Building design assistance program

Abstract

To provide a building design assistance program for assisting architects in designing a building so that the wellness of an office space is enhanced, thereby reducing the burden on an architectural designer and facilitating the design process.SOLUTION: A method refers to a database in which a plurality of implementation items for improving the evaluation of a plurality of evaluation axes for enhancing wellness is associated with the respective evaluation axes, and in which a priority and an ease of implementation are associated with each of the implementation items, such that the priority and the ease of implementation have a plurality of stages of values. The method includes an implementation item list creation function that arranges the evaluation axes in a first direction and arranges the implementation items corresponding to the respective evaluation axes in order of magnitude of the priority in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction, and an ease of implementation identification function that causes the ease of implementation to be identified for each of the implementation items. The method also proposes recommended implementation items that are recommended to be addressed next based on the priority and the ease of implementation among the implementation items that have not been changed to a supported state, which is a state in which it is determined to be addressed at the time of design.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 3

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to a building design support program.

Background Art

[0002] When constructing a building that has a work space such as an office, which is a space for workers to perform their duties, it may be necessary to design the building. Alternatively, the building may be designed for the purpose of remodeling an existing building so as to newly provide a work space. In such cases, in order for workers to be able to perform their duties safely, with peace of mind, comfortably and healthily in the constructed building, the health and intellectual productivity (hereinafter referred to as wellness) of the building are evaluated, and the building may be designed so as to improve the wellness. For example, as Non-Patent Document 1, a tool for comprehensively evaluating environmental performance related to buildings, blocks, cities, etc. from various viewpoints has been published. In Non-Patent Document 1, a very large number of evaluation axes are provided, such as the safety of buildings during earthquakes and strong winds, the maintenance status of buildings and building facilities, evacuation training assuming fires, etc., health checkups and welfare for maintaining the health of workers, and light and sound environments suitable for work. In Non-Patent Document 1, for each evaluation axis, items for evaluating the evaluation axis are provided, for example, on a 5-point scale, and by evaluating these items, a comprehensive evaluation of the wellness of the building can be obtained.

[0003] Here, when designing a building, due to budgetary or site and space efficiency constraints, it is substantially impossible to perform architectural design so as to obtain the best evaluation in all of the above-mentioned evaluation axes. Therefore, even if the evaluation of wellness is not high in some evaluation axes, an architectural designer may design the building by carefully examining each of the evaluation axes while making various design trade-offs regarding each evaluation axis so that the overall building has a high comprehensive evaluation of wellness. On the other hand, in Non-Patent Document 1, each evaluation axis and the items for evaluating the evaluation axis are listed uniformly. Therefore, when a building designer determines whether to reflect each item in the design, it is necessary to sequentially consider, for example, how easy it is to implement and how high the priority is by browsing the items one by one from the beginning. Such work may, in some cases, impose a heavy burden on the building designer.

[0004] When designing a building so that the wellness of the working space is enhanced, it is desired to assist in reducing the burden on the building designer and enabling easy design.

Prior Art Documents

Non-Patent Documents

[0005]

Non-Patent Document 1

Summary of the Invention

Problems to be Solved by the Invention

[0006] The problem to be solved by the present invention is to provide a building design support program that supports reducing the burden on a building designer and enabling easy design when designing a building so that the wellness of the working space is enhanced.

Means for Solving the Problems

[0007] In order to solve the above problems, the present invention employs the following means. That is, the present invention is a building design support program for supporting the design of a building considering wellness, and causes a computer to refer to a database in which a plurality of evaluation axes for enhancing wellness are each associated with a plurality of implementation items for improving the evaluation regarding the evaluation axis, and for each of the plurality of implementation items, a priority and an ease of implementation are associated with values at a plurality of levels, arrange the plurality of evaluation axes in a first direction, and arrange the plurality of implementation items corresponding to each of the evaluation axes in the order of decreasing priority in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction, so as to create a list of implementation items, and an ease of implementation identification function for making it possible to identify the ease of implementation corresponding to each of the implementation items, and provides a building design support program for realizing the same. According to the above configuration, in the database, a plurality of evaluation axes for enhancing wellness are recorded in a state where a plurality of implementation items for improving the evaluation regarding each evaluation axis are associated therewith. For each of these plurality of implementation items, a priority is associated with values at a plurality of levels. By referring to such a database, arranging the plurality of evaluation axes in a first direction, associating the plurality of implementation items corresponding to each evaluation axis with the evaluation axis, and arranging them in the order of decreasing priority in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction, a list of implementation items is created. By referring to such a list of implementation items, since the related implementation items are arranged in the order of decreasing priority for each evaluation axis, it is possible to easily determine which implementation items should be realized in designing the building for each evaluation axis. In the database, for each of a plurality of implementation items, the ease of implementation is associated with values at a plurality of levels. And in the list of implementation items, for each implementation item, the ease of implementation corresponding to the implementation item can be identified. Therefore, it is possible to easily determine which implementation item is easy to design the building to realize for each evaluation axis, and by selecting an implementation item with a high ease of implementation prior to others and designing the building to realize it, the wellness of the work space can be efficiently enhanced. In particular, by referring to the list of implementation items created in this way when the architect designs the building, it becomes possible to visually and easily grasp which implementation items have a high priority and ease of implementation. That is, in order to find implementation items with a high priority and ease of implementation, it is not necessary for the architect to browse and consider all implementation items. Therefore, the burden on the architect is reduced. In this way, when designing a building so as to enhance the wellness of the work space, it is possible to support the architect to reduce the burden and easily perform the design.

[0008] In one aspect of the present invention, when the building design support program receives from an input device a correspondence state change instruction to change any one of the implementation items in the list of implementation items to a correspondence state that is a state determined to correspond at the time of design, the building design support program further causes the computer to realize a correspondence state identification display function of updating the list of implementation items so that it can be identified that the implementation item targeted in the correspondence state change instruction has been set to the correspondence state. According to the above configuration, when receiving from the input device a correspondence state change instruction to change any one of the implementation items in the list of implementation items to a correspondence state that is a state determined to correspond at the time of design, the list of implementation items is updated so that it can be identified that the implementation item targeted in the correspondence state change instruction has been set to the correspondence state. Therefore, it is possible to easily determine which implementation item the architect has decided to correspond to.

