Yushun Zou

Node 1: Evaluate Value per Floor Area Based on Mass Floor Area and Rotation

image

Sub Function 1 for Node 1: Compute areas and total area for mass floors

image

Sub Function 2 for Node 1: Compute total value of building based on linear value relation regard height, mass floor areas and rotation angles

image
  • For node 1, I want to evaluate alternatives based on value of the building per mass floor areas which provides the effective of economic value of the building. In the mass floor function, I added an output which compute the summation of the mass floor areas which used for estimating the value per unit mass areas. In the compute value function, I added a factor which account for the cost of the rotation construction.

Height ratio = Level height / Total height of the building

Level rotation ratio = Height ratio * Difference between top and base rotation angle / 180 (Maximum rotation angle)

New value of each floor = value for each floor * (1 + Level rotation ratio)

  • Then, I just times the mass floor area and new unit value of each floor to calculate new values of floors for the building. After sum it up and divide by the total mass floor to get the indicator of the value per unit floor area. For evaluating alternatives from choice of module 5, I input two parameters : top height and top rotation of the building. Top height span from 700 to 750ft with 10ft interval, top rotation span from 15 degree to 90 degree with 15 degree intervals.

Data table of alternatives for Node 1:

First Node
Top Height(ft)
Top Rotation(°)
Gross Floor Area(ft^2)
Gross Surface Area(ft^2)
Gross Volume(ft^3)
Cost per Unit Floor Area($/ft^2)
700
15
486911.5218
287301.5116
7214601.153
865.6318667
700
30
486764.9439
287308.2612
7212242.782
876.4488712
700
45
486346.2263
287268.1981
7205698.045
877.2539818
700
60
485411.0146
287112.8721
7191643.005
878.3115646
700
75
483646.0339
286748.2114
7165198.338
879.5618
700
90
480698.1747
286072.992
7120970.924
880.9396111
710
15
496158.2532
291094.2235
7317666.899
885.1126579
710
30
496009.5715
291100.3626
7315274.95
885.6244742
710
45
495585.25
291058.5565
7308637.116
886.4427862
710
60
494636.6563
290899.39
7294382.367
887.5200921
710
75
492846.4823
290527.4531
7267562.03
888.7977672
710
90
489856.997
289840.1243
7222713.69
890.2121351
720
15
498269.536
294887.0798
7420732.635
885.9505226
720
30
498118.1528
294892.6185
7418307.09
882.7763063
720
45
497687.167
294849.0861
7411576.198
883.6029072
720
60
496724.4172
294686.0033
7397096.653
884.6875806
720
75
494909.4477
294307.1265
7369920.433
885.9678626
720
90
491879.6403
293607.4585
7324449.121
887.3756208
730
15
507529.3134
298680.0755
7523798.378
891.3884117
730
30
507376.358
298685.022
7521339.254
888.2679603
730
45
506940.0434
298639.779
7514515.273
889.0998131
730
60
505964.7428
298472.7233
7499815.348
890.1932866
730
75
504123.8039
298086.8016
7472283.964
891.4872117
730
90
501050.3335
297375.0362
7426184.482
892.914976
740
15
516776.4293
302473.2051
7626864.115
896.8242178
740
30
516621.39
302477.5679
7624371.397
897.352506
740
45
516179.1027
302430.6284
7617454.335
898.197448
740
60
515190.4313
302259.7905
7602554.78
899.3104574
740
75
513324.7263
301866.6776
7574647.443
900.6315461
740
90
510208.7575
301142.8474
7527919.742
902.0954871
750
15
518888.3031
306266.4621
7729929.855
897.6528414
750
30
518730.534
306270.2502
7727403.548
894.5867516
750
45
518281.1722
306221.628
7720393.385
895.4400137
750
60
517278.7378
306047.0282
7705293.446
896.5604441
750
75
515388.2327
305646.7486
7677010.898
897.884236
750
90
512232.3359
304910.3933
7629635.252
899.3417234
Highest Value per Unit Area =
902.0954871
Location of Max =
30

After comparison, the most effective value provider for the building is the alternative with top height of 740 ft and top rotation angle of 90 degree. This choice can provide highest value for about 902 dollar per square foot.

Node 2: Evaluate Directness for Interested Building and Disinterested Building

image

Sub Function for Node 2: Compute Summation of Directness of Interested and Disinterested Building

image
  • For node 2, I want to evaluate alternatives based on directness of the building to interested and disinterested building at the same time. The indicator can evaluate the building location better for accounting directness to advantageous surroundings(e.g. landmark of the region) and disadvantageous surroundings that people want to evade(e.g. inauspicious building, industry with air pollution) In the subfunction of calculating the directness, I added an input of disinterested building which used to compute the directedness to bad surroundings. For disinterested directness, I times a factor of -1.5 because people usually have stronger emotion for bad stuff compared to good views. Finally, I added up the summation directness from different objects together to get the total directness of the building to the surroundings.

Data table of alternatives for Node 2:

Second Node
Top Height(ft)
Top Rotation(°)
Gross Floor Area(ft^2)
Gross Surface Area(ft^2)
Gross Volume(ft^3)
Directness to Surrounding Buildings
700
15
486911.5218
287301.5116
7214601.153
-190.0538305
700
30
486764.9439
287308.2612
7212242.782
-192.6563106
700
45
486346.2263
287268.1981
7205698.045
-195.2244369
700
60
485411.0146
287112.8721
7191643.005
-195.78692
700
75
483646.0339
286748.2114
7165198.338
-196.8164678
700
90
480698.1747
286072.992
7120970.924
-196.2699448
710
15
496158.2532
291094.2235
7317666.899
-190.0453691
710
30
496009.5715
291100.3626
7315274.95
-192.6472252
710
45
495585.25
291058.5565
7308637.116
-195.2161777
710
60
494636.6563
290899.39
7294382.367
-195.7752036
710
75
492846.4823
290527.4531
7267562.03
-196.8063797
710
90
489856.997
289840.1243
7222713.69
-196.2466872
720
15
498269.536
294887.0798
7420732.635
-190.0372541
720
30
498118.1528
294892.6185
7418307.09
-192.6385084
720
45
497687.167
294849.0861
7411576.198
-195.2082577
720
60
496724.4172
294686.0033
7397096.653
-195.763963
720
75
494909.4477
294307.1265
7369920.433
-196.7967169
720
90
491879.6403
293607.4585
7324449.121
-196.2243985
730
15
507529.3134
298680.0755
7523798.378
-190.0294684
730
30
507376.358
298685.022
7521339.254
-192.6301553
730
45
506940.0434
298639.779
7514515.273
-195.2006579
730
60
505964.7428
298472.7233
7499815.348
-195.7531828
730
75
504123.8039
298086.8016
7472283.964
-196.7874312
730
90
501050.3335
297375.0362
7426184.482
-196.2030106
740
15
516776.4293
302473.2051
7626864.115
-190.0219954
740
30
516621.39
302477.5679
7624371.397
-192.6221327
740
45
516179.1027
302430.6284
7617454.335
-195.1933566
740
60
515190.4313
302259.7905
7602554.78
-195.7428323
740
75
513324.7263
301866.6776
7574647.443
-196.7785176
740
90
510208.7575
301142.8474
7527919.742
-196.1824654
750
15
518888.3031
306266.4621
7729929.855
-190.0148182
750
30
518730.534
306270.2502
7727403.548
-192.6144272
750
45
518281.1722
306221.628
7720393.385
-195.1863585
750
60
517278.7378
306047.0282
7705293.446
-195.7328742
750
75
515388.2327
305646.7486
7677010.898
-196.7699531
750
90
512232.3359
304910.3933
7629635.252
-196.1627171
Highest Directness =
-190.0148182
Location of Min =
31

After comparison, the alternatives provide the best view is the alternative with top height of 750 ft and top rotation angle of 15 degree. This choice can provide highest directness view for interested object and lease directness view for disinterested object.

💡

Point to Ponder:

Do the new evaluation metrics that you’ve designed capture the meaningful differences between the building form alternatives?

Yes. For the defined node 1, the alternative not provide the least floor area or the highest floor area, but it do have the highest unit value for the building which stand for highest efficiency of floor area usage. For the defined node 2, the winner between alternatives not provide the gross surface area, but it still gives the highest gross volumes and most favorable directness of views to the surroundings. What other metrics would be useful to compute to help understand and make the case for which alternatives are truly better than others?

Another metrics pops out of my mind is the alternatives which can provide the best microclimate conditions with largest mass floor areas. This metrics can select the best livable and largest living areas between building alternatives with the microclimate function provided in the Autodesk Forma. We can calculate it by times the value of microclimate in each floor with their respective floor areas and then sum all values together to get the final score for each building alternative.