Corinne Charlton

• the design alternatives that you modeled and tested
• I designed different alternative models in Revit and tested the PV potential of each design (Location: The Dish, Stanford CA). The photovoltaic (PV) potential explores how my building form affects the ability to place PV panels that will generate renewable energy.
• I used rounded surfaces in the first model and rectangular surfaces in the second.

Model #1:




Model #2


• The results of the analyses and how they influenced your thinking about how to move forward
• The first model saves $4.21 dollars per m^2 per year in electricity assuming that 90% of the roofing space is allotted to solar panels with 20.4% efficiency.
• The second model saves $6.97 dollars per m^2 per year in electricities based on the same assumptions.
• At first I was surprised by these results, because I initially believed the rounded buildings would be the most efficient in terms of potential to collect sunlight. My results suggest the opposite. However, after a closer look, I realize that I miscalculated the roofing surface area allotted to each model. Thus, despite the fact that each have an equal ratio of roof to solar panels, the first model is larger and will thus require more solar power to operate than the second smaller model.
• My ultimate conclusion is that the two models are very close in overall efficiency, and the difference between rounded roofs and flat roofs does not make a significant difference for PV potential.

Model #1 Results:

Model #2 Results: