Design & Planning Intelligence | High Performance Design
Explore project specific environmental performance questions through tailored modelling, scenario comparison and technical design analysis.
Where standard assessment pathways or individual modelling disciplines do not fully answer the question, specialised ESD design modelling can help investigate design options, test assumptions and provide project specific technical evidence to support informed decision making.
Explore Modelling SupportIn Brief
Specialised ESD design modelling is a scoped technical investigation used to examine a defined environmental performance question or compare specific design scenarios. It may be used where a project needs more detailed evidence than broad design advice can provide, or where the question does not sit wholly within a standard compliance pathway or a single-purpose modelling service. Depending on the agreed scope, the modelling may examine how changes to the building envelope, glazing, shading, orientation, form, ventilation assumptions, services or other project variables influence a stated performance objective.
The purpose of the modelling is not to generate a universal answer, but to test project-specific assumptions, compare options and provide technical evidence that can support design discussion. Results depend on the information supplied, the modelling method, the scenarios being compared and the assumptions agreed at the start of the work. Outputs should therefore be interpreted with the stated scope, inputs and limitations.
Specialised ESD design modelling is distinct from Design Stage Performance Advice, which provides broader early guidance on design risks and likely assessment pathways, and from Climate Responsive Design Support, which focuses on climate, orientation, sun, shade, ventilation potential and passive design response. It also does not replace dedicated Daylight Modelling, Thermal Comfort Modelling, CFD Modelling or formal compliance pathways where those are required.
It may model defined design scenarios, envelope and glazing assumptions, shading geometry, orientation, ventilation or services assumptions and other project-specific variables relevant to the performance question.
It may be useful when a project needs to compare options, test assumptions, investigate an unresolved performance risk or determine whether a more specific modelling or assessment pathway is required.
Requirements depend on the modelling question, but may include drawings, orientation, building geometry, envelope and glazing information, project assumptions, design options, services information and the objective being investigated.
Knowledge Navigation
Follow this guide to understand how project-specific modelling can investigate defined environmental performance questions, compare design scenarios and provide carefully scoped technical evidence.
Foundation
Understand how tailored modelling can investigate a defined project-specific environmental performance question.
Project Need
Learn why some design questions require more detailed investigation than broad advice or a standard assessment pathway can provide.
Related Pathways
See how specialised modelling differs from early design advice, dedicated modelling disciplines and formal assessment pathways.
Modelling Questions
Explore the types of design options, assumptions, risks and performance questions that may be investigated.
Scenario Testing
Understand how baseline, proposed and alternative scenarios can be compared using consistent assumptions.
Project Inputs
Review the drawings, technical information, assumptions and project objectives that may be required.
Outputs
See how scenario comparisons, technical commentary and design evidence should be read with the stated assumptions.
Process
Follow the work from defining the modelling question and assumptions through to comparison, interpretation and reporting.
Limitations
Understand how input quality, assumptions, project stage and real building conditions may influence the findings.
Project Relevance
Identify situations where project teams may benefit from comparing options or investigating unresolved performance questions.
Guidance
Recognise common problems with unclear questions, inconsistent scenarios, incomplete inputs and overinterpreted results.
Practical Guidance
Find concise answers about modelling scope, scenario comparison, project inputs, compliance boundaries and expected outcomes.
Purpose and Scope
Specialised ESD design modelling is a project-specific technical investigation used to examine a clearly defined environmental performance question, compare design scenarios or test the influence of selected assumptions.
Unlike a standard report or rating pathway, the modelling scope is developed around the question the project team is trying to answer. This may involve comparing alternative design options, examining the effect of changes to glazing, shading or envelope assumptions, testing the sensitivity of an outcome to selected inputs or identifying whether a more dedicated modelling pathway is required.
The modelling question should be specific enough to guide the selection of inputs, assumptions, scenarios and outputs. A question such as whether one option performs differently from another can usually be investigated more clearly than a broad request to make a building more sustainable. Defining the question first helps keep the work proportionate, technically relevant and aligned with the decisions the project team needs to make.
