Volume 13, Issue 1 (2023)
Naqshejahan 2023, 13(1): 48-68 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Sotodeh S, Ghobadian V. Elaboration of an intervention framework and the contemporization of Karaj Iron Foundry based on the DGNB sustainability ranking system. Naqshejahan 2023; 13 (1) :48-68
URL: http://bsnt.modares.ac.ir/article-2-65141-en.html
URL: http://bsnt.modares.ac.ir/article-2-65141-en.html
1- PhD Student, Department of Architecture, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad university, Tehran, Iran
2- Associate Professor, Departmentof Architecture, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran , vah.qobadiyan@iauctb.ac.ir
2- Associate Professor, Departmentof Architecture, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran , vah.qobadiyan@iauctb.ac.ir
Abstract: (1570 Views)
Aims: Sustainability assessment systems are an important tool for measuring and managing actions taken in architectural works. The main goal of the research is to measure the efficiency of the DGNB system in management and programming the architectural interventions in the Karaj Iron Foundry.
Methods: descriptive-analytical research method is adopted in the article. The method of data collection is archieve documentary. the Karaj Iron Foundry as a shared heritage of Iran and Germany is selected as case study of the reserch. The monument was built by famous German, Austrian, Italian, Swiss, etc. architects between World War I and World War II, and it is worth considering as a world heritage site.
Findings: The findings of the research in the Karaj Iron Foundry based on the DGNB system indicate that the environmental quality with 20% influence on the sustainability is in the first place, the economic quality is in the second place with 17.9%, and the social quality is in the second place. Cultural and functional quality with 16.7% stand in third place, technological quality with 15.3% stands in fourth place, process quality with 15.2% stands in fifth place and finally site quality with 15% stands in sixth place.
Conclusion: The results indicate the efficiency of the DGNB rating system in programming an action framework for the Karaj Iron Foundry. Therefore, it is possible to recommend the adoption of this sustainability evaluation system in managing the action process in other valuable works of contemporary heritage and industrial architectural heritage.
Methods: descriptive-analytical research method is adopted in the article. The method of data collection is archieve documentary. the Karaj Iron Foundry as a shared heritage of Iran and Germany is selected as case study of the reserch. The monument was built by famous German, Austrian, Italian, Swiss, etc. architects between World War I and World War II, and it is worth considering as a world heritage site.
Findings: The findings of the research in the Karaj Iron Foundry based on the DGNB system indicate that the environmental quality with 20% influence on the sustainability is in the first place, the economic quality is in the second place with 17.9%, and the social quality is in the second place. Cultural and functional quality with 16.7% stand in third place, technological quality with 15.3% stands in fourth place, process quality with 15.2% stands in fifth place and finally site quality with 15% stands in sixth place.
Conclusion: The results indicate the efficiency of the DGNB rating system in programming an action framework for the Karaj Iron Foundry. Therefore, it is possible to recommend the adoption of this sustainability evaluation system in managing the action process in other valuable works of contemporary heritage and industrial architectural heritage.
Keywords: Sustainability, DGNB sustainability assessment system, industrial heritage, shared heritage of Iran and Germany, contemporization, new technologies, contemporary architecture of Iran, Karaj Iron Foundry
Article Type: Original Research |
Subject:
Highperformance Architecture
Received: 2022/10/1 | Accepted: 2022/12/22 | Published: 2023/03/25
Received: 2022/10/1 | Accepted: 2022/12/22 | Published: 2023/03/25
References
1. Ismaeel W S E, Adel Elsayed M. Sustainable sites in two generations of city development using GIS-MCDM and LEED LT and SS categories. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2022, 330 (1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129782 [Article] [DOI]
2. Ciumasu IM. (2013). Dynamic decision trees for building resilience into future eco-cities. Technological Forecasting & Social Change. 80(9), 1804–1814. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2012.12.010 [Article] [DOI]
