A comparison of standardized calculation methods for in situ measurements of facades U-value
In recent years, a growing concern has been how to determine the actual thermal behaviour of façades in their operational stage, in order to establish appropriate energy-saving measures. This paper aims at comparing standardized methods for obtaining the actual thermal transmittance of existing buil...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2016 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) |
| Repositorio: | UPCommons. Portal del coneixement obert de la UPC |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:upcommons.upc.edu:2117/132231 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/2117/132231 https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.08.072 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Insulation (Heat) Facades U-value calculation Thermal transmittance Average method Dynamic method In-situ measurements Facade Aïllament tèrmic Façanes Àrees temàtiques de la UPC::Edificació::Instal·lacions i acondicionament d'edificis::Aïllament acústic i tèrmic |
| Sumario: | In recent years, a growing concern has been how to determine the actual thermal behaviour of façades in their operational stage, in order to establish appropriate energy-saving measures. This paper aims at comparing standardized methods for obtaining the actual thermal transmittance of existing buildings’ façades, specifically the average method and the dynamic method defined by ISO 9869-1:2014, to verify which best fits theoretical values. The paper also aims to promote the use of the dynamic method, and facilitate its implementation. Differences between the theoretical U-value and the measured U-value obtained using the average and dynamic methods were calculated in three case studies, and then compared. The results showed that differences between the theoretical and the measured U-value were lower when the dynamic method was used. Particularly, when testing conditions were not optimal, the use of the dynamic method significantly improved the fit with the theoretical value. Moreover, measurements of the U-value using the dynamic method with a sufficiently large dataset showed a better fit to the theoretical U-value than the results of other dynamic methods proposed by authors. Further research should consider the optimum size of the dataset to obtain a measured U-value that is correctly adjusted to the theoretical U-value. |
|---|