scholarly journals Building Energy Performance Assessment Using an Easily Deployable Sensor Kit: Process, Risks, and Lessons Learned

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario Frei ◽  
Chirag Deb ◽  
Zoltan Nagy ◽  
Illias Hischier ◽  
Arno Schlueter

In the building and construction sector, the mismatch between predicted and measured energy consumption is a well-known phenomenon called the performance gap. A promising approach to reduce the performance gap and thus improve the current building energy performance assessments are methods based on in-situ measurements. In this work, we present a building assessment process based on a novel, easily deployable wireless sensor kit. The basic sensor kit for building energy assessment presented in this study consists of a heating energy input node, several indoor temperature nodes, an outdoor temperature node, and a heat flux sensor. Specifically, the study outlines a medium-scale deployment of the sensor kit in eight occupied single-family homes in Switzerland and identifies the benefits of such an approach in the estimation of the overall heat loss coefficient and U-values. The findings of this study suggest that such sensor kits could be effectively used for rapid building performance assessment, and the paper concludes by outlining the potential benefits and implementation challenges of a larger scale study.

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-136
Author(s):  
Chaitali Basu ◽  
Virendra Kumar Paul ◽  
M.G. Matt Syal

The energy performance of an existing building is the amount of energy consumed to meet various needs associated with the standardized use of a building and is reflected in one or more indicators known as Building Energy Performance Indicators (EnPIs). These indicators are distributed amongst six main factors influencing energy consumption: climate, building envelope, building services and energy systems, building operation and maintenance, occupants' activities and behaviour, and indoor environmental quality. Any improvement made to either the existing structure or the physical and operational upgrade of a building system that enhances energy performance is considered an energy efficiency retrofit. The main goal of this research is to support the implementation of multifamily residential building energy retrofits through expert knowledge consensus on EnPIs for energy efficiency retrofit planning. The research methodology consists of a comprehensive literature review which has identified 35 EnPIs for assessing performance of existing residential buildings, followed by a ranking questionnaire survey of experts in the built-environment to arrive at a priority listing of indicators based on mean rank. This was followed by concordance analysis and measure of standard deviation. A total of 280 experts were contacted globally for the survey, and 106 completed responses were received resulting in a 37.85% response rate. The respondents were divided into two groups for analysis: academician/researchers and industry practitioners. The primary outcome of the research is a priority listing of EnPIs based on the quantitative data from the knowledge-base of experts from these two groups. It is the outcome of their perceptions of retrofitting factors and corresponding indicators. A retrofit strategy consists of five phases for retrofitting planning in which the second phase comprises an energy audit and performance assessment and diagnostics. This research substantiates the performance assessment process through the identification of EnPIs.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1203 (3) ◽  
pp. 032047
Author(s):  
Kjartan Van den Brande ◽  
Marc Delghust ◽  
Jelle Laverge ◽  
Arnold Jannsens

Abstract To boost the energy performance of buildings, the EU has established a legislative framework including the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD). Through this document, EU state members are incentivized to set up a Building Energy performance Assessment Method (BEAM), tailored to the specific needs of the country. There is no standard definition for the energy performance of a building. Since the options are numerous, it is important for the policymaker to define the goals of their specific BEAM first, before developing the BEAM itself. The definition of these goals is a subjective matter and can differ when asked to different organizations in the building sector. To comprehend the desires and perspectives from each different group, a structured overview of the goals that are important for the specific region is needed. For this paper, a method was developed to provide this structured overview and was tested on the legislative energy performance of buildings (EPB) framework of Flanders, Belgium. The Flemish framework was initiated in 2006 and is still in action today. The method consists of two steps. In the first step, a multi-level tree structure for goal mapping based on the Goal Breakdown Structure (GBS) was developed. The main goal, reducing global warming, is on top of the tree structure, which then subdivides into many sub-goals on different levels. An example of a goal on the lowest level of the structure could be the insulation level of the walls. In the second step, prominent stakeholders in the Flemish building industry, including policymakers, researchers, manufacturers, contractors and building owners, were surveyed to capture their expectations from a BEAM and to query whether the current BEAM corresponds with those expectations. The goal of this survey was to receive qualitative, not quantitative input from the stakeholders. In total, 33 respondents completed the survey. The survey results showed that, in general, the desired goals have not changed substantially compared to the pre-set goals in 2006. Trias Energetica is still the preferred guideline for the decision-making process of the building owner, although its absolute power has decreased slightly and seems to be more prone to the conditions. The current indicator for the overall energy needs (E level) is still strongly preferred, while the recently introduced S level (assessment of the envelope) attracts mixed feelings in terms of usefulness to the entire EPB framework. The overheating indicator receives the most critique for not being accurate enough due to the simplified, single zone BEAM


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document