+ All Categories
Home > Engineering > NBEC 2014 - Energy Performance of Windows

NBEC 2014 - Energy Performance of Windows

Date post: 15-Jul-2015
Category:
Upload: rdh
View: 234 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
29
Energy Performance of Windows: Navigating North American and European Window Standards ROBERT LEPAGE, MASC, P.ENG., RDH BUILDING ENGINEERING LTD. VICTORIA, BC ON BEHALF OF BRITTANY HANAM, MASC, P.ENG., AL JAUGELIS, AND GRAHAM FINCH, MASC, P.ENG.
Transcript
Page 1: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Energy Performance of Windows: Navigating North American and European Window Standards

ROBERT LEPAGE, MASC, P.ENG.,

RDH BUILDING ENGINEERING LTD. VICTORIA, BC

ON BEHALF OF BRITTANY HANAM, MASC, P.ENG., AL JAUGELIS, AND GRAHAM FINCH, MASC, P.ENG.

Page 2: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Outline

à Project Origins à  Importance of high performance windows à Applicable Standards à Difference between standards

à  Boundary Conditions à  Topology à  U-Values à  Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC)

à  Impacts on Performance à Summary

Page 3: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Understanding Window Rating Systems

à  Recently completed a large industry research project to look at the validity of the Canadian ER Rating and to evaluate/rank windows in terms of U-values SHGC while also assessing thermal comfort

à  Differences between North American & European ( and Passive House) window rating systems being studied as part of a follow-up task -Today: What we have uncovered so far…

Page 4: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Window Selection for High Performance Homes

à  High performance windows form integral part of strategy to achieve whole building energy target à  Provide necessary solar heat gains

à  Reduce heat loss to a point where window becomes a gain

à  High performance windows provide high interior surface

temperatures for thermal comfort & prevent

condensation/surface mold growth à  Selection of window properties is climate & building

dependant – though general guidelines exist

à  Windows from Europe are rated differently than in North

America

Page 5: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

≤  0.80%

0.8  to  1.01% 1.0  to  1.4

10%

1.4  to  2.089%

North American Window Products

à  What are some of the best performing windows available from North American manufacturers?

à  From the ENERGY STAR Canada product database: à  326 of 583,120 listings have U ≤ 0.8; triples have

surface 6 low-e coating and/or Krypton gas fill, or quad glazing

à  Of these listings, highest SHGC is 0.33 à  How are European manufacturers

achieving low U-values and high SHGC with only triple glazing and argon gas fill?

Page 6: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Window Rating Standards

à  North America – NFRC 100 (U-value) and NFRC

200 (SHGC/VT) à  Computer simulation (THERM) using

laboratory validated test for calibration/confirmation of model

à  NFRC 100& 200 are ISO 15099 compliant methods

à  Europe – ISO 10077-1 (Whole Window U-value),

ISO 10077-2 (Frame U-value), EN-673 (Glazing U-

value), EN-410 (Glazing g-value/SHGC)

à  Passive House Institute Darmstadt (PHI-D) –

references ISO 10077, EN 673, EN 410 à  Plus minimum surface temperature criteria

Page 7: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Key Differences Between Window Rating Standards

à  Boundary conditions (temperatures &

air film resistances)

à  Window geometry

à  Calculation methodologies

(algorithms) for IGU and frame U-

values

à  SHGC (g-factor) for the windows and,

à  Treatment of sloped glazing

Page 8: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Heat Flow Basics for Windows

à  Conduction à  Heat is lost or gained through window when there is a

temperature difference between inside and outside à  Measured in terms of U-value, Btu/hr-ft2-F or W/m2-K

à  Solar Gain à  Heat gained through direct or indirect solar radiation à  Measured in terms of the Solar Heat Gain Coefficient

(SHGC) à  Infiltration

à  Air leakage through cracks in fenestration

Page 9: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Key Difference – Boundary Conditions