3. Elias Bibri S. Data-driven smart sustainable cities of the future: An evidence synthesis approach to a comprehensive state-of-the-art literature review. Sustainable Futures. 2021, 3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2021.100047 [Article] [DOI]
4. Adams K, Osmani M, Thorpe, A. Thornback J. Circular Economy in Construction: Current Awareness. Challenges and Enablers. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1680/jwarm.16.00011 [Article] [DOI]
5. Gerv´asio, H., Sim˜oes da Silva, L. A probabilistic decision-making approach for the sustainable assessment of infrastructures. Expert Syst. Appl. 2012, 39, 7121–7131, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.01.032 [Article] [DOI]
6. Zafarmandi S, Mahdavinejad M. Technology of Modern Windcatchers: A Review. Int. J. Architect. Eng. Urban Plan. 2021 Jul; 31(3):1-11. https://doi.org/10.22068/ijaup.31.3.549 [Article] [DOI]
7. Altamirano-Avila A, Martínez M. Urban sustainability assessment of five Latin American cities by using SDEWES index. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2021, 287(10). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125495 [Article] [DOI]
8. Kang N, Kwak N. A multilevel approach to civic participation: Individual length of residence, neighborhood residential stability, and their interactive effects with media use. Communication Research. 2003 Feb;30(1):80-106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650202239028 [Article] [DOI]
9. Bahraini H, Izadi M S, Mofidi M. Urban renewal approaches and policies (from reconstruction to sustainable urban regeneration). Urban Studies. 2012, 9, 17-30. https://urbstudies.uok.ac.ir/article_7883.html [Article]
10. Ganobjak M, Brunner S, Wernery J. Aerogel materials for heritage buildings: Materials, properties and case studies, Journal of Cultural Heritage, 2019, 42, 81-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2019.09.007 [Article] [DOI]
11. Benites A J, Simões A F. Assessing the urban sustainable development strategy: An application of a smart city services sustainability taxonomy. Ecological Indicators. 2021, 127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107734 [Article] [DOI]
12. Carroon J. Sustainable preservation: Greening existing buildings. John Wiley & Sons, 2010. DOI: 978-0470169117. Available from: https://thegbi.org/green-globes-certification/why-green-globes/compare?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI8-7ntPjI-wIVS4CDBx1x8gcWEAAYASAAEgKRyfD_BwE [Article]
13. Elabd N M, Mansour L Y M, Khodier M. Utilizing innovative technologies to achieve resilience in heritage buildings preservation. Developments in the Built Environment. 2021, 8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dibe.2021.100058 [Article] [DOI]
14. Figueiredo R, Romão X, Paupério E. Component-based flood vulnerability modelling for cultural heritage buildings. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 61, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102323 [DOI]
15. Masud-All-Kamal M, Nursey-Bray M, Monirul Hassan S M. Challenges to building social capital through planned adaptation: Evidence from rural communities in Bangladesh. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability. 2021, 3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2021.100091 [Article] [DOI]
16. Firouzbakht A, Parhizkar A, Rabieifar WA. Strategies of the environmental structure of the city with the approach of sustainable urban development (case study: Karaj city). Human Geography Research. 2011, 213-239. http://ensani.ir/file/download/article/20160106150558-10012-45.pdf [Article]
17. Narayanan A, Jenamani M, Mahanty B. Determinants of sustainability and prosperity in Indian cities. Habitat International. 2021, 118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2021.102456 [Article] [DOI]
18. Haapio A, Viitaniemi P. A critical review of building environmental assessment tools. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2008, 28, 469–482, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2008.01.002 [Article] [DOI]
19. Qobadian V, Behineh M. Sustainable Architecture, Journal of Architecture and Construction, No. 39. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1531-314X.2007.00104.x [Article] [DOI]
20. Han Y, Mozumder P. Building-level adaptation analysis under uncertain sea-level rise. Climate Risk Management. 2021, 32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2021.100305 [Article] [DOI]
21. Liu S, Li Z, Teng Y, Dai L. A dynamic simulation study on the sustainability of prefabricated buildings. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2021, 18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103551 [Article] [DOI]
