Sustainable Design Advocacy through the Workflow

Hoda Barzegar Ganji (PhD Candidate)
Kyle Talbott (Associate Professor)

Sustainability has various interpretations in architectural language. In this paper, we consider the techno-rational approach with the goal of lower environmental impact and energy consumption (Guy and Farmer, 2001). During the second half of the twentieth century, mechanically-conditioned buildings became a presumed equivalence of comfort. While there are objections with this idea, still many people assume that forced-air systems are the only option for efficiency and comfort. When we consider that building owners often incur enormous operating costs for mechanical ventilation and inhabitants usually give up personalized control of such systems, the reality rarely matches the assumption. Why don’t more people consider natural or hybrid systems? Maybe the problem is methodological. Traditionally, in pursuit of sustainable design, architects design the building volume, the siting, the shape of the envelope, and then forward it to the engineers. Engineers then define ventilation requirements and stuff it all inthe given envelope. The whole thing assumes that ventilation has no influence on building form and skin, and that engineers alone are responsible for ventilation design.

Do architecture firms still follow the same routine, or is new thinking about sustainability beginning to influence their project methodology? To answer this question, we interviewed North American architects, engineers and sustainability consultants. We studied the workflow patterns in these firms and compared the merits of each workflow. Although the traditional workflow still exists in some firms, a variety of new approaches are being developed, which question the traditional roles of architect and engineer and which facilitate a wide range of buildings with different levels of sustainability. The digital data exchange flow is also studied. New digital workflows seem to accommodate more innovative and holistic design approach.