Comparison of Transient Hygrothermal Modelling Against In Situ Measurement for Thermal Transmittance

Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

Thermal transmittance (U-values) of exterior walls represents a source of uncertainty when estimating the energy performance of dwellings. It has been noted in research that the standard calculation methodology for thermal transmittance should be improved. Subsequently, hygrothermal analysis has been used as an accurate building design tool due to its incorporation of climate-specific effects on construction assemblies such as moisture retention and release. In situ measurement of thermal transmittance could also be an effective tool for evaluating the material performance of assemblies of a building. This paper provides the context, research process and analysis of four case studies situated in Dublin, Ireland. The case studies offer an account of the in situ thermal transmittance of exterior walls and link these to hygrothermally simulated comparisons along with more traditional design U-values. The findings of this paper identify discrepancies between in situ and design U-values, using measurement, hygrothermal simulation and standard method U-value calculations. This study can form the basis for further research on retrofit of the Irish housing stock. Furthermore, the paper offers a source of information for researchers and designers exploring the performance of external walls to anticipate best practice detailing and in situ thermal performance values.

Keywords

Hygrothermal In situ Thermal transmission Case study 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Ahmad, A., Maslehuddin, M., & Al-Hadhrami, L. M. (2014). In situ measurement of thermal transmittance and thermal resistance of hollow reinforced precast concrete walls. Energy and Buildings, 84, 132–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asdrubali, F., D’Alessandro, F., Baldinelli, G., & Bianchi, F. (2014). Evaluating in situ thermal transmittance of green buildings masonries—A case study. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 1, 53–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker, P. (2008). Preliminary results. Scotland: Historic Scotland.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, P. H. (2011). U-values and Traditional Buildings: Historic Scotland Technical Paper 10. In situ measurements and their comparisons to calculated values. Edinburgh: Historic Scotland.Google Scholar
  5. Byrne, A., Byrne, G., Davies, A., & Robinson, A. J. (2013). Transient and quasi-steady thermal behaviour of a building envelope due to retrofitted cavity wall and ceiling insulation. Energy and Buildings, 61, 356–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Corbetta, P. (2003). Social research: Theory, methods and techniques. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed). SAGE Publications, 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, California.Google Scholar
  8. Currie, J., Williamson, J. B., & Stinson, J. (2013). Monitoring thermal upgrades to ten traditional properties. Edinburgh: Historic Scotland.Google Scholar
  9. Doran, S. (2000). Field investigations of the thermal performance of construction elements as built. Glasgow, Scotland: BRE.Google Scholar
  10. Doran, S., & Carr, B. (2008). Thermal transmittance of walls of dwellings before and after application of insulation. Glasgow, Scotland: Energy Saving Trust.Google Scholar
  11. Evangelisti, L., Guattari, C., Gori, P., & Vollaro, D. R. (2015). In situ thermal transmittance measurements for investigating differences between wall models and actual building performance. Sustainability, 7(8), 10388–10398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Flood, C., Scott, P. L., & Gleeson, W. (2016). Application of transient hygrothermal modelling to assess thermal transmittance: A case study in Dublin, Ireland. CIB World Building Congress 2016, Tampere, Finland.Google Scholar
  13. Hulme, J., & Doran, S. (2015). In-situ measurements of wall U-values in English housing. Watford, England: BRE.Google Scholar
  14. Kema. (2008). Demand side management in Ireland: Evaluating the energy efficiency opportunities: Sustainable energy authority Ireland.Google Scholar
  15. Li, F. G. N., Smith, A. Z. P., Biddulph, P., Hamilton, I. G., Lowe, R., Mavrogianni, V., et al. (2015). Solid-wall U-values: Heat flux measurements compared with standard assumptions. Building Research & Information, 43(2), 238–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maxwell, J. A. (1998). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Google Scholar
  17. Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Applied social research methods series (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Peng, C., & Wu, Z. (2008). In situ measuring and evaluating the thermal resistance of building construction. Energy and Buildings, 40(11), 2076–2082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rasooli, A., Itard, L., & Ferreira, C. I. (2016). A response factor-based method for the rapid in-situ determination of wall’s thermal resistance in existing buildings. Energy and Buildings, 119, 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rhee-Duverne, S., & Baker, P. (2013). Research into the thermal performance of traditional brick walls. London, English Heritage.Google Scholar
  21. Rye, D. C. (2010). U-value report. London: SPAB.Google Scholar
  22. Rye, D. C., & Scott, C. (2012). U-value report revised. London: SPAB.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dublin School of Surveying and Construction Management, Dublin Institute of TechnologyDublinIreland
  2. 2.Coady ArchitectsDublin 6Ireland

Personalised recommendations