22. Rezaei Ghahrodi S, Mahdovinejad M J. Review and adaptation of global valuation standards for industrial architectural heritage works, restoration and architecture of Iran, 2018, 9(17), 21-37. http://mmi.aui.ac.ir/article-1-526-fa.html [Article]
23. Lu Y, Wu Z, Chang R, Li Y. Building information modeling (BIM) for green buildings: a critical review and future directions. Autom. Constr. 2017, 83, 134–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.08.024 [Article] [DOI]
24. Torabi M, Mahdavinejad M. Past and Future Trends on the Effects of Occupant Behaviour on Building Energy Consumption. J. Sustain. Archit. Civ. Eng. 2021 Oct 27;29(2) 83-101. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.sace.29.2.28576 [Article] [DOI]
25. Rees WE. Is 'Sustainable City' an Oxymoron?, Local Environment, 1997, 2 (3), 303-310. DOI: 10.1080/13549839708725535 [Article]
26. Martínez de Estarrona U, Seneviratne D, Villarejo R, Galar D. The New Asset Management: Implications of Servitization in Circular Economy. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management Science. 2018, 1. https://doi.org/10.13052/jiems2446-1822.2018.006 [Article] [DOI]
27. Talaei M, Mahdavinejad M, Azari R, Prieto A, Sangin H. Multi-objective optimization of building-integrated microalgae photobioreactors for energy and daylighting performance. Journal of Building Engineering. 2021 Jun 5:102832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102832 [Article] [DOI]
28. Shaeri J, Mahdavinejad M. Prediction Indoor Thermal Comfort in Traditional Houses of Shiraz with PMV/PPD model. International Journal of Ambient Energy. 2022 Dec 31;43(1):8316-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/01430750.2022.2092774 [Article] [DOI]
29. Sardaro R, La Sala P, De Pascale G, Faccilongo N. The conservation of cultural heritage in rural areas: Stakeholder preferences regarding historical rural buildings in Apulia, southern Italy. Land Use Policy. 2021, 109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105662 [Article] [DOI]
30. Saadatjoo P, Mahdavinejad M, Zhang G, Vali K. Influence of permeability ratio on wind-driven ventilation and cooling load of mid-rise buildings. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2021 Jul 1;70:102894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.102894 [Article] [DOI]
31. Rahbar M, Mahdavinejad M, Markazi A.H.D., Bemanian M. Architectural layout design through deep learning and agent-based modeling: A hybrid approach. Journal of Building Engineering. 2022 April15; 47, 103822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103822 [Article] [DOI]
32. Ragheb A, Aly R, Ghada A. Toward sustainable urban development of historical cities: Case study of Fouh City, Egypt. Ain Shams Engineering Journal. 2021, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2021.06.006 [Article] [DOI]
33. Rock M, Hollberg A, Habert G, Passer A. LCA and BIM: visualization of environmental potentials in building construction at early design stages, Build. Environ. 2018, 140, 153–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.05.006 [Article] [DOI]
34. Shahi S, Esnaashary Esfahani M, Bachmann C, Haas C. A definition framework for building adaptation projects. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2020, 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102345 [Article] [DOI]
35. Roshanfekr S, Tawil N M, Ani A I, Goh N A, Hamzah N A. Framework Studies of Sustainable Eco Urban space. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology. 2013, 5(11), 3079-3082.
36. Rahbar M, Mahdavinejad M, Markazi A.H.D., Bemanian M. Architectural layout design through deep learning and agent-based modeling: A hybrid approach. Journal of Building Engineering. 2022 April15; 47, 103822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103822 [Article] [DOI]
37. Van Dijk M P. Beijing and Rotterdam Eco Cities? Using 100 Criteria for a Classification of Ecological Cities Paper. Knowledge Collaboration & Learning for Sustainable Innovation ERSCP-EMSU conference, Delft, The Netherlands, 2010, 25-29. http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:9aad21d5-b2c0-42fd-924a-8351c05becc1 [Article]
38. Schraven D, Joss S, de Jong M. Past, present, future: Engagement with sustainable urban development through 35 city labels in the scientific literature 1990–2019. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2021, 10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.125924 [Article] [DOI]
39. Yildirim M, Turan G. Sustainable development in historic areas: Adaptive reuse challenges in traditional houses in Sanliurfa, Turkey. Habitat International. 2012, 36(4), 493–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2012.05.005 [Article] [DOI]
