4.6 Article

An Exhaustive Search Energy Optimization Method for Residential Building Envelope in Different Climatic Zones of Kazakhstan

Journal

BUILDINGS
Volume 11, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/buildings11120633

Keywords

building envelope; optimization; OTTV; energy consumption; Brute Force Algorithm

Funding

  1. Nazarbayev University Faculty development competitive research [021220FD0651, SOE2017004]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This research aims to analyze the energy consumption of residential buildings in Kazakhstan and reduce energy consumption by optimizing the envelope configuration. The results show that optimized measures can significantly reduce energy consumption during heating and cooling periods.
Nowadays, the residential sector of Kazakhstan accounts for about 30% of the total energy consumption. Therefore, it is essential to analyze the energy estimation model for residential buildings in Kazakhstan so as to reduce energy consumption. This research is aimed to develop the Overall Thermal Transfer Value (OTTV) based Building Energy Simulation Model (BESM) for the reduction of energy consumption through the envelope of residential buildings in seven cities of Kazakhstan. A brute force optimization method was adopted to obtain the optimal envelope configuration varying window-to-wall ratio (WWR), the angle of a pitched roof, the depth of the overhang shading system, the thermal conductivity, and the thicknesses of wall composition materials. In addition, orientation-related analyses of the optimized cases were conducted. Finally, the economic evaluation of the base and optimized cases were presented. The results showed that an average energy reduction for heating was 6156.8 kWh, while for cooling it was almost 1912.17 kWh. The heating and cooling energy savings were 16.59% and 16.69%, respectively. The frontage of the building model directed towards the south in the cold season and north in the hot season demonstrated around 21% and 32% of energy reduction, respectively. The energy cost savings varied between 9657 to 119,221 x20b8; for heating, 9622 to 36,088 x20b8; for cooling.

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