Advanced search
2 files | 10.11 MB Add to list

Quality assurance for building-stock energy models : a performance comparison of eleven uncertainty and sensitivity analysis methods

Matthias Van Hove (UGent) , Marc Delghust (UGent) and Jelle Laverge (UGent)
Author
Organization
Abstract
Building-Stock Energy Models (BSEMs) have grown in popularity, implementation, scale and complexity. Yet, BSEM quality assurance processes have lagged behind. This article proposes a scalable methodology to apply Uncertainty (UA) and Sensitivity Analysis (SA) to BSEMs and studies the performance of eleven common UA-SA methods (OAT, SRC, SRRC, FFD, Morris, Sobol’, eFAST, FAST-RBD, DMIM, PAWN, DGSM) for three UA-SA targets: screening, ranking and indices. Applying UA and SA to BSEMs requires a two-step input parameter sampling that samples ‘across stocks’ and ‘within stocks’. To make efficient use of computational resources, practitioners should (i) distinguish between three UA-SA targets and (ii) choose a method based on the aimed UA-SA target. The computational cost varies according to the UA-SA target and method; (i) for screening: OAT, SRC, SRRC, FFD and Morris; (ii) for ranking: SRC, SRRC and Morris and (iii) for indices: Sobol’ is the most efficient, among the tested UA-SA methods.
Keywords
IEA EBC Annex 70, building-stock energy model, uncertainty analysis, sensitivity analysis, nested parameter sampling, convergence speed

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text (Published version)
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 5.19 MB
  • AuthorAccepted.pdf
    • full text (Accepted manuscript)
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 4.92 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Van Hove, Matthias, et al. “Quality Assurance for Building-Stock Energy Models : A Performance Comparison of Eleven Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis Methods.” JOURNAL OF BUILDING PERFORMANCE SIMULATION, 2024, doi:10.1080/19401493.2023.2248063.
APA
Van Hove, M., Delghust, M., & Laverge, J. (2024). Quality assurance for building-stock energy models : a performance comparison of eleven uncertainty and sensitivity analysis methods. JOURNAL OF BUILDING PERFORMANCE SIMULATION. https://doi.org/10.1080/19401493.2023.2248063
Chicago author-date
Van Hove, Matthias, Marc Delghust, and Jelle Laverge. 2024. “Quality Assurance for Building-Stock Energy Models : A Performance Comparison of Eleven Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis Methods.” JOURNAL OF BUILDING PERFORMANCE SIMULATION. https://doi.org/10.1080/19401493.2023.2248063.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Van Hove, Matthias, Marc Delghust, and Jelle Laverge. 2024. “Quality Assurance for Building-Stock Energy Models : A Performance Comparison of Eleven Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis Methods.” JOURNAL OF BUILDING PERFORMANCE SIMULATION. doi:10.1080/19401493.2023.2248063.
Vancouver
1.
Van Hove M, Delghust M, Laverge J. Quality assurance for building-stock energy models : a performance comparison of eleven uncertainty and sensitivity analysis methods. JOURNAL OF BUILDING PERFORMANCE SIMULATION. 2024;
IEEE
[1]
M. Van Hove, M. Delghust, and J. Laverge, “Quality assurance for building-stock energy models : a performance comparison of eleven uncertainty and sensitivity analysis methods,” JOURNAL OF BUILDING PERFORMANCE SIMULATION, 2024.
@article{01H8P7PZQHE7CDK60VAJ3E9BAH,
  abstract     = {{Building-Stock Energy Models (BSEMs) have grown in popularity, implementation, scale and complexity. Yet, BSEM quality assurance processes have lagged behind. This article proposes a scalable methodology to apply Uncertainty (UA) and Sensitivity Analysis (SA) to BSEMs and studies the performance of eleven common UA-SA methods (OAT, SRC, SRRC, FFD, Morris, Sobol’, eFAST, FAST-RBD, DMIM, PAWN, DGSM) for three UA-SA targets: screening, ranking and indices. Applying UA and SA to BSEMs requires a two-step input parameter sampling that samples ‘across stocks’ and ‘within stocks’. To make efficient use of computational resources, practitioners should (i) distinguish between three UA-SA targets and (ii) choose a method based on the aimed UA-SA target. The computational cost varies according to the UA-SA target and method; (i) for screening: OAT, SRC, SRRC, FFD and Morris; (ii) for ranking: SRC, SRRC and Morris and (iii) for indices: Sobol’ is the most efficient, among the tested UA-SA methods.}},
  author       = {{Van Hove, Matthias and Delghust, Marc and Laverge, Jelle}},
  issn         = {{1940-1493}},
  journal      = {{JOURNAL OF BUILDING PERFORMANCE SIMULATION}},
  keywords     = {{IEA EBC Annex 70,building-stock energy model,uncertainty analysis,sensitivity analysis,nested parameter sampling,convergence speed}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  title        = {{Quality assurance for building-stock energy models : a performance comparison of eleven uncertainty and sensitivity analysis methods}},
  url          = {{http://doi.org/10.1080/19401493.2023.2248063}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: