Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

A comprehensive analysis of parametric design approaches for solar

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Modern urban architecture is innovative, involves integrated solar technologies to increase sustainability, by
Parametric design providing efficient energy solutions, and involves stakeholders from multiple domains, with specific concerns.
Categories Such development, however, leads to complex interrelationships among disciplines and relies on models to
Design scope
simulate different aspects. To address these, the parametric design approach is widely adopted, enabling the
Application
Technology
generation of several urban designs in the early stage, and evaluating these across several objectives. This
Objective provides possibilities for creating collaborative, multi-disciplinary workflows for energy projects at different
Implementation scales. This paper provides a critical overview of the possibilities offered by the parametric design, to increase the
sustainability of advanced buildings, by putting a focus on solar energy. This paper analyses the parametric
design across five categories: design scope, application, technology, objective, and implementation method. No
review article currently highlights all these aspects to observe overall research in the field. The results indicate
that the parametric design is prominent on a single building-scale, while windows in building-scale and building
forms in district-scale models are widely manipulated parameters. Most models are limited to BIPV, shader, and
solar façade technologies, daylight and solar power applications, and energy and comfort-related objectives, the
majority of which are implemented using dedicated parametric modeling tools. Further ongoing research trends
emphasize how parametric design transforms the field and creates opportunities for designers working in
building energy research. The analytical results help to find current barriers, and future initiatives to implement
the parametric design at a wider spread for solar integration into buildings.

1. Introduction into multi-layered skins to capture sunlight for energy applications for
objectives i.e., minimal reliance on fossil fuels, cost-effectiveness, and a
The buildings sector accounts for ≈40% of the global energy con­ carbon-free environment [8]. Thus, the façade design is linked with the
sumption, and a large amount of CO2 emissions [1–5]. This has accel­ technological realization of energy solutions leading to concepts of
erated the development of sustainable, and energy-efficient buildings, ‘intelligent’, ‘adaptive’, or ‘responsive’ façades, which enable controlling
ensuring low energy consumption and CO2 emissions, and guarantying daylight, regulating heat transfer, and producing energy (elec­
users’ comfort. Nowadays, significant recognition is focused on the tricity/heat) from integrated technologies i.e., solar cells or thermal
contribution of solar energy to buildings’ energy conservation, consti­ collectors [10–13]. This however requires carefully engineered building
tuting important measures, necessary to increase sustainability [4,6,7]. elements (i.e., windows, roofs, or façades) with respect to solar tech­
Therefore, new strategies promoting the utilization of solar energy are nologies [8,10].
imperative in a growing urbanizing world [8]. Nevertheless, ambitious Nevertheless, modern buildings are complex civil engineered prod­
goals regarding sustainability, require new methods, to understand how ucts, involving many interdependent disciplines, where interrelation­
buildings should be designed, and how resources should be used [9]. ships of physical characteristics of the urban area and integrated
Because urban architecture is central to achieving such ambitious tar­ technology should be understood. This complexity stemming from
gets, buildings should be designed in synergy with the environment [3,8, growing sustainability needs and the energy transition urgency has led
9]. Such synergy is achievable by defining building geometries on small- to finding the best approaches to realize solar energy solutions in
(a single) or large- scale (neighborhoods), to efficiently use solar energy buildings [8]. To make effective solar integration with buildings
[8]. Recently, building envelopes have been progressively transformed possible, parametric design has gained significant interest in the energy

E-mail address: [email protected].

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112849
Received 4 June 2022; Received in revised form 3 August 2022; Accepted 14 August 2022
Available online 31 August 2022
1364-0321/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

research community, enabling stakeholders to make informed decisions, have been achieved by applying parametric design, through a state-of-
particularly in the early-stage design [14–17]. The parametric design the-art review, and paying attention to different aspects to achieve the
approach reduces both; the time and effort needed to make design goal of sustainability. Attempting to address the above gaps, this review
changes and allows the evaluation of different design options. According aims to answer the following: (1) what is the state-of-the-art on para­
to Caetano et al. [18], it can be defined as ‘an approach that describes a metric design approaches, (2) what are the characteristics of parametric
design symbolically based on the use of parameters.’ The parametric design models; and (3) what are the research gaps and future research di­
approach is followed by developing models that capture relevant pa­ rections, for solar integration with buildings. The holistic and compre­
rameters, relationships, conditions, attributes, and functions [19] hensive review presented here allows for developing an overall
(Fig. 1). perspective of parametric models developed for solar integration into
This has spurred new interests in finding urban forms to make solar the built environment. Additionally, this study captures the research
energy considerations an integral part of urban design practice, and trends, and critical review of possibilities that applying parametric
integrates energy and urban planning, unlike traditional methods that design approaches can support informed-decision making, considering a
treat these separately. The parametric design approach reflects a cross- set of performance objectives. By highlighting several aspects, this
sectoral, multi-disciplinary concept covering a broader spectrum of is­ research emphasizes how the parametric design approach creates op­
sues (i.e., technical, economic, social, or environmental) in the urban portunities for multi-disciplinary teams to work together and contrib­
context. Existing seminal work demonstrates that parametric models utes to the ongoing efforts to design and demonstrate sustainable, and
allowed specialists to address different domain-specific goals in the efficient buildings using solar energy.
early-stage design, by exploring and understanding complex, interdis­
ciplinary relationships among urban and technological parameters
1.1. The literature review concept
[20–22].
Despite several studies reporting parametric models for solar inte­
This review analyses scientific papers based on the five categories of
gration with buildings, literature review of the scholarly works on the
parametric design: application, design scope, objective, technology, and
parametric modeling subject is scarce and fragmented. Most review
implementation (Fig. 2). Fig. 3 illustrates a typical parametric design
studies focused on traditional methods for solar integration in sustain­
approach.
able buildings, by reporting heating/cooling methods [3,5], daylight
The applications are divided into six categories as (1) conversion of
and shading technologies [4,10], urban microclimate [23], passive solar
sunlight into useable form i.e., electricity/heat (‘solar energy’) [14]; (2)
designs [24], solar technologies [25], or solar energy considerations [8,
simulation of buildings’ energy (‘building physics’); (3) reception of
26]. However, these studies with limited scope have only reviewed some
direct sunlight for illuminance (‘daylight’) [30]; reception of solar gains
aspects and did not review parametric modeling approaches. Only a few
effecting indoor temperature (‘indoor environment’) [31]; (5) assessment
researchers identified the status of parametric design approaches
of life-cycle impact (‘LCA’) [32]; and (6) consideration of more than one
through a literature review. For instance, only one study reviewed the
applications (‘combined’) [21,30,33]. The design scope is grouped into
parametric models focusing only on daylight applications [27]. While
two categories based on: (1) variables that are manipulated in the
other studies reviewed all different models (including traditional and
models (‘parameters’), and (2) the scope on which models are developed
parametric) by focusing on either solar-urban planning [28] or build­
(‘scale’). The category ‘parameters’ is further divided according to the
ings’ performance [29]. Among these, a comprehensive compilation of
type of variables related to buildings (‘urban parameters’) [34–36]; and
the parametric models for solar integration with buildings is still
integrated energy systems (‘technology parameters’) [16,37–39]. While
missing. The evolution of the concept, key research trends, and research
the category ‘scope’ is divided based on the spectrum of developed
gaps have not been fully explored. Even though Santos-Herrero et al. [6]
models that includes the design of single buildings (‘building-scale’) [22,
reviewed modeling/simulation tools for sustainable buildings, however,
30,35,40]; and neighborhoods (‘district-scale’) [41–43]. The objectives
their scope did not include parametric models for solar integration with
are divided into five categories as (1) low buildings’ energy demand or
buildings.
good generation from integrated technology (‘energy’) [16,34]; (2) low
To the best of the author’s knowledge, none of the existing reviews
energy costs (‘economy’); (3) low environmental impact i.e., less CO2
provided an analysis to measure the research impact and map the cur­
(‘environment’) [37]; (4) satisfactory thermal or visual conditions
rent knowledge on parametric modeling for solar integration with
(‘comfort’) [44]; and (5) addressing more than one of aforementioned
buildings, using large scholarly datasets. Further, no review articles
objectives (‘multiple’) [35,44,45]. The technologies are categorized into
were solely dedicated to discussing the different aspects of parametric
five types based on energy conversion/utilization techniques as (1)
design such as application, design scope, energy technology, imple­
building integrated photovoltaic producing electricity from the sunlight
mentation tools, or objectives. It is worth assessing the advances that
(‘BIPV’) [46]; (2) BIPV with active shading systems producing electricity

Fig. 1. Author’s own representation of basic concept of parametric design approach.

2
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

Fig. 2. The categorization of parametric design approaches based on five main components.

Fig. 3. Author’s own illustrative representation of a parametric design for solar integration with urban envelopes considering a set of parameters for a specific
project, considering specific technology and application, and using a set of tools to address certain objectives.

and controlling daylight (‘BIPVSS’) [15]; (3) building components (i.e., simulating aspects i.e., daylight, irradiance, or building energy simula­
blinds/fenestration) controlling illuminance in buildings (‘shader’) [36]; tions, and include (1) Grasshopper that runs within the Rhinoceros
(4) a multi-purpose building façade collecting solar gains and main­ application (‘Rh/Gr tool’) [49–52]; and Dynamo that runs within the
taining indoor thermal comfort (‘solar façade’) [47]; and a combination Revit application (‘Rv/Dyn tool’) [45]. The category ‘custom tools’ is
of several different technologies (‘hybrid’) [35,48]. Fig. 4 illustrates the divided into how different tools are combined as (1) integrating 3D tools
working principal of different solar energy technologies. with other programs (Matlab/EnergyPlus) to perform simulations, that
The implementation methods/tool used for applying the parametric are not supported by the built-in plugins that come within 3D tools
design approach are divided into two main categories as: (1) existing (‘tailored 3D tools’) [15,37–39,48]; and (2) combining several different
three-dimensional (3D) modeling tools with built-in plugins to create programs excluding 3D dedicated tools such as Rh/Gr or Rv/Dyn, for
geometries and perform a set of simulations (‘dedicated tools’); and (2) multiple simulations (‘out-of-box tool’) [53].
custom tailored tools that are formulated by combining several different A detailed description of each category and sub-category of the
tools including 3D tools (‘custom tools’). The category ‘dedicated tools’ is parametric design is provided in the next sections. The paper is struc­
further divided into types of market-available, 3D tools that allow tured as follows. Following this introductory section, the method

3
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

Fig. 4. Author’s own representation of different technologies for solar integration with buildings through parametric design approach.

applied for the review is described. Section 3 then provides the results of technologies.
the review followed by section 4 which identifies the research gaps and
provides suggestions for further applying parametric design approaches 3. Classification mapping
directly derived from the results of the review, and finally, concludes the
paper. Researchers developed parametric models by focusing on a single
technology or hybrid technologies, to address specific applications
2. Research method (Fig. 5).
Among all reviewed articles, most studies (62%) focused on a single
To obtain a comprehensive list of parametric design approaches used technology, while 30% of studies focused on two, and 8% of studies
in the buildings sector, a thorough and holistic literature review was focused on more than two technologies. Further, 55% of the studies
conducted in this research using Elsevier’s database, one of the most reported models for a single application, while 33% reported two and
comprehensive research publications databases. The search approach 12% reported more than two applications. A nearly equal number of
was based on using titles and matching conditions to find the exact studies reported models for daylight and solar power applications. For
research topics. For instance, the query for searching literature is (key­ instance, for daylight, 19 studies focused on the shader. While for solar
words (“parametric modeling”)) or (keywords (“parametric design”)) or power, 16 studies reported BIPV, three reported solar façade, and one
(keywords (“parametric building design”)) or (keywords (“parametric solar reported hybrid technology. Moreover, 15% of the articles reported
integration”)) or (keywords (“parametric building-integrated PV”)) or models for combined applications covering both; daylight and building
(keywords (“parametric daylighting”)) or (keywords (“parametric design physics. Among these, 14 studies reported hybrid technology (shader
and building energy”)) or (keywords (“parametric models and building en­ with solar façade), and only one study reported shader technology. The
ergy”)). The search query returned 1223 journal articles in the begin­ building physics has been mainly addressed in combined application
ning. However, after carefully screening through abstracts of the areas, and only one study reported a model to only address it by focusing
returned papers, 103 research articles, and 16 review papers were on solar façades. Moreover, 12% of the articles reported models for the
selected for further analysis. In the following step, each paper was LCA application, among which, 9 focused on BIPV, two focused on solar
thoroughly read, to extract the information about each category i.e., façade, and one focused on other renewable energy technologies
application, design scope, objective, technology, and implementation (henceforth referred to as ‘renewables’). 8% of the articles focused on
method for the parametric design, according to the general framework addressing three applications in combined mode including, daylight,
introduced in the previous section. The extracted information was building physics, and solar power. Among these, four reported BIPV
examined to understand and capture the latest trends in parametric with shader and solar façade, two reported shaders with solar façade,
design approaches which can be used in the design process of energy- and only one reported renewable with shader or solar façade, as hybrid
efficient, and high-performing buildings, mainly using solar energy technologies.

