IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i13p3302-d377303.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding Computational Methods for Solar Envelopes Based on Design Parameters, Tools, and Case Studies: A Review

Author

Listed:
  • Miktha Farid Alkadri

    (Department of Architecture and Engineering Technology, Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology, Julianalaan 134, 2628 BL Delft, The Netherlands)

  • Francesco De Luca

    (Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Tallinn University of Technology, Ehitajate tee 5, 19086 Tallinn, Estonia)

  • Michela Turrin

    (Department of Architecture and Engineering Technology, Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology, Julianalaan 134, 2628 BL Delft, The Netherlands)

  • Sevil Sariyildiz

    (Department of Architecture and Engineering Technology, Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology, Julianalaan 134, 2628 BL Delft, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The increasing population density in urban areas simultaneously impacts the trend of energy consumption in building sectors and the urban heat island (UHI) effects of urban infrastructure. Accordingly, passive design strategies to create sustainable buildings play a major role in addressing these issues, while solar envelopes prove to be a relevant concept that specifically considers the environmental performance aspects of a proposed building given their local contexts. As significant advances have been made over the past decades regarding the development and implementation of computational solar envelopes, this study presents a comprehensive review of solar envelopes while specifically taking into account design parameters, digital tools, and the implementation of case studies in various contextual settings. This extensive review is conducted in several stages. First, an investigation of the scope and procedural steps of the review is conducted to frame the boundary of the topic to be analyzed within the conceptual framework of solar envelopes. Second, comparative analyses between categorized design methods in parallel with a database of design parameters are conducted, followed by an in-depth discussion of the criteria for the digital tools and case studies extracted from the selected references. Third, knowledge gaps are identified, and the future development of solar envelopes is discussed to complete the review. This study ultimately provides an inclusive understanding for designers and architects regarding the progressive methods of the development of solar envelopes during the conceptual design stage.

Suggested Citation

  • Miktha Farid Alkadri & Francesco De Luca & Michela Turrin & Sevil Sariyildiz, 2020. "Understanding Computational Methods for Solar Envelopes Based on Design Parameters, Tools, and Case Studies: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-24, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:13:p:3302-:d:377303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/13/3302/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/13/3302/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Freitas, S. & Catita, C. & Redweik, P. & Brito, M.C., 2015. "Modelling solar potential in the urban environment: State-of-the-art review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 915-931.
    2. Albert Ping Chuen Chan & Amos Darko & Ernest Effah Ameyaw, 2017. "Strategies for Promoting Green Building Technologies Adoption in the Construction Industry—An International Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-18, June.
    3. Littlefair, Paul, 1998. "Passive solar urban design : ensuring the penetration of solar energy into the city," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 303-326, September.
    4. Koester, Robert J., 1994. "The Fundamentals of Integrating “the commons”: Application as community tissue or urban implant," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 5(5), pages 1015-1020.
    5. Ralegaonkar, Rahul V. & Gupta, Rajiv, 2010. "Review of intelligent building construction: A passive solar architecture approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(8), pages 2238-2242, October.
    6. Martín-Martín, Alberto & Orduna-Malea, Enrique & Thelwall, Mike & Delgado López-Cózar, Emilio, 2018. "Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1160-1177.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hasan, Javeriya & Horvat, Miljana, 2023. "Spatial parameters and methodological approaches in solar potential assessment - State-of-the-art," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    2. Borge-Diez, David & Icaza, Daniel & Açıkkalp, Emin & Amaris, Hortensia, 2021. "Combined vehicle to building (V2B) and vehicle to home (V2H) strategy to increase electric vehicle market share," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nasrollahi, Nazanin & Shokri, Elham, 2016. "Daylight illuminance in urban environments for visual comfort and energy performance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 861-874.
    2. Formolli, M. & Kleiven, T. & Lobaccaro, G., 2023. "Assessing solar energy accessibility at high latitudes: A systematic review of urban spatial domains, metrics, and parameters," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    3. Chen, Xi & Yang, Hongxing & Lu, Lin, 2015. "A comprehensive review on passive design approaches in green building rating tools," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 1425-1436.
    4. Pacheco, R. & Ordóñez, J. & Martínez, G., 2012. "Energy efficient design of building: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 3559-3573.
    5. Vrînceanu, Alexandra & Dumitrașcu, Monica & Kucsicsa, Gheorghe, 2022. "Site suitability for photovoltaic farms and current investment in Romania," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 320-330.
    6. David Jancsics & Salvador Espinosa & Jonathan Carlos, 2023. "Organizational noncompliance: an interdisciplinary review of social and organizational factors," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 1273-1301, September.
    7. Jingqi Gao & Xiang Wu & Xiaowei Luo & Shukai Guan, 2021. "Scientometric Analysis of Safety Sign Research: 1990–2019," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-15, January.
    8. Cristina Robledo-Ardila & Juan Pablo Román-Calderón, 2022. "Potential: in search for meaning, theory and avenues for future research a systematic review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 149-186, February.
    9. Vivek Kumar Singh & Prashasti Singh & Mousumi Karmakar & Jacqueline Leta & Philipp Mayr, 2021. "The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5113-5142, June.
    10. Zhixin Zhang & Min Chen & Teng Zhong & Rui Zhu & Zhen Qian & Fan Zhang & Yue Yang & Kai Zhang & Paolo Santi & Kaicun Wang & Yingxia Pu & Lixin Tian & Guonian Lü & Jinyue Yan, 2023. "Carbon mitigation potential afforded by rooftop photovoltaic in China," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, December.
    11. Zhikun Ding & Rongsheng Liu & Zongjie Li & Cheng Fan, 2020. "A Thematic Network-Based Methodology for the Research Trend Identification in Building Energy Management," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-33, September.
    12. Gonzalo Wandosell & María C. Parra-Meroño & Alfredo Alcayde & Raúl Baños, 2021. "Green Packaging from Consumer and Business Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.
    13. Finn, Thomas & McKenzie, Paul, 2020. "A high-resolution suitability index for solar farm location in complex landscapes," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 520-533.
    14. Pantea Kamrani & Isabelle Dorsch & Wolfgang G. Stock, 2021. "Do researchers know what the h-index is? And how do they estimate its importance?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5489-5508, July.
    15. Perez-Vega, Rodrigo & Hopkinson, Paul & Singhal, Aishwarya & Mariani, Marcello M., 2022. "From CRM to social CRM: A bibliometric review and research agenda for consumer research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1-16.
    16. Jamil, Basharat & Akhtar, Naiem, 2017. "Comparison of empirical models to estimate monthly mean diffuse solar radiation from measured data: Case study for humid-subtropical climatic region of India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1326-1342.
    17. Fuster-Palop, Enrique & Prades-Gil, Carlos & Masip, X. & Viana-Fons, Joan D. & Payá, Jorge, 2021. "Innovative regression-based methodology to assess the techno-economic performance of photovoltaic installations in urban areas," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    18. Hussain, C.M. Iftekhar & Norton, Brian & Duffy, Aidan, 2017. "Technological assessment of different solar-biomass systems for hybrid power generation in Europe," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P2), pages 1115-1129.
    19. Zoltán Krajcsák, 2021. "Researcher Performance in Scopus Articles ( RPSA ) as a New Scientometric Model of Scientific Output: Tested in Business Area of V4 Countries," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-23, October.
    20. Tianlong Yu & Hao Yang & Xiaowei Luo & Yifeng Jiang & Xiang Wu & Jingqi Gao, 2021. "Scientometric Analysis of Disaster Risk Perception: 2000–2020," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-19, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:13:p:3302-:d:377303. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.