4.6 Article

Multiobjective Optimal Scheduling Framework for HVAC Devices in Energy-Efficient Buildings

Journal

IEEE SYSTEMS JOURNAL
Volume 13, Issue 4, Pages 4398-4409

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/JSYST.2019.2933308

Keywords

Greedy algorithm; heating ventilation air conditioning (HVAC) scheduling; Pareto optimization; smart building (SB); thermal comfort

Funding

  1. IMPRINT-2 initiative
  2. DST through SERB, Govt. of India

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The world wide energy consumption has been growing in aggregate at a tremendous rate, and a majority of the same is due to heating ventilation air conditioning (HVAC) loads in urban buildings. With the help of the recent advances in energy management and optimization techniques, the operations and functioning of these devices can now be managed and controlled efficiently for an improved energy consumption scenario and thereby reducing cost. In this article, we propose a multiobjective optimal scheduling framework based on Johnson's elementary circuit finding algorithm for controlling HVAC devices, specifically for buildings that require continuous thermal comfort maintenance. Two primary objectives addressed in this article are: minimizing power fluctuation and maximizing thermal comfortability of the users. We use standard comfortability indices to quantify thermal comfortability. To reduce the computation time, we also propose two intelligent improvement schemes that prune the exponential search space of Johnson's algorithm. Furthermore, a new greedy scheduling algorithm has been proposed to obtain near-optimal solutions efficiently. All the proposed approaches have been studied in a simulated environment depicting a real-world scenario to evaluate their efficiency and effectiveness for practical implementations, including a comparative analysis with Karp's minimum mean cycle algorithm in this problem setup.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available