Metaheuristic Optimization in Architecture: A Multi-Objective Framework for Building form Generation, Energy Performance, and Daylighting Design

Authors

https://doi.org/10.48313/maa.v1i1.65

Abstract

The escalating demand for high-performance buildings necessitates advanced computational methods capable of navigating the complex, multi-dimensional design spaces inherent in architectural optimization. This study proposes a multi-objective metaheuristic framework integrating four nature-inspired algorithms Genetic Algorithm (GA), Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), Grey Wolf Optimizer (GWO), and Whale Optimization Algorithm (WOA) for three interrelated architectural optimization problems: building form generation for minimum energy consumption, façade design for optimal daylighting performance, and spatial layout optimization for maximum space efficiency. The framework is benchmarked on a 15-story office building in Tehran, Iran, using EnergyPlus 23.1 coupled with MATrix LABoratory (MATLAB) -based optimization routines and  Typical Meteorological Year 3 (TMY3) meteorological data. Decision variables encompass building geometry, orientation, Window-to-Wall Ratio (WWR), shading device parameters, glazing properties, and spatial adjacency matrices. Performance is evaluated through Energy Use Intensity (EUI), Daylight Autonomy (DA), Useful Daylight Illuminance (UDI), construction cost indices, and spatial efficiency metrics across 30 independent runs per algorithm with 500 iterations each, totaling 60,000 function evaluations per algorithm. Results demonstrate that GWO achieves the most favorable trade-off between energy performance and daylighting quality, reducing EUI by 31.4% (from 118.5 to 81.2 kWh/m²/yr) and increasing DA by 22.7 percentage points (from 53.7% to 76.4%) compared to the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 90.1 baseline design. Statistical analyses using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and Friedman rankings confirm the superiority of GWO at the 0.001 significance level. The study provides actionable guidelines for integrating metaheuristic optimization into architectural practice, including recommendations for algorithm selection, parameter tuning, and Building Information Modeling (BIM) workflow integration. Implications for sustainable design practice and future research directions involving surrogate-assisted optimization and generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) coupling are discussed.

Keywords:

Metaheuristic algorithms, Architectural optimization, Building energy performance, Daylighting design, Multi-objective optimization, Sustainable architecture, Generative design

