Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Smart building management vs. intuitive human control—Lessons learnt from an office building in Hungary

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Building Simulation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Smart building management and control are adopted nowadays to achieve zero-net energy use in buildings. However, without considering the human dimension, technologies alone do not necessarily guarantee high performance in buildings. An office building was designed and built according to state-of-the-art design and energy management principles in 2008. Despite the expectations of high performance, the owner was facing high utility bills and low user comfort in the building located in Budapest, Hungary. The objective of the project was to evaluate the energy performance and comfort indices of the building, to identify the causes of malfunction and to elaborate a comprehensive energy concept. Firstly, current building conditions and operation parameters were evaluated. Our investigation found that the state-of-the-art building management system was in good conditions but it was operated by building operators and occupants who are not aware of the building management practice. The energy consumption patterns of the building were simulated with energy modelling software. The baseline model was calibrated to annual measured energy consumption, using actual occupant behaviour and presence, based on results of self-reported surveys, occupancy sensors and fan-coil usage data. Realistic occupant behaviour models can capture diversity of occupant behaviour and better represent the real energy use of the building. This way our findings and the effect of our proposed improvements could be more reliable. As part of our final comprehensive energy concept, we proposed intervention measures that would increase indoor thermal comfort and decrease energy consumption of the building. A parametric study was carried out to evaluate and quantify energy, comfort and return on investment of each measure. It was found that in the best case the building could save 23% of annual energy use. Future work includes the follow-up of: occupant reactions to intervention measures, the realized energy savings, the measurement of occupant satisfaction and behavioural changes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abu Bakar NN, Hassan MY, Abdullah H, Rahman HA, Abdullah MP, Hussin F, Bandi M (2015). Energy efficiency index as an indicator for measuring building energy performance: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 44: 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amaran S, Sahinidis NV, Sharda B, Bury SJ (2014). Simulation optimization: A review of algorithms and applications. 4OR, 12: 301–333.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen RV, Toftum J, Andersen KK, Olesen BW (2009). Survey of occupant behaviour and control of indoor environment in Danish dwellings. Energy and Buildings, 41: 11–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews CJ, Yi D, Krogmann U, Senick JA, Wener RE (2011). Designing buildings for real occupants: An agent-based approach. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part A: Systems and Humans, 41: 1077–1091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ASHRAE (2002). ASHRAE Guideline 14: Measurement of Energy and Demand Savings. Atlanta, GA, USA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Autodesk (2011). Autodesk Ecotect Analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belafi Z, Reith A (2014). Smart building management vs. intuitive human control—A case study: Phase I. Symposium on Occupant Behaviour, OB-14, Nottingham, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belafi Z, Deme KD, Reith A (2015). Smart building management vs. intuitive human control—A case study: Phase II. International Technical Forum on Occupant Behaviour, Berkeley, CA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boermans T, Petersdorff C (2007). U-values for better energy performance of buildings. Ecofys for Eurima.

    Google Scholar 

  • Candanedo JA, Dehkordi VR, Saberi-Derakhtenjani A, Athienitis AK (2015). Near-optimal transition between temperature setpoints for peak load reduction in small buildings. Energy and Buildings, 87: 123–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CBE (2014). Occupant Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) Survey. Center for the Built Environment, Available at https://www.cbe.berkeley.edu/research/survey.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cmadren (2011). Teaching Sustainability Has Benefits for Big Business. Pacific Standard, Available at https://psmag.com.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deme KD, Belafi Z, Gelesz A, Reith A (2015). Genetic optimisation of indoor environmental parameters for energy use and comfort—A case study for cool-humid climate. In: Proceedings of International IBPSA Building Simulation Conference, Hyderabad, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deme KD (2015). Financial Analysis of Building Energy Retrofit Measures. University of Miskolc, Hungary.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond RC, Opitz M, Hicks T, Von Neida B, Herrera S (2006). Evaluating the energy performance of the first generation of leed-certified commercial buildings. In: Proceedings of ACEEE 2006 Summer Study, Pacific Grove, CA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • EIA (2003). Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBES) Table E6: Electricity Use Intensities. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Available at https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/data/2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • EN 15251 (2008). Criteria for the Indoor Environmental Including Thermal, Indoor Air Quality, Light and Noise.

