Massing Optimization - Needs to understand the results
I am trying to study the energy consumption trend for different floor plates for different climate zones & cities all around the globe.
In most of the locations, the compact floor plates (like circle) is the most efficient one, while the cruciform design (see the image below), which has more perimeter spaces & envelope, is the least efficient one.
Although for the colder climate zones, the results tend to shift slightly but for couple of locations (for ex, Calgary) the cruciform is one of the most efficient floor plate. I looked at the numbers thoroughly & have done a thorough comparison between the kBtus figures, but it will be great if you folks can provide me an insite here.
I need to know what are the factors that can help the cruciform design to be efficient for the colder climates.
Assumptions here: 
Input Summary for the floor plates: 
Results: 
Are you trying to figure out why the Cruciform preforms much better than the Tripod Calgary, Cheyenne, and Minneapolis, or are you looking to replicate this success with Cruciform in other cold climate zones? Assuming you are trying to identify why the Cruciform performs well in some cold climates, I would look at time series data by day of year and time of day, and specifically look at solar heat gain.
Could be as simple as greater impact of daylighting.
It would also be interesting to see if a Tripod with the point facing south better follows behavior by Cruciform.
@JasonGlazer the daylighting impact is very less compare to the heating.
@David Goldwasser - I actually am planning to compare the daily runs for all the forms in Calgary climate. I think solar heat gain is definitely making a huge impact, but I feel the cloud cover is one of the reason too. Looks like the self shading in cruciform saves a lot on heating, but I am curious why this self-shading isnt making the saving impact for other colder locations.