Depending on the project, specialised modelling may support design discussion, technical reporting, further investigation or preparation for a later assessment pathway. It does not automatically establish compliance, certification or approval. Where a formal outcome is required, the relevant JV3, VURB, Section J, NatHERS or other defined pathway may still need to be completed separately.
Defined Question
The scope should identify the particular performance risk, design decision, assumption or comparison that needs technical investigation.
Comparable Scenarios
Where options are compared, the scenarios should use consistent inputs unless a particular variable is intentionally being tested.
Careful Interpretation
Findings should be interpreted with the agreed assumptions, project information, modelling limitations and purpose of the study.
Project Need
Not every environmental performance question is answered by a standard rating, compliance pathway or single-purpose modelling service. Some projects require a more focused investigation into the interaction between design decisions, assumptions and performance objectives.
Standard assessment pathways are generally structured around a defined purpose, methodology and output. This can provide clarity where the project question aligns with that pathway, but it may not explain how several design variables interact, why one option performs differently from another or which assumption is responsible for a particular result. Specialised modelling can help investigate these narrower questions where the project team needs evidence before committing to a design direction.
A need for specialised modelling may emerge during concept design, design development, coordination or technical review. It may follow an early performance review, a design change, an identified risk, a request for additional evidence or uncertainty about which formal pathway should be used later. The modelling scope should remain tied to the decision being considered rather than expanding into a general analysis of every aspect of the building.
Specialised modelling does not remove uncertainty from a project or guarantee that one option will be preferable in every respect. Its value lies in making selected assumptions and design differences more visible, allowing the project team to understand the implications of a decision within the agreed scope and identify where further investigation may be warranted.
Competing Options
Modelling may help compare options where the differences are not obvious from drawings alone and where a technical comparison would support the next design decision.
Non-Standard Conditions
Unusual geometry, mixed uses, complex envelope conditions or atypical operating assumptions may require a project-specific investigation rather than a standardised response.
Performance Risk
A project team may need to investigate whether an identified design risk is significant, sensitive to particular assumptions or better addressed through a dedicated modelling pathway.
Interacting Variables
Changes to glazing, shading, envelope, ventilation or services assumptions may interact. A scoped model can help distinguish the effect of selected variables.
Design Evidence
Comparative evidence may support discussion between architects, developers, consultants and project managers before the design or documentation is advanced.
Pathway Uncertainty
An initial technical investigation may help clarify whether the issue should proceed to daylight, comfort, airflow, residential rating, compliance or another defined pathway.
Scope Principle
The purpose of specialised modelling is not to model everything that could be measured. It is to investigate the variables that are material to a defined project question and present the findings with enough context for the project team to use them responsibly.
Related Pathways
The appropriate pathway depends on whether the project needs broad design guidance, investigation of a defined technical question, a dedicated specialist study or evidence for a formal assessment system.
Environmental performance questions can arise at different stages and for different purposes. Some require early strategic review before the project team knows exactly what should be modelled. Others are already sufficiently defined to support a scoped technical investigation. Where the question relates primarily to daylight, human comfort or airflow, a dedicated specialist modelling pathway may be more appropriate. Where a formal rating, certification or compliance outcome is required, the relevant defined assessment pathway must be followed.
Specialised ESD design modelling sits between broad advice and highly prescribed assessment pathways. It is most relevant where a project team has a specific performance question, design option or assumption that requires technical investigation, but the work does not sit wholly within one standard modelling discipline or formal compliance method.
Strategic Review
This pathway provides broad early guidance on design risks, opportunities and likely assessment needs before the technical question has necessarily been defined in detail.
Most appropriate when: the project team needs help identifying which performance matters require further investigation.
Climate Response
This pathway focuses on how a design responds to local climate, orientation, sun, shade, ventilation potential and passive heating and cooling opportunities.
Most appropriate when: the primary question concerns passive design logic rather than a defined technical modelling investigation.
Technical Investigation
This pathway investigates a clearly defined environmental performance question through scoped modelling, project-specific assumptions and comparison of relevant design scenarios.
Most appropriate when: a specific design option, performance risk or assumption requires tailored technical investigation.
Dedicated Disciplines
These pathways examine a defined specialist subject using methods and outputs appropriate to internal daylight, human comfort or airflow behaviour.
