Article 正式发布 Versions 1 Vol 28 (6) : 1141-1149 2019
Download
A Comprehensive Evaluation on Energy, Economic and Environmental Performance of the Trombe Wall during the Heating Season;供暖工况下特朗勃墙能源、经济和环境性能的综合评估
: 2019 - 11 - 05
19 0 0
Abstract & Keywords
Abstract: Trombe wall is a passive building energy saving technology that uses solar energy to reduce buildings’ heating load and adjust indoor thermal environment. In recent years, much research has been done to increase the thermal efficiency of Trombe wall, but little is focused on the evaluation of Trombe wall from energy, economic and environmental aspects comprehensively. Based on the thermal performance calculation method in ISO 52016-2:2017(E), the authors proposed a concise method to evaluate the energy, economic and environmental performance of ventilated and non-ventilated Trombe walls during a heating season. Firstly, non-iteration calculation methods were introduced for the energy evaluation of Trombe wall and conventional wall during the heating season. Then the economic and environmental evaluation models were brought out according to the energy performance of Trombe wall. After that, a residential building was presented as the case building to evaluate Trombe walls’ performance in five building climate zones of China. The calculation results showed that both heating degree days and solar radiation had significant impact on the energy saving effect of Trombe walls. In comparison with non-ventilated Trombe walls, ventilated ones displayed more obvious energy saving potential in all five climate regions, which can provide averagely 62% more heating for the room in the case study. Though the heating degree days of Guangzhou (hot-summer and warm-winter zone) was the smallest in the five zones, ventilated Trombe wall in the zone had the poorest economic performance due to the scarcest solar radiation during the heating season. 特朗勃墙是一种利用太阳能降低建筑能耗和改善室内热舒适的被动式节能技术。近年来的研究多集中于提升特朗勃墙的热性能方面,但对特朗勃墙能量、经济和环境综合评估的研究较少。作者基于ISO 52016-2:2017(E)中的关于特朗勃墙热性能的计算方法,提出了一种评估通风和非通风特朗勃墙在供暖季下能量、经济和环境方面综合表现的简单方法。首先,本文介绍了一种评估特朗勃墙和普通外墙能量表现的非迭代方法,随后根据特朗勃墙的能量表现对其进行经济性评估和环境效益评估,最后研究了处于中国不同气候区的居住建筑特朗勃墙的综合性能。结果显示,供暖度日数和太阳辐射强度对特朗勃墙的节能效果具有重要影响,相比于非通风特朗勃墙,通风特朗勃墙在所有工况下可平均多提供62%的热量,具有更好的节能表现。尽管处于夏热冬暖的广州地区的度日数是五个气候区中最小的,但是由于该地区供暖季的太阳辐射强度较差,广州地区的特朗勃墙的经济效益也较差。
Keywords: Trombe wall, energy evaluation, economic evaluation, environmental evaluation, heating load
1. Introduction
Energy crisis and environmental pollution are two major problems facing the world today. The report “International energy landscape” shows that 48% of energy consumption was in buildings, and 25% of this is for heating, ventilation and air-condition system (HVAC) [1]. China has established several energy efficiency targets to reduce the energy consumption in new buildings [2]. For these reasons, how to reduce the energy consumption of buildings, especially the fossil energy, is the key to mitigate the energy crisis and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The buildings utilizing solar energy become a topic of increasing interests that can address the issue of energy poverty and considerably improve the indoor thermal comfort as well [3]. Trombe wall, as a passive building energy saving technology, can reduce building energy consumption and adjust indoor thermal environment in winter with appropriate design, thus it is a good option for building envelope component.
