architectural guidebook for high energy efficiency ... architectural... · architectural guidebook...
TRANSCRIPT
Architectural Guidebook for High Energy Efficiency Building Design
15.06.2015 Dr.-Ing. Robert Himmler
1. Background to the Building Energy Code 2. Evaluation of BEC for 257 Buildings in
Thailand 3. Energy performance labelling of buildings 4. Suggestions for a architectural
guidebook
2 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Background to this study
• Building Energy Code (BEC) was developed in Thailand since 1995 and approved by Cabinet in 2009
• After first development, BEC standards did not change, while technology may have improved over past 10 years
• Thailand’s Energy Efficiency Development Plan (EEDP) sees BEC implementation as high priority
• Thailand’s EEDP suggests to introduce and implement Building Energy Labels
Objective of TGP-EEDP • In order to improve uptake of Building Energy Code, it is relevant to
know what is the state of the art in energy efficiency of new buildings • Analysis of state of the art may lead to adjustment of BEC standards • In order to introduce Building Energy Labels, (adjusted) BEC
standards should be basis for labels
3 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
How the Building Energy Code works
Thai Building Energy Code (BEC)
System Performance Compliance
Whole Building Energy Compliance
Roof Thermal Transfer Value RTTVP<RTTVR
Lighting Power Density
LPDP<LPDR
coefficient of performance (of an air-conditioning system)
COPP >COPR
Overall Thermal Transfer Value OTTVP<OTTVR
Proposed Building
Reference Building <
4 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Calculation of OTTV / RTTV
OTTV = (1-WWR)·(TDeq)·UW + WWR ·∆T ·Uf + WWR ·SHGC ·SC ·ESR
Equivalent temperature difference (wall orientation, solar absorption, heat capacity)
U-value walls
Temperature difference
U-value windows
Solar Heat Gain Coefficient
Shading Coefficient
Effective Solar Radiation
Wall Window Shading
window-to- wall ratio
window-to- wall ratio
window-to- wall ratio
5 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Evaluation of BEC for Buildings in Thailand
6 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Overview of evaluated buildings
! A total of 257 buildings!
Building(Type(Public'Buildings' Private'Buildings' Total'
Exis6ng'Building'
New''Building'
Rewarded'Building'
Exis6ng'Building'
New''Building'
Rewarded'Building'
Buildings''
Office'Building' 19' 28' 3' 0' 4' 1' 55'
Department'store' 0' 0' 0' 4' 1' 3' 8'
Condominium' 9' 2' 1' 6' 24' 0' 42'
Hospital' 2' 33' 0' 0' 0' 0' 35'
Hotel' 2' 5' 0' 1' 6' 0' 14'
Educa6onal'Ins6tute' 15' 74' 0' 0' 0' 0' 89'
Conven6on'Building' 5' 9' 0' 0' 0' 0' 14'
7 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Data analysed in this study
- OTTV (Overall Thermal Transfer Value) - RTTV (Roof Thermal Transfer Value) - LPD (Lighting Power Density) - COP (Coefficient of Performance) was not possible,
because data was missing - Whole building energy compliance
The following diagrams represent office buildings only, however results can be transferred to the other building types.
8 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Average OTTV in Office
• Existing Buildings perform better than new buildings • Technically it is no problem to achieve lower
OTTV values ("rewarded buildings) • Rewarded Buildings already perform much better
than current BEC requirement
9 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Comparison of existing and new office buildings
Existing Buildings (KMUTT Campus) Rewarded Buildings
Façade Properties (low OTTV): • Single glazing • No coating • Window to wall ratio: <50 % • Fully shaded
Façade Properties (low OTTV): • Double glazing • Coating • Fully glazed • No shading (internal)
New Buildings
Façade Properties (high OTTV): • single glazing • tinted glazing • Fully glazed • No shading (internal)
Future (super low OTTV): • Double glazing • Window to wall ratio: <50 % • Fully shaded
10 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
160'to'10
10'to
'20
20'to
'30
30'to
'40
40'to
'50
50'to
'60
60'to
'70
70'to
'80
80'to
'90
90'to
'100
100'to'110
110'to'120
120'to'130
130'to'140
140'to'150
150'to'160
>'16
0
Num
ber'o
f'buildings'[1]
OTTV'[W/m2]
Statistical'Analyses'of'OTTV'in'Office'Buildings
Rewarded'Buildings'(4)
New'Buildings'(32)
Existing'Buildings'(19)
OTTV in Office
Fail Pass
Limit Value of OTTV
• Around 60 % of all buildings fail system compliance of BEC
• OTTV limit is strict enough, but must be enforced!