4
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

Fig. 5. A map of applications and applied technologies extracted from the reviewed articles focusing on parametric design.

A 6% of the articles reported models for addressing both building 29% addressed both; energy and comfort, 23% addressed only
physics and solar power, whereas most studies (five) used hybrid tech­ comfort, and 14% addressed only energy (demand/generation) related
nologies (solar façade with BIPV or renewables), and only used BIPV objectives. However, 12% of the articles do not report on any objectives
technology. While 4% of the articles aimed to address both; daylight and as shown by ‘n.a.’ (Fig. 6), among which, most reported technology
solar power, with BIPVSS as the most prominent technology choice. choice (i.e., BIPV). A 6% of the articles focused on both objectives; en­
There exist very few studies (less than five) that aimed to address the ergy and economy, through techno-economic feasibility assessment of
indoor environment, as a single application, or as part of combined solar technology. Only three studies aimed to assess only solar potential
applications, where solar façade as a single technology or in hybrid or solar potential to achieve other objectives (i.e., energy and comfort).
mode (with shader or BIPVSS) is a prominent choice. Although several While one study assessed solar potential with energy or environment.
researchers proposed models to address different applications using a Given their objectives for improving comfort and energy, 17 studies
single technology, however, hybrid technologies are popular solutions used a shader along with a solar façade. A few studies (≈ three) used
for combined applications. Moreover, BIPV followed by shader, and solar façade or BIPV as single technology or use hybrid solutions by
solar façade is the most considered technology, in reported models. combing BIPV or BIPVSS with a shader and/or solar façade. While 19 of
Fig. 6 summarizes the number of studies concerning technology, and the studies focused on the shader, two focused on the shader and/or
objectives. Among the reviewed articles, more studies (42%) focused on solar façade, and only one study focused on BIPVSS, to address users’
addressing objectives from two domains, followed by studies on single comfort. A total of 14 studies focused on addressing energy objectives,
domain-specific objective, while the nearly same number of studies where BIPV was the most used technology. For instance, five articles
(about 13%) either reported objectives from three domains or did not reported BIPV, three reported BIPV with solar façade, and the other six
report any information on study goals as shown by ‘n.a.’ (Fig. 6). reported (i.e., BIPVSS or solar façade), or hybrid technologies (i.e., solar

Fig. 6. A map of objectives and applied technologies extracted from the reviewed article focusing on parametric design.

5
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

façade with others (renewables and/or shader)). Further, about 6% of used tailored 3D custom tools (Rh/Gr based), and ≈ 2% used dedicated
studies addressed both: economy and energy objectives by only focusing (Rh/Gr) tools to address LCA on building-scale or district-scale. No study
on BIPV. Moreover, 4% of studies focused on solar façades to estimate reported a district-scale model to address building physics, while only
envelopes’ solar potential. Additionally, most studies that reported one study used a dedicated tool (Rh/Gr) to address it but was limited to a
models for addressing objectives related to the environment along with single building. Very few studies (<1%), addressed indoor environment
other objectives (comfort, energy, or economy), the economy with the application for building- or district-scale, by using a dedicated (Rh/Gr)
environment, or solar potential with energy is limited (less than three), tool. The results indicate that the adoption of a specific implementation
where most researchers focused on either solar façade or BIPV tech­ method depends on the required simulations or urban area type. How­
nology. Nevertheless, the results show that energy and/or comfort are ever, advances in dedicated, 3D tools with divergent plugins, are
the most prominent objectives that are addressed in the current practice, promising to implement the parametric models to address a variety of
through parametric design. Moreover, the parametric models are applications. Researchers in their developed models at different scales
implemented through several tools, to address different applications also manipulated several different parameters through implementation
(Fig. 7). tools (Fig. 8).
60% of the reviewed articles implemented parametric design The total number of studies is slightly larger than the number of
through dedicated tools based on Rh/Gr (using built-in plugins), 28% of reviewed articles, as several researchers considered manipulating more
articles reported custom, tailored 3D tools by integrating Rh/Gr-based than one design parameter in their models. A large number of the arti­
models with other programs, and only 1% reported dedicated and cles do not report on any implementation method, which is more
tailored 3D tools using Rv/Dyn program. Only, 2% of the articles prominent in the district-scale models. In building-scale models, nearly
implemented models in out-of-box custom tools. Additionally, 8% of the 30% of studies reported models, with the window as a key parameter,
studies that aimed to address single applications (LCA or solar power) on the majority of which used a dedicated (Rh/Gr) tool. 12% of studies
building-scale, or combined applications on district-scale, did not report manipulated building dimensions, where dedicated Rh/Gr base
on any implementation method as indicated by ‘n.a.’ (Fig. 7). Con­ modeling, and tailored 3D approach are most common, as reported by
cerning the models on building-scale, for combined applications, 20% of four studies following each of these tools, and one used a custom, out-of-
the articles reported Rh/Gr tool (dedicated tool), 8% reported tailored box tool. Further, the fraction of studies manipulating building form
3D (custom tool), and 1% reported out-of-box custom tools. Further, through custom (out-of-box) tools is only 1%, while the majority of
only one study used Rv/Dyn as a dedicated tool. The fraction of studies studies (nine) used dedicated tools (Rh/Gr with other programs).
reporting district-scale models, through dedicated tools or custom (Rh/ Similarly, 12% of studies proposed models to manipulate technology
Gr + other) tools are limited to ≈ 2% of the total articles. Studies mainly parameters, where tailored custom tools are widely adopted, for
addressed daylight (as one of the widely addressed applications), only example, six studies used these tools, while a small number (three) of
used dedicated tools (Rh/Gr), or used Rh/Gr with other programs as researchers also used dedicated tools mainly based on Rh/Gr. This is
tailored 3D tools. followed by the number of studies manipulating roof shape, where an
For instance, studies 16 studies reported building-scale and two equal number of articles (five) articles reported dedicated tools (Rh/Gr),
studies reported district-scale models for daylighting, that were imple­ as well as, tailored 3D, custom tools. These tools are also used in nearly
mented in a dedicated tool, and only one study implemented the model 8% of total reported models that allowed varying orientation or material
using a custom tool (Rh/Gr with other programs), which was limited to properties. Among all, roof slope is the least considered design param­
building-scale. To address solar power on a building-scale, 7% of the eter as reflected by only three studies and is only considered in building-
articles implemented models through dedicated tools (Rh/Gr), 4% scale models that are implemented in tailored 3D custom tools (by
through custom tools (Rh/Gr or Dyn/Rv, with other programs), and only integrating Dyn/Rv or Rh/Gr with other programs). In district-scale
one study used a custom (out-of-box) tool. On the district-scale, an equal models, nearly 18% of the articles reported building form, or di­
number of articles (2%) addressed solar power by using dedicated or mensions as a design parameter, among which, the majority used
custom tools, that were based on Rh/Gr. Moreover, 3% of the articles dedicated tools (Rh/Gr), while only one used tailored 3D, custom tool

Fig. 7. A map of applications and implementation methods extracted from the reviewed articles that developed parametric models at building- and district-scale.

6
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

Fig. 8. A map of considered parameters and implementation methods extracted from the reviewed articles that developed parametric models at building- and
district-scale.

(using Rh/Gr). This is followed by about 12% of studies, manipulating 61–63,65,67,69,71]. For instance, Esfahani et al. [46] proposed a
neighborhood aspects (density, the distance among buildings, buildings parametric model and used a multi-objective optimization (MOO) al­
number, etc.), mainly through dedicated tools (Rh/Gr). Additionally, gorithm, to maximize solar irradiance level on building envelope for
nearly the same fraction of studies (≈ 7%) manipulated roof shape, or optimal performance of BIPV, by mainly manipulating roof designs. The
window design, and only one study also developed a custom tool using common approach in all studies focusing on efficient integration of BIPV
Rh/Gr. However, most studies on windows manipulation did not report with buildings was the same, optimizing building geometries to maxi­
on tools, while the majority of studies used dedicated tools (Rh/Gr) for mize the solar irradiance level, before installation of technology [61,62],
roof designs. Very few articles (one) focused on manipulating other so that optimal level of performance can be achieved. For instance,
parameters i.e., material, roof slope, orientation, or technical aspects. Lobaccaro et al. [64] assessed solar potential on building façades and
Although there exists a wide range of parametric models, most studies roofs to increase the solar irradiance and ultimately improve the energy
proposed building-scale (74%) models compared with district-scale generation of BIPV. They generated several design solutions by manip­
(26%) models. One of the common barriers to district-scale models is ulating urban forms, density, and roof designs in a neighborhood.
an increased design complexity and expensive simulation. This neces­ Having the same concerns as in Ref. [64], Horvat [59] proposed a
sitates finding novel approaches, to develop parametric models, for significantly simpler model, by only manipulating urban density.
designing and simulating self-sufficient neighborhoods. The following Several studies [16,58,69] focused on manipulating roof designs in
sections present a detailed explanation of categories including design models on building-scale, to investigate the available irradiance and
scope, application, technology, implementation, and objective, that are energy generation of BIPV. These studies mainly focused on estimating
found in this review. solar potential and energy performance. In addition to these two con­
cerns, Lydon et al. [39] further addressed building physics application
by parametrically generating designs, and calculating the respective
3.1. Technology, application, and objective energy demands of urban areas. They aimed to design optimal building
geometry, to increase the energy yield by improving the irradiance level
Based on the data extracted from the articles on parametric design, and reducing the building’s energy demand. Moreover, a few studies
technologies concerning applications and objectives are discussed in this reported models to analyze the techno-economic, and environmental
section. feasibility of BIPV, by focusing on the LCA [32,37,38,41,54,60,66,68,
70]. For instance, Edmund and Go [37] developed a model to assess the
3.1.1. Building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) feasibility of three BIPVs, according to several performance indicators
The BIPV as a building component has gained significant attention including performance ratio, grid energy export, the contribution of
from the building research community. Several studies [14,16,22,32,37, BIPV yield to annual energy demand, and energy generation cost, and
38,41,46,54–71] proposed parametric models by using BIPV, mainly to CO2 emissions (25 years lifetime). Similarly, Florio et al. [54] developed
address solar power applications. Researchers mainly aimed to improve a model and used a MOO (evolutionary) algorithm to generate several
the energy generation by, for example, maximizing electrical output designs, intending to perform LCA of BIPV to be installed on buildings in
[16,58,59,64], or the performance ratio [69], or minimizing the mutual Geneva (Switzerland). Given an average building’s energy demand,
shading among several modules [61]. Roofs with high solar potential their model allowed finding optimal designs where BIPV can generate
and offering installation spaces, in dense urban areas, have been mainly even two times the required energy (15 kWh yield). Similarly,
considered for BIPV deployment, through parametric design [16,56,58,

