Michael Nehme

• Decision 1: Construction Cost vs Usable Floor Area
• Design Variables
• Building Width
• Building Length
• Floor-to-Floor Height
• Number of Floors
• Evaluators
• Total Construction Cost
• Total Usable Floor Area
• Most Important Tradeoffs to Consider
• As building dimensions and number of floors increase, total usable floor area grows increasing real estate value, but total construction cost also increases
• This decision ultimately depends on the investor's willingness to spend more upfront, considering that a larger building generates more rentable space and higher income potential in the future
• Decision 2: Column Spacing vs Structural Depth
• Design Variables
• Column spacing in X direction
• Column spacing in Y direction
• Slab thickness
• Beam depth
• Evaluators
• Usable Open Space
• Structural Material Quantity
• Most Important Tradeoffs to Consider
• Increasing the column spacing creates larger open spaces, which improves architectural flexibility and usability.
• However, longer spans usually require deeper beams, thicker slabs, or more structural material to control deflection and strength.
• The goal is to balance open, flexible space with a reasonable structural system.
• Decision 3: Surface-to-Volume Ratio vs Construction Cost
• Design Variables
• Building Width
• Building Length
• Floor-to-Floor Height
• Number of Floors
• Evaluators
• Surface-to-Volume Ratio
• Total Construction Cost
• Most Important Tradeoffs to Consider
• As building volume increases, usable floor area grows but so does construction cost. A compact building shape keeps the surface-to-volume ratio low, meaning less material is used on the envelope relative to the usable space gained

I am enrolled in 2 units but decided to attempt doing the module with 4 input parameters and 4 evaluators for extra credit.

I have decided to study decision 3 : Surface-to-Volume Ratio vs Construction Cost.

Building shape optimization is a critical decision in the early stages of any construction project as it directly impacts the construction cost, real estate value, and environmental performance of the building. When thinking about the shape of the building, the investor and architect need to consider whether they want to spend more upfront to gain more rentable space in the future, or keep costs low at the expense of usable area. Based on this decision, the width, length, floor height, and number of floors of the building will be modified. As the building dimensions increase, the construction cost increases due to the larger volume of material required. However the usable floor area also increases, generating more rental income potential. The surface-to-volume ratio is a key measure of envelope efficiency (a compact building shape minimizes this ratio meaning less material is used on the envelope relative to the usable space gained). All evaluators were computed directly from the building geometry using simple formulas within code blocks in Dynamo, with construction cost derived from the total building volume multiplied by the preset cost of 1500$ per cubic meter. For this module I used a simple rectangular shape defining the building using the width, length, number of floors and the height of each floor.

• Surface-to-Volume Ratio vs Construction Cost vs Usable Floor Area vs Facade Area
• Design Variables: Building Width, Building Length, Floor-to-Floor Height, Number of Floors
• Evaluators: Surface-to-Volume Ratio (Min.), Total Construction Cost (Min.), Total Usable Floor Area (Max.), Facade Area (Min.).
• Tradeoffs: As the building dimensions and number of floors increase, construction cost increases due to the larger material volume and labor required, but usable floor area also grows increasing real estate value. A compact building shape reduces the surface-to-volume ratio and facade area improving envelope efficiency, but achieving a large usable area in a compact form requires more floors which drives up construction cost. The goal is to find the building shape that maximizes usable space while minimizing construction cost, facade area, and surface-to-volume ratio.

• The screenshot of the Scatterplot or Parallel Coordinates Graph illustrating the tradeoff that you chose to model and study.

After running many simulations I get the following results

SurfaceToVolume Ratio vs Construction Cost (x1000):

• Provide a brief explanation of what’s being shown in the Scatterplot or Parallel Coordinates Graph and how the tradeoff being illustrated would impact the design decision. What would you do with this info?

The scatterplot shows the relationship between Construction Cost (x1000) in dollars (X-axis), Surface-to-Volume Ratio (Y-axis), and Usable Floor Area represented by the colors (red being low, blue being high). The graph reveals a clear curve showing that as construction cost increases, the surface-to-volume ratio decreases, meaning the building becomes more efficient. The color gradient further shows that the most expensive buildings with the lowest surface-to-volume ratio also have the highest usable floor area shown in blue. As a designer or investor this information is very useful. Buildings in the top left of the graph are cheap but inefficient with a high surface-to-volume ratio and low usable area. Buildings in the bottom right are more expensive but more envelope-efficient, and they generally provide higher usable floor area. A reasonable design would likely be selected near the middle of the curve, where the surface-to-volume ratio is relatively low without requiring the highest construction cost. This tradeoff would directly inform the investor's decision on how much to spend upfront to achieve the desired balance between cost efficiency and rentable space.

• An image of your Dynamo Study Graph (showing all your nodes and the connecting logic) -- You can use the File > Export Workspace As Image... command in Dynamo to save a PNG image to upload with your posting.