.0 in the formula.

Score = (Maximum - The Value) / (Maximum - Minimum)

After calculating each score, the total score in each case were summed up in the way below. In the formula, N means a weighting factor and S means a score.

Total score = Σ (N * S)

In this project, 2.0 was used as a weighting factor in construction cost and the number of obstacles and 1.0 was used in the others.

The process in Dynamo and outcomes were shown in the pictures below. The recommend shape, the original shape, had 5.32 in the total score.