11 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
BEC*Reference*Value Existing*Buildings*(19) New*Buildings*(32) Rewarded*Buildings*(4)
RTTV
$[W/m
2 ]
Average$RTTV$in$Office$Buildings
Average RTTV in Office
• Existing Buildings perform better than new buildings!
• Technically it is no problem to achieve lower RTTV values ("rewarded buildings)
12 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
200'to'5
5'to'10
10'to
'15
15'to
'20
20'to
'25
25'to
'30
30'to
'35
35'to
'40
40'to
'45
45'to
'50
50'to
'55
55'to
'60
60'to
'65
65'to
'70
70'to
'75
75'to
'80
>'80
Num
ber'o
f'buildings'[1]
RTTV'[W/m2]
Statistical'Analyses'of'RTTV'in'Office'Buildings
Rewarded'Buildings'(4)
New'Buildings'(32)
Existing'Buildings'(19)
RTTV in Office
Fail Pass
• Around 30 % of all buildings fail BEC • RTTV limit is strict enough, but must
be enforced!
BEC Limit Value of RTTV
13 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
BEC*Reference*Value Existing*Buildings*(19) New*Buildings*(32) Rewarded*Buildings*(4)
LPD$[W
/m2 ]
Average$LPD$in$Office$Buildings
Average Lighting Power Density (LPD) in Office
• All building types are 1/3 below current LPD limit • Therefore LPD has to be tightened • Suggestion: 10 W/m2 (ASHRAE: 9,7 W/m2)
14 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
200'to'2
2'to'4
4'to'6
6'to'8
8'to'10
10'to
'12
12'to
'14
14'to
'16
16'to
'18
18'to
'20
>'20
Num
ber'o
f'buildings'[1]
LPD'[W/m2]
Statistical'Analyses'of'LPD'in'Office'Buildings
Rewarded'Buildings'(4)
New'Buildings'(32)
Existing'Buildings'(19)
LPD in Office
Fail Pass
BEC Limit Value of LDP
15 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Existing.Buildings.(19) New.Buildings.(32)
Energy'Con
sumption''[k
Wh/m
2 a]
Average'Energy'Consumption'in'Office'Buildings
Average.EnergyConsumption(Reference).of.OfficeBuildings.[kWh/m2a]
Average.EnergyConsumption(Proposed).of.OfficeBuildings.[kWh/m2a]
Average End Energy Results (Existing & New Building)
• All buildings fulfil BEC requirements, although OTTV & RTTV is often not sufficient
• Bad OTTV & RTTV is compensated by savings due to LPD (reason: LPD easy to fulfil!)
16 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Statistical Analyses of whole building compliance in Office Buildings
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
90+to+5
5+to+10
10+to
+15
15+to
+20
20+to
+25
25+to
+30
30+to
+35
35+to
+40
40+to
+45
45+to
+50
50+to
+55
55+to
+60
60+to
+65
65+to
+70
70+to
+75
75+to
+80
>+80
Num
ber'o
f'buildings'[1]
Energy'savings'compare'to'reference'building'[%]
Statistical'Analyses'of'Whole'Building'Compliance'in'Office'Buildings
Rewarded+Buildings+(4)
New+Buildings+(32)
Existing+Buildings+(19)Because of lax LPD requirements savings seem to be substantial
17 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Suggestions for energy performance labelling of buildings
18 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
A labeling system has been developed by Prof. Surapong (as in EEDP)
Suggested Labelling Scheme on the bases of BEC Calculation Method: BEC: Current Building Energy Code HEPS: Higher Energy Performance Standard Level ECON: Economic level NZEB: Net zero energy buildings level " developed on bases of life cycle cost (LCC) calculation for energy saving
measures " suggested requirements are economically efficient!