References

  1. [1] UNEP, U. (2022). 2022 global status report for buildings and construction: Towards a zero emission, efficient and resilient buildings and construction sector. United nations environment programme Nairobi. https://wedocs.unep.org/items/c22095a1-fbcc-4378-8a42-b87ef3ec724c
  2. [2] Attia, S., Hamdy, M., O’Brien, W., & Carlucci, S. (2013). Assessing gaps and needs for integrating building performance optimization tools in net zero energy buildings design. Energy and buildings, 60, 110–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.01.016
  3. [3] Evins, R. (2013). A review of computational optimisation methods applied to sustainable building design. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 22, 230–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.02.004
  4. [4] Wortmann, T., & Nannicini, G. (2017). Introduction to architectural design optimization. In City networks: Collaboration and planning for health and sustainability (pp. 259–278). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65338-9_14
  5. [5] Mirjalili, S., Mirjalili, S. M., & Lewis, A. (2014). Grey wolf optimizer. Advances in engineering software, 69, 46–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.12.007
  6. [6] Caldas, L. G., & Norford, L. K. (2002). A design optimization tool based on a genetic algorithm. Automation in construction, 11(2), 173–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-5805(00)00096-0
  7. [7] Tuhus Dubrow, D., & Krarti, M. (2010). Genetic algorithm based approach to optimize building envelope design for residential buildings. Building and environment, 45(7), 1574–1581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.01.005
  8. [8] Caldas, L. (2008). Generation of energy efficient architecture solutions applying GENE ARCH: An evolution based generative design system. Advanced engineering informatics, 22(1), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2007.08.012
  9. [9] Nguyen, A. T., Reiter, S., & Rigo, P. (2014). A review on simulation based optimization methods applied to building performance analysis. Applied energy, 113, 1043–1058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.08.061
  10. [10] Delgarm, N., Sajadi, B., Kowsary, F., & Delgarm, S. (2016). Multi objective optimization of the building energy performance: A simulation based approach by means of particle swarm optimization (PSO). Applied energy, 170, 293–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.02.141
  11. [11] Ghalambaz, M., Yengejeh, R. J., & Davami, A. H. (2021). Building energy optimization using grey wolf optimizer (GWO). Case studies in thermal engineering, 27, 101250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2021.101250
  12. [12] Mirjalili, S., Saremi, S., Mirjalili, S. M., & Coelho, L. dos S. (2016). Multi objective grey wolf optimizer: A novel algorithm for multi criterion optimization. Expert systems with applications, 47, 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.10.039
  13. [13] Magnier, L., & Haghighat, F. (2010). Multiobjective optimization of building design using TRNSYS simulations, genetic algorithm, and artificial neural network. Building and environment, 45(3), 739–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.08.016
  14. [14] Ascione, F., Bianco, N., De Stasio, C., Mauro, G. M., & Vanoli, G. P. (2016). Simulation based model predictive control by the multi objective optimization of building energy performance and thermal comfort. Energy and buildings, 111, 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.11.033
  15. [15] Chen, X., Yang, H., & Zhang, W. (2018). Simulation based approach to optimize passively designed buildings: A case study on a typical architectural form in hot and humid climates. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 82, 1712–1725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.018
  16. [16] Westermann, P., & Evins, R. (2019). Surrogate modelling for sustainable building design a review. Energy and buildings, 198, 170–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.05.057
  17. [17] Nabil, A., & Mardaljevic, J. (2006). Useful daylight illuminances: A replacement for daylight factors. Energy and buildings, 38(7), 905–913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2006.03.013
  18. [18] Torres, S. L., & Sakamoto, Y. (2007). Facade design optimization for daylight with a simple genetic algorithm. Proceedings of building simulation 2007 (pp. 1162–1167). International Building Performance Simulation Association (IBPSA). https://www.aivc.org/sites/default/files/p117_final.pdf
  19. [19] Konis, K., Gamas, A., & Kensek, K. (2016). Passive performance and building form: An optimization framework for early stage design support. Solar energy, 125, 161–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2015.12.020
  20. [20] Hillier, B., & Hanson, J. (1984). The social logic of space. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597237
  21. [21] Rodrigues, E., Gaspar, A. R., & Gomes, Á. (2013). An evolutionary strategy enhanced with a local search technique for the space allocation problem in architecture, Part 1: Methodology. Computer aided design, 45(5), 887–897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2013.01.001
  22. [22] Dino, I. G. (2016). An evolutionary approach for 3D architectural space layout design exploration. Automation in construction, 69, 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.05.020
  23. [23] Wright, J., & Mourshed, M. (2009). Geometric optimization of fenestration. Proceedings of building simulation 2009: Eleventh international IBPSA conference (pp. 920–927). International Building Performance Simulation Association. https://doi.org/10.26868/25222708.2009.0920-927
  24. [24] Arabasy, M., & Ghoneim, R. S. (2025). Enhancing sustainable urban design using machine learning: Comparative analysis of seven metaheuristic algorithms in energy efficient digital architecture. Frontiers in built environment, 11, 1526209. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2025.1526209
  25. [25] Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., & Meyarivan, T. (2002). A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA II. IEEE transactions on evolutionary computation, 6(2), 182–197. https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.996017
  26. [26] Mirjalili, S., Jangir, P., & Saremi, S. (2017). Multi objective ant lion optimizer: A multi objective optimization algorithm for solving engineering problems. Applied intelligence, 46(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-016-0825-8
  27. [27] Sobol, I. M. (2001). Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Mathematics and computers in simulation, 55(1–3), 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4754(00)00270-6

Downloads

Published

2024-03-10

Issue

Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): Metaheuristic Algorithms with Applications

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Mirfallah, S. . (2024). Metaheuristic Optimization in Architecture: A Multi-Objective Framework for Building form Generation, Energy Performance, and Daylighting Design. Metaheuristic Algorithms With Applications, 1(1), 20-35. https://doi.org/10.48313/maa.v1i1.65

Similar Articles

1-10 of 25

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.