Content deleted Content added
Daniel.ruepp (talk | contribs) m "See also" is not an advertising platform for software products, but to link topic related sites. |
m Task 16: replaced (0×) / removed (20×) deprecated |dead-url= and |deadurl= with |url-status=; |
||
Line 32:
== History ==
The history of BPS is approximately as long as that of [[computer]]s. The very early developments in this direction started in the late 50's and early 60's in the United States and Sweden. During this period, several methods had been introduced for analyzing single system components (e.g. gas boiler) using steady state calculations.The very first reported simulation tool for buildings was '''BRIS''', introduced in 1963 by the [[Royal Institute of Technology]] in Stockholm.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Brown|first1=Gösta|title=The BRIS simulation program for thermal design of buildings and their services|journal=Energy and Buildings|date=January 1990|volume=14|issue=4|pages=385–400|doi=10.1016/0378-7788(90)90100-W}}</ref> Until the late 60's, several models with hourly resolution had been developed focusing on energy assessments and heating/cooling load calculations. This effort resulted in more powerful simulation engines released in the early 70's, among those were BLAST, DOE-2, [[ESP-r]], HVACSIM+ and [[TRNSYS]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ibpsa.org/%5Cproceedings%5CBS1999%5CBS99_P-01.pdf|title=Early history and future prospects of building system simulation|last=Kusuda|first=T.|date=1999|website=IBPSA Proceedings
The development of building simulation represents a combined effort between academia, governmental institutions, industry, and professional organizations. Over the past decades the building simulation discipline has matured into a field that offers unique expertise, methods and tools for [[building performance]] evaluation. Several review papers and state of the art analysis were carried out during that time giving an overview about the development.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Augenbroe|first=Godfried|last2=Hensen|first2=Jan|date=2004-08-01|title=Simulation for better building design|journal=Building and Environment|series=Building Simulation for Better Building Design|volume=39|issue=8|pages=875–877|doi=10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.04.001}}</ref><ref>Hensen, J. (2006). [http://www.janhensen.nl/publications_folder/06_ibpsa-cz_hensen.pdf About the current state of building performance simulation and ibpsa]. In ''4th national IBPS-CZ conference'' (p. 2).</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Wang|first=Haidong|last2=Zhai|first2=Zhiqiang (John)|date=2016-09-15|title=Advances in building simulation and computational techniques: A review between 1987 and 2014|journal=Energy and Buildings|volume=128|pages=319–335|doi=10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.06.080}}</ref>
Line 50:
In the context of building simulation models, '''error''' refers to the discrepancy between simulation results and the actual measured performance of the building. There are normally occurring [[uncertainties in building design and building energy assessment|uncertainties in building design and building assessment]], which generally stem from approximations in model inputs, such as occupancy behavior. '''Calibration''' refers to the process of "tuning" or adjusting assumed simulation model inputs to match observed data from the utilities or [[Building Management System]] (BMS).<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Raftery|first=Paul|last2=Keane|first2=Marcus|last3=Costa|first3=Andrea|date=2011-12-01|title=Calibrating whole building energy models: Detailed case study using hourly measured data|journal=Energy and Buildings|volume=43|issue=12|pages=3666–3679|doi=10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.09.039}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Reddy|first=T. Agami|date=2006|title=Literature Review on Calibration of Building Energy Simulation Programs: Uses, Problems, Procedures, Uncertainty, and Tools.|url=http://web.a.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=00012505&AN=21489891&h=p8ojDgTz25mLEtPl4J%2f86zfAUGKoYzTVsDcvoE2LFrNnW0vox%2bp0QW8edSwoCq%2bDwUzsmlj6wPJVrbTSmFK79g%3d%3d&crl=c&resultNs=AdminWebAuth&resultLocal=ErrCrlNotAuth&crlhashurl=login.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26profile%3dehost%26scope%3dsite%26authtype%3dcrawler%26jrnl%3d00012505%26AN%3d21489891|journal=ASHRAE Transactions|volume=112 |issue=1|pages=226–240|via=}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Heo|first=Y.|last2=Choudhary|first2=R.|last3=Augenbroe|first3=G.A.|title=Calibration of building energy models for retrofit analysis under uncertainty|journal=Energy and Buildings|language=en|volume=47|pages=550–560|doi=10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.12.029|year=2012}}</ref>