19 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
OTTV requirements according to a labeling system developed by Prof.Surapong (as in EEDP)
OTTV [W/m2]( Current BEC(
Suggested BEC( BEC+ HEPS HEPS+ ECON ECON+ NZEB
Office Building' 50' 50' 40' 30' 25' 20' 17.5' 15'
Department Store' 40' 40' 32.5' 25' 20' 15' 12.5' 10'
Condominium' 30' 30' 22.5' 15' 12.5' 10' 8.75' 7.5'
Hospital' 30' 30' 22.5' 15' 12.5' 10' 8.75' 7.5'
Hotel' 30' 30' 22.5' 15' 12.5' 10' 8.75' 7.5'
Educational Institute' 50' 50' 40' 30' 25' 20' 17.5' 15'
Convention Center' 40' 40' 32.5' 25' 20' 15' 12.5' 10'
20 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Suggestion for Building Energy Label Scheme
Possible(Label( Current BEC(
Suggested BEC( BEC+ HEPS HEPS+ ECON ECON+ NZEB
((((((((((((((((
Label(becomes(minimum(BEC(requirement(
2015( 2016( 2019 2022 2025 2028 2031 2034
1( 2( 3 4 5
G( F( E D C B A
21 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Timeline of BEC on the example of a office building
0"
10"
20"
30"
40"
50"
60"
0"
10"
20"
30"
40"
50"
60"
Actual"BEC"(2015)"
Suggested"BEC"
(2016)"
BEC+"(2019)"
HEPS"(2022)"
HEPS+"(2025)"
ECON"(2028)"
ECON+"(2031)"
NZEB"(2034)"
Energy'Saving'compa
red'to'actua
l'BEC
'(%)'
Power'Den
sity'(W
/m2)'
OTTV"[W/m2]" RTTV"[W/m2]" LPD""[W/m2]" Energy"Saving"[%]"
2015 2016 2019 2022 2025 2028 2031 2034
BEC
BEC =Suggested
BEC
BEC =BEC+
BEC =HEPS
BEC =HEPS+
BEC =ECON
BEC =ECON+
BEC =NZEP
22 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
How to achieve building labels on the example of OTTV
Current BEC BEC+ HEPS HEPS+ ECON ECON+ NZEB
Orientation South South South South South South South
WWR 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30%
Overhang [m] 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Components
Glazing: Uf =5.8 W/m2K SHGC = 80% Wall: 15 cm Brick
Glazing: Uf =3.53 W/m2K SHGC = 44% Wall: 15 cm Brick5 cm
Glazing: Uf =3.53 W/m2K SHGC = 44% Wall: 15 cm light weight concrete
Glazing: Uf =3.53 W/m2K SHGC = 44% Wall: 15 cm Brick 5 cm Insulation (k=0.04W/mK)
Glazing: Uf =3.53 W/m2K SHGC = 44% Wall: 15 cm Brick 10 cm Insulation (k=0.04W/mK)
Glazing: Uf =1.65 W/m2K SHGC = 20% Wall: 15 cm Concrete (light weight : density 620 kg/m3)
Glazing: Uf =1.65 W/m2K SHGC = 20% Wall: 15 cm Brick 5 cm Insulation (k=0.04W/mK)
OTTVP[W/m2] 46.21 34.66 29.42 20.64 17.37 17.03' 10.82'
OTTVRef [W/m2] 50 40 30 25 20 17.5 15
23 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
0
10
20
30
40
50
60Reference
Rewarded1Building
OTTV$[W/m2]
Are the labeling requirements technically achievable? OTTV comparison of rewarded office buildings
One office building already meets ECON label!
Several office buildings already meet HEPS label
All rewarded office buildings meet new suggested BEC label
Current BEC
Suggested BEC BEC+ HEPS HEPS+ ECON ECON+ NZEB
Bui
ldin
g N
o.6
Bui
ldin
g N
o.8
Bui
ldin
g N
o.2
Bui
ldin
g N
o.18
Bui
ldin
g N
o.7
Bui
ldin
g N
o.4
Bui
ldin
g N
o.15
Bui
ldin
g N
o.13
Bui
ldin
g N
o.5
Bui
ldin
g N
o.17
Bui
ldin
g N
o.16
Bui
ldin
g N
o.14
24 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Conclusions
• Study on 257 buildings shows, that they all fulfil BEC whole building energy requirements
• Current BEC should be tightened by reducing LPD requirements, which will indirectly lead to an improved building envelope
• EEDP suggests building energy labels, which can be used for a future tightening of the BEC
• Energy labels can be used for financial incentive schemes (will be discussed in the afternoon session)
25 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Architectural Guidebook for High Energy Efficiency Building Design
26 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Background and objectives of the guidebook
Background: • Most architects and engineers don’t know how to achieve a
certain OTTV/RTTV value • A lot of investors think it is expensive to install a façade with a
higher quality • Some architects think, a high-performance façade limits their
creativity
Objectives of the guidebook: • Guideline about how to achieve certain OTTV/RTTV values • Suggestions for strategies to achieve cost efficient facades with
low LCC • Examples for aesthetic façade solutions
27 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Option 1a: built examples
Example by GBI Innowall
Section of the Southern Facade
The combination of low Window-to-Wall ratio with overhang shading devices permits achieving low OTTV values even when utilising efficient single glazing insteadof double or triple glazing
GENERAL INFORMATION
OF THE BUILDING
Type of BuildingOffice
LocationBangkok, Thailand
OrientationMain facade facing SouthAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBCCCCCCCC
DimensionsHeightFacade’s lengthHeight of floorOther
Other informationAAAAAAABBBBBBBCCCCCCC
Fiber Glass Insulation is covere by a cement mortar, this system improves the Overall Thermal Resistance of the Building Facade
Designing horizontal overhang shading in southern facades is an efficient measure to reduce the solar radiation throughthe facade
Due to Thailand’s latitude more solar exposure occurson the southern facade
Horizontal Overhang
P. XX
Fiber Glass
Insulation
OTTV < 50.00 W/m²
1- Office Building - Educational Institute
*OTTV =
48.95 W/m²
The OTTV value and other feeatures values were hypothetical assumed and are only utilised for graphical purposes.
