Searsmont, PRWEB, June 13 2017

Ecocor, a construction company that manufactures, delivers and assembles high performance Passive House buildings, will act as the industry partner for TeamMTL at Solar Decathlon China 2018 in Dezhou, China. TeamMTL is a collaborative endeavor between the School of Architecture and several other departments at McGill University and Concordia University in Montreal.

Bruno Lee is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Building, Civil and Environmental Engineering and a part of the Centre for Zero Energy Building Studies, both at Concordia University. His research interests lie in “[facilitating] building design decisions that are based on objective and data driven reasoning, and [advancing] evaluation means to ensure robust design solutions that survive future challenges in a dynamic environment.” As a part of TeamMTL, Bruno has taken on the responsibility of Faculty Co-Lead for the engineering side of our project. 

Q: You have mentioned your previous participation in the solar decathlon, but as a student- how have your responsibilities changed since then?

A: As a student (I participated in the 2005 competition), our role was to work on our assigned task. The design element was centered on that task itself, but seldom ventured into the work of others. As a faculty lead, we treat the project as an whole- balancing ambition and limitation, weighing innovation against feasibility- not to mention the massive mountain of administrative work. 

Q: Have you noticed a difference in how students are engaged with the project now versus when you were a student participating?

A: In this Solar Decathlon (2017), we have tried to create an immerse experience for students such that they can try out many different things depending on the time they can afford to do so. For example, the building envelope design is closely tied to the energy performance of the building- if the same student involves themselves in both realms, they will have a much greater appreciation of the whole experience.

Q: Is the work being done by students an application of any theory based classes that are specifically taught at Concordia or McGill that you know of?

A: The Solar Decathlon experience is more or less like a real full-time consultancy job for those students that are spending the effort to be fully involved. At school, we learn the theory. With the Solar Decathlon, we apply the theory. On the other hand, we are trying to bring the Solar Decathlon experience into the classroom. For the engineering side, we have two capstone teams now basing their graduation project on the Solar Decathlon through BLDG 490 at Concordia. This graduation project involves 4-5 students each specializing in a different aspect in building design, HVAC, lighting, building envelope, and structure.

To truly apply the knowledge effectively, one must have the passion, vision, diligence and dedication. I would like to whole-heartedly thank all the volunteers who have donated both time and effort, sacrificing both sleep and leisure to make this project a success.

Q: What drew you to participate in this year’s project?

A: I was approached by Professor Jemtrud (McGill’s School of Architecture) and I agreed without hesitation. Once you do a Solar Decathlon, you will end up wanting to do it again and again... particularly, this time with a great teammate from McGill. 

Q: What are the primary softwares being used?

A: EnergyPlus, TRNSYS, Open Studio, Daysim, Rhino, Wufi

Q: For those not well-versed in the world of engineering or design could you explain a general approach to the process for the technical drawings and design development deliverable that just passed? Is the process more structured or organic?

A: An engineering approach is, in general, very structured and systematic. We spend time defining the objectives thoroughly. In fact- without clear design goals and well-defined objectives, the project will become vague and disoriented. Right from the very beginning we have wanted to make this building net-zero energy capable yet affordable. With this clear mandate in mind, the subsequent investigations and analyses all worked towards these two objectives. The results, as we concluded with this past submission, adopted a design solution that fulfilled net-zero energy capability but at the same time are not much costlier than a typical design.