PIEE CIFE Proposal Haymaker Welle

7/31/2019 PIEE CIFE Proposal Haymaker Welle

1/15

An Integrated Conceptual Design

Process for Energy, Thermal Comfort,and Daylighting

Prepared for:

Jim Sweeney

Director of the Precourt Institute for EnergyEfficiency; Professor of Management Science andEngineering, Stanford University

Principal Investigator:

John Haymaker, PhD, AIA, LEED APAssistant Professor

Center for Integrated Facility Engineering (CIFE)Stanford University

Research Staff:

Benjamin Welle C.E.M., LEED AP, E.I.T.PhD Student

Center for Integrated Facility Engineering (CIFE)Stanford University

June 1st, 2007
http://www.stanford.edu/http://www.stanford.edu/http://www.stanford.edu/http://www.stanford.edu/


2/15

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................11

SECTION 2 AN INTEGRATED CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PROCESS FOR

ENERGY, THERMAL COMFORT, AND DAYLIGHTING..........................21


3/15

1 EXECUTIVESUMMARY

11

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The life-cycle energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting performance of buildings is substantially

determined in the early stages of the design process. Performance-based analysis methodssupported by product models have little opportunity to inform these early stage design decisions

because current tools and processes do not support the rapid generation and analysis of

alternatives. The goal of this research is to reduce the time required to complete such design

iterations. We anticipate that this will allow design teams to formally investigate the energy,

thermal comfort, and daylighting performance of many more alternatives during the conceptual

design phase leading to improved built environments. To this end, we propose to (1) develop a

framework to measure the effectiveness of multidisciplinary design (MDD) methodologies using

time as the unit of analysis; (2) identify the critical conceptual design parameters and parametric

relationships for energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting; (3) implement methods and

technologies including building information modeling (BIM), parametric modeling, and process

integration and optimization (PIDO) to automate discipline analysis and process integration; and(4) measure the effectiveness of these new methodologies using the described framework.


4/15

2 ANINTEGRATEDCONCEPTUAL DESIGNPROCESS FORENERGY,THERMAL COMFORT, ANDDAYLIGHTING

2-1

2 GILROY HIGH SCHOOL

2.1 OBSERVED PROBLEM

The vast majority of buildings today suffer from inadequate thermal performance, such as excessive

energy consumption, thermal comfort issues, and insufficient daylighting. These deficiencies are often the

result of an inability of the design team to consider a wide variety of design options for all these criteria in

an integrated and systematic way due to budget, schedule, and technology constraints. Advancements in

computer-based Building Information Modeling (BIM) and analysis methods now allow architects and

engineers to simulate building performance in a virtual environment. However, the potential of this

technology to inform the early stages of the design process has not been fully realized because current

tools and processes do not support the rapid generation and evaluation of alternatives. Current building

design and analysis tools fail to enable the user to easily evaluate design modifications to the building

envelope (geometric or material), orientation, mechanical systems, and system operation, and quickly

understand the impacts on energy consumption, thermal and visual comfort, and cost. The extensive

amount of time required to generate and evaluate a design option using model-based methods means that

very few, if any, options can be adequately studied during the conceptual design phase before a decision

must be made. Consequently, the resulting building design frequently falls short of environmental, social,

and economic performance goals. Removing these barriers will allow for cheaper, more resource

efficient, and healthier built environments.

The goal of this research is to identify and test a methodology that reduces the time required for architects

and multidisciplinary engineers to complete a design iteration that evaluates sustainable design goals in

the areas of energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting. This methodology will leverage the technical

capabilities of BIM, rapidly developing building analysis tools, and other relevant model-based designand communication applications. Following is our diagnosis of the problem to be addressed by this

research.

2.1.1 Process Analysis

We recently asked 50 engineers at a leading Building Engineering firm, how they spent their time during

the conceptual design process. Figure 2-1 describes how we asked categorized an engineers time for our

survey, and Figure 2-2 shows the result of this survey. This preliminary research shows that architects and

engineers spend the majority of their time managing design information (58%) and relatively less time

specifying (6%) the processes to construct information, and executing (36%) the construction of this

information. In all, it takes architects and engineers over one month to generate and analyze a design

option using current building analysis models and, typically, less than three such iterations are completed

during the conceptual design phase (Flager and Haymaker, 2007). These shortcomings are due to tool,

process, and designer limitations.


