4.7 Article

Human-centred performance criteria for adaptive fa?ade design: Based on the results of a user experience survey

期刊

BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT
卷 222, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109386

关键词

Human -centred design; User experience; User comfort; Adaptive facade; Fa?ade performance

资金

  1. TU Delft

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Indoor environmental conditions have significant effects on users' comfort, satisfaction, and well-being. This paper investigates the impact of the building facade on users' experiences in work environments through an online survey. The results provide insights into users' preferences and can be used to determine performance criteria for human-centered adaptive facade design.
Indoor environmental conditions have significant effects on the user, in terms of comfort, satisfaction, and well-being. Even though the facade is one of the main systems that shape the indoor environment, there is a lack of research on how it affects the user. In work environments, not only indoor conditions but also the daily in-teractions with the building's facade (i.e. opening a window, closing a window blind, or simply looking through a window) have a consequential impact on the user experience. In that respect, as a part of ongoing doctoral research, an international online survey study was conducted to investigate users' experiences in their work environments, related to the building's facade. The questionnaire was structured not only to understand the users' current experiences but also their anticipations in terms of a preferred user experience concept. Hence, portrays a perspective on the question: what do users want from the facade that they are interacting with, in work environments? This paper primarily presents the effects of the human factors on the preference levels of different user experiences and interpretation of the results leads to the determination of human-centred performance criteria for adaptive facade design.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据