40. Sarmadi H, Mahdavinejad M. A designerly approach to Algae-based large open office curtain wall Façades to integrated visual comfort and daylight efficiency. Solar Energy. 2023 Feb 1;251:350-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2023.01.021 [Article] [DOI]
41. Visualizing interdependencies among sustainability criteria to support multicriteria decision-making processes in building design. Proc. CIRP. 2018, 69, 200–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.11.115 [Article] [DOI]
42. Wieser AA, Scherz M, Maier S, Passer A, Kreiner, H. Implementation of sustainable development goals in construction industry - a systemic consideration of synergies and trade-offs. IOP Conf. Ser. 2019, 323, 1–12. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/323/1/012177 [Article]
43. Subiza-Pérez M, Pasanen T, Ratcliffe E, Lee K, Bornioli A, de Bloom J, Korpelad K. Exploring psychological restoration in favorite indoor and outdoor urban places using a top-down perspective. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 78. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101706 [Article] [DOI]
44. Torres-González M, Prieto A J, Alejandre FJ, Blasco-Lópeza FJ. Digital management focused on the preventive maintenance of World Heritage Sites, Automation in Construction, 2021, 129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103813 [Article] [DOI]
45. Yung E H K, Chan E H W. Implementation challenges to the adaptive reuse of heritage buildings: Towards the goals of sustainable, low carbon cities. Habitat International. 2012, 36(3), 352-361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2011.11.001 [Article] [DOI]
46. Van Dijk M P. Beijing and Rotterdam Eco Cities? Using 100 Criteria for a Classification of Ecological Cities Paper. Knowledge Collaboration & Learning for Sustainable Innovation ERSCP-EMSU conference, Delft, The Netherlands; 2010, October 25-29. http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:9aad21d5-b2c0-42fd-924a-8351c05becc1 [Article]
47. World Commission on Environment and Development, Brundtland, 1987. Available at: https://idl-bnc-idrc.dspacedirect.org/bitstream/handle/10625/152/WCED_v17_doc149.pdf [Article]
48. DGNB, Kriterienübersicht für Neubau Büro- und Verwaltungsgebäude [Kriterienübersicht für Neubau Büround Verwaltungsgebäude]. 2020. Available at: https://www.bnb-nachhaltigesbauen.de/fileadmin/publikationen/broschuere-nb-2017_barrierefrei.pdf [Article]
49. Elefante C. The greenest building is... one that is already built. InForum Journal 2007 (Vol. 21, No. 4, p. 26). National Trust for Historic Preservation. Available at: https://www.serfgreen.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Download-Cooley-Tampa-bay-Profile-PDF.pdf [Article]
50. Conejos Sh. Designing for future building adaptive reuse using adaptSTAR. International Conference on Sustainable Urbanization. 2010, 1-10. http://epublications.bond.edu.au/sustainable_development/41 [Article]
51. Berthold É, Juste R, Georges AT. Using Sustainability Indicators for Urban Heritage Management: A Review of 25 Case Studies. Int. J. of Heritage and Sustainable Developmen. 2014, 4, 23-34. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Etienne-Berthold-2/publication/312121367_Using_sustainability_indicators_for_Urban_Heritage_Management_A_review_of_25_case_studies/links/58700c0408ae8fce491df012/Using-sustainability-indicators-for-Urban-Heritage-Management-A-review-of-25-case-studies.pdf [Article]
52. McDonald S, Naglis M, Vida M. Urban Regeneration for Sustainable Communities: A Case Study. Baltic Journal on Sustainability. 2009, 15 (1), 49-59. https://doi.org/10.3846/1392-8619.2009.15.49-59 [Article] [DOI]
53. Pomponi F, Moncaster A. Embodied Carbon Mitigation and Reduction in the Built Environment–What Does the Evidence Say? Journal of Environmental Management. 2016, 181, 687–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.08.036 [Article] [DOI]
54. Debacker W, Saskia M. D1 Synthesis of the State-of-the-Art. Key barriers and opportunities for Materials Passports and Reversible Design in the current system. 2016. http://www.bamb2020.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/D1_Synthesis-report-on-State-of-the-art_20161129_FINAL.pdf [Article]
55. Aytac DO, Arslan TV, Durak S. Adaptive Reuse as a Strategy toward Urban Resilience. European Journal of Sustainable Development. 2016, 5(4), 523–32. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2016.v5n4p523 [Article] [DOI]
56. Munarim U, Enedir G. Environmental Feasibility of Heritage Buildings Rehabilitation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2016, 58: 235–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.334 [Article] [DOI]
