4.7 Article

Inter-building effect: Simulating the impact of a network of buildings on the accuracy of building energy performance predictions

期刊

BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT
卷 58, 期 -, 页码 37-45

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.06.017

关键词

Building networks; Energy efficiency; Inter-building effect; Simulation

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [1142379]
  2. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn
  3. Directorate For Engineering [1733695, 1142379] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Given the significant energy consumption imputable to buildings, the development of accurate models to predict building energy performance to understand their environmental impact has become a fundamental research issue. In this paper, a method for evaluating a building's energy performance by enlarging the assessment perspective from a single building to a network of buildings is proposed and applied. The purpose of this research was to establish how a combined Inter-Building Effect (IBE) on energy consumption could work and how it could condition buildings' energy performance when there are close spatial relationships among buildings. To examine this, a simulation of the energy performance of a whole network of buildings represented by a realistic block of twenty single-family homes subject to different climatological contexts was conducted. The results demonstrate that buildings can mutually impact the energy dynamics of other buildings and that this effect varies by climatological context and by season. The IBE analysis and the specific proposed methodology revealed energy requirement modeling inaccuracies of up to 42% in summer (in Miami, FL) and up to 22% in winter (in Minneapolis, MN). These findings demonstrate that in order to accurately predict the energy performance of a single building, the IBE created by the spatial relationship with surrounding buildings should be considered. (c) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. 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