Analysis of the passive design and solar collection techniques of the houses in the 2009 U.S. Department of Energy's Solar Decathlon competition
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The U.S. Department of Energy‘s Solar Decathlon is a competition in which twenty university teams compete to design and build the best completely solar powered house. The biennial competition culminates with the teams reconstructing their houses on the National Mall in Washington, DC for a week of tours and contests. In order for houses to be successful they must take advantage of passive solar design techniques while maximizing the solar energy collected through photovoltaic and thermal collectors.\nInternal temperature, internal humidity, overall energy balance, site insolation, site temperature and site humidity data were measured for all twenty houses in 15 minute intervals for the eight days of the competition period. Photovoltaic conversion and thermal energy collection were predicted through simple equations which utilized site insolation and temperature data along with collector parameters and orientation. The construction documents for all twenty houses were analyzed for passive solar design techniques. Passive solar data was quantified through use of several rules of thumb. The passive solar design techniques analyzed were direct–gain, indirect–gain, thermal mass, daylighting, insulation, window placement, and shading.\nMeasured internal temperature and energy usage data were compared with the quantified passive solar rule of thumb values and plotted. Trendlines were fit to the resulting plots using simple linear regression. These trendlines were used to discuss patterns that emerged correlating each passive solar design technique to house performance. These correlations were also used to discuss the validity of the rules of thumb as a design tool.\nThe results for adherence to the passive solar rules of thumb and solar energy collection were combined to provide rankings of the best designed solar houses. The top three designs based on these criteria were Team Ontario/BC, Team Alberta, and University of Minnesota. These rankings were compared to combined placement in the comfort zone competition and the energy balance competition. Only one of the three predicted best houses was also in the top three for actual competition performance: Team Ontario/BC.\nStrong relationships emerged between insulating values and internal temperature control. Strong relationships were also found between thermal storage volume and predicted total thermal collection. The plotted comparisons contradicted many of the limits associated with the passive solar rules of thumb. The rules of thumb are best used as quick calculations and estimations and a more refined computer model should be used for more accurate results.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».