4.7 Article

Developing urban residential reference buildings using clustering analysis of satellite images

期刊

ENERGY AND BUILDINGS
卷 169, 期 -, 页码 417-429

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.03.064

关键词

Residential building benchmark; Building shape; Cluster analysis; Built-up area; Bottom-up approach

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [NSFC 51561135002]
  2. UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EPSRC EP/N009797/1]
  3. China Scholarship Council [201506050035]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Built-up areas tend to comprise a variety of buildings with diverse and complex shapes, functions and construction characteristics. This variety is the source of significant challenges when calculating building energy use at the building stock level. Moreover, the process of developing stock models usually requires large amounts of data that are frequently scarce, nonexistent or at least not publicly available. Under these circumstances, defining a limited set of reference buildings representing the stock is useful to study the actual energy consumption and the potential effects of different energy conservation measures. This paper presents a new method for developing typical residential reference buildings at district level for bottom-up energy modeling purposes. By means of widely and freely available satellite images, an information database of building shapes is created and a clustering analysis of the geometrical features is performed to define a number of archetypes representative of the heating and cooling energy demand of the district. The method is tested and demonstrated through the case study of the Yuzhong District in Chongqing (China) by comparing the Energy Use Intensity (EUI) of the archetypes derived in this way against detailed dynamic simulations. Results show very small differences in the estimated stock energy consumption (+0.03% in heating energy consumption and +2.97% in cooling energy consumption). (C) 2018 Published by Elsevier B.V.

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