4.5 Article

Precomputed Radiative Heat Transport for Efficient Thermal Simulation

期刊

COMPUTER GRAPHICS FORUM
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cgf.14957

关键词

CCS Concepts; center dot Computing methodologies -> Ray tracing; Physical simulation; center dot Applied computing -> Physics; Computer-aided design

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article introduces a method based on computer graphics and thermal radiation to predict the thermal impact in architectural design and urban planning. The method combines photon tracing and finite element discretization to solve heat transfer problems efficiently, and integrates solar irradiation data for different simulation scenarios.
Architectural design and urban planning are complex design tasks. Predicting the thermal impact of design choices at interactive rates enhances the ability of designers to improve energy efficiency and avoid problematic heat islands while maintaining design quality. We show how to use and adapt methods from computer graphics to efficiently simulate heat transfer via thermal radiation, thereby improving user guidance in the early design phase of large-scale construction projects and helping to increase energy efficiency and outdoor comfort. Our method combines a hardware-accelerated photon tracing approach with a carefully selected finite element discretization, inspired by precomputed radiance transfer. This combination allows us to precompute a radiative transport operator, which we then use to rapidly solve either steady-state or transient heat transport throughout the entire scene. Our formulation integrates time-dependent solar irradiation data without requiring changes in the transport operator, allowing us to quickly analyze many different scenarios such as common weather patterns, monthly or yearly averages, or transient simulations spanning multiple days or weeks. We show how our approach can be used for interactive design workflows such as city planning via fast feedback in the early design phase.

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

4.5
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