AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
Powered by AMiner. Clicking this button will take you away from SciOpen.
Home Building Simulation Article
Article Link
Cite
EndNote(RIS) BibTeX
Collect
Submit Manuscript
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Research Article

Potential of perforated exterior louvers to improve the comfort and energy performance of an office space in different climates

Daniel Uribe1,3, Waldo Bustamante2,3, Sergio Vera1,3( )
Department of Construction Engineering and Management, School of Engineering, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
School of Architecture, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
Center for Sustainable Urban Development, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
Show Author Information

Abstract

Fully glazed building façades often experience high solar heat gains and daylight transmission, resulting in high cooling energy consumption and visual discomfort. The objective of this study was to investigate the potential of perforated exterior louvers for controlling solar heat gains through a fenestration system, providing visual comfort to the occupant and improving the energy performance of an office space in distinct climates (tropical, semiarid, humid subtropical, continental) based on integrated thermal and lighting simulations. The louvers evaluated have 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25% and 30% perforations with 120 and 240 mm louver spacing. This study demonstrates the potential of perforated exterior louvers for controlling solar heat gains and daylight transmission to improve the visual comfort of the occupant and the building energy consumption. Since perforations can significantly influence office performance and occupant comfort, it is crucial for an evaluation of this type of louver to be completed in the early design stages with integrated thermal and lighting simulation tools that are able to address the complex thermal and optical properties of the louvers. Louvers with 120 mm spacing and 5%–20% perforations reduce office energy consumption by 15%–63% (depending on the city) compared with an unshaded window while meeting the visual comfort criteria (sDA300/50% between 96% and 100%, ASE4000/400h of 0% and DGPs perception class A). Additionally, the percentage of perforations and spacing of louvers significantly impact the evaluated performance criteria. CFSs fully cover the window but have evenly distributed perforations outperform shading devices with larger spacing between louvers and louvers without perforations.

Keywords

visual comfortenergy performanceperforated exterior louverssolar heat gainsdaylightintegrated building simulations

References

 
D Appelfeld, A McNeil, S Svendsen (2012). An hourly based performance comparison of an integrated micro-structural perforated shading screen with standard shading systems. Energy and Buildings, 50: 166–176.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
ASHRAE (2013) ASHRAE Handbook—Fundamentals. Atlanta, GA, USA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.
 
L Bellia, C Marino, F Minichiello, A Pedace (2014). An overview on solar shading systems for buildings. Energy Procedia, 62: 309–317.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
JM Blanco, P Arriaga, E Rojí, J Cuadrado (2014). Investigating the thermal behavior of double-skin perforated sheet façades: Part A: Model characterization and validation procedure. Building and Environment, 82: 50–62.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
B Bueno, J Wienold, A Katsifaraki, TE Kuhn (2015). Fener: A radiance-based modelling approach to assess the thermal and daylighting performance of complex fenestration systems in office spaces. Energy and Buildings, 94: 10–20.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
W Bustamante, S Vera, A Prieto, C Vásquez (2014). Solar and lighting transmission through complex fenestration systems of office buildings in a warm and dry climate of Chile. Sustainability, 6: 2786–2801.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
W Bustamante, D Uribe, S Vera, G Molina (2017). An integrated thermal and lighting simulation tool to support the design process of complex fenestration systems for office buildings. Applied Energy, 198: 36–48.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
CIBSE (2006). CIBSE Guide A: Environmental Design. London: The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers.
 
P Correia da Silva, V Leal, M Andersen (2013). Occupants interaction with electric lighting and shading systems in real single-occupied offices: Results from a monitoring campaign. Building and Environment, 64: 152–168.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
Y-C Chan, A Tzempelikos (2013). Efficient venetian blind control strategies considering daylight utilization and glare protection. Solar Energy, 98: 241–254.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
Y-C Chan, A Tzempelikos (2015). Daylighting and energy analysis of multi-sectional facades. Energy Procedia, 78: 189–194.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
L Heschong, K Van Den Wymelenberg, M Andersen, N Digert, L Fernandes, et al. (2013). Approved methods: IES spatial daylight autonomy (sDA) and annual sunlight exposure (ASE). Infoscience Standard, LM-83-12. New York: Illuminating Engineering Society.
 
S Hoffmann, ES Lee, A McNeil, L Fernandes, D Vidanovic, A Thanachareonkit (2016). Balancing daylight, glare, and energy-efficiency goals: An evaluation of exterior coplanar shading systems using complex fenestration modeling tools. Energy and Buildings, 112: 279–298.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
IEA (2012). Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS): 2012 CBECS Survey Data. U.S. Energy Information Administration. Available at http://www.eia.gov. Accessed 30 Aug 2016.
 
A Kirimtat, BK Koyunbaba, I Chatzikonstantinou, S Sariyildiz (2016). Review of simulation modeling for shading devices in buildings. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 53: 23–49.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
K Konis (2013). Evaluating daylighting effectiveness and occupant visual comfort in a side-lit open-plan office building in San Francisco, California. Building and Environment, 59: 662–677.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
TE Kuhn (2006). Solar control: A general evaluation method for facades with venetian blinds or other solar control systems. Energy and Buildings, 38: 648–660.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
A Laouadi, A Parekh (2007). Optical models of complex fenestration systems. Lighting Research & Technology, 39: 123–145.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
LBNL (2014). WINDOW 7.3. Berkeley, CA, USA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
 
DHW Li, JC Lam (2000). Solar heat gain factors and the implications to building designs in subtropical regions. Energy and Buildings, 32: 47–55.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
M Liu, KB Wittchen, PK Heiselberg (2015). Control strategies for intelligent glazed façade and their influence on energy and comfort performance of office buildings in Denmark. Applied Energy, 145: 43–51.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
O Lucon, D Ürge-Vorsatz, AZ Ahmed, H Akbari, P Bertoldi, et al. (2014). Buildings. In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
 
AG Mainini, T Poli, M Zinzi, A Speroni (2014). Spectral light transmission measure of metal screens for glass façades and assessment of their shading potential. Energy Procedia, 48: 1292–1301.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
A McNeil (2013). The Three-Phase Method for Simulating Complex Fenestration with Radiance. Available at https://www.radiance-online.org//learning/tutorials/Tutorial-ThreePhaseMethod.pdf.
 
