Choice of windows and glazing renovation

Help and advice for your real work in new or renovation, interior or exterior.
User avatar
bham
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1666
Registration: 20/12/04, 17:36
x 6




by bham » 01/02/10, 19:27

aerialcastor wrote:
So what is the point of investing in a more expensive ITE if the benefit of inertia is reduced by a standard DV?

I don't see how standard DV affects inertia.

In the sense that the calories retained by inertia are partly lost by the thermal bridge of the standard DV.
aerialcastor wrote:But I maintain that for a house that wants to make passive solar the best is the DV without low emissivity.
A project on which I worked, the problem is posed. What type of glazing? The answer was given by a dynamic thermal simulation (thus taking into account the irradiation, the cloudiness, the angle of incidence of the rays, the temperatures inside and outside, ... all with a step of 15min).
The project is there:
http://www.architecturenaturelle.com/menu_principal.html
With a more complete explanation here:
https://www.econologie.com/fichiers/partager2/1265035216iRjzLe.pdf
This project is in the 84 therefore same climate problematic
Ah you participated in this project! Bravo, I knew this achievement recently, it's nice!
So I believe that you have a scientific and technical approach to the thing and I an empirical approach, ie a feeling that is not scientific but that in principle, tries to get closer to common sense. I am wary of ready-made software that everyone uses, because that suggests that their designer did not omit any basic parameters. But perhaps it is an unnecessary distrust?
0 x
aerialcastor
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 865
Registration: 10/05/09, 16:39
x 21




by aerialcastor » 01/02/10, 20:04

me an empirical approach, ie a feeling which has nothing scientific but which in principle, tries to approach common sense.


Common sense and empiricism is good because it allows you to sidestep the problem and understand the phenomenon, moreover everything starts from there.
And the basic principles everyone knows, solar gain, insulation, inertia. But then you have to manage to size, and there we are forced to make calculations, before we did that in static, and it allows to clear the ground, because the physical relationships involved are relatively simple, but the problem is is that the input parameters (irradiation, external temp, angle of incidence, etc.) vary over time. And there the dynamic simulation makes it possible to vary the inputs and therefore to simulate the building in real conditions, and no longer in terms of monthly average.
After of course, the software must calculate correctly, but there is beginning to be feedback that shows that it works.
For example: http://www.architecturenaturelle.com/menu_principal.html There I do not know the project, I did not stay very long there.

We see that the consumption is higher than forecast but this is due to a different use of the greenhouse. Besides, this is the main problem of low consumption houses, the behavior of users greatly influences consumption.

In the sense that the calories retained by inertia are partly lost by the thermal bridge of the standard DV.


We are typically in the case where common sense and empiricism are no longer enough. The standard DV will bring more solar gains but also more losses. What to do? A simulation shows that associated with sufficient inertia, the clear DV will bring more energy than a low emissivity DV.
0 x
Save a tree, eat a beaver.
It is no use to succeed in life, what it takes is to miss his death.
User avatar
bham
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1666
Registration: 20/12/04, 17:36
x 6




by bham » 02/02/10, 09:01

aerialcastor wrote:
In the sense that the calories retained by inertia are partly lost by the thermal bridge of the standard DV.


We are typically in the case where common sense and empiricism are no longer enough. The standard DV will bring more solar gains but also more losses. What to do? A simulation shows that associated with sufficient inertia, the clear DV will bring more energy than a low emissivity DV.

Have you had the opportunity, using an infrared thermometer, to measure the temperatures of the interior windows or aluminum window frames in different conditions, sunshine or not, especially in this house https://www.econologie.info/share/partag ... iRjzLe.pdf and compare them with indoor room temperatures and external temperatures?
0 x
aerialcastor
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 865
Registration: 10/05/09, 16:39
x 21




by aerialcastor » 02/02/10, 11:58

No : Cheesy:
0 x
Save a tree, eat a beaver.

