vyzn at Swissbau: Is gut feeling enough for the best project variant?
In the early planning phase of a real estate project, the key decisions on CO2 emissions, energy efficiency, comfort and cost are set. But what are these decisions actually based on? Is experience enough to reliably assess a building's performance?
At this year's Swissbau, we put it to the test.
The challenge: 3 models, 4 metrics, 1 goal
At our booth, we presented three project variants - as 3D-printed models to touch and compare.
Which variant performs best in the areas of:
- Emissions (LCA / embodied energy)
- Energy efficiency (heating demand)
- Comfort (summer thermal protection)
- Cost (according to e-BKPH)
On top of that, visitors could combine the ground floor, upper floor and roof to form a new, optimised overall variant.
When experience reaches its limits
It was fascinating to watch: what was planned as a "quick look" turned into an intensive study of variants for many. One participant spent almost a full hour comparing the models, analysing facade structures and discussing thermal mass.
This shows that even for professionals it is hard to correctly assess the complex interactions between material choice, window ratio and cost purely visually or intuitively.
The resolution: data instead of assumptions
The three variants were evaluated directly from the digital building models with the vyzn software. The calculation ran automatically, in line with the relevant standards and within a few minutes.
The result was extremely close. The analysis clearly showed that the optimum often lies in the combination. The "winning variant" for overall efficiency was a mix: the ground floor of the black model combined with the upper floor and roof of the blue model.
The winners
Only a few participants managed to estimate all the metrics exactly right. We tip our hats to:
- The team at Schindler Group (Anna, Sebastian, Miguel & Lukas)
- Chris from Enerhaus Web Services GmbH
Your bottles of sparkling wine are the well-deserved reward for your analytical eye!
Conclusion: what we take away from the challenge
The challenge made it clear that the best solution is rarely the obvious one. The optimum did not lie in a single variant, but in a combination.
Intuition and experience remain important parts of planning. But with several conflicting goals at once, even seasoned experts reach their limits. A structured, data-driven analysis creates transparency and comparability here.
The goal is not to replace gut feeling, but to complement it. This way, sound decisions can be made as early as the preliminary project, before adjustments become time-consuming or costly.
Would you like to see what the analysis looked like in detail?Watch the video here with our COO Martino, in which he explains the background to the challenge:
Video: https://youtu.be/kHdPmfRPG5I