Most appropriate when: the project question sits clearly within one specialist modelling discipline.
Formal Assessment
These are defined regulatory or rating pathways with particular methodologies, documentation requirements and assessment purposes.
Most appropriate when: the project requires evidence for a nominated compliance or residential thermal rating pathway.
Defined Standard
Passive House is a separate high performance building standard with defined principles, calculation methods, documentation and certification requirements.
Most appropriate when: the project is pursuing the Passive House standard or requires advice within that defined framework.
Pathway Principle
Specialised ESD design modelling should not be selected simply because modelling is available. The pathway should be chosen according to the question being asked, the decision the project team needs to make and whether a formal assessment, dedicated specialist study or broader design review is ultimately required.
Modelling Questions
Specialised modelling is most useful when the project team can identify a specific question, design option or assumption that needs technical investigation.
The scope of a specialised ESD model should be shaped by the decision the project team is trying to make. Rather than attempting to measure every aspect of environmental performance, the modelling can focus on the variables that are material to the question being investigated. This may involve comparing alternative design options, examining how selected assumptions influence an outcome or testing whether an identified risk warrants more detailed specialist analysis.
The questions below are examples only. The appropriate modelling method, inputs and outputs depend on the project type, design stage, available documentation and agreed scope. Some questions may also need to be referred to a dedicated modelling, compliance or certification pathway.
Design Options
A model may compare alternative forms, layouts, envelope strategies or design changes where the project team needs to understand the relative effect of each option.
Glazing and Shading
The investigation may test changes to glazing area, glass assumptions, external shading or façade geometry against an agreed performance objective.
Envelope Assumptions
Modelling may help compare selected insulation, construction or infiltration assumptions and identify which changes materially influence the outcome being considered.
Form and Orientation
Where relevant to the agreed question, the model may compare massing, orientation or geometry changes without replacing broader climate-responsive design advice.
Performance Risk
An initial modelling exercise may help determine whether a concern is material, sensitive to particular assumptions or better addressed through a dedicated specialist study.
Design Change
The project team may need to understand whether a change to geometry, construction, glazing, shading or services assumptions alters the previously considered outcome.
Scenario Assumptions
Sensitivity testing may compare selected assumptions to show whether the outcome remains consistent or changes materially under different conditions.
Technical Evidence
Comparative outputs may help explain the technical implications of a decision to architects, developers, consultants and other members of the project team.
Next Pathway
The findings may indicate that the question should proceed to a dedicated daylight, comfort, airflow, residential rating, compliance or certification pathway.
Defining the Question
A useful modelling question should identify the decision being considered, the variables that may change and the type of evidence needed. The clearer the question, the easier it is to define a proportionate modelling scope and avoid conclusions that extend beyond the purpose of the study.
Scenario Testing
Much of the value of specialised ESD design modelling comes from comparing alternative design scenarios using a consistent technical framework rather than assessing a single option in isolation.
Scenario testing allows the project team to examine how individual design decisions may influence an agreed performance objective. Instead of asking whether a building performs well in absolute terms, the investigation compares two or more carefully defined scenarios while keeping the remaining assumptions consistent. This approach makes it easier to understand which changes are responsible for any difference in the results.
The scenarios selected should reflect genuine design decisions that are still available to the project. Examples may include alternative façade treatments, glazing strategies, roof configurations, shading systems, envelope assumptions or other project-specific variables. The objective is not to produce as many scenarios as possible but to compare the options that are most likely to influence the decision currently being made.
To ensure that comparisons remain meaningful, the scope should identify which variables are intentionally changing and which assumptions remain fixed. Without this discipline, differences between scenarios may become difficult to interpret because multiple factors are changing simultaneously.
Baseline
A reference model establishes the common starting point against which alternative options can be assessed throughout the investigation.
Alternative
Each alternative should modify only the design variable being investigated while maintaining the agreed assumptions used in the baseline.
Interpretation
The comparison should explain how the scenarios differ and what those differences may mean within the agreed scope of the investigation.
Decision Making
Scenario testing provides comparative technical evidence that can assist architects, consultants and clients when evaluating available design options.