 
Nomenclature
Atotal investment/yuanRiinternal thermal resistance of the massive wall, between air layer and interior environment /m2·K·W−1
Acarea of the conventional wall/m2Rlthermal resistance of the air layer/m2·K·W−1
Aswarea of the Trombe wall/m2Scapital saving value in life cycle/yuan
CFPconventional fuel price/yuan·kJ−1Teexternal environment temperature/K
DFdiscount factorTiinternal environment temperature/K
dlending ratettotal hours of heating period/h
eannual fuel price increase rateUethermal transmittance of the transparent envelope containing the air space/W·m−2·K−1
Effthermal efficiency of the conventional heating equipment/%Uithermal transmittance of the massive wall containing the air space/W·m−2·K−1
FFframe reduction factorUototal thermal transmittance of the Trombe wall /W·m−2·K−1
FSshading reduction factorUctotal thermal transmittance of the conventional wall/W·m−2·K−1
FWcorrection factor for non-scattering glazingGreek letters
gcalorific value of conventional fuel/ kWh·kg−1solsolar absorption coefficient of the massive wall behind the transparent envelope
gwtotal solar energy transmittance of the glazing covering the air layersolar absorption coefficient of the conventional wall
hcconvection surface heat transfer coefficient in the air layer/W·m−2·K−1correction factor of opaque building envelope’s overall heat transfer coefficient
hrradiation surface heat transfer coefficient in the air layer/W·m−2·K−1aCaheat capacity per unit volume of air/J·m−3·K−1
Iwglobal incident solar radiation of south facing wall/kWh·m−2alratio of solar heat gain to heat loss of the air layer
LClife cycle/yearswnon-dimensional parameter related to the air layer temperature
MCCmaintenance cost coefficientratio of the accumulated internal and external temperature difference when the ventilation is on, to its value over the whole calculation period
npayback period/yearratio of total radiation falling on the element when the air layer is open to the total solar radiation during the whole calculation period
qv,swset value of air flow rate through the ventilated layer/m3·s−1Subscripts
carbon dioxide emissions in the life cycle/kgcconventional wall
QTotalheating load during heating period/kWhGainheat gain
Qaccumulated heat during the heating period /kWhLossheat loss
QHLannual accumulated heating load per unit Trombe wall area/kWh·m−2nvnon-ventilated Trombe wall
QESannual accumulated energy saving per unit Trombe wall area compared with conventional wall/kWh·m−2tTrombe wall
Reexternal thermal resistance of the transparent envelope, between air layer and external environment/m2·K·W−1vventilated Trombe wall
With a relatively simple structure, Trombe wall can be added to the south massive wall in the retrofit of old buildings or adopted in the new building design. Fig. 1 shows the construction of ventilated and non-ventilated Trombe wall. The ventilated Trombe wall consists of the massive wall, vents at the top and bottom, transparent envelope (usually is glass) and thermal channel between massive wall and glass [4]. While the massive wall absorbs solar radiation, heat flux enters indoor environment via conduction and convection. The main difference between ventilated and non-ventilated wall is that, for the latter one, the solar radiation heat is transferred to the indoor environment by conduction only. Khalifa and Abbas [5] numerically studied the thermal performance of Trombe wall with different massive wall materials, and concluded that the phase change materials (PCMs) could reduce indoor temperature fluctuations. Ana Briga-Sá et al. studied the influence of the massive wall material and thickness on Trombe wall thermal performance, and found that when the massive wall is ventilated, Trombe wall can provide 44.06 % more heat compared with the non-ventilated [6]. Basak et al. [7] analyzed energy performance of the photo voltaic Trombe wall system experimentally and numerically, and results showed that this system could provide 10% more energy compared with traditional Trombe walls. Wang Liping and Li Angui [8] studied Trombe wall’s optimum ratio of air gap to height and concluded that it’s dependent on inlet and outlet parameters design and independent of solar radiation. Fakhreddine et al. [9] drew the relationship between annual heating energy demand and Trombe wall areas using TRNSYS software. In view of the abundant solar energy resources of the high-altitude region, Liu Zhijian et al. optimized passive solar house envelope dimensions, and found the most suitable depth of sunspace and window to wall ratio [10].