5/15

SECTION 2 CIFE PRECOURT PROPOSAL

Figure 2-1

Framework for Measuring Process Effectiveness

Figure 2-2

Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) Design Process Metrics

Figure 2-2: A typical AEC design process results in only a few design iterations, with the majority of the iterationtime being spent on information management. A more streamlined design process will allow the design team toincrease the average number of design iteration per project.

The optimized design of building energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting performance ideally requires

an iterative design process that currently does not take place. First, the design process often fails to begin

with a sound understanding of the building science behind these three aspects of building performanceimportant for conceptual design. Second, building analysis tools require design parameters that are not

captured within traditional architectural and mechanical design tools. Third, designers have difficulties

generating multiple design options and exploring solution spaces. Fourth, a lack of interoperability

between building design and building analysis tools (e.g. for architecture to energy) significantly hinders

the ability to leverage existing information. Finally, designers struggle to integrate the results of analysis

tools and optimize the related parameters to meet their particular design goals. Figure 2-3 illustrates some

of these issues. These five areas are discussed in further detail in the following section.

Haymaker_Welle Research Proposal 22


6/15


Figure 2-3

Current Model-Based Building Analysis Deficiencies

Energy Simulation Application

BIM Model

Trade-Offs and

Optimization?

Daylighting Simulation Application

Thermal Comfort Simulation Application

kWh, Therms

Lumens, Candelas

Air Velocity,

Temperature Distribution

BA

Figure 2-3: (A) Data transfer capabilities between BIM models and building analysis tools are typically restrictedto geometric information, and even that design information is not transferred efficiently. (B) Additionally, there isa lack of methods to evaluate trade-offs and optimize the relevant design parameters between disparate building

analysis applications.

Insufficient Understanding of Building Science

Energy performance, thermal comfort, and daylighting in buildings is the result of a complex set of

interrelationships between the external environment, the shape and character of the building components,

equipment loads, lighting, mechanical systems, building envelope, and air distribution strategies. Building

optimization, achieving the greatest possible efficiency and environmental soundness with the least

expenditure of resources, requires an understanding of these interrelationships and an integrated whole

building design process. For example, enhancing daylighting performance often comes at a detriment to

energy and thermal comfort performance and vice versa, and therefore the three should not be evaluated

independently. Many projects fail to consider the appropriate design parameters and analyze their

interrelationships and trade-offs in an efficient and effective manner. Energy, thermal comfort, anddaylighting must be assessed in relation to each other, and few firms possess the knowledge and tools to

adequately do so, particularly in the conceptual design phase where time and budget constraints are

significant. Additionally, very often design parameters are considered and the resulting design options

modeled during the conceptual design phase that take a considerable amount of effort but give minimal

added value to the design iteration relative to other, more important parameters. These deficiencies often

prevent design teams from meeting their sustainability goals. Figure 2-4 shows the building parameters

that must be considered.



7/15


Figure 2-4

Building Design Parameters

Figure 2-4: Building design parameters consist of both building element parameters (e.g. walls, windows, and

equipment) and building space parameters (e.g. HVAC zoning and temperature setpoints). Both element andspace parameters consist of attributes and configurations. Examples of each are shown.

Difficulty Capturing Important Design Data in Building Design Tools

In current practice, there is a disconnect between the use of building analysis tools for energy, thermal

comfort, and daylighting design and the primary building design tools used for architectural andmechanical building design. This is due to the inability of traditional CAE (computer-aided engineering)

tools such as AutoCad to capture the information needed for energy and thermal analysis, such as material

properties and space loads, in a usable format.

Difficulty Generating Multiple Options to Explore the Solution Space

Designers tools are intended to evaluate static design options rather than help them define and explore

solution spaces. This limits the design teams ability to generate multiple design options, and establishes

the need for parametric design.

Minimal Interoperability between Building Design Tools and Building AnalysisTools

Another problem is that when information is produced, little consideration is given as to how to represent

that information to facilitate multidisciplinary analysis. If the architectural and mechanical building

design tools contain information relevant to energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting building analysis

tools, the transfer of this information between them is typically a manual process. The result of this

interoperability is that frequently the pertinent information for building analysis is misinterpreted,

overlooked, or simply ignored.

Lack of Building Analysis Tool Integration and Optimization

Design professionals spend much of their time managing design information, including manually

integrating and representing this information in their task-specific format, and coordinating their solutions

rather than exploring further design options. These limitations prevent a more complete and systematic



8/15


exploration and optimization of the design space based on multidisciplinary model-based performance

analysis.

2.2 THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

In this section we first describe the fundamental points of departure for our research and their limitations.

2.2.1 Thermal Performance Design Parameters and Parametric Relationships for

Conceptual Design

A significant body of research and best practices exists for the design of energy, thermal comfort, and

daylighting systems. The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers

(ASHRAE), the US Green Building Council (USGBS) and Leadership in Energy and Environmental

Design (LEED), and the Association of Energy Engineers (AEE) are just several of the organizations that

provide research and design guidelines in these areas. However, this information is fragmented, fails to

adequately address all the relevant design disciplines in a comprehensive manner, and is not presented in

a manner easily managed by architects and engineers during the conceptual design phase. Further

research into how these three sustainable design goals impact each other and should be modeled during

the conceptual design phase is needed. Identification of high-priority design parameters and an

understanding of how those parameters interact with each other are critical to enabling the maximum

flexibility in evaluating multiple design options.

2.2.2 Building Information Modeling (BIM)

BIM is a data-rich, object-based, intelligent digital representation of a facility which includes not only 3D

geometric models (and, therefore are capable of directly generating 2D and 3D drawings), but also

specific information on a wide range of building elements and systems associated with a building (e.g.,

wall constructions, material properties, spaces and thermal zones, heating, ventilating, and air

conditioning (HVAC) systems, geospatial information, space loads, etc.). This information can be used by

other building analysis purposes, such as cost calculation, building code checking, clash detection, and,

for the purposes of the proposed research, energy/thermal comfort simulation, and daylighting. Though

the functionality of the most common BIMs (Autodesk Revit, Bentley Architecture, Graphisofts

ArchiCAD) have progressed significantly in the past few years, much of the potential of BIM remains

largely untapped. Further work is needed to determine if the appropriate design information for use in

energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting analyses can be captured within a building information model.

2.2.3 IFC and XML

Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) and Extensible Markup Language (XML) are task and schema

specifications that provide standard ways to define information like that contained in BIM. IFC is anobject-oriented data model developed by the International Alliance for Interoperability (IAI) used to

describe the relationships and properties of building specific objects. To date, its industry implementation

is limited due to gaps in capturing the entire extent of AEC information (it is currently limited togeometric information) and the lack of software systems that support it.

XML is a set of rules for designing text formats to structure information. Several industry-specific sets of

rules of XML-based schemas are currently being developed for the AEC industry (aecXML, green

building XML (gbXML), ecoXML, virtual environment XML (veXML)), but none have emerged to gain

wide industry acceptance.



9/15


Both IFC and XML create a common language for transferring BIM information between different BIM

and building analyses applications while maintaining the meaning of different pieces of information in the

transfer. This reduces the need of remodeling the same building in each different application. It also adds

transparency to the process. A wide variety of data specific formats are available to enable

interoperability which can be customized to process specific needs, but more research is needed to

establish how to apply these standards to conceptual building design for energy, thermal comfort, and

daylighting.

2.2.4 Building Analysis Tools

Building Analysis Tools for the simulation and analysis of energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting have

varying degrees of functionality and interoperability with the IFC and XML schemas. The primary tools

used in todays design environment for energy, thermal comfort (evaluated using computational fluid

dynamics (CFD)), and daylighting are DOE2 (eQUEST, VisualDOE, Riuska), EnergyPlus, IES,

ECOTECT, Trane Trace, Flovent, and Fluent. These applications require a wide range of design

parameters to be specified by the user, many of which can be captured within a BIM. Further research is

needed to identify the required design parameters of these specific applications that may be captured in

IFC and XML format, their current ability to do so, and the highest priority interoperability enhancements

for the purposes of sustainable building design.

2.2.5 Process Integration and Design Optimization

Process Integration and Design Optimization (PIDO) is an emerging line of software products developed

in aerospace design that aims to give users the ability to integrate processes that utilize multiple digital

design and analysis tools. These products allow software tools to be wrapped and published on a

computing networks. This allows disciplines to keep ownership of their codes, maintain and upgrade

them, and serve them from their preferred computing platform. PIDO tools also provide a graphical

environment which permits users to select published components and graphically link their inputs and

outputs as required to create an integrated multidisciplinary analysis (MDA) model. Among limitations of

PIDO tools are the lack of support of various process components and a narrow problem focus that does

not explicitly address multidisciplinary teams communication and coordination issues. Very little workhas been done to date to test the effectiveness of these frameworks in the AEC domain, and whether or

not the PIDO framework can effectively capture, analyze, and optimize the necessary design parameters

of the specific building analysis tools listed above for energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting.

