Dealing with and maintaining high-quality standards in the design and construction phases is challenging, especially for on-site construction. Issues like improper implementation of building components and poor communication can widen the gap between design specifications and actual conditions. To prevent this, particularly for energy-efficient buildings, it is vital to develop resilient, sustainable strategies. These should optimize resource use, minimize environmental impact, and enhance livability, contributing to carbon neutrality by 2050 and climate change mitigation. Traditional post-occupancy evaluations, which identify defects after construction, are impractical for addressing energy performance gaps. A new, real-time inspection approach is necessary throughout the construction process. This paper suggests an innovative guideline for prefabricated buildings, emphasizing digital ‘self-instruction’ and ‘self-inspection’. These procedures ensure activities impacting quality adhere to specific instructions, drawings, and 3D models, incorporating the relevant acceptance criteria to verify completion. This methodology, promoting alignment with planned energy-efficient features, is supported by BIM-based software and Augmented Reality (AR) tools, embodying Industry 4.0 principles. BIM (Building Information Modeling) and AR bridge the gap between virtual design and actual construction, improving stakeholder communication and enabling real-time monitoring and adjustments. This integration fosters accuracy and efficiency, which are key for energy-efficient and nearly zero-energy buildings, marking a shift towards a more precise, collaborative, and environmentally sensible construction industry.
DOCUMENT
The conservation of our heritage buildings is a European wide policy objective. Historical buildings are not only works of art, but embody an important source of local identity and form a connection to our past. Protection agencies aim to preserve historical qualities for future generations. Their work is guided by restoration theory, a philosophy developed and codified in the course of the 19th and 20th century. European covenants, such as the Venice Charter, express shared views on the conservation and restoration of built heritage. Today, many users expect a building with modern comfort as well as a historical appearance. Moreover, new functionality is needed for building types that have outlived their original function. For example, how to reuse buildings such as old prisons, military barracks, factories, or railway stations? These new functions and new demands pose a challenge to restoration design and practices. Another, perhaps conflicting EU policy objective is the reduction of energy use in the built environment, in order to reach climate policy goals. Roughly 40% of the consumption of energy takes place in buildings, either in the production or consumption phase. However, energy efficiency is especially difficult to achieve in the case of historical buildings, because of strict regulations aimed at protecting historical values. Recently, there has been growing interest in energy efficient restoration practices in the Netherlands, as is shown by the 'energy-neutral' restoration of Villa Diederichs in Utrecht, the 'Boostencomplex' in Maastricht and De Tempel in The Hague. Although restoration of listed buildings is obviously focused on the preservation of historical values, with the pressing demands from EU climate policy the energy efficiency of historical building
MULTIFILE
Designs for improving energy efficiency in historical buildings are tailor made. For initiators the flexible character of design processes raises uncertainty about why certain energy measures are (not) allowed. How is decision making in thedesign process organised? And what mechanisms influence tailor made designs? In this paper we present an integral design method for energy efficient restoration. Our theoretical background draws on two sources. Firstly, we follow design theory with distinct generic and specific designs. Secondly we use the ‘heritage-as-a-spatial-factor’ approach, where participants with different backgrounds focus on adding value to heritage. By applying the integral design method, we evaluate decision making processes and reflect on heritage approaches. We suggest how the integral design method can be improved andquestion the parallel existence of heritage approaches.
DOCUMENT