 
Fig. 1 (a) Ventilated Trombe wall and (b) Non-ventilated Trombe wall
Usually the performance evaluation of Trombe wall can be classified into three aspects: energy, economic and environmental evaluation. In energy aspect, Duan Shuangping et al. [11] used the energy efficiency and exergy analysis methods to study the thermal perfor- mance of Trombe wall with different air channel depths, solar radiation intensity and transmissivity of the glass cover. Sandra Corasaniti et al. [12] used the heat flux, mean air temperature and energy gain as criteria to evaluate the Trombe-Michel wall and traditional Trombe wall. Jerzy Szyszka [13] defined a distribution efficiency factor and studied the specific calculation method with different Trombe wall structures. Ana Briga-Sá et al. [14] studied Trombe wall’s energy performance with different massive wall thickness based on ISO 13790:2008(E) in Portuguese region. In economic aspect, the optimal structure parameters of Trombe wall were determined using LCC (Life Cycle Cost) criterion by Jaber and Ajib in Mediterranean region [15]. In environmental aspect, Stazi et al. [16] provided an integrated approach, which combined CO2 emissions and energy consumption in life cycle, to optimize the energy and environmental performances with different combinations of glass, wall materials and thickness of the massive wall. The literature review reveals that the purposes of most Trombe wall research focused on optimizing related structure parameters and improving its thermal perfor- mance under certain working conditions rather than helping decision makers evaluate the overall performance during the whole heating period till now. However, in practical engineering, economic and environmental benefits together with the energy performance need to be considered comprehensively, so this is the focus of the paper.
For the three aspects of Trombe wall performance evaluation, the energy evaluation is the fundamental one. Mainly three methods were used to evaluate the energy performance of Trombe wall under different operation conditions: (a) Utilizing energy simulation software such as TRNSYS, Energy Plus, CFD and self programming. It can decrease the number and cost of experiments after validating models. However, it is inevitable to take a long time on setting up Trombe wall and the building models that makes it inconvenient for engineers. (b) Experiment or field test. It is a credible method especially suitable for theory validation, but the disadvantages are obvious too: it is not only costly and time consuming, but also unable to obtain the actual data with different Trombe wall configurations. (c) Establishing mathematical models without iteration. The biggest advantage of this method is that it can obtain the energy performance of Trombe wall quickly at the design stage with reasonable precision. So it will be adopted in this paper.
In this paper, a set of performance evaluation models are established on energy, economic and environmental aspects that are suitable for practical project decision making at the design stage. Firstly, the Trombe wall energy calculation method in ISO 52016-2:2017(E) [17] and its correction [18] is adopted to evaluate the thermal and energy performance in comparison with conventional wall during the heating season. Secondly, the capital saving value in life cycle method, additional investment recovery period method and a CO2 emissions reduction model are adopted for the evaluation of Trombe wall on the economic and environmental aspects. Thirdly, case studies in five different China building climate zones are used to illustrate the methods set up in the paper, and then this paper analyzes the feasibility of using the Trombe wall system in different climate zones of China. It is found that the same Trombe wall has different performance indexes in different building climate zones. And some conclusions are made in the end.
2. Methodology
Usually Trombe wall should be evaluated from energy, economy and environment perspective so that the design engineers could make a reasonable decision. The evaluation methods are presented below.
2.1   Energy evaluation of Trombe wall
For the energy evaluation, the method in the international standard ISO 52016-2:2017(E) [17] is mainly adopted, and the method is applicable to both ventilated and non-ventilated Trombe wall. According to the standard, the total energy that Trombe wall obtains is the sum of heat gain and heat loss through the wall as Eq. (1) shows. The heat gain comes from solar radiation and the heat loss is casued by the tempereature difference between indoor and outside air.
(1)
where QTotal,t is the heating load of Trombe wall during the heating period (kWh). QGain is the accumulated heat gain during the heating period (kWh). QLoss is the accumulated heat loss during the heating period (kWh).
For the convenience of application, two energy indexes are proposed here. The first one is annual accumulated heating load per unit Trombe wall area (QHL ) and the second one is annual accumulated energy saving per unit Trombe wall area compared with conventional wall (QES ) , which are shown in Eq. (2) and Eq. (3).
(2)
(3)
where QHL is the annual accumulated heating load per unit Trombe wall area (kWh/m2). QES is the annual accumulated energy saving per unit Trombe wall area compared with conventional wall (kWh/m2). QTotal,c is the conventional wall heating load during the heating period (kWh). Asw is the area of the Trombe wall (m2).
The energy evaluation of Trombe wall is based on the following assumptions [17, 18].
a. The surface temperatures of the inner and outer walls are uniform, so the Trombe wall is simplified into a zero dimensional lumped parameter model.
b. For ventilated Trombe wall, when the air layer temperature is lower than room temperature, the air flow stops. Otherwise, the air in the layer begins to flow.
c. The heat transfer coefficients of thermal conduction, convection and radiation are constant that are independent of temperature. This assumption turns a nonlinear equation into a linear equation (refer to Eqs. (4) and (6)), so the superposition principle is applicable in the calculation.
d. For the ventilated Trombe wall, the air flow rate in the air layer is known and constant.
e. The air in the air layer is transparent medium without absorption and emission capability.
Next, the calculation method of heat gain and heat loss in Eq. (1) is described according to ventilated and non-ventilated Trombe wall respectively (Please refer to Fig. 1 for the structures).
(1) Ventilated Trombe wall
Heat gain
The solar radiation will be absorbed by the massive wall when the air layer is covered by a transparent envelope, and then the heat absorbed continues to be transferred to the internal environment by conduction and convection. So the heat gain of the Trombe wall can be expressed by solar radiation intensity, as shown in Eq. (4).
(4)
where Iw is the accumulated total solar incident radiation during heating calculation period (kWh/m2). sol is solar absorption coefficient of the massive wall behind the transparent envelope. FF is the frame reduction factor. FS is the shading reduction factor. FW is the correction factor for non-scattering glazings. gw is total solar energy transmittance of the glazing covering the air layer. Uo is total thermal transmittance of the Trombe wall (W/(m2·K)). Re is external thermal resistance of the transparent envelope, between air layer and external environment (m2·K/W). Ri is internal thermal resistance of the massive wall, between air layer and interior environment (m2·K/W). Rl is thermal resistance of the air layer (m2·K/W). Ui is thermal transmittance of the massive wall containing the air space (W/(m2·K)). Ue is thermal transmittance of the transparent envelope containing the air space (W/(m2·K)). aCa is heat capacity per unit volume of air (J/(m3·K)). qv,se is set value of air flow rate through the ventilated layer (m3/s). sw is non-dimensional parameter related to the air layer temperature. ω is the ratio of the total solar radiation falling on the heat collection element when the air layer is open to the total solar radiation falling on the heat collection element during the calculation period. So its value is between zero and one and it can be calculated byEq. (5).
(5)
where al is the ratio of solar heat gain to heat loss of the air layer. For the detail explanation of variables in Eq. (4) and Eq. (5), please refer to literature [18] and [17].
Heat loss
The heat loss of Trombe wall is caused by the temperature difference between air layer and outdoor environment, and according to the ISO 52016-2:2017(E) it can be expressed by the indoor and outdoor air temperature difference shown in Eq. (6). The temperature difference multiplied by the calculation period is also called heating degree days.
(6)
The effects of heat conduction, convection and radiation in different Trombe wall layers are taken into account in Eq. (6). The layers of Trombe wall refer to the transparent structure, air layer and thermal storage wall.
The factor in Eq. (6) is the ‘‘ratio of the accumulated internal-external temperature difference when the ventilation is on, to its value over the whole calculation period’’. The opening and closing of the vents depends on the temperature difference between air layer and internal environment, so the factor is greater than zero unless the vents were off all the time (it is equivalent to non-ventilated Trombe wall). The calculation method of the factor was given in the standard of ISO 52016 as shown in Eq. (7). Te is the external environment temperature (K). Ti is the internal environment temperature (K). t is the total hours of heating period (h). Other variables in Eq. (6) are the same as in Eq. (4).