57. Heidrich O, Kamara J, Maltese S, Cecconi FR, Dejaco MC. A critical review of the developments in building adaptability. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation. 2017, 35.4: 284–303. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBPA-03-2017-0018 [Article] [DOI]
58. Kubbinga B, Fischer A. Achterberg E, Ramkumar S, De Wit M, Van Heel P, Van Amerongen B, Buijs M, Brekelmans H. A Future Proof Built Environment. Netherlands: Circle Economy and ABN AMRO, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103656 [Article] [DOI]
59. Ghisellini P, Maddalena R, Sergio U. Exploring environmental and economic costs and benefits of a circular economy approach to the construction and demolition sector. A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018, 178: 618–643. https://pubag.nal.usda.gov/catalog/6346871 [Article]
60. Shahbazi M, Yeganeh M, Bamanian M. Meta-analysis of environmental vitality factors in open spaces. Motaleate Shahri. 2020, 9(34), 61-76. https://www.sid.ir/en/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=830830 [Article]
61. Afsahhosseini F, Zabihi H, Jahanshahloo L. Causative Investigating the Infrastructure of Tourism and Location Competitiveness of Tourism Destination in Arid Regions, Case Study: Maranjab Desert. Urban Tourism Quarterly, 2019;6(3): 125-139. https://doi.org/10.22059/jut.2019.259703.496 [Article] [DOI]
62. Rahbar M, Mahdavinejad M, Bemanian M, Davaie Markazi AH, Hovestadt L. Generating Synthetic Space Allocation Probability Layouts Based on Trained Conditional-GANs. Applied Artificial Intelligence. 2019 Jul 3;33(8):689-705. https://doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2019.1592919 [Article] [DOI]
63. Fardpour S. Confrontation and interaction of semantic authenticity and modern building materials in today's Iranian architectural works. Naqshejahan - Basic Studies and New Technologies of Architecture and Planning. 2022;12(3):42-62. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.23224991.1401.12.3.7.1
64. Alilou M, Mahdavinejad M. The Effect of CCT on Vitality and Population Absorption in Urban Area: Case Study of the Safavi Bridge Urban Area in Karaj, Iran. Light & Engineering (Svetotekhnika), Moscow. 2022 Sep 1;30(5): 81-91. Available at: https://l-e-journal.com/en/journals/light-engineering-30-5/light-engineering-30-5-2022-paper-version/ [Article]
65. Bahramipanah A, Kia A. Quranic Interpretation of Holy Light Idea in Islamic and Iranian Architecture of Safavid Era. Naqshejahan - Basic Studies and New Technologies of Architecture and Planning. 2020 Dec 10;10(4):287-293. [Persian] https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.23224991.1399.10.4.7.9 [Article]
66. Shaeri J, Mahdavinejad M. Prediction Indoor Thermal Comfort in Traditional Houses of Shiraz with PMV/PPD model. International Journal of Ambient Energy. 2022 Jun 21. https://doi.org/10.1080/01430750.2022.2092774 [Article] [DOI]
67. Diba D. Contemporary architecture of Iran. Architectural Design. 2012 May;82(3):70-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1406 [Article] [DOI]
68. Mahdavinejad M, Hosseini SA. Data mining and content analysis of the jury citations of the Pritzker Architecture prize (1977–2017). Journal of Architecture and Urbanism. 2019 Feb 1;43(1):71-90. https://doi.org/10.3846/jau.2019.5209 [Article] [DOI]
69. Eslamirad N, Kolbadinejad SM, Mahdavinejad M, Mehranrad M. Thermal comfort prediction by applying supervised machine learning in green sidewalks of Tehran. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment. 2020 Apr 28; 9(4):361-374. https://doi.org/10.1108/SASBE-03-2019-0028 [Article] [DOI]
70. Andersen R, Jensen LB, Ryberg M. Using digitized public accessible building data to assess the renovation potential of existing building stock in a sustainable urban perspective. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2021 Dec 1;75:103303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103303 [Article] [DOI]
71. Talaei M, Mahdavinejad M, Azari R, Prieto A, Sangin H. Multi-objective optimization of building-integrated microalgae photobioreactors for energy and daylighting performance. Journal of Building Engineering. 2021 Jun 5:102832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102832 [Article] [DOI]
72. Fallahtafti R, Mahdavinejad M. Window geometry impact on a room's wind comfort. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. 2021 Mar 24;28(9):2381-2410. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-01-2020-0075 [Article] [DOI]
73. Goharian A, Mahdavinejad M. A novel approach to multi-apertures and multi-aspects ratio light pipe. Journal of Daylighting. 2020 Sep 16;7(2):186-200. https://doi.org/10.15627/jd.2020.17 [Article] [DOI]
