DESIGN BUILDER SIMULATIONS
vii. Conclusions
although the literature suggests that 50% WWR is the best option in the case of temperate climates,
There are some interesting conclusions to be made for the simulations conducted for different combinations of units. First of all,
the operative
temperatures achieved for all simulated cases are
the results of the different percentages are very close and do not make a big difference neither in terms of energy performance nor in terms of comfort.
within the accepted range. An interesting result is that the proposed design has a much higher
In general, the results obtained were beneficial
impact on cooling loads showing considerable
and showed a much better energy performance in
reduction compared to the reference project than
comparison to that of the reference project with
on heating loads, which are actually slightly higher.
the typical office construction as shown in Graph
This aspect is particularly beneficial, since cooling
18. MFMs show more controlled solar gains, thus
is more difficult to reduce in office buildings.
leading to lower needs for heating and cooling, and
Futhermore, the lighting consumption is higher for
offer additionally the benefit of energy production.
the MFM because the transparent parts have always
Nevertheless, the comfort percentage obtained in
a shading system to control the solar radiation and
the cases of the reference projects is around 1%
heat gains. Even though this is disadvantageous for
higher than the one achieved by the cases with the
the overall energy performance, the final results
MFM. As far as the transparent units are concerned,
showed that all simulated cases of MFM have a
the electrochromic one shows a better annual
better energy performance than the reference
performance, whereas the integrated blinds offer a
project as shown in Graph 18.
bit higher comfort.
As far as the Window-Wall-Ratio is concerned, the
The
40% WWR shows a better energy performance than
of the design with modules delivering different
the 50%, which is logical since a bigger surface is
functions and performing better as a whole was
opaque, however the difference is very small. For
validated to be working since the more modules
the case of 50% WWR, there is a higher heating and
were combined and simulated, the better results
cooling demand and a lower lighting demand since
of energy performance and comfort were achieved.
the transparent surface is bigger. The operative
As can be seen from the previous graphs, the cases
temperatures of the 40% and 50% WWR have a
where only one module was simulated covering
very small difference being almost same or slightly
the whole facade, show much worse results than
higher for the case of 50%WWR and maybe this is
the ones where different modules are combined. In
why the comfort seems to be slightly better as well
particular, the heating, cooling and lighting loads
than in the case of 40%. The comfort has reached
(Graphs 9 & 10) and the discomfort hours (Graphs
accepted percentages (>=95%) for all simulated
15 & 16) are much higher, whereas the required
cases of 50% WWR whereas a few of the respective
annual comfort percentage is not achieved for all
percentages in the cases of the 40% are slightly
cases.
most important conclusion is that the logic
lower (only around 0,5%) than the minimum 95%. According to these facts we could conclude, that
137