Development of test procedure for the evaluation of building energy simulation tools - phase III addition of subsystem test toward systematic diagnostics for HVAC system simulation-
Development of test procedure for the evaluation of building energy simulation tools - phase III addition of subsystem test toward systematic diagnostics for HVAC system simulation-
复制标题
开发用于评估建筑能源模拟工具的测试程序 - 第三阶段添加子系统测试以实现 HVAC 系统模拟的系统诊断 -
DOI：
10.26868/25222708.2019.210592
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Eisuke Togashi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sei Ito;E. Ono;H. Yoshida;H. Yamaguchi;Eisuke Togashi
本文介绍了最近的工作，开发的测试程序的评估建筑物能源模拟工具的一个委员会的供热，空调和卫生工程师的日本（SHASE）。SHASE测试程序的重点是评估工具估计商业建筑热负荷和HVAC系统能耗的能力，其大纲已在BS 2017会议上公布。在本文中，我们报告的模拟试验结果的额外的测试用例的几个用户和工具的基础上改进和扩展的过程。对热负荷模拟试验的试验条件进行了修订，以便为试验参与者更准确和精确地指定建模方法。在整个系统的测试中增加了新的暖通空调设备和节能控制策略的测试用例。测试结果显示，不同工具之间的能耗存在差异，这主要是由于设备特性、控制逻辑模型以及用户人为错误和模型解释的差异造成的。考虑到这些问题，我们计划更新指南说明和条件。自1980年以来，NREL和IEA已经开展了建筑物能源模拟工具评估方法的研究，并于1995年开发了IEA BESTEST（Judkoff和Neymark，1995年）。部分工作由ASHRAE发布为标准140（ASHRAE，2017）。然而，该评估方法的范围仅限于少数HVAC系统，不包括日本常用的系统。在ASHRAE的SSPC 140中，开发了HVAC系统评估方法以改进标准，但重点是检查稳态热平衡（Neymark等人，2017年）。因此，没有通用的程序来评估商业建筑中使用的HVAC系统的能耗。而在日本，2015年对节能法进行了重大修订，在申请建筑审批时，必须说明年能源消耗量。这一修正案导致了对建筑物能源模拟工具可靠性的客观评估方法的需求。因此，SHASE于2013年成立了一个专门委员会，为评价方法开发日本自己的测试程序，并于2016年发布了评价方法指南（SHASE，2016）。该指南的内容已在前一次会议上报告（Ono等人，2017年）。本文描述了委员会持续活动的以下结果：1）几个用户和工具对基本用例的模拟试验结果以及一些测试条件的修订，2）新的增强的附加测试用例的细节。测试程序概述本测试程序的目的是确定包括热负荷模拟在内的HVAC系统能量模拟工具的可靠性，并使其能够用于用户使用这些工具的教育和培训。本试验程序的范围仅限于空调系统和相关通风系统。此外，住宅建筑系统不在本试验程序范围内。图1显示了测试用例配置和本文内容的概要。用红色字体表示的部分是与上一篇论文相比的主要变化，稍后将详细描述。从模拟工具评价的角度出发，本程序的范围大致分为热负荷模拟和HVAC系统模拟，并对各个部件和整个系统进行评价，目的是简化因果关系的识别。本文介绍了1）热负荷模拟试验的整栋楼和JE 110空调系统模拟试验的基本工况的模拟试验; 2）空调系统模拟试验评价指标的扩展，设备试验增加了全热交换器，全系统试验增加了JE 120至JE 240的6个工况;在整个建筑物测试中，对东京的一座七层建筑物进行了计算，总建筑面积为10，000 m2，如图2所示。如图3所示，热源系统由空气源热泵/制冷机（AHP 1和AHP 2）和吸收式制冷机（AR 1）构成。HVAC系统包括图4所示的AHU和VAV系统。空调周期为6月1日至9月30日用于制冷，12月1日至3月31日用于供暖。在中间时段中，设想HVAC系统停止。对于这里没有报道的详细计算条件，请参考以前的论文。________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________第16届IBPSA会议记录，罗马，意大利，9月。2019年2月4日4578 https://doi.org/10.26868/25222708.2019.210592以下是每个测试用例的条件和试验结果的描述。表1显示了模拟试验中使用的工具的概述。请注意，使用NewHASP，LCEM和BEST的模拟试验不是由这些程序作者进行的，而是由用户进行的，并且程序作者没有验证结果。图2：整个建筑测试的标准平面图。NEP Office 1 NP
This paper presents recent work to develop the test procedure for the evaluation of building energy simulation tool by a committee of the Society of Heating, Air-Conditioning and Sanitary Engineers of Japan (SHASE). The SHASE test procedure focuses on evaluating a tool’s capability of estimating thermal load and a HVAC system's energy consumption in commercial buildings, and its outline was presented at the BS2017 conference. In this paper, we report simulation trial results of additional test cases by several users and tools based on the improved and extended procedure. The test conditions of the thermal load simulation test were revised in order to specify modelling method more accurately and precisely for test participants. Test cases with new HVAC equipment and control strategy aiming energy conservation were added to the whole system test. The test results showed discrepancies in energy consumption between tools which is mainly caused by the difference in equipment characteristics, control logic modelling, and user’s human errors and interpretation in modelling. We are planning to update the guideline description and conditions taking these issues into consideration. Introduction Research on the methods of evaluation of building energy simulation tools has been carried out in NREL and IEA since 1980, and in 1995 the IEA BESTEST was developed (Judkoff and Neymark, 1995). A portion of the work was published by ASHRAE as Standard 140 (ASHRAE, 2017). However, the scope of this evaluation method was limited to a few HVAC systems, which do not cover the systems commonly used in Japan. In SSPC140 by ASHRAE a HVAC system evaluation method was developed to improve the Standard, but the focus was on checking the steady state heat balance (Neymark et al., 2017). Therefore there is no common procedure for evaluating the energy consumption for HVAC systems used in commercial buildings. While in Japan major amendment to the energy conservation law took place in 2015, and when applying for building approval it has become compulsory to state the annual energy consumption. This amendment led to a demand for a method of objective evaluation of the reliability of building energy simulation tools. Therefore in 2013 SHASE established a special committee to develop Japanese own test procedure for the evaluation method, and in 2016 a guideline for the evaluation method was published (SHASE, 2016). The contents of the guideline were reported at the previous conference (Ono et al., 2017). In this paper the following results of the continuing activities of the committee are described: 1) simulation trial results of base cases by several users and tools and revision of some test conditions, and 2) details of new enhanced additional test cases. Outline of test procedure The objective of this test procedure is to determine the reliability of energy simulation tools for HVAC systems including thermal load simulation, and to enable their use in the education and training of users in the use of these tools. The scope of this test procedure is limited to air conditioning systems and associated ventilation systems. Also, systems for residential buildings is outside the scope of this test procedure. Figure 1 shows the test case configuration and the outline of this paper’s contents. The parts shown in red characters are the main changes from the previous paper, and are described in detail later. From the point of view of simulation tool evaluation, the scope of this procedure is broadly divided into thermal load simulation and HVAC system simulation, and evaluation of each component and the overall system is carried out, with the objective of simplifying the identification of the cause and effect relationship. This paper describes 1) simulation trials of base cases which are whole building of thermal load simulation test and JE110 of HVAC system simulation test, 2) expansion of evaluation target for HVAC system simulation test, adding total heat exchanger for the equipment test and 6 cases of JE120 to JE240 for the whole system test, and 3) discussion about causes of the discrepancies. In the whole building test, calculations are performed for a building which has seven stories and total floor area of 10,000 m2 in Tokyo as shown in Figure 2. The heat source system is configured from air source heat pump/chillers (AHP1 and AHP2) and an absorption chiller (AR1) as shown in Figure 3. The HVAC system includes the AHU and VAV system shown in Figure 4. The air-conditioning periods are taken to be June 1st to September 30th for cooling, and December 1st to March 31st for heating. In the intervening periods it is envisaged that the HVAC system is stopped. For the detailed calculation conditions that are not reported here, refer to the previous paper. ________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Proceedings of the 16th IBPSA Conference Rome, Italy, Sept. 2-4, 2019 4578 https://doi.org/10.26868/25222708.2019.210592 The following is a description of the conditions and the trial results for each test case. Table 1 shows an overview of the tools used in the simulation trials. Note that the simulation trials u sing NewHASP, LCEM and BEST were not conducted by these program authors but by just users, and the results were not verified by the program authors. Figure 2: Standard floor plan of the whole building test. NWP NEP Office 1 NP
使用蒙特卡罗方法对建筑物能效投资进行风险分析
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
森山大輝;大西康伸;藤田真衣;藤岡泰寛・磯崎透子・大原一興;Togashi Eisuke
通讯作者：
Togashi Eisuke