[0009] In another aspect of the present invention, the building design support program causes the computer to, for each of the evaluation axes in the implementation item list, extract, from among the plurality of implementation items associated with the evaluation axis, the implementation item that is not in the corresponding state and has the highest priority, obtain the ease of implementation of the implementation item, and calculate the maximum value of the obtained ease of implementation among all the evaluation axes, which is an ease-of-implementation maximum value calculation function; and for each of the implementation items extracted for each of the evaluation axes in the implementation item list, if the ease of implementation is the maximum value, propose the implementation item as a recommended implementation item that is recommended to be corresponded to next, which is a recommended implementation item proposal function, and further cause the computer to implement them. According to the above configuration, for each of the evaluation axes in the implementation item list, the implementation item that is not in the corresponding state and has the highest priority is extracted from among the plurality of implementation items associated with the evaluation axis. Then, the ease of implementation of the extracted implementation item is obtained, and the maximum value of the obtained ease of implementation among all the evaluation axes is calculated. The implementation item having the maximum value of the ease of implementation calculated in this way is considered to be particularly easy to implement even among the uncorresponding implementation items. Therefore, by proposing, as a recommended implementation item, the item having the maximum value of the ease of implementation among the implementation items extracted for each evaluation axis as described above, it is possible to efficiently extract and propose items having both high priority and high ease of implementation among the implementation items that are not in the corresponding state.

[0010] In another aspect of the present invention, a score is associated with each of the implementation items, and the building design support program further causes the computer to implement a score calculation function that calculates a wellness evaluation score based on the scores of the implementation items that are in the corresponding state. According to the above configuration, since the wellness evaluation score is calculated based on the scores of the implementation items that are in the corresponding state, it is possible to easily grasp the state of how much wellness the building has in the current design situation.

[0011] In another aspect of the present invention, for each of a plurality of the evaluation axes, a subject that implements the evaluation axis is associated with the database. The subject includes an architectural designer. The building design support program causes the computer to further implement an evaluation axis extraction function that refers to the database and extracts, from among the plurality of evaluation axes, the evaluation axes for which the subject is the architectural designer. The implementation item list creation function creates the implementation item list for the evaluation axes extracted by the evaluation axis extraction function. According to the configuration as described above, an evaluation axis for which the subject is an "architectural designer" is extracted from among a plurality of evaluation axes, and an implementation item list is created for the extracted evaluation axes. For this reason, even if there are a mixture of evaluation axes for which the subject is an "architectural designer" and evaluation axes for which the subject is different from an "architectural designer", such as the owner or manager of a building, only the evaluation axes for which the subject is an "architectural designer" can be extracted. In this way, when an architectural designer considers implementation items corresponding to the design, evaluation axes different from those for which the subject is an "architectural designer" can be excluded, so that the architectural designer can save the labor of checking and considering evaluation axes that he or she would not originally need to consider. Therefore, the burden on the architectural designer can be reduced.

Effects of the Invention

[0012] According to the present invention, it is possible to provide a building design support program that supports easy design by reducing the burden on an architectural designer when designing a building so that the wellness of the work space is enhanced.

Brief Description of the Drawings

[0013]

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Mode for Carrying Out the Invention

[0014] Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings. The functional configuration of a building design support system that executes the building design support program according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown in FIG. 1. The building design support system 1 includes a device main body 2, an input device 3, and an output device 4. The device main body 2 is a computer equipped with hardware such as a processor and a memory, and by executing the building design support program according to this embodiment, as shown in FIG. 1, an evaluation axis extraction unit 12, an implementation item list creation unit 13, an implementation ease identification unit 14, a correspondence state identification display unit 15, a score calculation unit 16, an implementation ease maximum value calculation unit 17, a recommended implementation item proposal unit 18, and a display unit 19 are functionally provided. The input device 3 is a keyboard, a mouse, etc., and various inputs to the building design support program executed in the building design support system 1 are performed via the input device 3. The output device 4 is a display, a printer, etc., and the results of the building design support program executed in the building design support system 1 are displayed.

[0015] The building design support system 1 supports the design of a building considering wellness by an architect. An architect may design a building to newly construct a building having a work space which is a space for an operator to perform work. Alternatively, an architect may also design a building for the purpose of remodeling an existing building so as to newly provide a work space. In such a case, the building design support system 1 presents to the architect the implementation items related to the wellness design of the building in a state where the priority and the ease of implementation of the implementation items can be easily identified. Thereby, the architect can easily identify the implementation items with high priority and high ease of implementation. To manage such implementation items, the building design support system 1 includes a database 11.

[0016] FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of the database used in this embodiment. In the database 11, for each of a plurality of evaluation axes for enhancing wellness, a plurality of implementation items for improving the evaluation regarding the evaluation axis are associated, and for each of the plurality of implementation items, a priority and an ease of implementation are associated so as to have values at a plurality of levels, respectively. Specifically, a plurality of evaluation axes are registered in the database 11. Each of the evaluation axes is for evaluating the wellness of a building and is set based on different viewpoints in terms of design and management and operation. In the example shown in FIG. 2, for example, "interior design plan of common areas", "shape and freedom of space", "building maintenance plan", "regular inspection", etc. are registered in the database 11 as evaluation axes.

