Engineering topics

Xie, Jiarong

Publications and source records attributed to Xie, Jiarong.

4 records

DOE OSTI2024

Development of National New Construction Weighting Factors for the Commercial Building Prototype Analyses (2008-2022)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) tasked Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) with updating commercial building construction weights for the purpose of estimating national and state-by-state energy savings impacts of changes made to various commercial energy codes and standards. A similar activity was last completed by PNNL in 2020 using disaggregate construction volume data acquired from the Dodge Data & Analytics database (formerly McGraw Hill) for the years 2003-2018 (Lei et al, 2020). As time passes, changes in economic and social demand reshape construction volume trends. For the current update, PNNL reviewed the same data source with the latest construction data for the years 2008-2022. For commercial building analyses, PNNL typically uses a suite of 16 prototype buildings simulated in the 19 ASHRAE climate zones with 16 of them present in the United States. The 2008-2022 commercial building weighting factors were derived using the same approach employed to develop the 2003-2018 set (Lei et al, 2020). Applying the construction volume data from the database to the prototypes and climate zones resulted in the following new construction area-based weighting factors. Table ES.1 shows the weighting factors including all building categories found in the database, and Table ES.2 shows the weighting factors normalized to include only buildings represented by the 16 prototypes. Section 3.0 also includes national- and state-level weighting factors by area and building count.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2024

Measuring Impact: Evaluating Thermal Zoning Simplification on Energy Efficiency Measures Analysis

Building Energy Modeling (BEM) is a versatile tool for designing, retrofitting, ensuring code compliance, obtaining certifications, qualifying for incentives, and enabling real-time building control. However, capturing all the details of building geometry for thermal zoning can be time-consuming, costly, and sometimes computationally challenging. As a result, modelers have been applying zoning simplification based on factors such as space functions and internal loads, as well as relying on their experience and judgment while adhering to zoning rules outlined in industry standards. Despite the prevalence of this common practice, a notable gap exists in the literature regarding studies quantifying the influence of simplified thermal zoning on the evaluation of Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs). Recognizing this gap, this paper seeks to contribute to the field by enhancing the understanding of how the simplification of thermal zoning influences the evaluation of EEMs against a baseline design. The study utilized a medium office prototype model with a detailed floor plan featuring over 20 zones per floor covering diverse functional spaces with varying internal loads and occupancy schedules. A standard thermal zoning strategy outlined in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 Appendix G was employed as the simplified zoning method. This strategy condenses the zoning into a core zone and four perimeter zones per floor. It was compared with the detailed zoning approach, which involves one zone per space. Common Energy EEMs, such as enhanced envelope, high-efficiency appliances and equipment, and HVAC controls, were individually implemented and evaluated. The results indicate that the performance comparison between the two zoning methods varies depending on the type of measures considered. Basic measures, such as adding wall insulation, demonstrate similar energy impacts, while advanced HVAC control measures, such as static pressure reset, exhibit a more substantial difference that cannot be overlooked.

Xie, Jiarong↗

DOE OSTI2023

Comparing simulated demand flexibility against actual performance in commercial office buildings

Commercial building energy benchmarking has been used as a mechanism to evaluate energy use of a single building over time, relative to other similar buildings, or to simulations of a reference building conforming to various energy standards. Lack of empirical demand flexibility data and consistent flexibility metrics has limited the ability to compare demand flexibility performance with estimated demand flexibility in buildings. In this study, we collected demand response performance data for a total of 831 demand response events from 192 sites as a first step to build such a building demand flexibility dataset, and propose a standard core data schema to consolidate field data from different sources. We also performed parametric simulations of a control strategy called “global temperature adjustment” using commercial office prototype building models. We then compared the simulated demand flexibility performance against the actual data for offices with global temperature adjustment strategy implemented. During demand response events with an average outside air temperature of 34 °C (range 23 °C–42 °C), the measured demand decrease intensity of the demand flexibility metrics were 6.1 watts per square meter (W/m 2 ), 10.0 W/m 2 , 11.1 W/m 2 , 7.1 W/m 2 , and 4.7 W/m 2 for small, small–medium, medium, medium–large, and large office buildings, respectively. Compared to the measured data in medium- and large-size buildings, the simulated demand decrease intensity was 0.7 W/m 2 (17%) lower on average. The discrepancy between simulated and measured peak demand intensities fell within one standard deviation of the mean measured data. Here, the comparison results validate the credibility of simulations in capturing real building data for assessing the technical potential of building demand flexibility.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2022

Defining and applying an electricity demand flexibility benchmarking metrics framework for grid-interactive efficient commercial buildings

Building demand flexibility (DF) research has recently gained attention. To unlock building DF as a predictable grid resource, we must establish a quantitative understanding of the resource size, performance variability, and predictability based on large empirical datasets. Researchers have proposed various sets of theoretical metrics to measure this performance. Some metrics have been applied to simulation results, but most fall short of exploring the complexities in real building applications. There are practical metrics used in individual demand response field studies but they alone cannot fulfil the job of DF benchmarking across a diverse group of buildings. The electrical grid's geographically diverse and changing nature presents challenges to comparing building DF performance measured under different conditions (i.e., benchmarking DF). To address this challenge, a novel DF benchmarking framework focused on load shedding and shifting is presented; the foundation is a set of simple, proven single-event metrics with attributes describing event conditions. These enable benchmarking and visualization in different dimensions for identifying trends that represent how these attributes influence DF. To test its feasibility and scalability, the DF framework was applied to two case studies of 11 office buildings and 121 big-box retail buildings with demand response participation data. Furthermore, these examples provided a pathway for using both building level benchmarking and aggregation to extract insights into building DF about magnitude, consistency, and influential factors. Potential applications of the framework and real-world values have been identified for grid and building stakeholders.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