A McNeil, ES Lee (2013). A validation of the Radiance three-phase simulation method for modelling annual daylight performance of optically complex fenestration systems. Journal of Building Performance Simulation, 6: 24–37.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
A McNeil, CJ Jonsson, D Appelfeld, G Ward, ES Lee (2013). A validation of a ray-tracing tool used to generate bi-directional scattering distribution functions for complex fenestration systems. Solar Energy, 98: 404–414.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
A McNeil (2015a). Daylight simulation of complex fenestration systems. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium Architecture and Engineering of Building Envelopes, Santiago, Chile.
 
A McNeil (2015b). genBSDF Tutorial. Available at https://www.radiance-online.org/learning/tutorials/Tutorial-genBSDF_v1.0.1.pdf. Accessed 3 10.03.2016.
 
G Molina, S Vera, W Bustamante (2014). Groundhog—Lighting analysis within Sketchup. Available at http://igd-labs.github.io/ Groundhog.
 
G Molina, W Bustamante, J Rao, P Fazio, S Vera (2015). Evaluation of radiance’s genBSDF capability to assess solar bidirectional properties of complex fenestration systems. Journal of Building Performance Simulation, 8: 216–225.
Crossref Google Scholar
 
MV Nielsen, S Svendsen, LB Jensen (2011). Quantifying the potential of automated dynamic solar shading in office buildings through integrated simulations of energy and daylight. Solar Energy, 85: 757–768.
Google Scholar
 
NRC (2013). Survey of commercial and institutional energy use: Buildings 2009: Summary Report. Ottawa: Natural Resources Canada.
 
OECD/IEA (2013). Transition to sustainable buildings: Strategies and opportunities to 2050. Available at http://www.iea.org.
 
S Reilly, W Hawthorne (1998). The impact of windows on residential energy use. ASHRAE Transactions, 104(2): 791–798.
Google Scholar
 
H Shen, A Tzempelikos (2012). Daylighting and energy analysis of private offices with automated interior roller shades. Solar Energy, 86: 681–704.
Google Scholar
 
E Shen, J Hu, M Patel (2014). Energy and visual comfort analysis of lighting and daylight control strategies. Building and Environment, 78: 155–170.
Google Scholar
 
F Stazi, S Marinelli, C Di Perna, P Munafò (2014). Comparison on solar shadings: Monitoring of the thermo-physical behaviour, assessment of the energy saving, thermal comfort, natural lighting and environmental impact. Solar Energy, 105: 512–528.
Google Scholar
 
A Tzempelikos, M Bessoudo, AK Athienitis, R Zmeureanu (2010). Indoor thermal environmental conditions near glazed facades with shading devices – Part II: Thermal comfort simulation and impact of glazing and shading properties. Building and Environment, 45: 2517–2525.
Google Scholar
 
A Tzempelikos, H Shen (2013). Comparative control strategies for roller shades with respect to daylighting and energy performance. Building and Environment, 67: 179–192.
Google Scholar
 
S Vera, W Bustamante, G Molina, D Uribe (2016). A flexible and time-efficient schedule-based communication tool for integrated lighting and thermal simulations of spaces with controlled artificial lighting and complex fenestration systems. Journal of Building Performance Simulation, 9: 382–396.
Google Scholar
 
S Vera, D Uribe, W Bustamante, G Molina (2017). Optimization of a fixed exterior complex fenestration system considering visual comfort and energy performance criteria. Building and Environment, 113: 163–174.
Google Scholar
 
J Wienold, J Christoffersen (2006). Evaluation methods and development of a new glare prediction model for daylight environments with the use of CCD cameras. Energy and Buildings, 38: 743–757.
Google Scholar
 
J Wienold (2007). Dynamic simulation of blind controls strategies for visual comfort and energy balance analysis. In: Proceedings of the 10th International IBPSA Building Simulation Conference, Beijing, China.
 
J Wienold (2009). Dynamic daylight glare evaluation. In: Proceeings of the 11th International IBPSA Conference, Glasgow, UK.
 
H Yi, RS Srinivasan, WW Braham (2015). An integrated energy–emergy approach to building form optimization: Use of EnergyPlus, emergy analysis and Taguchi-regression method. Building and Environment, 84: 89–104.
Google Scholar
Building Simulation
Volume 11 Issue 4,
August 2018
Pages 695-708
DOI: 10.1007/s12273-018-0435-y
Cite this article:
Uribe D, Bustamante W, Vera S. Potential of perforated exterior louvers to improve the comfort and energy performance of an office space in different climates. Building Simulation, 2018, 11(4): 695-708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-018-0435-y

502

Views

16

Crossref

N/A

Web of Science

19

Scopus

0

CSCD

Altmetrics
Received: 12 May 2017
Revised: 02 February 2018
Accepted: 05 February 2018
Published: 01 March 2018
© Tsinghua University Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018
Return