Good Practice
A useful comparison does not attempt to prove that one design is universally better than another. Instead, it demonstrates how specific changes influence a defined performance objective so that design decisions can be made with greater technical confidence and a clear understanding of the assumptions behind the findings.
Project Inputs
Every modelling outcome depends on the information, assumptions and project scope used to create it. Clear documentation of these inputs is essential for producing results that can be interpreted with confidence.
Specialised ESD design modelling is only as reliable as the information available at the time the investigation is undertaken. Early concept projects may require simplified assumptions, while later design stages can incorporate progressively more detailed architectural, environmental and technical information. The modelling scope should acknowledge the level of certainty that exists rather than assuming information that has not yet been established.
Project documentation commonly includes architectural drawings, site information, material assumptions, glazing schedules, preliminary specifications, environmental data and other information relevant to the agreed modelling objective. Not every project requires every input. The information collected should remain proportionate to the technical question being investigated.
Equally important are the assumptions that cannot yet be confirmed. Construction details, occupancy patterns, operational characteristics or future design changes may all influence the interpretation of the results. Recording these assumptions allows the findings to be understood within the context in which the modelling was undertaken and makes future updates significantly more straightforward if the design evolves.
Architecture
Plans, elevations, sections and three-dimensional geometry often form the foundation of the technical investigation.
Envelope
Envelope assemblies, glazing assumptions, shading devices and preliminary specifications may be incorporated where relevant to the scope.
Environment
Climate data, orientation, surrounding context and other environmental conditions may be included where they influence the investigation.
Assumptions
Where information is incomplete, documented assumptions provide a transparent basis for interpreting the modelling results.
Important
Specialised ESD design modelling should always be interpreted alongside the assumptions on which it was based. As projects develop and documentation becomes more complete, updating those assumptions may change the technical findings and should be considered part of the normal design development process.
Outputs
The value of specialised ESD design modelling lies not only in producing technical outputs, but in explaining what those outputs mean within the agreed project scope, assumptions and design objectives.
A completed modelling study may include numerical results, scenario comparisons, graphical outputs, technical commentary or recommendations for further investigation. The exact deliverables depend on the purpose of the study rather than a fixed reporting format. A project investigating envelope options may require different outputs from one examining operational assumptions or comparing alternative design concepts.
The interpretation of these outputs is often more important than the values themselves. Differences between scenarios should be considered alongside the assumptions used to create them, the maturity of the design, the quality of the available information and the limitations identified during the modelling process. Results should therefore be viewed as evidence supporting project decisions rather than as absolute predictions of future building performance.
Where the findings identify unresolved issues or additional opportunities, they may inform later design development or indicate that a dedicated modelling discipline, compliance pathway or certification process should be undertaken. The modelling itself remains one part of the broader environmental design process rather than the final project outcome.
Comparisons
Comparative outputs illustrate how alternative design scenarios perform against the agreed investigation criteria.
Evidence
Professional interpretation explains why differences occur and how they relate to the original project question.
Limitations
Every finding should be considered in the context of the available information, modelling assumptions and current design stage.
Next Steps
The findings may support design refinement, further technical investigation or progression to a formal assessment pathway where required.
Key Principle
Specialised ESD design modelling should not be judged by the amount of data it produces. Its purpose is to generate technically relevant evidence that helps the project team understand the consequences of specific design decisions, recognise the limitations of the investigation and determine the most appropriate next steps.
Process
A specialised modelling study progresses from defining the project question and assembling the available information through to scenario development, technical analysis, interpretation and reporting.
The process begins by establishing what the project team needs to understand and why that information is required. This initial definition is important because it determines the appropriate modelling method, the project inputs that need to be reviewed, the scenarios that should be compared and the outputs that will be useful for decision making.
Once the scope has been agreed, the available drawings, specifications and assumptions are reviewed and translated into a suitable technical model. Baseline and alternative scenarios are then developed in a consistent manner so that the influence of selected variables can be examined without introducing unrelated differences between options.
The completed analysis is interpreted against the original project question rather than reported as a collection of isolated results. Findings may support a design decision, identify a material risk, confirm that further investigation is warranted or indicate that the project should proceed to a dedicated modelling, compliance or certification pathway.