*
Uf = 2.50 W/(m²K)SHGC = 45 %
Single Glazing
Conductivity = 0.038 W/mKThickness= 10 cmCovered with mortar
Fiber Glass Insulation
Solar Absorptance 15 %White Coating
Horizontal 1 mOverhang Shading
Example of OTTV < 50 W/m² (BEC) - Building Type AW
indow-to-Wall Ratio = 75 %
28 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Option 1b: built examples
Type of BuildingOffice Buildingtype A
LocationBangkok, Thailand
OrientationSouth
DimensionsHeightFacade’s lengthHeight of floor
MaterialsConcrete
Thickness 15 cm
Type of BuildingOffice Buildingtype A
LocationBangkok, Thailand
OrientationSouth
DimensionsHeightFacade’s lengthHeight of floor
Wndow-to-Wall Ratio = 50%
OverhangShading
Horizontal 1.0 m
Wndow-to-Wall Ratio = 30%
WindowType
Dark-ColouredVT = 0.44
U-Value = 2.50 W/(m²K)SHGC = 46 %
Opaque WallMaterial
Conductivity = 0.16 W/mKDensity = 620 kg/m³
Thickness= 15 cm
ExternalCoating
Cream-ColouredAbsorptance = 0.5
OverhangShading
No Shading
WindowTypeClear
VT = 0.54U-Value = 1.25 W/(m²K)
SHGC = 76 %
Opaque WallMaterial
Conductivity = 1.44 W/mKDensity = 2400 kg/m³
Thickness= 15 cm
ExternalCoating
Cream-ColouredAbsorptance = 0.5
P. XX
*OTTV = 49.99 W/m²
*OTTV = 49.17 W/m²
Offic
e Bui
ldin
g -
OTTV
< 50
W/m
² (BE
C)
1
1
The OTTV value and other feeatures values were hypothetical assumed and are only utilised for graphical purposes.
*
29 © JGSEE/KMUTT . http://www.jgsee.kmutt.ac.th . BEC . 15.05.2015
Option 2: Catalogue with design solutions
S
W E
N
S
W E
N
S
W E
N
OTTV = 48.68 W/m²
OTTV = 50.67 W/m²
OTTV = 48.97 W/m²
OTTV = 54.51 W/m²
OTTV = 40.55 W/m²
Uf = 5.45 W/(m²K)SHGC = 55 %
Single Glazing
Conductivity = 0.038 W/mK Fiber Glass Insulation
Solar Absorptance 30 %White Coating
OTTV = 49.41 W/m²
OTTV = 49.70 W/m²
OTTV = 47.50 W/m²
OTTV = 18.93 W/m²
OTTV = 41.50 W/m²
Uf = 2.86 W/(m²K)SHGC = 30 %
Single Glazing
Conductivity = 0.807 W/mKDensity = 1760 kg/m³
Brick w/Cement Mortar
Solar Absorptance 30 %White Coating
Horizontal 1 mOverhang Shading
OTTV = 47.59 W/m²
OTTV = 29.63 W/m²
OTTV = 28.20 W/m²
OTTV = 28.37 W/m²
OTTV = 24.17 W/m²
Uf = 2.50 W/(m²K)SHGC = 45 %
Single Glazing
Conductivity = 0.16 W/mKDensity = 620 kg/m³
Light Concrete
Solar Absorptance 30 %White Coating
Horizontal 1 mOverhang Shading
Window-to-W
all Ratio = 30 %
Window-to-W
all Ratio = 75 %
Window-to-W
all Ratio = 30 %
Example of OTTV < 50 W
/m² (BEC) - Building Type
OTTV < 50.00 W/m²
1- Office Building - Educational Institute
OTTV < 50.00 W/m²
1- Office Building - Educational Institute
OTTV < 50.00 W/m²
1- Office Building - Educational Institute
Page. XX