[Back]

U. Pont, A. Mahdavi:
"Evaluation of Prescriptive Indicators for Building Performance - A Ranking Based Approach";
Applied Mechanics and Materials, 12th Envibuild - Buildings and Environment - From Research to Application Proceedings of the 12th International EnviBUILD Conference (7th & 8th September 2017) (2019), 887; 172 - 180.

In recent discussions on the evaluation methodology of different aspects of building performance, the idea of so-called prescriptive indicators was proposed. These indicators are simple benchmark values of a building, and do not require any complex calculation or simulation. They are regularly based on certain design parameters pertaining to geometric or semantic aspects of the building, such as compactness and mean weighted U-value. Their purpose - amongst others - is to equip building planners with a very quick method to estimate the performance of their building designs in early design stages and to categorize its performance. Moreover, such prescriptive indicators could be considered an alternative concept to the current practice of energy certification in Europe. The energy certificate calculation methodologies in most countries did increase in complexity in the past years. As a result, the issuing of energy certificates has become a time-consuming and cumbersome process. Moreover, the quality of results of energy certificates became questioned in recent years due to uncertainties connected to input data assumptions and widely interpretable guidelines regarding the issuing. Prescriptive indicators, if their derivation is properly documented, can at least mitigate the issue regarding issuing guidelines due to their simple character. A important research question, however, is the relation between key performance indicators, which are the results of energy certification or building performance simulation, and prescriptive indicators. This contribution suggests a methodology based on rank comparison that might help to identify prescriptive indicators that are similar in their sensitivity on design changes as certain key performance indicators are.

(no german abstract)
In recent discussions on the evaluation methodology of different aspects of building performance, the idea of so-called prescriptive indicators was proposed. These indicators are simple benchmark values of a building, and do not require any complex calculation or simulation. They are regularly based on certain design parameters pertaining to geometric or semantic aspects of the building, such as compactness and mean weighted U-value. Their purpose - amongst others - is to equip building planners with a very quick method to estimate the performance of their building designs in early design stages and to categorize its performance. Moreover, such prescriptive indicators could be considered an alternative concept to the current practice of energy certification in Europe. The energy certificate calculation methodologies in most countries did increase in complexity in the past years. As a result, the issuing of energy certificates has become a time-consuming and cumbersome process. Moreover, the quality of results of energy certificates became questioned in recent years due to uncertainties connected to input data assumptions and widely interpretable guidelines regarding the issuing. Prescriptive indicators, if their derivation is properly documented, can at least mitigate the issue regarding issuing guidelines due to their simple character. A important research question, however, is the relation between key performance indicators, which are the results of energy certification or building performance simulation, and prescriptive indicators. This contribution suggests a methodology based on rank comparison that might help to identify prescriptive indicators that are similar in their sensitivity on design changes as certain key performance indicators are.

Prescriptive indicators, Pearson correlation, Spearman rank correlation, ranking, building performance evaluation.