4.6 Article

Sensitivity Analysis of Passive Design Strategies for Residential Buildings in Cold Semi-Arid Climates

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 12, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su12031091

关键词

decision support; building simulation; personalised systems; adaptive comfort

资金

  1. Higher Education Commission (HEC) Pakistan [50027882]
  2. Fond de la Recherche Scientifique (FNRS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Buildings are significant drivers of greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption. Improving the thermal comfort of occupants in free-running buildings and avoiding active and fossil fuel-based systems is the main challenge in many cities worldwide. However, the impacts of passive design measures on thermal comfort in cold semi-arid regions are seldom studied. With the rapid urbanization and the widespread use of personalised heating and cooling systems, there is a need to inform building designers and city authorities about passive design measures that can achieve nearly optimal conditions. Therefore, in this study, a global sensitivity analysis of the impact of passive design parameters on adaptive comfort in cold semi-arid climates was conducted. A representative residential building was simulated and calibrated in Quetta, Pakistan, to identify key design parameters for optimal thermal comfort. The results list and rank a set of passive design recommendations that can be used widely in similar climates. The results show that among the investigated 21 design variables, the insulation type of roof is the most influential design variable. Overall, the sensitivity analysis yielded new quantitative and qualitative knowledge about the passive design of buildings with personalised heating systems, but the used sensitivity analysis has some limitations. Finally, this study provides evidence-based and informed design recommendations that can serve architects and homeowners to integrate passive design measures at the earliest conceptual design phases in cold semi-arid climates.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据