Author
Listed:
- Langner, Felix
- Kovačević, Jovana
- Spatafora, Luigi
- Dietze, Stefan
- Waczowicz, Simon
- Çakmak, Hüseyin K.
- Matthes, Jörg
- Hagenmeyer, Veit
Abstract
Energy flexibility is essential for aligning the energy demand with the intermittent electricity generation from renewable energy sources. In the European Union, buildings account for 40 % of the final energy consumption, thus offering significant potential for energy flexibility through load shifting, peak clipping, valley filling, and flexible load shaping. While experimental studies are crucial for providing realistic estimates of cost savings, comparing various control algorithms in the real world is inherently difficult. The present paper addresses this challenge by simultaneously controlling three architecturally identical buildings with different controllers to shift space heating in response to dynamic pricing. Model predictive control (MPC) and fuzzy logic control (FLC) are compared to a baseline control across various experiments, encompassing different objectives, price signals, and comfort levels. Over the course of a one-month experimental study, both MPC and FLC improved thermal comfort while achieving cost savings ranging from 7.8 % to 33.4 % and from 4.4 % to 8.6 %, respectively. The additional savings provided by MPC compared to FLC increase with greater price variability, indicating that MPC is particularly advantageous in markets with high price spreads. Conversely, when prices fluctuate less, the computationally more efficient FLC is sufficient. When minimizing costs, the MPC reduces the heating costs by 33.4 % but merely reduces the CO2 emissions by 2.9 %. Consequently, focusing solely on cost minimization is insufficient to achieve substantial emission reductions.
Suggested Citation
Langner, Felix & Kovačević, Jovana & Spatafora, Luigi & Dietze, Stefan & Waczowicz, Simon & Çakmak, Hüseyin K. & Matthes, Jörg & Hagenmeyer, Veit, 2025.
"Experimental evaluation of model predictive control and fuzzy logic control for demand response in buildings,"
Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 401(PA).
Handle:
RePEc:eee:appene:v:401:y:2025:i:pa:s0306261925013960
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2025.126666
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:401:y:2025:i:pa:s0306261925013960. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.