The number of publications dealing with accuracy in building modeling and simulation increased significantly over the past decade. Many papers report large gaps between simulation results and measurements,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Coakley|first=Daniel|last2=Raftery|first2=Paul|last3=Keane|first3=Marcus|date=2014-09-01|title=A review of methods to match building energy simulation models to measured data|journal=Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews|volume=37|pages=123–141|doi=10.1016/j.rser.2014.05.007}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Li|first=Nan|last2=Yang|first2=Zheng|last3=Becerik-Gerber|first3=Burcin|last4=Tang|first4=Chao|last5=Chen|first5=Nanlin|title=Why is the reliability of building simulation limited as a tool for evaluating energy conservation measures?|journal=Applied Energy|volume=159|pages=196–205|doi=10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.09.001|year=2015}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hong|first=Taehoon|last2=Kim|first2=Jimin|last3=Jeong|first3=Jaemin|last4=Lee|first4=Myeonghwi|last5=Ji|first5=Changyoon|title=Automatic calibration model of a building energy simulation using optimization algorithm|journal=Energy Procedia|volume=105|pages=3698–3704|doi=10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.855|year=2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Mustafaraj|first=Giorgio|last2=Marini|first2=Dashamir|last3=Costa|first3=Andrea|last4=Keane|first4=Marcus|title=Model calibration for building energy efficiency simulation|journal=Applied Energy|language=en|volume=130|pages=72–85|doi=10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.05.019|year=2014}}</ref> while other studies show that they can match very well.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Christensen|first=Jørgen Erik|last2=Chasapis|first2=Kleanthis|last3=Gazovic|first3=Libor|last4=Kolarik|first4=Jakub|date=2015-11-01|title=Indoor Environment and Energy Consumption Optimization Using Field Measurements and Building Energy Simulation|journal=Energy Procedia|series=6th International Building Physics Conference, IBPC 2015|volume=78|pages=2118–2123|doi=10.1016/j.egypro.2015.11.281}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Cornaro|first=Cristina|last2=Puggioni|first2=Valerio Adoo|last3=Strollo|first3=Rodolfo Maria|date=2016-06-01|title=Dynamic simulation and on-site measurements for energy retrofit of complex historic buildings: Villa Mondragone case study|journal=Journal of Building Engineering|volume=6|pages=17–28|doi=10.1016/j.jobe.2016.02.001}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Cornaro|first=Cristina|last2=Rossi|first2=Stefania|last3=Cordiner|first3=Stefano|last4=Mulone|first4=Vincenzo|last5=Ramazzotti|first5=Luigi|last6=Rinaldi|first6=Zila|title=Energy performance analysis of STILE house at the Solar Decathlon 2015: lessons learned|journal=Journal of Building Engineering|volume=13|pages=11–27|doi=10.1016/j.jobe.2017.06.015|year=2017}}</ref> The reliability of results from BPS depends on many different things, e.g. on the quality of input data,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Dodoo|first=Ambrose|last2=Tettey|first2=Uniben Yao Ayikoe|last3=Gustavsson|first3=Leif|title=Influence of simulation assumptions and input parameters on energy balance calculations of residential buildings|journal=Energy|volume=120|pages=718–730|doi=10.1016/j.energy.2016.11.124|year=2017}}</ref> the competence of the simulation engineers<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Imam|first=Salah|last2=Coley|first2=David A|last3=Walker|first3=Ian|date=2017-01-18|title=The building performance gap: Are modellers literate?|journal=Building Services Engineering Research and Technology|language=en|volume=38|issue=3|pages=351–375|doi=10.1177/0143624416684641|url=http://opus.bath.ac.uk/53934/1/ImamColeyWalker2017.pdf}}</ref> and on the applied methods in the simulation engine.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Nageler|first=P.|last2=Schweiger|first2=G.|last3=Pichler|first3=M.|last4=Brandl|first4=D.|last5=Mach|first5=T.|last6=Heimrath|first6=R.|last7=Schranzhofer|first7=H.|last8=Hochenauer|first8=C.