An improved explicit scheme for whole-building hygrothermal simulation
- 56 Downloads
Implicit schemes require important sub-iterations when dealing with highly nonlinear problems such as the combined heat and moisture transfer through porous building elements. The computational cost rises significantly when the whole-building is simulated, especially when there is important coupling among the building elements themselves with neighbouring zones and with HVAC (heating ventilation and air conditioning) systems. On the other hand, the classical Euler explicit scheme is generally not used because its stability condition imposes very fine time discretisation. Hence, this paper explores the use of an improved explicit approach—the DuFort–Frankel scheme—to overcome the disadvantage of the classical explicit one and to bring benefits that cannot be obtained by implicit methods. The DuFort–Frankel approach is first compared to the classical Euler implicit and explicit schemes to compute the solution of nonlinear heat and moisture transfer through porous materials. Then, the analysis of the DuFort–Frankel unconditionally stable explicit scheme is extended to the coupled heat and moisture balances on the scale of a one- and a two-zone building models. The DuFort–Frankel scheme has the benefits of being unconditionally stable, second-order accurate in time O(Δt2) and to compute explicitly the solution at each time step, avoiding costly sub-iterations. This approach may reduce the computational cost by twenty as well as it may enable perfect synchronism for whole-building simulation and co-simulation.
Keywordsheat and moisture transfer numerical methods finite-differences explicit schemes DuFort–Frankel scheme whole-building simulation
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
The authors acknowledge the Brazilian Agencies CAPES of the Ministry of Education and CNPQ of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, for the financial support.
- Bauklimatik-Dresden (2011). Simulation program for the calculation of coupled heat, moisture, air, pollutant, and salt transport. Available at http://www.bauklimatik-dresden.de/delphin/index. php?aLa=en.Google Scholar
- Burch D (1993). An analysis of moisture accumulation in walls subjected to hot and humid climates. ASHRAE Transactions, 99(2): 1013–1022.Google Scholar
- Driscoll TA, Hale N, Trefethen LN (2014). Chebfun Guide. Oxford, UK: Pafnuty Publications.Google Scholar
- Fraunhofer IBP (2005). Wufi. Available at http://www.hoki.ibp.fhg.de/wufi/wufi_frame_e.html.Google Scholar
- Gasparin S, Berger J, Dutykh D, Mendes N (2017). Stable explicit schemes for simulation of nonlinear moisture transfer in porous materials. Journal of Building Performance Simulation, doi: 10.1080/ 19401493.2017.1298669.Google Scholar
- Hagentoft C-E, Kalagasidis AS, Adl-Zarrabi B, Roels S, Carmeliet J, et al. (2004). Assessment method of numerical prediction models for combined heat, air and moisture transfer in building components: Benchmarks for one-dimensional cases. Journal of Thermal Envelope and Building Science, 27: 327–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hensen J (1995). Modelling coupled heat and air flow: Ping-pong vs onions. In: Proceedings of Implementing the Results of Ventilation Research 16th AIVC Conference, Palm Springs, US, pp. 253–262.Google Scholar
- Matlab (2014). The MathWorks Inc. Available at https://www. mathworks.com.Google Scholar
- Mendes N (1997). Models for prediction of heat and moisture transfer through porous building elements. PhD Thesis, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Brazil. (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
- Mendes N, Ridley I, Lamberts R, Philippi P, Budag K (1999), Umidus: A PC program for the prediction of heat and mass transfer in porous building elements. In: Proceedings of the 6th International IBPSA Building Simulation Conference, Kyoto, Japan, pp. 277–283.Google Scholar
- Rode C, Grau K (2003). Whole building hygrothermal simulation model. ASHRAE Transactions, 109(1): 572–582.Google Scholar