BREASER system concept design and methodology for a ... · BREASER system concept design and methodology for a systemic building . December 2015 (M11) D2.2.: BREASER system concept

[Digitare il testo] [Digitare il testo]

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement N° 637186.

BREASER system concept design and methodology for a systemic building December 2015 (M11)

D2.2.: BREASER system concept design and methodology for a systemic building refurbishment WP 2, T 2.2 Authors: Isabel Lacave, Cristina Criado, Jesus García (ACC); Carlos Ochoa, Guedi Capeluto (TEI); Irene Rafols (ASC); Jose L. Hernandez (CAR); Andrew Ferdinando (LKS); Duygu Basoglu (EKO); Richard Kemp (TNO); Emilio Vega (SOL); Stefano Ellero (STA); Inés Apraiz (TEC);

BREakthrough Solutions for Adaptable Envelopes in building Refurbishment EeB-02-2014 RIA

D2.2 System concept design 2


Technical References

1

PU = Public PP = Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services) RE = Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services) CO = Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services)

Document history

V Date Beneficiary Author(s)

1st 11/05/2015 ACC Isabel Lacave

2nd 15/06/2015 ACC, ASC, CAR, MON, SOL, STA

Isabel Lacave, Irene Rafols, Jose Hernandez, Duygu Basoglu, Andrew Ferdinando, Emilio Vega, Stefano Ellero

3rd 25/07/2015 ACC, EKO, TEC, TEI Isabel Lacave, Duygu Basoglu, Inés Apraiz, Carlos Ochoa

4th 21/09/2015 ACC, TEI Isabel Lacave, Carlos Ochoa

5th 27/10/2015 ACC Isabel Lacave

6th 06/11/2015 ACC Isabel Lacave, Cristina Criado

7th 19/11/2015 ACC Isabel Lacave, Cristina Criado

8th 25/11/2015 ACC, TEI Isabel Lacave, Carlos Ochoa, Guedi Capeluto

9th 09/12/2015 ACC Jesús García, Isabel Lacave

Project Acronym BRESAER

Project Title BREakthrough Solutions for Adaptable Envelopes in building Refurbishment

Project Coordinator

Jesus Garcia Dominguez

ACCIONA INFRAESTRUCTURAS

mailto:[email protected]

Project Duration February 2015 – July 2019 (54 months)

Deliverable No. D2.2

Dissemination level 1 PU

Work Package WP 2 – Design criteria for the integrated system

Task T 2.2 – System concept design and definition of the refurbishment methodology

Lead beneficiary 1. ACC

Contributing beneficiary(ies)

3. ASC; 4. CAR; 5. EKO; 7. MON; 8. NAN; 10. TNO; 11. SOL; 12. STA; 13. TEI; 14. TEC

Due date of deliverable

31 July 2015

Actual submission date

20 December 2015

mailto:[email protected]



0 Summary This deliverable presents the results of the works developed under Task 2.2 “System concept design and definition of the building refurbishment methodology” in the context of WP2 “Design criteria for the integrated system”. In this Task, the conceptual design of the system and the methodology to achieve a systemic building refurbishment overview is defined. The following aspects have been studied: Analysis of possible combinations between innovative elements based on details of their location in the envelope, functionality, interaction between innovative elements and with the existing building, structural advantages and caveats, European standards to be met, commissioning of the system, features available in the building energy management system, etc. System modularity, anchorage and interface elements have been also examined. The objective to know where and how (requirements) each component must be located on the building in terms of architectural design and the system’s limitations. Definition of a representative abstraction of reality based on the characterization and delimitation of building typologies for the EU and its climate zones defined in Task 2.1. The representation of the typologies was made through appropriate dimensions, materials, usage profiles and conditioning systems, suitable for digital input in energy calculation programs. These will constitute the generic base cases from which baseline energy consumption profiles will be calculated using the tool described in Task 2.3.

Examination of the most suitable energy strategies and for each climate zone identified in Task 2.1 was made. These energy strategies take into account energy performance together with thermal and visual comfort. This is achieved through psychrometric charts for human comfort for the selected locations in the climatic zones. The second part of this activity consists in matching the conceptual strategies with functions or operation modes presented by the innovative envelope elements. Conceptual technology modes are used to guide research directions into improvements of the innovative elements according to each climatic zone. The third part of this activity is to filter the conceptual technological modes for suitability according to geographical orientation, as well as for energy self-generation potential. This was done with using whole-building energy simulation software such as EnergyPlus or Trnsys as deemed suitable for the representative locations of Task 2.1. Ranking by energy performance was made, noting the elements or modes that are beneficial for each orientation. Calculations for energy performance, thermal and visual comfort and emissions are considered. A synoptic summary of these efforts is given. The overall objective is to know where and how (requirements) each component must be located on the building in terms of energy performance and comfort. Finally, the overall design methodology has been developed taking into account architectural and energy performance aspects. This methodology has been implemented for the DEMO building and rest of representative base cases.



Table of content

0 SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 3

1 DEFINITION OF THE SYSTEM CONCEPT .............................................................................................. 8

1.1 ANALYSIS OF THE MODULARITY, ANCHORAGE AND INTERACTION AMONG BRESAER COMPONENTS AND THEIR

ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRATION ..................................................................................................................... 11 1.2 ANALYSIS OF THE INTERACTION BETWEEN THE EXISTING ENVELOPE REQUIREMENTS AND BRESAER COMPONENT

FEATURES ............................................................................................................................................... 17 1.3 BRESAER COMPONENTS AESTHETICAL FINISHING POSSIBILITIES .................................................................. 29 1.4 PV INTEGRATION STRATEGY IN BREASER ENVELOPE COMPONENTS ............................................................. 35 1.5 EUROPEAN STANDARDS TO BE MET ...................................................................................................... 36 1.6 FEATURES AVAILABLE IN THE BUILDING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND ITS INTERACTION WITH EXISTING BUILDING ..... 43 1.7 DEFINITION OF THE STEPS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR INSTALLATION AND COMMISSIONING OF THE SYSTEM .............. 45 1.8 SYSTEM’S LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 47 1.9 ARCHITECTURAL SYSTEM CONCEPT AND REFURBISHMENT METHODOLOGY ...................................................... 48

2 DEFINITION OF REPRESENTATIVE SITUATIONS (BASECASES) ............................................................ 52

2.1 RESIDENTIAL BASECASE BUILDING COMPLETE DESCRIPTION ......................................................................... 52 2.2 OFFICE BASECASE BUILDING COMPLETE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................ 57 2.3 EDUCATIONAL BASECASE BUILDING COMPLETE DESCRIPTION ....................................................................... 62

3 DEFINITION OF THE CONCEPTUAL ENERGY STRATEGIES AND IDENTIFICATION WITH CONCEPTUAL TECHNOLOGICAL MODES ..................................................................................................................... 70

3.1 MOST SUITABLE ENERGY STRATEGIES FOR EACH CLIMATE ZONE .................................................................... 70 3.2 CONCEPTUAL STRATEGIES VS. BREASER’S COMPONENTS. ENERGY PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS ..................... 78 3.3 ENERGY ANALYSIS OF ENVELOPE COMPONENT COMBINATIONS .................................................................... 81 3.4 ENERGETIC SYSTEM CONCEPT AND REFURBISHMENT DESIGN METHODOLOGY ................................................ 119

4 OVERALL SYSTEM CONCEPT AND DESIGN METHODOLOGY ............................................................ 123

4.1 OVERALL SYSTEM CONCEPT .............................................................................................................. 123 4.2 DESIGN METHODOLOGY DESCRIPTION AND APPLICATION TO DEMO BUILDING .............................................. 125 4.3 DESIGN METHODOLOGY IMPLEMENTED FOR REFERENCE BUILDINGS ............................................................ 143

5 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................................. 146

6 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................. 148



List of Tables Table 1 – System characteristics...................................................................................................................... 11 Table 2 – System additional characteristics .................................................................................................... 15 Table 3 – Envelope system components for BRESAER .................................................................................... 16 Table 4 – Climate and orientation and BREASER components match ............................................................ 18 Table 5 – Envelope location and interaction with and BREASER components ............................................... 19 Table 6 –BREASER integration strategy with visible architectural elements .................................................. 22 Table 7 – BREASER integration strategy with visible exiting services ............................................................. 27 Table 8 – Summary of characteristics and relevant requirements, assessment test methods and classification standards according to ETAG 034 and EN 13830. ..................................................................... 38 Table 9 – Summary of characteristics and relevant requirements, assessment test methods and classification standards according to Turkish regulation. ............................................................................... 42 Table 10 – Architectural design process based on envelope component possibilities and restrictions related to their architectural integration and interaction with the existing façade/roof characteristics. .................. 49 Table 11 – Detailed reference residential building parameters ...................................................................... 53 Table 12 – Representative parameters for each of the defined climatic zones, residential buildings ........... 56 Table 13 – Total building stock floor area and office building floor area of Czech Republic, France, Italy and Greece. ............................................................................................................................................................ 57 Table 14 – Representative parameters for each of the defined climatic zones, office building ..................... 61 Table 15 – Representative parameters for each of the defined climatic zones, educational building ........... 66 Table 16 – Identification of basic strategies and suitable orientations with BRESAER facade elements ....... 78 Table 17 – Representative conditions for simulation basecase residential module ....................................... 79 Table 18 – Representative conditions for simulation basecase office module ............................................... 79 Table 19 – Representative conditions for simulation basecase educational module ..................................... 80 Table 20 – Common improvements applied to each usage (U-value source: BPIE Data Hub website) .......... 81 Table 21 – Combinations for energy analysis .................................................................................................. 82 Table 22 – DEMO building characteristics analysis. BRESAER’s components integration possibilities ordered by degree of flexibility to define design methodology sequence. ................................................................ 126 Table 23 – Relation between interactions building/BRESAER’s possibilities (flexibility degree) and methodology design stages. .......................................................................................................................... 127 Table 24 – Energy consumption and percentage reduction relative to basecase. Summary for grade 2 options ........................................................................................................................................................... 133 Table 25 – Energy consumption and percentage reduction relative to basecase. Summary for grade 3 options ........................................................................................................................................................... 134 Table 26 – Floor and facade areas to be intervened in the demo building. Preliminary figures. ................. 138 Table 27 – Calculation of proportionality ratio ............................................................................................. 139 Table 28 – Energy savings per floor sector, per floor and total for building. Grade 2 options ..................... 139 Table 29 – Energy savings per floor sector, per floor and total for building. Grade 3 options ..................... 140



List of Figures Figure 1 – BREASER envelope general scheme ............................................................................................... 10 Figure 2 – Plan drawing of Solarwall system ................................................................................................... 12 Figure 3 – Section through Stam panel ........................................................................................................... 12 Figure 4 – Ulma ventilated façade system ...................................................................................................... 13 Figure 5 – Panel dimension comparison ......................................................................................................... 13 Figure 6 – Ascamm dynamic window and blind .............................................................................................. 14 Figure 7 – BRESAER structural system ............................................................................................................. 16 Figure 8 – BRESAER interfaces ......................................................................................................................... 16 Figure 9 – Example SolarDuct. Source: SolarWall group company ................................................................. 20 Figure 10 – Multifunctional Insulated Panel colored by adding pigments: grey range .................................. 30 Figure 11 – Multifunctional Insulated Panel colored by adding pigments: smooth green ............................. 30 Figure 12 – Multifunctional Insulated Panel colored by adding pigments: red coarse ................................... 30 Figure 13 – Multifunctional Insulated Panel colored by adding pigments: yellow coarse.............................. 30 Figure 14 – Multifunctional Insulated Panel colored by painting: light yellow ............................................... 30 Figure 15 – Multifunctional Insulated Panel possible finishing by textured matrix [1] .................................. 31 Figure 16 – Multifunctional Insulated Panel finishing by textured matrix successfully used by STAM .......... 31 Figure 17 – Lightweight Ventilated Façade Panel textured finishing [1] ......................................................... 31 Figure 18 – Lightweight Ventilated Façade Panel colors finishing [1] ............................................................. 32 Figure 19 – Solarwall system possible finishing colours .................................................................................. 33 Figure 20 – Dynamic window made of aluminum components ...................................................................... 34 Figure 21 – Dynamic window aluminum lacquered RAL colors Chart [1] ....................................................... 34 Figure 22 – SolarWall 2 stage system with glazing component. [1] ................................................................ 35 Figure 23 – Interaction of the BEMS with building facilities ........................................................................... 43 Figure 24 – Conceptual diagram of the BEMS ................................................................................................. 44 Figure 25 – Picture of a very similar residential building to that one selected in Bologna, Italy. Source: Google maps. ................................................................................................................................................... 54 Figure 26 – Layout of the East façade of the selected residential building .................................................... 54 Figure 27 – Layout of the West façade of the selected residential building ................................................... 55 Figure 28 – Layout of the North and South façades of the selected residential building ............................... 55 Figure 29 – Layout of first, second, third and fourth floor of the selected residential building ..................... 55 Figure 30 – Layout of ground floor of the selected residential building ......................................................... 56 Figure 31 – Layout of the façade of South façade of the selected office building .......................................... 58 Figure 32 – Layout of the façade of North façade of the selected office building .......................................... 58 Figure 33 – Layout of the façade of West and East façades of the selected office building ........................... 59 Figure 34 – Layout of first, second, third, fourth and ground floor of the selected office building ............... 59 Figure 35 – Layout of the basement floor of the selected office building ...................................................... 60 Figure 36 – Southwest and Southeast façades of KPECB ................................................................................ 62 Figure 37 – Plain view of first floor of KPECB .................................................................................................. 63 Figure 38 – Plain view of second floor of KPECB ............................................................................................. 63 Figure 39 – Plain view of ground floor of KPECB ............................................................................................. 64 Figure 40 – Plain view of basement floor of KPECB ........................................................................................ 64 Figure 41 – Front view of Southeast façade of KPECB .................................................................................... 64 Figure 42 – Front view of Northwest façade of KPECB ................................................................................... 65 Figure 43 – Front view of Southwest (left) and Northeast (right) façades of KPECB ...................................... 65 Figure 44 – Basement floor usages of KPECB .................................................................................................. 67 Figure 45 – Ground floor usages of KPECB ..................................................................................................... 68 Figure 46 – First floor usages of KPECB ........................................................................................................... 68



Figure 47 – Second floor usages of KPECB ..................................................................................................... 68 Figure 48 – Plant Room in the Demo Building (Boiler and pump) .................................................................. 69 Figure 49 – Pyschrometric chart and suggested strategies for Athens, Greece ............................................. 72 Figure 50 – Pyschrometric chart and suggested strategies for Ankara, Turkey .............................................. 73 Figure 51 – Pyschrometric chart and suggested strategies for Bologna, Italy ................................................ 74 Figure 52 – Pyschrometric chart and suggested strategies for Paris, France.................................................. 75 Figure 53 – Pyschrometric chart and suggested strategies for Prague, Czech Republic ................................. 76 Figure 54 – Strategy priority and clustering for the locations ......................................................................... 77 Figure 55 – Simulation results Educational Ankara 1 façade technology ....................................................... 83 Figure 56 – Simulation results Educational Ankara: 2 façade technologies .................................................... 84 Figure 57 – Simulation results Educational Ankara: 3 façade technologies .................................................... 85 Figure 58 – Simulation results Educational Athens: 1 facade technology ...................................................... 86 Figure 59 – Simulation results Educational Athens: 2 facade technologies .................................................... 87 Figure 60 – Simulation results Educational Athens: 3 facade technologies .................................................... 88 Figure 61 – Simulation results Educational Paris: 1 facade technology .......................................................... 89 Figure 62 – Simulation results Educational Paris: 2 facade technologies ....................................................... 90 Figure 63 – Simulation results Educational Paris: 3 facade technologies ....................................................... 91 Figure 64 – Simulation results Educational Prague: 1 facade technology ...................................................... 92 Figure 65 – Simulation results Educational Prague: 2 facade technologies .................................................... 93 Figure 66 – Simulation results Educational Prague: 3 facade technologies .................................................... 94 Figure 67 – Simulation results Offices Athens: 1 facade technology .............................................................. 95 Figure 68 – Simulation results Offices Athens: 2 facade technologies............................................................ 96 Figure 69 – Simulation results Offices Athens: 3 facade technologies............................................................ 97 Figure 70 – Simulation results Offices Bologna: 1 facade technology ............................................................ 98 Figure 71 – Simulation results Offices Bologna: 2 facade technologies .......................................................... 99 Figure 72 – Simulation results Offices Bologn: 3 facade technologies .......................................................... 100 Figure 73 – Simulation results Offices Paris: 1 facade technology ................................................................ 101 Figure 74 – Simulation results Offices Paris: 2 facade technologies ............................................................. 102 Figure 75 – Simulation results Offices Paris: 3 facade technologies ............................................................. 103 Figure 76 – Simulation results Offices Prague: 1 facade technology ............................................................ 104 Figure 77 – Simulation results Offices Prague: 2 facade technologies .......................................................... 105 Figure 78 – Simulation results Offices Prague: 3 facade technologies .......................................................... 106 Figure 79 – Simulation results Residential Athens: 1 facade technology...................................................... 107 Figure 80 – Simulation results Residential Athens: 2 facade technologies ................................................... 108 Figure 81 – Simulation results Residential Athens: 3 facade technologies ................................................... 109 Figure 82 – Simulation results Residential Bologna: 1 facade technology .................................................... 110 Figure 83 – Simulation results Residential Bologna: 2 facade technologies ................................................. 111 Figure 84 – Simulation results Residential Bologna: 3 facade technologies ................................................. 112 Figure 85 – Simulation results Residential Paris: 1 facade technology ......................................................... 113 Figure 86 – Simulation results Residential Paris: 2 facade technologies ...................................................... 114 Figure 87 – Simulation results Residential Paris: 3 facade technologies ...................................................... 115 Figure 88 – Simulation results Residential Prague: 1 facade technology ...................................................... 116 Figure 89 – Simulation results Residential Prague: 2 facade technologies ................................................... 117 Figure 90 – Simulation results Residential Prague: 3 facade technologies ................................................... 118 Figure 91 – Design methodology process with additive stages .................................................................... 128 Figure 92 – Design process development possible paths.............................................................................. 129 Figure 93 – Elevations of the Demo building (Education case) ..................................................................... 141 Figure 94 – Floor plans of the Demo building (Education case) .................................................................... 142 Figure 95 – Design methodology implemented for Office case .................................................................... 144 Figure 96 – Design methodology implemented for Residential case ............................................................ 145



1 Definition of the system concept BRESAER is an innovative, cost-effective, adaptable and industrialized envelope system (façades and roofs) for buildings refurbishment. This system includes combined active and passive pre-fabricated solutions integrated in a versatile lightweight structural mesh for reducing drastically the primary energy and the Greenhouse emissions while improving indoor environment quality (IEQ). The whole building will be governed by a cutting-edge Building Energy Management System (BEMS) covering a specific control for governing several envelope functions and the energy facilities of the building, including the energy generated by the BRESAER system. BREASER constructive system is based on a lightweight structural mesh where there are placed passive and active components. This mesh is made from metallic profiles to achieve a standardized constructive system easily to assembly and configurable. The technological components will be fixed to the BRESAER profiles with a common solution to achieve a real standardized system allowing very easy and fast installation and also removal in case of maintenance or replacement. BRESAER system is formed by the following technological components:

DYNAMIC WINDOW WITH AUTOMATED SOLAR BLINDS (DW): Window with automatic and controlled blind complementing energy savings and visual comfort strategies, such as light redirection and response to solar radiation. Blind is made from vertical insulated slats with automated rotation that reconfigures itself, self-adjusting the blind attending to external conditions of luminosity and/or radiation levels. Blind has over-lighting and overheating automated control and is self-adjustable to Day-Night cycles, improving window’s U-value during night periods.

MULTIFUNCTIONAL INSULATED PANEL (IP): Multilayer panel to reach better performance in terms of insulating capacity, lightness, thinness, manufacturing process, installation, and environmental aspects, with appropriated mechanical resistance to work as external panel.

Multifunctional because can be used as insulation panel combined with several external coatings providing different capabilities: BIPV for electricity generation; Combined thermo-reflexive (improving fire resistance) and self-cleaning coating (through photo-catalytic nanoparticles).



SOLAR THERMAL AIR COMPONENT (SOL): Combined solar thermal air and PV envelope component comprising many novelties: Flat metal panel properly integrated onto the BRESEAR structural elements of the envelope; 2-stage system strategically configured to deliver high temperatures (up to 55 °C above ambient temperature); Hybrid active component able to reach a peak power for energy generation of 400 W/m2 (100 W/m2 of PV electricity + 300 W/m2 of solar thermal) It has a Multi-purpose use: a) Winter: solar preheated air for space heating through outdoor ventilation; b) Summer: solar preheated air for the regeneration of a desiccant wheel combined with evaporative cooling and heat recovery; c)Integration of PV films on cladding of ventilated façade.

LIGHTWEIGHT VENTILATED FAÇADE MODULE (VF): Innovative multifunctional lightweight ventilated façade module. Based on the cladding panels made of Polymer Concrete with new special finishes providing special functionalities: BIPV for electricity generation integrated on the cladding panel; Combined thermo-reflexive (improving fire resistance) and self-cleaning coating (through photo-catalytic nanoparticles) applied on the cladding panel.

Extra-integrated technologies into the envelope components:

- PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS INTEGRATED IN ENVELOPE COMPONENT (PV) - COMBINED THERMAL INSULATION AND PHOTOCATALYTIC FUNCTIONAL COATING (COAT)

Combining for the first time, the reflective properties of cool paints with the self-cleaning action of photocatalytic nanoparticles, a breakthrough coating will be applied on the exterior of the envelope components to improve its thermal properties and maintenance needs.

Figure 1 presents the general scheme of BREASER system components integration. These are:

- Variable envelope technologies: Dynamic Windows (DM), Multifunctional Insulated Panels (IP), Solar Thermal Air Component (SOL) and Lightweight Ventilated Façade Module (VF)

- Extra integrated technologies in envelope: Photovoltaic Panels (PV) and Combined Thermal Insulation and Photocatalytic functional coating (COAT)

- Lightweight Structural Mesh: vertical and horizontal metallic profiles - Continuous insulation layer



Figure 1 – BREASER envelope general scheme

COMMON FEATURES:

- The four envelope components will use a common structure of vertical metallic profiles to fix and adapt to the existing building.

- A continuous insulation layer will be located on the internal face of the system, directly in contact with the exterior face of the building envelope. Its thickness and material will be specific for each building and climatic location.

VARIABLE FEATURES: - The horizontal substructure will be specific for each technology with the restriction to

maintain a constant distance between their external face and the existing building (alignment). This will provide a constant overhang.

- The distribution of the structure on the envelope will be flexible in order to adapt to each building’s geometry.

- The configuration and distribution of each of the envelop components will be specific for each case. It will depend on the architectural characteristics of the building, its energy performance goals, costs, etc.



The aim of this point is to analyse the possible combinations between innovative elements based on details of their location in the envelope, functionality, interaction between innovative elements and with the existing building, structural advantages and caveats, European standards to be met, commissioning of the system, features available in the building energy management system, etc. System modularity, anchorage and interface elements have been also examined. The objective is to know where and how (requirements) each component must be located on the building in terms of architectural design.

1.1 Analysis of the modularity, anchorage and interaction among BRESAER components and their architectural integration

In order to analyse the modularity, anchorage and interaction between the BRESAER components in a constructive manner, a brainstorming meeting was held in the ACCIONA offices in Alcobendas on April 21st, 2015. This workshop, attended by all component manufacturers (Solarwall, Stam, Ulma y Ascamm), WP3 leader (MON (LKS)) and Task 2.2 leader (ACC), built upon the information provided by each manufacturer in a previously issued technical questionnaire and contemplated;

BRESAER Envelope System broken down into the versatile and lightweight structural mesh, envelope components (Stam, Solarwall, Ulma and Ascamm) and the services integration (existing, electric cabling and HVAC)

System Configuration in terms of energy performance and architectural integration (structure and envelope componentes)

The information was complemented by additional individual teleconference meetings after the meeting. Full notes on this working session are included in the meeting minutes, however a summary of the main characteristics of each system is gathered in the table below followed by a description of their main requirements in the following sections:

Table 1 – System characteristics



1.1.1 System requirements

The Solarwall system requires a vertical chamber free of obstacles of at least 15cm favouring a vertical structure to fix the external perforated metal sheet (however, solutions with an additional horizontal profile are also acceptable). The chamber, in which captured air from the facade is drawn up into the air-handling units, also requires a smooth and solid back surface to avoid disruptions to the airflow and the introduction of loose particles in the air to be treated. Another important requirement is that the chamber is sealed on the edges of the system in order to control the flow of air from the exterior through the perforations and out via superior conducts. It is not a naturally ventilated facade. The system can be used in the roof with a minimum slope of 5%. The dimensions of the perforated metal sheet is flexible however in order to facilitate handling on site a standard size of 1m by 2m is recommended positioned in a vertical direction.

Figure 2 – Plan drawing of Solarwall system

The Stam system is fundamentally an insulated concrete panel that is intended to be fixed directly to an existing wall with anchors. A ventilated air cavity behind the panels should be avoided as this defeats the concept of the system. As a result of a previous innovation project (EASE), the panel offers a continuous insulation layer between panels by using a non-continuous concrete shell extruding the internal insulation in all the edges along with 8mm foam gaskets in the joints. This also allows the possibility of completely removing the back shell although solutions for anchoring would need to be studied. The system is not currently a commercial product. The system could be used for accessible flat roofs. The panels maximum dimension is 3.30 x 1,50m however it will be possible to reduce this dimension in 2.5cm steps until a minimum width of 50cm. The panels can be mounted both vertically and horizontally.

Figure 3 – Section through Stam panel



The Ulma ventilated facade system is a commercial product similar to many existing systems but with a polymer concrete panel that offers high resistance and an option of finishes. The panels are fixed to a horizontal rail system using the grooves incorporated in the panels. These horizontal profiles (at max 90cm centres) are fixed to vertical profiles (generally T profile) whose modularity is independent to the panel and create the naturally ventilated cavity. In order to optimise the continuity of the insulation layer against the existing wall, point brackets are used to support the vertical profiles. The system requires a ventilated cavity of at least 3cm plus a layer of humidity resistant insulation according to the thermal requirements. The standard dimensions of the polymer concrete panels is 90 x 180cm, however different size panels can be fabricated down to a minimum dimension of 30 x 30cm. They can be mounted both vertically and horizontally.

Figure 4 – Ulma ventilated façade system

Figure 5 – Panel dimension comparison



The Ascamm dynamic window and blind system is different to the previous systems with it not being a cladding element, however it forms part of the facade and needs to be integrated and combined with the three different cladding solutions and the BRESAER structure. The initial design proposes an overall thickness 10cm for the blinds which combined with the window will generate an overall thickness of 15-20cm, however the blind "box" has the flexibility to be elongated. Both the blind slats and the box are insulated with aerogel and therefore provide an additional continuity of the thermal envelope apart from window in itself. Structurally, Ascamm can provide a frame which can be fixed to a horizontal or BRESAER structure as the need may be. At this moment in time the maximum width available is 1.60m due fabrication constraints, the minimum width is 60cm and the maximum height 2m.

Figure 6 – Ascamm dynamic window and blind

1.1.2 Design requirements

A set of design requirements have been established to complement the overall BRESAER objective of providing an adaptable, standardized and modular structural system to accommodate all facade systems.

Align the external face of all the systems: this concept is deemed important to offer designers a choice of material finishes without the need for special edging. Having said that, the structural system will offer an element of flexibility to allow designers to change the planes if required.

Provision of a continuous insulating layer on the existing wall: although the emphasis is on modularity and flexibility, the project must provide effective solutions for energy saving aligning with the thermal performances to be established in the simulations.



These requirements establish design limitations and challenges that will orientate the design concept when analysed with the characteristics and concepts of each system.

- The first implies alignment with the widest system, which is Solarwall, however goes against the ideal position of the Stam panel.

- The second point is also in contradiction to the Stam concept requiring the panel to be positioned away from the existing wall and reduces the necessity of an insulated panel.

- This point is also questioned by the Solarwall concept that actually takes advantage of heat loss from a building and reuses it for the incoming air.

- The base requirement of the project to provide a universal structural system for all systems again contradicts the ideal positioning and fixing requirements of the Stam solution.

The following table gathers additional questions that could affect the selection of systems in certain situations.

Table 2 – System additional characteristics

Can the external panels withstand possible collisions and wear from vehicles or pedestrian traffic?

Could the system accommodate a service shaft behind the external panel?

Can the external panel be easily removed to access the space behind?

Solarwall The external metal sheet is only 0.7mm thick and although the corrugated profile increments its resistance, collision by a vehicle would cause denting.

Yes. It should not be part of the calculated chamber dimensioned for the required air volume however if space allows a "false" chamber could be created and sealed off.

Although it is not common practice there should be no problem in offering this solution.

Stam Yes. The durability of the Stam panels is principal advantage of the system.

No. The Stam panels are insulated and therefore favour either no cavity behind or an additional insulated space.

No. The weight and size of the panels make this option unfeasible

Ulma Yes, the panels are resistant to most wear and minor collisions. In cases where there is likelihood of larger collisions, the affected area can be reinforced within the cavity.

As long as the insulated layer is maintained the cavity could accommodate services, although this is limited in the case of minimum cavity widths.

Not easily. The system proposed requires the panels to be inserted from bottom to top in the rails provided therefore in order to remove a certain panel the whole column needs to be removed from the top.

Ascamm The blinds are made of aluminium and would be subjected to damage in the case of major collisions.

N/A N/A



1.1.3 Proposed system interfaces

Although each company usually provides all components for their system (structural and architectural) in order to define a common BRESAER structural system it is important to define system content, thresholds and interfaces in this case.

Table 3 – Envelope system components for BRESAER

Solarwall Stam Ulma Ascamm

Metal sheet + horizontal profile (+ chamber edge

seals)

Concrete insulated panel + anchors

Polymer concrete panels + horizontal rails

Blind box + window +

frame

The BRESAER structure therefore must accommodate all of these system substructures (1) as well as complying with the design concept and different system requirements, for example the cavity needed by Solarwall etc. Taking in mind the previously mentioned requirements, this structural system would consist of a main adaptable vertical structure anchored to the existing wall (2) by brackets that accommodate the insulating layer (3) with minimum thermal bridging.

Figure 7 – BRESAER structural system Figure 8 – BRESAER interfaces



1.2 Analysis of the interaction between the existing envelope requirements and BRESAER component features

Based on the initial description of each envelope component and the requirements and interactions described on the previous point, the analysis of how BREASER system will respond to the existing envelope requirements in terms of:

- Climate, orientation and envelope technologies match - Envelope location and components interaction - Interaction and integration with the architectural elements present on the building - Interaction and integration with the visible services present on the building

This will set the general strategies used by BREASER system to fulfil the architectural envelope requirements.

1.2.1 Climate and orientation and envelope technologies match

Based on the initial description of each components and general climatic strategies for these technologies, the possibility to locate each of them depending on the climate and orientation in here described. This analysis will be optimized with the simulations performance described in Section 3. In Task 2.4, cost and payback calculations will complete this analysis. The following table summarizes which component is more suitable for each climate and orientation:



Table 4 – Climate and orientation and BREASER components match

BREASER’s climatic zones

Multifunctional insulation panel

Lightweight ventilated facade

Solarwall Dynamic window

HOT

HOT SUMMER / COLD WINTER

TEMPERATE

COLD

+ PV

+ COAT

+ COAT

+ PV

+ COAT

+ COAT

+ COAT

+ COAT

+ COAT

+ PV

+ COAT

+ COAT

+ PV + COAT

+ COAT

+ COAT

+ COAT

+ COAT

+ PV

+ COAT

+ COAT

+ PV

+ PV

+ COAT

+ COAT

+ PV + PV

+ PV



1.2.2 Envelope location and interaction with BRESAER components

Based on the envelope components characteristics described by each manufacturer and the results of the Brainstorming meeting the location possibilities of each of them has been analysed and summarized on Table 5.

Table 5 – Envelope location and interaction with and BREASER components

Envelope locations

BRESAER envelope CP components strategy

Big wall areas

Big wall areas are the ones with more than 1,5 m2 with no interruptions. All opaque envelope components can be used. Multifunctional insulation panels will be mostly used on these areas due to its manufacturing dimensions.

Small wall areas

Small wall areas are those with less than 1,5 m2, e.g. spaces between windows. The lightweight ventilated façade components is the best choice, although Solarwall can be also used but losing its active performance, just as an aesthetical cladding.

Walls exposed to impacts

+ PV or COAT

+ PV

+ PV or COAT

+ COAT

+ COAT

+ COAT



Those wall areas, usually located on the bottom part of the wall, were impacts are expected, e.g. beaten tracks, parking areas, school playgrounds… Multifunctional insulation panel is the best choice because of its resistance.

Glazed areas

All glazed areas on the façade will be retrofitted with the Dynamic window component. When the glazed areas are bigger than 160x200cm the glazed area will be divided or a state of the art window will be used. When this device is not effective in terms of energy performance state of the art window will be used.

Flat roofs

*

Flat roof will be mainly retrofitted with Multifncional Insulated Panels as they are able to support people walking through. *If needed it’s possible to install solarwall system but as a SolarDuct type system, which already includes an inclination of 30 to 45º.

Figure 9 – Example SolarDuct. Source: SolarWall group company

+ COAT

+ PV or COAT

+ PV



Sloped roofs

Sloped roofs with more than 5% steepness and south orientations will be retrofitted with Solarwall technology. This is due to its ultralightweight and to guarranty its correct active performance.

Wall/wall corners

Façade corners will be solved with Ventilated Façade or Solar Wall components due to its dimensional flexibility. In case of using Solar Wall system each of the orientation must have independent air cavities.

Roof/wall corners

*

The edges between roof and wall will be solved with Solar Wall components. Depending on the case their air cavities will be connected or separate. If separated one of them might not be active, but just a cladding solution. When the roof is not flat or trafficable, Ventilated Façade components can be used.

+ PV

+ PV

+ PV or COAT



1.2.3 BRESAER interaction/integration with existing architectural

elements (visible) on the building’s envelope:

The analysis of how the BREASER system will behave and configure when interacting with existing architectural elements is summarized on Table 6. This is meant to be a sort of catalogue of BREASER system potential for its architectural integration. Each of these schematic solutions are presented as possibilities given to the users that could always be complemented with existing market products. Between these solutions, those that can be found on the DEMO building will be developed in detail in WP3 and WP6.

Table 6 –BREASER integration strategy with visible architectural elements

Architectural element

BRESAER interaction/integration strategy

Access door

The building’s entrance door will be integrated by including a special frame that will solve the interaction between the opening and BRESAER’s façade to seal the junction between them, anchor the door to the façade and break the possible thermal bridge. The door will be replaced or not depending on its architectural and energy performance quality.



Window

The existing windows will be replaced by BRESAER’s Dynamic Window component, which size will be adapted to the previous one. A special frame will solve the junction between the existing wall opening and the new façade. This frame will include the windowsill, header and jamb, glass framing and dynamic blinds’ box. The blind’s box will be located above the window’s opening and cladded by Ventilated Façade or Solar Wall components to guarantee the continuity of the envelope overhang.

Canopy or other solar protection element

All existing solar protection devices will be removed as the dynamic window’s blinds will replace its shading function.