|title=Validation of dynamic building energy simulation tools based on a real test-box with thermally activated building systems (TABS)|journal=Energy and Buildings|volume=168|pages=42–55|doi=10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.03.025|year=2018}}</ref><ref name=":02">{{Cite journal|last=Choi|first=Joon-Ho|title=Investigation of the correlation of building energy use intensity estimated by six building performance simulation tools|journal=Energy and Buildings|volume=147|pages=14–26|doi=10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.04.078|year=2017}}</ref> An overview about possible causes for the widely discussed [[performance gap]] from design stage to operation is given by de Wilde (2014) and a progress report by the Zero Carbon Hub (2013). Both conclude the factors mentioned above as the main uncertainties in BPS.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=de Wilde|first=Pieter|date=2014-05-01|title=The gap between predicted and measured energy performance of buildings: A framework for investigation|journal=Automation in Construction|volume=41|pages=40–49|doi=10.1016/j.autcon.2014.02.009}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.zerocarbonhub.org/sites/default/files/resources/reports/Closing_the_Gap_Bewteen_Design_and_As-Built_Performance_Interim_Report.pdf|title=Closing the Gap Bewteen Design and As-Built Performance
ASHRAE Standard 140-2017 "Standard Method of Test for the Evaluation of Building Energy Analysis Computer Programs (ANSI Approved)" provides a method to validate the technical capability and range of applicability of computer programs to calculate thermal performance.<ref>{{Cite book|title=ASHRAE/ANSI Standard 140-2017--Standard Method of Test for the Evaluation of Building Energy Analysis Computer Programs|last=ASHRAE|publisher=American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.|year=2017|isbn=|___location=Atlanta, GA|pages=}}</ref> ASHRAE Guideline 4-2014 provides performance indices criteria for model calibration.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Guideline 14-2014 Measurement of Energy Demand Savings; Technical Report|last=ASHRAE|publisher=American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.|year=2014|isbn=|___location=Atlanta, GA|pages=}}</ref> The performance indices used are normalized mean bias error (NMBE), [[coefficient of variation]] (CV) of the [[Root-mean-square deviation|root mean square error]] (RMSE), and R<sup>2</sup> ([[coefficient of determination]]). ASHRAE recommends a R<sup>2</sup> greater than 0.75 for calibrated models. The criteria for NMBE and CV RMSE depends on if measured data is available at a monthly or hourly timescale.
Line 73:
* Plugins for other software enabling certain performance analysis (e.g. DIVA for Rhino, Honeybee, [[Autodesk]] Green Building Studio)
Contrary to this presentation, there are some tools that in fact do not meet these sharp classification criteria, such as ESP-r which can also be used as a modeler application for EnergyPlus<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://lists.strath.ac.uk/archives/esp-r/2015/003176.html|title=Exporting ESP-r models to E+ .idf files
{| class="wikitable"
!Simulation engine
Line 84:
!Modeler applications and GUI
|-
|ApacheSim<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.iesve.com/software/ve-for-engineers/module/ApacheSim/482|title=APACHESIM|last=Integrated Environmental Solutions, Ltd|date=2017
|[[Integrated Environmental Solutions Ltd]]., UK
|
Line 91:
|Commercial
|6.0
|VE 2018<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.iesve.com/VE2018|title=VE2018 Website
|-
|Carrier HAP<ref name=":3">{{Cite web|url=https://www.carrier.com/commercial/en/us/software/hvac-system-design/hourly-analysis-program/|title=Hourly Analysis Program HVAC System Design Software {{!}} Carrier Building Solutions|website=Building Solutions|language=en-US|access-date=2017-11-07}}</ref>
Line 109:
|Freeware
|2.2
|eQuest,<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://doe2.com/equest/index.html|title=eQUEST|last=Hirsch|first=Jeff|website=doe2.com|access-date=2017-11-07}}</ref> RIUSKA,<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.granlund.fi/en/software/riuska/|title=RIUSKA Website|last=Granlund Consulting Oy
|-
|Energy+<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://energyplus.net/|title=Energy+ Homepage|last=US Departement of Energy's|first=Building Technology office
|[[Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory]], US
|2001
Line 118:
|Freeware
|8.9.0
