4.7 Article

A methodology for calibration of building energy models at district scale using clustering and surrogate techniques

期刊

ENERGY AND BUILDINGS
卷 226, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110309

关键词

Data-driven models; District scale energy models; Non-deterministic modelling; Emulators; Bayesian calibration; Clustering

资金

  1. City of Geneva
  2. European Commission [606851]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Prediction of building energy use, when performed at urban scale, is influenced by the choice of modelling approach, as well as the quality of available data. In the case of data scarcity, one of the main limitations of current urban scale building energy simulation models, is the use of deterministic approaches to specify modelling inputs for entire classes of buildings. This modelling approach is characterised by three major shortcomings: first, data uncertainties are not comprehensively considered; second, a rigorous method of identification of groups of buildings to be populated by similar modelling parameters is not specified; and third, strategies to calibrate the developed energy models are missing. Considering these challenges, the current paper presents a non-deterministic calibration method for groups of buildings. The methodology utilises four techniques: (i) the use of clustering to identify building groups and associated representative buildings within the urban context; (ii) the application of an automatic building energy modelling approach to simulate buildings within these groups; (iii) the application of data-driven models, used as emulators of the dynamic simulation engine, in a computationally efficient manner; and (iv) the exploitation of a non-deterministic Bayesian calibration framework to identify sets of representative parameters for the building clusters. Datasets, based on 2646 buildings from the city of Geneva, Switzerland, are used as a case study. Validation with measured data, shows that energy consumption and energy intensity predictions when considered at an aggregated scale, are within +/- 5%. On an individual building basis, the validation error is within +/- 20% for approximately 70% of the buildings. (C) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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