Due to the limitations of the stationary energy needs calculation, energy dynamic simulation tools become strictly essential. In literature, many researches compared different energy simulation tools without validating those models through real data. In this framework, this study aims to compare two energy dynamic simulation tools: TRNSYS 16 and Grasshopper/Archsim, through a real case study, the historical building of Palazzo Baleani, validated by comparing the simulated results with real consumptions. Furthermore, results will help users to choose the most suitable software depending on the needs and the available data. Finally, latest analysis underline that different type of retrofit solutions, simulated with those two tools, have a considerable impact on the achievement of nZEBs targets, especially on the listed building.

Comparison between two energy dynamic tools. The impact of two different calculation procedures on the achievement of nZEBs requirements / Pompei, Laura; Nardecchia, Fabio; Mattoni, Benedetta; Bisegna, Fabio; Mangione, Alessandro. - (2020), pp. 4259-4266. (Intervento presentato al convegno 16th Conference of the International-Building-Performance-Simulation-Association (IBPSA) tenutosi a Roma) [10.26868/25222708.2019.210977].

Comparison between two energy dynamic tools. The impact of two different calculation procedures on the achievement of nZEBs requirements

Laura Pompei
;
Fabio Nardecchia;Benedetta Mattoni;Fabio Bisegna;Alessandro Mangione
2020

Abstract

Due to the limitations of the stationary energy needs calculation, energy dynamic simulation tools become strictly essential. In literature, many researches compared different energy simulation tools without validating those models through real data. In this framework, this study aims to compare two energy dynamic simulation tools: TRNSYS 16 and Grasshopper/Archsim, through a real case study, the historical building of Palazzo Baleani, validated by comparing the simulated results with real consumptions. Furthermore, results will help users to choose the most suitable software depending on the needs and the available data. Finally, latest analysis underline that different type of retrofit solutions, simulated with those two tools, have a considerable impact on the achievement of nZEBs targets, especially on the listed building.
2020
16th Conference of the International-Building-Performance-Simulation-Association (IBPSA)
NZEB; dynamic simulations
04 Pubblicazione in atti di convegno::04b Atto di convegno in volume
Comparison between two energy dynamic tools. The impact of two different calculation procedures on the achievement of nZEBs requirements / Pompei, Laura; Nardecchia, Fabio; Mattoni, Benedetta; Bisegna, Fabio; Mangione, Alessandro. - (2020), pp. 4259-4266. (Intervento presentato al convegno 16th Conference of the International-Building-Performance-Simulation-Association (IBPSA) tenutosi a Roma) [10.26868/25222708.2019.210977].
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Pompei_Comparison_2020.pdf

solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 5.73 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
5.73 MB Adobe PDF   Contatta l'autore

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1464571
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 11
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 7
social impact