Define
The process begins by identifying the decision, performance risk or design option that requires investigation. The question should be specific enough to guide the technical scope and proposed outputs.
Review
Relevant drawings, site information, preliminary specifications and technical assumptions are reviewed to determine whether the available material is sufficient for the proposed investigation.
Scope
The modelling method, scenarios, assumptions, outputs and known limitations are defined before the technical investigation proceeds. This helps keep the work aligned with the agreed project need.
Model
A reference scenario is prepared using the agreed geometry, project inputs and assumptions. This creates the consistent technical basis against which alternative options can be compared.
Compare
Alternative scenarios are developed by changing the selected design variable or assumption while maintaining consistency across the remaining inputs wherever possible.
Interpret
The results are considered against the original project question, including the relative differences between scenarios, the assumptions used and any limitations affecting interpretation.
Report
The agreed outputs are presented with technical commentary, relevant assumptions and any recommended next steps, which may include design refinement or progression to another assessment pathway.
Early Projects
Concept-stage modelling may rely on simplified geometry or preliminary assumptions, provided these are clearly recorded and reflected in the interpretation.
Developed Projects
Later design stages may support more detailed inputs, narrower scenario testing and findings that respond to specific documentation or coordination decisions.
Design Revisions
Where the design, inputs or assumptions change materially, the model may need to be updated before earlier findings can be relied upon for later decisions.
Process Principle
The modelling process should remain proportionate to the project question. A clearly defined and carefully controlled investigation will generally provide more useful evidence than a larger model with unclear objectives, inconsistent assumptions or outputs that do not support a specific design decision.
Limitations
Specialised ESD design modelling can clarify the implications of selected design decisions, but every result remains dependent on the scope, assumptions, inputs and modelling method used.
A model is a structured representation of a proposed building or design scenario. It cannot reproduce every material, behavioural, environmental or operational condition that may occur once the building is constructed and occupied. The purpose of the model is therefore not to predict the future with absolute certainty, but to investigate defined questions using a consistent technical basis.
The level of confidence that can be placed in the findings is influenced by the maturity of the design and the quality of the project information. Concept-stage modelling may rely on simplified geometry, provisional specifications or assumed operating conditions. Later design stages may allow greater technical detail, but uncertainties can still remain around construction quality, installation, controls, occupancy and future operation.
Results should therefore be interpreted as evidence within the agreed investigation rather than as guarantees of actual building performance. Where the project question requires a formal compliance determination, certification outcome or specialist conclusion, the relevant defined assessment pathway must still be completed.
Input Quality
Preliminary drawings, missing specifications or unconfirmed details may require assumptions that influence the accuracy and interpretation of the findings.
Design Stage
The findings relate to the design information available when the model was prepared. Material changes may require the investigation to be updated.
Occupancy
Real occupancy, equipment use, window operation, schedules and comfort expectations may differ from the standard or project-specific assumptions used.
Construction
Installation quality, workmanship, commissioning and deviations from the documented design can influence actual outcomes in ways the model may not represent.
Weather and Context
Weather files, surrounding context and environmental assumptions represent selected conditions rather than every possible future event.
Scope Boundary
A study should not be interpreted as addressing performance matters, systems or design variables that were not included in the agreed scope.
Good Practice
A technically responsible modelling study makes its limitations visible rather than hiding them. This allows project teams to use the findings for the decision they were prepared to support, recognise when the design has changed materially and avoid extending conclusions beyond the scope of the investigation.
Project Relevance
Specialised ESD design modelling may be useful when a project team has a defined environmental performance question that cannot be resolved confidently through drawings, broad design advice or a standard assessment pathway alone.
The most appropriate time to undertake specialised modelling is generally when the project team still has a meaningful decision to make. This may occur during concept design, schematic design, design development or technical coordination, provided the alternatives being investigated remain available and the modelling can influence the direction of the project.
The service may also be relevant where a design has changed materially, a performance concern has emerged or the project team needs to understand whether further specialist analysis is justified. In these situations, a scoped investigation can help distinguish between a minor issue, a sensitive design variable and a matter that should proceed to a dedicated modelling, compliance or certification pathway.
