BIM interface for full vs. semi-automated building energy simulation

• The paper reports BIM interface which converts IFC to EnergyPlus input file, IDF.
• The interface supports full automated and semi automated interface (FAI and SAI).
• The pros and cons of each interface are discussed under stochastic comparison.
• SAI is more suitable for a reliable model than FAI due to human intervention.

BIM (building information model) enables information sharing and reuse for interoperability between prevalent software tools in the AEC (Architecture, Engineering, and Construction) industry. Although a BIM based energy simulation tool can reduce costs and time required for building energy simulation work, no practical interface between CAD tools and dynamic energy analysis tools has been developed so far. With this in mind, this study suggests two approaches (Full automated interface (FAI) and semi automated interface (SAI)) enabling information transition from CAD tools (e.g., IFC) to EnergyPlus input file, IDF. FAI, if ideally developed, can convert IFC to IDF based on the use of pre-defined defaults without requiring human intervention. In contrast, SAI converts geometry information drawn from IFC to IDF and then require human data entry for uncertain simulation inputs. For this study, a library building was chosen and space boundary generated from ArchiCAD 13 was employed for geometry mapping. The Morris method, one of sensitivity analysis methods, was used for identifying significant inputs. In FAI and SAI, dominant inputs, out of the Morris method, were identified for Monte Carlo simulation to quantify probabilistic simulation outputs. In the paper, FAI and SAI simulation results are cross-compared, and pros and cons of FAI and SAI are discussed.

Figure optionsDownload as PowerPoint slide