2017
DOI: 10.3390/en10101587
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validation of Calibrated Energy Models: Common Errors

Abstract: Nowadays, there is growing interest in all the smart technologies that provide us with information and knowledge about the human environment. In the energy field, thanks to the amount of data received from smart meters and devices and the progress made in both energy software and computers, the quality of energy models is gradually improving and, hence, also the suitability of Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs). For this reason, the measurement of the accuracy of building energy models is an important task, b… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
105
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 253 publications
(144 citation statements)
references
References 85 publications
0
105
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Since this was also the case in the building-level simulations, no further discussion on this takes place here. To be able to see how well the two models, BES-ref and BES-v.2, could replicate the logged measurements of temperature during the measurement period, a statistical analysis was done by calculating the mean bias error (MBE), normalized mean bias error (NMBE), and coefficient of variance (CV) of the root-mean-square error (RMSE) according to Reference [38]. Table 13 shows the results of MBE, NMBE, and CV (RMSE), when comparing simulated results of temperature to logged measurements.…”
Section: Apartment Levelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since this was also the case in the building-level simulations, no further discussion on this takes place here. To be able to see how well the two models, BES-ref and BES-v.2, could replicate the logged measurements of temperature during the measurement period, a statistical analysis was done by calculating the mean bias error (MBE), normalized mean bias error (NMBE), and coefficient of variance (CV) of the root-mean-square error (RMSE) according to Reference [38]. Table 13 shows the results of MBE, NMBE, and CV (RMSE), when comparing simulated results of temperature to logged measurements.…”
Section: Apartment Levelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As in the other automatic calibration techniques, the uncertainty analysis allows an evaluation of the model with well-known statistical indices such as coefficient of determination (R 2 ), coefficient of variation of the root mean square error (CV(RMSE)), and normalized mean bias error (N MBE) [42]. ASHRAE Guidelines 14 [43,44], Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) 3.0 [45,46], and International Performance Measurements and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) [3] recommend limits in order to consider an energy model as calibrated.…”
Section: The Design Of the Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two situations in relation to the opening of the balcony glazing were used to calibrate the simulation, that is, for the period between January 14 and 19 (closed balcony) and between January 27 and February 2 (open balcony). After some adjustments in the modeling, both situations presented satisfactory values for the NMBE and CV (RMSE) indices, making the model able to carry out the remaining simulations [26]. Table 1 Material properties and occupancy patterns.…”
mentioning
confidence: 96%