Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.763313
Title: Quantifying and mitigating differences between predicted and measured energy use in buildings
Author: Van Dronkelaar, Chris
ISNI:       0000 0004 7661 2062
Awarding Body: UCL (University College London)
Current Institution: University College London (University of London)
Date of Award: 2018
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Please try the link below.
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
Simulation is commonly utilised as a best practice approach to assess building performance in the building industry, and can help facility managers and engineers identify energy saving potentials, forecast future scenarios and evaluate the energy and cost performance of energy saving measures. However, the built environment is complex and influenced by a large number of independent and interdependent variables, making it difficult to achieve an accurate representation of real-world building energy in-use. This gives rise to significant discrepancies between simulation results and actual measured energy consumption of real buildings, termed 'the performance gap'. This is partly fueled by a lack of understanding of the procedural differences between national calculation methodologies and energy certificates commonly employed in presenting energy use. As such, a classification was adhered to, which distinguishes between three different performance gaps; the regulatory gap (predictions from compliance modelling), static gap (predictions based on performance modelling), and dynamic gap (calibrated predictions taking a longitudinal perspective). This research added to knowledge by making three separate contributions. The first contribution was the exploration of industry practices and stakeholders, which identified common barriers to delivering high building performance, and made suggestions on how to overcome such barriers. Through semi-structured interviews and round-table discussions with industry experts, five key factors were suggested for delivering better building performance. The second and third contributions emerged from case research, for which an overarching methodology was developed, aiming to quantify and mitigate differences between predicted and measured energy use. Fundamental tasks within the methodology were based upon previous research efforts, while new techniques were introduced to include the uncertainty of typically static input parameters to improve the calibration process. In particular, the second contribution was the quantification of the underlying causes of the performance gap and mitigation of differences between predicted and measured energy use in four case study buildings, through the application of sensitivity, and uncertainty analysis and manual calibration. Subsequently, the third contribution investigated the effect of data granularity on model calibration accuracy through meta-model based optimisation.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.763313  DOI: Not available
Share: