Advertisement

Numerical simulation study of BIPV/T double-skin facade for various climate zones in Australia: Effects on indoor thermal comfort

  • Siliang YangEmail author
  • Alessandro Cannavale
  • Deo Prasad
  • Alistair Sproul
  • Francesco Fiorito
Research Article Building Thermal, Lighting, and Acoustics Modeling
  • 18 Downloads

Abstract

Maintaining indoor thermal comfort is crucial for the health and productivity of building occupants. Building envelope plays a major role in influencing the impact of outdoor climate and controlling the indoor thermal conditions. In this paper, comparative analysis of indoor comfortable temperature for four different types of building-integrated photovoltaic/thermal (BIPV/T) building models in a range of climate zones in Australia was conducted using TRNSYS simulation tool. In terms of system operational mode, the four types of BIPV/T building facade systems include a building-integrated photovoltaic single-skin facade (SSF), non-ventilated BIPV/T double-skin facade (BIPV/T-DSF), naturally ventilated BIPV/T-DSF and fan-assisted BIPV/T-DSF. In addition to the operational modes of the facade systems, two types of semi-transparent PV glazing with different visible light transmittance (VLT) were respectively applied to the models as external window glazing. The numerical results showed that the naturally ventilated BIPV/T-DSF with lower VLT (27%) PV glazing maintained a relatively better indoor temperature for the hot climatic conditions compared to the other operational modes, while the non-ventilated BIPV/T-DSF with higher VLT PV glazing (37.5%) offered more comfortable indoor temperature (i.e. 20 to 26 °C for office hours) for the cold climates in Australia. On the other hand, the naturally ventilated BIPV/T-DSF could basically maintain comfortable indoor temperatures from 22 to 27 °C during office hours without mechanical systems for the peak summer times for cool temperate climates in Australia. Moreover, it was found that the thermal insulation effect of semi-transparent PV glazing hardly affected indoor operative temperature in the ventilated modes of the BIPV/T-DSF. According to the sensitivity analysis, the change of U-value of internal window of the DSF would significantly lead to the change of indoor thermal comfort in both ventilated operational modes, but very few changes for the non-ventilated DSF. The variation of cavity depth had distinct impact on the indoor thermal comfort for fan-assisted DSF but slightly affected that of other modes. In addition, the changes of opening ratio for the ventilating louvers and fan airflow rate of the DSF also had a degree of influence on indoor thermal comfort for naturally ventilated DSF and fan-assisted DSF respectively.

Keywords

building-integrated photovoltaic/thermal system (BIPV/T) double-skin facade (DSF) indoor thermal comfort semi-transparent PV glazing TRNSYS simulation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors kindly acknowledge the financial support for this research project was provided by the Faculty of Built Environment, University of New South Wales (Australia) and the Cooperative Research Centre for Low Carbon Living (CRC-LCL). The authors also would like to express the sincere gratitude to Dr. Jinqing Peng, from Hunan University (China) for providing the indispensable data.

References

  1. Aleksandrowicz O, Yezioro A (2018). Mechanically ventilated doubleskin facade in a hot and humid climate: Summer monitoring in an office tower in Tel Aviv. Architectural Science Review, 61: 171–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Architectural Louvers (2010). Model: E4WS Louver Performance Data. Architectural Louvers.Google Scholar
  3. ASHRAE (2002). ASHRAE Guideline 14–2002 for Measurement of Energy and Demand Savings. Atlanta: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers.Google Scholar
  4. ASHRAE (2017). ASHRAE Standard 55–2017. Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy. Atlanta: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers.Google Scholar
  5. Australian Building Codes Board (2015). Climate Zone Map: Australia Wide. Available at https://www.abcb.gov.au/Resources/Tools-Calculators/Climate-Zone-Map-Australia-Wide
  6. Australian Building Codes Board (2016). National Construction Code Volume 1: Building Code of Australia, Class 2 to Class 9 Buildings. Canberra: Australian Building Codes Board.Google Scholar
  7. Aziiz AD, Wonorahardjo S, Koerniawan MD (2018). Effectiveness of Double Skin Facade in Controlling Indoor Air Temperature of Tropical Buildings. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 152: 012016. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/152/1/012016. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barbosa S, Ip K (2016). Predicted thermal acceptance in naturally ventilated office buildings with double skin facades under Brazilian climates. Journal of Building Engineering, 7: 92–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beckman WA, Broman L, Fiksel A, Klein SA, Lindberg E, Schuler M, Thornton J (1994). TRNSYS The most complete solar energy system modeling and simulation software. Renewable Energy, 5: 486–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Biyik E, Araz M, Hepbasli A, Shahrestani M, Yao R, et al. (2017). A key review of building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) systems. Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal, 20: 833–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boyce P, Eklund N, Mangum S, Saalfield C, Tang L (1995). Minimum acceptable transmittance of glazing. Lighting Research and Technology, 27: 145–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cannavale A, Hörantner M, Eperon GE, Snaith HJ, Fiorito F, Ayr U, Martellotta F (2017a). Building integration of semitransparent perovskite-based solar cells: Energy performance and visual comfort assessment. Applied Energy, 194: 94–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cannavale A, Ierardi L, Hörantner M, Eperon GE, Snaith HJ, Ayr U, Martellotta F (2017b). Improving energy and visual performance in offices using building integrated perovskite-based solar cells: A case study in Southern Italy. Applied Energy, 205: 834–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chan ALS, Chow TT, Fong KF, Lin Z (2009). Investigation on energy performance of double skin facade in Hong Kong. Energy and Buildings, 41: 1135–1142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chen C, Chen S, Chuang W, Shieh J (2011). Transparent glass window with energy-saving and heat insulation capabilities. Advanced Materials Research, 314: 10–16.Google Scholar
  16. Christians JA, Schulz P, Tinkham JS, Schloemer TH, Harvey SP, et al. (2018). Tailored interfaces of unencapsulated perovskite solar cells for >1,000 hour operational stability. Nature Energy, 3: 68–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Diaz LM, Southall R (2015). Le Corbusier’s Cité de Refuge: Historical & technological performance of the air exacte. In: Proceedings of at the Le Corbusier: 50 years later, Valencia, Spain. http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/LC2015.2015.796 Google Scholar
  18. Ding W, Hasemi Y, Yamada T (2005). Natural ventilation performance of a double-skin facade with a solar chimney. Energy and Buildings, 37: 411–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Elarga H, Zarrella A, De Carli M (2016). Dynamic energy evaluation and glazing layers optimization of facade building with innovative integration of PV modules. Energy and Buildings, 111: 468–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Freire RZ, Oliveira GHC, Mendes N (2008). Predictive controllers for thermal comfort optimization and energy savings. Energy and Buildings, 40: 1353–1365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ghaffarianhoseini A, Ghaffarianhoseini A, Berardi U, Tookey J, Li DHW, Kariminia S (2016). Exploring the advantages and challenges of double-skin facades (DSFs). Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 60: 1052–1065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Haase M, Wong F, Amato A (2007). Double–skin facades for Hong Kong. Surveying and Built Environment, 18(2): 17–32.Google Scholar