[0017] In the database 11, for each of the plurality of evaluation axes, a subject for implementing the evaluation axis is associated. More specifically, in the database 11, for each of the plurality of evaluation axes, a subject for implementing and executing the implementation items related to the evaluation axis is registered. In the present embodiment, the subjects include "architects" and "building managers". For example, in the example of FIG. 2, the evaluation axis "interior design plan of common areas" is regarding how to realize the interior of the common areas, which should be considered by the architect when designing the building, so the corresponding subject is "architect". Also, in the evaluation axis "shape and freedom of space", since the shape of the space, etc. should be considered by the architect when designing the building, the corresponding subject is "architect". Also, in the example of FIG. 2, the evaluation axis "building maintenance plan" is regarding how to schedule the inspection of the building when the building is designed, completed, and operation starts, which should be considered by the building manager when operating the building, so the corresponding subject is "building manager". Also, in the evaluation axis "fire training", since it is the building manager who formulates and implements the plan for conducting fire training, the corresponding subject is "building manager".

[0018] In database 11, a plurality of implementation items are associated with each of the plurality of evaluation axes. Each implementation item is an item for improving the evaluation of the building regarding the corresponding evaluation axis. In the evaluation axis where the subject is the "architect", by reflecting the associated implementation items in the building design, the wellness of the building can be enhanced regarding the relevant evaluation axis. Also, in the evaluation axis where the subject is the "building manager", by implementing the associated implementation items during operation, the wellness of the building can be enhanced regarding the relevant evaluation axis. For example, in the evaluation axis of "interior design plan for common areas", a plurality of implementation items for enhancing the wellness regarding the interior of the common areas, such as "aligning the colors of the interior materials in the entrance hall (a unified interior)" and "providing a planting space in the EV hall", are associated. Similarly, in the evaluation axis of "shape and freedom of space", a plurality of implementation items for enhancing the wellness regarding the shape of the spaces in the building and the degree to which the spaces can be freely utilized, such as "dividing the office space into multiple spaces by adding partition walls" and "shaping the office space into a rectangle or the like", are associated. The same applies to the evaluation axes of "building maintenance plan" and "fire training".

[0019] In database 11, a priority is associated with each implementation item. The priority is an index indicating how important the corresponding implementation item is. In the evaluation axis where the subject is the "architect", it can be said that the higher the priority of the implementation item, the more it should be considered to be reflected in the building design preferentially over others. Similarly, in the evaluation axis where the subject is the "building manager", it can be said that the higher the priority of the implementation item, the more it should be considered to be planned during the operation of the building preferentially over others. The priority has values at multiple levels. In the present embodiment, the priority has values at four levels from 1 to 4. More precisely, in the present embodiment, the maximum value of the number of implementation items corresponding to each evaluation axis is 4, and for each evaluation axis, the priority values are associated with each implementation item such that they increase by 1 in order from 1. This is merely an example, and it goes without saying that the number of priority levels is not limited to 4. In the present embodiment, the implementation item with a priority value of 4 is the one with the highest priority and should be prioritized over others, and the implementation item with a priority value of 1 is the one with the lowest priority. In the example of FIG. 2, regarding the evaluation axis "interior design plan of the shared area", the implementation item "align the colors of the interior materials in the entrance hall (interior with a unified feeling)" is associated with a priority value of 3, and the implementation item "provide a planting space in the EV hall" is associated with a priority value of 2. Similarly, priorities are associated with other evaluation axes. In the present embodiment, for a plurality of implementation items associated with the same evaluation axis, different priority values are associated with each other.

[0020] In the database 11, ease of implementation is associated with each implementation item. Ease of implementation is an index indicating how easy it is to implement the corresponding implementation item. In the evaluation axis where the subject is an "architect", the greater the ease of implementation of an implementation item, the easier it is to reflect the implementation item in the design of the building. Similarly, in the evaluation axis where the subject is a "building manager", the greater the ease of implementation of an implementation item, the easier it is to plan during the operation of the building. Ease of implementation has values at multiple levels. In the present embodiment, ease of implementation has values at four levels from 1 to 4. It goes without saying that the number of levels of ease of implementation is not limited to 4. In the present embodiment, the implementation item with an ease of implementation value of 4 is the one with the highest ease of implementation and is easy to implement, and the implementation item with a priority value of 1 is the one with the lowest ease of implementation and is difficult to implement. In the example of FIG. 2, regarding the evaluation axis "interior design plan of the shared area", for the implementation items "align the colors of the interior materials in the entrance hall (interior with a unified feeling)", "provide a planting space in the EV hall", and "interior according to the space usage", the value of 4 is associated with each of them as the ease of implementation. Similarly, for other evaluation axes, the ease of implementation is associated. Different from the priority, for a plurality of implementation items associated with the same evaluation axis, the same value of the ease of implementation may be associated.

[0021] Furthermore, in the database 11, for each implementation item, the evaluation points of how much the wellness property is improved when the implementation item is realized are stored in association as scores (not shown).

[0022] The evaluation axis extraction unit 12 refers to the database 11 and extracts the evaluation axes whose main body is the "architect" from among the plurality of evaluation axes. The implementation item list creation unit 13 refers to the database 11, arranges a plurality of evaluation axes in the first direction, and arranges the plurality of implementation items corresponding to each evaluation axis in the second direction orthogonal to the first direction in the order of the magnitude of the priority, associated with the evaluation axis, to create an implementation item list. The implementation item list creation unit 13 creates an implementation item list for the evaluation axes extracted by the evaluation axis extraction unit 12 as having the main body as the "architect". The ease of implementation identification unit 14 enables the ease of implementation corresponding to each implementation item to be identified in each implementation item.

[0023] When the correspondence state identification display unit 15 receives a correspondence state change instruction from the input device 3 to change any of the implementation items in the implementation item list to a correspondence state that is a state determined to correspond during design, the implementation item list is updated so that it can be identified that the implementation item targeted in the correspondence state change instruction has become the correspondence state. Each implementation item is associated with a score, and the score calculation unit 16 calculates a wellness evaluation score based on the scores of the implementation items that are considered to be in a corresponding state.

