4.7 Article

Comparative studies on using RSM and TOPSIS methods to optimize residential air conditioning systems

Journal

ENERGY
Volume 144, Issue -, Pages 98-109

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2017.11.160

Keywords

Optimization; Operating parameters; RSM method; TOPSIS method; Energy consumption; Thermal comfort

Funding

  1. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [15CX02111A]
  2. Research Foundation for Talents of China University of Petroleum (East China) [11201501018]
  3. Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation, China [ZR2016EEQ29]
  4. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51606044, 51408233]
  5. Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province [2017A030313300]
  6. University of Tokyo
  7. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The operating parameters of task/ambient air conditioning (TAC) systems including supply air temperature (t(s)) and air flow rate (Q(s)) were reported to have critical effects on energy savings and thermally comfortable environment. Due to the existing contradictions between these two aspects, a multi-objective study should be carried out to realize consuming minimum energy and at the same time to guarantee the thermal comfort level at suitable range. Two optimization methods were adopted in this study, one is the response surface methodology (RSM), and the other is the technique for order preferences by similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS) method. The objective of this study was to compare the pros and cons of these two methods. It was found that the optimum operating parameters obtained using RSM method were 26 degrees C (t(s)) and 28.94 1/s (Q(s)), corresponding to energy consumption (Q(c)) of 46.89 W and PMV of 0.11; while that obtained using TOPSIS method were 26 degrees C (t(s)) and 30 1/s (Q(s)), corresponding to energy consumption (Q(c)) of 49.64 W and PMV of 0.09. Furthermore, compared with TOPSIS method, there were only 9 cases used in RSM method saving 74% of computation cost. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available