ASSESSMENT OF ENERGY PERFORMANCE AND THERMAL BEHAVIOR OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING

Year 2019, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 21 - 42, 11.03.2020

Ayse Zelal Tugrul

https://doi.org/10.23884/IJESG.2019.4.1.03

Abstract

This study provides a comprehensive analysis on the impacts of passive and active design strategies with regard to energy efficiency and thermal comfort of a building in three different climate conditions, over a case study. A single-family building has been simulated to determine energy consumption and internal thermal comfort based on static (ISO 7730:2005) and adaptive thermal comfort (EN 15251:2007) criteria. A serious of simulations were conducted to optimize the building envelope by using Trnsys 17. The study carried out the results of different design options by the implementation of varied thermal mass, natural ventilation, shading, plant system and heat exchanger options for Lystrup, Paris and Rome climates. The results of simulations point out that a single building strategy without a promoter energy-driven strategy, is not enough to obtain an energy efficient building.

Keywords

: Thermal Comfort, Building Envelope, Low-energy Residential Building

References

• I. Sartori, A. Napolitano, A. J. Marszal, S. Pless, P. Torcellini, and K. Voss, “Criteria for definition of net zero energy buildings,” in Proceedings of EuroSun, 2010.
• X. Wang, D. Chen, and Z. Ren, “Assessment of climate change impact on residential building heating and cooling energy requirement in Australia,” Build. Environ., vol. 45, no. 7, pp. 1663–1682, 2010.
• J. Ü. Pfafferott, S. Herkel, D. E. Kalz, and A. Zeuschner, “Comparison of low-energy office buildings in summer using different thermal comfort criteria,” Energy Build., vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 750–757, 2007.
• A. Gagliano, F. Patania, F. Nocera, A. Ferlito, and A. Galesi, “Thermal performance of ventilated roofs during summer period,” Energy Build., vol. 49, pp. 611–618, Jun. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.03.007.
• X. Chen, H. Yang, and L. Lu, “A comprehensive review on passive design approaches in green building rating tools,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 50, pp. 1425–1436, 2015.
• B. W. Olesen, “The philosophy behind EN15251: Indoor environmental criteria for design and calculation of energy performance of buildings,” Energy Build., vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 740–749, Jul. 2007, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2007.02.011.
• G. Salvalai, J. Pfafferott, and M. M. Sesana, “Assessing energy and thermal comfort of different low-energy cooling concepts for non-residential buildings,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 76, pp. 332–341, 2013.
• E. Iso, “7730: 2005,” Ergon. Therm. Environ.-Anal. Determ. Interpret. Therm. Comf. Using Calc. PMV PPD Indices Local Therm. Comf. Criteria, 2005.
• K. Ulgen, “Experimental and theoretical investigation of effects of wall’s thermophysical properties on time lag and decrement factor,” Energy Build., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 273–278, 2002.
• A. Gagliano, F. Patania, F. Nocera, and C. Signorello, “Assessment of the dynamic thermal performance of massive buildings,” Energy Build., vol. 72, pp. 361–370, 2014.
• H. Asan, “Numerical computation of time lags and decrement factors for different building materials,” Build. Environ., vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 615–620, 2006.
• U. E. N. I. di Unificazione, “UNI EN ISO 13786,” Therm. Perform. Build. Compon.-Dyn. Therm. Charact.-Calc. Methods, 2008.