This paper compares Building Control Virtual Test Bed (BCVTB) and Functional Mock-up Interface (FMI) standard to conduct coupled energy modelling and control for academic and research campuses. The intent is to systematically compare BCVTB and FMI. As proof-of-concept demonstration, building energy models of Colorado School of Mines are developed in EnergyPlus and coupled through BCVTB and FMI. The coupled models in BCVTB and FMI represent a virtual campus and they are compared from different perspectives such as simulation runtime, easiness of employing simple if–then–else control, easiness of integrating other programs and feasibility to employ advanced control and optimization. Overall, FMI standard is more promising due to its (a) capability to be programmed in a multithreading manner, (b) capability to be implemented as Gauβ–Seidl and Jacobi methods of loose coupling and (c) higher feasibility to implement advanced control and optimization programs.

本文比较了建筑控制虚拟测试台（BCVTB）和功能模拟接口（FMI）标准，以对学术和研究园区进行耦合的能源建模和控制。目的是系统地比较BCVTB和FMI。作为概念验证的演示，科罗拉多能源学院的建筑能源模型是在EnergyPlus中开发的，并通过BCVTB和FMI进行了耦合。BCVTB和FMI中的耦合模型代表一个虚拟园区，并从不同的角度对它们进行了比较，例如仿真运行时，是否易于使用if-then-else控制，易于集成其他程序以及采用高级控制和优化的可行性。总体而言，由于FMI标准（a）具有以多线程方式进行编程的功能，因此前景更为广阔，