- Use cases
- Co-Creation Space
Community
Organizations
Collaboration Partners
- Login
NOT REGISTERED YET?
Register for the Use Case Management Service for free to start creating your first use case.
Registered users can use the download area and the comment functions.
All dokuments are licensed as a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
(Attribution-Non-Commercial-ShareAlike 4.0). Further information can be found at
The documents reflect the current best practice and do not claim to be complete. They should not to be understood in the sense of a generally valid recommendation or guideline from a legal point of view. The documents are intended to support appointing and appointed parties in the application of the BIM method. The documents must be adapted to the specific project requirements in each case. The examples listed do not claim to be complete. Its information is based on findings from practical experience and is accordingly to be understood as best practice and not universally applicable. Since we are in a phase in which definitions are only emerging, the publisher cannot guarantee the correctness of individual contents.
Aim:
By providing the stakeholders with a structured procedure to characterize the project goals, capture their perspectives, analyze multiple renovation options, and obtain a final ranking the aim of this use case is to improve the quality, availability, accessibility of information by the different stakeholders involved; it also supports the involvement of end-users such as tenants and owners. Having a structure approach to analyze renovation alternatives and involve the different stakeholders at different stages also contributes to reduce the time compared to the conventional practices.
Scope:
The use case supports the stakeholders through the process to select a suitable renovation solution.
Decision-making approaches are intended to provide stakeholders with a structured framework to address the process of making decisions, especially when multiple and conflicting objectives and criteria can appear. As presented below, the approach proposed by BIM-SPEED provides clear steps to conduct the decision-making process. Having the structure procedure to make the decision can reduce the time to select the final renovation solution. Since the stakeholders involved in the project are requested to perform specific actions at different stages, they can engage in the renovation, facilitating the process. Capturing the stakeholders’ perspectives through the weighting method and integrating them with the alternatives’ performances enable a transparent way to make the decision. The general decision tree included in the frameworks comprise social, economic, and environmental elements to encourage stakeholders to establish a more comprehensive evaluation.
Fig: Comparison between common practices and BIM Speed approach in decision making
The main exchange activities are performed between the spreadsheet supporting the decision-making framework and the BIM-SPEED platform as presented in figure below. The main elements exchanged are in the form of .csv files. The information collected through the decision-making framework can be transferred to the platform where it can be leveraged by external services. For instance, one of the planned services is a dashboard to display the information in a user-friendly interface to support the stakeholders to make the final decision. The characterization of the project, the decision tree with objectives and criteria, the preferences of the stakeholders, the performance of the alternatives and the final ranking can be gathered and displayed together to facilitate stakeholders to make the final decision. Additional exchanges occurred between external services and the platform at the criteria quantification stage. The format and data exchanged at this step depends on the criteria selected to evaluate the alternatives. Some examples are presented in the figure below.
Fig: Exchange requirements
General description of Overall Process:
The users should follow six steps. The first three steps correspond to the Multi-criteria definition stage where the stakeholders should:
The Criteria and preferences quantification stage includes steps four and five
At the last stage, Decision analysis,
The results from the criteria quantification and the preferences of the stakeholders are combined to rank the alternatives and identify which are the alternatives that perform the better on the criteria, and at the same time capture the preferences of the different stakeholders.
Figure 1: Decision-making procedure
The implementation of the use case in one demonstration case of the BIM-SPEED EU project is presented to illustrate the application of the proposed workflow.
Multi-criteria definition stage:
• Description and characterization of the project.
The building to be renovated corresponds to one of the dwelling units of a duplex residence unit (two-family) constructed in 1961 and located in Gdynia, in the North of Poland. The external walls of the building are made of full brick and have a thickness of 56cm, the building is partially insulated with expanded polystyrene. It is connected to the natural gas and the heating system is based on the gas boiler. The reasons for the renovation are: very low building condition, the age of the building, low energy performance and the need to rearrange and enlarge the usable area. As-built 2D drawings and BIM model are available for the building. The decision-maker of the process is the private owner of the unit.
Table 1: General information
Table 2 summarizes the renovation scenarios considered for the building:
Table 2: Overview of Gdynia renovation scenarios
1. In Renovation scenario 1, the following interventions has been analysed:
ETICS – All facades above the ground were insulated with 0,12m thic EPS 032 with λ=0,032W/mK, bacement external walls were insulatet with 0,12m thic XPS 200-036 with λ=0,036W/mK
Roof insulation – roof insulated with 0,12m thic EPS 032 with λ=0,032W/mK
Windows were replaced with triple-glazed windows. The frames are made of polyvinylchloride (PVC). The U-value of 0,90 W/(m2 K) of the windows was used.
Floor insulation – floors between storeys were insulated with 0,04m thic EPS 036 with λ=0,036W/mK, bacement floor were insulated with 0,10m thic EPS 100 with λ=0,036W/mK
Lighting – all light sources were replaced by LED technology
Piping – all pipes in system were replaced with new ones
Boilers- boiler was replaced with gas condensing boiler Thermal solar was installed
2. In Renovation scenario 2, includes:
Ventilated facade – all walls insulated with 0,12m thic EPS 032 with λ=0,032W/mK and with 0,03m air gap
Second window - triple-glazed windows. The frames are made of polyvinylchloride (PVC). The U-value of 0,90 W/(m2 K) of the windows was used
Floor insulation – floors between storeys were insulated with 0,04m thic EPS 036 with λ=0,036W/mK, bacement floor were insulated with 0,10m thic EPS 100 with λ=0,036W/mK
Radiators- radiators were replaced with 917-1072W panel radiators
Decentralised mechanical ventilation was installed
3. In Renovation scenario 3,
ETICS – All facades above the ground were insulated with 0,12m thic EPS 032 with λ=0,032W/mK, bacement external walls were insulatet with 0,12m thic XPS 200-036 with λ=0,036W/mK
Roof insulation – roof insulated with 0,12m thic EPS 032 with λ=0,032W/mK
Windows were replaced with triple-glazed windows. The frames are made of polyvinylchloride (PVC). The U-value of 0,90 W/(m2 K) of the windows was used.
Floor insulation – floors between storeys were insulated with 0,04m thic EPS 036 with λ=0,036W/mK, bacement floor were insulated with 0,10m thic EPS 100 with λ=0,036W/mK
Lighting – all light sources were replaced by LED technology
Piping – all pipes in system were replaced with new ones
Boilers- boiler was replaced with gas condensing boiler
Thermal solar was installed
• Objectives and criteria setting.
The private investor renovating their house is aware of the risks caused by global warming and pollution, diverse economic, social and environmental aspects are relevant for them. In a sessions with the architect responsible for the project, the owner defined the objectives and criteria for the project, they indicated multiple aspects that they wanted to consider during the evaluation of the renovation alternatives. Figure 2 depicts the final decision tree for this case.
Figure 2: Decision tree for Gdynia
Criteria and preferences quantification stage:
• Criteria weights.
The owner of the apartment indicated their preferences on the different criteria included in the decision tree following the pairwise comparison method, the results are summarized in Table 3. The most important criteria are the investment cost (23,15%), thermal comfort (15,68%) and global warming potential (15,15%).
Table 3: Weighting criteria for Gdynia
To study the different renovation scenarios, energy simulations were performed directly on EPlus, modifying the BEM model in the .idf file according to the components included in each of the scenarios. The performance of the renovation scenarios according to other criteria was calculated using different methods. The results are presented in Table 4. The best performances are indicated with bold font.
Table 4: Renovation scenarios for Gdynia, general results
Decision analysis.
After analyzing the data, the decision-making framework implemented on the Excel spreadsheet generated a ranking of the most suitable solutions based on the scores allocated to each criterion. According to the results, renovation scenario 3 is the most suitable solution. It is the most complete renovation strategy that will bring benefits in terms of investment cost, thermal comfort and global warming potential. This renovation alternative performs the best according to thermal comfort and investment cost, which are two of the three most important criteria. This scenario performs similar to scenario 1 in terms of criteria such as energy savings, durability, and total energy demand. However, scenario 3 performs the best in other aspects such as LCC cost, visual comfort, and renovation time. Figure 2 presents a screenshot of the model including the final renovation solution for the building.
Figure 3: Final renovation solution for Gdynia
At this stage, the proposed use case encourages the evaluation of the existing conditions of the dwelling unit/s, identification of potential restrictions, general objectives for the renovation project, and the role of the different stakeholders. In the first step of the proposed framework, stakeholders are requested to characterize the project, start a discussion regarding expectations, current problems encounter by the inhabitants, restrictions due to budget, time, and regulations. The results from this process are essential for the design of potential renovation alternatives that fulfill the objectives of the project, comply with the applicable regulation, are compatible with the existing conditions of the building, and meet additional requirements. Furthermore, the relevance and ease of implementing a structured decision making process is also detailed in the description and objectives section of the use-case.
As a pre-requisite to start the implementation of the use case at this stage, the following are required:
At this stage, the proposed use case supports the stakeholders to select the final renovation solution to be implemented on the project. Once the stakeholders’ preferences and the performance of the different alternatives are integrated to obtain the final ranking, stakeholders can analyze the options, main design elements of them, and trade-off between different aspects to make the final decision. The final renovation solutions is the starting point for the conceptual design and planning stages.
As a pre-requisite to start the implementation of the use case at this stage, the following are required: