4.7 Article

Definition of occupant behavior in residential buildings and its application to behavior analysis in case studies

期刊

ENERGY AND BUILDINGS
卷 104, 期 -, 页码 1-13

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.06.075

关键词

Definition of occupant behavior; Residential buildings; Characteristics of occupant behavior; Case studies

资金

  1. Scientific Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars of State Education Ministry
  2. Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [LQ15E080001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

One significant obstacle improving the energy efficiency of buildings is a lack of understanding the occupant behavior in buildings. There is a need for systematic definitions to describe occupant behavior for different research purposes. To achieve this, three-levels of definitions for behavioral parameters for residential buildings were developed. The three levels - simple, intermediate and complex - serve three research purposes-statistical analysis, case studies and detailed diagnostics/simulation, respectively. For statistical analysis, a few parameters related to the schedule of occupancy and appliances are defined. More parameters are defined at the intermediate level, where definitions for the operation schedule and the set point of appliances for case studies are provided. For the complex level, subschemas are defined to describe the schedule, set points and control rules of three kinds of occupant behavior, namely occupancy, appliance operation, and window/shading operation. A statistical survey of occupant behavior in residential buildings in a city and a one-year monitoring of occupant behavior in a family were conducted to verify the simple-level definitions and the complex-level definitions. The result indicates the different levels of definitions can apply to different research purposes and reveals the main features and energy saving potential related to occupant behavior. (C) 2015 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