It is no use to succeed in life, what it takes is to miss his death.
Coati84
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 103
Registration: 03/07/09, 10:02
Location: PERTUIS (84)
x 1




by Coati84 » 07/04/11, 10:38

Hello,

I'm finally going to start renovating my house and more particularly changing my old wooden windows with beautiful aluminum frames.

I received a very detailed quote at the start of the week from BELISOL, which offers quality products.

I persist and I sign on the following choice:
* for south-facing windows, put standard 4-15-4 mm double glazing with Ug = 2.9 W / m².K and a solar factor (Fs) of 0.78?
* for north-east-west windows, put 4-15-4 mm double glazing, argon gas and low-emissivity transparent layer on the inside with Ug = 1.1 W / m².K and a solar factor (Fs) 0.64.
glazing 4-15-4?
For information, my "south" windows overlook my living room and I have to the north of this living room a 15 cm thick concrete and cinder block wall. A wooden shutter is present in front of each "south" French window. The cross wall therefore acts as a slightly inertial wall. Finally, I will not embark on additional insulation work for the moment for budgetary reasons. Finally, I plan to put a pergola with deciduous foliage by summer.

Am I right in persisting in wanting standard DV on "south" windows? Or should I put a DV argon gas and low emissivity clear coat on these windows? Is it ultimately a point of detail? And to do a kind of "passive" heating.

As a reminder, my static calculation is as follows:

My calculations as a first approximation for a month of December are as follows:
- source http://pagesperso-orange.fr/herve.silve/bilan_th.htm
- solar irradiation value in 84 [zone H2] on a vertical plane: 24 x 58.9 W / m² = 1.4 kWh / m²
- average temperature in December: 5.5 ° C
- average duration of sunshine fixed at approximately 7 hours in December
- standard double glazing 4/16/4:
solar gain - loss = 1 x 400 x 0.76 hours - 7 x (2.8 - 19.5) x 5.5 hours = 24 - 7 = 448 kWh / m²
- double glazing 4/16/4 with low emissivity face
solar gain - loss = 1 x 400 x 0.64 hours - 7 x (1.4 - 19.5) x 5.5 hours = 24 - 6 = 272 kWh / m²

This calculation must be redone for the other 5 months of heating, but it is always the standard double glazing which is the most appropriate for the "south" orientation because of a greater solar contribution. An approximate calculation for the 6 months of heating (mid-October to mid-April) gives an annual advantage of 8 kWh / m² for standard double glazing, ie in my case an annual advantage of 80 kWh.

I'm crashing or is it OK?

Thank you in advance for your answers.
0 x
Coati84 - realization of a 40 m² wooden extension of my house: 2nd semester 2021
User avatar
I Citro
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5129
Registration: 08/03/06, 13:26
Location: Bordeaux
x 11




by I Citro » 07/04/11, 18:44

Coati84 wrote:I'm crashing or is it OK?
Who could invalidate or confirm this demonstration. :?:
I find myself with the same case of conscience ... I must not be the only one. :?

It must surely be balanced with the regional sunshine parameters. :?:

Personally, I would like to provide seasonal shading on my windows by extending my eaves.
My living room and my south-facing library have (cumulative) 6m of bay windows in 2m high or about 25m² opening.
Let's round to 10m², and 500W of solar power per m² in winter, this gives me a passive solar contribution of 5kW ... Largely enough to explain why my living room rises to 25 ° in full winter as soon as it is sunny ...

The installation of my VMC double flux should allow me to benefit even more from these solar gains by distributing them on the other rooms of the house.
: Idea:
0 x
Coati84
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 103
Registration: 03/07/09, 10:02
Location: PERTUIS (84)
x 1




by Coati84 » 07/04/11, 23:41

I'm going to put:
- DV argon FE 4/15/4 - SGG CLIMAPLUS N: Ug = 1.1 W / m².K - Fs = 0.63 for all orientations except "south",
- DV standard 4/15/4 - SGG CLIMALIT: Ug = 2.7 W / m².K - Fs = 0.76 for the "south" orientation.