[0024] The maximum ease-of-implementation calculation unit 17 extracts, for each evaluation axis in the implementation item list, the implementation item that is not in a corresponding state and has the highest priority from among the multiple implementation items associated with the evaluation axis, obtains the ease of implementation of the implementation item, and calculates the maximum value of the obtained ease of implementation among all the evaluation axes. The recommended implementation item proposal unit 18, for each evaluation axis in the implementation item list, proposes, for the implementation item extracted by the maximum ease-of-implementation calculation unit 17, the implementation item as a recommended implementation item that is recommended to be the next item to be corresponded if the ease of implementation is the maximum value. The display unit 19 displays the results of each of the above processes on the output device 4.

[0025] The building design support system 1 causes a computer to realize an evaluation axis extraction function, an implementation item list creation function, an ease-of-implementation identification function, a corresponding state identification display function, a score calculation function, a maximum ease-of-implementation calculation function, a recommended implementation item proposal function, and a display function, which respectively correspond to the evaluation axis extraction unit 12, the implementation item list creation unit 13, the ease-of-implementation identification unit 14, the corresponding state identification display unit 15, the score calculation unit 16, the maximum ease-of-implementation calculation unit 17, the recommended implementation item proposal unit 18, and the display unit 19, by executing a building design support program. Hereinafter, by taking as an example the content registered in the database 11 as shown in FIG. 2 and explaining the actual processing flow for this, the details of each function realized by the building design support system 1 as described above will be explained.

[0026] FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing the flow of the building design support process executed by the building design support system 1 of the present embodiment. First, the evaluation axis extraction unit (evaluation axis extraction function) 12 extracts the evaluation axes centered on the "architect" (step S1). As already described, the database 11 stores evaluation axes for a plurality of entities, namely, "architects" and "building managers". Here, the building design support system 1 supports the design of a building considering wellness by an architect, and the user of the building design support system 1 is an architect. Therefore, the evaluation axis extraction unit 12 refers to the database 11, refers to the entity associated with the evaluation axis among the plurality of evaluation axes, and determines whether the entity is an "architect", thereby extracting the evaluation axes that the architect should consider implementing. In this way, the evaluation axis extraction unit 12 extracts the evaluation axes that are relevant to the architect as the user and that the architect should consider when designing a building.

[0027] Next, the implementation item list creation unit (implementation item list creation function) 13 creates an implementation item list (step S2). FIG. 4 is a diagram showing the created implementation item list. The implementation item list creation unit 13 first refers to the database 11 and arranges the plurality of evaluation axes A whose entity is an "architect" and which are extracted by the evaluation axis extraction unit 12 in the first direction D1. In this embodiment, the first direction D1 is the horizontal direction. In this embodiment, the evaluation axes A include, for example, an evaluation axis A1 labeled "interior plan of common areas", an evaluation axis A2 labeled "introduction of natural light", an evaluation axis A3 labeled "shape and freedom of space", an evaluation axis A4 labeled "margin of load", and an evaluation axis A5 labeled "variable operation flexibility of equipment and facilities".

[0028] Next, the implementation item list creation unit 13 refers to the database 11 and associates a plurality of implementation items T corresponding to each of the evaluation axes A arranged in the first direction D1 with the evaluation axes A, and arranges them in the second direction D2 orthogonal to the first direction D1. In the present embodiment, the second direction D2 is the vertical direction. For example, in the evaluation axis A1 described as "interior design of the shared area", in the database 11, the implementation item T described as "interior according to the space use (easy-to-enter bright entrance hall, corridor where walking is enjoyable, EV hall where waiting time can be enjoyed, etc.)", the implementation item T described as "providing a planting space in the EV hall (biophilic design)", and the implementation item T described as "aligning the colors of the interior materials of the entrance hall (interior with a sense of unity)" are associated. Therefore, the implementation item list creation unit 13 associates these implementation items T with the evaluation axis A1 and arranges them in the vertical direction.

[0029] Here, in the database 11, the values of the priorities P are respectively associated with the above three implementation items T in the order of 1, 2, and 3. The implementation item list creation unit 13 arranges each implementation item T in the order of this priority P. In the example shown in FIG. 4, in the second direction D2, the implementation items T are arranged such that the lower the implementation item T is located, the greater the priority P. In this way, the database 11 creates the implementation item list 20. Here, in this example, the maximum value of the number of implementation items T corresponding to each evaluation axis A is 4. Therefore, in order to make the format as a table tidy, for the evaluation axes A in which the number of corresponding implementation items T is 3 or less, implementation items T of "not applicable" that are substantially not required to be corresponded are provided so that the number of implementation items T becomes 4. The name of this item is not limited to "not applicable", and it can be anything or even blank.

[0030] Hereinafter, in order to individually specify the implementation item T in the implementation item list 20, the description of "Implementation item T (number of evaluation axis A)-(priority value)" is used. For example, when it is described as implementation item T2-3, it refers to implementation item T "make the window area 10% or more of the floor area" on evaluation axis A2 with a priority P value of 3. Similarly, when it is described as implementation item T3-2, it refers to implementation item T "shape the shape of the work space into a rectangle or the like" on evaluation axis A3 with a priority P value of 2.

[0031] Next, the implementation ease identification unit (implementation ease identification function) 14 enables the implementation ease corresponding to each implementation item T to be identified in each implementation item T (step S3). FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an implementation item list in a state where the implementation ease corresponding to each implementation item is identified and displayed. FIG. 6 is a diagram showing a legend of implementation ease. As already explained, in the database 11, a value of implementation ease E is associated with each implementation item T. The implementation ease identification unit 14 identifies each implementation item T in the implementation item list 20 by color-coding according to the corresponding value of implementation ease E, so that the implementation ease E of each implementation item T can be understood at a glance. In the present embodiment, as shown in FIG. 6, brighter colors are associated with larger implementation ease E values, indicating easier implementation, and darker colors are associated with smaller implementation ease E values, indicating more difficult implementation. In the present embodiment, since the implementation ease E has values from 1 to 4, four types of colors are used. In FIG. 5, for implementation items T marked as "not applicable" that the architectural designer does not need to handle, a color different from the color associated with the value of implementation ease E used in FIG. 6 is assigned. This color is darker than any of the colors associated with the values of implementation ease E.