7
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

Gremmelspacher et al. [38] proposed a model for the same purpose as in proposed model, they generated and evaluated several window designs
Ref. [54], to develop nearly-zero energy buildings, but in renovation to determine optimum tracking angle and solar cell layouts for optimal
projects. They implemented the method in a case study (Sweden), and energy performance. They considered energy yield and visual comfort as
developed several designs, by mainly focusing on techno-economic as­ two objectives. Hence, they evaluated designs in terms of energy per­
pects. For example, they aimed to achieve optimal solutions by opti­ formance indicators such as annual (electric) energy yield and module
mizing both; BIPV and building geometry, for maximum energy efficiency, daylighting performance indicators in terms of daylight glare
generation, and minimum energy use intensity and life-cycle costs. probability (DGP), and unified glare rating (UGR).
Another study [70] proposed a model, to perform LCA of BIPV, and used Later, Gao et al. [21] proposed a model using a MOO (genetic) al­
a MOO algorithm to maximize energy yield (i.e., utilization capacity and gorithm, to optimize both; the window and building envelope. Their
system efficiency), and minimize the net system cost and building en­ main goal was to address combined applications i.e., daylight, solar
ergy cost. The method proposed in this study was useful for the power, and an indoor environment. In this way, they compared several
techno-economic assessment of BIPV, by enabling the generative design optimal designs for objectives i.e., daylight, electrical power, and solar
of building envelopes combined with optimal BIPV designs. Kanters gain on the envelope. Thus, they aimed to find an equilibrium between
et al. [60] developed a parametric model for assessing building façades these conflicting objectives, so that the best optimal design can be
and neighborhoods for reduced shading and optimal energy yield. They generated in an early-stage design. Taveres-Cachat et al. [30] proposed a
performed LCA and evaluated two technologies: BIPV and solar thermal model to optimize the design of exterior louver-based BIPVSS on the
collectors in terms of energy yield and the payback time (25 years life­ building’s southern face (Nordic climate). They aimed to address
time). Salimzadeh et al. [66] proposed a model for designing daylight, building physics, and solar power as combined applications.
surface-specific BIPV layouts on the building skin. They selected a case They coupled the proposed model with a MOO algorithm and other tools
study of a tall building (Canada) and simulated various design scenarios for thermal, electric, and lighting simulations. Their main objectives
for comparing different designs in terms of energy yield and cost (i.e., were to improve continuous daylight autonomy (cDA), reduce net en­
payback time and net profit). ergy demand, and increase the energy yield (electricity) of BIPVSS. Their
Shi et al. [68] developed a model for different urban typologies to results showed a trade-off between cDA and energy yield, and between
investigate interactions between energy demand and urban typologies. cDA and energy demand. Following the same methodology as in
They also focused on LCA of (20 years lifetime), and estimated energy Ref. [30], Taveres-Cachat and Goi [33] proposed a model to find a
penetration and system capital costs. They evaluated several para­ correlation between building geometry and louvers-installed BIPVSS
metrically generated typologies and emphasized that a high solar energy performance to balance conflicting objectives i.e., daylight level, solar
penetration (~0.22) can increase the cost (~9 $/m2). One study [32] heat gain, and energy yield. They also investigated the soft aspects of
proposed a model by using a MOO algorithm in a parametric model, to problem formulation in the optimization process. In this context, they
minimize greenhouse gas emissions for zero-emission buildings. The changed the solution space size; increased the number of parameters by
study estimated embodied emissions and energy balances by optimizing adding flexibility to the model; and changed the number of the objec­
building form and performing LCA. The main goal of this study was to tives by considering different combinations of objectives related to
investigate the correlation between building design, energy demand, daylight, and energy (demand and yield).
and the environment. Manni et al. [41] performed similar work as in Hofer et al. [17] proposed a model that was coupled with electrical
Ref. [32] not only for Nordic but also for Mediterranean climate zones. energy simulations of BIPVSS and predicted the shading pattern of
They performed a three-step optimization through an evolutionary al­ modules, with high spatial-temporal resolution. They analyzed three
gorithm on the parametric model to shape the environment-responsive façade-integrated BIPVSS configurations (horizontal, vertical, and
nearly zero-emission building model, where the main focus was to in­ diamond-shaped louvers) and two tracker configurations (one- and
crease the solar gain on envelopes for maximum energy yield, and two-axis). Their findings reflected a trade-off between the tracker’s
minimum greenhouse gas emissions. performance and the mutual shading of the BIPVSS modules. The
Literature reveals that the majority of studies that focused on BIPV BIPVSS is an emerging technology, that can address multiple applica­
have considered several objectives such as maximum energy yield, tions, however, the work is still undermined compared with BIPV. The
minimum greenhouse gas emissions, and minimum costs for techno- most common design challenge in implementing such a technology is an
economic, and environmental feasibility. However, BIPV can be com­ underlying trade-off between reduced solar gain for good thermal
bined with active shading systems (BIPVSS), another sensible technol­ comfort and increased direct sunlight for good daylight. Additionally,
ogy to resist the excessive amount of sunlight negatively affecting visual other building elements can be used to address daylight applications as
comfort. In addition to maintaining visual comfort, BIPVSS takes discussed in the following section.
advantage of solar radiation for generating electricity as discussed in the
next section. 3.1.3. Shader
Several studies [36,49,50,52,72–87] proposed parametric models to
3.1.2. BIPV with active shading system (BIPVSS) optimally design buildings, that can efficiently collect and distribute the
Several studies [15,17,21,30,33] proposed parametric models to sunlight in the interior. The aim of these studies was to address the
successfully deploy BIPVSS into buildings, the majority of which aimed daylight application, and to improve the visual comfort in terms of i.e.,
to address daylight and solar power applications. However, a few re­ useful daylight illuminance (UDI) [36,73,76,79,84,87], daylight glare
searchers also proposed models to address other applications i.e., probability (DGP) [36], exceeded UDI (EUDI) [49], daylight autonomy
monitoring building physics [30] and maintaining the indoor environ­ (DA) [49,79], spatial daylight autonomy (sDA) [52,75,80], annual solar
ment quality [21]. In commonly proposed models, researchers mainly exposure (ASE) [52,72,75], total annual illumination [72], task plan
manipulated window elements that were combined with sun-tracking illuminance [85], daylight depth [85], daylit area [82], or mean illu­
devices. However, the main challenge in installing BIPVSS with win­ minance rate [73]. Sufficient quantity and quality of sunlight hours
dows is an inherent trade-off between the performance of a solar tracker necessitate the design of optimal building envelopes [77]. This has been
and mutual shading between adjacent BIPVSS modules on windows, achieved through the application of parametric models, where several
which might degrade the overall energy performance. Several re­ optimal building layouts can be generated by manipulating geometrical
searchers attempted to address these challenges, through parametric aspects in several design scenarios. For instance, Samadi et al. [87]
models. For instance, Gao et al. [15] proposed a parametric model for parametrically designed a kinetic shading system with independent
designing a window that comprised several horizontally (parallel) units responding to sunlight through two- and three-dimensional rota­
positioned BIPV modules and sun-tracking shading elements. In the tion. They used a genetic algorithm and evaluated several designs, to

8
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

improve the daylight efficiency in terms of maximum UDI (100–2000 address applications i.e., building physics [34], indoor environment [47,
lux). 88], LCA [89,90], or solar power [42,51,91]. Some researchers also
Similarly, Bournas [76] evaluated UDI at the district-scale by para­ focused on hybrid applications i.e., building physics and indoor envi­
metrically exploring the room geometry and urban density (Sweden), to ronment [31,92,93]; or LCA and indoor environment [94]. Concerning
address daylight. Hosseini et al. [36,49,80] proposed three different single application, a study [34] proposed a model and used a MOO
parametric models. First, they [36] developed a method to assess (genetic) algorithm to optimize building form to address building
building façades considering dynamic daylight and occupants’ position physics application, and aimed to minimize the building energy de­
to reach visual comfort goals in terms of good UDI (100–2000 lux) and mand. Abdollahzadeh and Biloria [47] proposed a parametric model to
low DGP for minimum glare discomfort. Then, they [49] integrated the evaluate the thermal performance of streets in residential zones
façade with colored glass to improve the daylight in terms of good UDI, (Australia). Their model enabled the generation and evaluation of
less DGP, well EUDI, and enhanced DA. Finally, they [80] considered a several urban configurations to improve thermal comfort in terms of
bio-inspired façade to investigate daylight in terms of adequate average solar exposure time and the average mean radiant temperature.
sDA (sufficiency of daylight illuminance) improved UDI (100–3000 lux), Suyoto et al. [88] proposed a parametric model to design an office
and low EUDI. Another study [79] proposed a model for parametrically tower to investigate areas with minimal solar gain/good shadow. Their
generating and optimizing light well on the building by manipulating main goal was to evaluate designs, that can ensure good thermal com­
the well’s aperture to find an optimal level of UDI (100–2000 lux) and fort. Oliveira and Gognat [89] proposed a model to parametrically
DA (150–300%). Brembilla et al. [72] parametrically generated complex generate building envelopes for sustainable performance by considering
fenestration and shading systems to evaluate indicators, i.e., UDI, DA, LCA. Their method enabled the multi-objective assessment of solar fa­
total annual illumination (daylight level), and visual discomfort level in çades in terms of energy demand, cost, and carbon emissions. Another
terms of ASE (accounting for direct solar radiation). study [90] proposed a parametric model and applied a MOO (evolu­
One study [74] reported a method using a MOO algorithm on a tionary) algorithm, to optimally generate a solar façade. The model
parametric model to evaluate several public spaces and urban canopy presented in this study enabled the evaluation of several designs by
solutions. The main goal was to evaluate designs in terms of shaded performing energy simulations through solar irradiance analysis. Hence,
areas for comfortable seating and sufficient sunlight hours for visual the study explored several designs, through parametric analysis and
comfort. Zayed et al. [85] parametrically generated slat designs (as evaluated corresponding LCA-related energy to meet nearly zero energy
sun-breaker) for improving daylight distribution in office spaces, building standards. Some researchers [42,51,91] proposed parametric
focusing on hot, arid areas. They evaluated several designs across visual models for the optimal design of building façades for maximizing the
comfort objectives i.e., task plan illuminance and daylight depth. envelope’s solar gain. They optimized building designs by applying
Another study [82] aimed to improve daylight in a hospital by investi­ MOO algorithms in their models, with a common goal of obtaining
gating several, parametrically generated window solutions. The main maximum solar irradiance on the building envelope. In this way, they
aim of this study was to evaluate designs concerning daylit, partially aimed to estimate the solar potential of BIPV, for the efficient generation
daylit, and overlit areas. The study indicated that the daylit area should of solar electricity.
reach ≥50% of the available area. Only a few studies reported parametric models to address hybrid
Rashwan et al. [73] parametrically generated several building de­ applications, using solar facades. For example, Abdollahzadeh and
signs (office spaces) in hot and dry climates and evaluated daylight Biloria [31] proposed a parametric model using a MOO algorithm for
levels. They aimed to improve the mean illuminance rate and UDI, to generating several urban designs and evaluated these designs across
achieve illuminance in compliance with the recommended levels (300 objectives from the energy and comfort domain i.e., heating, and cooling
lux). Nevertheless, achieving sufficient illuminance, and avoiding glare demand, and indoor physiological equivalent temperature. Their results
to reduce visual discomfort remained the key focus in most studies [36, showed that the parametric design approach allows improvement of
49,80,83], that aimed to address daylight applications using the shader. 25.85% in thermal comfort, 72.76% in cooling demand, and 93.67% in
In addition to obtaining a sufficient level of daylight, improved thermal heating demand. Samuelson et al., 2016 [92] proposed a model to
comfort is another objective in existing studies. For instance, a study parametrically generate, more than 90,000 building design options, in
[78] proposed a model for parametrically designing Venetian blinds the urban context and iteratively performed energy simulations. They
(Cairo), to provide sufficient daylight and prevent heat gain for aimed to address two applications i.e., building physics and indoor
improved thermal comfort. Other studies developed parametric models environment, by targeting low energy use intensity, small peak load, and
to find a trade-off among sDA and ASE in office [75] and flat skylights safe indoor temperature as key objectives. However, their results re­
(heritage) [52] buildings. One study [84] proposed a model to para­ flected an inherent trade-off among these three objectives. Tabadkani
metrically generate and optimize windows through a MOO algorithm, to et al. [93] developed a parametric model for courtyard design in the
improve two conflicting objectives: maximum UDI for good daylight, urban context and evaluated several urban designs by focusing on the
and minimum solar heat gains by reducing window size. indoor environment and building physics applications. The main goal of
Nevertheless, there exist, several parametric models, to address this study was to find a correlation between urban design and perfor­
daylight by reaching visual comfort objectives. However, researchers mance objectives. By accounting for solar gain on the envelope, they
strived to maintain thermal comfort while increasing illuminance levels, aimed to address two objectives, the predicted mean vote index
due to additional solar gains, which reflects a trade-off between visual reflecting thermal comfort (− 0.5 – +0.5), and low energy demand.
and thermal comfort. Additionally, studies optimized buildings by The parametric design approach has gained significant interest in
carefully designing solar façades in parametric models, to address solar façades, for addressing several applications. However, the majority
different applications and achieve certain objectives as discussed in the of parametric models, are mainly developed to improve thermal comfort
following section. and/or reduce energy demand. Nevertheless, different single technolo­
gies can potentially address combined applications where more than one
3.1.4. Solar façade objective can be achieved. Additionally, some researchers have devel­
Several researchers proposed parametric models for carefully engi­ oped models only for the utilization of hybrid technologies in buildings,
neering solar façades, by manipulating different urban parameters [31, as discussed in the following section.
34,42,47,51,88–93]. This has accelerated the development of nearly
zero energy buildings, to increase the sustainability of buildings, and 3.1.5. Hybrid technologies
address concerns from building and energy domains. For instance, re­ Several researchers proposed parametric models considering hybrid
searchers developed models to parametrically generate buildings to technologies i.e., (1) BIPV and shader [95]; (2) BIPV and solar façade