Specialised modelling is less useful where the project question remains too broad, the design options are no longer available or the required outcome is already governed by a clearly defined formal assessment method. In those cases, broader design advice or the relevant specialist pathway may provide a more direct and proportionate response.
Option Comparison
The project team may benefit from comparing alternative forms, façade strategies, envelope assumptions or other design variables before one option becomes fixed.
Design Change
A change to glazing, shading, geometry, construction or another relevant assumption may require investigation before earlier performance conclusions are carried forward.
Unresolved Risk
A scoped investigation may help determine whether an identified issue is material, sensitive to selected assumptions or likely to require more detailed analysis.
Complex Interaction
Where geometry, glazing, shading, envelope or operational assumptions interact, modelling may help isolate the influence of selected variables.
Technical Coordination
Comparative findings may support discussion between architects, engineers, developers and other consultants where different project priorities need to be coordinated.
Pathway Selection
An initial investigation may help determine whether the matter should proceed to daylight, thermal comfort, CFD, NatHERS, compliance or another defined pathway.
Strong Fit
The strongest modelling brief identifies the decision being considered, the options that remain available and the evidence needed to compare them responsibly.
Broader Advice First
Where the team needs help identifying the main performance risks or deciding what should be investigated, Design Stage Performance Advice may be more appropriate initially.
Defined Pathway
Where the project already requires a nominated rating, compliance determination, specialist study or certification outcome, the relevant formal pathway should generally be followed directly.
Timing Principle
Specialised modelling generally provides the greatest value before the relevant design decision becomes fixed. Undertaking the investigation early enough allows the findings to influence the project rather than merely documenting the consequences of choices that can no longer be changed.
Common Misunderstandings
Specialised modelling is sometimes confused with general sustainability advice, formal compliance assessment or a guaranteed prediction of future building performance. These are separate functions.
The purpose of specialised ESD design modelling is to investigate a defined technical question using an agreed set of inputs, assumptions and scenarios. It is not a substitute for every environmental design service that may be required across the life of a project, nor does it automatically satisfy a statutory, rating or certification requirement.
The modelling should also not be interpreted as an open-ended search for the best possible building. A technically useful investigation begins with a clear question and tests the variables that are relevant to that decision. Where the project team instead needs broad direction across several performance issues, a wider design advisory service may be the more appropriate starting point.
Maintaining these distinctions helps protect the scope of the investigation and prevents the findings from being extended beyond the purpose for which the model was prepared.
Misunderstanding 01
The service does not provide a broad review of every sustainability issue affecting a project. It investigates a specific performance question through a defined modelling scope.
Misunderstanding 02
A specialised modelling study does not by itself establish compliance with the NCC, BASIX, NatHERS, Section J, JV3, VURB or another regulated pathway unless that formal assessment is separately commissioned.
Misunderstanding 03
The modelling does not award a rating, certificate or project accreditation. Certification frameworks retain their own criteria, documentation and verification processes.
Misunderstanding 04
The results reflect the modelled scenarios and assumptions. Actual outcomes may differ because of construction quality, occupancy, operation, maintenance and future environmental conditions.
Misunderstanding 05
Some investigations may focus on a façade, zone, system, interface or selected design variable rather than modelling every aspect of the building.
Misunderstanding 06
A smaller number of carefully controlled scenarios will usually provide clearer evidence than numerous options with changing assumptions and an uncertain purpose.
Use Specialised Modelling When
Consider Another Service When
Scope Principle
The usefulness of specialised ESD design modelling depends on a clear boundary. It should answer the question it was commissioned to investigate without being presented as a broader design review, a formal approval or a prediction of every condition the completed building may experience.
Frequently Asked Questions
Specialised ESD design modelling is a targeted technical investigation used to answer a defined environmental performance question.
It may compare selected design scenarios, test the influence of particular variables or assumptions and provide technical evidence that helps a project team make a specific design decision.
Specialised modelling is generally most useful while the project team still has a meaningful decision to make.
This may occur during concept design, schematic design, design development or technical coordination, depending on the question being investigated, the available project information and the design options that remain open.
Specialised ESD design modelling may be used for houses, apartment developments, mixed use projects, commercial buildings, educational facilities and other architecturally designed projects.
