Advanced

Daylight and energy performance of a double and single skin facade in a cold climate

Winrow, Julie LU (2019) AEBM01 20191
Energy and Building Design
Department of Architecture and Built Environment
Abstract
The objective of this thesis was to investigate how double skin facades (DSFs) meet daylight and energy requirements compared to single skin facades (SSFs), also considering the life cycle costing (LLC) of both solutions. A South facing, an unobstructed glazed office building in Sweden was used as a basic building object, where SSFs and DSFs were iteratively applied. A mid-level floor was chosen as representative for energy and daylight conditions of the entire building, where various office configurations were investigated. Energy simulations were carried out using the software IDA ICE. The daylighting simulations were performed with the 3D modelling program Rhinoceros incorporating Grasshopper and the Ladybug and Honeybee plugins. An LCC... (More)
The objective of this thesis was to investigate how double skin facades (DSFs) meet daylight and energy requirements compared to single skin facades (SSFs), also considering the life cycle costing (LLC) of both solutions. A South facing, an unobstructed glazed office building in Sweden was used as a basic building object, where SSFs and DSFs were iteratively applied. A mid-level floor was chosen as representative for energy and daylight conditions of the entire building, where various office configurations were investigated. Energy simulations were carried out using the software IDA ICE. The daylighting simulations were performed with the 3D modelling program Rhinoceros incorporating Grasshopper and the Ladybug and Honeybee plugins. An LCC analysis was performed over a life span of 100 years. Visual comfort studies for various DSFs variations were undertaken. The energy study results indicated that SSFs performed significantly better that DSFs options. However, none of the studied options was able to meet the Swedish building regulations BBR (Boverkets byggregler, 2019) or the Miljöbyggnad version 3.0 environmental standards. For the LLC investigations, the SSF resulted in the lowest costs. However, the DSF performed better in terms of daylighting, especially regarding the annual glare occurrence. The visual comfort studies of DSFs indicated a considerably improved visual environment compared to SSFs. The introduction of opaque and translucent panels with improved U-values in the DSF construction indicated a potential to improve the energy performance of DSFs. (Less)
Popular Abstract
The objective of this thesis was to investigate how double skin facades (DSFs) meet daylight and energy requirements compared to single skin facades (SSFs), also considering the life cycle costing (LLC) of both solutions. A South facing, an unobstructed glazed office building in Sweden was used as a basic building object, where SSFs and DSFs were iteratively applied. A mid-level floor was chosen as representative for energy and daylight conditions of the entire building, where various office configurations were investigated. Energy simulations were carried out using the software IDA ICE. The daylighting simulations were performed with the 3D modelling program Rhinoceros incorporating Grasshopper and the Ladybug and Honeybee plugins. An LCC... (More)
The objective of this thesis was to investigate how double skin facades (DSFs) meet daylight and energy requirements compared to single skin facades (SSFs), also considering the life cycle costing (LLC) of both solutions. A South facing, an unobstructed glazed office building in Sweden was used as a basic building object, where SSFs and DSFs were iteratively applied. A mid-level floor was chosen as representative for energy and daylight conditions of the entire building, where various office configurations were investigated. Energy simulations were carried out using the software IDA ICE. The daylighting simulations were performed with the 3D modelling program Rhinoceros incorporating Grasshopper and the Ladybug and Honeybee plugins. An LCC analysis was performed over a life span of 100 years. Visual comfort studies for various DSFs variations were undertaken. The energy study results indicated that SSFs performed significantly better that DSFs options. However, none of the studied options was able to meet the Swedish building regulations BBR (Boverkets byggregler, 2019) or the Miljöbyggnad version 3.0 environmental standards. For the LLC investigations, the SSF resulted in the lowest costs. However, the DSF performed better in terms of daylighting, especially regarding the annual glare occurrence. The visual comfort studies of DSFs indicated a considerably improved visual environment compared to SSFs. The introduction of opaque and translucent panels with improved U-values in the DSF construction indicated a potential to improve the energy performance of DSFs. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Winrow, Julie LU
supervisor
organization
course
AEBM01 20191
year
type
H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
subject
keywords
Double skin facades, Daylighting, Visual comfort, Life cycle costing, Energy efficiency.
language
English
additional info
Summary

The objective of this thesis was to investigate how double skin facades (DSFs) meet the visual, thermal and energy requirements compared to single skin facades (SSFs). Current Swedish building regulations and environmental certifications require increased energy efficiency and the reduction of CO2 emissions. The two façade typologies were tested against these regulations and certifications to investigate how they perform and/or comply with the regulations. A closed cavity base case DSF-CCF was studied in addition to a DSF with a vented cavity and the SSFs with both external and inter-pane shading devices. The scope of the study included: energy, daylighting, visual comfort, and life cycle costing (LLC).