[0032] The display unit (display function) 19 displays the implementation item list 20 created as described above on the output device 4. In the implementation item list 20 created in this way and displayed on the output device 4, the lower the item, the larger the value of the priority P, and the brighter the color, the larger the ease of implementation E. Therefore, the building designer can efficiently search for the implementation item T that is easy to implement and has a high priority by browsing the displayed implementation item list 20 and looking for the implementation item T with a bright color located as low as possible. By browsing the implementation item list 20 in this way, the building designer determines the implementation item T to be reflected in the design while designing the building. For the implementation item T determined to be reflected in the design and corresponding, the building designer inputs, using the input device 3, an instruction to change the corresponding state to the corresponding state, which is a state determined to correspond during the design, into the building design support system 1.

[0033] The building design support system 1 determines whether it has received an instruction to change the corresponding state for any of the implementation items in the implementation item list (step S4). If it has not received an instruction to change the corresponding state (No in step S4), the building design support system 1 continues to wait for an instruction to change the corresponding state to be input.

[0034] If it has received an instruction to change the corresponding state (Yes in step S4), the corresponding state identification display unit (corresponding state identification display function) 15 updates the implementation item list 20 so that it can be identified that the implementation item T targeted in the instruction to change the corresponding state has been set to the corresponding state (step S5). Fig. 7 is a diagram showing a state in which some of the implementation items in the implementation item list shown in Fig. 5 have been changed to the corresponding state. In this example, it is the case where an architectural designer inputs a corresponding state change instruction for, for example, implementation item T1-3 and implementation item T4-3 using the input device 3. For this reason, the corresponding state identification display unit 15 changes the colors of these implementation item T1-3 and implementation item T4-3 so that it can be identified that they are in the corresponding state. In the present embodiment, the color corresponding to the corresponding state is the same color as the implementation item T marked as "not applicable". That is, the color corresponding to the corresponding state is a color different from any of the colors expressing the ease of implementation E shown in FIG. 6.

[0035] When an architectural designer sets any implementation item T to the corresponding state, the score calculation unit (score calculation function) 16 calculates an evaluation score for wellness (step S6). The score calculation unit 16 calculates the evaluation score for wellness, for example, by calculating the total score associated with the implementation item T in the database 11 for all implementation items T that have been set to the corresponding state by all past operations of the architectural designer. Alternatively, for example, when each of the implementation items T associated with each evaluation axis A has a low corresponding priority value, such as implementation item T2-1 "make the window area 20% or more of the floor area", implementation item T2-2 "make the window area 15% or more of the floor area", implementation item T2-3 "make the window area 10% or more of the floor area", and the content of the implementation item T with a high priority value is included, only the score for the implementation item T with the lowest priority (that is, the broadest content) among the implementation items T set to the corresponding state may be reflected in the calculation of the evaluation score S. The display unit 19 displays the evaluation score S calculated as described above as "Score" as shown in FIG. 7. In FIG. 7, the evaluation score S is, for example, 30 points.

[0036] Next, the building design support system 1 determines whether the calculated evaluation score S is equal to or greater than a threshold value (step S7). The threshold value is the target value of the wellness of the building to be designed, and is a reference value for determining whether to continue the design from the viewpoint of enhancing the wellness to a certain level or higher. When the evaluation score S is equal to or greater than the threshold value (Yes in step S7), if the implementation item T determined by the building designer to be addressed in the design is actually reflected in the design, the wellness of the constructed building as a result satisfies the required standard, and it is determined that there is no need to address more implementation items T from the viewpoint of at least enhancing the wellness to a certain level or higher, and the process ends.

[0037] When the evaluation score S is less than the threshold value (No in step S7), it is necessary to address more implementation items T in order to enhance the wellness further. In this case, first, the ease-of-implementation maximum value calculation unit (ease-of-implementation maximum value calculation function) 17 calculates the maximum value of the ease of implementation (step S8). Specifically, the ease-of-implementation maximum value calculation unit 17 first extracts, for each evaluation axis A in the implementation item list 20, the implementation item T that has not been set as the corresponding state and has the highest priority from among the plurality of implementation items T associated with the evaluation axis A. For example, in FIG. 7, as the implementation item T that has not been set as the corresponding state and has the highest priority for each evaluation axis A, the implementation item T1-2, the implementation item T2-3, the implementation item T3-3, the implementation item T4-2, and the implementation item T5-4 are extracted. Next, the ease-of-implementation maximum value calculation unit 17 acquires the value of the ease of implementation E of each of the extracted implementation items T from the database 11 and calculates the maximum value thereof. In the above example, since the values of the ease of implementation E of the extracted implementation items T1-2, T2-3, T3-3, T4-2, and T5-4 are 4, 4, 3, 4, and 4, respectively, the maximum value is, for example, 4.

[0038] Then, based on the above maximum value, the Recommended Implementation Item Proposal Unit (Recommended Implementation Item Proposal Function) 18 proposes recommended implementation items, which are the implementation items that are recommended to be addressed next (step S9). FIG. 8 is a diagram showing a state in which some of the implementation items are proposed as recommended implementation items in the implementation item list shown in FIG. 7. Specifically, for each of the evaluation axes A in the implementation item list 20, the Recommended Implementation Item Proposal Unit 18 determines whether the implementation ease E of the implementation item T extracted as in step S8 matches the calculated maximum value. If it is the maximum value, the implementation item T is proposed as a recommended implementation item R. For example, in the above example, since the maximum value is 4, among the extracted implementation items T, the implementation items T1-2, T2-3, T4-2, and T5-4 with an implementation ease E of 4 are proposed as recommended implementation items R. The Recommended Implementation Item Proposal Unit 18 discriminately displays the proposed recommended implementation item R separately from other implementation items T. In this embodiment, the recommended implementation item R is displayed in, for example, bold and italic text to be distinguished from other implementation items T.

[0039] The display unit 19 displays the implementation item list 20 in which the display of the recommended implementation item R is reflected as described above on the output device 4. In the implementation item list 20 created in this way and displayed on the output device 4, the implementation item T that has a large priority P and the maximum implementation ease E, and is considered to be the easiest to implement, is recommended, proposed, and displayed as a recommended implementation item R, distinguished from other implementation items T. Therefore, it becomes easier for the building designer to search for the implementation item T that has both a large priority and a large implementation ease among all the implementation items T. By viewing the implementation item list 20 in which the recommended implementation item R is discriminately displayed as shown in FIG. 8, the building designer adds and determines the implementation item T to be reflected in the design, for example, from among the recommended implementation items R, while designing the building. The building designer may also add and determine the implementation item T to be reflected in the design from among the implementation items T that are not proposed as the recommended implementation item R. The building designer inputs, via the input device 3, an instruction to change the corresponding status for the implementation item T determined to be reflected and corresponding in the design into the building design support system 1.

[0040] The building design support system 1 determines again whether it has received an instruction to change the corresponding status for any of the implementation items in the implementation item list (step S4). When it has received an instruction to change the corresponding status (Yes in step S4), the corresponding status identification display unit 15 updates the implementation item list 20 so that it can be identified that the implementation item T targeted in the instruction to change the corresponding status has been set to the corresponding status (step S5), and the score calculation unit 16 calculates the evaluation score S (step S6). FIG. 9 is a diagram showing a state in which some of the implementation items in the implementation item list shown in FIG. 8 have been changed to the corresponding status. In this example, it is the case where the building designer has input, via the input device 3, an instruction to change the corresponding status for the implementation item T1-2, the implementation item T2-3, and the implementation item T5-4 into the building design support system 1. For this reason, the corresponding status identification display unit 15 changes the colors of these implementation items T1-2, implementation item T2-3, and implementation item T5-4 so that it can be identified that they have been set to the corresponding status.

[0041] Note that in this example, the building designer selects the implementation item T that is reflected and corresponding in the design from among the recommended implementation items R, but it is not limited to this. For example, the building designer may select the implementation item T that is reflected and corresponding in the design from among the implementation items T that are proposed as the recommended implementation items R but not recommended as described above. Also, in this example, the building designer selects the implementation item T with the highest priority P on each evaluation axis A, but the implementation item T with a lower priority P may be selected prior to the implementation item T with a higher priority P. In FIG. 9, as the number of implementation items T determined by the building designer to be corresponding and set to the corresponding status has increased, the evaluation score S has increased from 30 to 75.

[0042] After that, if the evaluation score S is not greater than or equal to the threshold value (No in step S7), the ease-of-implementation maximum value calculation unit 17 calculates the maximum value of the ease of implementation again (step S8), and the recommended implementation item proposal unit 18 proposes the recommended implementation item R (step S9). FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a state in which some implementation items are proposed as recommended implementation items in the implementation item list shown in FIG. 9. In the example shown in FIG. 10, the ease-of-implementation maximum value calculation unit 17 extracts the implementation items T1-1, T2-2, T3-3, T4-2, and T5-3 as the implementation items T that are not in the corresponding state and have the highest priority among the implementation items T on each evaluation axis A. Since the maximum value of these ease-of-implementation E values is 4, the recommended implementation item proposal unit 18 proposes the implementation items T1-1, T2-2, and T4-2 with an ease of implementation E of 4 as the recommended implementation items R.

[0043] The display unit 19 displays the implementation item list 20 in which the display of the recommended implementation item R is reflected as described above on the output device 4. Based on the implementation item list 20 in which the recommended implementation item R is proposed in this way, the architectural designer reflects it in the design, determines the corresponding implementation item T, and inputs a corresponding state change instruction to the building design support system 1 by the input device 3 for the determined implementation item T. In this way, steps S4 to S9 are repeatedly executed until it is determined in step S7 that the evaluation score S is greater than or equal to the threshold value.

[0044] FIG. 11 is a diagram showing a state in which some implementation items are changed to the corresponding state in the implementation item list shown in FIG. 10. For example, in FIG. 11, the architectural designer changes the implementation items T1-1, T2-2, and T4-2 proposed as the recommended implementation item R to the corresponding state, and the color is changed and displayed so that it can be identified that these implementation items T are in the corresponding state. Even in this case, the processes of calculating the evaluation score S (step S6), comparing the evaluation score S with the threshold value (step S7), calculating the maximum value of ease of implementation (step S8), and proposing the recommended implementation items R (step S9) are repeatedly performed.

[0045] FIG. 12 is a diagram showing a state in which some of the implementation items are proposed as recommended implementation items in the implementation item list shown in FIG. 11. In the example shown in FIG. 12, the ease-of-implementation maximum value calculation unit 17 extracts the implementation items T2-1, T3-3, T4-1, and T5-3 as the implementation items T that are not in the corresponding state and have the highest priority from among the implementation items T on each evaluation axis A. Since the maximum value of these ease-of-implementation Es is 3, the recommended implementation item proposal unit 18 proposes the implementation items T2-1, T3-3, T4-1, and T5-3 with an ease of implementation E of 3 as the recommended implementation items R.

[0046] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing a state in which further processing has progressed from the implementation item list shown in FIG. 12 and the number of implemented items in the corresponding state has increased. FIG. 14 is a diagram showing a state in which some of the implementation items are proposed as recommended implementation items in the implementation item list shown in FIG. 13. In the example shown in FIG. 13, when proposing the recommended implementation item R, the ease-of-implementation maximum value calculation unit 17 extracts the implementation item T5-2 as the implementation item T that is not in the corresponding state and has the highest priority from among the implementation items T on each evaluation axis A. Since the maximum value of the ease of implementation E of the extracted implementation item T, that is, the value of the ease of implementation E of the implementation item T5-2 is 2, the recommended implementation item proposal unit 18 proposes the implementation item T5-2 with an ease of implementation E of 2 as the recommended implementation item R as shown in FIG. 14.