|DesignBuilder,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Tindale|first=A|date=2005|title=Designbuilder Software|url=|journal=Design-Builder Software Ltd|volume=|pages=|via=}}</ref> OpenStudio,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Guglielmetti|first=Rob|display-authors=et al|date=2011|title=OpenStudio: An Open Source Integrated Analysis Platform|url=http://www.ibpsa.org/proceedings/BS2011/P_1245.pdf|journal=Proceedings of Building Simulation 2011: 12th Conference of International Building Performance Simulation Association|volume=|pages=442–449|via=}}</ref> Many other<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.buildingenergysoftwaretools.com/?capabilities=Whole-building+Energy+Simulation&keywords=EnergyPlus|title=List of graphical user interfaces for Energy+|last=BEST directory
|-
|ESP-r<ref name=":5">{{Cite web|url=https://www.strath.ac.uk/research/energysystemsresearchunit/applications/esp-r/|title=ESP-r {{!}} University of Strathclyde|website=www.strath.ac.uk|language=en|access-date=2017-11-08}}</ref>
Line 136:
|Commercial
|4.8
|ICE,<ref name=":2" /> ESBO<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.equa.se/en/esbo|title=IDA ESBO Homepage|last=EQUA Simulation AB
|-
|SPARK<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://simulationresearch.lbl.gov/projects/spark|title=Project SPARK|last=LBNL|first=US Departement of Energy
|Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, US
|1986
Line 147:
|VisualSPARK
|-
|TAS<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.edsl.net/#|title=EDSL TAS website
|Environmental Design Solutions Limited, UK
|
Line 163:
|Commercial
|18.0
|Simulation Studio,<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://web.mit.edu/parmstr/Public/Documentation/02-SimulationStudio.pdf|title=Manual for Simulation Studio
|}
== BPS in practice ==
Since the 90's, building performance simulation has undergone the transition from a method used mainly for research to a design tool for mainstream industrial projects. However, the utilization in different countries still varies greatly. Building certification programs like [[Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design|LEED]] (USA), [[BREEAM]] (UK) or [[DGNB]] (Germany) showed to be a good driving force for BPS to find broader application. Also, national building standards that allow BPS based analysis are of good help for an increasing industrial adoption, such as in the United States ([[ASHRAE 90.1]]),<ref name=":1" /> Sweden (BBR),<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.boverket.se/en/start-in-english/|title=BBR - Swedish building regulation
The Swedish building regulations are unique in that computed energy use has to be verified by measurements within the first two years of building operation. Since the introduction in 2007, experience shows that highly detailed simulation models are preferred by modelers to reliably achieve the required level of accuracy. Furthermore, this has fostered a simulation culture where the design predictions are close to the actual performance. This in turn has led to offers of formal energy guarantees based on simulated predictions, highlighting the general business potential of BPS.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.gbpn.org/databases-tools/bc-detail-pages/sweden#Summary|title=Swedish code summarized in global performance network
== Performance-based compliance ==
In a performance-based approach, compliance with building codes or standards is based on the predicted energy use from a building simulation, rather than a prescriptive approach, which requires adherence to stipulated technologies or design features. Performance-based compliance provides greater flexibility in the building design as it allows designers to miss some prescriptive requirements if the impact on building performance can be offset by exceeding other prescriptive requirements.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://cbei.psu.edu/eeb-codes-performance-based-codes/|title=A new paradigm for building codes|last=Senick|first=Jennifer
The following is a list of U.S. based energy codes and standards that reference building simulations to demonstrate compliance:
Line 195:
; Certifications
* BEMP - Building Energy Modeling Professional, administered by ASHRAE<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.ashrae.org/professional-development/ashrae-certification/certification-types/bemp-building-energy-modeling-professional-certification|title=Building Energy Modeling Professional Certification
* BESA - Certified Building Energy Simulation Analyst, administered by AEE<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.aeecenter.org/certifications/certifications/certified-building-energy-simulation-analyst|title=Certified Building Energy Simulation Analyst
== See also ==
| |||