Window Rating Standard

Exterior Temperature

Interior Temperature

Exterior Boundary

Condition – W/m2·K

Interior Boundary

Condition – W/m2·K

NFRC 100 & 200

-18 oC (0oF) 21 oC (70oF)

26.0 2.44 -3.29* convection

ISO 10077-1 and 10077-2 and EN 673

0 oC (32oF) 20 oC (68oF) 25.0 7.7 combined

ISO 15099 0 oC (32oF) 20 oC (68oF) 20.0 3.6 * convection

Passive House Cert. Criteria

-10 oC (14oF) 20 oC (68oF) 25.0 7.7 combined

For U-value Calculations (Insulated Frames)

This matters because temperature affects gas thermal resistance (NFRC/CEN account differently) and interior/exterior air films add thermal resistance directly

Page 10: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Key Difference – Boundary Conditions

Window Rating Standard

Exterior Temperature

Interior Temperature

Solar Insolation W/

m2

NFRC 100 & 200

32 oC (90oF) 24 oC (75oF)

783

ISO 10077-1 and 10077-2 and EN 673

30 oC (86oF) 25 oC (77oF) 500

Passive House Cert. Criteria

30 oC (86oF) 25 oC (77oF) 500

For SHGC Calculations

Different exterior temperatures create different temperature profiles, and different solar insolation affects solar heat gain calculations. SHGC includes both long and shortwave radiosity of the system.

Page 11: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Key Differences: Standard Sizes

à  NFRC sizes depend on operator type

à  For example:

Fixed: 1.2 m x 1.5 m

Casement – Single: 0.6 m x 1.5 m

  Passive House has one standard size for fixed and operable punched windows – 1.23 m x 1.48 m  German operable windows typically Tilt & Turn – larger sizes

Tilt & Turn: 1.2 m x 1.5 m

Page 12: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Key Difference: Window Geometry – Design

European (EU) Style Window North American (NA) Style Window

Operable Hardware Preference – EU (Inswing) vs NA (Outswing)

EU Frames tend to be deeper (avg. ~4.75”) than NA frames (avg. 2.75”)

EU glazing spacer buried within frame vs inline with NA frame sightline

SAME Argon & SAME low-e emissivity coatings But Different Results!

IGU gap, 1/2” optimum under NA NFRC vs 5/8” optimum under EU CEN/ISO

More standard EU 4mm vs NA 3mm glass panes

Page 13: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Key Difference: Rating Procedures for U-Values

ISO 10077 – European Style Window NFRC 100 – North American Style Window

Uframe x Aframe

Standard Window Size 1.23m wide x 1.48m high (48” x 58 ¼”)

Standard Window Size 1.2m wide x 1.5m high (47 ¼” x 59”)

Uglazing x Aglazing

ψspacer x L glazed perimeter

ψinstall x L window perimeter

Uframe x Aframe

Uglazing x Aglazing

Uedge glz x Aedge

glz 2.5”

Uedge glz (NFRC) can be converted into a ψedge glz EN/ISO relatively easily (but not vice versa)

Page 14: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Key Difference: Rating Procedure for SHGC

ISO 10077 – European Style Window NFRC 100 – North American Style Window

g-value in Europe / SHGC in North America,

g-value provided for center of glass only (neglects frames) Convert to whole window by multiplying by glass/window ratio (becomes lower by 20-40%+)

SHGC provided for whole window (includes frame effect) Convert to just glazing by dividing by glass/window ratio (becomes higher by 15-25%+)

Many European glazing manufacturers also use low-iron glass to get the SHGC a few percent higher

Page 15: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Key Differences: Algorithms

à  The NFRC algorithm for centre of glass U-value are more

accurate

à  NFRC follows ISO 15099, Passive House follows ISO

10077-2 and EN 673 à  Footnote in ISO 10077-2, section 6.2 (reference to EN

673):

“NOTE The correlations for high aspect ratio cavities [in glazing] used in EN 673 and ISO 10292 tend to give low

values for the equivalent thermal conductivity. More accurate correlations are given in ISO 15099.”

