DI-UMONS : Dépôt institutionnel de l’université de Mons

Recherche transversale
Rechercher
(titres de publication, de périodique et noms de colloque inclus)
2019-09-02 - Colloque/Présentation - communication orale - Anglais - page(s)

Quinten Julien , Feldheim Véronique , "Application of a mixed method of 1-D equivalent wall to multidimensional geometries: impact on building energy performance" in 16th IBPSA International Conference : Building Simulation 2019, Rome, Italie, 2019

  • Codes CREF : Recherche énergétique (DI2290), Transfert de chaleur (DI2211)
  • Unités de recherche UMONS : Thermique et Combustion (F704)
  • Instituts UMONS : Institut de Recherche en Energétique (Energie)
Texte intégral :

Abstract(s) :

(Anglais) Some building energy software consider heat flux as being 1-D and are not able to consider the dynamic thermal effects of multidimensional details. We have proposed a new equivalent wall method: multidimensional geometries are replaced by 1-D three-layer walls. Equivalent walls of six thermal bridges of a building are validated for realistic boundary conditions (average error on heat flux < 0.5 W/m, error on energy transferred < 0.5%). By using those equivalent walls in energy simulation of the studied building, impact of thermal bridges on cooling needs is multiplied by three and heating/cooling power can be quite different (15/22% of the maximal value), compared to a classic evaluation.

(Anglais) Some building energy software consider heat flux as being 1-D and are not able to consider the dynamic thermal effects of multidimensional details. We have proposed a new equivalent wall method: multidimensional geometries are replaced by 1-D three-layer walls. Equivalent walls of six thermal bridges of a building are validated for realistic boundary conditions (average error on heat flux < 0.5 W/m, error on energy transferred < 0.5%). By using those equivalent walls in energy simulation of the studied building, impact of thermal bridges on cooling needs is multiplied by three and heating/cooling power can be quite different (15/22% of the maximal value), compared to a classic evaluation.

(Anglais) Some building energy software consider heat flux as being 1-D and are not able to consider the dynamic thermal effects of multidimensional details. We have proposed a new equivalent wall method: multidimensional geometries are replaced by 1-D three-layer walls. Equivalent walls of six thermal bridges of a building are validated for realistic boundary conditions (average error on heat flux < 0.5 W/m, error on energy transferred < 0.5%). By using those equivalent walls in energy simulation of the studied building, impact of thermal bridges on cooling needs is multiplied by three and heating/cooling power can be quite different (15/22% of the maximal value), compared to a classic evaluation.

(Anglais) Some building energy software consider heat flux as being 1-D and are not able to consider the dynamic thermal effects of multidimensional details. We have proposed a new equivalent wall method: multidimensional geometries are replaced by 1-D three-layer walls. Equivalent walls of six thermal bridges of a building are validated for realistic boundary conditions (average error on heat flux < 0.5 W/m, error on energy transferred < 0.5%). By using those equivalent walls in energy simulation of the studied building, impact of thermal bridges on cooling needs is multiplied by three and heating/cooling power can be quite different (15/22% of the maximal value), compared to a classic evaluation.

(Anglais) Some building energy software consider heat flux as being 1-D and are not able to consider the dynamic thermal effects of multidimensional details. We have proposed a new equivalent wall method: multidimensional geometries are replaced by 1-D three-layer walls. Equivalent walls of six thermal bridges of a building are validated for realistic boundary conditions (average error on heat flux < 0.5 W/m, error on energy transferred < 0.5%). By using those equivalent walls in energy simulation of the studied building, impact of thermal bridges on cooling needs is multiplied by three and heating/cooling power can be quite different (15/22% of the maximal value), compared to a classic evaluation.