9
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

[35,96,97]; (3) shader and solar façade [40,43–45,53,98–114]; (4) BIPV performed by manipulating urban (roof forms, slopes, and orientation)
and other renewables [115]; (5) BIPV, shader and solar façade [20,48, and system design parameters (size, shapes, etc.). The main goal of this
116,117]; (6) BIPV, solar façade, and other renewables [1,118]; and (7) study was to assess the solar potential of roofs, before integrating the
BIPV, shader, solar façade, and other renewables [39]. Studies that technology, and ultimately increase the final energy.
focused on using shader and solar façades, addressed building physics Some studies proposed models using hybrid technologies by
and daylight applications and aimed to improve visual comfort and combining BIPV with solar façade [35,96,97], shader [95], or with both,
reduce the energy demand [43,45,53,101–105,107–110,112]. Further, solar façade and shader [20,48,116,117]. For instance, researchers [35,
most researchers used MOO algorithms in their proposed models, to 96,97] developed models, by combining BIPV with solar façade, to find
minimize energy demand and increase visual comfort [45,53,101,104, the impact of building geometries on objectives i.e., electrical energy
105,107,110,112]. For example, researchers developed models to yield from BIPV, and energy demand, and mainly addressed solar power
improve building energy performance, and fraction of well-illuminated and building physics applications. Another study [95], optimized
area [45]; enhance illuminance, and reduce energy demand [101,102, building geometry in a parametric model, to address daylight and solar
109]; or reduce energy demand, and increase daylight performance in power applications. The main goal of this study was to maximize the
terms of sDA [43,103,104,113], DA [53,108,113], UDI [105,107,108, illuminance (i.e., sDA). Further, by maximizing solar gain, the study
110,113], or USDI [112]. aimed for good building energy performance (i.e., maximum average
Researchers also aimed to reduce visual discomfort i.e., DGP and load match index) by utilizing BIPV. The majority of studies [20,48,116,
buildings’ energy demand [105,108]. One study [40] proposed a model 117] proposing parametric models have focused on using BIPV with
for daylight application, to improve illuminance level and maintain vi­ other technologies (i.e., shared, solar façade), addressed multiple ap­
sual comfort (i.e., less glare). While a few studies [40,111] proposed plications (i.e., daylight, building physics, and solar power), and
models for assessing building façades for better illuminance and considered objectives such as high sDA, low energy demand, and high
comfortable indoor temperature by addressing applications i.e., daylight energy yield. However, these models are mainly applied on a
and indoor environment. To address the same applications as in Refs. district-scale. Moreover, limited to certain applications, existing models
[40,111], one study [98] proposed a parametric model and used a MOO may vary in terms according to the design scope and implementation
algorithm, to minimize the solar gain, and maximize the shading area for strategy, as discussed in the following section.
a comfortable temperature. Taveres-Cachat and Goi [111] proposed a
model to parametrically generate different shading system configura­ 3.2. Design scope, application, and implementation
tions, installed on the building exterior, optimize solar gain on the
façade, and ultimately maintain indoor thermal comfort. Based on the data extracted from the studies reporting parametric
Many researchers developed models to parametrically generate solar models, the design scope, and implementation tools (Fig. 9) to address
façades, to address combined applications. For instance, researchers different applications are discussed in this section. Fig. 10 also repre­
[44,99,114] developed a parametric model and applied the MOO algo­ sents an example workflow of parametric design workflow for solar
rithm to optimize building geometry, for addressing applications i.e., analysis, by utilizing a set of tools to manipulate design parameters.
daylight, building physics, and indoor environment. They defined a set
of objectives across multiple disciplines i.e., minimum building energy 3.2.1. Building-scale
demand, maximum thermal (i.e., predicted mean vote index) and visual Fig. 11 shows the rendered solar designs and respective building-
(i.e., glare) comfort, and good daylight performance (i.e., sDA, DA, and scale parameters, that are manipulated in existing models. Most
UDI). Some studies [100,106] proposed models to parametrically studies proposed models by manipulating parameters from one
generate solar façades, and assess performance through irradiance geometrical aspect i.e., building dimensions [73,107], or form [36,40,
analysis. These studies aimed to address applications i.e., daylight, 49,80,86,88,91], window [33,44,45,50,72,75,78,82,84,85,104,105,
building physics, and solar power. The main objectives of these studies 108,110,111,113,115], or roof shape [22,52,58,74,79,98]. Some studies
were, for example, good visual comfort, low building energy demand, considered parameters from two geometrical aspects i.e., building di­
and good energy yield from solar technology (i.e., BIPV/renewables). mensions, and orientation [46]; building dimensions, and roof slope
Some researchers [1,39,115,118] developed models by combining [66]; building dimensions, and window [53,87]; building form, and
hybrid renewables with technologies i.e., BIPV, shader, and solar façade. window [21]; material, and window [112]; orientation, and material
For instance, Kanters and Wall [118] proposed a model to para­ [89]; or roof shape, and window [101]. A few studies considered pa­
metrically design urban typologies, to address building physics and solar rameters from three geometrical aspects i.e., orientation, material, and
power applications. They aimed to find the impact of urban design on window [34,90]; building form, orientation, and material [99]; or
the performance of nearly-zero energy buildings. Their model allowed building form, dimensions, and material [32].
generating several urban designs, that helped to reduce buildings’ en­ While some studies even considered more than three geometrical
ergy demand (electrical and heating), and increase solar fraction from aspects i.e., building form, material, window, and technology parame­
technologies i.e., BIPV and solar thermal collectors. Considering the ters [93]; building dimensions, orientation, window, and technology
same applications and objectives as in Ref. [118], Perera et al. [1] parameters [70]; building dimensions, orientation, window, and mate­
investigated several urban forms, parametrically, by using solar façades rial [114]; or building dimensions, orientation, window, material, and
as tertiary technology along with BIPV and other renewables. Another technology parameters [102]. However, studies manipulating both;
study [115] proposed a parametric model and used the MOO algorithm building designs (i.e., building dimensions [109,115]; roof shape [16,
for generating optimal building designs, by using BIPV with other re­ 39,69] and slope [37]; or window [30,35] and technology design are
newables to perform LCA. The main objective of this study was to very limited). Moreover, most models are limited to building-scale and
minimize operational costs and minimize the CO2 concerning solar are implemented through dedicated tools (Rh/Gr) with several plugins
technologies. Lydon et al. [39] proposed a model by using BIPV, shader, (i.e., EnergyPlus i.e., Ladybug, Diva, and Honeybee), for irradiance and
solar façade, and thermally-active systems. They aimed to address energy simulations. Among all, daylight is the widely addressed appli­
daylight, building physics, and solar power applications by calculating cation in models, on the building-scale.
shading levels, demand, and yield as comfort and energy objectives. Several researchers only intended to design windows, by manipu­
Similarly, in the previous study, the author [119], developed a para­ lating, for example, blinds configuration (i.e., form, orientation, rota­
metric model, to integrate and assess the performance of two-stage solar tion, position, screen depth, gap width, thickness, or incision depth
concentrators using a solar cell and a thermal receiver, with a building angle) [72,78,85]; window-to-wall ratio, glazing type [82]; window
roof. In a parametric manner, more than 20,000 simulations were dimensions, material [45], blinds distribution [33,50], side opening

10
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

Fig. 9. A map of implementation methods extracted from the reviewed articles that developed parametric models at building- and district-scale.

Fig. 10. An example of workflow of parametric design approach to assess the solar potential at neighborhood scale Reprinted from Ref. [64], Copyright (2022), with
permission from Elsevier.