Page 16: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

How do these differences affect energy performance?

à  Study evaluated U-value, solar heat gain of three

windows using NFRC and ISO/PHI methods à  North American Vinyl Frame

à  North American Fibreglass Frame

à  European Vinyl Frame

à  Each window had same

glass, gas fill and spacer

à  Showed how same product

performs under different

rating systems

Page 17: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Centre of Glass U-Value

à  Triple glazing, argon gas fill, two low-e coatings à  Big difference between U-values for NFRC and ISO methods

and standard temperatures

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

10 12 14 16 18 20

Centre  of  G

lass  U-­‐Value

,  W/m

2 -­‐K

Gap  Size,  mm

NFRC,  -­‐18°C

ISO,  0°C

Page 18: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Centre of Glass U-Value

à  Triple glazing, argon gas fill, two low-e coatings à  Differences when only changing exterior temperature of

methodology

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

10 12 14 16 18 20

Centre  of  G

lass  U-­‐Value

,  W/m

2 -­‐K

Gap  Size,  mm

NFRC,  -­‐18°C

NFRC,  0°C

ISO,  -­‐18°C

ISO,  0°C

Page 19: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

10 12 14 16 18 20

Centre  of  G

lass  U-­‐Value

,  W/m

2 -­‐K

Gap  Size,  mm

NFRC,  -­‐18°C

NFRC,  -­‐7°C

NFRC,  0°C

NFRC,  5°C

ISO,  -­‐18°C

ISO,  -­‐7°C

ISO,  0°C

ISO,  5°C

Centre of Glass U-Value

à  Triple glazing, argon gas fill, two low-e coatings à  Add in climate-specific temperatures for Passive House

certification…

Page 20: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

10 12 14 16 18 20

Centre  of  G

lass  U-­‐Value

,  W/m

2 -­‐K

Gap  Size,  mm

NFRC,  -­‐18°C

NFRC,  -­‐7°C

NFRC,  0°C

NFRC,  5°C

ISO,  -­‐18°C

ISO,  -­‐7°C

ISO,  0°C

ISO,  5°C

Centre of Glass U-Values

à  Examples à  12.7 mm gap: NFRC U-0.72, ISO U-0.70

à  18 mm gap: NFRC U-0.73, ISO U-0.57

Page 21: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

10 12 14 16 18 20

Centre  of  G

lass  U-­‐Value

,  W/m

2 -­‐K

Gap  Size,  mm

NFRC,  -­‐18°C

NFRC,  -­‐7°C

NFRC,  0°C

NFRC,  5°C

ISO,  -­‐18°C

ISO,  -­‐7°C

ISO,  0°C

ISO,  5°C

Centre of Glass U-Values

à  Optimal gap size different for NFRC and ISO

NFRC optimal gap size is approx. 13 mm

ISO optimal gap sizes are larger, approx.18 mm

Page 22: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Centre of Glass U-Values

à  Six other IGU configurations were simulated

à  Biggest difference in U-values for larger gap sizes à  Double glazing 15.875 mm gaps

à  Triple glazing 12.7 mm gaps

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.8

Double  -­‐High  Solar  Gain

Double  -­‐Low  Solar  Gain

Triple  -­‐High  Solar  Gain

Triple  -­‐Low  Solar  Gain

Centre  of  G

lass  U-­‐Value

,  W/m

2-­‐K

NFRC

ISO

19% 23%

0% 2%

Page 23: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

Fixed  -­‐  Head Fixed  -­‐  Sill Fixed  -­‐  Jamb

Triple  -­‐  180/180

Fram

e  U-­‐Value

,  W/m

2 -­‐K

Triple  Glazed  North  American  Vinyl  Frame  Window

NFRC

ISO

Frame U-Values

à  NFRC frame U-values determined with actual IGU and

spacer; ISO values determined with ‘calibration panel’ of

specified conductivity – lower ISO frame U-values

à  Also different standard material properties, e.g. fibreglass

11% to 16% difference

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.4

Fixed  -­‐  Head Fixed  -­‐  Sill Fixed  -­‐  Jamb

Triple

Fram

e  U-­‐Value

,  W/m

2 -­‐K

Triple  Glazed  Fibreglass  Frame  Window

NFRC

ISO

2% to 4% difference

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.2

Fixed  -­‐  Head Fixed  -­‐  Sill Fixed  -­‐  Jamb

Passive  House  Triple

Fram

e  U-­‐Value

,  W/m

2 -­‐K

Triple  Passive  House  European  uPVC  Window

NFRCISO

13% to 16% difference

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6

ISO  Frame  U-­‐Value

NFRC  Frame  U-­‐Value

No Correlation!

Page 24: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

-­‐15%

-­‐10%

-­‐5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

Fixed Operable Fixed Operable

Triple  -­‐  180/180 Triple  -­‐  366/180

Percent  Difference  in  NFRC  &  ISO  U-­‐Values  for  Triple  Glazed  Windows

North  American  Vinyl

North  American  Fibreglass

European  Vinyl

Whole Product U-Values

à  Highest percent difference in window U-values was 18%

ISO Lower U-Values

NFRC Lower U-Values

Triple - High Solar

Triple - Low Solar

Page 25: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Solar Heat Gain Values

à  Centre of glass NFRC values were 1% to 8% lower than ISO

à  Greater difference for low solar gain glazing

à  Big difference between centre of glass and whole product

values!

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Double  -­‐  180 Double  -­‐  366 Triple  -­‐  180/180 Triple  -­‐  366/180

Solar  H

eat  G

ain  Co

efficient

NFRC  Centre  of  GlassISO  Centre  of  GlassNFRC  Fixed  SHGCNFRC  Operable  SHGC

Fixed: 18% - 19% reduction Operable: 46% - 48% reduction

Double High Solar

Double Low Solar

Triple Low Solar Triple High Solar

Page 26: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Summary – Biggest Difference?

à  Many differences, but a significant one is centre of glass

U-value calculations

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.8

Double  High  SolarNA  Vinyl

Double  High  SolarNA  Fibreglass

Double  High  SolarEU  uPVC

Triple  High  SolarNA  Vinyl

Triple  High  SolarNA  Fibreglass

Triple  High  SolarEU  uPVC

Centre  of  G

lass  U-­‐Value

,  W/m

2-­‐K

NFRC

ISO

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.8

Double  High  SolarNA  Vinyl

Double  High  SolarNA  Fibreglass

Double  High  SolarEU  uPVC

Triple  High  SolarNA  Vinyl

Triple  High  SolarNA  Fibreglass

Triple  High  SolarEU  uPVC

Windo

w  U-­‐Value

,  W/m

2-­‐K NFRC

ISO

Centre of Glass

U-Values

Whole Window U-Values

Page 27: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Lessons Learned

à  Neither NFRC nor ISO system is “better” à  NFRC uses more accurate algorithms, compares all

products using the same conditions

à  PHI uses more realistic climate design conditions,

components allow for better energy modeling

à  Today products are optimized to perform best under

the rating regimes in effect in Europe, North America à  Rating regimes drive product design

à  North American simulation tools have the capability to

model products for Passive House standards

Page 28: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Summary and Conclusions

à  NFRC and EN/ISO calculate and report window U-values and SHGC differently and under different conditions (apples vs oranges) à  Neither is necessarily better, both have limitations

à  Careful what values you input into energy models (PHPP is

EN/ISO calibrated, most other NA software uses NFRC) – “NFRC values appear conservative, EN/ISO values appear optimistic”

à  Design for your climate/site/building – guidelines exist à  U-value specification to meet energy target & comfort/surface

temperature criteria à  SHGC to meet energy target & thermal comfort (but watch

overheating without shading)

Page 29: NBEC 2014  -  Energy Performance of Windows

Questions

Robert Lepage [email protected] – 250.479.1110


Recommended