Abstract The design of low energy buildings requires accurate thermal simulation software to assess the heating and cooling loads. Such designs should sustain thermal comfort for occupants and promote less energy usage over the life time of any building. One of the house energy rating used in Australia is AccuRate, star rating tool to assess and compare the thermal performance of various buildings where the heating and cooling loads are calculated based on fixed operational temperatures between 20 °C to 25 °C to sustain thermal comfort for the occupants. However, these fixed settings for the time and temperatures considerably increase the heating and cooling loads. On the other hand the adaptive thermal model applies a broader range of weather conditions, interacts with the occupants and promotes low energy solutions to maintain thermal comfort. This can be achieved by natural ventilation (opening window/doors), suitable clothes, shading and low energy heating/cooling solutions for the occupied spaces (rooms). These activities will save significant amount of operating energy what can to be taken into account to predict energy consumption for a building. Most of the buildings thermal assessment tools depend on energy-based approaches to predict the thermal performance of any building e.g. AccuRate in Australia. This approach encourages the use of energy to maintain thermal comfort. This paper describes the advantages of a temperature-based approach to assess the building’s thermal performance (using an adaptive thermal comfort model) over energy based approach (AccuRate Software used in Australia). The temperature-based approach was validated and compared with the energy-based approach using four full scale housing test modules located in Newcastle, Australia (Cavity Brick (CB), Insulated Cavity Brick (InsCB), Insulated Brick Veneer (InsBV) and Insulated Reverse Brick Veneer (InsRBV)) subjected to a range of seasonal conditions in a moderate climate. The time required for heating and/or cooling using the adaptive thermal comfort approach and AccuRate predictions were estimated. Significant savings (of about 50 %) in energy consumption in minimising the time required for heating and cooling were achieved by using the adaptive thermal comfort model.
[1]
D Geard.
An empirical validation of the house energy ratingsoftware AccuRate for residential buildings in cooltemperate climates of Australia
,
2011
.
[2]
Min Li,et al.
Can personal control influence human thermal comfort? A field study in residential buildings in China in winter
,
2014
.
[3]
Michael A. Humphreys,et al.
ADAPTIVE THERMAL COMFORT AND SUSTAINABLE THERMAL STANDARDS FOR BUILDINGS
,
2002
.
[4]
Gail Brager,et al.
Developing an adaptive model of thermal comfort and preference
,
1998
.
[5]
Behdad Moghtaderi,et al.
Assessment of the Thermal Performance of Complete Buildings Using Adaptive Thermal Comfort
,
2016
.
[6]
Tarja Häkkinen,et al.
Comfort assessment in the context of sustainable buildings: Comparison of simplified and detailed human thermal sensation methods
,
2014
.
[7]
Bassam Moujalled,et al.
Comparison of thermal comfort algorithms in naturally ventilated office buildings
,
2008
.
[8]
Kefa V. O. Rabah,et al.
Development of energy-efficient passive solar building design in Nicosia Cyprus
,
2005
.
[9]
Appu Haapio,et al.
A critical review of building environmental assessment tools
,
2008
.
[10]
Behdad Moghtaderi,et al.
A concept for a potential metric to characterise the dynamic thermal performance of walls
,
2012
.
[11]
Lisa Guan,et al.
Cross-correlations between weather variables in Australia
,
2007
.
[12]
Maria Kordjamshidi,et al.
Overcoming problems in house energy ratings in temperate climates: A proposed new rating framework
,
2009
.