Validation of dynamic building energy simulation tools based on a real test-box with thermally activated building systems (TABS)

Publikation: Beitrag in einer FachzeitschriftArtikelForschungBegutachtung

Abstract

Empirical validation and code-to-code comparison of more than one building simulation tool has seldom been done in literature. Therefore this paper presents the first detailed comparison of 1D building energy simulation tools with 3D CFD simulation and measurement data from a test bed (Test-Box), exposed to natural environmental conditions. Dymola (library: IDEAS), EnergyPlus, IDA ICE and TRNSYS –four com- monly used tools–were selected for comparison against highly accurate real measurement data and dy- namic CFD results. This paper evaluates the performance of mentioned above 1D simulation tools and in particular their implemented Thermally Activated Building Systems (TABS) models. The mean error, RMSE, standard deviation and maximal error for the room air, the ceiling surface and concrete tempera- ture of the Test-Box model results are acceptable for all tools. The time course of the room air tempera- ture follows the measurement data relatively well for all four tools. However, the negative bias (Dymola -0.92 K, EnergyPlus -2.18 K, IDA ICE -0.37 K and TRNSYS -1.13 K) indicates a general overestimation for all tools. Furthermore, the paper reflects the properties of simulation tools regarding the modelling language, GUIs, co-simulation capabilities and their recommended field of application.
Originalspracheenglisch
Seiten (von - bis)42-55
FachzeitschriftEnergy and buildings
Jahrgang168
DOIs
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - 10 Mär 2018

Fingerprint

Computational fluid dynamics
Ceilings
Graphical user interfaces
Air
Concretes
Temperature
Modeling languages

Schlagwörter

    Dies zitieren

    @article{7737edfe3c494911947cb75b9de87205,
    title = "Validation of dynamic building energy simulation tools based on a real test-box with thermally activated building systems (TABS)",
    abstract = "Empirical validation and code-to-code comparison of more than one building simulation tool has seldom been done in literature. Therefore this paper presents the first detailed comparison of 1D building energy simulation tools with 3D CFD simulation and measurement data from a test bed (Test-Box), exposed to natural environmental conditions. Dymola (library: IDEAS), EnergyPlus, IDA ICE and TRNSYS –four com- monly used tools–were selected for comparison against highly accurate real measurement data and dy- namic CFD results. This paper evaluates the performance of mentioned above 1D simulation tools and in particular their implemented Thermally Activated Building Systems (TABS) models. The mean error, RMSE, standard deviation and maximal error for the room air, the ceiling surface and concrete tempera- ture of the Test-Box model results are acceptable for all tools. The time course of the room air tempera- ture follows the measurement data relatively well for all four tools. However, the negative bias (Dymola -0.92 K, EnergyPlus -2.18 K, IDA ICE -0.37 K and TRNSYS -1.13 K) indicates a general overestimation for all tools. Furthermore, the paper reflects the properties of simulation tools regarding the modelling language, GUIs, co-simulation capabilities and their recommended field of application.",
    keywords = "TABS, building simulation, Dymola, EnergyPlus, IDA ICE, TRNSYS, CFD, equation-based modeling",
    author = "Nageler, {Peter Josef} and Gerald Schweiger and Martin Pichler and Daniel Brandl and Thomas Mach and Richard Heimrath and Hermann Schranzhofer and Christoph Hochenauer",
    year = "2018",
    month = "3",
    day = "10",
    doi = "10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.03.025",
    language = "English",
    volume = "168",
    pages = "42--55",
    journal = "Energy and buildings",
    issn = "0378-7788",
    publisher = "Elsevier B.V.",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Validation of dynamic building energy simulation tools based on a real test-box with thermally activated building systems (TABS)

    AU - Nageler, Peter Josef

    AU - Schweiger, Gerald

    AU - Pichler, Martin

    AU - Brandl, Daniel

    AU - Mach, Thomas

    AU - Heimrath, Richard

    AU - Schranzhofer, Hermann

    AU - Hochenauer, Christoph

    PY - 2018/3/10

    Y1 - 2018/3/10

    N2 - Empirical validation and code-to-code comparison of more than one building simulation tool has seldom been done in literature. Therefore this paper presents the first detailed comparison of 1D building energy simulation tools with 3D CFD simulation and measurement data from a test bed (Test-Box), exposed to natural environmental conditions. Dymola (library: IDEAS), EnergyPlus, IDA ICE and TRNSYS –four com- monly used tools–were selected for comparison against highly accurate real measurement data and dy- namic CFD results. This paper evaluates the performance of mentioned above 1D simulation tools and in particular their implemented Thermally Activated Building Systems (TABS) models. The mean error, RMSE, standard deviation and maximal error for the room air, the ceiling surface and concrete tempera- ture of the Test-Box model results are acceptable for all tools. The time course of the room air tempera- ture follows the measurement data relatively well for all four tools. However, the negative bias (Dymola -0.92 K, EnergyPlus -2.18 K, IDA ICE -0.37 K and TRNSYS -1.13 K) indicates a general overestimation for all tools. Furthermore, the paper reflects the properties of simulation tools regarding the modelling language, GUIs, co-simulation capabilities and their recommended field of application.

    AB - Empirical validation and code-to-code comparison of more than one building simulation tool has seldom been done in literature. Therefore this paper presents the first detailed comparison of 1D building energy simulation tools with 3D CFD simulation and measurement data from a test bed (Test-Box), exposed to natural environmental conditions. Dymola (library: IDEAS), EnergyPlus, IDA ICE and TRNSYS –four com- monly used tools–were selected for comparison against highly accurate real measurement data and dy- namic CFD results. This paper evaluates the performance of mentioned above 1D simulation tools and in particular their implemented Thermally Activated Building Systems (TABS) models. The mean error, RMSE, standard deviation and maximal error for the room air, the ceiling surface and concrete tempera- ture of the Test-Box model results are acceptable for all tools. The time course of the room air tempera- ture follows the measurement data relatively well for all four tools. However, the negative bias (Dymola -0.92 K, EnergyPlus -2.18 K, IDA ICE -0.37 K and TRNSYS -1.13 K) indicates a general overestimation for all tools. Furthermore, the paper reflects the properties of simulation tools regarding the modelling language, GUIs, co-simulation capabilities and their recommended field of application.

    KW - TABS

    KW - building simulation

    KW - Dymola

    KW - EnergyPlus

    KW - IDA ICE

    KW - TRNSYS

    KW - CFD

    KW - equation-based modeling

    U2 - 10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.03.025

    DO - 10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.03.025

    M3 - Article

    VL - 168

    SP - 42

    EP - 55

    JO - Energy and buildings

    JF - Energy and buildings

    SN - 0378-7788

    ER -