[0047] The building design support program as described above is a building design support program for supporting the design of a building considering wellness. The computer refers to a database 11 in which a plurality of evaluation axes A for enhancing wellness are each associated with a plurality of implementation items T for improving the evaluation regarding the evaluation axis A, and for each of the plurality of implementation items T, a priority P and an ease of implementation E are associated so as to have values in a plurality of levels. The computer arranges the plurality of evaluation axes A in a first direction D1, associates the plurality of implementation items T corresponding to each evaluation axis A with the evaluation axis A, and arranges them in a second direction D2 orthogonal to the first direction D1 in the order of the magnitude of the priority P, thereby creating an implementation item list 20, and realizes an ease of implementation identification function for enabling the ease of implementation E corresponding to the implementation item T to be identified in each of the implementation items T. According to the above configuration, in the database 11, a plurality of evaluation axes A for enhancing wellness are recorded in a state where a plurality of implementation items T for improving the evaluation regarding each evaluation axis A are associated with each evaluation axis A. For each of these plurality of implementation items T, a priority P is associated so as to have values in a plurality of levels. By referring to such a database 11, arranging the plurality of evaluation axes A in a first direction D1, associating the plurality of implementation items T corresponding to each evaluation axis A with the evaluation axis A, and arranging them in a second direction D2 orthogonal to the first direction D1 in the order of the magnitude of the priority P, an implementation item list 20 is created. By referring to such an implementation item list 20, for each evaluation axis A, since the related implementation items T are arranged in the order of the magnitude of the priority P, it is easily distinguishable which implementation item T should be realized for each evaluation axis A when designing the building. In the database 11, for each of the plurality of implementation items T, the ease of implementation E is associated so as to have values at a plurality of levels. And in the implementation item list 20, for each of the implementation items T, the ease of implementation E corresponding to the implementation item T can be identified. Therefore, it is possible to easily determine which implementation item T is easy to design the building to realize for each evaluation axis A, and by selecting the implementation item T with a large ease of implementation E prior to others and designing the building to realize this, the wellness of the work space can be efficiently enhanced. In particular, when the building designer designs the building with reference to the implementation item list 20 created in this way, it becomes possible to visually and easily grasp which implementation item T has a large priority P and ease of implementation E. That is, in order to find the implementation item T with a large priority and ease of implementation, it is not necessary for the building designer to browse and consider all the implementation items. Therefore, the burden on the building designer is reduced. In this way, when designing the building so that the wellness of the work space is enhanced, it becomes possible to support the building designer to reduce the burden and perform the design easily.

[0048] Further, when the building design support program receives a correspondence state change instruction from the input device 3 to change any of the implementation items T in the implementation item list 20 to a correspondence state that is a state determined to correspond at the time of design, the building design support program further causes the computer to realize a correspondence state identification display function that updates the implementation item list 20 so that it can be identified that the implementation item T targeted in the correspondence state change instruction has been set to the correspondence state. According to the configuration as described above, when receiving a correspondence state change instruction from the input device 3 to change any of the implementation items T in the implementation item list 20 to a correspondence state that is a state determined to correspond at the time of design, the implementation item list 20 is updated so that it can be identified that the implementation item T targeted in the correspondence state change instruction has been set to the correspondence state. Therefore, it is possible to easily determine which implementation item T the building designer has decided to correspond to.

[0049] In addition, the building design support program causes a computer to extract, for each of the evaluation axes A in the implementation item list 20, the implementation item T that is not in a corresponding state and has the highest priority P from among the plurality of implementation items T associated with the evaluation axis A, obtain the ease of implementation E of the implementation item T, calculate the maximum value of the obtained ease of implementation E among all the evaluation axes A, and implement a maximum ease of implementation calculation function. For each implementation item T extracted for each evaluation axis A in the implementation item list 20, when the ease of implementation E is the maximum value, the implementation item T is proposed as a recommended implementation item R that is recommended to be corresponded to next, and cause the computer to further implement a recommended implementation item proposal function. According to the above configuration, for each of the evaluation axes A in the implementation item list 20, the implementation item T that is not in a corresponding state and has the highest priority P is extracted from among the plurality of implementation items T associated with the evaluation axis A. Then, the ease of implementation E of the extracted implementation item T is obtained, and the maximum value of the obtained ease of implementation E among all the evaluation axes A is calculated. The implementation item T having the maximum value of the ease of implementation E calculated in this way is considered to be particularly easy to implement even among the uncorresponded implementation items T. Therefore, by proposing, as a recommended implementation item R, the implementation item T having the maximum value of the ease of implementation E among the implementation items T extracted for each evaluation axis A as described above, it is possible to efficiently extract and propose the implementation items T having both a high priority P and a high ease of implementation E among the implementation items T that are not in a corresponding state.

[0050] In addition, a score is associated with each of the implementation items, and the building design support program causes a computer to further implement a score calculation function for calculating a wellness evaluation score S based on the scores of the implementation items T that are in a corresponding state. According to the above configuration, since the wellness evaluation score S is calculated based on the scores of the implementation items T that are in a corresponding state, it is possible to easily grasp the state of how much wellness the building has in the current design situation.

[0051] In addition, in the database 11, for each of the plurality of evaluation axes A, a subject who implements the evaluation axis A is associated. The subject includes an architectural designer. The building design support program refers to the database 11 and further causes a computer to implement an evaluation axis extraction function that extracts an evaluation axis A for which the subject is an architectural designer from among the plurality of evaluation axes A. The implementation item list creation function creates an implementation item list 20 for the evaluation axis A extracted by the evaluation axis extraction function. According to the above configuration, an evaluation axis A for which the subject is an "architectural designer" is extracted from among the plurality of evaluation axes A, and an implementation item list 20 is created for the extracted evaluation axis A. Therefore, even if there is a mixture of an evaluation axis A for which the implementing subject is an "architectural designer" and an evaluation axis A for which the subject is different from an "architectural designer", for example, a building owner or manager, etc., only the evaluation axis A for which the subject is an "architectural designer" can be extracted. In this way, when an architectural designer considers the implementation item T corresponding to the design, since evaluation axes A for which the subject is different from an "architectural designer" can be excluded, the architectural designer can save the trouble of confirming and considering evaluation axes A that he / she would not originally need to consider. Therefore, the burden on the architectural designer can be reduced.