(7)
(2) Non-ventilated Trombe wall
Compared with the ventilated Trombe wall, it is less complicated for the non-ventilated Trombe wall to calculate the heat loss and solar gain in heating season. As the Trombe wall is non-ventilated, the convection parts in Eqs. (4) and (6) should be deleted, so the heat loss and heat gain of the non-ventilated Trombe wall can be calculated by Eqs. (8) and (9).
(8)
(9)
(3) Conventional wall
The energy saving of Trombe wall is obtained by comparison with conventional wall, so the total energy loss through the conventional wall (i.e. accumulated heating load) should also be calculated.
Similar to the calculation method of Trombe wall, the accumulated heating load of conventional wall can be calculated in the form of heating degree days by Eq. (10). The correction factor for overall heat transfer coefficient of conventional wall () in Eq. (10) reflects the heat gain from solar radiation on conventional wall which is between 0 and 1.
(10)
where QTotal,c is the conventional wall heating load during the heating period. is correction factor of opaque building envelope’s overall heat transfer coefficient. Uc is the total thermal transmittance of the conventional wall (W/(m2·K)). Ac is area of the conventional wall (m2).
2.2   Economic evaluation of Trombe wall
Apart from the energy evaluation, economic evaluation is also an important aspect of Trombe wall which provides a very important basis for the design scheme selection. Compared with conventional wall, the economic advantage of Trombe wall lies in the fact that the operation cost saved of Trombe wall in its life cycle is larger than its additional initial cost. This capital comparison method can be called “capital saving value in life cycle method”, and it is often supplemented by the additional investment recovery period method.
Due to the complexity of heat transfer of a building envelope in summer, few studies have been carried out for summer operation of Trombe wall, and no suitable cooling load calculation method is found for the actual project. So in this paper, it is assumed that Trombe wall can be effectively shaded without causing additional cooling load in summer.
(1) Capital saving value in life cycle method
Compared with conventional wall, Trombe wall usually needs more initial capital, but it can save operation cost because of its energy saving effect. Let S be the capital saving value in life cycle, then S can be expressed as Eq. (11) [19]. In other words, S is the amount of capital saved in the life cycle of Trombe wall. So if S is larger than zero, it can be concluded that Trombe wall is superior than conventional wall from the economic point of view.
(11)
where S is capital saving value in life cycle (yuan). DF is discount factor that can be calculated by Eq. (12). QES is energy saving compared with conventional wall during heating period (kJ). CFP is conventional fuel price (yuan/kJ) that can be calculated by Eq. (13). A is total initial increased investment compared with conventional wall (yuan). MCC is maintenance cost coefficient (ratio of annual maintenance cost to total increased investment).
(12)
where d is lending rate. e is annual fuel price increase rate. LC is life cycle, usually 20–50 years.
(13)
CEP ′ is conventional fuel price (yuan/kg). g is calorific value of conventional fuel (kWh/kg), and it is 8.13 kWh/kg for standard coal. Eff is heating efficiency of conventional heating equipment.
(2) Additional investment recovery period
Additional investment recovery period refers to the required time to recoup the additional initial investment of Trombe wall than conventional wall, and it is independent to life cycle period. Here, the dynamic method is adopted to calculate the additional investment recovery period n as shown in Eq. (14), which considers the time cost of capital.
(14)
where the discount rate DF is determined by Eq. (11) in which let S equals to zero.
2.3   Environmental evaluation
The environmental benefits of Trombe wall mainly lie in the reduction of environmental pollution due to the conventional energy saving effect, and carbon dioxide is usually used as the main indicator of the environmental pollution. The amount of carbon dioxide emission can be calculated by Eq. (15) [20].
(15)
where is the amount of carbon dioxide reduction when Trombe wall is adopted instead of conventional wall in the life cycle (kg). is carbon emission factor of various energy sources, and its values are shown in Table 1 [20].