[50], overhang length [50], insolation [44], louvers number, louvers tilt MOO (genetic) algorithms in their models, to optimize window designs
[33], or tracking position [115] in their models. to improve thermal and visual comfort, and solar energy yield.
Majority of these are implemented in dedicated tools (Rh/Gr) using Moreover, these researchers aimed to address only daylight or
plugins i.e., Honeybee [33,108], Diva [72,75,82,85], Honeybee, along daylight with, for example, building physics, indoor environment, and/
with Ladybug [44,50,78,104,105,110,113], Honeybee along with or solar power applications. Only Asl et al. [45] implemented their
Octopus [84], or Honeybee along with Ladybug, and Octopus [15,111]. parametric model in Rv/Dyn as a dedicated tool. They used a plugin
These plugins are mainly applicable to irradiance analysis and MOO (Optimo) to optimize the window design, to address daylight applica­
optimization. Most researchers [45,84,104,105,110,111,113,115], used tions. Two studies [73,107] parametrically designed buildings by

11
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

Fig. 11. Author’s own representation of rendered solar designs generated in Dynamo and Revit, using solar analysis package (example of irradiance analysis on
envelopes) by manipulation of several building-scale, urban design parameters, adopted from [21,22,32,34,36,40,46,49,53,66,70,73,80,82,84–91,93,99,101,102,
104,105,107,108,110–114].

manipulating dimensions (i.e., envelope opening patterns, and fillet wall dedicated tool (Rh/Gr) by using plugins i.e., Python, Evo Mass, Ladybug,
size) in a dedicated tool (Rh/Gr). However, they used a different com­ and Climate Studio, that enabled daylight and indoor environment
bination of plugins, for instance, one study [73] used Diva for daylight, simulations. Another study [88] proposed a model to parametrically
while the other [107] used several plugins including Ladybug, Honey­ generate a façade in the dedicated tool (Rh/Gr) by using Ecotect and
bee, and Galapagos for daylight and energy simulations, and façade Geco plugins, with a focus on daylight application. However, a few re­
optimization. Some researchers [36,40,49,80,86,88,91] only focused on searchers only focused on manipulating the roof designs i.e., skylight
manipulating building form-related parameters in the dedicated tool configuration in old heritage buildings [52], canopy location, and shape
(Rh/Gr) by using plugins for irradiance and energy simulation. How­ [74,98], light well aperture [79], or roof shape [22,58] by mainly
ever, in the existing models, the façade configurations are developed implementing models in dedicated tools (Rh/Gr). Most of them only
only in Rh/Gr using the Diva plugin for daylight simulations. focussed on daylight by using one plugin i.e., Diva, or Galapagos, or by
One study [40] proposed a model by manipulating façade form in the using a set of plugins (i.e., Wallacei and Ladybug; Honeybee and

12
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

Ladybug; or Honeybee, Ladybug, and Galapagos). Additionally, some envelope material), window (i.e., window-to-wall ratio), and technology
researchers used custom tools, by developing parametric geometries in parameters (i.e., heating/cooling system settings). Two studies [102,
Rh/Gr and combining them with external programs. For example, Anton 114] proposed models to generate several building designs through the
and Tănase [98] combined a parametric model with ANSYS and Lesosai custom tool, by combining the model implemented in Rh/Gr with the
tools, for simulating aspects related to daylight and the indoor envi­ ANN model. These studies considered varying building dimensions,
ronment. Hendarti and Sjarifudin [58] combined a parametric model for orientation, wall material, and window (window-to-wall ratio, di­
generating roof designs with Geco/Ecotect tool for dynamic solar irra­ mensions, material, shading device type). However, one study [114]
diance simulations. Their main objective was to estimate solar electric used a MOO algorithm to manipulate these design parameters auto­
yield. matically with a focus on addressing applications i.e., daylight, building
Moreover, some researchers developed models by manipulating physics, and the indoor environment. While the other [102] also
urban and technology. For instance, researchers [16,37,39,69] manip­ manipulated technical parameters but the focus was only limited to
ulated BIPV orientation and layouts, roof shapes (i.e., shed, gable, daylight and building physics applications.
saltbox, or curved), and slopes. These models were mainly implemented Similarly, Lobaccaro et al. [32] implemented their model in a custom
through custom tools by developing models in Rh/Gr, using irradiance tool, by developing the model in Rh/Gr, using a set of plugins (i.e., Diva,
plugins (i.e., Diva and Ladybug), and also using other programs. For Ladybug, and Evaluate), and performing simulations in other tools i.e.,
example, using Matlab, Simulink, and SketchUp to address daylight and Design-Builder tool by focusing on LCA. They evaluated the perfor­
solar power [16]; using Lesosai, ANSYS, TRNSYS, Matlab, and CONTAM mance of designs by manipulating parameters i.e., building form,
to address building physics and solar power [39]; or using PV-GIS, (construction) components dimensions, and material quantity. Although
PVsyst, PVWatts, HOMER Pro, and SAM to address LCA [37] applica­ existing seminal work presents several parametric models, most of
tions. Some researchers [30,35] manipulated BIPV tilt angle, and win­ which are implemented in dedicated tools i.e., Rh/Gr along with
dow design (i.e., window-to-wall ratio, louver blade angle), to address divergent, built-in plugins sued for a variety of simulations. Moreover,
combined applications i.e., building physics, solar power, and daylight. building dimensions, building form, and windows appear to be widely
They mainly implemented models in dedicated tools (Rh/Gr) using investigated design parameters in building-scale models. There exist a
plugins i.e., Ladybug for irradiance, and Honeybee for building energy variety of district-scale models as well, which are discussed in the
(in EnergyPlus) simulations. Some researchers [109,115] proposed following section in terms of parameters, applications, and imple­
models by manipulating urban and technology parameters to address mentation tools.
LCA and several other combined applications. For instance, Purup and
Petersen [109] developed a custom tool by combining models developed 3.2.2. District-scale
in Rh/Gr (using Diva plugin) with C#.Net-based script, to change Fig. 12 shows the rendered solar designs and respective district-scale
building zones, and system (heating/ventilation/air conditioning) set­ parameters, that are manipulated in existing models. Regarding the
tings to address daylight, and building physics applications. Samadi parametric models on a district-scale, researchers aimed to manipulate
et al. [87] proposed a model implemented in the dedicated tool (Rh/Gr), parameters related to individual buildings as well as the neighborhood,
to manipulate building dimensions and windows (dimensions, and that can support a range of applications. This study identifies models
shader units). They used the Ladybug plugin for daylight simulations manipulating parameters from a single to four geometrical aspects.
and the Galapagos plugin for optimization of the building geometry. Lin Concerning on design aspect, researchers manipulated parameters
et al. [53] optimized building dimensions and the window for daylight related to the neighborhood (i.e., density or number of buildings) [59],
and building physics applications by developing a custom, out-of-box buildings form [81], and roof shape [51] in their proposed models.
tool based on computer language (Qt) and OpenGL interface (using These models were mainly implemented in dedicated tools i.e., Rh/Gr
DAYSIM, and Ecotect). along with Diva plugin for the irradiance and energy simulations.
Toutou et al. [112] and Daly [101] optimized window design to Further, these models are limited to solar power, and daylight applica­
address daylight and building physics applications by using a MOO tions [51,59,81]. Among these, one study also used [51] Galapagos
(genetic) algorithm in the parametric model implemented in the dedi­ plugin to use the MOO algorithm, to maximize solar gain by automati­
cated tool (Rh/Gr). However, the former [112] used Honeybee and cally manipulating roof design. Additionally, Kanters and Horvat [59]
Octopus plugins, and also manipulated material properties, while the emphasized that at the district-scale, urban density can significantly
latter [101] used Geco to transform data to the Ecotect and Galapagos influence the energy yield from BIPVs.
plugin by including skylight design parameters. Esfahani et al. [46] Concerning models with two design aspects, researchers varied pa­
addressed solar power application by implementing a model in the rameters, that were related to buildings’ dimensions, and neighborhood
dedicated tool (Rh/Gr) by manipulating building dimensions and [100]; buildings’ dimensions, and form [1,68,116]; buildings’ form, and
orientation and using a set of plugins i.e., Ladybug for irradiance sim­ neighborhood [94]; or buildings’ form, and orientation [41]. For
ulations, and Galapagos for MOO optimization. While Oliveira and instance, Chang et al. [100] implemented a model in the dedicated tool
Gognat [89] developed a custom tool by manipulating building orien­ (Rh/Gr), by manipulating building dimensions, and buildings’ separa­
tation and façade glazing ratio in Rh/Gr and integrated it with R script tion distance. They used Honeybee and Ladybug plugins to address
irradiance, and LCA simulations. Touloupaki and Theodosiou [34,90] applications i.e., daylight, building physics, and solar power. A few re­
developed a model by manipulating orientation, envelope material, and searchers [1,68,116] proposed models to manipulate building forms and
window-to-wall ratio in the dedicated tool (Rh/Gr). To address building dimensions, but with different implementation approaches, and appli­
physics and LCA applications, they considered using Ladybug, Honey­ cations. For example, Gholami et al. [116] varied form factor, and
bee, and evolutionary algorithm plugins, for performance evaluation floor-area-ratio in a custom tool combining Rh/Gr-based model using
and design optimization. urban daylight and urban modeling interface plugins with Geographical
Two studies [93,99] proposed models to explore building design in information system (GIS). They aimed to address daylight, building
the dedicated tool (Rh/Gr) and used Honeybee and Ladybug plugins. physics, and solar power applications. Perera et al. [1] considered the
However, one study [99] varied building form (i.e., wall angle, orien­ same parameters in their model as in Ref. [116], however, they devel­
tation), and window (i.e., window-to-wall ratio, number, and glazing oped a custom tool by combining the model implemented in Rh/Gr with
material), and used Octopus for optimization by focusing on daylight, a GIS database and urban simulation model (CitySim), to address
building physics, and indoor environment applications. While the other building physics and solar power applications. While Shi et al. [68]
[93] only focused on building physics, and the indoor environment developed a model by changing form factor, floor-area-ratio, and site
applications, and changed building form (i.e., courtyard geometry, coverage ratio by using a custom tool that combined the model

13
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

Fig. 12. Author’s own representation of rendered solar designs generated in Dynamo and Revit, using solar analysis package (example of irradiance analysis on
envelopes) by manipulation of several district-scale, urban design parameters, adopted from [1,31,41,43,51,54,59,64,68,76,81,94,100,116,117].

implemented in Rh/Gr with an urban block generator and city energy [43,76]; buildings’ form, dimensions, and orientation [47]; building’s
analyst tools, to address LCA application for BIPV. form, dimensions, and roof shape [64]; building’s form, dimensions, and
Setting the same objective as in Ref. [68], another study [41] pro­ window [31]; or buildings’ form, neighborhood, and roof shape [54].
posed a model using a dedicated tool (Rh/Gr) along with a set of plugins For instance, Natanian and Auer [117] varied floor-area-ratio, building
i.e., Ladybug for energy simulation and Octopus for MOO optimization. contours, street width, and window-to-wall ratio in the dedicated tool
The main aim of this study was to investigate the impact of building (Rh/Gr), and used Honeybee and Colibri plugins for a variety of simu­
form and orientation on energy performance. Ismaeel et al. [94] used a lations to address daylight, building physics, and solar power applica­
custom tool by combining the Rh/Gr-based model using the Ladybug tions. Other researchers [43,76] considered the same aspects (i.e., form,
plugin with ArcGIS Model Builder. They focused on applications i.e., dimension, and neighborhood), but selected a different set of parame­
LCA and the indoor environment, by manipulating parameters related to ters. For example, Bournas [76] varied building typologies, mean
building form and neighborhood. The majority of existing models [1,68, building heights, and urban density, while Nault et al. [43] varied
94,116] that allows manipulating parameters related to two geometrical building footprint, dimensions, plot ratio, and distance between build­
aspects are implemented in custom, tailored 3D tools (using Rh/Gr with ings. The former implemented model in Rh/Gr using Honeybee plugin
other programs). for daylighting, while the latter used a custom (tailored 3D) tool by
Concerning models based on three geometrical aspects, researchers combining the Rh/Gr-based model using the Diva plugin with Matlab
manipulated parameters related to buildings’ dimensions, window, and script to address daylighting and building physics applications.
neighborhood [117]; buildings’ form, dimensions, and neighborhood Abdollahzadeh and Nimish Biloria [31,47] developed two different