Just one last question: my front door is actually a glass patio door that sits under the porch ... and which has a large sun mask on it. For this patio door, I am going to use the DV argon FE 4/15/4 - SGG CLIMAPLUS N. glazing. Will I see a slight difference in color in my garden when I look at the different patio doors in my orientation "south" which will have either DV argon FE or DV standard?


Good evening to all.
0 x
Coati84 - realization of a 40 m² wooden extension of my house: 2nd semester 2021
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 08/04/11, 00:10

Taking another source of data to cross-check
http://www.outilssolaires.com/infos/index-ensoleil.htm
http://resosol.org/parametres/images/janvierV.jpg
2,4 to 2,5KWh / m2 / day in January for the optimum 84 at 45 ° and 40% less vertical.
http://www.cipcsp.com/tutorial/ensoleil ... rance.html
http://www.alertes-meteo.com/cartes/ens ... france.htm
and table in the middle of this long page:
http://herve.silve.pagesperso-orange.fr/solaire.htm
we get over a month of December in Montélimar coming from the sun 66,5KWh or on 1 day of 31 days, 2,13KWh / day on average
In Paris it's much less, clouds, 35,1 / 31 = 1,13KWh.
but do not multiply what is for one day by 7 hours as written for the solar gain when it is already counted in the 1400Wh / day:
1 x 400 x 0.76 hours
therefore 1 x 400 - 0.76 x (2.8 - 19.5) x 5.5 hours = 24Wh / day
1 x 400 x - 0.64 x (1.4 - 19.5) x 5.5 hours = 24Wh / day
It is necessary to mark the units in particular the duration per day for KWh
Glazing with low losses divided by 2 is much more interesting over 24 hours given the little sun received in winter.
You have to calculate in spring and autumn where you can have a slightly opposite result.
If we have 2,5KWh in vertical January following the first link
http://resosol.org/parametres/images/janvierV.jpg
then the difference is small for 1KWh / m2 of solar heating per day and 170Wh / day more for db glazing with low losses.
However, this calculation forgets the losses at night by infrared radiation to the clear sky, which are effective in cooling the windows at night more than the ambient air ((very visible on cars at -5 ° C) which increases the losses. this can be taken into account by decreasing the average T compared to that given.
Then the most insulating glazing will be even more interesting.

If we can better insulate the window at night with a special shutter insulating well at night, then with 8 hours instead of 24 hours of losses per day, the result is reversed, favoring the collector with better solar yield and more losses.
0 x
Coati84
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 103
Registration: 03/07/09, 10:02
Location: PERTUIS (84)
x 1




by Coati84 » 08/04/11, 13:17

Thank you Dedeleco for your detailed contribution.

If I understand correctly, I will therefore ask my carpenter to install for all the windows of the DV argon FE 4/15/4 - SGG CLIMAPLUS N - Ug = 1.1 W / m².K - Fs = 0.63.

Is it OK ? Thank you for your quick response - if you can - because I am launching the final order with BELISOL next Tuesday.

See you later.
0 x
Coati84 - realization of a 40 m² wooden extension of my house: 2nd semester 2021
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 08/04/11, 13:43

I only did an error free calculation on the units.
The difference is small and therefore you have to see the other problems, like price, and color effects, by looking carefully at the windows to be sure to avoid regrets.
In spring and autumn the effect is reversed, to be calculated.

The insulation of the rest of the house is much more important than double glazing in my opinion, to be done well before.

This sentence worries me:
.
Finally, I will not embark on additional insulation work for the moment for budgetary reasons.

it all depends on what is already isolated or not isolated in the house:
Attic and roof first well before double glazing.
If the walls are thermal colanders, double glazing is quite illusory.
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Renovation, construction and real estate work: help, advice and methods ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 34 guests