The appropriate modelling scope depends on the building type, project scale, design stage, available information and the technical question the project team needs to resolve.
The modelling may explore how selected changes to building geometry, glazing, shading, envelope systems, construction assumptions or operational conditions influence a defined performance outcome.
The investigation should remain focused on a clearly framed question rather than attempting to model every environmental performance matter affecting the project.
No. Design Stage Performance Advice provides a broader strategic review of an evolving architectural design.
Specialised ESD design modelling has a narrower technical purpose. It uses modelling or simulation to investigate a defined project question, compare selected scenarios or test the influence of specific design variables.
No. Climate Responsive Design Support focuses on how climate, orientation, seasonal sun, wind, shading and site exposure may shape the architectural concept.
Specialised ESD design modelling is used when a defined design question requires a more structured technical investigation or comparison between selected scenarios.
Not automatically. Specialised ESD design modelling may identify that daylight performance requires further investigation, but a dedicated Daylight Modelling study remains a separate service.
Dedicated daylight analysis may use specific simulation methods, performance metrics and reporting requirements that extend beyond a broader project-specific modelling investigation.
Not unless thermal comfort analysis is expressly included within the agreed project scope.
Where a project requires detailed evaluation of internal temperatures, comfort conditions, overheating risk or occupied hours, a dedicated Thermal Comfort Modelling assessment may be more appropriate.
Not automatically. Computational Fluid Dynamics is a dedicated modelling discipline used to investigate airflow, pressure, wind movement and related fluid behaviour.
Where the project question requires detailed airflow simulation, a separate CFD Modelling scope may be recommended.
No. Specialised ESD design modelling does not automatically demonstrate compliance with the NCC, BASIX or another regulatory requirement.
Where the project requires a formal Section J assessment, JV3 assessment, VURB assessment, BASIX assessment or another defined compliance pathway, that work must be commissioned separately.
No. Specialised modelling may help explore design decisions that could later influence residential thermal performance, but it does not produce a NatHERS star rating.
A formal NatHERS assessment must be completed through the relevant accredited software and assessment process where a rating is required.
No. Passive House is a defined building performance standard with specific criteria, calculation methods, documentation requirements and verification processes.
Specialised ESD design modelling may explore a particular performance question, but it does not establish Passive House compliance or certification unless a dedicated Passive House scope is undertaken.
Useful information may include the project location, site plan, architectural drawings, building geometry, preliminary specifications, glazing information, envelope assumptions and any existing technical studies.
The project team should also explain the decision being considered, the scenarios to be compared and the question the modelling is intended to answer.
No. Modelling may begin using concept drawings, schematic plans or preliminary design information where the investigation is appropriate to that level of detail.
Early-stage models may require simplified geometry and provisional assumptions. These should be documented clearly so the findings can be interpreted within the level of certainty available at the time.
A baseline scenario is generally established using the agreed project information and assumptions. Alternative scenarios are then created by changing the selected design variable while keeping other inputs consistent wherever possible.
This controlled approach helps the project team understand which change is responsible for the difference between the modelled outcomes.
Assumptions may relate to construction systems, glazing, shading, occupancy, operating schedules, equipment, environmental conditions or design details that have not yet been confirmed.
These assumptions should be recorded transparently because they influence the meaning of the results and may need to be updated as the project develops.
Depending on the agreed scope, the outputs may include numerical results, scenario comparisons, graphical information, marked-up drawings, technical commentary or a written modelling memorandum.
The reporting format should reflect the project question and provide enough explanation for the findings to support the intended design decision.
Modelling provides a structured representation of selected design scenarios. It does not predict every condition that may occur once the building is constructed and occupied.
Actual outcomes may be influenced by construction quality, installation, commissioning, occupant behaviour, building operation, maintenance and future environmental conditions.
No. The modelling provides technical evidence based on the agreed scope, project information, scenarios and assumptions.
It does not provide a performance guarantee, formal compliance determination, rating, certification outcome or assurance that the completed building will perform exactly as modelled.
Yes. A model may be updated where the architectural design, material selections, glazing, envelope assumptions, operational inputs or project objectives change materially.