14
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

models in the dedicated tool (Rh/Gr). First, they [47] varied building techniques [4,10], passive solar strategies [23,24], urban solar consid­
form, dimensions, and street orientation for indoor environment simu­ eration [8,26], or advanced solar technologies [25]. However, these
lation by using Honeybee and Ladybug plugins. Later [31] they used studies only limit their scope to traditional, non-parametric design ap­
window design parameters (window-to-wall ratio), building form, and proaches, and only dealt with particular aspects i.e., application, or
dimensions. Moreover, to address different applications (i.e., indoor technology. Despite a large number of studies proposing parametric
environment and building physics), they only used one plugin (Honey­ models, a comprehensive review is still missing from such scholarly
bee) unlike in their previous work in Ref. [47]. Lobaccaro et al. [64] and work. Some researchers, however, reported examples of parametric
Florio et al. [54] manipulated building form and roof shape by imple­ models in the solar integration projects, but a detailed overview
menting their model in a custom tool, to address applications i.e., solar considering several different aspects is still scarce. For example, two
power and LCA. However, Lobaccaro et al. [64] manipulated building reviews were based on several different methods in building energy
dimensions, and Florio et al. [54] manipulated neighborhood as an research and solar strategies in envelopes, among which they high­
additional geometrical aspect. For irradiance and energy simulations, lighted some examples of parametric models as well [28,29]. However,
they both used custom tools, however, Lobaccaro et al. [64] combined one review focused only on the parametric models, however, this review
Rh/Gr-based model using Honeybee and Diva plugins with Revit, Excel, was dedicated to daylight applications [27]. Therefore, the review
and AutoCAD programs, while Florio et al. [54] combined Rh/Gr-based presented in this study fills the aforementioned gaps in current research.
model with DaySim and CitySim programs. Concerning four geometrical The work presented here is novel in many aspects. Firstly, it provides a
aspects, researchers [20,42,92,96,97,103,106,118] developed models holistic overview of existing parametric models regardless of any spe­
only to address combined applications i.e., daylight, solar power, and cific solar application and/or technology.
building physics. For instance, they manipulated parameters related to Secondly, classifies the parametric models across several categories
building form, dimensions, and neighborhood along with roof shape in including design scope, technology, application, objective, and imple­
custom tools [96]. Some manipulated window [103], or building mentation method, to understand key characteristics. Finally, it pro­
orientation [42] in the dedicated tool (Rh/Gr) using divergent plugins to vides future directives for accelerating the development of sustainable
address different applications. buildings through applying parametric design approaches. These aspects
Some manipulated geometrical aspects related to building form, are missing in the current literature in the field. The analytical results
orientation, and window with building dimensions, or material prop­ are presented by extracting the relevant information of existing models
erties [20,92] in their models. For example, Samuelson et al. [92] and mapping it across (1) technology, applications, and objectives; and
implemented their model in a custom (tailored 3D) tool by combining (2) design scope, applications, and implementation, as discussed in
Rh/Gr-based model with EnergyPlus for energy simulations. They sections 3.1 and 3.2 respectively. These results helped to identify current
manipulated building typologies, orientation, window-to-wall ratio, research trends and the research gaps in this field. It is found that most
glass type, and wall material, to find optimal configurations to address models have been implemented through ‘dedicate tools’ which come
applications i.e., building physics and indoor environment. Others [97, with built-in plugins. In this context, the 3D modeling tool, Rh/Gr has
118] manipulated parameters related to roof shape, orientation, and gained significant attention as a dedicated tool. This tool has also been
neighborhood along with building dimensions or roof slope to address widely used as a ‘custom tool’ when integrated with other simulation
combined applications i.e., building physics and solar power. For engines. Further, the most common plugins that have been used within
example, Kanters and Wall [118] developed a model in the dedicated these tools, include ‘Honeybee’, ‘Ladybug’, and ‘Diva’, for simulating
tool, (Rh/Gr) by using the Diva plugin, and manipulated roof shape and aspects of daylight, solar irradiance, or energy (yield/demand). These
slope, orientation, and urban density. While Amado and Poggi [97] findings are consistent with the results of other reviews on parametric
varied building height, orientation, urban density, and roof shape in a models [27–29]. Another new and major finding that points toward the
custom tool to address building physics and solar power applications. current status of parametric design is that most models are still appli­
For this, they combined Rh/Gr model with solar dynamic analysis cable to small buildings, given a limited number of district-scale models,
(Geco/Ecotect) and the GIS database. Loeffler et al. [106] varied site in existing research.
coverage ratio, building orientation, insolation material, and Additionally, the nature of design parameters that are manipulated
window-to-wall ratio in a dedicated tool (Rh/Gr) and used the Ladybug in existing models varies with respect to scale. For instance, parameters
plugin to address several applications (daylight, building physics, and related to window configuration are more common in building-scale
solar power). models, and building forms are widely explored in district-scale
Generally, the proposed parametric models on district-scale, are only models. Nevertheless, windows appear to be a suitable choice, when
implemented in custom (tailored 3D) tools by integrating Rh/Gr-based the aim is to address daylighting, and this has also been discussed in one
models with other programs, and in dedicated tools (Rh/Gr) using of the existing reviews [27]. The majority of models support using a
divergent plugins. Additionally, most of these models are developed to single technology such as BIPV, shader, and solar façade to generate
address combined applications. Particularly, building physics and solar solar energy, reduce the buildings’ energy demand, and improve com­
power are popular, that are combined with other applications. fort (visual/thermal). Whereas, shader along with solar facades is widely
Regarding the parameters, building form followed by the building di­ adopted among all hybrid technologies, to improve comfort. Further,
mensions, and neighborhood are the most explored geometrical aspects two application areas seem to dominate which include daylight and
in the reported parametric models. solar power, where most researchers strived to address goals related to
energy and comfort domains. Nevertheless, the review reflects that no
4. Discussion and conclusions single technology can support all applications or address all objectives,
Based on these findings, several conclusions can be drawn, that guide to
The parametric design has been getting popular in recent years, to set up the future goals given several limitations of the existing models:
not only address the design complexity of modern buildings but also to (1) among reviewed articles, 55% reported daylight, 39% reported solar
address concerns related to sustainability. This paper has presented a power, 37% reported building physics, and 13% reported LCA or indoor
literature review on parametric models, that are used for solar integra­ environment as single or combined applications. (2) fraction of studies
tion with urban architecture, and classifies these models across five main addressing single and combined applications is 55% and 45% respec­
categories including design scope, solar technologies, applications, ob­ tively; (3) more than 70% of the reviewed articles proposed
jectives, and implementation methods. Although, several researchers single-building scale models, among which windows received signifi­
have reviewed methods/techniques to increase the sustainability of cant interest followed by building dimensions and form as key design
buildings, which is but not limited to cooling and [3,5], daylighting parameters; (4) only 13% studies proposed models by interactively

15
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

designing urban areas and energy technologies as BIPV/BIPVSS; (5) such technology through parametric design, on the urban scale. This
more than 35% of studies allowed manipulating multiple design pa­ would require more experimentation, to make these solutions compa­
rameters; (6) about 63% of reported models mainly focused on single rable with market-available BIPVs or BIPVSS. Additionally, not all ob­
technology utilization, and more than 40% of studies reported use of jectives can be achieved through parametric design, particularly which
BIPV, shader, or solar façade as most common choices; (7) Most studies are conflicting in nature, such as thermal (less solar gains) versus visual
focused on addressing visual comfort, and energy (demand and yield) (good amount of sunlight/illuminance, and less glare) comfort. This is
objectives, with a fraction of 52%, and 66% of the reviewed articles; and obvious in studies reporting models on daylight as in Refs. [52,75,84,
(8) nearly 62% of studies implemented models through dedicated tools; 85], and this also is consistent with the other review on daylighting [27].
where using out-of-box tools for implementation is least common as Further, a balance between low demand and high energy yield has also
reflected by 2% of studies. been indicated in several studies [1,22,30,35,39]. This requires more
Further, these conclusions guide to set up future goals given several experimentation, particularly in the early-stage design process of
limitations of the existing models. Firstly, concerning tools, Rh/Gr as a adaptive solar facades. This can be supported by the application of MOO
dedicated tool has dominated in the field of parametric design and is algorithms. Already some researchers have attempted to use these al­
getting upgraded consistently, within several new plugins, but there is gorithms on the parameters models as in [15,30,40,42,46,51,54,74,84,
still an inherent limitation regarding flexibility when it comes to per­ 87,91,99,104,111,112,114,115], in efforts to address conflicting ob­
forming several different simulations. The built-in plugins can only jectives. However, these studies are lower than studies that only focused
support certain disciplines, and this requires having tools that can be on manually filtering designs according to performance, without
custom tailored, according to the preferences of multi-disciplinary teams applying any optimization algorithm.
to perform simulations. To support this, custom tools, either by It is needless to say that the existing research covers a broad spec­
combining Rh/Gr with other programs or integrating several other tools, trum of parametric design approaches, but still misses a major aspect of
are necessary. Even several studies proposed custom tools, but their generative design. For instance, categorization of the parametric
number is significantly less than studies only opting in dedicated tools, models, according to the MOO algorithms, is not the scope of this work.
and this finding is also replicated in Ref. [28]. Thus, more skills and This study did not explore several MOO techniques, that are used in this
efforts are required, to develop, flexible, adaptable, and custom tools. As field, and are effective to generate designs promptly. Nevertheless, this
the building industry is constantly evolving, several novel tools to sup­ research provides a holistic and comprehensive overview of parametric
port the design process should be developed. Secondly, regarding the models for solar integration with the built environment. The analytical
scope, two aspects still need attention; the selection of parameters to be findings and recommendations according to limitations to the existing
manipulated in models, and the (design) scope to which the models need models can allow the development of future models which can be
to be implemented. Further, very few studies explored the designs by applied for designing urban infrastructure on small- to large-scale,
manipulating parameters of integrated technologies particularly, BIPV which is sustainable by utilizing solar technologies.
and BIPVSS, and are limited to a single building-scale.
As buildings and solar technologies should be designed in synergy, Declaration of competing interest
this of course would require having flexible and high-performing, urban,
and energy systems designs. Thus, the development of models that The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
particularly allow designing buildings and technologies in an integrative interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
manner, should be a future step in this field. As author’s previously the work reported in this paper.
developed parametric model addresses this concern, by collaborative
designing a single building and energy system, in a parametric manner, Data availability
and assessing the performance of several solutions for energy yield and
onsite solar potential as in [119]. However, such an approach is still less No data was used for the research described in the article.
adopted in current research, as reflected by the small number of studies.
The review pointed out another drawback of current models, which is
Acknowledgments
the lack of design exploration with respect to the dynamic environ­
mental conditions, which is also replicated in Ref. [27]. This would
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding
require the inclusion of parameters that reflect the environment so that
agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
future models can be used to model, design, and assess the performance
of urban infrastructure at various geographical locations or in diverse
References
regions. These models would allow informed decision-making in
early-stage design. Moreover, one of the reasons behind the small [1] Perera ATD, Coccolo S, Scartezzini JL. The influence of urban form on the grid
number of models on a district-scale is the increased design complexity integration of renewable energy technologies and distributed energy systems. Sci
stemming from a large number of design parameters related to neigh­ Rep 2019;9(1):17756.
[2] Anderson JE, Wulfhorst G, Lang W. Energy analysis of the built environment – a
borhoods/several buildings. This requires the development of models, review and outlook. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;44:149–58.
that can allow understanding of the significance of parameters, so [3] Wang Y, Shukla A, Liu S. A state of art review on methodologies for heat transfer
insignificant parameters can be taken out to reduce the complexity, and and energy flow characteristics of the active building envelopes. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2017;78:1102–16. ISSN 1364-0321.
ultimately reduce the time and cost of simulation(s). One option could
[4] Yu X, Su Y. Daylight availability assessment and its potential energy saving
be performing a sensitivity analysis to understand, which parameters are estimation –A literature review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;52:494–503.
important, and that can be excluded from the models, thus more ISSN 1364-0321.
[5] Prieto A, Knaack U, Klein T, Auer T. 25 Years of cooling research in office
experimentation is still required to address this.
buildings: review for the integration of cooling strategies into the building façade
While some models still support the utilization of hybrid energy (1990–2014). Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;71:89–102. ISSN 1364-0321.
technologies, including other renewables, than BIPV or BIPVSS, the [6] Santos-Herrero JM, Lopez-Guede JM, Flores-Abascal I. Modeling, simulation and
number of these models is still low. Within emerging markets of energy, control tools for nZEB: a state-of-the-art review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2021;
142:110851. ISSN 1364-0321.
several novel solutions have been developed in recent years, particularly [7] Ohlsson KEA, Olofsson T. Benchmarking the practice of validation and
to address multiple applications. Among these, solar concentrators are uncertainty analysis of building energy models. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2021;
prominent which can not only be used for electricity, but also heating/ 142:110842. ISSN 1364-0321.
[8] Akrofi MM, Okitasari M. Integrating solar energy considerations into urban
cooling, and daylighting applications through the use of solar cells and planning for low carbon cities: a systematic review of the state-of-the-art. Urban
optical fibers. However, none of the existing work reports on applying Governance; 2022. p. 2664–3286.