2.2.6 Narratives

Narratives [Haymaker, J., et. al. (2004)] are a process modeling language to describe and communicate

the design process using an acyclic graph structure. Each node in the graph corresponds to a definedinformation representation, and the reasoning process which operates on inputs to produce this output.

Narratives help AEC professionals communicate multidisciplinary design processes and the information

models used in these processes. However, Narratives do not explicitly facilitate the exchange or

coordination of information for the described process. While PIDO assists in process integration andoptimization, Narratives assist in communication.

2.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The following research questions will be addressed by our research:



10/15


1. Whatprocesses and information are required for energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting

performance-based conceptual building design?

This research question seeks to define what are the critical design parameters and parameter

interactions that should be considered, how, when, and by whom.

2. What technologies can best manage theseprocesses and information to achieve the highestperformance designs?

This research question seeks a methodology that enables professionals to most effectively use

model-based design and analysis information for energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting. It

seeks to understand how this information be exchanged more effectively between a BIM and

building analysis tools, and how can the functionality and results of disparate analyses be

integrated and optimized in these three areas.

2.4 RESEARCH METHODS

Our research methods can be broken down into two concurrent parts, one dealing with strategy and

problem exploration and the second dealing with implementation and testing. Part one consists of fivestages: (1) development of a framework to measure MDA process effectiveness, (2) evaluation of current

MDA process used by a leading mechanical design firm, (3) identification of the critical design

parameters and their interrelationships that must be considered to effectively evaluate energy, thermal

comfort, and daylighting sustainable design goals, (4) Research on the potential of current building

information models to capture the necessary design parameters, and (5) exploration of data schema

interoperability between building information models and several popular building analysis tools for

energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting. Part two, implementation and testing, consists of two stages:

(1) incorporation of energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting modeling into proposed MDA processes

and (2) process integration and automation. We also will measure the effectiveness of each of our

proposed interventions to current practice and document detailed comparison studies. We describe all of

the stages in detail below.

2.4.1 Development of our Framework

Relying on work done within the areas of systems engineering, workflow management and AEC we will

continue to expand our framework to measure methodology effectiveness (see Figure 2-1) to precisely

characterize the challenges faced by teams of multidisciplinary professionals on AEC projects. In addition

to using this framework to assess the methodologies we will implement as part of this proposal,

methodologies found within AE and parallel industry and academia will be speculatively evaluated within

our framework. These speculative predictions will be used to propose future work and formulate specific

problems that address challenges faced within AE design.

2.4.2 Evaluation of Current MDA Process

We will analyze the current MDA process used by the leading mechanical design firm Taylor

Engineering. Taylor Engineering is nationally recognized as one of the most progressive energy efficient

and sustainable mechanical design firms in the country. In particular, their process will be evaluated in the

context of the Stanford Green Dorm Project, for which Taylor Engineering is the mechanical design firm.

The Green Dorm is an ideal case study for this research since design goals in energy, thermal comfort,

and daylighting will all be considered. We will work close with Allan Daly, a principal at Taylor and the

current project manager on the Green Dorm project, and the current lecturer for CEE256-Building

Systems, as well as other Taylor Engineering principals. Their MDA process applied to several other on-



11/15


going projects will be evaluated as well. In addition to the analysis-based components of their MDA

process, we will document and analyze additional important parameters such as the appropriate

coordination, feedback, and decision-making loops that must take place to ensure the project meets its

sustainable design goals. A second MDA process evaluation will then be implemented on one of the

several Stanford University projects slated to begin the feasibility/conceptual design phase later next year.

2.4.3 Identify Critical Conceptual Design Parameters and Parametric Relationshipsfor Energy, Thermal Comfort, and Daylighting Design

We will evaluate the critical design parameters and their parametric relationships for energy, thermal

comfort, and daylighting analysis using 4 methods to assure generality. As described above, we will

observe and consult with a leading mechanical design firm, Taylor Engineering, on the important

conceptual design phase parameters that must be considered for efficient design of energy, thermal

comfort, and daylighting. Second, we will work with the energy consulting firm KEMA/Xenergy, a leader

in both existing building and new construction building thermal performance, on similar issues. Third, we

will consult with a leading Title 24/energy/Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)

consulting firm in the San Diego area, Brummitt Energy Associates, which has extensive experience in

energy and daylighting design. Benjamin Welle, the research staff for this project, worked as an energy

engineer at KEMA/Xenergy for 5 years and has also assisted Brummitt Energy Associates on severalLEED projects. Finally, we will evaluate current published research and design principals in these three

areas.