Balcony

The existing balconies will be refurbished in two different aspects: its floor will be thermally insulated externally with existing market products to break the thermal bridge through this element; the railing will be cladded for its architectural renovation. These cladding components will be done by BRESAER’s envelope components as Ventilated Façade or Solar Wall system + PV when possible, but could be also finished with market products depending on the architects’ choice.

Loggia or bay window

Existing loggias will be replaced by Dynamic Windows component and its glazing system. It will include blinds depending on the energetic performance needs. Top and bottom floors will be thermally insulated and cladded with BRESAER’s components + PV if possible or by market products depending on the architect’s choice.



Overhangs

The transition between two façade planes with different overhang will be solved using the most flexible cladding components is sense of dimension and shape. These are the Ventilated Façade and the Solar Wall. The last one will just be used as an aesthetical cladding component, nota as an active component. Special attention will be taken to the joints to prevent water leakage or thermal bridges.

Decorative elements

Non-regular or non-orthogonal surfaces will be covered by Solar Wall component. Its metallic sheet cladding allows its adaptation to this kind of volumes. Special attention will be taken to the joints to prevent water leakage or thermal bridges.



Flat roof perimeter wall

The top finishing of flat roof’s perimeter wall will be cladded with Solar Wall or Ventilated Façade components because of its light weight and dimensions flexibility. Special attention will be taken to the joints between wall and roof to prevent water leakage or thermal bridges.

Sloped roof overhang

Slopped roof overhangs will be cladded with Solar Wall components because of its light weight. Drainage opening will be needed as rain will run below this envelope component. Special attention will be taken to the joints between wall, roof and this element to prevent water leakage or thermal bridges.



1.2.4 BRESAER interaction/integration with existing services (visible) on

the building’s envelope

The analysis of how the BREASER system will behave and configure when interacting with existing services is summarized on Table 7. This is meant to be a sort of catalogue of BREASER system potential for its architectural integration. Each of these schematic solutions are presented as possibilities given to the users that could always be complemented with existing market products. Between these solutions, those that can be found on the DEMO building will be developed in detail in WP3 and WP6.

Table 7 – BREASER integration strategy with visible exiting services

Technical appliance BRESAER envelope components

Rain water gutters

Horizontal rain gutters will be integrated in the overhang of slopped roofs. This will allow a correct architectural integration that must guarantee the correct drainage and sealing of rain water. How this horizontal gutter will connect with the vertical downpipe must be analysed and solved depending on the building.



Water, gas ducts & rain water downpipes & electrical, telecommunication cables

Specific cavities/risers will be located on the envelope to host vertical and horizontal facilities ducts and cables. These cavities/risers will be cladded with Solar Wall of Ventilated Façade envelope components. A version accessible for inspections for this two envelope components must be developed. Electrical and telecommunication cables will be located in independent risers from rainwater, water or gas ducts. Rainwater and water risers will be correctly sealed from the rest of the façade cavity, ventilated and drained to prevent condensations and water accumulation in case of leakage. Gas ducts will be located in independent risers and cladded with Solar Wall metallic sheets with perforations big enough to guarantee good ventilation.

Exhaust stacks

2 options: maintain existing (left) & replace by new one to move location (right)



Air conditioner units and other HVAC devices

Special connectors will be developed to fix the existing Air conditioner units to BRESAER’s load bearing structure. These units will be relocated on the façade o allow this correct anchoring. A special covering box will be used to integrate these elements by using the light weight Solar Wall metallic sheet cladding.

1.3 BRESAER components aesthetical finishing possibilities Beside the flexibility of application of different envelope technologies, each of them have also different finishing possibilities. This gives the architects great possibilities to give different aesthetical composition solutions to each building although using a unique system, BRESAER system. In any case the application of each technology will be limited by the requirements and possibilities described on section 1.1 and 1.2.

1.3.1 Multifunctional Insulated Panels finishing possibilities.

Multifunctional Insulated Panels developed by STAM can be customized in color and surface finish. The best option for the color is to add pigments in the concrete mix. In principle any pigment can be added, but so far the best results were achieved with colors in the range of grey/black.



Figure 10 – Multifunctional Insulated Panel colored by

adding pigments: grey range


adding pigments: smooth green


adding pigments: red coarse


adding pigments: yellow coarse

Another option, more effective in case of light colors, is to paint the panels. In this case an operation is added, but it is quite straightforward and any paint suitable for façade application is fine.

Figure 14 – Multifunctional Insulated Panel colored by painting: light yellow

As far as the surface finish is concerned, textures of matrixes such as Reckli [1] can be reproduced.



Figure 15 – Multifunctional Insulated Panel possible finishing by textured matrix [1]

The only technical limitation is in the thickness of the decoration, which must be “small”. Wisla and Lena matrixes have been used successfully the Wisla and Lena matrixes by STAM, which have quite thin decorations. However, the choice of different surface finishes in the same building will be limited, because of the relatively high cost of the matrix (about 300 Euros/m2).

Figure 16 – Multifunctional Insulated Panel finishing by textured matrix successfully used by STAM

1.3.2 Lightweight Ventilated Façade Panels finishing possibilities.

Lightweight Ventilated Façade Panels developed by ULMA can be customized in color and surface finish. Three different textures could be used: air – soft finishing-, earth –reproducing natural stones- and water -reproducing water waves-.

Figure 17 – Lightweight Ventilated Façade Panel textured finishing [1]



A big range of colours is provided; customization is also possible.

Figure 18 – Lightweight Ventilated Façade Panel colors finishing [1]

1.3.3 Solarwall System finishing possibilities.

SolarWall systems will integrate with any material that is used on the building envelope by providing a range of color possibilities, most likely dark colors, to ensure an attractive appearance, combining aesthetics with high energy performance. The colors below features the Premium Finish Hairexcel (60 microns) which has exceptional UV protection & weatherability combined with brilliant color & gloss. Furthermore, SolarWall systems require no specific maintenance.



Figure 19 – Solarwall system possible finishing colours

1.3.4 Dymanic Window finishing possibilities.

The Dynamic Window device is mainly composed by dynamic blinds or slats and a framed window. Both components will be made in aluminium. The different aesthetical possibilities is achieved by this aluminum finishing.



Figure 20 – Dynamic window made of aluminum components

The slats and window frames can be finished with anodized aluminium or lacquered in typical RAL colours. Commercial window frames from Cortizo [1] will be used.

Figure 21 – Dynamic window aluminum lacquered RAL colors Chart [1]



1.4 PV integration strategy in BREASER envelope components

One of the main features of BRESAER’s system is the integration of active technologies in cladding components to be used for building retrofitting. Photovoltaic technology will be integrated in the three opaque cladding components defined in this system: Multifunctional Insulated Panel, Solar Thermal Air Component and Lightweight Ventilated Façade Module. Due to the specific characteristics of each of the opaque envelope components different PV technologies where analysed to select the most suitable for each case in terms of material finishing, energy behaviour, functionality, fixing possibilities, aesthetics… According to this the following strategies were set for each opaque component:

- Multifunctional Insulated Panel will integrate flexible Thin Film PV modules as a final finishing. These modules will be semi-transparent in order to maintain as much as possible the panel’s original aesthetical finishing. The PV flexible film will be adhered to the panel. In case the adhesion is not considered feasible enough based on the panel’s cementitious finishing, transparent rigid panels will be used with mechanical fixation.

- Solar Thermal Air Component will integrate semi-transparent Rigid PV panels by replacing the glazing component of the 2-stage system [1].

Figure 22 – SolarWall 2 stage system with glazing component. [1]

In this case Thin Film PV technology was rejected due to the impossibility to maintain the porosity of the metal sheet cladding when adhering the film.

- Lightweight Ventilated Façade Module will integrate both Thin Film and rigid panels PV technology with two different solutions. Semi-transparent Thin Film PV modules will be



adhered when maintaining the panel’s original aesthetical finishing is requested. Rigid PV panels will be integrated by replacing a complete ventilated façade module when the adhesion to the ventilated module surface coat is not considered to be feasible. This solution will use the same anchoring system, structure and have the same dimensions as the ventilated cladding module replaced.

1.5 European Standards to be met The goal of this Section is to summarise the inputs from T7.1 (“Report on existing standards and standardization landscape”, performed by AENOR) in relation with the following characteristics which shall be met by the BRESAER envelope:

- Energy performance u-values or energy consumption - Fire performance - Wind pressure or other mechanical actions - Seismic regulations - Other if necessary

The European Union approved in 2011 the Construction Products Regulation nº305/2011, superseding the former Construction Products Directive 89/106/EEC, in order to establish harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products and the basic requirements for construction works:

1) Mechanical resistance and stability 2) Safety in case of fire 3) Hygiene, health and the environment 4) Safety and accessibility in use 5) Protection against noise 6) Energy economy and heat retention 7) Sustainable use of natural resources

This regulation is applicable to all construction products covered by a harmonized standard or an European technical approval, which take into consideration the above mentioned basic requirements for construction works through the definition of essential characteristics and their methods of assessment, that are finally expressed into a Declaration of Performances and the CE Marking. Since the BRESAER System includes several construction products and constitutes a construction product in itself, with a specific objective of facilitating the acceptance and utilization by the market of the developed solutions, it is of utmost importance to develop the system as close as possible to the conditions indicated in the Construction Products Regulation nº305/2011. At present, there are two main European documents that cover construction products similar to the BRESAER System, which are useful for the assessment of performances of their essential characteristics. These are the following, with their scope:



1. ETAG 034 “Guideline for European technical approval of kits for external wall claddings”; Part I: ventilated cladding kits comprising cladding components and associated fixings, and Part II: cladding kits comprising cladding components, associated fixings, subframe and possible insulation layer. This document covers kits for vertical exterior wall claddings consisting of an external cladding, mechanically fastened to a framework (specific to the kit or not), which is fixed to the external wall of new or existing buildings (retrofit). An insulation layer is usually fixed on the external wall. The substrate walls are made of masonry (clay, concrete or stone), concrete (cast on site or as prefabricated panels), timber or metal frame. Insulation material is defined in accordance with an EN standard or an ETA. Between the cladding elements and the insulation layer or the external wall accordingly, there is an air space which shall always be drained and may be ventilated or not. The cladding elements can be made of e.g. wood based panels, plastic, fibre cement, fibre reinforced cement, concrete, metal, laminate panels, stone, ceramic or terra cotta tiles. The cladding elements are attached to the external wall using a subframe, which is made of timber or metal (steel, stainless steel or aluminium). 2. EN 13830 “Curtain walling – Product standard”. This European Standard specifies requirements of curtain walling kit intended to be used as a building envelope to provide weather resistance, safety in use and energy economy and heat retention and provides test/assessments/calculation methods and compliance criteria of the related performances. The curtain walling kit covered by this standard should fulfil its own integrity and mechanical stability but does not contribute to the load bearing or stability of the main building structure, and could be replaced independently of it. In



Table 8 it is reported a summary of the relevant characteristics considered in both documents and their assessment method/standard or requirement. It is to be considered that the products covered by ETAG 034 are closer to the BRESAER System compared to those covered by EN 13830. Nevertheless, the EN 13830 includes important element that cannot be neglected in a comprehensive standardization landscape. In addition, fire propagation on façade could also be relevant due to the combustible internal insulation core. A harmonised European test method has not been developed yet, the practice is that each country has its own method at the moment. Therefore, the compliance with norms must be checked on a Country-by-Country basis. As an example, the Hungarian test method can be found in Hungarian standard MSZ 14800-6:2009. Finally, it should be noticed that this information is given for the BRESAER System as a whole, and specific or individual components of the system may be covered by other European or international standards.



Table 8 – Summary of characteristics and relevant requirements, assessment test methods and classification

standards according to ETAG 034 and EN 13830.

Construction Products Regulation nº305/2011 Basic Requirements

European related document

Clause and Characteristic to be assessed

Related standards, test Class, use category, criterion

"No performance determined (NPD)" option allowed

1) Mechanical resistance and stability

See requirement 4 Safety and accessibility in use

2) Safety in case of fire

ETAG 034

6.2.1 Reaction to fire

Classification according EN 13501-1 (Where all components of the kit are class A1 without testing, the whole kit may be classified Class A1 without testing. Where one or more of the components is classified according to a "Classified without further testing" (CWFT) Decision, the whole kit may be classified to the lowest class of any component.)

Euroclasses A1 to F

Yes (Class F)

6.2.2 Reaction to fire on rear side

Classification according EN 13501-1 (Where all components of the kit are class A1 without testing, the whole kit may be classified Class A1 without testing. Where one or more of the components is classified according to a CWFT Decision, the whole kit may be classified to the lowest class of any component.)

Euroclasses A1 to F

Yes (Class F)

6.2.3 Fire resistance

Not relevant

EN 13830

4.1 Reaction to fire of components

Test according EN ISO 11925-2, EN 13823, EN ISO 1182, EN ISO 1716 and classified according EN 13501-1

Classes

4.2 Fire resistance

Test according EN 1364-3 and EN 1364-4, and classified according EN 13501-2

Classes

4.3 Fire propagation

Test according EN 1364-4 and classified according EN 13501-2

Classes

3) Hygiene, health and the environment

ETAG 034

6.3.1 Watertightness of joints

Two requirements shall be satisfied for the intended working life of the kit: * Water running down the wall shall not reach the inside face of the wall * Materials likely to be adversely affected by water (adhesives, insulation fixings subject to corrosion, etc) shall not become damp. In case of doubt: Artificial rain test according EN 12865 Procedure A.

Pass/fail and Value of air pressure

Yes

6.3.2 Waterpermeability

Not relevant if kit has a ventilated air space. Not relevant

6.3.3 Water vapour permeability

Not relevant if kit has a ventilated air space. Not relevant

6.3.4 Drainability

The cladding kit shall be designed and installed so that water which penetrates in the air space or condensation water shall be drained out of the installed kit without accumulation or moisture damage or leakage into the substrate

Pass/fail Yes



or the wall cladding kit.

6.3.5 Release of dangerous substances

The applicant shall submit a written declaration stating whether the product/kit contains dangerous substances according to European and national regulations, when and where relevant in the Member States of destination, and shall list these substances. It will provide the method(s) which has been used for demonstrating compliance with the applicable regulations in the Member States of destination, according to the EU database http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/construction/cpd-ds/index.cfm (method(s) of content or release, as appropriate).

Indication of dangerous substances incl. concentration etc. ”No dangerous substances”

Yes

EN 13830

4.4 Watertightness

Test according EN 12155 and expressed according EN 12154

Classes

4.15 Air permeability

Tested according EN 12153 and expressed according EN 12152

Classes

4.16 Water vapour permeability

Declared type of vapour barrier

4) Safety and accessibility in use

ETAG 034

6.4.1 Wind load resistance

Wind suction: test according ETAG 034 Part I 5.4.1.1 Wind pressure: test according ETAG 034 part I 5.4.1.1 with wind action reversed

Resistance value

No

6.4.2 Mechanical resistance

For all cladding products, the bending strength, modulus of elasticity and rupture of the product, determined according to Annex C of ETAG 034 is required. (Fibre cement flat sheet EN 12467) The material and geometric properties of the fixings are to be declared according to either relevant EN standard or ETAG. Otherwise the pull-out resistance has to be determined by testing, according its family and ETAG 034 part I 5.4.2.1 to 5.4.2.8 For subframe, the following shall be indicated in ETA: • The effective moment of area of profiles and modulus of elasticity profile material (EN 755-2 for aluminium profiles) • The mechanical characteristics of fixings (traction and shear) • The characteristic resistance of brackets (Rcr, Rcd1, Rcd2, Rs and Rc, Rt) as tested according to annex E of ETAG 034 part II • The implantation of the fixings

Resistance value

No

6.4.3 Resistance to horizontal points load

Test in 6.4.3 of ETAG 034 part I: The cladding shall sustain safely, without reduction in performance and without permanent deformation to any component, a static 500 N load applied one minute horizontally through two squares of 25 x 25 x 5 mm spaced apart (distance 440 mm) on any part of the surface of the cladding (one person standing on a ladder leaning against the surface of the cladding) at room temperature.

Pass/fail Yes

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/construction/cpd-ds/index.cfm

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/construction/cpd-ds/index.cfm



6.4.4 Impact resistance – shatter properties

Resistance to hard body impact: according ISO 7892 Resistance to soft body impact: according ISO 7892

Categories I, II, II or IV

Yes

6.4.5 Resistance to seismic actions

European or national regulations Yes

6.4.6 Hygrothermal Behavior

Test according ETAG 034 Part I 5.4.6 Pass/fail Yes

EN 13830

4.5 Resistance to its own dead loads

Self-weight calculated according EN 1991-1-1 and annex C of EN 13830. Max. Deflection of any horizontal framing shall not exceed L/500.

Declared value kN/m

2

4.6 Wind load resistance

Tested according EN 12179, EN 1991-1-4 and annex C of EN 13830. Classified according EN 13116. Max. Frontal deflection of walling framing members shall not exceed 5.7 values.

Declared value kN/m

2

4.7 Resistance to snow load

Load calculated according EN 1991-1-3 and annex C of EN 13830. Max. deflection of walling framing members shall not exceed 5.8 values

Declared value kN/m

2

4.8.3 Impact resistance

Test according EN 14019 and classified according EN 14019

Classes

4.9 Resistance to live horizontal loads at sill level

Load calculated according EN 1991-1-1 and annex C of EN 13830. Max. deflection of walling framing members shall not exceed 5.10 values

Declared value kN/m

4.10.2 and 4.10.3 Seismic resistance

Load calculated according EN 1998-1 and tested according annex D of EN 13830

Declared value

4.11 Thermal shock resistance

Declared type of glass

5) Protection against noise

ETAG 034 6.5 Protection against noise

Not relevant to part I, but in part II: The Rw value measured according to EN ISO 10140, and classified according EN ISO 717-1, shall be indicated with the description of the supporting wall.