Table 1 The carbon emission factor
 
Energy sourceCoalOilNatural gasElectric
The carbon emission factor0.7260.5430.4040.866
3. Case Study
3.1   Project introduction


 
Fig. 2 The first floor plan of the residential building
3.2   Results and Discussion
(1) Energy evaluation
Table 2 The details of the Trombe wall
 
Construction of South wallLayerMaterial nameThickness/
m
Thermal conductivity/
W·m−2·K−1
Thermal resistance/
m2·K·W−1
Total heat
transfer coefficient/
W·m−2·K−1
1Double glass0.0220.2100.100
2Open-air channel0.150-0.400
3Thermal insulation mortar0.0200.3000.0670.337
4Aerated concrete block0.3500.1602.188
5Polymer mortar0.0200.3500.057
1Double glass0.0220.2100.100
2Closed-air channel0.1500.0265.769
3Thermal insulation mortar0.0200.3000.0670.120
4Aerated concrete block0.3500.1602.188
5Polymer mortar0.0200.3500.057
Table 3 The details of conventional wall in different climate zones
 
HarbinBeijingChangshaKunmingGuangzhou
Thermal resistance/m2·K·W−13.182.060.510.840.24
Total heat transfer coefficient/W·m−2·K−10.300.451.501.002.50
Table 4 Global properties of climates used for evaluation
 
Climate zoneTypical cityHeating degree days
(HDD)/°C·d−1
Incident radiation during heating
period (I) (south)/kWh·m−2
severe coldHarbin5419736
coldBeijing2795700
hot-summer and cold-winterChangsha1554241
mildKunming1224609
hot-summer and warm-winterGuangzhou394184


 
Fig. 3 Accumulated heating load per unit wall area during heating season
(2) Economic evaluation


 
Fig. 4 Energy saving per unit wall area compared with conventional wall in heating conditions
(3) Environmental evaluation
Table 5 Economic evaluation of Trombe wall
 
HarbinBeijingChangshaKunmingGuangzhou
Energy saving QES /kWh1341154412541587741
Ventilated Trombe wallCapital saving value in life cycle S/yuan65138217578585791480
Payback period n/year9.98.310.78.022.1
Non-ventilated Trombe wallEnergy saving QES /kWh983118211341274647
Capital saving value in life cycle S/yuan3506517647745952686
Payback period n/year14.811.612.210.527.6
Table 6 CO2 emission reductions in five typical cities
 
CO2 reduction/kgHarbinBeijingChangshaKunmingGuangzhou
Ventilated Trombe wall43,91450,56341,07251,97724,272
Non-ventilated Trombe wall32,17638,69537,12841,72621,171
4. Conclusions
As a passive building technology, Trombe wall can reduce building energy consumption by utilizing solar energy, and it has CO2 emission reduction effect as well. In the paper, the evaluation method of Trombe wall on the energy, economic and environmental performance was studied and the corresponding calculation models were presented. Then the evaluation method was adopted in cases where Trombe wall was applied in a residential building in five building climate zones. Through analysis of the cases, it was found that the heating degree days and the incident solar radiation had significant influence on the energy saving and CO2 emission reduction effect of Trombe wall. Under different heating degree days and incident solar radiation, Kunming and Beijing are the two cities where Trombe wall displays much better energy and economic performance. Though the heating degree days in Guangzhou is the smallest in the five zones, Trombe wall in the city has the poorest economic evaluation performance due to the scarcest solar radiation during the heating season. Meanwhile, it is also found that ventilated Trombe wall can provide about 62% more solar energy than non-ventilated Trombe wall in all the cases. So ventilated Trombe should be recommended in such projects.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the funding by China National 13th Five-Year Plan of Key Research and Development Program “The technical system and key technologies development of nearly zero-energy buildings” (2017YFC0702600).
[1]
Aminzade B., Collection of studies on sustainable urban development. Tehran University Press, Tehran, 2011.
[2]
Liu Z., Liu Y., He B., Xu W., Jin G., Zhang X., Application and suitability analysis of the key technologies in nearly zero energy buildings in China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2018, 101: 329‒345.
