Ghafoori, M and Abdallah, M (2022) Simulation-based optimization model to minimize equivalent annual cost of existing buildings. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 148(2): 04021202, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Building's energy and water consumption and associated utility costs can be significantly reduced if proper energy and water-efficiency upgrades are applied. Due to the limitations of the upgrade budgets and the availability of a wide range of energy and water-efficiency measures, decision makers are always faced with a challenging task to identify optimal sets of building upgrade measures. This paper presents the development of a new model that is capable of identifying an optimum selection of building upgrade measures to minimize equivalent annual cost (EAC) while maintaining the performance of existing buildings and complying with available upgrade budgets. The model is developed in three main phases: (1) formulation phase, where decision variables, objective function, and constraints are identified and formulated; (2) implementation phase that performs the model computations and specifies the model input and output data; and (3) performance evaluation phase where two case studies of university buildings are analyzed to demonstrate the capabilities of the model. Furthermore, a case study from the literature is used to verify the model performance and document its new capabilities. The primary contributions that this research adds to the body of knowledge are: (1) developing new model that can identify optimal selection of building upgrades while complying with user-specified requirements for building operational performance and available upgrade budgets in short computation time, (2) modeling a wide range of upgrade measures for building fixtures and equipment as well as envelope components, and (3) integrating updatable databases from vendors and suppliers to generate up-to-date and practical recommendations. The model is designed to use OpenStudio to analyze combinations of feasible alternatives such as HVAC systems, wall and roof insulations, window types, and water heaters to calculate the corresponding building energy consumption. The model is designed to perform its computations using binary linear programming to identify global optimum solutions in short computational time. The results of the case studies illustrated the capabilities of the model in optimizing building upgrade measures to reduce the building utility costs up to 38% while complying with specified upgrade budgets.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | binary linear programming; building energy simulation; building equivalent annual cost analysis; building retrofit; building upgrade; openstudio |
| Index terms: | simulation-based optimization, cost analysis, performance evaluation, body of knowledge, water consumption, computation, window, database, linear programming, case study, efficiency, building energy consumption, insulation, roof, implementation, modelling, building operational performance, building energy simulation |
| Subjects: | data management, architectural elements, design practice, performance measurement, algorithms, performance management, energy systems, contractual arrangements, knowledge management, financial and cost management, analytical methods, environmental resource management, building materials, sustainability and energy, data collection methods, computational methods |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Cost Management, Procurement, Sustainability, Quality Management, Design Practice, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here