Rw value Yes

EN 13830

4.12 Direct airborne sound insulation

Tested according EN ISO 10140-2 and classified according EN ISO 717-1

Declared value dB

4.13 Flanking sound transmission

Tested according EN ISO 10848-1 and EN ISO 10848-2 and classified according EN ISO 717-1

Declared value dB

6) Energy economy and heat retention

ETAG 034 6.6 Energy economy and heat retention

Not relevant to part I, but in part II: The thermal resistance values of the kit shall be declared as the total thermal resistance in m2.K/W including any thermal bridges (e.g. fixings and brackets) in accordance with chapter 5.6 of ETAG 034 Thermal resistance according EN ISO 6946, EN ISO 10211 Insulation product's thermal resistance according EN 13162 to EN 13171, This thermal resistance shall exceed 0,5 m

2K/W.

R value Yes



EN 13830

4.14 Thermal transmittance

Calculated according EN ISO 12631 and tested according EN ISO 12567-1

Declared value W/m

2K

4.17 Radiation properties

Energy transmittance calculated according EN 410 and tested according EN 13363-1 or EN 13363-2

Declared value

7) Sustainable use of natural resources

No essential characteristics defined yet for this basic requirement. The basic requirement for construction works on sustainable use of natural resources should notably take into account the recyclability of construction works, their materials and parts after demolition, the durability of construction works and the use of environmentally compatible raw and secondary materials in construction works. For the assessment of the sustainable use of resources and of the impact of construction works on the environment Environmental Product Declarations should be used when available (based on EN 15804:2012+A1:2013).

Aspects of durability and serviceability

ETAG 034

6.7.1 Pulsating load

The following shall be indicated: • The 5%-fractile values (for a confidence level of 75% with an unknown standard deviation of the population) and the mean values of test series. • The load/displacement curves.

Value Yes

6.7.2 Dimensional stability of external cladding element

The mean, characteristic or tabulated value shall be indicated

Value Yes

6.7.3 Immersion in water

The following shall be indicated: • The 5%-fractile values (for a confidence level of 75% with an unknown standard deviation of the population) and the mean values of test series. • The load/displacement curves.

Value Yes

6.7.4 Freeze-thaw

The cladding element shall be freeze-thaw resistant in accordance with the relevant EN or ISO standard. The following shall be indicated: • The 5%-fractile values (for a confidence level of 75% with an unknown standard deviation of the population) and the mean values of test series. • The load/displacement curves. • The number of freeze-thaw cycles

Pass/fail and number of cycles

Yes

6.7.5 Chemical and biological attack

If necessary, the performance deterioration caused by chemical and biological attack shall be declared.

Pass/fail Yes

6.7.6 Corrosion

If necessary, the performance deterioration caused by corrosion shall be declared.

Pass/fail Yes

6.7.7 UV radiation

If appropriate, the performance deterioration caused by UV radiation shall be declared.

Pass/fail Yes

EN 13830 4.19.2 Durability of watertightness

Gaskets: tested according EN 12365-4 and expressed according EN 12365-1 Sealants: tested according EN 15651-1 and EN

Classes



15651-2 and evaluated according EN ISO 8339, EN ISO 8340, EN ISO 9046, EN ISO 9047, EN ISO 10590 and EN ISO 10591. Classified according EN ISO 11600

4.19.3 Durability of thermal transmittance

Low emissivity coated glass tested according EN 1096-4, EN 1096-2, EN 1096-3 Insulated Glass tested according EN 1279-5, EN 1279-2, EN 1279-3, EN 1279-4 Sandwich panels tested according EN 14509 Thermal insulation products tested according EN 13162 to EN 13171 and expressed according them.

Pass/fail

4.19.4 Durability of air permeability

Weatherstrippings and gaskets tested according EN 12365-4 and expressed according EN 12365-1 Sealants tested according EN 15651-1 and EN 15651-2 2 and evaluated according EN ISO 8339, EN ISO 8340, EN ISO 9046, EN ISO 9047, EN ISO 10590 and EN ISO 10591. Classified according EN ISO 11600

Classes

The analysis of the European requirements is this stage was made to give input for the system design. The main conclusion is that these are very dependent on each country regulation with specific requirements and tests to be done for new building components not being able to find a common baseline. Therefore it was decided that Turkish regulation will be used to set this baseline requirement. If this requirements are found to be non-sufficient later on, the Spanish regulation will be used.

Table 9 – Summary of characteristics and relevant requirements, assessment test methods and classification

standards according to Turkish regulation.

Reaction to fire A2, B, C - s3, d2

Fire resistance EI90 - EI60

Content of dangerous substances

EN 480

Water tightness For materials containing bitumen; DIN 52132, DIN 52133 & EN 13970 A1-EQV

Water vapour permeability Condensation analysis should be done for all interfaces in facade system.

Mechanical resistance Turkish Standard TS 498, DIN 1055

Energy performance TS 825



1.6 Features available in the Building Management System and its interaction with existing building

"A Building Energy Management System (BEMS) is a cost-effective computer-based control system installed in buildings that monitors and controls the building's mechanical and electrical equipment such as ventilation, lighting, power systems, fire systems, and security systems" [1]. "Additionally, a BEMS is a complex, multi-level, multi-objective, integrated, interrelated and complete intelligent design management information system" [6], which combines software and hardware for managing the performance of the building facilities. The BMS is centred in four basic functions [1][6]:

Monitoring: Continuous monitoring of the sensors measurements.

Controlling: Control algorithms for the building facilities management.

Optimizing: Working out the best performance of the system.

Reporting: Documentation of the intermediate and final results.

BEMSs are commonly implemented in buildings for the management of the energy facilities and, as pointed in [7], they could represent up to 40% of the energy savings. With this aim, within the project, a BEMS is designed to govern the active envelope components, as well as the existing energy facilities. In that sense, within the BRESAER context, the BEMS will be able to manage the dynamic windows, ventilated façade, boiler, lighting systems, sensor network and the benefits of thermal insulation, as highlighted in Figure 23.

Figure 23 – Interaction of the BEMS with building facilities

First of all, in spite of being a passive solution, the thermal insulation gets some benefits in terms of energy. Thanks to the increase of insulation level, the energy demand of the building is reduced.



Therefore, the BEMS should take into consideration the new demand in order to balance the multiple energy sources to ensure the indoor conditions and decrease the final energy consumption. Secondly, regarding the sensor network, it will gather the energy performance of the building (including comfort), but also it will contain the suitable actuators to carry out different control strategies that allow the optimization of the energy sources. Next, the boiler will be used as support when the renewable sources are not able to cover the total demand of the building. In terms of renewable sources, the SolarWall system, which injects hot air into the building, will be managed by the BEMS with the aim of heating the different spaces of the building. In case of dynamic windows, the BEMS will take advantage of the solar gains to increase the temperature inside the rooms. Finally, having in mind that the dynamic windows also allow the increase of daylight, the lighting systems can be controlled in order to reduce the electricity consumption. As stated before, the BEMS should cover 4 main functionalities: monitoring, controlling, optimization and reporting. Monitoring is covered with the sensor network that collects the energy performance of the building. Controlling is determined by the automation network which is included not only in the sensor network, but also in the active solutions themselves. Optimization part is a requirement for the BEMS itself. That is to say, the BEMS control strategies try to balance all the active sources out with the aim of reducing the energy consumption in the best way as long as the comfort is ensured. Then, the only part which is not covered as yet by the BEMS is the reporting. However, one of the added value services layer (see Figure 24) will be the generation of monthly reports, hence, reporting is also included as functionality.

Figure 24 – Conceptual diagram of the BEMS

Conceptually, the BEMS will be a multilayer platform, as illustrated in Figure 24, where the communication with the physical elements will be carried out by means of connection drivers (as many as communication protocols). Next level remarks an integration layer which merges the different data from the drivers in a common data model for the representation of internal data, as well as database structure. Additionally, there exists the business core which is in charge of the internal management of signals for the control strategies, data collection and so on. The upper layer contains the high-level services which implement the optimized control strategies, reporting, connection to external tools as TRNSYS for predictive analysis and calculation of aggregated data, such as Key Performance Indicators for evaluation purposes.



1.7 Definition of the steps and requirements for installation and commissioning of the system

The BRESAER system will be applied on the façades of existing buildings for retrofitting. The building structure shall remain intact. Prior to implementation the building shall be analyzed for the following constraints:

- Geometry: The applicability of some components of the BRESAER system depend on a geometry with large surfaces. This will be the determinant of details of application and choice of components. Height limitations also apply based on profile strength for the cladding structure. The building shall meet system requirements described in Chapter 1.1.1 for the BRESAER system to be applicable and any projections that shall cause. Constraints to consider are if the building has a sloped roof and/or a south façade free of obstacles for the implementation and the maximum dimensions of 160x200 for the dynamic windows. To increase accuracy and provide a realistic estimation of how BRESAER can improve the existing situation photogrammetry and vectorization of the building envelope, envelope openings and relevant internal dimensions will be done. This provides a picture of envelope topography and enables to consider actions for structural adaptation and anchorage.

- The material composition of the envelope and estimated condition will be determined from original construction documentation and probes of external walls, roofs and windows where this is deemed relevant. An inventory of the type and state of any conditioning equipment and lighting systems will be registered.

- Climate and orientation: BRESAER system components will be placed based on solar radiation and insulation prerequisites determined by climate and orientation as described in Chapter 1.2 and Chapter 3.4.

- Access routes: Openings and circulation routes within the building for the transport of equipment shall be inspected and alternative ways of access shall be determined if the present plan comes out as a constraint. For example, part of the roof structure may be temporarily demolished and rebuilt if there is no other way of getting machinery in.

- Occupancy: The operational schedule of the building shall be sought and construction works shall be carried with the least disruption possible.

In order to choose the most feasible retrofitting strategies for the building using the BRESAER system, an energy evaluation will be done on the building previous to intervention. This evaluation will be based on results from energy, emission and comfort calculations done on the digital basecase model. Results from the basecase simulation of the building are to be considered as the baseline energy consumption and emissions case. The results of the baseline will be compared with the application of different scenarios and technological strategies applied through computer simulation. The selection of these scenarios will be supported by the system design guide and computer aiding tool developed under Task 2.3. The obtained information from the evaluation will facilitate assessing the energy feasibility of the technological components. Additional technical, economic, legal and constructive considerations (with special attention to seismic performance) relevant to the building will be applied in order to decide on a course of action involving the application of the innovative technologies that are



relevant to the building in terms of their potential for energy saving, emission reduction, human comfort and payback. The BREASER system components will be implemented on the façade with the dimensional requirements described in Table 1 and with the support of the software tool for supporting the envelope components installation design developed under task 4.4. Following the design phase for adapting the BRESAER system to the building subject to retrofitting, the following steps shall be followed:

1.7.1 Preparation

Mechanical Infrastructure

Equipment shall be placed in the building and sensors installed. This step can be held in any season if suitable access routes for the equipment are found in the building since it will be carried mostly indoors and partly on the roof and weather will not be a major concern. The timing will depend on the project schedule and monitoring plan. For this process, equipment defined in product specifications shall be used for set ups. However, in case of access from the roof or façade openings, lifts will be needed.

Façade Surfaces The façade of the building shall be stripped of its present cladding to expose the bare structure. While the BRESAER system is meant to be implemented on a limited range of building sizes, this process may take a varied amount of time depending on the present cladding and the level of complication in the building geometry. This process shall take a minimum of two and a maximum of three weeks and its timing is critical as the building shall not be left exposed in its stripped state. The phase can be partially simultaneous with the recladding phase to minimize exposure. A dry season shall be sought. This phase can be done using manual tools and scaffolding if the present structure does not indicate any specific procedure.

Glazed Areas

Depending on planned details of new cladding to be implemented, the building opening sizes may shrink. In this case glazing shall be removed, profiles shall frame the opening to provide a surface for the new cladding to connect to and new windows shall be placed. Also, for the application of dynamic windows, previous glazing shall be removed. This phase can be carried simultaneously with other façade works. This phase can be done using manual tools and scaffolding if the present structure does not indicate any specific procedure.

1.7.2 Construction of components

Construction of Bearing Structure The same vertical profiles and anchors will be utilized for all component types. Attachment of different materials will be on varying substructures along horizontal elements. This process shall



be the first step after the stripping of the present façade and the preparation of a new base surface to hold all other interventions. It may take one to three weeks and be done using manual tools and scaffolding.

Construction of Mechanical and Electrical Lines

Spaces allocated within the building for main heating and cooling equipment shall be prepared and wiring routes throughout the building determined. The façade substructure shall also bear wiring connected to the solar wall and dynamic window applications. Connections through the façade spanning interior to exterior elements shall be tightly insulated. Connections shall be put through functional tests prior to façade cladding.

Laying of Insulation, Façade Cladding and Dynamic Window Application Insulation will be laid within the substructure as determined for each system and the indicated ventilation gaps provided. Cladding will be mounted based on system requirements and orientation as described within system descriptions. Big wall areas will either be coated, covered with PV panels or Solarwall systems based on their orientation. Small wall areas will be coated. All surfaces shall eventually be level with each other where they are adjacent, therefore, the substructure shall be accordingly. Façade openings such as doors shall be insulated with special frames to prevent thermal bridges.

1.7.3 Testing and commissioning

The testing phase shall be dependent on product specifications of each piece of equipment and require the presence of experts. The placing of equipment shall be before façade cladding while testing shall be after the system is finalized and a month may be allocated for the process.

Detailed guides for Installation. Commissioning and Maintenance (developed under Task 4.1) will be used to support all this process and guarantee the optimization of all the retrofitting process from design and prefabrication to on-site works.

1.8 System’s limitations BRESAER project ambition is to develop a system able to retrofit the wider range of buildings as possible. The system is flexible enough to retrofit buildings with different uses, architectural and energy performing characteristics, climatic needs and local constructive practices. Despite this, due to the intrinsic characteristic of the system, some buildings will be out of the scope of BRESAER system retrofitting possibilities because of their technical and non-technical characteristics. The building characteristics that could limit the system’s implementation are the following:

a) Buildings with complex geometry, as the cost of retrofitting will be too high because of the nonstandard components.

b) Building with big glazed areas, as curtain walls, or with a big ratio glazed/opaque surface, as it won’t be possible to integrate most of the envelope components. This ratio will be defined during the project development.



c) The height of the building to be retrofitted will be limited by to structure dimensions, due to the wind loads the profiles are able to support. This height will be defined in WP3.

d) Building that not receive enough solar radiation. The lack of solar radiation will make all active components useless. The limit of solar radiation incidence will be defined during the project development.

e) The system could not fulfil very strict building national regulations standard with the current design. Some modifications could be needed.

f) Good energy performing buildings, as the range of energy savings won’t be enough to consider the system cost-effective. Nevertheless the system could be partially implemented with active components to integrate RES.

g) Historical buildings façades, as this are commonly protected and no external modifications are allowed. Nevertheless the system could be implemented on roofs.

1.9 Architectural system concept and refurbishment methodology

The fundamental concept of BRESAER must be maintained, that being an innovative, cost-effective, adaptable and industrialized envelope system for buildings refurbishment including combined active and passive pre-fabricated solutions integrated in a versatile lightweight structural mesh. This concept, which will allow for the easy and fast installation and removal of any one system and the possibility to substitute it with another without large manipulation of the sub structure, must also incorporate the additional design requirements in order to offer an innovate and attractive solution to building retrofits.

A vertical profile structure can serve all envelope components and must be capable of providing the requirements of each. It will most likely need to be adaptable in order to align the systems.

The fixing system of the envelope components to the vertical profiles will be specific for each technology and could also provide the necessary depths to align all systems.

The continuous insulation layer will fit between the vertical profile anchors and should be be rigid, water resistant and fire resistant.

ULMA system and Solarwall are the solutions that permit cabling distribution within its air cavity, additionally Solarwall could be accessible.

Stam would be the ideal solution for ground floor applications in terms of durability and resistance to collisions.

Previously to starting the design process, local regulations must be analysed. Turkish regulation is used to set the system’s baseline requirements. If these requirements are found to be non-sufficient, design changes will be analysed and implemented if possible.

Also the system’s limitations exposed on section 1.8 must be checked in order to know if the building is liable to be retrofitted with BRESAER’s system.



The architectural design process is described based on the possibilities and restrictions of each

envelope component related to their architectural integration and interaction with the existing

façade/roof characteristics. Table 10 summarizes how and where each technology can be applied

for each envelope situation:

For each situation a numerical value of “flexibility degree” has been given. This value corresponds to the number of different technologies that could be applied; higher values means more design flexibility. These are: degree 1, one single envelope technology can be used; degree 2, two different envelope technologies can be used; degree 3, three different envelope technologies can be used. In addition, an “+” symbol is added to the degree definition to mark an extra requirement (not related to the envelope technology selection) that must be fulfilled and partially limits the situation flexibility. For example, when analysing the solution for a window, not only it will be limited to using the Dynamic Window technology but also the opening’s frame must be considered; the results is an 1+ flexibility degree. These added restrictions have been defined on section 1.2 Analysis of the interaction between the existing envelope requirements and BRESAER component features.

Distribution of horizontal and vertical structural profiles to solve obstacles and openings is the first step of this designing process as it will restrict the technologies integration. In some cases, an early decision of technologies to be used is needed in order to define the vertical structure (i.e. corners where VF or SOL could be used have different width requirements)

Finally, the most suitable technologies for each orientation and climate will be used to guaranty energy performance improvement of the building to be retrofitted. This will be further analysed on Section 3.

Table 10 – Architectural design process based on envelope component possibilities and restrictions related

to their architectural integration and interaction with the existing façade/roof characteristics.

Vertical structure and part of the horizontal structure. Special Interactions

GENERAL VERTICAL STRUCTURE RELATION max 90cm min 25cm

Systems, windows, overhangs, etc. should be rounded.

