4.7 Article

Calibration of building energy models for retrofit analysis under uncertainty

期刊

ENERGY AND BUILDINGS
卷 47, 期 -, 页码 550-560

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.12.029

关键词

Retrofit analysis; Normative energy models; Bayesian calibration; Uncertainty analysis

资金

  1. Energy Efficient Cities Initiative (EECi) at the University of Cambridge
  2. NSF-EFRI SEED
  3. EPSRC [EP/F034350/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Directorate For Engineering
  5. Emerging Frontiers & Multidisciplinary Activities [1038248] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  6. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/F034350/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Retrofitting existing buildings is urgent given the increasing need to improve the energy efficiency of the existing building stock. This paper presents a scalable, probabilistic methodology that can support large scale investments in energy retrofit of buildings while accounting for uncertainty. The methodology is based on Bayesian calibration of normative energy models. Based on CEN-ISO standards, normative energy models are light-weight, quasi-steady state formulations of heat balance equations, which makes them appropriate for modeling large sets of buildings efficiently. Calibration of these models enables improved representation of the actual buildings and quantification of uncertainties associated with model parameters. In addition, the calibrated models can incorporate additional uncertainties coming from retrofit interventions to generate probabilistic predictions of retrofit performance. Probabilistic outputs can be straightforwardly translated to quantify risks of under-performance associated with retrofit interventions. A case study demonstrates that the proposed methodology with the use of normative models can correctly evaluate energy retrofit options and support risk conscious decision-making by explicitly inspecting risks associated with each retrofit option. (C) 2011 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