[3]
Liu Z., Wu D., He B., Liu Y., Zhang X., Yu H., Jin G., Using solar house to alleviate energy poverty of rural Qinghai-Tibet region, China: A case study of a novel hybrid heating system. Energy and Buildings, 2018, 178: 294‒303.
[4]
Yang L., He B., Ye M., The application of solar technologies in building energy efficiency: BISE design in solar-powered residential buildings. Technology in Society, 2014, 38: 111‒118.
[5]
Khalifa A.J.N., Abbas E.F., A comparative performance study of some thermal storage materials used for solar space heating. Energy and Buildings, 2009, 41(4): 407‒415.
[6]
Briga Sá A.C., Martins A., Boaventura-Cunha J., Carlos Lanzinha J., Paiva A., An analytical approach to assess the influence of the massive wall material, thickness and ventilation system on the Trombe wall thermal performance. Journal of Building Physics, 2017, 41(5): 445‒468.
[7]
Koyunbaba B.K., Yilmaz Z., Ulgen K., An approach for energy modeling of a building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) Trombe wall system. Energy and Buildings, 2013, 67: 680‒688.
[8]
Wang L., Li A., A numerical study of Trombe wall for enhancing stack ventilation in buildings. In Proceedings of PLEA2006—The 23rd Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, Geneva, Switzerland, 6–8 September 2006.
[9]
Abbassi F., Dimassi N., and Dehmani L., Energetic study of a Trombe wall system under different Tunisian building configurations. Energy and Buildings, 2014, 80: 302‒308.
[10]
Liu Z., Wu D., Li J., Yu H., He B., Optimizing building envelope dimensions for passive solar houses in the Qinghai-Tibetan region: window to wall ratio and depth of sunspace. Journal of Thermal Science, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11630-018-1047-7.
[11]
Duan S., Jing C., Zhao Z., Energy and exergy analysis of different Trombe walls. Energy and Buildings, 2016, 126: 517‒523.
[12]
Corasaniti S., Manni L., Russo F., Gori F., Numerical simulation of modified Trombe-Michel Walls with exergy and energy analysis. International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, 2017, 88: 269‒276.
[13]
Szyszka J., Simulation of modified Trombe wall. E3S Web of Conferences, 2018, 49: 00114.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20184900114.
[14]
Briga-Sá A., Martins A., Boaventura-Cunha J., Lanzinha J.C., Paiva A., Energy performance of Trombe walls: Adaptation of ISO 13790: 2008 (E) to the Portuguese reality. Energy and Buildings, 2014, 74: 111‒119.
[15]
Bojić M., Johannes K., Kuznik F., Optimizing energy and environmental performance of passive Trombe wall. Energy and Buildings, 2014, 70: 279‒286.
[16]
Stazi F., Mastrucci A., Munafò P., Life cycle assessment approach for the optimization of sustainable building envelopes: An application on solar wall systems. Building and Environment, 2012, 58: 278‒288.
[17]
ISO 52016-2: heat transfer and solar heat gains of windows and special elements. International standard, Switzerland, 2017.
[18]
Ruiz-Pardo Á., Domínguez S.Á., Fernández J.A.S., Revision of the Trombe wall calculation method proposed by UNE-EN ISO 13790. Energy and Buildings, 2010, 42(6): 763‒773.
[19]
Li Y., Passive solar house thermal design manual. Tsinghua University Press, Beijing, 1993. (in Chinese)
[20]
GB 50495-2009: Technical code for solar heating system, China Architecture& Building Press, Beijing, China, 2009. (in Chinese)
[21]
Lu, Y., Practical heating and air conditioning design manual, Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 1993. (in Chinese)
[22]
GB 50176-1993: Thermal design standards for civil building, China Planning Press, Beijing, 1993. (in Chinese)
[23]
CMA, Special meteorological data set for China's building thermal environment analysis. China Architecture & Building Press, Beijing, 2005. (in Chinese)
Article and author information
Download:
ZHANG Hongliang
SHU Haiwen*
shuhaiwen@dlut.edu.cn
Publication records
Published: Nov. 5, 2019 (Versions1
References
Journal of Thermal Science