  23. Han J, Lu L, Peng J, Yang H (2013). Performance of ventilated double-sided PV facade compared with conventional clear glass facade. Energy and Buildings, 56: 204–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Höppe P (2002). Different aspects of assessing indoor and outdoor thermal comfort. Energy and Buildings, 34: 661–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hwang R-L, Shu S-Y (2011). Building envelope regulations on thermal comfort in glass facade buildings and energy-saving potential for PMV-based comfort control. Building and Environment, 46: 824–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ioannidis Z, Buonomano A, Athienitis AK, Stathopoulos T (2017). Modeling of double skin facades integrating photovoltaic panels and automated roller shades: Analysis of the thermal and electrical performance. Energy and Buildings, 154: 618–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Joe J, Choi W, Kwon H, Huh J-H (2013). Load characteristics and operation strategies of building integrated with multi-story double skin facade. Energy and Buildings, 60: 185–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kamel RS, Fung AS (2014). Modeling, simulation and feasibility analysis of residential BIPV/T+ASHP system in cold climate—Canada. Energy and Buildings, 82: 758–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (2018). WINDOW: A computer program for calculating total window thermal performance indices. Available at https://windows.lbl.gov/software
  30. Lyons PR, Arasteh D, Huizenga C (2000). Window performance for human thermal comfort. ASHRAE Transactions, 106(1): 594–602.Google Scholar
  31. Mingotti N, Chenvidyakarn T, Woods AW (2011). The fluid mechanics of the natural ventilation of a narrow-cavity double-skin facade. Building and Environment, 46: 807–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Raftery P, Keane M, Costa A (2011). Calibrating whole building energy models: Detailed case study using hourly measured data. Energy and Buildings, 43: 3666–3679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Peng J, Lu L, Yang H (2013). An experimental study of the thermal performance of a novel photovoltaic double-skin facade in Hong Kong. Solar Energy, 97: 293–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Peng J, Lu L, Yang H, Ma T (2015). Comparative study of the thermal and power performances of a semi-transparent photovoltaic facade under different ventilation modes. Applied Energy, 138: 572–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Peng J, Curcija DC, Lu L, Selkowitz SE, Yang H, Zhang W (2016). Numerical investigation of the energy saving potential of a semitransparent photovoltaic double-skin facade in a cool-summer Mediterranean climate. Applied Energy, 165: 345–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Raja IA, Nicol JF, McCartney KJ, Humphreys MA (2001). Thermal comfort: Use of controls in naturally ventilated buildings. Energy and Buildings, 33: 235–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Saadon S, Gaillard L, Giroux-Julien S, Ménézo C (2016). Simulation study of a naturally-ventilated building integrated photovoltaic/thermal (BIPV/T) envelope. Renewable Energy, 87: 517–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Saelens D, Hens H (2001). Experimental evaluation of airflow in naturally ventilated active envelopes. Journal of Thermal Envelope and Building Science, 25: 101–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Saelens D, Roels S, Hens H (2008). Strategies to improve the energy performance of multiple-skin facades. Building and Environment, 43: 638–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Viljoen A, Dubiel J, Wilson M, Fontoynont M (1997). Investigations for improving the daylighting potential of double-skinned office buildings. Solar Energy, 59: 179–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wang C, Peng J, Li N, Wang M, Li X (2017). Study on the operation strategy of ventilated photovoltaic windows in hot-summer and cold-winter zone in China. Procedia Engineering, 205: 2092–2099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Weber A, Koschenz M, Holst S, Hiller M, Welfonder T (2002). TRNFLOW: Integration of COMIS into TRNSYS TYPE 56. In: Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Energy Performance and Indoor Climate, EPIC 2002.Google Scholar
  43. Yang S, Fiorito F, Sproul A, Prasad D (2017). Studies on optimal application of building integrated photovoltaic/thermal facade for commercial buildings in Australia. Paper presented at the Solar World Congress 2017, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Yang S, Fiorito F, Sproul A, Prasad D (2018). Study of building integrated photovoltaic/thermal double-skin facade for commercial buildings in Sydney, Australia. Final Conference of COST TU1403 “Adaptive Facades Network”. Lucerne, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  45. Zhang W, Eperon GE, Snaith HJ (2016). Metal halide perovskites for energy applications. Nature Energy, 1: 16048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zöllner A, Winter ERF, Viskanta R (2002). Experimental studies of combined heat transfer in turbulent mixed convection fluid flows in double skin facades. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 45: 4401–4408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Tsinghua University Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Siliang Yang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alessandro Cannavale
    • 2
  • Deo Prasad
    • 3
  • Alistair Sproul
    • 4
  • Francesco Fiorito
    • 1
    • 5
  1. 1.Faculty of Built EnvironmentUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Department of Sciences in Civil Engineering and ArchitecturePolytechnic University of BariBariItaly
  3. 3.Cooperative Research Centre for Low Carbon Living (CRC-LCL)SydneyAustralia
  4. 4.School of Photovoltaic & Renewable Energy EngineeringUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  5. 5.Department of Civil, Environmental, Land, Building Engineering and ChemistryPolytechnic University of BariBariItaly

Personalised recommendations