Choosing the appropriate sensitivity analysis method for building energy model-based investigations

被引:101
作者
Kristensen, Martin Heine [1 ]
Petersen, Steffen [1 ]
机构
[1] Aarhus Univ, Dept Engn, Inge Lehmanns Gade 10, DK-8000 Aarhus, Denmark
关键词
Sensitivity analysis; Morris method; Sobol method; Building energy modelling; Input information; Probability density functions; PERFORMANCE; UNCERTAINTY; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.08.038
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Current literature holds various examples of investigations that make use of a building energy model (BEM) combined with a sensitivity analysis (SA) technique to identify and rank the BEM input parameters that the model output is most sensitive to. However, a sound argumentation that vouches for the reliability, validity and necessary complexity of the chosen SA method for the specific purpose of the BEM-based analysis, is rare. This paper reports on an investigation of how two different levels of a-priori information about input parameters, applied to three different SA methods (Local, Morris and Sobol), influenced the identification and ranking of the input parameters that the annual energy need output of a quasi-steady-state BEM using monthly time steps, and a simple dynamic BEM using hourly time steps, is most sensitive to. It was found that the three SA methods, to a great extent, were able to identify the same cluster of most sensitive input parameters, independent of the level of a-priori input parameter information and BEM. However, the ranking of most sensitive input parameters varied with the applied SA method, BEM, and level of a-priori input parameter information. From a practical point of view, the choice of appropriate SA method is concluded to depend on the purpose of the SA analysis. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:166 / 176
页数:11
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2007, Sensitivity analysis in practice: A guide to assessing scientific models (Reprinted)
[2]   Handling uncertainty in housing stock models [J].
Booth, A. T. ;
Choudhary, R. ;
Spiegelhalter, D. J. .
BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT, 2012, 48 :35-47
[3]   Sensitivity analysis: A review of recent advances [J].
Borgonovo, Emanuele ;
Plischke, Elmar .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2016, 248 (03) :869-887
[4]  
Bourges B, 1992, Climatic data handbook for europe: climatic data for the design of solar energy systems
[5]   The use of graph theory in the sensitivity analysis of the model output: a second order screening method [J].
Campolongo, F ;
Braddock, R .
RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 1999, 64 (01) :1-12
[6]   STUDY OF SENSITIVITY OF COUPLED REACTION SYSTEMS TO UNCERTAINTIES IN RATE COEFFICIENTS .1. THEORY [J].
CUKIER, RI ;
FORTUIN, CM ;
SHULER, KE ;
PETSCHEK, AG ;
SCHAIBLY, JH .
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS, 1973, 59 (08) :3873-3878
[7]   Application of sensitivity analysis in design of sustainable buildings [J].
Heiselberg, Per ;
Brohus, Henrik ;
Hesselholt, Allan ;
Rasmussen, Henrik ;
Seinre, Erkki ;
Thomas, Sara .
RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2009, 34 (09) :2030-2036
[8]   Survey of sampling-based methods for uncertainty and sensitivity analysis [J].
Helton, J. C. ;
Johnson, J. D. ;
Sallaberry, C. J. ;
Storlie, C. B. .
RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 2006, 91 (10-11) :1175-1209
[9]   Sensitivity analysis evaluating basic building geometry's effect on energy use [J].
Hemsath, Timothy L. ;
Bandhosseini, Kaveh Alagheband .
RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2015, 76 :526-538
[10]   Importance measures in global sensitivity analysis of nonlinear models [J].
Homma, T ;
Saltelli, A .
RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 1996, 52 (01) :1-17