İç Mimarlık Bölümü

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12416/27

Browse

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5

Citation - WoS: 106
Citation - Scopus: 123
A comparative review of environmental concern prioritization: LEED vs other major certification systems
(Academic Press Ltd- Elsevier Science Ltd, 2015) Suzer, Ozge; 27418; İç Mimarlık
The matter of environmental concern prioritization integrated into globally used green building rating systems is a fundamental issue since it determines how the performance of a structure or development is reflected. Certain nationally-developed certification systems are used globally without being subjected to adjustments with respect to local geographical, cultural, economic and social parameters. This may lead to a situation where the results of an evaluation may not reflect the reality of the region and/or the site of construction. The main objective of this paper is to examine and underline the problems regarding the issue of weighting environmental concerns in the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification system, which is a US-originated but globally used assessment tool. The methodology of this study consists of; (i) an analysis of the approach of LEED in the New Construction and Major Renovations scheme in version 3 (LEED NC, v.3) and the Building Design and Construction scheme in version 4 (LEED BD + C, v.4), (ii) case studies in which regional priority credits (RPCs) set by LEED for four countries (Canada, Turkey, China and Egypt) are criticized with respect to countries' own local conditions, and, (iii) an analysis of the approaches of major environmental assessment tools, namely; BREEAM, SBTool, CASBEE and Green Star, in comparison to the approach in LEED, regarding the main issue of this paper. This work shows that, even in its latest version (v.4) LEED still displays some inadequacies and inconsistencies from the aspect of environmental concern prioritization and has not yet managed to incorporate a system which is more sensitive to this issue. This paper further outlines the differences and similarities between the approaches of the aforementioned major environmental assessment tools with respect to the issue of concern and the factors that should be integrated into future versions of LEED. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Citation - WoS: 8
Citation - Scopus: 10
A practical approach to performance-based building design in architectural project
(Routledge Journals, Taylor & Francis Ltd, 2020) Sayin, Selcuk; Celebi, Gulser
The aim of this study is to develop an approach that can enhance and contribute to the practical applicability of performance-based building design in architectural projects. The need for such an approach is based on the current lack of a practical application for performance-based design in architectural projects, despite the numerous studies conducted in this regard to date. The approach has been applied in a commercial building project designed by an architectural firm in Konya. The performance evaluation of the design developed in accordance with the requirements of the client/builder and the restrictions of regulations was carried out using IES VE 2014 software at a specific phase of the design process. Through this building performance simulation tool; the thermal protection of the envelope/heat loss and solar gain, thermal comfort (temperature, humidity), air quality (freshness), daylight and glare levels were evaluated for the selected spaces in the building, and following the evaluation, new design proposals were put forward to improve the design so as to meet the performance goal.
Citation - WoS: 51
Citation - Scopus: 68
Analyzing the compliance and correlation of LEED and BREEAM by conducting a criteria-based comparative analysis and evaluating dual-certified projects
(Pergamon-elsevier Science Ltd, 2019) Suzer, Ozge; 27418; İç Mimarlık
Certified green buildings are known to demonstrate high environmental performance; however, it is still not clear where they stand among each other, unless certified by the same body. This study aims to examine the compliance and correlation between the most prominent green building rating systems, LEED and BREEAM. It also estimates how a project would be graded by one system if already certified by the other. Regarding the methodology of the study, the intents of evaluation criteria in the latest versions for new constructions of LEED and BREEAM are analyzed. Commonly addressed and different concerns are determined, and the scales for assigning their award levels are compared. It is observed that they have a high level of compliance because 83% of the environmental concerns are commonly addressed issues. Moreover, it is derived that a dual-certified project aiming to achieve the same award level in both assessments has to display a better performance in BREEAM as it includes a higher number of concerns to be fulfilled. Based on the correlation analyses on twenty dual-certified buildings, the results from the scatter plot diagram, Pearson's Correlation Coefficient (r) and Paired Samples t-Test show that there is a large positive linear correlation and that LEED scores are significantly higher than BREEAM scores. Furthermore, the difference between the averages of LEED and BREEAM scores and the average difference between award levels indicate that if there would be a difference in ratings of dual-certified projects, it would be in favor of LEED by one award level.
Citation - WoS: 10
Citation - Scopus: 12
Perceptual analysis of the speech intelligibility and soundscape of multilingual environments
(Elsevier Sci Ltd, 2019) Kitapci, Kivanc; Galbrun, Laurent; 275153; İç Mimarlık
This paper examines the perceived speech intelligibility of English, Polish, Arabic, and Mandarin and, more generally, the soundscape associated to multilingual environments. Listening tests were used to evaluate three acoustic environments (an airport, a hospital, and a caf) under three room acoustic conditions defined by a different speech transmission index (STI) (STI = 0.4, 0.5 and 0.6). In the tests, participants rated eleven semantic attributes representative of speech perception and the overall soundscape (speech intelligibility, speech level, speech pleasantness, noisiness, annoyance, relaxation, comfort, environment pleasantness, eventfulness, excitement, and familiarity). Results obtained indicate that inter-language comparisons based on perceived speech intelligibility are different from those obtained from objective speech intelligibility tests. Noticeably, English participants were found to be most sensitive to changes in room acoustic conditions and to meaningful and distractive noise sources, whilst Arab participants were least sensitive to changes in room acoustic conditions and more tolerant to noise. Perceived speech intelligibility correlated significantly with non-acoustical factors (speech pleasantness, comfort and environment pleasantness), and 'emotional factors' (annoyance, relaxation, comfort and environment pleasantness) explained a large portion of the variance in soundscape assessment. Results also showed that language affected the perceived speech intelligibility marginally (p = 0.051) and noisiness significantly (p = 0.047), the latter being the best indicator of cultural variations amongst the attributes tested. Overall, the study shows that designing for speech intelligibility cannot be solely based on room acoustic parameters, especially in the case of multi-lingual environments. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Citation - WoS: 16
Citation - Scopus: 16
Translation of soundscape perceptual attributes from English to Turkish
(Elsevier Sci Ltd, 2023) Yorukoglu, P. N. Dokmeci; Bayrak, O. Turker; Coban, N. Akbulut; Osma, U. B. Ercakmak; Aletta, F.; Oberman, T.; Kang, J.; Ortak Dersler Bölümü
The International Standard Organization (ISO) published the standard series on soundscape for the identification, data collection and data analysis. However, since all these standards are in English language, the reliable standardized usage in other languages and its applicability is questionable. Thus, this two-staged study aims: i) to determine the Turkish equivalences of the 8 soundscape perceptual attributes that are published in ISO/TS 12913-2:2018 and ISO/TS 12913-3:2019, ii) to analyze if the determined Turkish attributes have concept equivalence to the original ones, and iii) to determine if the translated Turkish scale is reproducible. The first stage involved the translation of the attributes by focus group discussions and finalization by Turkish linguistic experts. As a result, the attributes 'eventful', 'vibrant', 'pleasant', 'calm', 'uneventful', 'monotonous', 'annoying', and 'chaotic' are translated to Turkish as 'hareketli', 'coskulu', 'keyifli', 'sakin', 'duragan', 'tekduze', 'rahatsiz edici', and 'karmasik', respectively. The second stage involves the analysis of reproducibility in terms of inter-rater reliability and conceptual validity. It is found that the Turkish scale is reproducible based on high inter-rater reliability in all attri-butes. Context validity at a conceptual level is analyzed both in terms of the difference between the aver-age scores given to the English attributes and their corresponding Turkish equivalences and the correlation between the English and Turkish scores given to each attribute. The highest difference between the average scores (around 10 points on a slider scale of 0 to 100) is found to be in the translation of 'vibrant' while the lowest correlated one (slightly lower than 0.5) is found in 'chaotic' attribute as in line with literature. Despite this result, when the scores are reduced to 2 dimensions as pleasantness and eventfulness, it is seen that there is a high correlation between the English and Turkish scales. It is considered that the results obtained from this research could act as a base in the future for the establishment of Turkish Standards on soundscape and standardization of the translated and validated Turkish soundscape perceptual attributes and the 'perceived affective quality' scale defined under ISO/TS 12913-2:2018 in English. (c) 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Browse

Browsing İç Mimarlık Bölümü by Scopus Q "Q1"