Special interactions related to vertical structure1 1These interactions should be identified and defined first because they condition vertical structure

Flat roof SOL/IP max 100cm/330cm min -/50cm

Sloped roof SOL max 100cm min -

Wall /Roof corners (without downpipes)

SOL/VF max 100cm/330cm min -/50cm

Walls exposed to impacts IP max 330cm min 50cm

Part of the horizontal structure

Related to openings, when vertical structure is not continuous.

Technologies to be applied according to interactions

Group Interaction with

existing envelope

Number of possible technologies (grade

of flexibility)

Technologies

IP VF SOL DW

Wall areas Big Wall areas 3 x x x



Small Wall areas (<0,5x0,5)

2 x x

Façade base Walls exposed to impacts

1 x

Openings (Windows, doors, bay Windows…)

Access doors 1 (frame) Glazed áreas/window

1+ frame x


2+ DW + PV above + floor ext.insulation

x x x

Type of roof Flat roofs 2* x x* *If needed it’s possible to install SOL but as SolarDuct type system (inclination 30º-45º) Sloped roofs 1 x

Edges, corners Wall corners 2 x x Roof corners 2 x x

Balconies (no glazed), overhangs

Balcony 3 + floor ext.insulation + no

PV

x x x

Overhangs 2 + PV in overhang façade

x x

Decorative elements 2 x x Flat roof perimeter walls

2 x x

Slooped roof overhang

2 x x

Systems

Rain water gutters 1 x Downpipes, cables 1 x Exhaust tracks 2 x x Air conditioning, HVAC

1 x

Number of possible technologies Grade of flexibility

Structure and 1 1 ↓Not flexible = restricted

2+/3+ 2/3 ± Part flexible/part not flexible 2 2 Flexible 3 3 ↑ Flexible

Technologies to be applied according to façades orientation

These options are developed in section 3. It depends on each building specific location and climate, apart from façades orientation.

Energy savings evaluation

Evaluation of energy savings of each room is developed in section 3. It is related to surface of each technology and surface of each technology (window, roof, façade).

Beside the flexibility of application of different envelope technologies, each of them have also different finishing possibilities. This gives the architects great possibilities to give different aesthetical composition solutions to each building although using a unique system, BRESAER system.



As BRESAER’s system integrates active and passive technologies, on-site renewable energy production (heat and electricity), heating, cooling and power system design must be overlapped with the architectural design process. How this systems can be physically integrated in the envelope have been defined on section 1.2. All these facilities will be controlled by a building Energy Management System which combines software and hardware. The BEMS is centred in four basic functions: monitoring, controlling, optimizing and reporting.

The architectural design process must be also overlapped with the installation and commissioning design in other to guaranty an easy, fast and successful construction process to ultimately achieve an energy and cost-effective building retrofit.



2 Definition of representative situations (basecases)

As described in Task 2.1, the building typology delimitation is mainly based on two aspects: analysis of the existing building stock and intrinsic characteristics of the BRESAER system. First step was the selection of parameters that would be used for the building’s analysis, selection and characterization. Next step was to select one country and a city to represent each of the four defined climatic zones. Once the representative country for each climatic zone was selected, the next step taken was the delimitation of the building’s characteristics based on their age band for each function type. The age band with more stock volume (built area) was chosen and its parameters taken to characterize the representative building. The result of this process is the delimitation of the buildings’ function type to residential buildings, offices buildings and educational buildings. For each of these, a real building was selected in order to have a basis to start the architectural and energetic design of the retrofitting system. The geometrical parameters of these buildings will remain the same for each climatic zone. The remaining parameters will be defined by the representative country selected for each region and restricted by the age band delimitation. The objective now is to provide the next subtasks with a complete definition of the reference buildings.

2.1 Residential basecase building complete description As describe in Task 2.1, the country that will define the representative non-geometrical building parameters for each climatic zone will be:

- Czech Republic for Cold climate - France for Temperate climate - Italy for Hot Summer /Cold Winter climate - Greece for Hot climate

The real residential building selected to be the reference residential building is a residential building in Bologna, Italy, selected due to of its adequate dimensions and WWR ratio, construction type and material. This building is presented in Figure 25. It is a rectangular block built in the period 1946-1960 and divided into 4 conditioned floors with a gross area of 440.75 m2 per floor and with a total conditioned floor area 1763 m2. More detailed building parameters are described in



Table 11.



Table 11 – Detailed reference residential building parameters



Figure 25 – Picture of a very similar residential building to that one selected in Bologna, Italy. Source:

Google maps.

With all this information, sketches have been draw to be used in the whole-building energy simulation of the reference residential building. Figure 26, Figure 27, Figure 28, Figure 29 and Figure 30 shown for the reference residential building the corresponding lay out of: East façade; West façade; North and South façades; first, second, third and fourth floor and ground floor.

Figure 26 – Layout of the East façade of the selected residential building



Figure 27 – Layout of the West façade of the selected residential building

Figure 28 – Layout of the North and South façades of the selected residential building

Figure 29 – Layout of first, second, third and fourth floor of the selected residential building



Figure 30 – Layout of ground floor of the selected residential building

The geometrical parameters of this residential building will remain the same for each climatic zone. The building characterization for each climatic zone will be completed with the selected building parameters as described in Table 12. These residential buildings will be used as a basis for the architectural and energetic strategy development of the BRESAER system.

Table 12 – Representative parameters for each of the defined climatic zones, residential buildings

Walls Roof Floor

1,43 1,45 1,01Heat. Cool. DHW

128 _ 15

Walls Roof Floor

1,7 2,56 1,25

Heat. Cool. DHW

73 _ 15

Walls Roof Floor

1,15 1,1 0,94

Heat. Cool. DHW

15

Walls Roof Floor

2,22 3,05 3,125

Heat. Cool. DHW

38 _ 15

SELECTION COLD ZONE - Czech Republic (Prage)

(age) <1979Nº floors 4

Floor size [m2] 1.763

U values [W/m2ºC]

Windows

2,9Consumption

[kW/h/yr]

Total

143

SELECTION TEMPERATE ZONE - France (Paris)

(age) <1970

Nº floors 4


U values [W/m2ºC]

Windows

3,55

Consumption

[kW/h/yr]

Total

88

SELECTION HOT SUMMER / COLD WINTER ZONE - Italy (Bolonia)

(age) 1946-1960

Nº floors 4


U values [W/m2ºC]

Windows

4,9

Consumption

[kW/h/yr]

Total

168 183

SELECTION HOT ZONE - Greece (Athens)

(age) <1980

Nº floors 4*


U values [W/m2ºC]

Windows

4,7

Consumption

[kW/h/yr]

Total

53



With respect the HVAC y DHW systems, the characteristics are the following:

Gas central heating system: gas non-condensing boiler, atmospheric burner, installed in

unconditioned space, chimney > 10 m, before 1996. Central distribution, horizontal strings in unheated rooms / 1961-1976.

DHW system: gas-fired instantaneous water heater, non-condensing, open combustion chamber without standing pilot.

2.2 Office basecase building complete description As describe in Task 2.1, the country that will define the representative non-geometrical building parameters for each climatic zone will be:

- Czech Republic for Cold climate - France for Temperate climate - Italy for Hot Summer /Cold Winter climate - Greece for Hot climate

Table 13 presents total building stock floor area, office building floor area and percentage of office building floor area respect total building stock floor area, for Czech Republic, France, Italy and Greece. (Source BPIE Data Hub for the energy performance of buildings). Data in Deliverable 2.1 were wrong.

Table 13 – Total building stock floor area and office building floor area of Czech Republic, France, Italy and

Greece.

m2% m2

% m2% m2

%

Total building stock 402000000 - 2790000000 - 3140000000 - 391000000 -

Office buildings 35600000 8.9 205000000 7.3 56700000 1.8 26200000 6.7

Czech Republic France Italy Greece

The geometrical office building information, mainly the WWR, is not found to be a statistically feasible value in most of the cases. Therefore, one office building has been defined with adequate geometrical characteristics: an acceptable minimum building dimensions and floors, an acceptable ratio between opaque area and glazed area and a relatively simple geometry. The geometrical parameters of this office building will remain the same for each climatic zone. The defined geometrical parameters of this office building are the following:

- Glazing ratio of 18% (floor area) - 4 floors - Floor area size of 450 m2

Figure 31, Figure 32, Figure 33, Figure 34 and Figure 35 present for the reference office building the corresponding layout of: South façade; North façade, West and East façades; first, second, third, fourth, ground floor and basement floor.



Figure 31 – Layout of the façade of South façade of the selected office building

Figure 32 – Layout of the façade of North façade of the selected office building



Figure 33 – Layout of the façade of West and East façades of the selected office building

Figure 34 – Layout of first, second, third, fourth and ground floor of the selected office building



Figure 35 – Layout of the basement floor of the selected office building

The geometrical parameters of this office building will remain the same for each climatic zone. The building characterization for each of the defined climatic zones is described in



Table 14. These office buildings will be used as a basis for the architectural and energetic strategy development of the BRESAER system. HVAC system has to be defined.



Table 14 – Representative parameters for each of the defined climatic zones, office building

30%

Walls Roof Floor

0.8 0.8 1.5

Heat. Cool. Light.

265 19 10

30%

Walls Roof Floor

2.1 1.8 1.8

Heat. Cool. Light.

257 15 37

30%

Walls Roof Floor

1.2 1.3 0.8

Heat. Cool. Light.

26 58

30%

Walls Roof Floor

2.4 3 0.7

Heat. Cool. Light.

86 63 22

Glazing ratio

Glazing ratio

450

450

Glazing ratio

450

Construct. type Reinforce concrete frame

Consumption

[kW/h/yr]

Total

Floor size [m2]

U values [W/m2ºC]

Windows

5

Glazing ratio

450

SELECTION HOT ZONE - Greece (Athens)

(age) <1960

Nº floors 4

Construct. type

Consumption

[kW/h/yr]

Total

170

Solid masonry/ reinforced concrete; exposed facades of brick, stone, plaster and concrete

Floor size [m2]

U values [W/m2ºC]

Windows

5.5

SELECTION HOT SUMMER / COLD WINTER ZONE - Italy (Bologna)

(age) < 1980

Nº floors 4

U values [W/m2ºC]

Windows

5

Construct. type Masonry type, no curtain wall

Consumption

[kW/h/yr]

Total

(age) < 1960

Nº floors 4

Floor size [m2]

Construct. type Concrete structure, no curtain wallConsumption

[kW/h/yr]

Total

SELECTION TEMPERATE ZONE - France (Paris)

Floor size [m2]

U values [W/m2ºC]

Windows

2.8

SELECTION COLD ZONE - Czech Republic (Prage)

(age) < 1945Nº floors 4



2.3 Educational basecase building complete description As describe in task 2.1, the countries that will define the representative non-geometrical building parameters for each climatic zone will be:

- Czech Republic for Cold climate - France for Temperate climate - Turkey for Hot Summer /Cold Winter climate - Greece for Hot climate

The selection for the Hot Summer / Cold winter region was not based on the country’s available information but on the fact that the project’s demonstration will be performed in an educational building in Ankara (Turkey). As this city’s climate has typical Hot Summer / Cold winter region’s values, it was considered the best option. The real educational building selected to be the reference educational building is the project´s demonstration building: Keçiören Public Education Center Building (hereinafter referred to as “KPECB”), in Ankara (Turkey). Figure 36 presents a photograph of KPECB demo building.

Figure 36 – Southwest and Southeast façades of KPECB

The building is a Public Educational Centre. It is a rectangular block built in 1990, divided into 4 floors with a gross area of 450 m2 each; which defines a total floor area of 1800 m2. Walls were built with cast concrete and their thickness is 20 cm. There is no air cavity or insulation. The sloped roof is not insulated and is also constructed with concrete. Concrete floors do not provide heavy thermal mass. Windows of measurement 70x170 cm are double glazed with PVC framing, and are mostly located in the Southeast and Northwest façades, as shown in the corresponding figures below. These façades are not protected with any shading devices. Building usage is classrooms, offices, workshops and computer labs.



The building is conditioned with a central heating system consisting of a natural gas boiler and an electrical pump, and individual cooling systems. Radiators heat each room of the building, while cooling is distributed by split air-conditioning units on some classrooms. There are no domestic hot water, ventilation or energy control systems.

Figure 37, Figure 38, Figure 39, Figure 40, Figure 41, Figure 42 and Figure 43 shown for KPECB the corresponding pain view of: first floor, second floor, ground floor, basement floor, Southeast façade, Northwest façade and Southwest and Northeast façades.

Figure 37 – Plain view of first floor of KPECB

Figure 38 – Plain view of second floor of KPECB



Figure 39 – Plain view of ground floor of KPECB

Figure 40 – Plain view of basement floor of KPECB

Figure 41 – Front view of Southeast façade of KPECB



Figure 42 – Front view of Northwest façade of KPECB

Figure 43 – Front view of Southwest (left) and Northeast (right) façades of KPECB

The geometrical parameters of this office building will remain the same for each climatic zone. The building characterization for each climatic zone will be completed with the selected building parameters as described in Table 15. These educational buildings will be used as a basis for the architectural and energetic strategy development of the BRESAER system.



Table 15 – Representative parameters for each of the defined climatic zones, educational building



Further, Figure 44, Figure 45, Figure 46 and Figure 47 present a scheme of zones usages and floor layouts, for each floor, to identify usage and occupation profile of KPECB.

Figure 44 – Basement floor usages of KPECB



Figure 45 – Ground floor usages of KPECB

Figure 46 – First floor usages of KPECB

Figure 47 – Second floor usages of KPECB



With respect the HVAC y DHW systems, the characteristics are the following:

Heating: 1 boiler with 200,000 kcal/h (235 kW) heating capacity and radiators

Heating Fuel: Natural gas

Cooling: 8 split air-conditioners in classrooms

Cooling Fuel: Electricity

No DHW

No mechanical ventilation systems

Figure 48 – Plant Room in the Demo Building (Boiler and pump)



3 Definition of the conceptual energy strategies and identification with conceptual technological modes

The following sections have as objective to provide an initial suitability study of components for different conditions to be encountered. The analysis initiates with determination of suitable conceptual strategies in each climate zone based on thermal comfort. BRESAER building components are then matched according to their characteristics in order to fulfil the conceptual strategies, using also the possible combinations described in Section 1.21. A series of abstractions summarizing the conditions to be used previous to energy analysis using exact models are then presented.

3.1 Most suitable energy strategies for each climate zone The starting tool used for defining conceptual energy strategies is the psychrometric chart [8]. It is suitable for delimiting these strategies, as it can show acceptable limits for human occupancy in a space based on combinations of relative humidity (RH) and temperature. A variety of comfort models exist based on operative conditions and generic user characteristics. This document will refer to the ASHRAE HOF 2005 comfort model, with indoor temperatures between 20 and 23.3 degrees Celsius, at 50% RH. The software Climate Consultant v6.0 [9] will be used for automating analysis of climate data. Psychrometric chart analysis shows the number of hours that a single conceptual strategy has to be applied in order to obtain comfort conditions. Strategies are expressed as percentage of the total number of hours per year that these must be applied. Overlaps are possible, therefore percentages do not add to 100%. A caveat of the psychrometric chart analysis is that it is independent of orientation and energy source. Therefore, care must be taken when identifying conceptual strategies with solar-driven technologies such as ventilated facades. Due to the same fact, site-specific orientation and obstruction analysis should also be made when considering energy-generating devices such as photovoltaic panels. Figure 49 to Figure 53 show the strategies for each of the representative cities selected in D2.1, expressed as percentage of total hours in the year (8760). The software draws its analysis on weather files with hourly data for the required variables. These weather files can also be used in energy analysis tools such as EnergyPlus. The psychrometric chart is shown for each location along with each hourly climate data point plotted. In this way it is possible to quickly see the distributions for both temperature and moisture/relative humidity. The coloured boundaries show the psychrometric regions where strategies are expected to make an impact. The two areas contained within blue boundaries show where indoor comfort is anticipated in the absence of intervention measures for two levels of clothing – summer and winter.



In all cases, internal gains are assumed present and contribute to maintaining the building temperature during the heating season. This has the effect of lowering the assumed building balance point to around 13 C. Some of the climate strategies mention the use of evaporative cooling to minimise requirements for mechanical cooling. While BRESEAR does not include any active humidification elements, there is the possibility that active modules such as Solarwall panels will include an air handling system and therefore evaporative cooling may be considered as an optional revision to pre-requisite equipment. A more detailed analysis of how the façade modules best support the energy strategies identified is given later in Section 3.2. However, in very general terms, some relevant points are made linking the climate to the possible choice of modules. A general analysis of the climate for the 5 locations (including the demonstration building in Ankara) shows that heating and overheating prevention measures are universally needed. Overheating prevention can enable solutions without mechanical cooling, or reduce the hours of cooling use so is a valid consideration even in colder climates. Therefore, some common strategies are applicable to all regions and discussed here to prevent duplication: a)- All areas benefit from passive solar heating. Such a strategy needs to avoid excessive summer gain so shading systems should be employed when the sun is at higher altitude. b)- Internal heat gain is an important means to reduce heating load, therefore influencing detailing and construction supervision of retrofit modules. The analysis of the sites is as follows: 1-Athens (Hot climate)

The location has relatively mild winters and hot, sunny summers. Suitable design strategies can ensure active climate control systems are minimally used. The recommendations for this climate are focused on solar control measures to prevent overheating and direct solar radiation on occupants (Figure 49).



Figure 49 – Pyschrometric chart and suggested strategies for Athens, Greece

Mechanical cooling is needed for an estimated 6.3% of annual hours where direct evaporative cooling can be implemented, but otherwise increases to 14.4%. If the building is of high thermal mass, then façade ventilation strategies that allow night purging, for example cross flow ventilation between opposing facades with opening windows, can reduce the need for cooling but the effect is small – a reduction of around 30 hours’ use annually. Natural ventilation can make a useful contribution to displacing the use of cooling. In its absence, cooling is likely to be required for around 90 additional hours. A suitable strategy may therefore involve the use of natural ventilation openings in the facades, such as operable windows. Athens is sunny all year with consequences for summer and winter periods. Cloud cover from June to September averages less than 20% thus solar gain is a major issue for overheating. Average hourly temperatures exceed 27 C for 15% of the year, with a significant proportion of such hours occurring between noon and 6pm. Window shading is therefore important for all facades except the north. As with most climates, insulation can provide benefits on all facades since heating is still likely. All non-northern facades may benefit from solar reflective coatings to minimize heat gain. In winter solar radiation levels are still quite high, averaging approximately 200W/m2 on a vertical south-facing surface during daylight hours. In addition to the aforementioned passive heating potential, this may offer opportunities for ventilation air preheating although the useful yield during the short heating season should be consider further in a detailed design. The hourly global horizontal radiation averages 363W/m2 over the year and is the highest of all the locations considered. Photovoltaic films can be considered.



2-Ankara (Demonstration site) The city is located within the “Hot summers / cool winters” climate region. The climate has a number of notable features relevant to strategies (Figure 50). While in summer high temperatures are common, with 5% of days averaging over 27 C, the absolute moisture content is low with moisture content rarely exceeding 0.01kg/kg dry air. The hot summer periods are therefore of “dry heat” and the use of direct evaporative cooling in conjunction with suitable solar control measures may eliminate the need for mechanical cooling. This will also help to maintain building humidity during periods when the outside air is hot but exceptionally dry, as can occur for perhaps 30-40 hours a year.

Figure 50 – Pyschrometric chart and suggested strategies for Ankara, Turkey

Ankara has a large summer diurnal temperature variation. For buildings with high thermal mass, pre-cooling via night ventilation through cross flow can eliminate the majority of summer discomfort. In this case, measures to help prevent solar gain such as shading, insulating panels and solar reflective panels are important especially on the south and western facades to reduce mechanical cooling. Annual solar radiation levels are high, averaging 320W/m2 on a horizontal surface. Solar shading of windows is important from May to September, especially on south and west facades but also on the east. However, while summer radiation levels are high, Ankara is particularly cold in winter and measures to reduce heat loss are likely to be the most important. Temperatures in the coldest winter month are similar to those of Prague and the dominant requirement for comfort over the year is heating. High levels of insulation may also be appropriate. With the exception of December, there is a reasonably high solar radiation average on south facing vertical surfaces for the winter months. A design strategy to promote winter solar utilization on the south facade may be of interest, such as passive solar gain or solar-heated cavities. In the event that the building includes façade modules using a building mechanical ventilation system, such as Solarwall, heat recovery is worth considering. Measures to minimize heat gain through windows and facades



should also be considered, such as closable window shutters and ensuring elements are well sealed. Natural ventilation cooling is likely to be of limited significance, reducing predicted cooling operation by less than 30 hours, since air temperatures can be very high in summer. If employing heating, direct evaporative cooling and measures to promote winter solar gain, then comfort is predicted for 99.9% of annual hours. Mechanical cooling is likely to be redundant if using the recommended conceptual strategies. Omitting evaporative cooling but with a strategy of summer night ventilation in conjunction with high thermal mass (if this is feasible in the final modules and the construction is massive) then comfort is still predicted for 99.2% of annual hours. 3-Bologna (Hot summers cool winters) An examination of the chart for Bologna shows that it has similar strategies to those of Ankara (Figure 51). It is slightly warmer for most of the year but winter temperatures result in a high number of heating hours. Modules which reduce heat loss, such as effective insulation, are thus likely to be appropriate. Solar radiation levels in summer are moderately high, and average daily summer temperatures exceed 27 C for 8% of days. This suggests solar shading in relevant facades. Winter radiation levels are not particularly remarkable, so the benefits of winter solar heating may be limited, or at least more similar to Paris and Prague than the Turkish locations. Overall average radiation levels on a horizontal surface are 239W/m2. Natural ventilation strategies for the summer, including night purging when high thermal mass is available can make a useful contribution. However, summer humidity can be high meaning evaporative cooling in mechanical ventilation systems is unlikely to eliminate the need for mechanical cooling. Summer mechanical cooling is likely to be present, mainly due to a large number of hours exceeding 30 C and high RH.

Figure 51 – Pyschrometric chart and suggested strategies for Bologna, Italy



4-Paris (Temperate climate) Although Paris does not reach such low temperatures in winter, summer temperatures are also not extreme, hence it is a typical temperate climate. From the graphs, the dominant intervention required will be heating, therefore the strategy concerning well insulated facades and air tight construction still applies (Figure 52). With the absence of evaporative cooling, mechanical cooling may be necessary (98.9% comfortable hours are suggested in its absence) but for only a short duration.

Figure 52 – Pyschrometric chart and suggested strategies for Paris, France

If a building is not mechanically cooled, and hence natural ventilation is provided, then good sealing of façade openings is appropriate. Evaporative cooling through a mechanical ventilation system helps to provide a boost to summer comfort (to 99.8% hours expected), but can likely still be omitted without unacceptable discomfort arising too often. Natural ventilation for heat purging at night when high thermal mass is available is an option to maximize summer comfort. Sun shading of windows is preferable on the south and western facades but possibly optional on the east. Paris is quite a cloudy location with cloud cover averaging 50-70%. Solar radiation is consequently 221W/m2. However, radiation on vertical south facing surfaces is slightly higher than for Prague or Bologna. This is reflected in the slightly higher expected contribution from passive solar gain in winter and perhaps the suitability of solar preheating of ventilation air. 5-Prague (Cold climate)

Prague has few hours where the climate is comfortable without additional processes, and this is dominated by the need for heating (Figure 53). Suitable strategies are likely to focus on highly insulating and air tight modules. Passive solar heating is beneficial, but the climate is not particularly favourable for solar heating strategies. Average radiation during daylight hours on vertical south-facing facades barely reaches 50W/m2 from November to January and struggles to reach 100W/m2 in February-March. This is reflected by the low contribution from passive solar



heating in the chart, but is likely to extend to other solar utilizing modules in the winter months. Prague is a cloudy location, with an average of around 80% cloud cover in mid-winter, falling to 50-60% in summer. Hourly average solar yields are at slightly under 200W/m2 for the year.

Figure 53 – Pyschrometric chart and suggested strategies for Prague, Czech Republic

Prague benefits from a climate that may not need mechanical cooling when appropriate design decisions are taken. If natural ventilation is possible through the façade, then comfort may be possible for 99.2% of the year, with the remainder due to occasional high temperatures. Such levels may be acceptable for naturally ventilated buildings in conjunction with shading of windows. Strategies to include evaporative cooling in mechanical ventilation systems or night purge ventilation (for suitable properties) may take acceptable hours to above 99.8%. As summary of the analysis, Figure 54 shows the strategy recommendations from Climate Consultant for the five locations. It has also been filtered to remove those not relevant for the BRESEAR system. Numbering comes from the list provided by the software.



T C HS/CW HS/CW H

Paris Prague Bologna Ankara Athens

19 19 19 19 11

11 11 11 11 19

4 4 4 4 35

12 12 5 5 58

5 12 12 37

22 22 22 43

50

Applicable to all climates and locations

High incidence (4 locations)

Common incidence (3 locations)

Applicable to single location (Hot)

4 Extra insulation (super insulation) might prove cost effective, and will increase occupant comfort by keeping indoor temperatures more uniform

5 Carefully seal building to minimize infiltration and eliminate drafts, especially in windy sites (wrap, weather stripping, tight windows)

11 Heat gain from lights, occupants, and equipment greatly reduces heating needs so keep building tight, well insulated (to lower Balance Point temperature)

12 Insulating blinds, heavy draperies, or operable window shutters will help reduce winter night time heat losses if automatically controlled

19 For passive solar heating face most of the glass area south to maximize winter sun exposure, and design overhangs to fully shade in summer

22 Super tight buildings need a fan powered HRV or ERV (Heat or Energy Recovery Ventilator) to ensure indoor air quality while conserving energy

35 Good natural ventilation can reduce or eliminate air conditioning in warm weather, if windows are well shaded and oriented to prevailing breezes

37 Window overhangs (designed for this latitude) or operable sunshades (awnings that extend in summer) can reduce or eliminate air conditioning

43 Use light colored building materials and cool roofs (with high emissivity) to minimize conducted heat gain

50 In hot, dry climates an evaporative cooler can provide enough cooling capacity (if water is available and humidity is low) thus reducing or even eliminating air conditioning

58 This is one of the more comfortable climates, so shade to prevent overheating, open to breezes in summer, and use passive solar gain in winter

Figure 54 – Strategy priority and clustering for the locations

Note that in some instances, the strategy may be indirectly related to BRESAER elements so it is retained. For example, recommendation 22 would be applicable for mechanical ventilation systems, as it may be used in a building with Solarwall panels. The colour scheme shows how there is much commonality in the recommendations. Strategies to shade glazing in the summer and using well insulated / airtight facades to minimize heat loss are applicable to all climates.



3.2 Conceptual strategies vs. BREASER’s components. Energy performance requirements

Conceptual energy strategies found in the previous section can be matched with conceptual technologies, which have been identified as the following: Insulation upgrading, shading, colour, ventilation, passive heating/cooling. These in turn can be identified with the specific proposed elements described in Section 1. Table 16 shows how elements considered in the BRESAER project fulfil each conceptual energy strategy and technology. As it was mentioned in Section 3.1, psychrometric analysis is independent of orientation and energy source. Therefore, the table also provides a preliminary analysis on the most suitable orientations where these elements can be placed based on their characteristics. This analysis will be taken into account for computer simulations.

Table 16 – Identification of basic strategies and suitable orientations with BRESAER facade elements

Element Conceptual energy

strategy Conceptual technology

Most suitable technology orientation

STAM panel Passive solar gains Insulation N, S, E,W

ASCAMM blinds Sun-shading Shading and insulation when closed

N (privacy and insulation), S, E, W

Solarwall panel Internal heat gain, forced cooling

Passive heating/cooling (active if fan is used)

S, E, W

ULMA ventilated cavity

Ventilation &cooling, internal heat gain

Ventilation, passive heating/cooling

N, S, E, W

Nanophos reflective paint

Forced cooling Colour S, E, W

Solarwall and ULMA systems are very similar in their basic principles of using solar-driven buoyancy. However, the proposed Solarwall configuration can include active components. STAM panel will be used not only to provide a high degree of insulation either in roof or façade, but can also be placed in practice in façade locations closer to the ground where people or vehicles are in frequent contact with the façade wall. For simulation purposes, all systems will be considered under ideal usage conditions for every climate and usage. In order to assign values previous to computer simulations, data was provided by manufacturers on the main characteristics of their components. Table 17 to Table 19 present starting conditions used for energy analysis.



Table 17 – Representative conditions for simulation basecase residential module

Residential study module

Width (m)

Length (m)

Height (m)

Floor area m2

Window area m2

Color outer wall

Color roof

Reflectance ceiling

Reflectance internal walls

Reflectance floor

Temperature settings C

Winter heating setpoint C

Summer heating setpoint C

COP

Loads per basic unit

Usage Time 00:00-07:00 07:00-08:00 08:00-17:00 17:00-24:00

Total load occupants W * 320 320 0 500

Fixed equipment W/m2 1 1 1 1

Other equipment W/m2 0 2 0 10

Lighting W/m2 0 6 0 12

Number of switches 1 1 1 1

Number of lighting zones 1 1 1 1

Infiltration and ventilation

Infiltration ach (natural) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Quality ventilation ach (usage time) 0 0 0 0

Night ventilation natural means, ach 0 0 0 0

Night ventilation mech. means, ach 0 0 0 0

Shading coefficient of elements (if present)

Internal blinds

U-values external opaque elements

U-value glazing

According to climate zone and location D2.1


Representative existing situation

n/a

0.3

0.55

0.7

0.6

0.3

10

10

2.8

100

20 (20% floor area)

20

25

3

Table 18 – Representative conditions for simulation basecase office module

Office study module

Width (m)

Length (m)

Height (m)

Floor area m2

Window area m2

Color outer wall

Color roof

Reflectance ceiling


Reflectance floor




COP


Usage Time 00:00-08:00 08:00-17:00 17:00-20:00 20:00-24:00

Total load workers W * 0 1008 756 0

Fixed equipment W/m2 0.1 0.50 0.40 0.1

Other equipment W/m2 0 11 8 0










Internal blinds


U-value glazing



9 (18% floor area)

0.65

25

3

0.3

0.55

0.7

0.6

0.3

20


6.1

8.2

3 [5]

50



Table 19 – Representative conditions for simulation basecase educational module

Educational study module

Width (m)

Length (m)

Height (m)

Floor area m2

Window area m2

Color outer wall

Color roof

Reflectance ceiling


Reflectance floor




COP


Usage Time 00:00-08:00 08:00-16:00 16:00-18:00 18:00-24:00

Total load students W* 0 4200 2080 0

Fixed equipment W/m2 0 4 4 0

Other equipment W/m2 0.7 1 1 0.7










Internal blinds


U-value glazing

n/a



20

25

3


7.3

7.3

3.2

53.29

0.3

6.4 (12% floor area)

0.3

0.55

0.7

0.6

These tables provide information based on the conditions described in Section 2. Other sources include the end-uses and load distributions described in D2.1. They can be used to produce an abstract, modular representation of reality that enables its representation through computer simulation programs, and its extension to buildings with different characteristics. Among the features presented, they include cooling and heating set points, initial infiltration levels, as well as load schedules for occupancy and equipment. Table 20 provides a series of common improvements that are assumed as basic requirements applied in every improved case, as pre-requisite to the placement of technology combinations. These enhancements are related to: upgrading to current regulatory thermal insulation levels [9]; reduction of infiltration; and introduction of sensors in office and educational buildings turning off artificial lighting when daylight exceeds 500 lux. This level is taken from EN 12464-1:2011 (for writing, typing, reading, data processing on computer). The lighting sensor is applied only to combinations using the ASCAMM blind system in the selected building usages.



Table 20 – Common improvements applied to each usage (U-value source: BPIE Data Hub website)

Use Component

Target U-value per city (W/m2-C) Target

infiltration (ach)

Ascamm system only

Prague Paris Bologna Athens

Light sensors

per zone (On/Off)

Light level

switch off (lx)

Residential

Resid external wall

0.27 0.31 0.29 0.38

0.15 0 -- Resid roof 0.24 0.21 0.28 0.34

Resid glazing 1.7 1.7 2 2.6

Resid window frame

1.5 1.5 2 2

Educational

Educ external wall

0.28 0.33 0.45 0.37

0.15 1 500 Educ roof 0.22 0.2 0.28 0.32

Educ glazing 1.7 1.7 2.4 2.6

Educ window frame

1.5 1.5 2 2

Office

Office external wall

0.29 0.32 0.29 0.39

0.15 1 500 Office roof 0.23 0.2 0.26 0.34

Office glazing 1.7 1.7 2 2.6

Office window frame

1.5 1.5 2 2

3.3 Energy analysis of envelope component combinations EnergyPlus [11] was used in order to analyse through computer modelling the most suitable technology combinations for each usage and location. This software provides an efficient and verified solution for large scale analysis of different building variables. Constant developments of this software enable it to model the advanced technological characteristics present in considered options for application in the BRESAER system, as well as their interaction with each other. The computer simulations took into account the study modules characteristics for each use (educational, residential and office), together with the common improvements in each of them. They were studied for the main geographical orientations (North, South, East, West), in the five selected cities (Ankara, Athens, Bologna, Paris and Prague).



The number of possible technology combinations was limited by the functional studies of previous sections, and are summarized in Table 21. The table is arranged according to the number of technologies applied to the façade in order to represent different degrees of complexity. Nanophos reflective paint is assumed in all combinations as an external layer. Roof technologies (STAM system, Solarwall) are present as indicated.

Table 21 – Combinations for energy analysis

# Facade Technologies

Code Full description

-- 1 Base Basecase

1 Technology

2 SCr Solar collector roof

3 STr Stam panel roof

4 STw Stam panel wall

5 SCw Solar collector wall

6 VF Ventilated façade

7 BG Blinds&glazing

8 SCr+SCw Solar collector roof + solar collector wall

9 SCr+VF Solar collector roof + ventilated façade

10 SCr+STw Solar collector roof + Stam panel wall

11 SCr+BG Solar collector roof + Blinds&glazing

12 STr+SCw Stam panel roof + solar collector wall

13 STr+VF Stam panel roof + ventilated façade

14 STr+STw Stam panel roof + Stam panel wall

15 STr+BG Stam panel roof + Blinds&glazing

16 STr+SCr+STw Stam panel roof + solar collector roof + Stam panel wall

2 Technologies

17 BG+SCw Blinds&glazing + Solar collector wall

18 BG+VF Blinds&glazing + Ventilated façade

19 BG+STw Blinds&glazing + Stam panel wall

20 SCr+SCw+BG Solar collector roof + Solar collector wall + Blinds&glazing

21 SCr+VF+BG Solar collector roof + Ventilated facade + Blinds&glazing

22 SCr+STw+BG Solar collector roof + Stam panel wall + Blinds&glazing

23 STr+SCw+BG Stam panel roof + Solar collector wall + Blinds&glazing

24 STr+VF+BG Stam panel roof + Ventilated façade + Blinds&glazing

25 STr+STw+BG Stam panel roof + Stam panel wall + Blinds&glazing

3 Technologies 26 STr+SCr+STw*+VF+BG Stam panel roof + Solar collector roof + Stam panel wall* + Ventilated façade + blinds&glazing

*On areas above and below window only

The study module has two thermal zones with identical orientation, geometry and window areas. The first zone is assumed to be an intermediate floor (called “middle floor”), while the second is assumed to be directly over it as the top floor with a flat roof (called “upper floor”). Façade and glazing technologies are applied equally on both thermal zones. Technologies such as solar collector roofs are assumed to provide heating to all the zones.



Simulation results for educational use are shown from Figure 55 to Figure 66, results for office use are shown from Figure 67 to Figure 78, while results for residential use are shown from Figure 79 to Figure 90. Energy consumption results are organized in kWh/m2/year, according to source type and end-use (gas for heating; electricity for cooling, fans and lighting). They summarize a total of 1248 simulation runs.



Figure 55 – Simulation results Educational Ankara 1 façade technology

An

kara

Ed

uca

tio

nal



Figure 56 – Simulation results Educational Ankara: 2 façade technologies

An

kara

Ed

uca

tio

nal



Figure 57 – Simulation results Educational Ankara: 3 façade technologies

An

kara

Ed

uca

tio

nal



Figure 58 – Simulation results Educational Athens: 1 facade technology

Ath

en

s Ed

uca

tio

nal



Figure 59 – Simulation results Educational Athens: 2 facade technologies

Ath

en

s Ed

uca

tio

nal



Figure 60 – Simulation results Educational Athens: 3 facade technologies

Ath

en

s Ed

uca

tio

nal



Figure 61 – Simulation results Educational Paris: 1 facade technology

Par

is E

du

cati

on

al



Figure 62 – Simulation results Educational Paris: 2 facade technologies

Par

is E

du

cati

on

al



Figure 63 – Simulation results Educational Paris: 3 facade technologies

Par

is E

du

cati

on

al



Figure 64 – Simulation results Educational Prague: 1 facade technology

Pra

gue

Ed

uca

tio

nal



Figure 65 – Simulation results Educational Prague: 2 facade technologies

Pra

gue

Ed

uca

tio

nal



Figure 66 – Simulation results Educational Prague: 3 facade technologies

Pra

gue

Ed

uca

tio

nal



Figure 67 – Simulation results Offices Athens: 1 facade technology

Ath

en

s O

ffic

es



Figure 68 – Simulation results Offices Athens: 2 facade technologies

Ath

en

s O

ffic

es



Figure 69 – Simulation results Offices Athens: 3 facade technologies

Ath

en

s O

ffic

es



Figure 70 – Simulation results Offices Bologna: 1 facade technology

Bo

logn

a O

ffic

es



Figure 71 – Simulation results Offices Bologna: 2 facade technologies

Bo

logn

a O

ffic

es



Figure 72 – Simulation results Offices Bologn: 3 facade technologies

Bo

logn

a O

ffic

es



Figure 73 – Simulation results Offices Paris: 1 facade technology

Par

is O

ffic

es



Figure 74 – Simulation results Offices Paris: 2 facade technologies

Par

is O

ffic

es



Figure 75 – Simulation results Offices Paris: 3 facade technologies

Par

is O

ffic

es



Figure 76 – Simulation results Offices Prague: 1 facade technology

Pra

gue

Off

ice

s



Figure 77 – Simulation results Offices Prague: 2 facade technologies

Pra

gue

Off

ice

s



Figure 78 – Simulation results Offices Prague: 3 facade technologies

Pra

gue

Off

ice

s



Figure 79 – Simulation results Residential Athens: 1 facade technology

Ath

en

s R

esi

de

nti

al



Figure 80 – Simulation results Residential Athens: 2 facade technologies

Ath

en

s R

esi

de

nti

al



Figure 81 – Simulation results Residential Athens: 3 facade technologies

Ath

en

s R

esi

de

nti

al



Figure 82 – Simulation results Residential Bologna: 1 facade technology

Bo

logn

a R

esi

den

tial



Figure 83 – Simulation results Residential Bologna: 2 facade technologies

Bo

logn

a R

esi

den

tial



Figure 84 – Simulation results Residential Bologna: 3 facade technologies

Bo

logn

a R

esi

den

tial



Figure 85 – Simulation results Residential Paris: 1 facade technology

Par

is R

esi

de

nti

al



Figure 86 – Simulation results Residential Paris: 2 facade technologies

Par

is R

esi

de

nti

al



Figure 87 – Simulation results Residential Paris: 3 facade technologies

Par

is R

esi

de

nti

al



Figure 88 – Simulation results Residential Prague: 1 facade technology

Pra

gue

Re

sid

en

tial



Figure 89 – Simulation results Residential Prague: 2 facade technologies

Pra

gue

Re

sid

en

tial



Figure 90 – Simulation results Residential Prague: 3 facade technologies

Pra

gue

Re

sid

en

tial



From the simulation results it can be seen that in general, suitable technologies and their combinations can reduce between 38 to 72% of the initial energy consumption, depending on module placement, usage and geographical location. However, this still leaves a large number of solutions to be selected under energy considerations. Two main criteria were used to filter the most suitable solutions in terms of energy consumption only: The first was to pick those providing a total energy consumption of 60 kWh/m2/year. The second consisted of selecting among these, the top three energy performers in terms of absolute energy savings percentage. It was seen that most of the solutions fulfilling these criteria can be found in the space of two façade combinations. This provides an indication about the degree of complexity that needs to be considered for a high-energy saving solution. The results in this solution space of two façade combinations also provide similar amounts of energy savings. This is a positive aspect since the existence of a wide variety of solutions available also indicates that the proposed BRESAER system combinations can satisfy a range of needs according to other design objectives, such as budget, degree of desired complexity, etc.

3.4 Energetic system concept and refurbishment design methodology

In order to apply basecase simulation results to other general cases during the early design stage, it is necessary to provide estimates for each situation before performing an in-depth analysis of each case. These estimations provide criteria to decision-makers and allow exploration of different solutions, without committing significant resources such as detailed energy modelling. It must be noted that there is probability of high variations between representative base cases and any studied building where the system will be applied. Therefore, proportionality between expected energy savings must be calculated when providing estimates. Part of this variability not only includes the entire geometry of the study building and user’s behavior, but also the percentage of floor area or envelope surface to be intervened. Cases such as shading from neighbouring obstructions can prevent application of certain technologies. In that situation, available envelope area is reduced, and retrofit of these areas is limited to upgrading insulation to regulatory values only. The proposed methodology for energy estimates is based on coefficient proportionality of building envelope areas over the floor areas served by them. The assumptions that must be taken for the system to work are that the envelope areas that are retrofit must be continuous, there must be a low variation between the proportions of different served floor areas in each level, and that floor-to-floor distances have to be relatively the same between each other. As well, it is assumed that for solutions that comprise combinations of two or more technologies the ratio between them is maintained fairly close to the basecase. It is not necessary for all building envelope areas to be



covered with technologies, but the entire building envelope must comply with insulation and infiltration levels of Table 20. The estimation methodology consists of the following steps: 1. Total floor areas to be conditioned with technologies (TFAa) must be accounted for each level.

conditioned conditioned

Conditioned

Floor below top floor

Conditioned

Not

Top floor

Not

conditionedNot

Conditioned

Typical middle floor 2. Three specific floors must be noted: Top floor (the one with roof), floor below the top floor, and typical middle floor(s). Typical middle floors are assumed to be identical or close to identical, otherwise they must be noted separately. For simplicity, ground floors may be considered as middle floors.

Floor below top floor

Typical middle floor

Top floor

Typical middle floor

3. Façade areas to be retrofit with technology combinations (SAa) must be detailed for each floor and orientation. If the roof is going to be used for technology placement it must be kept as separate data.

East/West

Not covered

Not covered

North/South

Covered

Covered

Not covered

Covered



4. Floor area percentages for each façade and orientation must be defined according to the floor plan shape and total floor area to be served in the building under study (FAa). This will vary if the floor plan shape is prism or square, and the number of external walls. Complex shapes such as L or U-shaped plans should be broken down into smaller prisms or squares.

W

Proportion of served areas per orientation in one floor

N

E

S

FAa = TFa x % assigned per orientation 4b. A similar division must be made for the roof areas for each orientation but added to the façade areas to be covered according to relevant orientation of the top floor only. 5. A technology combination must be selected based on the results shown from Figure 55 to Figure 90. The top floor and floor below top will receive the same combination, while middle floors can have different combinations as allowed by the functional considerations of Section 1. The energy saving percentage of the picked combinations (EScomb) must be noted for each of the involved floors.

6. The ratio for retrofit surface area and serviced floor area, a, must be calculated for the section under study for each orientation, as well as the ratio between basic module surface area and basic module floor area, b. A second ratio (a/b) is calculated as well. This means there will be one ratio for the module on the top level and another for the middle levels.

building

building

Floor area

Surface area

module

module

Floor area

Surface area

EScomb = 59%

a = SAa/FAa b = Sab/FAb

Division of served floor areas per floor per orientation in a prism-shaped floor plan

Example of surface area ratios for top floor



7. The ratio (a/b) calculated in the previous step is multiplied by the energy saving provided by the technology combination used for that floor (EScomb). This result is multiplied by the weighted floor area served by the desired surface area in the case under study (FAa). The product is the energy saving of the section area (ESs)

ESs = (a/b) x (EScomb) x (FAa) 8. The procedure is repeated for the orientations involved and that will receive retrofit. Results can be added to obtain energy savings per each floor (ESf).

ESf = ESsn+ESse+ESss+ESsw 9. The floor areas are weighted relative to the total building area (including unconditioned areas), and multiplied in terms of percentage to the energy savings per floor (ESf). These results are added in order to obtain the total energy saving of the building using the considered technology combinations.

EStotal =(ESf1*Percentage area floor1)+(ESf2*Percentage area floor2)+….+(ESfn*Percentage area floorn)

This estimation methodology will be explored further in Task 2.3, with additional refinements during the course of the project. An application example is presented using the demonstration building in Ankara, as shown in Section 4.



4 Overall system concept and design methodology

4.1 Overall system concept The overall concept of BRESAER system is defined as an innovative, cost-effective, adaptable and industrialized envelope system for buildings refurbishment including combined active and passive pre-fabricated solutions integrated in a versatile lightweight structural mesh. It will allow easy and fast installation and removal of the system and the possibility to modify or substitute the envelope technologies distribution and include new ones without large manipulation of the sub structure. To achieve a versatile constructive system able to integrate active and passive envelope technologies, the following features will be used for the system development:

A vertical profile structure will serve all envelope components and be capable of providing

the requirements of each. It will be adaptable in order to align the systems.

The fixing system of the envelope components to the vertical profiles will be specific for

each technology and will provide the necessary depths to align all systems.

The continuous insulation layer will fit between the vertical profile anchors and will be

rigid, water resistant and fire resistant.

Different PV technologies will be integrated in ULMA, Solarwall and STAM’s envelope

technologies to provide on-site electric energy.

ULMA and Solarwall envelope technologies will be modified to permit cabling distribution

within its air cavity, additionally Solarwall could be accessible for maintenance purposes.

BRESAER system’s aims to retrofit the wider range of buildings as possible, including different typologies and climatic conditions. To achieve a cost-effective and realistic system, the range of buildings was limited in terms of worse energy performance and big building stock in Task 2.1 (See D2.1 “Definition of the envelope System context and Limits of Use”).The target building typologies has been described deeper in Section 2 to be used as base-case for the system’s development to guaranty its versatility from the very beginning. The distribution and configuration of the envelope technologies will be customized for each building and based in two aspects:

Architectural integration based on the possibilities and limitation of each envelope

component to interact with the existing envelope characteristics. This aspect has been

deeply analysed in Sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4 and a design methodology has been

developed. Beside the flexibility of application of different envelope technologies, each of

them have also different finishing possibilities. This gives the architects great possibilities

to give different aesthetical composition solutions to each building although using a unique

system, BRESAER system.



Energy performance improvements to achieve an energy consumption below 60

kW/m2·year. The best configurations and distributions for each building typology defined in

Section 2 have been deeply analysed in Section 3. This analysis has been made through

computer simulations. The large number of results generated by the analysis and high

variability to be found between basecases and studied building, have resulted in a

proposed energy-estimation methodology for early stages, previous to in-depth analysis.

This methodology helps to take decisions concerning feasibility of possible retrofit

interventions.

As BRESAER system integrates active and passive technologies, on-site renewable energy production (heat and electricity), heating, cooling and power system design must be overlapped with the architectural design process. All these facilities will be controlled by a building Energy Management System which combines software and hardware. The BEMS is centred in four basic functions: monitoring, controlling, optimizing and reporting.

The architectural design process must be also overlapped with the installation and commissioning design in other to guaranty an easy, fast and successful construction process to ultimately achieve an energy and cost-effective building retrofit.

The analysis of the European requirements is this stage was made in Section 1.5 to give input for the system design. The main conclusion is that these are very dependent on each country regulation with specific requirements and tests to be done for new building components not being able to find a common baseline. Therefore, Turkish regulation will be used to set this baseline requirement. If these requirements are found to be non-sufficient later on, the Spanish regulation will be used. Previously to starting the design process, local regulations must be analysed. If requirements are found to be more restrictive than the ones defined for BRESAER’s development, design changes will be analysed and implemented if possible.

Also the system’s limitations exposed on section 1.8 must be checked in order to know if the building is liable to be retrofitted with BRESAER system.



4.2 Design methodology description and application to DEMO building

The design methodology developed and described hereafter includes mainly architectural and energy performance aspects. The rest of aspects included in BRESAER system as facilities, electronics, manufacturing, installation, commissioning and maintenance will complete the design methodology later on during the project’s development. A deep geometrical analysis of the building must be done before starting the design process to identify the interactions among the building’s characteristics and BRESAER system integration possibilities. For each situation a numerical value of “flexibility degree” is given. This value corresponds to the number of different technologies that could be applied; higher values means more design flexibility. These are:

- Degree 1, one single envelope technology can be used - Degree 2, two different envelope technologies can be used - Degree 3, three different envelope technologies can be used.

In addition, a “+” symbol is added to the degree definition to mark an extra requirement (not related to the envelope technology selection) that must be fulfilled and partially limits the situation flexibility. For example, when analysing the solution for a window, not only it will be limited to using the Dynamic Window technology but also the opening’s frame must be considered; the results is an 1+ flexibility degree. These added restrictions have been defined on section 1.2. The objective is to set an order or sequence of the building’s characteristics to be examined, from most restrictive: those to be decided in the first place as affect the rest of the system or those where a specific technology must be used; to most flexible: where several technologies could be used. This order of flexibility degree will be used to establish the BRESAER system design methodology following the same sequence. In order to make easier the comprehension of the methodology and to show its possibilities the Demonstration building has been used as a case of study for its application.



Table 22 shows the analysis made to the DEMO building and how BRESAER’s components can be integrated ordering them by their degree of flexibility.



Table 22 – DEMO building characteristics analysis. BRESAER’s components integration possibilities ordered

by degree of flexibility to define design methodology sequence.

ANKARA (TURKEY). Hot summer / cold winter

STAGE 0 Vertical structure and part of the horizontal structure. Special Interactions

GENERAL VERTICAL STRUCTURE RELATION

max 90cm min 25cm

Systems, windows, overhangs, etc. should be overcome.

Special interactions related to vertical structure1

1These interactions should be identified and defined first because they condition vertical structure

Flat roof SOL/IP max 100cm/330cm min -/50cm

Sloped roof SOL max 100cm min -

Wall /Roof corners (without downpipes)

SOL/VF max 100cm/180cm min -/30cm

Walls exposed to impacts IP max 330cm min 50cm

Part of the horizontal structure

Related to openings, when vertical structure is not continuous.

STAGES 1 to 3 Technologies to be applied according to interactions

+ Technologies to be applied according to façades orientation (conclusions from section 3)

STAGE (grade of flexibility)

Group Interaction with existing

envelope

Number of possibilities

(grade of flexibility)

Technologies

IP VF SOL DW

STA

GE

1 (

grad

e1)

VERTICAL STRUCTURE and part of the horizontal structure

↓Not flexible =

restricted (1)

Façade base Walls exposed to impacts

1

1 x

Opennings Opennings

(Windows, doors, bay Windows…)

Access doors 1 (frame)

Glazed áreas/window

1+ frame x

Type of roof Sloped roofs 1 x

Systems Rain water gutters

1 x

Downpipes, cables

1 x

Air conditioning, HVAC

1 x

Orientation (section 3)

North 1+ window x x

STA

GE

2 (

grad

e 2

, 2+)

± Part flexible/part not flexible

(2+)


Overhangs 2 + PV in overhang

façade

x x

Opennings (Windows, doors, bay

Windows…)


2 + DW + PV above + floor ext.insulation

x x x

Flexible (2)

Wall areas Small Wall 131reas (<0,5x0,5)

2 x x

Type of roof Flat roofs 2* x x*

*If needed it’s possible to install SOL but as SolarDuct type system (inclination 30º-45º)

Edges, corners Wall corners 2 x x



Roof corners 2 x x


Decorative elements

2 x x

Flat roof perimeter walls

2 x x

Slooped roof overhang

2 x x

Systems Exhaust tracks 2 x x

STA

GE

3 (

grad

e 3

, 3+)

± Part flexible/part not flexible

(3+)

Opennings (Windows, doors, bay

Windows…)


2 + DW + PV above + floor ext.insulation

x x x


Balcony 3 + floor ext.insulation

+ no PV

x x x

↑ Flexible (3)

Orientation (section 3)

South 3 x x x

Wall areas Big Wall areas 3 x x x

STAGE 4 Energy savings evaluation

Evaluation of energy savings of each room is developed in section 3. It is related to surface of each technology and surface of each technology (window, roof, façade).

Once the building’s characteristics have been analysed and the interactions among BRESAER system have been ordered by their degree of flexibility the design methodology is defined using the same sequence. This is an additive process, on each stage new technologies are added to the ones set in the previous stage model.

Table 23 – Relation between interactions building/BRESAER’s possibilities (flexibility degree) and

methodology design stages.

The process is defined by five stages that are closely related with the degrees of flexibility previously set:

Stage 0: vertical structural profiles and partially horizontal structural profiles (those surrounding openings and other elements) are defined and distributed. Also those special interactions related with the vertical profiles are set.

Stage 1: Grade 1 interactions are identified and technologies associated with this interaction are implemented.

STAGES Vertical

structure

Horizontal structure

(part)

grade 1 ↓Not flexible

grade 2 Flexible

grade 3 ↑Flexible

1

2+ 2 3+ 3

0 x x

1 x x x

Restricted design

2 x x x x x

3 x x x x x x x

Flexible design



At this stage a so called “restricted design” is obtained. This partial design has no flexibility in terms of technology selection and will be the common base for all the customization process to be done in the following stages.

Stage 2: Grade 2 and 2+ interactions are identified. Energy performance recommendations for that specific climate, orientation and building typology are checked and a suitable technology is selected and implemented for each situation. Horizontal structural profiles are defined and vertical profiles are reviewed.

Stage 3: Grade 3 and 3+ interactions are identified. Energy performance recommendations for that specific climate, orientation and building typology are checked and a suitable technology is selected and implemented for each situation. Horizontal structural profiles are defined and vertical profiles are reviewed. At this stage a so called “flexible design” is obtained. The final design is selected between the multiple possible combinations. BRESAER system is customized is terms of architecture and energy performance

For the selected design (or designs if a single combination is not selected) energy savings are evaluated, suitable solutions based on additional criteria such as cost.

Summing up Stages 0 and 1 define the so called “restricted design” where the building’s

characteristics limits how BRESAER system can be implemented. Stages 2 and 3 complete the

model by adding to the “restricted design” the customization of BRESAER’s components and

obtaining the so called “Flexible design”. Finally, on Stage 4 the energy savings achieved are

provided.

Figure 91 – Design methodology process with additive stages

Finally, there are two different paths for this process development:

A. Decision and technologies choice are made on each stage. Only on the last stage several design or models are considered.

STAGE 0 Vertical structure

Restricted Design

Flexible Design

Horizontal structure (part) Special interactions

STAGE 1 Interactions with grade 1 of flexibility

STAGE

2 Interactions with grade 2 or 2+ of flexibility

STAGE 3 Interactions with grade 3 or 3+ of flexibility

STAGE 4 Energy savings evaluation

Energy savings

evaluation



B. All design possibilities and technologies combinations are considered simultaneously on every stage. Decisions and choices are just made on the last stage to obtain the final design.

Figure 92 shows how this two process paths are followed. On the DEMO building design methodology developed in this document path A has been used.

Figure 92 – Design process development possible paths

Hereafter this design methodology has been graphically implemented for the DEMO building. After stage 0 and 1 the “restricted design” obtained is shown. Then the energy performance configuration is described to continue with stage 2 and 3. After these two stages the “flexible design” obtained is shown, including two different configurations that could be also obtained. Finally, the energy savings achieved is described on stage 4.









Technology selection for Stages 2 and 3 Information provided by



Table 22 is used to filter the different technology combinations available and evaluate them based on their energy performance. For grade 2 and grade 2+, the selection of available technologies indicates that for main opaque wall areas without specific features, choices are ventilated façade or solar collector. For glazed areas, the dynamic window is available. This gives the following possible combinations for South, East and West facades: VF+DW and SOL+DW The combination VF+SOL is not allowed due to low optimal energy performance. For North facades, as indicated by the table, the selection is IP+DW due to the lack of direct solar radiation reaching the area. For roofs in grade 2, the potential options are either basic insulation, IP or SOL. The resulting 9 combinations have been evaluated for energy performance for Ankara educational buildings. Energy performance for each combination applied to the two reference zones can be found in Figure 56. For convenience, total consumption and percentage reduction results are shown below:

Table 24 – Energy consumption and percentage reduction relative to basecase. Summary for grade 2

options

South

Roof choice

Main wall areas

Total cons. middle

(kWh/m2/year) Reduct. %

middle Total cons. top (kWh/m2/year)

Reduct. % top

-- VF+DW 39.06 51.64 46.79 64.26

-- SOL+DW 37.69 51.09 41.07 62.91

SOL VF+DW 36.90 53.79 39.99 68.31

SOL SOL+DW 37.35 53.22 34.95 72.30

IP VF+DW 39.01 51.15 41.35 67.23

IP SOL+DW 37.70 52.78 38.39 69.58

East

Roof choice

Main wall areas

Total cons. middle



Reduct. % top

-- VF+DW 49.46 49.50 58.24 60.18

-- SOL+DW 45.71 47.29 51.26 58.39

SOL VF+DW 43.20 53.95 46.15 67.03

SOL SOL+DW 41.43 55.84 37.71 73.05

IP VF+DW 49.43 47.32 51.37 63.29

IP SOL+DW 45.69 51.30 46.22 66.98



West

Roof choice

Main wall areas

Total cons. middle



Reduct. % top

-- VF+DW 47.31 50.95 57.96 59.98

-- SOL+DW 43.54 48.80 51.14 58.20

SOL VF+DW 41.05 55.58 45.64 67.09

SOL SOL+DW 39.91 56.82 37.51 72.95

IP VF+DW 47.29 48.83 50.81 63.36

IP SOL+DW 43.52 52.91 45.93 66.88

North

Roof choice

Main wall areas

Total cons. middle

(kWh/m2/year)

Reduct. % middle

Total cons. top (kWh/m2/year)

Reduct. % top

-- IP+DW 53.06 41.67 63.53 54.43

SOL IP+DW 49.38 45.72 51.67 62.94

IP IP+DW 53.04 41.69 56.36 59.57

The table highlights the main criteria used: (a) Energy consumption less than 60 kWh/m2/year, thus rejecting one option for North façade; (b) Choosing among the top three options in terms of percentage energy reduction for the two reference zones, as indicated with italics and bold. The three top choices in this particular scenario (shown in underline) are similar due to the inclusion of technologies that have settings enabling them to adapt to its specific setting, such as the dynamic window. For grade 3 selections, the energy consumption results of the suitable combination for Ankara educational buildings can be found in Figure 57. Numerical results and percentage reduction relative to the reference basecase are shown in Table 25. It can be seen that the options fulfill the specified criteria for selection.

Table 25 – Energy consumption and percentage reduction relative to basecase. Summary for grade 3

options

Orient. Roof

choice Main wall

areas

Total cons. middle

(KWh/m2/year)

Reduction % middle

Total cons. top (KWh/m2/year)

Reduction % top

North IP+SOL IP+VF+BG 47.87 47.38 49.51 64.49

South IP+SOL IP+VF+BG 36.97 53.70 38.19 69.73

East IP+SOL IP+VF+BG 43.19 53.97 43.48 68.93

West IP+SOL IP+VF+BG 41.13 55.49 43.03 68.97

The next stage relates to the evaluation of energy savings from the selected solutions.









STAGE 4 Energy saving estimations As mentioned in previous sections, there will be high variability between basecase situations and real buildings. These can apply to geometry, areas to be conditioned, surfaces that will have technologies on them, etc. The following procedure illustrates how energy saving estimations are calculated when applied to the studied building. 1- Areas to be conditioned and surfaces to be covered with technologies are accounted for. In the case of the demo building, these are shown in Table 26 for each floor and orientation. This table is based on the conditioning floor plans and elevations shown in the next pages. Quantities must be considered as preliminary figures that can change according to developments in the project. The amount of total areas can take into account factors such as shading from neighbouring buildings, approximate budget available, or surfaces with high traffic/impact.

Table 26 – Floor and facade areas to be intervened in the demo building. Preliminary figures.

Floor areas for conditioning (m2)

% of total floor area

Surface areas per orientation to be covered (m2)

N S E W

Basement 147.53 17.62 30.87 21.35 0.00 0.00

Ground 179.41 21.43 43.14 43.08 15.82 12.68

First 248.57 29.70 60.91 80.93 23.38 24.83

Second 261.54 31.25 128.88 94.50 23.94 66.04

Total floor area 837.05 -- n/a n/a n/a n/a

Roof 332.46 -- n/a n/a n/a n/a

Totals (m2) 1169.51 100.00 263.80 239.86 63.14 103.55

2- The percentage of floor area covered per orientation is calculated. As simplification, a prismatic shape area is taken for all floors. This gives for North and South 34% for each of them and 16% for East and West. 3- The ratio of surface area to be covered over floor area to be conditioned per orientation is calculated for each floor and orientation. This will be ratio a, shown in Table 27 which also includes relevant calculations for the roof areas and top level. Ratio b for the basecase situation is fixed according to the module being top or middle floor. The ratio a/b is also calculated.



Table 27 – Calculation of proportionality ratio

Floor ratio a=(retrofit surface

area) / (served floor area)

ratio b (base

situation)

a/b

N S E W N S E W

Basement 0.42 0.29 -- -- 0.44 0.95 0.66 -- --

Ground 0.71 0.71 0.55 0.44 0.44 1.61 1.61 1.26 1.01

First 0.72 0.96 0.59 0.62 0.44 1.64 2.18 1.34 1.42

Second 2.72 2.33 1.84 2.85 1.44 1.89 1.62 1.28 1.98

4- The energy savings for each floor according to the computer modelling are noted (Table 24 or Table 25). For top floor and middle floor, the savings to be used are those corresponding to the stated alternative. For typical middle floors, the saving to be used is the one of the alternative minus the roof technology (if chosen), which also exists in the calculated graphs. 5- The solution percentage is multiplied by the ratio a/b for each orientation. This number is then multiplied by the percentage of the floor portion per orientation and the results added to obtain the floor savings. 6- Steps 3 to 5 are repeated for each floor. 7- Results from step 6 are then multiplied by the percentage of floor area relative to the total floor area. These results can be added up to obtain the total estimate for the building.

Table 28 – Energy savings per floor sector, per floor and total for building. Grade 2 options

Grade 2

Floor

Energy savings % per floor sector = (a/b) x (Energy saving % of option) x (floor percentage per orientation)

energy saving % for each floor N S E W

Basement 19.89 16.87 - - 36.76

Ground 22.86 27.99 9.19 7.87 67.91

First 25.56 39.53 11.98 12.95 90.02

Second 11.31 15.15 9.19 23.12 58.78

Total estimated percentage savings for building :

Sum of (energy saving % for each floor) x (% total floor area) = 67.90%



Table 29 – Energy savings per floor sector, per floor and total for building. Grade 3 options

Grade 3

Floor

Energy savings % per floor sector = (a/b) x (Energy saving % of option) x (floor percentage per orientation)

Total % energy saving for each floor N S E W

Basement 19.60 16.90 - - 36.50

Ground 22.50 28.00 10.00 8.20 68.70

First 26.50 39.90 11.60 12.60 90.60

Second 11.60 14.60 14.10 21.90 62.20

Total estimated percentage savings for building :

Sum of (energy saving % for each floor) x (% total floor area) = 67.50%

From the results it can be seen that the estimated percentage is around 68% for both options. This estimate will be corroborated with detailed energy calculations in further stages of the project as well as in the implementation phase. One of the reasons for the combinations providing similar amounts can be found in that assigned areas for certain orientations (East and West) remain limited in contrast to the other orientations.



Figure 93 – Elevations of the Demo building (Education case)



Figure 94 – Floor plans of the Demo building (Education case)



4.3 Design methodology implemented for reference buildings

The same design methodology has been implemented for the two other building references defined in Section 2. These are office buildings and residential building. The design here shown provides the graphical information result of steps 0 to 3. Step 4, where the energy savings estimation is calculated will be further analysed on next deliverable D2.3.



Figure 95 – Design methodology implemented for Office case



Figure 96 – Design methodology implemented for Residential case



5 Conclusions The overall concept of BRESAER system has been defined to achieve a versatile constructive system able to integrate active and passive envelope technologies and allow easy and fast installation and removal of the system and the possibility to modify or substitute the envelope technologies distribution and include new ones without large manipulation of the sub structure, the following features will be used for the system development:

A vertical profile structure will serve all envelope components and be capable of providing

the requirements of each. It will be adaptable in order to align the systems.

The fixing system of the envelope components to the vertical profiles will be specific for

each technology and will provide the necessary depths to align all systems.

The continuous insulation layer will fit between the vertical profile anchors and will be

rigid, water resistant and fire resistant.

Different PV technologies will be integrated in ULMA, Solarwall and STAM’s envelope

technologies to provide on-site electric energy.

ULMA and Solarwall envelope technologies will be modified to permit cabling distribution

within its air cavity, additionally Solarwall could be accessible for maintenance purposes.

BRESAER system’s aims to retrofit the wider range of buildings as possible, including different typologies and climatic conditions. To achieve a cost-effective and realistic system, the range of buildings was limited in terms of worse energy performance and big building stock. The target building typologies has been described to be used as base-case for the system’s development to guaranty its versatility from the very beginning.

The system’s limitations have been set in order to know if the building is liable to be retrofitted with BRESAER system. As BRESAER system integrates active and passive technologies, on-site renewable energy production (heat and electricity), heating, cooling and power system design must be overlapped with the architectural design process. Installation and commissioning design will be deeply studied in other to guaranty an easy, fast and successful construction process to ultimately achieve an energy and cost-effective building retrofit. All these facilities will be controlled by a building Energy Management System which combines software and hardware. The BEMS is centred in four basic functions: monitoring, controlling, optimizing and reporting.

The analysis of the European requirements is this stage was made to give input for the system design. The main conclusion is that these are very dependent on each country regulation with specific requirements and tests to be done for new building components not being able to find a common baseline. Therefore, Turkish regulation will be used to set this baseline requirement. If these requirements are found to be non-sufficient later on, the Spanish regulation will be used. Previously to starting the design process, local regulations must be analysed. If requirements are



found to be more restrictive than the ones defined for BRESAER’s development, design changes will be analysed and implemented if possible.

The distribution and configuration of the envelope technologies will be customized for each building and based in architectural and energy performance aspects:

Architectural integration based on the possibilities and limitation of each envelope

component to interact with the existing envelope characteristics. This aspect has been

deeply analysed a design methodology has been developed. The procedure consisted on

defining a grade of flexibility – 1, 2 or 3 - for each interaction, similar to the number of

technologies that could be applied in that situation related to previous architectural and

energy savings conditions. Beside the flexibility of application of different envelope

technologies, each of them have also different finishing possibilities. This gives the

architects great possibilities to give different aesthetical composition solutions to each

building although using a unique system, BRESAER system.

Energy performance improvements to achieve an energy consumption below 60

kW/m2·year. The best configurations and distributions for each building typology defined

have been deeply analysed. This analysis has been made through computer simulations.

The energy analysis began by studying the psychrometric chart for human comfort,

identifying technology combinations according to energy strategies. Representative cases

were created using information found in this and previous deliverables. The resulting 1248

combinations were modelled using EnergyPlus. The large number of results generated by

the analysis and high variability to be found between base cases and studied building, have

resulted in a proposed energy-estimation methodology for early stages, , which

extrapolates data from energy calculations using a weighted area analysis, previous to in-

depth analysis. This methodology helps to take decisions concerning feasibility of possible

retrofit interventions.

Finally, a design methodology to achieve a systematic building refurbishment overview gathering all previous analysis has been developed. This methodology is based on 5 stages. Stages 0 and 1 define the so called “restricted design” where the building’s characteristics limits how BRESAER system can be implemented. Stages 2 and 3 complete the model by adding to the “restricted design” the customization of BRESAER’s components and obtaining the so called “Flexible design”. Finally, on Stage 4 the energy savings achieved are provided. In order to make easier the comprehension of the methodology and to show its possibilities the Demonstration building has been used as a case of study for its application.



6 References

[1] http://www.reckli.de/wp-content/uploads/1000_grad_ePaper/RECKLI_Katalog/2013/epaper/epaper.pdf

[2] http://www.cortizo.com/idioma=en/paginas/carta_ral [3] http://www.ulmaarchitectural.com/es/fachadas-ventiladas/gama-producto/vanguard/ [4] http://solarwall.com [5] J. Cser, R. Beheshti, P. van der Veer, Towards the development of an integrated building

management system, in: Innovation in Technology Management - The Key to Global Leadership, PICMET '97: Portland International Conference on Management and Technology, 1997, pp. 27-31.

[6] D. Abdulmohsen, Al-Hammad, Building management system (BMS), http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa/ARE/amhammad/ARE-457-course-web/Building-Management-System.pdf, college of environmental design (2013).

[7] NETxAutomation, Netx automation, http://www.netxautomation.com, nETx BMS Server 2.0 (2014).

[8] B. Givoni, Climate considerations in building and urban design, Wiley 1998. [9] M. Milne, Climate Consultant v6.0. Available from http://www.energy-design-

tools.aud.ucla.edu/ (Accessed November 2015) [10] Building Performance Institute Europe (BPIE), Data Hub for the Energy Performance of

Buildings, available at http://www.buildingsdata.eu/ (Accessed November 2015). [11] U.S. Department of Energy, EnergyPlus software. Available from

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/ (Accessed November 2015).

http://www.reckli.de/wp-content/uploads/1000_grad_ePaper/RECKLI_Katalog/2013/epaper/epaper.pdf

http://www.reckli.de/wp-content/uploads/1000_grad_ePaper/RECKLI_Katalog/2013/epaper/epaper.pdf

http://www.cortizo.com/idioma=en/paginas/carta_ral

http://www.ulmaarchitectural.com/es/fachadas-ventiladas/gama-producto/vanguard/

http://www.netxautomation.com/

http://www.energy-design-tools.aud.ucla.edu/

http://www.energy-design-tools.aud.ucla.edu/

http://www.buildingsdata.eu/

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/

Documents

BREASER system concept design and methodology for a ... · BREASER system concept design and methodology for a systemic building . December 2015 (M11) D2.2.: BREASER system concept