首页> 外文期刊>Energy and Buildings >Energy performance analysis of an office building in three climate zones
【24h】

Energy performance analysis of an office building in three climate zones

机译:三个气候区中办公楼的能源绩效分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Most of the studies encompassing dynamic simulations of multi-storey buildings account only for a few selected zones, to simplify, decrease simulation run-time and to reduce the complexity of the 'to be simulated' model. This conventional method neglects the opportunity to see the interaction between different zones as it relates to whole building performance. This paper presents fifteen individual cases of dynamic simulations of a six-storey office building with 160 zones. The energy performance analysis was conducted for three climate zones including Helsinki in Finland, London in the United Kingdom and Bucharest in Romania. For each location, the following three cases were simulated: (i) building as usual simulated according to valid national building codes; (ii) Energy-efficient (EE) case with selected necessary parameters enhanced to reduce total delivered energy demand; and (iii) nZEB case representing partial enhancement of the EE case based on the parametric analysis. The results of nZEB indicate that for Helsinki, it is possible to reduce the space-heating load by 86%, electricity consumed by lighting, appliance, and HVAC by 32%. For London, the heating load is reduced by 95%, cooling load is slightly increased, and electricity demand is decreased by 33%. For Bucharest, 92% of energy in heating can be saved, cooling energy demand was reduced by 60% and electricity consumption by 34%. Based on the nZEB cases for each location, alternative heating and cooling choices of a radiant floor panel system and radiant ceiling panel system were explored. There are small differences in absolute consumption demand for heating, cooling, and electricity for three cases in each location. The specific energy/m(2) for heating remained nearly the same in all systems for all three cases in each location. Alternative choices for heating and cooling by using Radiant Ceiling Panel (RCP) and Radiant Floor Panel (RFP) were investigated for all final nZEB cases. Marginal difference in heating energy required for space heating can be seen for London nZEB IHC and London nZEB RCP of 0.8 kWh/m(2)/year and for Bucharest nZEB IHC and Bucharest nZEB RCP case of 1.3 kWh/m(2)/year. RFP has the availability of large surface area for heat exchange and can provide heating at a low temperature and cooling at high temperature, but requires supporting air based cooling during the humid season. For RCP, the limited temperature exchange surface may increase the airflow rate, but supplies it at a lower temperature for the same load. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
机译:涉及多层建筑动态模拟的大多数研究仅考虑了少数选定区域,以简化,减少模拟运行时间并降低“待模拟”模型的复杂性。这种传统方法忽略了看到不同区域之间相互作用的机会,因为它关系到整个建筑物的性能。本文介绍了一个具有160个区域的六层办公楼的15个动态模拟案例。对三个气候区进行了能源性能分析,包括芬兰的赫尔辛基,英国的伦敦和罗马尼亚的布加勒斯特。对于每个位置,模拟了以下三种情况:(i)按照有效的国家建筑法规照常模拟建筑; ii提高能效(EE)情况,并选择必要的参数,以减少交付的总能源需求; (iii)nZEB案例代表基于参数分析的EE案例的部分增强。 nZEB的结果表明,对于赫尔辛基来说,可以将空间供暖负荷减少86%,将照明,电器和HVAC消耗的电力减少32%。在伦敦,供热负荷减少了95%,制冷负荷略有增加,电力需求减少了33%。对于布加勒斯特,可以节省92%的供暖能源,冷却能源需求减少了60%,电力消耗减少了34%。基于每个位置的nZEB案例,研究了辐射地板面板系统和辐射天花板面板系统的替代加热和冷却选择。在每个位置的三种情况下,供暖,制冷和电力的绝对消耗需求之间的差异很小。在每个位置的所有三种情况下,所有系统中用于加热的比能量/ m(2)几乎保持不变。对于所有最终的nZEB案例,都通过使用辐射天花板面板(RCP)和辐射地板面板(RFP)进行了供暖和制冷的替代选择。伦敦nZEB IHC和伦敦nZEB RCP为0.8 kWh / m(2)/年,布加勒斯特nZEB IHC和布加勒斯特nZEB RCP情况为1.3 kWh / m(2)/年,可以看到空间供暖所需的边际热能差异。 。 RFP具有用于热交换的大表面积,并且可以提供低温加热和高温冷却,但是在潮湿季节需要支持基于空气的冷却。对于RCP,有限的温度交换表面可能会增加气流速率,但对于相同的负载,应以较低的温度提供气流。 (C)2017 Elsevier B.V.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号