Data-driven optimization of building-integrated ducted openings for wind energy harvesting

Sensitivity analysis of metamodels

Journal Article (2022)
Author(s)

Zeynab Kaseb (TU Delft - Intelligent Electrical Power Grids)

H. Montazeri (Eindhoven University of Technology)

Research Group
Intelligent Electrical Power Grids
Copyright
© 2022 Z. Kaseb, H. Montazeri
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.124814
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2022
Language
English
Copyright
© 2022 Z. Kaseb, H. Montazeri
Research Group
Intelligent Electrical Power Grids
Volume number
258
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Metamodels are developed and used for aerodynamic optimization of a ducted opening integrated into a high-rise building to maximize the amplification factor within the duct. The duct consists of a nozzle, a throat, and a diffuser. 211 high-resolution 3D RANS CFD simulations are performed to generate training and testing datasets. The space-filling design and Genetic algorithm are used for data sampling and optimization, respectively. The performance of five commonly-used metamodels is systematically investigated: Response Surface Methodology (RSM), Kriging (KG), Neural Network (NN), Support Vector Regression (SVR), and Genetic Aggregation Response Surface (GARS). The investigation is based on (i) detailed in-sample and out-of-sample evaluations of the metamodels, (ii) annual available power in the wind (Pavailable), and (iii) annual energy production (AEP) for a 3-bladed horizontal-axis wind turbine (HAWT) installed in the mid-throat for the optimum designs obtained by the metamodels. The results show that converging-diverging ducted openings can magnify the experienced wind speed by the turbine and enhance the available wind power. In addition, the use of different metamodels can lead to a variation of up to 153% in the estimated Pavailable. For a small dataset, crude yet still acceptable accuracy can be achieved for Genetic Aggregation Response Surface and Kriging at a very low computational time.