1998
DOI: 10.1177/014362449801900201
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Review paper: Validation of building thermal and energy models

Abstract: A literature review is presented on the validation of thermal and energy models up to 1994. Over 65 different studies are reported here. The existing validation methodologies are reviewed. The validation process began in the early 1970s. However, there was little distinct validation methodology or procedure. Only a few high-quality, well documented data sets are available. It is concluded that much work is needed on detailed data collection, as in most of studies reported here, such data were not available. Ma… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 23 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, none of the before mentioned studies effectively applies an empirical validation procedure to understand the model’s outcomes reliability. The empirical validation procedure compares the model predictions with the measurements as stated in Ahmad (1998) and Bowman and Lomas (1985). This type of validation can lead to large inaccuracy in terms of errors and discrepancies between predictions and observations.…”
Section: Review On Hydronic Floor Heating Models and Empirical Validamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, none of the before mentioned studies effectively applies an empirical validation procedure to understand the model’s outcomes reliability. The empirical validation procedure compares the model predictions with the measurements as stated in Ahmad (1998) and Bowman and Lomas (1985). This type of validation can lead to large inaccuracy in terms of errors and discrepancies between predictions and observations.…”
Section: Review On Hydronic Floor Heating Models and Empirical Validamentioning
confidence: 99%