    Google Scholar 

  • EQUA (1995). IDA Indoor Climate and Energy. Available at http://www.equa.se/en/ida-ice. Accessed 1 Mar2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdman S (2011). Educating and Engaging Occupants on Energy Efficiency. Automated Buildings, Available at http://www.automatedbuildings.com/news/nov11/articles/qag/111028105707qag.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evins R (2013). A review of computational optimisation methods applied to sustainable building design. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 22: 230–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Federspiel CC (1997). Estimating the inputs of gas transport processes in buildings. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 5: 480–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaetani I, Hoes P-J, Hensen JLM (2016). Occupant behavior in building energy simulation: Towards a fit-for-purpose modeling strategy. Energy and Buildings, 121: 188–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerra-Santin O, Itard L (2010). Occupants’ behaviour: Determinants and effects on residential heating consumption. Building Research & Information, 38: 318–e38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunay HB, O’Brien W, Beausoleil-Morrison I (2013). A critical review of observation studies, modeling, and simulation of adaptive occupant behaviors in offices. Building and Environment, 70: 31–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausladen G (2005). Climate Design: Solutions for Buildings That Can Do More with Less Technology. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhauser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hensen JLM, Lamberts R (2012). Building Performance Simulation for Design and Operation. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • HOAI (2013). HOAI Design Phases in Planer und deren Auftraggeber im Spannungsfeld zwischen verbindlichem Preisrecht und Vertragsfreiheit. Available at http://www.hoai.de.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoes P, Hensen JLM, Loomans MGLC, de Vries B, Bourgeois D (2009). User behavior in whole building simulation. Energy and Buildings, 41: 295–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong T, D’Oca S, Taylor-Lange SC, Turner WJN, Chen Y, Corgnati SP (2015a). An ontology to represent energy-related occupant behavior in buildings. Part II: Implementation of the DNAS framework using an XML schema. Building and Environment, 94: 196–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong T, D’Oca S, Turner WJN, Taylor-Lange SC (2015b). An ontology to represent energy-related occupant behavior in buildings. Part I: Introduction to the DNAs framework. Building and Environment, 92: 764–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong T, Taylor-Lange SC, D’Oca S, Yan D, Corgnati SP (2016). Advances in research and applications of energy-related occupant behavior in buildings. Energy and Buildings, 116: 694–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hussain S, Gabbar HA, Bondarenko D, Musharavati F, Pokharel S (2014). Comfort-based fuzzy control optimization for energy conservation in HVAC systems. Control Engineering Practice, 32: 172–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam KP, Höynck M, Dong B, Andrews B, Chiou Y-S, Zhang R, Benitez D, Choi J (2009). Occupancy detection through an extensive environmental sensor network in an open-plan office building. In: Proceedings of International IBPSA Building Simulation Conference, Glasgow, UK, pp. 1452–1459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langevin J, Wen J, Gurian PL (2015). Simulating the human-building interaction: Development and validation of an agent-based model of office occupant behaviors. Building and Environment, 88: 27–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Machairas V, Tsangrassoulis A, Axarli K (2014). Algorithms for optimization of building design: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 31: 101–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martiskaïnen M (2007). Affecting consumer behaviour on energy demand, Final Report to EdF Energy. University of Sussex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier AK, Moezzi M, Hammer C, Goins J (2014). Behavioral strategies to bridge the gap between potential and actual savings in commercial buildings. Final Report for California Air Resources Board and the California Environmental Protection Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newsham GR, Mancini S, Birt BJ (2009). Do LEED-certified buildings save energy? Yes, but.. Energy and Buildings, 41: 897–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen A-T, Reiter S, Rigo P (2014). A review on simulation-based optimization methods applied to building performance analysis. Applied Energy, 113: 1043–1058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicol JF, Humphreys MA (2002). Adaptive thermal comfort and sustainable thermal standards for buildings. Energy and Buildings, 34: 563–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien W (2013). Evaluating the performance robustness of fixed and movable shading devices against diverse occupant behaviors. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Simulation for Architecture & Urban Design, San Diego, CA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paciuk M (1989). The Role of Personal Control of the Environment in Thermal Comfort and Satisfaction at the Workplace. PhD Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palme M, Isalgue A, Coch H, Serra R (2006). Robust design: A way to control energy use from the human behaviour in architectural spaces. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture (PLEA), Geneva, Switzerland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palonen M, Hamdy M, Hasan A (2013). MOBO A new software for multi-objective building performance optimization. In: Proceedings of International IBPSA Building Simulation Conference, Chambéry, France, pp. 2567–2574.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pantelic, J, Raphael B, Tham KW (2012). A preference driven multicriteria optimization tool for HVAC design and operation. Energy and Buildings, 55: 118–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parameshwaran R, Karunakaran R, Kumar CVR, Iniyan S (2010). Energy conservative building air conditioning system controlled and optimized using fuzzy-genetic algorithm. Energy and Buildings, 42: 745–762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polinder H, Schweiker M, Van Der Aa A, Schakib-Ekbatan K, et al. (2013). Total energy use in buildings. Analysis and evaluation methods. Final report Annex 53. Occupant behavior and modelling. PVGIS (2013). Available at http://photovoltaic-software.com/pvgis.php.

