Overheating in English dwellings: Comparing modelled and monitored large-scale datasets

Symonds, P; Taylor, J; Mavrogianni, A; Davies, M; Shrubsole, C; Hamilton, I and Chalabi, Z (2017) Overheating in English dwellings: Comparing modelled and monitored large-scale datasets. Building Research & Information, 45(1-2), pp. 195-208. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

Monitoring and modelling studies of the indoor environment indicate that there are often discrepancies between simulation results and measurements. The availability of large monitoring datasets of domestic buildings allows for more rigorous validation of the performance of building simulation models derived from limited building information, backed by statistical significance tests and goodness-of-fit metrics. These datasets also offer the opportunity to test modelling assumptions. This paper investigates the performance of domestic housing models using EnergyPlus software to predict maximum daily indoor temperatures over the summer of 2011. Monitored maximum daily indoor temperatures from the English Housing Survey's (EHS) Energy Follow-Up Survey (EFUS) for 823 nationally representative dwellings are compared against predictions made by EnergyPlus simulations. Due to lack of information on the characteristics of individual dwellings, the models struggle to predict maximum temperatures in individual dwellings and performance was worse on days when the outdoor maximum temperatures were high. This research indicates that unknown factors such as building characteristics, occupant behaviour and local environment makes the validation of models for individual dwellings a challenging task. The models did, however, provide an improved estimate of temperature exposure when aggregated over dwellings within a particular region.;Monitoring and modelling studies of the indoor environment indicate that there are often discrepancies between simulation results and measurements. The availability of large monitoring datasets of domestic buildings allows for more rigorous validation of the performance of building simulation models derived from limited building information, backed by statistical significance tests and goodness-of-fit metrics. These datasets also offer the opportunity to test modelling assumptions. This paper investigates the performance of domestic housing models using EnergyPlus software to predict maximum daily indoor temperatures over the summer of 2011. Monitored maximum daily indoor temperatures from the English Housing Survey's (EHS) Energy Follow-Up Survey (EFUS) for 823 nationally representative dwellings are compared against predictions made by EnergyPlus simulations. Due to lack of information on the characteristics of individual dwellings, the models struggle to predict maximum temperatures in individual dwellings and performance was worse on days when the outdoor maximum temperatures were high. This research indicates that unknown factors such as building characteristics, occupant behaviour and local environment makes the validation of models for individual dwellings a challenging task. The models did, however, provide an improved estimate of temperature exposure when aggregated over dwellings within a particular region.;  Monitoring and modelling studies of the indoor environment indicate that there are often discrepancies between simulation results and measurements. The availability of large monitoring datasets of domestic buildings allows for more rigorous validation of the performance of building simulation models derived from limited building information, backed by statistical significance tests and goodness-of-fit metrics. These datasets also offer the opportunity to test modelling assumptions. This paper investigates the performance of domestic housing models using EnergyPlus software to predict maximum daily indoor temperatures over the summer of 2011. Monitored maximum daily indoor temperatures from the English Housing Survey's (EHS) Energy Follow-Up Survey (EFUS) for 823 nationally representative dwellings are compared against predictions made by EnergyPlus simulations. Due to lack of information on the characteristics of individual dwellings, the models struggle to predict maximum temperatures in individual dwellings and performance was worse on days when the outdoor maximum temperatures were high. This research indicates that unknown factors such as building characteristics, occupant behaviour and local environment makes the validation of models for individual dwellings a challenging task. The models did, however, provide an improved estimate of temperature exposure when aggregated over dwellings within a particular region.;

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: energyplus; occupant behaviour; building information modelling; building performance; overheating; simulation; housing stock; validation; thermal comfort; climate-change; homes; construction & building technology; temperatures; buildings; datasets; heat; indoor air quality
Index terms: building technology, thermal comfort, validation, building simulation, estimate, housing, indoor environment, dataset, building information modelling, summer, modelling, indoor air quality, housing stock, domestic building, monitoring, indoor temperature, energyplus, overheating, survey, exposure, occupant behaviour, building performance
Subjects: analytical methods, environmental science, environmental health, industry analysis, data management, health behaviours and lifestyles, control systems, information systems, public and environmental health, quality assurance, modelling and simulation, climate science, engineering systems, data collection methods, thermal systems, professional development, environmental engineering, financial and cost management, construction type
Topics: Construction Technology, Information Management, Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Quality Management, Digital Applications, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Site Management, Cost Management
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