Energy efficient climate control in office buildings without giving up implementability

Gruber, Mattias; Trüschel, Anders; Dalenbäck, Jan-Olof

doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.05.075

Cited by 19 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, setpoints can be selected on a finer scale (e.g., hourly) in HVAC control loop to improve the efficiency of the operations. However, there is again a trade-off between the complexity of the controller and the potential energy savings [36], which requires further investigations. Although the energy simulation models provided by the DOE were rigorously studied and tuned to represent the available building stock, each building might behave differently compared to the reference buildings in terms of the energy efficiency due to various simulation model parameters.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy savings from temperature setpoints and deadband: Quantifying the influence of building and system properties on savings

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides a systematic approach for quantifying the influence of building size, construction category, climate, occupancy schedule, setpoint, and deadband on HVAC energy consumption in office buildings. Simulating the DOE reference office buildings of three sizes and three construction categories in all United States climate zones, using the EnergyPlus, we conducted several N-way ANOVA analyses to study the interrelationships between setpoints, deadbands and several building related and environment related factors. In summary, daily optimal deadband selection of 0, 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 K would result in an average energy savings of -70.0, -34.9, -13.7, 9.6, 16.4, and 21.2 %, respectively, compared to baseline deadline of 3 K. Selecting the daily optimal setpoint in the range of 22.5 ± 1 °C, 22.5 ± 2 °C, and 22.5 ± 3 °C would result in an average savings of 7.5, 12.7, and 16.4 %, respectively, compared to the baseline setpoint of 22.5 °C. Additionally, we found that when the outdoor temperature is within -20 to 30°C, the optimal setpoint depends on the building size. We also observed a range of outdoor temperatures (e.g., 9 -14 °C for small buildings and 8 -11 °C for medium buildings) where the setpoint selection would only slightly influence the energy consumption. However, the choice of setpoints becomes very influential (up to 30% of energy savings) where the outdoor temperatures are slightly outside the mentioned ranges on either direction. The potential savings from selecting daily optimal setpoints in the range of 22.5 ± 3 °C in different climates and for small, medium and large office buildings, would lead to 10.09 -37.03%, 11.43 -21.01%, and 6.78 -11.34 % savings, respectively, depending on the climate.

show abstract

Section: Limitations and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy savings from temperature setpoints and deadband: Quantifying the influence of building and system properties on savings

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies have investigated the effect of different facade and building envelope solutions on the energy performance and indoor climate conditions of office buildings over the last years [6][7][8][9][10]. Majority of the previous studies have focused on measures applied in office buildings located in hot or intermediate climates, where the dimensioning and operation of air-conditioning systems is one of the essential factors in office buildings, when energy performance, indoor climate conditions and performance of workers are discussed [8][9][10][11][12][13]. Typically improved indoor climate conditions lead to increased energy consumption in office buildings and it is challenging to improve the energy performance and to decrease the environmental impact of buildings towards low-energy, low-carbon and nearly zero-energy buildings, and to provide productive and comfortable indoor climate conditions at the same time [10][11][12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-optimal renovation solutions to maximize environmental performance, indoor thermal conditions and productivity of office buildings in cold climate

Niemelä

Levy

Kosonen

et al. 2017

Sustainable Cities and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents cost-optimal renovation solutions and economic viability of different renovation measures to maximize environmental performance, thermal comfort conditions and productivity of workers in office buildings built in the late 1970s and 1980s in cold climate regions. The study also analyzes optimal combinations of renovation measures and HVAC system set points to maximize thermal comfort conditions and productivity of the building users. The productivity loss caused by unfavorable indoor thermal comfort conditions was integrated in the LCC analysis (15-year life-cycle period) of the study using an appropriate method to estimate the amount of lost performance of workers caused by the productivity loss. Simulation-based multi-objective optimization analysis was used as the research method of the study. Environmental impact of the renovation measures was studied by assessing the CO2 emissions of the delivered energy consumption. The results demonstrate that as high as 65% return on investment and 63% reduction in the CO2 emissions of operation can be achieved in owner occupied office buildings, when both the energy efficiency and the thermal comfort conditions are cost-optimally improved simultaneously. According to the results, the cost optimum energy production system concept is a ground source heat pump system used for combined heating and cooling.

show abstract

“…Only room temperature behaviour was observed during the test. More recently, Mattias et al [47] identified and carried out experimental analysis on the simple automated ventilation system of the buildings as it can have large energy savings potential. The building controller was assessed for indoor climate control by automating the ventilation flow rate during a typical office working day.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental performance evaluation of solid concrete and dry insulation materials for passive buildings in hot and humid climatic conditions

Rehman

2017

Applied Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is known that enhancement of building energy efficiency can help in reducing energy consumption. The use of the solar insulating materials are the most efficient and cost effective passive methods for reducing the cooling requirements of the buildings. Apart from theoretical studies, no detailed experimental studies were performed in the UAE on energy savings by using solar insulation materials on buildings. Four (3mx3mx3m) solar calorimeters were built in RAK, UAE in order to perform an open air outdoor test for energy savings obtained with solar insulating materials. The design is aimed to determine the heat flux reduction and the energy savings achieved with and without different solar insulating materials, mounted at the south wall of solar calorimeters with similar indoor and ambient conditions. Experimental results are discussed to evaluate the thermal performance during high temperature conditions in summer's period when cooling demand of the building is at its peak and also in winters when there is no cooling demand. The test is from 2012 to 2014. The controlled-temperature experimental study at a set point of 24 o C showed that if the standard building material, i.e. solid concrete, is retrofitted with polyisocyanurate(PIR) and reflective coatings or completely replaced with energy-efficient dry insulation material walls such as exterior insulation finishing system (EIFS), energy savings up to an average of 7.6-25.3% can be achieved. This is due to the reduction of heat flux by an average of 22-75% at south wall during summer. Similarly, free floating analysis was done during winter and the measurements showed the behaviour of the heat flux flow and the variations in room temperature due to the variation of thermal mass caused by the difference in heat capacities of the façade with and without insulation. Heat flux and temperature variations were minimal in cases of insulated buildings when compared against a reference building in the winter free flow tests. The temperature variation is limited to 2 o C in case of insulated buildings compared to 6 o C in the reference case caused by high thermal inertia. Thus, insulation is essential in summer as well as in winter for the buildings in Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Overall, this paper provides a novel view on the most significant contributors to the thermal behaviour of the structure, and presents a methodology on the outdoor tests with various materials, that can significantly improve the thermal behaviour of the buildings in the extremely hot climate.

show abstract

Energy efficient climate control in office buildings without giving up implementability

Cited by 19 publications

References 20 publications

Energy savings from temperature setpoints and deadband: Quantifying the influence of building and system properties on savings

Energy savings from temperature setpoints and deadband: Quantifying the influence of building and system properties on savings

Cost-optimal renovation solutions to maximize environmental performance, indoor thermal conditions and productivity of office buildings in cold climate

Experimental performance evaluation of solid concrete and dry insulation materials for passive buildings in hot and humid climatic conditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About