    Google Scholar 

  • Questionnaire (n.d). Available at https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScpIDEk2oOfXOi0cs_x7mYqV0wErwC9G0MuLPbz7wz47q4I6w/viewform.

  • RIBA (2013). RIBA Plan of Work. Available at https://www.ribaplanofwork.com.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sowa J (2002). Co2-based occupancy detection for on-line demand controlled ventilation systems. In: Proceedings of Indoor Air, Monterey, CA, USA, pp. 334–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun K, Hong T (2017). A simulation approach to estimate energy savings potential of occupant behavior measures. Energy and Buildings, 136: 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SzCsM-EüM (2002). 3/2002. (II. 8.) SzCsM-EüM—Joint Decree on Minimum Level of Work-Safety Requirements.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Q, Holmberg S (2015). A methodology to assess energy-demand savings and cost effectiveness of retrofitting in existing Swedish residential buildings. Sustainable Cities and Society, 14: 254–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward L (2013). Energy Dashboards Enter the Office Cubicle. The Wall Street Journal, 22 Sept 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • West SR, Ward JK, Wall J (2014). Trial results from a model predictive control and optimisation system for commercial building HVAC. Energy and Buildings, 72: 271–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan D, Hong T (2014). IEA EBC Annex 66. Available at http://annex66.org.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yan D, O’Brien W, Hong T, Feng X, Gunay HB (2015). Occupant behavior modeling for building performance simulation: Current state and future challenges. Energy and Buildings, 107: 264–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu W, Li B, Jia H, Zhang M, Wang D (2015). Application of multiobjective genetic algorithm to optimize energy efficiency and thermal comfort in building design. Energy and Buildings, 88: 135–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zöld A (1999). Energiatudatos építészet. Műszaki könyvkiadó, Budapest.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors would like to express their gratitude to ABUD Ltd., and especially to Kornél Döme Deme, for providing support, necessary equipment and software products for the research project. The present work benefited from the help of the owner of the office building used as a case study. This work was also supported by the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy of the United States Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. The presented work is part of the research activities of Annex 66, under the International Energy Agency’s Energy in Buildings and Communities Program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pal Csonka Doctoral School, Faculty of Architecture, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Műegyetem rkp. 3, 1111, Hungary

    Zsofia Belafi

  2. Building Technology & Urban Systems Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1 Cyclotron Road, Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA

    Tianzhen Hong

  3. Advanced Building and Urban Design (ABUD), Budapest, Lónyay u. 29, 1093, Hungary

    Zsofia Belafi & Andras Reith

Authors
  1. Zsofia Belafi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tianzhen Hong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andras Reith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andras Reith.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Belafi, Z., Hong, T. & Reith, A. Smart building management vs. intuitive human control—Lessons learnt from an office building in Hungary. Build. Simul. 10, 811–828 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-017-0361-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-017-0361-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation