Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Considerations on design optimization criteria for windows providing low energy consumption and high visual comfort
Department of the Built Environment, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands.
Department of the Built Environment, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7520-1593
Department of the Built Environment, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands.
Department of the Built Environment, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands.
2012 (English)In: Applied Energy, ISSN 0306-2619, E-ISSN 1872-9118, Vol. 95, 238-245 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Apparent window size contradictions arise when optimizing simultaneously for low energy (small sizes) and visual comfort (large sizes). Diverse multi-objective optimization methods exist, but basic questions must be solved beforehand such as choosing appropriate evaluation measures. This work aims to determine the suitability of combined optimization criteria on window sizing procedures for low energy consumption with high visual comfort and performance.The paper showcases diverse measures available to valorise energy consumption and visual aspects. A series of energy and visual criteria were selected, defining acceptance thresholds for dynamic evaluations. Whole-building computer simulations were performed on a standardized office located in a temperate climate. Discrete window-to-wall ratio variations were studied to demonstrate how these criteria affect the solution space.Results were classified using a graphical optimization method, obtaining a solution space satisfying both energy and visual requirements. Most project expectations can be met within the range of sizes. However, unprotected windows barely meet acceptance criteria, needing additional control devices. Applying various related criteria with adequate values increases the diversity of acceptable solutions but too many limits it. Clear objectives and acceptance ranges have to be conceptualized in order to translate them into decisions. This becomes important when involving team design.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2012. Vol. 95, 238-245 p.
Keyword [en]
Building energy performance, Optimization criteria, Visual comfort, Visual performance, Window size, Climatology, Computer simulation, Multiobjective optimization, Energy utilization, architectural design, energy conservation, energy use, optimization, performance assessment, size, standardization, structural component, temperate environment, threshold, wall
National Category
Building Technologies
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-31844DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.02.042ISI: 000303365900027Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84859424242OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hj-31844DiVA: diva2:973884
Available from: 2016-09-23 Created: 2016-09-23 Last updated: 2016-09-23Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Aries, Myriam
In the same journal
Applied Energy
Building Technologies

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 20 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf