Advertisement

Impacts of Common Simulation Assumptions in Sweden on Modelled Energy Balance of a Multi-family Building

  • Ambrose DodooEmail author
  • Uniben Y. A. Tettey
  • Leif Gustavsson
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Energy book series (SPE)

Abstract

Here, we explore key input parameters and common assumptions for energy balance analysis of residential buildings in Sweden and assess their impacts on simulated energy demand of a building. Our analysis is based on dynamic hour-by-hour energy balance modelling of a typical Swedish multi-storey residential building constructed in 1972. The simulation input parameters studied are related to microclimate, building envelope, occupancy behaviour, ventilation, electric and persons heat gains. The results show that assumed indoor temperature set points, internal heat gains and efficiency of ventilation heat recovery systems have significant impact on the simulated energy demand. For microclimate parameters, the outdoor temperature, ground solar reflection and window shading gave significant variations in the simulated space heating and cooling demands. We found that input parameter values and assumptions used for building energy simulation vary significantly in the Swedish context, giving considerably different estimated annual final energy demands for the analysed building. Overall, the estimated annual final space heating demand of the building varied between 50 and 125 kWh/m2 depending on the simulation dataset used. This study suggests that site-specific parameter values may be appropriate for accurate analysis of a building’s energy performance to reduce data input uncertainties, as such factors may have a significant impact on building energy balance and energy savings of retrofit measures.

Keywords

Energy simulation Residential buildings Input parameter data 

References

  1. 1.
    IPCC, Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Directive 2010/31/EU, Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May2010 on the energy performance of buildings (Recast), Official J. Eur. Union. L 153, 18(06) (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    European Commission, 2050 low-carbon economy. Accessed at http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/strategies/2050/index_en.htm on 12 Apr 2017 (2016)
  4. 4.
    Swedish Government Bill 2005/06:145, Swedish Government Bill 2005/06:145 National Programme for Energy Efficiency and Energy-smart Construction. Accessed at http://www.government.se/information-material/2006/05/national-programme-for-energy-efficiency-and-energy-smart-construction/ on 12 Apr 2017
  5. 5.
    Swedish Energy Agency, Energy in Sweden 2015. Accessed at www.energimyndigheten.se on 12 Apr 2017, Energimyndigheten (2015)
  6. 6.
    D. Daly, P. Cooper, Z. Ma, Understanding the risks and uncertainties introduced by common assumptions in energy simulations for Australian commercial buildings. Energy Build. 75, 382–393 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    F. Karlsson, P. Rohdin, M.-L. Persson, Measured and predicted energy demand of a low energy building: important aspects when using Building Energy Simulation. Build. Serv. Eng. Res. Technol. 28(3), 223–235 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A.C. Menezes et al., Predicted vs. actual energy performance of non-domestic buildings: using post-occupancy evaluation data to reduce the performance gap. Appl. Energy 97, 355–364 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J.F. Karlsson, B. Moshfegh, Energy demand and indoor climate in a low energy building—changed control strategies and boundary conditions. Energy Build. 38(4), 315–326 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    T. Kalema et al., Accuracy of energy analysis of buildings: a comparison of a monthly energy balance method and simulation methods in calculating the energy consumption and the effect of thermal mass. J. Building Phys. 32(2), 101–130 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. Wall, Energy-efficient terrace houses in Sweden: simulations and measurements. Energy Build. 38(6), 627–634 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Dodoo, U.Y.A. Tettey, L. Gustavsson, On input parameters, methods and assumptions for energy balance and retrofit analyses for residential buildings. Energy Build. 137, 76–89 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    StruSoft, VIP-Energy, Version 2.1.0 StruSoft AB, Editor. 2012: Sweden. http://www.strusoft.com/products/vip-energy
  14. 14.
    Meteotest, METEONORM 7: Global meteorological database for engineers, planners and education, Meteotest (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    SVEBY, Brukarindata bostader version 1.1. Accessed at http://www.sveby.org/hur-anvander-jag-sveby/berakning/ 29 June 2015 (2013)
  16. 16.
    Boverkets Byggregler, Boverkets Författningssamling, The national Board of Housing Building and planning, Karlskrona. Accessed at http://www.boverket.se on 10 Apr 2017 (In Swedish) (2015)
  17. 17.
    L. Gustavsson et al., Primary energy implications of end-use energy efficiency measures in district heated buildings. Energy Build. 43(1), 38–48 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    M.-L. Persson, A. Roos, M. Wall, Influence of window size on the energy balance of low energy houses. Energy Build. 38(3), 181–188 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    U.Y.A. Tettey, A. Dodoo, L. Gustavsson, Primary energy implications of different design strategies for an apartment building. Energy 104, 132–148 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    R. Elsland, I. Peksen, M. Wietschel, Are internal heat gains underestimated in thermal performance evaluation of buildings? Energy Procedia 62, 32–41 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Y. Zou, Classification of Buildings with Regard to Airtightness, in Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering (Chalmers University of Technology Götenborg, Sweden, 2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    L. Liu, P. Rohdin, B. Moshfegh, Evaluating indoor environment of a retrofitted multi-family building with improved energy performance in Sweden. Energy Build. 102, 32–44 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Boverkets Byggregler, Boverkets Författningssamling, The national Board of Housing Building and planning, Karlskrona. Available at http://www.boverket.se (In Swedish) (2015)
  24. 24.
    Swedish Energy Agency, FTX-aggregat hus med 130 m2 boyta. Available at https://www.energimyndigheten.se/Hushall/Testerresultat/Testresultat/FTX-aggregat-hus-med-130-m-boyta/?tab=1 (2010)
  25. 25.
    Camfil. City pollution. AirMail No. 2. 2014 [cited 3 Sept 2015]; Available from: http://www.camfil.se/FileArchive/Brochures/Airmail/AirMail_2014_2_EN.pdf
  26. 26.
    N. Brelih, How to improve energy efficiency of fans for air handling units. REHVA J., 5–10 (2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    U.Y.A. Tettey, A. Dodoo, L. Gustavsson, Energy use implications of different design strategies for multi-storey residential buildings under future climates. Energy (2017)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    J. Vesterberg, S. Andersson, T. Olofsson, in The Influence from Input Data Provided by the User on Calculated Energy Savings. 10th Nordic Symposium on Building Physics, Lund, Sweden, 15–19 June 2014Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ambrose Dodoo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Uniben Y. A. Tettey
    • 1
  • Leif Gustavsson
    • 1
  1. 1.Sustainable Built Environment Group, Department of Built Environment and Energy TechnologyLinnaeus UniversityVäxjöSweden

Personalised recommendations