<div class="csl-bib-body">
<div class="csl-entry">Marković, M., Pont, U., & Mahdavi, A. (2019). The Potential of Descriptive Building Specifications as an Alternative To Detailed Normative Calculations. <i>Applied Mechanics and Materials</i>, <i>887</i>, 164–171. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.887.164</div>
</div>
-
dc.identifier.issn
1660-9336
-
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12708/142374
-
dc.description.abstract
(no german abstract)
Abstract. Energy performance calculations are stipulated by law in most European countries. Thereby, different calculation schemes have been developed in the past years in different countries. The physical processes in buildings were simplified in terms of normative calculation routines in most of these schemes. A major idea behind these simplifications was to enable different stakeholders (practitioners, engineers, and architects) to issue energy certificates without being simulation experts. Moreover, the simplifications needed to be described thoroughly in corresponding guidelines to ensure and facilitate the comparability of the energy performance of different buildings. However, neither of these objectives can be considered to be fully met. Regarding the former, the normative calculation procedures increased in complexity in the past years, so that the issuing of energy certificates requires not only the stakeholder's expertise but also a comprehensive knowledge of the standards that form the calculation method. Regarding the latter, recent research efforts revealed that many guidelines do not fully cover every aspect of the calculation procedures and the assumptions regarding required input data. Thus, the comparability of energy certificates has to be strongly questioned, as a number of relevant calculation parameters are dependent on the interpretation of the corresponding issuer. Given this background, alternative approaches to building performance evaluation would be of interest. Previous approaches by different researchers suggested so called prescriptive indicators, which can be derived by basic building data (for instance, geometry and thermal quality of the building envelope components). This contribution is based on this concept. In the framework of a master thesis, a number of prescriptive indicators were considered. These indicators were derived for a set of sample buildings. In a parallel effort, energy certificates (encompassing Key Performance Indicators KPIs) were calculated for the sample buildings. It is clear that the prescriptive indicators cannot act as a 1:1 replacement for KPIs in terms of a numeric value. However, their usefulness can be expressed by the relation of the prescriptive indicator and the corresponding KPIs of a building. Thus, the results of the described calculation efforts were ranked. Subsequently, the lists of buildings ranked by the different indicators were compared in order to identify prescriptive indicators, which result in the same or at least similar ranking as the normative key performance indicators. Within this contribution, the suggested prescriptive indicators, the sample buildings, and the results of the analysis are presented and discussed.
de
dc.description.abstract
Abstract. Energy performance calculations are stipulated by law in most European countries. Thereby, different calculation schemes have been developed in the past years in different countries. The physical processes in buildings were simplified in terms of normative calculation routines in most of these schemes. A major idea behind these simplifications was to enable different stakeholders (practitioners, engineers, and architects) to issue energy certificates without being simulation experts. Moreover, the simplifications needed to be described thoroughly in corresponding guidelines to ensure and facilitate the comparability of the energy performance of different buildings. However, neither of these objectives can be considered to be fully met. Regarding the former, the normative calculation procedures increased in complexity in the past years, so that the issuing of energy certificates requires not only the stakeholder's expertise but also a comprehensive knowledge of the standards that form the calculation method. Regarding the latter, recent research efforts revealed that many guidelines do not fully cover every aspect of the calculation procedures and the assumptions regarding required input data. Thus, the comparability of energy certificates has to be strongly questioned, as a number of relevant calculation parameters are dependent on the interpretation of the corresponding issuer. Given this background, alternative approaches to building performance evaluation would be of interest. Previous approaches by different researchers suggested so called prescriptive indicators, which can be derived by basic building data (for instance, geometry and thermal quality of the building envelope components). This contribution is based on this concept. In the framework of a master thesis, a number of prescriptive indicators were considered. These indicators were derived for a set of sample buildings. In a parallel effort, energy certificates (encompassing Key Performance Indicators KPIs) were calculated for the sample buildings. It is clear that the prescriptive indicators cannot act as a 1:1 replacement for KPIs in terms of a numeric value. However, their usefulness can be expressed by the relation of the prescriptive indicator and the corresponding KPIs of a building. Thus, the results of the described calculation efforts were ranked. Subsequently, the lists of buildings ranked by the different indicators were compared in order to identify prescriptive indicators, which result in the same or at least similar ranking as the normative key performance indicators. Within this contribution, the suggested prescriptive indicators, the sample buildings, and the results of the analysis are presented and discussed.
en
dc.language.iso
en
-
dc.publisher
Trans Tech Publications
-
dc.relation.ispartof
Applied Mechanics and Materials
-
dc.subject
General Engineering
-
dc.subject
energy performance of buildings
-
dc.subject
heating demand
-
dc.subject
descriptive building specification
-
dc.subject
key performance indicators
-
dc.subject
normative calculation procedures.
-
dc.title
The Potential of Descriptive Building Specifications as an Alternative To Detailed Normative Calculations
en
dc.type
Artikel
de
dc.type
Article
en
dc.description.startpage
164
-
dc.description.endpage
171
-
dc.type.category
Original Research Article
-
tuw.container.volume
887
-
tuw.journal.peerreviewed
true
-
tuw.peerreviewed
true
-
tuw.researchTopic.id
E6
-
tuw.researchTopic.id
E1
-
tuw.researchTopic.name
Sustainable Production and Technologies
-
tuw.researchTopic.name
Energy Active Buildings, Settlements and Spatial Infrastructures
-
tuw.researchTopic.value
60
-
tuw.researchTopic.value
40
-
dcterms.isPartOf.title
Applied Mechanics and Materials
-
tuw.publication.orgunit
E259-03 - Forschungsbereich Bauphysik und Bauökologie
-
tuw.publisher.doi
10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.887.164
-
dc.identifier.eissn
1660-9336
-
dc.description.numberOfPages
8
-
wb.sciencebranch
Architektur
-
wb.sciencebranch
Bauingenieurwesen
-
wb.sciencebranch.oefos
2012
-
wb.sciencebranch.oefos
2011
-
wb.facultyfocus
Öko-effiziente Entwicklung und Gestaltung der gebauten Umwelt und der räumlichen Ressourcen
de
wb.facultyfocus
Eco-efficient development and design of the built environment
en
wb.facultyfocus.faculty
E250
-
item.languageiso639-1
en
-
item.openairecristype
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
-
item.openairetype
research article
-
item.grantfulltext
none
-
item.fulltext
no Fulltext
-
item.cerifentitytype
Publications
-
crisitem.author.dept
E259-03 - Forschungsbereich Bauphysik und Bauökologie