Updating the model may be necessary before earlier findings can be relied upon for later design decisions or more developed project documentation.
The service is commonly used by architects, developers, builders, project managers, engineers and multidisciplinary consultant teams.
It is particularly relevant where a project team needs technically structured evidence before selecting between design options, resolving a performance concern or progressing to a more formal assessment pathway.
Project Specific Requirements
The appropriate modelling method, required project information, assumptions, design scenarios, technical outputs and possible next steps depend on the building type, project stage, available documentation and the specific performance question being investigated. These answers provide general guidance and should not be treated as a compliance determination, formal rating, certification outcome, performance guarantee or substitute for a dedicated daylight, thermal comfort, CFD or other specialist assessment where one is required.
Related Knowledge
Specialised ESD Design Modelling investigates a defined environmental performance question through project-specific technical analysis. Where the required outcome involves a dedicated simulation discipline, broader architectural guidance, formal compliance assessment or a recognised building performance framework, a related pathway may be more appropriate.
Indoor Comfort Performance
Evaluate predicted internal temperatures, overheating exposure and comfort conditions under defined weather, occupancy, glazing, shading, ventilation and envelope assumptions.
Explore Thermal Comfort Modelling →
Natural Light Performance
Investigate how glazing, room depth, façade geometry, internal planning and surrounding obstructions influence daylight availability and distribution within a proposed building.
Explore Daylight Modelling →
Airflow and Fluid Behaviour
Analyse airflow direction, air velocity, pressure, wind interaction and ventilation behaviour where building geometry or surrounding conditions create a complex fluid dynamics question.
Explore CFD Modelling →
Strategic Design Refinement
Review an evolving architectural design to identify performance priorities, unresolved assumptions, potential risks and questions that may require more focused technical investigation.
Explore Design Stage Performance Advice →
Climate-Led Architectural Thinking
Consider how local climate, orientation, seasonal sun, wind, shading and site exposure may inform the architectural response before major design decisions become fixed.
Explore Climate Responsive Design Support →
Solar Access and Built Form
Investigate how building siting, height, orientation and massing may affect direct sunlight access to dwellings, private open spaces and neighbouring properties.
Explore Solar Access & Overshadowing →
Site and Surrounding Context
Review landform, orientation, adjoining development, vegetation, exposure and surrounding site conditions that may influence the design or the scope of later environmental analysis.
Explore Site & Contextual Analysis →
Defined High Performance Framework
Pursue a defined building performance framework based on energy demand, airtightness, thermal bridge control, high performance envelopes and verified comfort criteria.
Explore Passive House →
Residential Thermal Assessment
Calculate the regulated heating and cooling performance of a proposed dwelling and determine its NatHERS star rating through an accredited residential thermal assessment.
Explore NatHERS Assessment →
Commercial Building Compliance
Assess the energy efficiency provisions applicable to a commercial building through the relevant National Construction Code Section J compliance pathway.
Explore Section J Assessment →
Commercial Performance Solution
Compare the annual energy performance of a proposed commercial building with a compliant reference building through the NCC JV3 verification method.
Explore JV3 Assessment →
Design & Planning Gateway
Explore climate response, design refinement, thermal comfort, daylight, airflow, solar access, site intelligence and environmental modelling pathways according to the project stage, technical question and evidence required.
Explore the Design & Planning Intelligence gateway →
Specialised ESD Design Modelling Project Review
Send the available plans, elevations, sections, design models, preliminary specifications and any existing technical studies, together with the design alternatives, performance concerns or unresolved questions the project team needs to investigate.
Certified Energy can review the proposed question, available project information, modelling assumptions and design variables to determine an appropriate investigation pathway. The scope may compare selected scenarios, test the influence of a specific design change or identify whether the matter should proceed to dedicated Thermal Comfort Modelling, Daylight Modelling, CFD Modelling or another defined technical assessment pathway.
The appropriate modelling method, required project information, assumptions, number of scenarios, level of technical detail and reporting format depend on the building type, project stage, available documentation and the specific design decision the investigation is intended to support.
Last reviewed: July 2026. This page is maintained by Certified Energy as part of its High Performance Design Hub; Design & Planning Intelligence.
