Building Simulation

, Volume 6, Issue 4, pp 351–364 | Cite as

Cooling load reduction effect and its mechanism in between-glass cavity and venetian blind operation during the summer season

  • Kwang Ho Lee
  • Taeyeon Kim
  • Garam Lee
  • Jungyun Lee
Research Article Building Thermal, Lighting, and Acoustics Modeling


The proper operation of venetian blinds in between-glass cavity airspaces is one of the most commonly used passive control techniques and can significantly reduce the cooling load and energy use in buildings. This study investigated the cooling load reduction effect of the blind integrated with the cavity operation. A full heat balance analysis was performed using EnergyPlus to provide a detailed understanding of the heat transfer mechanism that takes place around the blind and between-glass cavity. A sensitivity analysis was also carried out to evaluate the effects of different slat angles and blind operation hours. The results show that integration of the blind and between-glass cavity operations can significantly reduce the cooling load in buildings. The cooling load reduction effect of the cavity operation (by approximately 50%) was greater than that of the blind operation (by 5% to 40%, depending on slat angle and operating hours). It was found that the interzone heat transfers between the cavity and the room space and convection heat fluxes from each surface mainly contribute to the total cooling load reduction. In addition, the double-sided blind had a greater potential to reduce the cooling load compared with a conventional single-sided blind due to its greater capability of reflecting direct solar radiation and preventing diffuse solar radiation from penetrating the room space. The results of the study show that the largest reduction of cooling load can be achieved by the cavity operation, followed by the blind operation and the proper selection of operating hours for the blinds.


venetian blinds between-glass cavity operation cooling load heat balance method energy simulation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alzoubi HH, Al-Zoubi AH (2010). Assessment of building facade performance in terms of daylighting and the associated energy consumption in architectural spaces: Vertical and horizontal shading devices for southern exposure facades. Energy Conversion and Management, 51: 1592–1599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ASHRAE (2007). ASHRAE Standard 90.2, Energy-Efficient Design of Low-Rise Residential Buildings. Atlanta, USA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.Google Scholar
  3. ASHRAE (2009a). ASHRAE Fundamentals Handbook, Chapter 19 Energy Estimating and Modeling Methods. Atlanta, USA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.Google Scholar
  4. ASHRAE (2009b). ASHRAE Fundamentals Handbook, Chapter 16 Ventilation and Infiltration. Atlanta, USA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.Google Scholar
  5. Bessoudo M, Tzempelikos A, Athienitis AK, Zmeureanu R (2010). Indoor thermal environmental conditions near glazed facades with shading devices—Part I: Experiments and building thermal model. Building and Environment, 45: 2506–2516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bhavani RG, Khan MA (2009). An intelligent simulation model for blind position control in daylighting schemes in buildings. Building Simulation, 2: 253–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Colaco SG, Kurian CP, George VI, Colaco AM (2008). Prospective techniques of effective daylight harvesting in commercial buildings by employing window glazing, dynamic shading devices and dimming control—A literature review. Building Simulation, 1: 279–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crawley DB, Lawrie LK, Winkelmann FC, Buhl WF, Huang YJ, Pedersen CO, Strand RK, Liesen RJ, Fisher DE, Witte MJ, Glazer J (2001). EnergyPlus: Creating a new-generation building energy simulation program. Energy and Buildings, 33: 319–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. EnergyPlus (2010a). EnergyPlus Engineering Reference. The Reference to EnergyPlus Calculations. Available: Scholar
  10. EnergyPlus (2010b). EnergyPlus Input Output Reference. The Encyclopedic Reference to EnergyPlus Input and Output. Available: Scholar
  11. Gavan V, Woloszyn M, Kuznik F, Roux JJ (2010). Experimental study of a mechanically ventilated double-skin facade with venetian sun-shading device: A full-scale investigation in controlled environment. Solar Energy, 84: 183–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gratia E, De Herde A (2007). The most efficient position of shading devices in a double-skin facade. Energy and Buildings, 39: 364–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. He G, Shu L, Zhang S (2011). Double skin facades in the hot summer and cold winter zone in China: Cavity open or closed? Building Simulation, 4: 283–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. ISO Standard (2001). ISO Standard 15099, Thermal Performance of Windows, Doors and Shading Devices—Detailed Calculations. International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
  15. Korea Energy Management Corporation (2011). Efficient Energy Usage Standard.Google Scholar
  16. Mahdavi A (2008). Predictive simulation-based lighting and shading systems control in buildings. Building Simulation, 1: 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mahdavi A, Mohammadi A, Kabir E, Lambeva L (2008). Shading and lighting operation in office buildings in Austria: A study of user control behavior. Building Simulation, 1: 111–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. van Moeseke G, Bruyere I, De Herde A (2007). Impact of control rules on the efficiency of shading devices and free cooling for office buildings. Building and Environment, 42: 784–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Shen E, Hong TZ (2009). Simulation-based assessment of the energy savings benefits of integrated control in office buildings. Building Simulation, 2: 239–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Simmler H, Fischer U, Winkelmann F (1996). Solar-thermal window blind model for DOE-2. Simulation Research Group Internal Report, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.Google Scholar
  21. Tzempelikos A, Athienitis AK (2007). The impact of shading design and control on building cooling and lighting demand. Solar Energy, 81: 369–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tzempelikos A, Bessoudo M, Athienitis AK, Zmeureanu R (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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Tsinghua University Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kwang Ho Lee
    • 1
  • Taeyeon Kim
    • 2
  • Garam Lee
    • 2
  • Jungyun Lee
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Architectural EngineeringHanbat National UniversityDaejeonR.O. Korea
  2. 2.Department of Architectural EngineeringYonsei UniversitySeoulR.O. Korea

Personalised recommendations