Teaching Building Performance Simulations by using a Control Method

Description

AIM AND APPROACH
Performing advanced and reliable Building Performance Simulations (BPS) in order to study for example the energy use of future buildings is an important ability to gain as a future energy specialist. Teaching BPS and critically analysing results of such tools may be challenging, especially in courses with students of diverse backgrounds. This paper describes the outcomes of adopting a so-called
control method to teach advanced BPS in a limited time to students in a Master course in Energy Use in Buildings at Lund University, Sweden.
Students get the assignment to compare the energy use of a simple room by using steady-state calculations in Excel and by running simulations with the help of Archsim [2] and EnergyPlus (E+). The static calculations consider transmissions losses through the building envelope, ventilation and infiltration losses, the thermal mass, and a template value to consider the internal loads and solar gains. In Archsim/E+, a modified weather file is used to start with. The control method goes through different steps, where the complexity of the energy calculation and simulation is steadily increased. The differences between Excel and Archsim/E+ are explained by the teachers.

SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION AND RELEVANCE
The development of the control method followed the pedagogical framework based of constructive alignment principles, aimed to reach a so-called “relation stage” in the SOLO taxonomy. In energy-efficient building design, this approach is innovative since deep pedagogical reflections usually focus on the theoretical curricula of the course.
Course evaluations from previous years have pointed out that students experienced difficulties understanding how dynamic BPS tools work on all levels; from modelling to a critical understanding of the results. The presented control method is the first fundamental step of explaining complex dynamic simulations to students that are new to this topic. Giving students confidence in the BPS program they use while providing them with a better understanding of the complexity of energy simulations is, therefore, seen as very relevant for the
students’ careers.
It is also relevant to show students that dynamic simulation programs will give slightly different results than handmade, static, calculations (considering the same conditions) because of the nature of both methods. In both methods, assumptions and simplifications are made to approach complex physical real-world situations, resulting in different outcomes with different accuracy.

PRELIMINARY RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
The improved teaching method with the control method is planned in such a way that it will be easier for students to understand the differences between handmade, static, calculations and dynamic simulations. At Lund University, all courses are subject to a course evaluation by students. The evaluation follows a validated template developed by pedagogical researchers, and it provides both
quantitative and qualitative information on the teaching quality and content.
This course evaluation will provide results for the whole course on teaching methods, clear goals in the course, etc. A special evaluation regarding the control method will be conducted in order to get more specific feedback on the method. Comparing the course evaluation of this year with the course evaluations from previous years will provide more insight in how the teaching has changed. We expect that the course evaluation will be largely improved. We also expect a lower variance in evaluation scores, i.e. a higher agreement on the teaching quality amongst the student group.

Period	2019 Sept 4
Event title	16th IBPSA: International Building Performance Simulation Association Conference
Event type	Conference
Location	Rome, ItalyShow on map
Degree of Recognition	International