A shot in the dark: The current state of PCM hysteresis modelling in building energy simulation software

IF 7.1 2区工程技术 Q1 CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY

Energy and Buildings Pub Date : 2025-09-12 DOI:10.1016/j.enbuild.2025.116418

Dmitry Zhilyaev , Alejandro E. Albanesi , M. Cecilia Demarchi , Víctor D. Fachinotti , Hans L.M. Bakker , Henk M. Jonkers

{"title":"A shot in the dark: The current state of PCM hysteresis modelling in building energy simulation software","authors":"Dmitry Zhilyaev , Alejandro E. Albanesi , M. Cecilia Demarchi , Víctor D. Fachinotti , Hans L.M. Bakker , Henk M. Jonkers","doi":"10.1016/j.enbuild.2025.116418","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Phase change materials (PCM) are receiving ever-growing attention as a promising construction material for improving building energy performance through thermal storage and peak load shifting. The analysis of PCM performance and decision-making related to PCM implementation in building envelopes often relies on building energy simulation software such as EnergyPlus – a de facto standard in the academic world and the industry. For a precise modelling of the dynamic PCM behaviour, it is essential to correctly account for PCM hysteresis. This work introduces two new implementations of PCM hysteresis models in EnergyPlus. Further, it provides an in-depth analysis of four publicly available EnergyPlus-based hysteresis models, including the two newly introduced ones, and identifies the existing limitations for each of them. Finally, it explores the effects of PCM model selection on decision-making using the example of novel PCM-embedded material development. The results of this study show that the current built-in hysteresis model in EnergyPlus is not implemented correctly, and none of the other analysed models is completely free of limitations. Moreover, this work draws attention to the existing contradictions between different PCM modelling approaches, highlighting the critical impact the selection of a PCM model has on PCM-related decision-making. We conclude that while the existing hysteresis models in EnergyPlus are operable – albeit with great caution – they are not yet at the stage where they could be used as a reliable decision-making support tool. Practical real-world integration of PCM in building envelopes is hardly possible without having dependable modelling tools to back it up, and the development of such tools requires far more attention than it is given at the moment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11641,"journal":{"name":"Energy and Buildings","volume":"348 ","pages":"Article 116418"},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy and Buildings","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037877882501148X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Phase change materials (PCM) are receiving ever-growing attention as a promising construction material for improving building energy performance through thermal storage and peak load shifting. The analysis of PCM performance and decision-making related to PCM implementation in building envelopes often relies on building energy simulation software such as EnergyPlus – a de facto standard in the academic world and the industry. For a precise modelling of the dynamic PCM behaviour, it is essential to correctly account for PCM hysteresis. This work introduces two new implementations of PCM hysteresis models in EnergyPlus. Further, it provides an in-depth analysis of four publicly available EnergyPlus-based hysteresis models, including the two newly introduced ones, and identifies the existing limitations for each of them. Finally, it explores the effects of PCM model selection on decision-making using the example of novel PCM-embedded material development. The results of this study show that the current built-in hysteresis model in EnergyPlus is not implemented correctly, and none of the other analysed models is completely free of limitations. Moreover, this work draws attention to the existing contradictions between different PCM modelling approaches, highlighting the critical impact the selection of a PCM model has on PCM-related decision-making. We conclude that while the existing hysteresis models in EnergyPlus are operable – albeit with great caution – they are not yet at the stage where they could be used as a reliable decision-making support tool. Practical real-world integration of PCM in building envelopes is hardly possible without having dependable modelling tools to back it up, and the development of such tools requires far more attention than it is given at the moment.

查看原文本刊更多论文

瞎猜：建筑能源仿真软件中PCM迟滞建模的现状

相变材料（PCM）作为一种有前途的建筑材料，通过蓄热和移峰负荷来改善建筑能源性能，正受到越来越多的关注。对PCM性能的分析和与建筑围护结构中PCM实施相关的决策通常依赖于建筑能源模拟软件，如EnergyPlus，这是学术界和工业界的事实上的标准。对于动态PCM行为的精确建模，必须正确考虑PCM的迟滞。本文介绍了EnergyPlus中PCM迟滞模型的两种新实现。此外，本文还深入分析了四种公开可用的基于energyplus的迟滞模型，包括两种新引入的模型，并确定了每种模型的现有局限性。最后，以新型嵌入PCM的材料开发为例，探讨了PCM模式选择对决策的影响。本研究的结果表明，EnergyPlus中目前内置的滞后模型没有正确实现，其他分析的模型都没有完全摆脱局限性。此外，本文还关注了不同PCM建模方法之间存在的矛盾，强调了PCM模型的选择对PCM相关决策的关键影响。我们的结论是，尽管EnergyPlus中现有的滞后模型是可操作的（尽管需要非常谨慎），但它们还没有达到可以作为可靠的决策支持工具的阶段。如果没有可靠的建模工具作为后盾，PCM在建筑围护结构中的实际集成几乎是不可能的，而且这种工具的开发需要比目前给予的更多的关注。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Energy and Buildings 工程技术-工程：土木

CiteScore

12.70

自引率

11.90%

发文量

863

审稿时长

38 days

期刊介绍： An international journal devoted to investigations of energy use and efficiency in buildings Energy and Buildings is an international journal publishing articles with explicit links to energy use in buildings. The aim is to present new research results, and new proven practice aimed at reducing the energy needs of a building and improving indoor environment quality.