- \n
- Nuclear Containment Building<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Historical Building<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Green Roof System<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Wooden Roof Truss System<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Bridge<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Pavement System<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/2-1-1024x384.jpeg\")
<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nFigure O1<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Purpose and scope<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Purpose<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Explain the design logic of the tender at a system-integration level<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Make interdisciplinary coordination clearer (who affects what, and why)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Support scenario comparison using the same evaluation metrics and constraints<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
Scope<\/strong>
The ontology focuses on:<\/p>\n\n\n\n- \n
- System boundaries and relationships<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Global design parameters that influence multiple subsystems<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Shared performance metrics for evaluation<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Mandatory project constraints (requirements)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
It explicitly does not<\/strong> implement:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Operational simulations<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Material-level calculations<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Optimization algorithms<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/1.jpeg\")
<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nFigure O2<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ontology structure<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The ontology is organized around six core classes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Project<\/strong> (the overall tender context)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- System<\/strong> (abstract class for all subsystems)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- DesignParameter<\/strong> (inputs that control design decisions)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- PerformanceMetric<\/strong> (outputs used to evaluate quality)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Requirement<\/strong> (constraints that must be satisfied)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- DesignVariant<\/strong> (alternative configurations)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
Each subsystem (Bridge, Road, GreenRoof, etc.) is a subclass of System<\/strong>, with one corresponding system individual<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n
\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/image-206.png\")
<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nFigure O3 <\/strong>
<\/p>\n\n\n\nProject integration<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
A single project instance, centralizes the decision logic. It connects to:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- All subsystem instances<\/strong> (via
hasSubsystem<\/code>)<\/li>\n\n\n\n- Global performance metrics<\/strong> (via
hasOutput<\/code>)<\/li>\n\n\n\n- Mandatory requirements<\/strong> (via
mustSatisfy<\/code>)<\/li>\n\n\n\n- Design variants<\/strong> (via
hasDesignVariant<\/code>)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\nThis setup keeps all reasoning anchored at the project level, so every design alternative is evaluated consistently.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Global design parameters<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Three global parameters drive the main cross-system trade-offs:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Reactor Radius<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Controls containment size and structural volume<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Strongly affects embodied CO\u2082 and total cost<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Drives economic return through usable area\/income logic<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Bridge Position<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Determines the river-crossing alignment<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Changes bridge length and approach road layout<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Creates a bridge vs. road trade-off in cost and CO\u2082<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Green Roof Coverage<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Influences roof loads and truss demand<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Can trigger wall strengthening for the historical building<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Affects embodied CO\u2082 through added structural work and materials<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/image-207.png\")
<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nFigure O5<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Performance metrics <\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Two global performance metrics are used to compare alternatives:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Total CO\u2082 Emissions (A1\u2013A3)<\/strong>: embodied carbon from material production across the integrated project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Return on Investment (ROI)<\/strong>: rental income over 15 years divided by total construction costs<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
Because these metrics are attached at the project level, each variant is compared on the same basis<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n
\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/image-208.png\")
<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nFigure O6<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Requirements<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The ontology explicitly models the key project constraints:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Maximum total embodied CO\u2082: 2,070,000 kg<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Minimum green roof coverage: 10%<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Mandatory river crossing via a bridge<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Functional connectivity between containment and historical building<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Reuse and renovation of the historical building<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Containment geometric constraints (fixed height + minimum radius range)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dependencies<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The ontology captures key conceptual dependencies to keep reasoning transparent, for example:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Higher green roof load \u2192 higher truss demand \u2192 possible wall strengthening<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Larger containment size \u2192 increased logistics demands \u2192 affects road class + bridge load capacity<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Bridge and road placement depend on the spatial logic between containment and the historical building<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
This is not \u201ccalculation,\u201d it\u2019s the map of cause-and-effect relationships<\/strong> that your Dynamo workflows and simulations can then quantify.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Design variants <\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Without design variants,<\/strong> you only have one frozen design.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
With design variants,<\/strong> you can compare alternatives transparently.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In this ontology, each DesignVariant<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Uses the same systems<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Must satisfy the same requirements<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Is evaluated using the same performance metrics<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- But differs in one or more design parameter values<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
This makes \u201cVariant 1 vs Variant 2\u201d explicit and auditable, even if the numbers are generated in Dynamo.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Ontology The ontology captures the project-level design logic for a competitive nuclear facility tender. It integrates six interdependent subsystems inside one shared model: Figure O1 Purpose and scope Purpose ScopeThe ontology focuses on: It explicitlyContinue reading<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":301,"featured_media":0,"parent":24068,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-26223","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/26223","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/301"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=26223"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/26223\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":26249,"href":"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/26223\/revisions\/26249"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/24068"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=26223"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
- Minimum green roof coverage: 10%<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Return on Investment (ROI)<\/strong>: rental income over 15 years divided by total construction costs<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
- Total CO\u2082 Emissions (A1\u2013A3)<\/strong>: embodied carbon from material production across the integrated project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Green Roof Coverage<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
- Bridge Position<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
- Global performance metrics<\/strong> (via
- System<\/strong> (abstract class for all subsystems)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Project<\/strong> (the overall tender context)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/141.23.68.248\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/2-1.jpeg\")
<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n