A base case building was used as the main study object, where façade variations were iteratively applied. The base case building was a highly glazed multi-storey office building located in Malmö, Sweden (lat. long.). The site had a South orientation, which was unobstructed due to adjacent train tracks. A mid-level floor was chosen for the investigation as a representative for the average energy and daylight conditions. Different office types were studied including a South facing cell office, South-West and South-East, dual aspect corner offices, and an open plan office. An initial daylight analysis between the DSF and SSF allowed to size window openings to produce equivalent daylight factor (DF) median levels. Energy simulations were then carried out using the software IDA ICE, where the glazing for both options had the same g-, U-value and visual light transmittance (Tvis). For the daylight studies, the 3D modelling program Rhinoceros was used in conjunction with Grasshopper and the Ladybug and Honeybee plugins. Improved energy studies were then undertaken with improved g-value and Tvis. An LCC study was carried out for the various façade options which included: initial and replacement façade costs, energy, cleaning and maintenance to ascertain how the various options performed over a life span of 100 years. Visual comfort studies for various DSF improvements were also undertaken. These included the introduction of opaque, translucent panels of various Tvis and high-level louvres.

The results indicate that the energy intensity of the SSF options was considerably lower than the DSF options. In the LCC analyses, the SSF also performed significantly better in comparison to the DSF, with the SSF inter pane shading performing well due to the increased protection of the shading device provided by the glazing. The main reason for the increased costs associated with the DSF was the reduced life span of the façade made of glass and the increased frequency of replacement required. However, in terms of daylighting, the DSFs performed better than the SSF. Due to a reduced annual glare occurrence and greater visual comfort being observed for the improved DSFs options. The improved DSF provided good visual comfort in the open plan office; the introduction of opaque and translucent panels with improved U-values also considerably improved the energy performance of DSFs. This also enabled the area of clear glazing requiring cleaning and the size of the blinds to be reduced, which has an effect on the LCC of DSFs in the positive direction.

Regarding the energy simulations, it is noteworthy that none of the options (SSFs or DSFs) was able to meet the Swedish building regulations BBR 26 or the Miljöbyggnad version 3.0.
id
8983819
date added to LUP
2019-06-14 13:45:02
date last changed
2019-06-14 13:45:02
@misc{8983819,
  abstract     = {The objective of this thesis was to investigate how double skin facades (DSFs) meet daylight and energy requirements compared to single skin facades (SSFs), also considering the life cycle costing (LLC) of both solutions. A South facing, an unobstructed glazed office building in Sweden was used as a basic building object, where SSFs and DSFs were iteratively applied. A mid-level floor was chosen as representative for energy and daylight conditions of the entire building, where various office configurations were investigated. Energy simulations were carried out using the software IDA ICE. The daylighting simulations were performed with the 3D modelling program Rhinoceros incorporating Grasshopper and the Ladybug and Honeybee plugins. An LCC analysis was performed over a life span of 100 years. Visual comfort studies for various DSFs variations were undertaken. The energy study results indicated that SSFs performed significantly better that DSFs options. However, none of the studied options was able to meet the Swedish building regulations BBR (Boverkets byggregler, 2019) or the Miljöbyggnad version 3.0 environmental standards. For the LLC investigations, the SSF resulted in the lowest costs. However, the DSF performed better in terms of daylighting, especially regarding the annual glare occurrence. The visual comfort studies of DSFs indicated a considerably improved visual environment compared to SSFs. The introduction of opaque and translucent panels with improved U-values in the DSF construction indicated a potential to improve the energy performance of DSFs.},
  author       = {Winrow, Julie},
  keyword      = {Double skin facades,Daylighting,Visual comfort,Life cycle costing,Energy efficiency.},
  language     = {eng},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Daylight and energy performance of a double and single skin facade in a cold climate},
  year         = {2019},
}