16
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

[9] Salvia M, Leo SD, Nakos C, Maras H, Panevski S, Fülöp O, Papagianni S, [38] Gremmelspacher JM, Pizarro RC, Jaarsveld MV, Davidsson H, Johansson D.
Tarevska Z, Čeh C, Szabó E, Bodzsár B. Creating a sustainable and resource Historical building renovation and PV optimisation towards NetZEB in Sweden.
efficient future: a methodological toolkit for municipalities. Renew Sustain Sol Energy 2021;223:248–60. ISSN 0038-092X.
Energy Rev 2015;50:480–96. ISSN 1364-0321. [39] Lydon GP, Hofer J, Svetozarevic B, Nagy Z, Schlueter A. Coupling energy systems
[10] Konstantoglou M, Tsangrassoulis A. Dynamic operation of daylighting and with lightweight structures for a net plus energy building. Appl Energy 2017;189:
shading systems: a literature review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;60:268–83. 310–26.
ISSN 1364-0321. [40] Wang L, Zhang H, Liu X, Ji G. Exploring the synergy of building massing and
[11] Ruiz-Valero L, Faxas-Guzmán J, Ferreira J, González V, Guerrero N, Ramirez F. façade design through evolutionary optimization. Front Architect Res 2022:
Thermal performance of facades based on experimental monitoring of outdoor 2095–635.
test cells in tropical climate. Civ Eng J 2021;7(12):1982–97. 2676-6957. [41] Manni M, Lobaccaro G, Lolli N, Bohne RA. Parametric design to maximize solar
[12] Davlatshoevich ND. Investigation optical properties of the orthorhombic system irradiation and minimize the embodied GHG emissions for a ZEB in Nordic and
CsSnBr3-xIx: application for solar cells and optoelectronic devices. J Hum Earth Mediterranean climate zones. Energies 2020;13(18):1–18.
Future 2021;2(4):404–11. ISSN: 2785-2997. [42] Lobaccaro G, Carlucci S, Croce S, Paparella R, Finocchiaro L. Boosting solar
[13] Qerimi D, Dimitrieska C, Vasilevska S, Rrecaj A. Modeling of the solar thermal accessibility and potential of urban districts in the Nordic climate: a case study in
energy use in urban areas. Civ Eng J 2020;6(7):1349–67. Trondheim. Sol Energy 2017;149:347–69.
[14] Aguacil S, Lufkin S, Rey E. Active surfaces selection method for building- [43] Nault E, Moonen P, Rey E, Andersen M. Predictive models for assessing the
integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) in renovation projects based on self-consumption passive solar and daylight potential of neighborhood designs: a comparative
and self-sufficiency. Energy Build 2019;193:15–28. ISSN 0378-7788. proof-of-concept study. Build Environ 2017;116:1–16.
[15] Gao Y, Dong J, Isabella O, Santbergen R, Tan H, Zeman M, Zhang G. [44] Huang L, Fan C, Zhai ZJ. A graphical multi-objective performance evaluation
A photovoltaic window with sun-tracking shading elements towards maximum method with architect-friendly mode. Front Architect Res 2021;10(2):420–31.
power generation and non-glare daylighting. Appl Energy 2018;228:454–1472. ISSN 2095-2635.
[16] Gao Y, Dong J, Isabella O, Santbergen R, Tan H, Zeman M, Zhang G. Modeling [45] Asl MR, Zarrinmehr S, Bergin M, Yan W. BPOpt: a framework for BIM-based
and analyses of energy performances of photovoltaic greenhouses with sun- performance optimization. Energy Build 2015;180:401–12.
tracking functionality. Appl Energy 2019;233–234:424–42. [46] Esfahani SK, Karrech A, Cameron R, Elchalakani M, Tenorio R, Jerez F.
[17] Hofer J, Groenewolt A, Jayathissa P, Nagy Z, Schlueter. Parametric analysis and Optimizing the solar energy capture of residential roof design in the southern
systems design of dynamic photovoltaic shading modules. Energy Sci Eng 2016;4: hemisphere through Evolutionary Algorithm. Energy Built Environ 2021;2(4):
134–52. 406–24.
[18] Caetano I, Santos L, Leitão A. Computational design in architecture: defining [47] Abdollahzadeh N, Biloria N. Outdoor thermal comfort: analyzing the impact of
parametric, generative, and algorithmic design. Front Architect Res 2020;9(2): urban configurations on the thermal performance of street canyons in the humid
287–300. subtropical climate of Sydney. Front Architect Res 2021;10(2):394–409. ISSN
[19] Borrmann A, Berkhahn V. Principles of geometric modeling. In: Borrmann A, 2095-2635.
König M, Koch C, Beetz J, editors. Building information modeling. Cham: [48] Costanzo V, Yao R, Essah E, Shao L, Shahrestani M, Oliveira AC, Araz M,
Springer; 2018. Hepbasli A, Biyik E. A method of strategic evaluation of energy performance of
[20] Nault E, Waibel C, Carmeliet J, Andersen M. Development and test application of Building Integrated Photovoltaic in the urban context. J Clean Prod 2018;184:
the UrbanSOLve decision-support prototype for early-stage neighborhood design. 82–91.
Build Environ 2018;137:58–72. [49] Hosseini SM, Mohammadi M, Schröder T, Guerra-Santin O. Integrating
[21] Gao Q, Yang Y, Wang Q. An integrated simulation method for PVSS parametric interactive kinetic façade design with colored glass to improve daylight
design using multi-objective optimization. Front Architect Res 2021:2095–635. performance based on occupants’ position. J Build Eng 2020;31:101404. ISSN
[22] Lydon GP, Caranovic S, Hischier IA. Schlueter Coupled simulation of thermally 2352-7102.
active building systems to support a digital twin. Energy Build 2019;202:109298. [50] Akimov L, De Michele G, Oberegger UF, Badenko V, Mainini AG. Evaluation of
ISSN 0378-7788. EN15193-1 on energy requirements for artificial lighting against Radiance-based
[23] Toparlar Y, Blocken B, Maiheu B, van Heijst GJF. A review on the CFD analysis of DAYSIM. J Build Eng 2021;40:102698. ISSN 2352-7102.
urban microclimate. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;80:1613–40. ISSN 1364- [51] Lobaccaro G, Chatzichristos S, Leon VA. Solar optimization of housing
0321. development. Energy Proc 2016;91:868–75. ISSN 1876-6102.
[24] Stevanović S. Optimization of passive solar design strategies: a review. Renew [52] Marzouk M, ElSharkawy M, Mahmoud A. Optimizing daylight utilization of flat
Sustain Energy Rev 2013;25:177–96. ISSN 1364-0321. skylights in heritage buildings. J Adv Res 2022;37:133–45. ISSN 2090-1232.
[25] Kanters J, Wall M. A planning process map for solar buildings in urban [53] Lin B, Yu Q, Li Z, Zhou X. Research on parametric design method for energy
environments. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;57:173–85. ISSN 1364-0321. efficiency of green building in architectural scheme phase. Front Architect Res
[26] Freitas S, Catita C, Redweik P, Brito MC. Modelling solar potential in the urban 2013;2(1):11–22. ISSN 2095-2635.
environment: state-of-the-art review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;41:915–31. [54] Florio P, Peronato G, Perera ATD, Blasi AD, Poon KH, Kämpf JH. Designing and
ISSN 1364-0321. assessing solar energy neighborhoods from visual impact. Sustain Cities Soc 2021;
[27] Eltaweel A, Su Y. Parametric design and daylighting: a literature review. Renew 71:102959. ISSN 2210-6707.
Sustain Energy Rev 2017;73:1086–103. [55] Freitas JDS, Cronemberger J, Soares RM, Amorim CND. Modeling and assessing
[28] Lobaccaro G, Croce S, Lindkvist C, Probst MCM, Scognamiglio A, Dahlberg J, BIPV envelopes using parametric Rhinoceros plugins Grasshopper and Ladybug.
Lundgren M, Wall M. A cross-country perspective on solar energy in urban Renew Energy 2020;160:1468–79. ISSN 0960-1481.
planning: lessons learned from international case studies. Renew Sustain Energy [56] Groenewolt A, Bakker J, Hofer J, Nagy Z, Schlüter A. Methods for modelling and
Rev 2019;108:209–37. ISSN 1364-0321. analysis of bendable photovoltaic modules on irregularly curved surfaces. Int J
[29] Taveres-Cachat E, Favoino F, Loonen R, Goia F. Ten questions concerning co- Energy Environ Eng 2016;7:261–71.
simulation for performance prediction of advanced building envelopes. Build [57] Hachem C, Elsayed M. Patterns of façade system design for enhanced energy
Environ 2021;191:107570. ISSN 0360-1323. performance of multistory buildings. Energy Build 2016;130:366–77.
[30] Taveres-Cachat ET, Lobaccaro G, Goia F, Chaudhary G. A methodology to [58] Hendarti R, Sjarifudin FU. Form finding of PV roof top using parametric study.
improve the performance of PV integrated shading devices using multi-objective Proc Eng 2016;169:416–21.
optimization. Appl Energy 2019;247:731–44. [59] Kanters J, Horvat M. Solar energy as a design parameter in urban planning.
[31] Abdollahzadeh N, Nimish Biloria N. Urban microclimate and energy Energy Proc 2012;30:1143–52.
consumption: a multi-objective parametric urban design approach for dense [60] Kanters J, Wall M, Dubois M-C. Development of a façade assessment and design
subtropical cities. Front Architect Res 2022:2095–635. tool for solar energy (FASSADES). Buildings 2014;4(1):43–59.
[32] Lobaccaro G, Wiberg AH, Ceci G, Manni M, Lolli N, Beradi U. Parametric design [61] Kanters J, Davidsson H. Mutual shading of PV modules on flat roofs: a parametric
to minimize the embodied GHG emissions in a ZEB. Energy Build 2018;167: study. Energy Proc 2014;57:1706–15.
106–23. [62] Kanters J, Wall M, Dubois MC. Typical values for active solar energy in urban
[33] Taveres-Cachat E, Goia F. Exploring the impact of problem formulation in planning. Energy Proc 2014;48:1607–16.
numerical optimization: a case study of the design of PV integrated shading [63] Kuo HJ, Hsieh SH, Guo RC, Chan CC. A verification study for energy analysis of
systems. Build Environ 2021;188:107422. ISSN 0360-1323. BIPV buildings with BIM. Energy Build 2016;130:676–91. ISSN 0378-7788.
[34] Touloupaki E, Theodosiou T. Optimization of building form to minimize energy [64] Lobaccaro G, Lisowska MM, Saretta E, Bonomo P, Frontini F. A methodological
consumption through parametric modelling. Procedia Environ Sci 2017;38: analysis approach to assess solar energy potential at the neighborhood scale.
509–14. Energies 2019;12(18):3554.
[35] Hoseinzadeh P, Assadi MK, Heidari S, Khalatbari M, Saidur R, Nejad KH, [65] Mendis T, Huang Z, Xu S. Determination of economically optimised building
Sangin H. Energy performance of building integrated photovoltaic high-rise integrated photovoltaic systems for utilisation on facades in the tropical climate:
building: case study, Tehran, Iran. Energy Build 2021;235:110707. a case study of Colombo, Sri Lanka. Build Simulat 2020;13:171–83.
[36] Hosseini SM, Mohammadi M, Guerra-Santin O. Interactive kinetic façade: [66] Salimzadeh N, Vahdatikhaki F, Hammad A. Parametric modeling and surface-
improving visual comfort based on dynamic daylight and occupant’s positions by specific sensitivity analysis of PV module layout on building skin using BIM.
2D and 3D shape changes. Build Environ 2019;165:106396. ISSN 0360-1323. Energy Build 2020;216:109953.
[37] Edmund JWT, Go YL. Enhancement and validation of building integrated PV [67] Saretta E, Bonomo P, Frontini F. A calculation method for the BIPV potential of
system: 3D modelling, techno-economics and environmental assessment. Energy Swiss façades at LOD2.5 in urban areas: a case from Ticino region. Sol Energy
and Built Environment; 2021. ISSN 2666-1233. 2020;195:150–65. ISSN 0038-092X.