74. Goharian A, Mahdavinejad M, Bemanian M, Daneshjoo K. Designerly optimization of devices (as reflectors) to improve daylight and scrutiny of the light-well’s configuration. Building Simulation. 2021 Oct 9 (pp. 1-24). Tsinghua University Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-021-0839-y [Article] [DOI]
75. Talaei M, Mahdavinejad M, Azari R, Haghighi HM, Atashdast A. Thermal and energy performance of a user-responsive microalgae bioreactive façade for climate adaptability. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments. 2022 Aug 1;52:101894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.101894 [Article] [DOI]
76. Hadianpour M, Mahdavinejad M, Bemanian M, Haghshenas M, Kordjamshidi M. Effects of windward and leeward wind directions on outdoor thermal and wind sensation in Tehran. Building and Environment. 2019 Mar 1;150:164-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.12.053 [Article] [DOI]
77. Jiménez-Pulido C, Jiménez-Rivero A, García-Navarro J. Improved sustainability certification systems to respond to building renovation challenges based on a literature review. Journal of Building Engineering. 2022 Jan 1;45:103575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103575 [Article] [DOI]
78. Diba D. L'Iran et l'architecture contemporaine. Mimar (Singapore). 1991;38:20-25. [French] Available at: francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=19648743 [Article]
79. Hadianpour M, Mahdavinejad M, Bemanian M, Nasrollahi F. Seasonal differences of subjective thermal sensation and neutral temperature in an outdoor shaded space in Tehran, Iran. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2018 May 1; 39: 751-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.03.003 [Article] [DOI]
80. Rahbar M, Mahdavinejad M, Markazi A.H.D., Bemanian M. Architectural layout design through deep learning and agent-based modeling: A hybrid approach. Journal of Building Engineering. 2022 April15; 47, 103822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103822 [Article] [DOI]
81. Shaeri J, Mahdavinejad M, Pourghasemian MH. A new design to create natural ventilation in buildings: Wind chimney. Journal of Building Engineering. 2022 Aug 22:105041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.105041 [Article] [DOI]
82. Del Rosario P, Palumbo E, Traverso M. Environmental Product Declarations as Data Source for the Environmental Assessment of Buildings in the Context of Level (s) and DGNB: How Feasible Is Their Adoption?. Sustainability. 2021 Jan;13(11):6143. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116143 [Article] [DOI]
83. Cao C. Comparative Analysis of German Dgnb and Chinese Green Building Evaluation Standards. InJournal of Physics: Conference Series 2022 Jun 1 (Vol. 2202, No. 1, p. 012033). IOP Publishing. DOI 10.1088/1742-6596/2202/1/012033 [Article] [DOI]
84. Ferreira A, Pinheiro MD, de Brito J, Mateus R. Retail Buildings' Sustainability Assessment Tools: A Critical Analysis of Leed, Breeam and Dgnb. Breeam and Dgnb. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4054414 [Article] [DOI]
85. Osmolovska O. Providing Sustainability in Big Companies: An Example of DGNB Certification. Економіка розвитку систем. 2022 Jan 31;2(1):29-32. https://doi.org/10.32782/2707-8019/2022-1-5
86. Shirzadnia Z, Goharian A, Mahdavinejad M. Designerly approach to skylight configuration based on daylight performance; Toward a novel optimization process. Energy and Buildings. 2023 Mar 11:112970. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2023.112970 [Article] [DOI]
87. Bazazzadeh H, Pilechiha P, Nadolny A, Mahdavinejad M, Hashemi Safaei SS. The Impact Assessment of Climate Change on Building Energy Consumption in Poland. Energies. 2021 July 06;14(14):4084. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en14144084 [Article] [DOI]
88. Ahmadi J, Mahdavinejad M, Larsen OK, Zhang C, Zarkesh A, Asadi S. Evaluating the different boundary conditions to simulate airflow and heat transfer in Double-Skin Facade. In Building Simulation 2022 May;15(5):799-815. Tsinghua University Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-021-0824-5 [Article] [DOI]
89. Ahmadi J, Mahdavinejad M, Asadi S. Folded double-skin façade (DSF): in-depth evaluation of fold influence on the thermal and flow performance in naturally ventilated channels. International Journal of Sustainable Energy. 2021 Jun 16:1-30. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786451.2021.1941019 [Article] [DOI]
90. Askari A, Mahdavinejad M, Ansari M. Investigation of displacement ventilation performance under various room configurations using computational fluid dynamics simulation. Building Services Engineering Research and Technology. 2022 May 7;43(5):627–643. https://doi.org/10.1177/01436244221097312 [Article] [DOI]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |