Sensitivity of Characterizing the Heat Loss Coefficient through On-Board Monitoring: A Case Study Analysis

Marieline Senave, Staf Roels, Stijn Verbeke, Evi Lambie and Dirk Saelens
Additional contact information
Marieline Senave: Building Physics Section, Department of Civil Engineering, KU Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 40—Box 2447, BE-3001 Heverlee, Belgium
Staf Roels: Building Physics Section, Department of Civil Engineering, KU Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 40—Box 2447, BE-3001 Heverlee, Belgium
Stijn Verbeke: Unit Smart Energy and Built Environment, Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO), Boeretang 200, BE-2400 Mol, Belgium
Evi Lambie: Building Physics Section, Department of Civil Engineering, KU Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 40—Box 2447, BE-3001 Heverlee, Belgium
Dirk Saelens: Building Physics Section, Department of Civil Engineering, KU Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 40—Box 2447, BE-3001 Heverlee, Belgium

Energies, 2019, vol. 12, issue 17, 1-29

Abstract: Recently, there has been an increasing interest in the development of an approach to characterize the as-built heat loss coefficient (HLC) of buildings based on a combination of on-board monitoring (OBM) and data-driven modeling. OBM is hereby defined as the monitoring of the energy consumption and interior climate of in-use buildings via non-intrusive sensors. The main challenge faced by researchers is the identification of the required input data and the appropriate data analysis techniques to assess the HLC of specific building types, with a certain degree of accuracy and/or within a budget constraint. A wide range of characterization techniques can be imagined, going from simplified steady-state models applied to smart energy meter data, to advanced dynamic analysis models identified on full OBM data sets that are further enriched with geometric info, survey results, or on-site inspections. This paper evaluates the extent to which these techniques result in different HLC estimates. To this end, it performs a sensitivity analysis of the characterization outcome for a case study dwelling. Thirty-five unique input data packages are defined using a tree structure. Subsequently, four different data analysis methods are applied on these sets: the steady-state average, Linear Regression and Energy Signature method, and the dynamic AutoRegressive with eXogenous input model (ARX). In addition to the sensitivity analysis, the paper compares the HLC values determined via OBM characterization to the theoretically calculated value, and explores the factors contributing to the observed discrepancies. The results demonstrate that deviations up to 26.9% can occur on the characterized as-built HLC, depending on the amount of monitoring data and prior information used to establish the interior temperature of the dwelling. The approach used to represent the internal and solar heat gains also proves to have a significant influence on the HLC estimate. The impact of the selected input data is higher than that of the applied data analysis method.

Keywords: characterization; physical parameter identification; heat loss coefficient; on-board monitoring data; data analysis methods; sensitivity; uncertainty; case study analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/17/3322/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/17/3322/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:12:y:2019:i:17:p:3322-:d:261819

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().