17
N. Bushra Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 168 (2022) 112849

[68] Shi Z, Fonseca JA, Schlueter A. A parametric method using vernacular urban comparative analysis and deep-learning predictive model. Front Architect Res
block typologies for investigating interactions between solar energy use and 2022:2095–635.
urban design. Renew Energy 2021;165(1):823–41. [94] Ismaeel WSE, Elsayed MA, Elsayed DSI. Revisiting ‘Sabil’ buildings as nuclei of
[69] Walker L, Hofer J, Schlueter A. High-resolution, parametric BIPV and electrical sustainable urban mobility in Fatimid Cairo: an urban-touristic approach
systems modeling and design. Appl Energy 2019;238:164–79. considering urban and environmental qualities. Ain Shams Eng J 2022;13(6):
[70] Youssef AMA, Zhai ZJ, Reffat RM. Genetic algorithm based optimization for 101774. ISSN 2090-4479.
photovoltaics integrated building envelope. Energy Build 2016;127:627–36. [95] Natanian J, Aleksandrowicz O, Auer T. A parametric approach to optimizing
[71] Youssef AMA, Zhai ZJ, Reffat RM. Design of optimal building envelopes with urban form, energy balance and environmental quality: the case of Mediterranean
integrated photovoltaics. Build Simulat 2015;8:353–66. districts. Appl Energy 2019;254:2–17.
[72] Brembilla E, Chi DA, Hopfe CJ, Mardaljevic J. Evaluation of climate-based [96] Amando M, Poggi F. Solar urban planning: a parametric approach. Energy Proc
daylighting techniques for complex fenestration and shading systems. Energy 2014;48:1539–48.
Build 2019;203:109454. ISSN 0378-7788. [97] Amado M, Poggi F. Solar energy integration in urban planning: GUUD model.
[73] Rashwan A, Gizawi LE, Sheta S. Evaluation of the effect of integrating building Energy Proc 2014;50:277–84.
envelopes with parametric patterns on daylighting performance in office spaces [98] Anton I, Tănase D. Informed geometries. Parametric modelling and energy
in hot-dry climate. Alex Eng J 2019;58(2):551–7. ISSN 1110-0168. analysis in early stages of design. Energy Proc 2016;85:9–16. ISSN 1876-6102.
[74] Ameijde JV, Ma CY, Goepel G, Kirsten C, Wong J. Data-driven placemaking: [99] Bakmohammadi P, Noorzai E. Optimization of the design of the primary school
public space canopy design through multi-objective optimisation considering classrooms in terms of energy and daylight performance considering occupants’
shading, structural and social performance. Front Architect Res 2022;11(2): thermal and visual comfort. Energy Rep 2020;6(1590 – 1607). ISSN 2352-4847.
308–23. ISSN 2095-2635. [100] Chang S, Saha N, Castro-Lacouture D, Yang PPJ. Generative design and
[75] ElBatran RM, Ismaeel WSE. Applying a parametric design approach for performance modeling for relationships between urban built forms, sky opening,
optimizing daylighting and visual comfort in office buildings. Ain Shams Eng J solar radiation and energy. Energy Proc 2019;158:3994–4002. ISSN 1876-6102.
2021;12(3):3275–84. [101] Daly HMTE. Automated fenestration allocation as complying with LEED rating
[76] Bournas I. Daylight compliance of residential spaces: comparison of different system. Alex Eng J 2014;53(4):883–90. ISSN 1110-0168.
performance criteria and association with room geometry and urban density. [102] Elbeltagi E, Wefki H. Predicting energy consumption for residential buildings
Build Environ 2020;185:107276. ISSN 0360-1323. using ANN through parametric modeling. Energy Rep 2021;7(2534 – 2545). ISSN
[77] De Luca F, Dogan T. A novel solar envelope method based on solar ordinances for 2352-4847.
urban planning. Build Simulat 2019;12:817–34. [103] Jayaweera N, Rajapaksha U, Manthilake I. A parametric approach to optimize
[78] Eltaweel A, Su Y. Controlling Venetian blinds based on parametric design; via solar access for energy efficiency in high-rise residential buildings in dense urban
implementing Grasshopper’s plugins: a case study of an office building in Cairo. tropics. Sol Energy 2021;220:187–203.
Energy Build 2017;139:31–43. ISSN 0378-7788. [104] Kim H, Clayton MJ. A multi-objective optimization approach for climate-adaptive
[79] Goharian A, Daneshjoo K, Yeganeh M. Standardization of methodology for building envelope design using parametric behavior maps. Build Environ 2020;
optimizing the well aperture as device (reflector) for light-wells; A novel 185:107292. ISSN 0360-1323.
approach using Honeybee & Ladybug plugins. Energy Rep 2022;8:3096–114. [105] Lavin C, Fiorito F. Optimization of an external perforated screen for improved
ISSN 2352-4847. daylighting and thermal performance of an office space. Procedia Eng 2017;180:
[80] Hosseini SM, Mohammadi M, Schröder T, Guerra-Santin O. Bio-inspired 571–81. ISSN 1877-7058.
interactive kinetic façade: using dynamic transitory-sensitive area to improve [106] Loeffler R, Österreicher D, Stoeglehner G. The energy implications of urban
multiple occupants’ visual comfort. Front Architect Res 2021;10(4):821–37. ISSN morphology from an urban planning perspective – a case study for a new urban
2095-2635. development area in the city of Vienna. Energy Build 2021;252:111453.
[81] Lobaccaro G, Frontini F. Solar energy in urban environment: how urban [107] Mahdavinejad M, Nazar NS. Daylightophil high-performance architecture: multi-
densification affects existing buildings. Energy Proc 2014;48:1559–69. ISSN objective optimization of energy efficiency and daylight availability in BSk
1876-6102. climate. Energy Proc 2017;115:92–101. ISSN 1876-6102.
[82] Sherif A, Sabry H, Arafa R, Wagdy A. The impact of alternative window glazing [108] Pesenti M, Masera G, Fiorito F. Shaping an origami shading device through visual
types and a shading system on the daylighting of hospital patient rooms: and thermal simulations. Energy Proc 2015;78:346–51. ISSN 1876-6102.
simulation analysis under a desert clear sky. Energy Proc 2015;78:1805–10. ISSN [109] Purup PB, Petersen S. Rapid simulation of various types of HVAC systems in the
1876-6102. early design stage. Energy Proc 2017;122:469–74. ISSN 1876-6102.
[83] Tabadkani A, Shoubi MV, Soflaei F, Banihashemi S. Integrated parametric design [110] Qingsong M, Fukuda H. Parametric office building for daylight and energy
of adaptive facades for user’s visual comfort. Autom ConStruct 2019;106:102857. analysis in the early design stages. Procedia - Soc Behav Sci 2016;216:818–28.
[84] Tarabieh K, Nassar K, Abdelrahman M, Mashaly I. Statics of space syntax: analysis ISSN 1877-0428.
of daylighting. Front Architect Res 2019;8(3):311–8. ISSN 2095-2635. [111] Taveres-Cachat E, Goia F. Co-simulation and validation of the performance of a
[85] Zayed A, Elkhateib M, Mahdy M, Elwy I. Exploring dynamic slat system for highly flexible parametric model of an external shading system. Build Environ
enhancing daylighting distribution at deep office spaces in hot arid regions. 2020;182:107111. ISSN 0360-1323.
Energy Proc 2018;153:290–4. ISSN 1876-6102. [112] Toutou A, Fikry M, Mohamed W. The parametric based optimization framework
[86] Zhang L, Zhang L, Wang Y. Shape optimization of free-form buildings based on daylighting and energy performance in residential buildings in hot arid zone. Alex
solar radiation gain and space efficiency using a multi-objective genetic algorithm Eng J 2018;57(4):3595–608. ISSN 1110-0168.
in the severe cold zones of China. Sol Energy 2016;132:38–50. ISSN 0038-092X. [113] Zani A, Andaloro M, Deblasio L, Ruttico P, Mainini AG. Computational design and
[87] Samadi S, Noorzai E, Beltrán LO, Abbasi S. A computational approach for parametric optimization approach with genetic algorithms of an innovative
achieving optimum daylight inside buildings through automated kinetic shading concrete shading device system. Proc Eng 2017;180:1473–83. ISSN 1877-7058.
systems. Front Architect Res 2020;9(2):335–49. ISSN 2095 – 2635. [114] Zou Y, Zhan Q, Xiang K. A comprehensive method for optimizing the design of a
[88] Suyoto W, Indraprastha A, Purbo HW. Parametric approach as a tool for decision- regular architectural space to improve building performance. Energy Rep 2021;7:
making in planning and design process. Case study: office tower in Kebayoran 981–96. ISSN 2352-4847.
Lama. Procedia - Soc Behav Sci 2015;184:328–37. ISSN 1877-0428. [115] Waibel C, Evins R, Carmeliet J. Co-simulation and optimization of building
[89] Oliveira ECD, Gognat L. Multi-criteria assessment of sustainable envelop geometry and multi-energy systems: interdependencies in energy supply, energy
strategies’ performances. Energy Proc 2017;122:703–8. ISSN 1876-6102. demand and solar potentials. Appl Energy 2019;242:1661–82. ISSN 0306-2619.
[90] Touloupaki E, Theodosiou T. Energy performance optimization as a generative [116] Gholami M, Mofidi Shemirani M, Fayaz R. A modelling methodology for a solar
design tool for nearly zero energy buildings. Proc Eng 2017;180:1178–85. energy-efficient neighbourhood. Smart Sustain Built Environ 2018;7(1):117–32.
[91] Zhu L, Liu Y, Yang Y, Chen S. Multi -objective optimization of solar curved surface [117] Natanian J, Auer T. Balancing urban density, energy performance and
based on parametric design. Energy Proc 2019;158:446–52. environmental quality in the Mediterranean: a typological evaluation based on
[92] Samuelson H, Claussnitzer S, Goyal A, Chen Y, Romo-Castillo A. Parametric photovoltaic potential. Energy Proc 2018;152:1103–8. ISSN 1876-6102.
energy simulation in early design: high-rise residential buildings in urban [118] Kanters J, Wall M. The impact of urban design decisions on net zero energy solar
contexts. Build Environ 2016;101:19–31. ISSN 0360-1323. buildings in Sweden. Urban Plann Transport Res 2014;2(1):312–32.
[93] Tabadkani A, Aghasizadeh S, Banihashemi S, Hajirasouli A. Courtyard design [119] Bushra N, Hartmann T, Constantin Ungureanu LC. Performance assessment
impact on indoor thermal comfort and utility costs for residential households: method for roof-integrated TSSCs. Appl Energy 2022;322:119454. ISSN 0306-
2619.

18