2.4.4 Incorporate BIM and Energy, Thermal Comfort, and Daylighting Analyses into

MDA Process

Though the Green Dorm Project will be used as a case study for documenting a current MDA process, we

shall start to apply new strategies to the project concurrently. Multiple building information models of the

Stanford Green Dorm will be constructed in Autodesk Revit, Bentley Architecture, and Graphisofts

ArchiCAD and evaluated as to how the added functionality of the models and the appropriate building

analyses could be integrated into the process and design iterations of Taylor Engineering to support the

projects goals. Multiple design options will be generated and evaluated using the BIM applications and

the appropriate building analysis tools. The BIM models created for Green Dorm project will be analyzed

to identify weaknesses and limitations of the current BIM tools in capturing and utilizing the required

design parameters needed for analysis and solutions will be proposed. Our proposed process path will

then be implemented on one of the several Stanford University projects slated to begin the

feasibility/conceptual design phase later next year.

2.4.5 Research Potential of BIM to Capture the Necessary Design Parameters

We will evaluate the potential of the three most popular building information models, Autodesk Revit,

Bentley Architecture, and Graphisofts ArchiCAD to capture and utilize the appropriate design

parameters needed to meet energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting sustainable design goals. We will

work closely with the United States General Services Administrations (GSA) Office of the Chief

Architects (OCA) National 3D-4D-BIM Program on this task. Benjamin Welle is currently a CIFE

Visiting Fellow at the GSA OCAs National 3D-4D-BIM Program. Unparalleled access to case studies,

BIM software vendors, and GSA project team members is available to our project team through our

relationship with the OCAs 3D-4D-BIM Program Manager, Calvin Kam, Ph.D., a former Stanford CIFE

student. We will also leverage working relationships with Integrated Environmental Solutions (IES), a

leading software developer of integrated energy, CFD, and daylighting applications. IES has recently

joined teams with Autodesk in integrating the leading BIM application, Autodesk Revit, with their suite



12/15


of building analysis tools. Benjamin Welle has a strong working relationship with Chiensi Harriman, the

West Coast Technical Manager for IES and a former Stanford student. With a primary goal of application

integration and interoperability and being a leader in that field, the opportunity to work with IES will

greatly contribute to our research efforts. The Autodesk Revit product development and management

team has also recently expressed interest in collaborating in our research.

2.4.6 Explore Data Schema Interoperability

The directed interviews described above, as well as collaboration with the GSA and IES, will be used to

identify the existing structure and format of IFC and XML information that is exchanged on the selected

projects. Benjamin is in the process of developing the GSAs BIM Guide Series 05-Energy Performance

and Operations. His research is focused on the interoperability of BIM models with energy, thermal

comfort, and daylighting analysis tools. He is working with vendors, national and international AE firms

and organizations, and other BIM industry leaders in the development of BIM Guide Series 05, and this

research will be leveraged for the purposes of our research. He will work closely with the IAI (in

particular with their buildingSMART initiative projects, such as the Information Delivery Manual (IDM)

methodologies), the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS), the Construction Specification

Institute (CSI), and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). This research will be

coupled with literature review of data schemas currently researched in the AEC and parallel industries.This information will be studied to recommend an existing or infer a new data schema to facilitate

interoperability. We will then specify the format and structure of information to be exchanged for theselected projects, establishing information transfer protocols between building information models and

building analysis tools for energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting.

2.4.7 Process Integration and Automation

Two stages will be considered for this second phase. The first stage entails automating the data extraction

from the created building information models for use within the selected building analysis software tools.

Such process integration will enable designers to quickly understand the multidisciplinary performance of

a particular design, and to manually generate design modifications to understand their impacts. The

second stage involves using commercial PIDO software to automate the modeling and analyses portionsof the MDA processes. The parametric relationship research will be used to generate design options, and

we will evaluate the effectiveness of the optimization algorithms used in the PIDO software for thermal

performance design. An exploration of the design space will be conducted with resulting design

performance improvements documented. This research will be conducted for both the Green Dorm

project, and a second selected case study.