[0052] Particularly in this embodiment, as the number of implementation items T determined for which an architectural designer is to be responsible increases, the color of the corresponding implementation item T accumulates from the bottom to the top of the implementation item list 20 and increases. For this reason, an architectural designer can visually and tangibly perceive that the design from the perspective of enhancing wellness is steadily progressing. As a result, the architectural designer can proceed with the design in a enjoyable manner. In addition, other architectural designers other than the architectural designer in charge of the design of the target building can also view the implementation item list 20 in which the correspondence status is reflected by referring to the database 11. Therefore, the progress of the design regarding wellness can be easily shared among architectural designers.

[0053] Note that the building design support program of the present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments described with reference to the drawings, and various other modifications can be considered within its technical scope. For example, in the above embodiment, the implementation item list creation unit 13 created one implementation item list 20, but the implementation item list creation unit 13 may create two or more implementation item lists 20. In this case, for example, the implementation item list creation unit 13 extracts only the evaluation axis A in which all the ease of implementation of the corresponding implementation item T is the maximum value (for example, 4 in the example of the above embodiment), creates the first implementation item list, and creates the second implementation item list based on the evaluation axis A not included in the first implementation item list. By doing so, the building designer may improve the design efficiency by preferentially viewing the first implementation item list that summarizes only the evaluation axis A considered to be easy to implement. Alternatively, for example, in addition to creating the implementation item list 20 of the above embodiment, the implementation item list creation unit 13 may create an implementation item list composed of the evaluation axis A whose subject is "building manager".

[0054] Further, when the recommended implementation item proposal unit 18 extracts the recommended implementation item R, when all the recommended implementation items R are in the corresponding state, it may calculate what the evaluation score S will be and display this result. Alternatively, the recommended implementation item proposal unit 18 may select the implementation item T by the amount necessary for the evaluation score S to be equal to or higher than the threshold value and propose this as the recommended implementation item R. For this purpose, the recommended implementation item proposal unit 18 may propose a plurality of implementation items T as the recommended implementation item R for one evaluation axis A, or in addition to the implementation item T whose ease of implementation E is the maximum value, the implementation item T whose ease of implementation E is not the maximum value may be proposed as the recommended implementation item R. Furthermore, in the above-described embodiment, when presenting the recommended implementation item R to the building designer, by identifying and displaying the part corresponding to the recommended implementation item R in the implementation item list 20, it was shown to the building designer which ones are the recommended implementation item R, but it is not limited to this. For example, the recommended implementation item R may be presented to the building designer by listing the content of the recommended implementation item R in a bullet-point manner.

[0055] In addition to this, it is possible to select and choose the configurations exemplified in the above-described embodiment and each modification example, or to appropriately change them to other configurations.

Explanation of Reference Numerals

[0056] 1 Building Design Support System 19 Display Unit 3 Input Device 20 Implementation Item List 4 Output Device A Evaluation Axis 11 Database D1 First Direction 12 Evaluation Axis Extraction Unit D2 Second Direction 13 Implementation Item List Creation Unit E Ease of Implementation 14 Ease of Implementation Identification Unit P Priority 15 Corresponding State Identification Display Unit R Recommended Implementation Item 16 Score Calculation Unit S Evaluation Score 17 Maximum Value Calculation Unit for Ease of Implementation T Implementation Item 18 Recommended Implementation Item Proposal Unit

Claims

1. A building design support program for supporting the design of a building considering wellness, comprising: on a computer, referring to a database in which a plurality of implementation items for improving the evaluation regarding each of a plurality of evaluation axes for enhancing wellness are associated with each evaluation axis, and for each of the plurality of implementation items, a priority and an ease of implementation are associated with values of a plurality of levels respectively, arranging the plurality of evaluation axes in a first direction, and arranging the plurality of implementation items corresponding to each evaluation axis in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction in the order of the magnitude of the priority, thereby creating a list of implementation items; an implementation item list creation function; an ease of implementation identification function for enabling identification of the ease of implementation corresponding to each implementation item in each implementation item; A building design support program for realizing the above functions.

2. The building design support program according to claim 1, further causing the computer to realize a correspondence state identification display function for updating the list of implementation items so that it can be identified that the implementation item targeted in the correspondence state change instruction has been set to the correspondence state when receiving a correspondence state change instruction from an input device to change any of the implementation items in the list of implementation items to a correspondence state in which it is determined that they correspond during design.

3. On the computer, for each of the evaluation axes in the list of implementation items, extracting the implementation item that has not been set to the correspondence state and has the highest priority from among the plurality of implementation items associated with the evaluation axis, obtaining the ease of implementation of the implementation item, and calculating the maximum value of the obtained ease of implementation among all the evaluation axes; an ease of implementation maximum value calculation function; a recommended implementation item proposal function for proposing, as a recommended implementation item, the implementation item for which the ease of implementation is the maximum value among the implementation items extracted for each of the evaluation axes in the list of implementation items; The building design support program according to claim 2, further causing the computer to realize the above functions.

4. Points are associated with each of the implementation items. A score calculation function for calculating a wellness evaluation score based on the points of the implementation items determined to be in the corresponding state, and causing the computer to further implement the score calculation function, the building design support program according to claim 2 or 3.

5. In the database, for each of the plurality of evaluation axes, a subject that implements the evaluation axis is associated, and the subject includes an architectural designer. A function for extracting an evaluation axis, which refers to the database and extracts, from among the plurality of evaluation axes, an evaluation axis for which the subject is the architectural designer, is further implemented in the computer. The implementation item list creation function creates the implementation item list for the evaluation axis extracted by the evaluation axis extraction function, the building design support program according to claim 1.

Images