2.5 RESEARCH IMPACT

2.5.1 Contribution to Research

The proposed research will document the critical design parameters and parametric relationships that

must be considered in the effective design of energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting systems during theconceptual design phase. The research will specify how to implement the process and analysis

methodologies, building information modeling, and building analysis tools in support of sustainable

design goals in energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting. Automated discipline analysis and

multidisciplinary optimization (MDO) will be performed. We will provide a framework and

measurements to scientifically assess the proposed methodologies compared to current AEC practice

using time and number of design and analysis iterations as the units of analysis. This research will lead to



13/15


an improved understanding of both the current AEC design process and a methodology that engages the

important stakeholders, technologies, and information in that process.

2.5.2 Contribution to Professional Practice

The goal of this research is to reduce the amount of time required to generate and evaluate a design option

in the area of energy, thermal comfort, and daylighting using model-based methods. A methodology willbe developed that architects and engineers may use to reduce the simulation cycle time, and to formally

investigate many more design alternatives within a given project timeline. This work will improve

building performance in terms of initial cost, sustainability, and overall quality.

Figure 2-5

PIDO Integration with Energy, Thermal Comfort, and Daylighting Analysis Tools

Figure 2-5: This figure represents a vision of how all of these methods could be integrated into a collaborativemethodology. The enhanced execution, visualization, and communication of the project teams analyses willallow for improved decision-making and, ultimately, better buildings.

2.6 REFERENCES

Flager, F., Haymaker, J. (2007). A Comparison of Multidisciplinary Design, Analysis and Optimization

Processes in the Building Construction and Aerospace Industries. EG-ICE conference in Maribor,

Slovenia, June 27-29.

Haymaker, J., et. al. (2004). Engineering test cases to motivate the formalization of an AEC project

model as a directed acyclic graph of views and dependencies, ITcon Vol. 9.



14/15


2.7 SCHEDULE,DELIVERABLES, AND BUDGET

2.7.1 Schedule and Deliverables

Deliverables for both case studies include, but not limited to:

Narratives (process diagrams): We will develop detailed Narratives to document the people, tools,

reasoning, information used, and information constructed at each step in the process.

Measurement of current MDA practice: Documented framework together with data representing

our findings of challenges within current MDA practice.

A survey of effective approaches for interoperability compatible with considered processes. The

survey will document advantages and disadvantages of the approaches reviewed.

A comprehensive evaluation of the current state of BIM design tools as applied to our research

and a roadmap of recommended software modifications to resolve the identified weaknesses.

A non-automated but integrated process simulating project team design generation and analysis

tasks with the intervention of BIM technology and our chosen data schema approach, followed by

an integrated and automated process simulating the project team design generation and analysis

tasks.

A comprehensive report detailing the critical design parameters and parametric relationships forenergy, thermal comfort, and daylighting conceptual design, the methodology for determining

those factors, and how that information should be integrated with the BIM and PIDO

applications.

Acomprehensive report documenting the results of all 8 quarters of research, including a

comparison of methodology impacts between the two case studies.



15/15


2.7.2 Budget

Project: CEE-FY08-510 Haymake Proposal to PIEEDepartment: Civil EngineeringPrincipal Investigator: HAYMAKER, JOHN (Asst Prof) - CEAdministrator: S. Bergman

All Periods01/01/08 - 12/31/09

% Amount % Amount Total AmountHaymaker, John (Asst Prof) acad 0 0

smm 0 0 0 0Graduate Students

2008, RA Pre-Quals, GRAD (Res Asst) acad 50 21,980 50 22,639 44,619smm

0

50 7,254 50 7,472 14,726Other Staff

Programmer, to be named (Programmer) cal 15 12,120 15 12,484 24,604Total Salaries 41,354 42,595 83,949

BenefitsGraduate 1,111 1,144 2,255Staff 3,600 3,708 7,308

Total Salaries and Benefits 46,065 47,447 93,512Travel, Domestic

Travel 5,000 5,000 10,000Capital Equipment

1 computer 5,000 5,000TuitionStudent Tuition 21,113 21,958 43,071

Total Direct Costs 77,178 74,405 151,583Modified Total Direct Costs 51,065 52,447 103,512University IDC CostsTotal IDC CostsAnnual Amount Requested 77,178 74,405 151,583

Rates Used in Budget CalculationsBenefit RatesGraduate: UFY08 03.80%; UFY09 03.80%; UFY10 03.80%;Staff: UFY08 29.70%; UFY09 29.70%; UFY10 29.70%;Indirect Cost RateSpecial Rate: UFY08 00.00%; UFY09 00.00%; UFY10 00.00%;

Proposal Budget

Period 1 Period 21/01/08 - 12/31/200 01/01/09 - 12/31/2009


Documents

PIEE CIFE Proposal Haymaker Welle