Green Building Design

Dr. Liam OBrien

Dept. of Civ&Env Engineering
Carleton University

Agenda
1.
2.
3.
4.

5.
6.

7.

Introduce course
Major issues
Case studies
Review syllabus, course schedule
Office hours
Labs
AC&SE CEAB survey please remind me!

My Background

B.Eng., Aerospace Engineering

M.A.Sc., Aerospace Engineering
Product design
Evaluating the sustainability of
engineering activities

PhD, Building Engineering

Thesis: Development of a design

tool for solar houses
Consulting on over a dozen
building projects

Started at Carleton in 2011 for

new Architectural Conservation
and Sustainability Engineering
program

Human Building Interaction Laboratory

Occupant
Behaviour
Smart Controls
Fixed/Passive Design
Simulation, BIM, and visualization research

Occupant behaviour field

studies
Advanced/learning/smart
controls for lighting and
blinds
Model-predictive controls
Building performance
visualization
Occupant modelling
Building information
modelling and data
visualization
Natural ventilation
Occupant comfort
Design of offices and
homes for occupants

8 researchers (civil, mechanical, enviro, architecture, psychology, computer

engineering); ~12 industry and govt partners
International research community on NZEBs and occupant behaviour

Research: design processes,

tools, visualization

Teaching

GREEN HIGH
PERFORMANCE BUILDING
DESIGN

Learning outcomes of GBD

Understand the anatomy of a building and how different

components affect environmental impact and occupant
health and comfort
Know how to perform basic calculations enough to
make informed design decisions at least at the
conceptual design stage
Be able to walk through a building and relate course
theory to them
Understand the design process and the roles of all major
design parties

Learning outcomes of GBD

Be aware of and develop skills using software tools

Develop skills to identify symbiotic relationships between
components and understand and apply integrated design
Understand the strategies that can/should be
implemented at the various design/life-cycle stages
Understand different approaches to building
codes/standards and how to apply them

Topics with less detail

LEED
Water systems

Building anatomy

(Notes on board)

10

Context for Canadian buildings

Commercial/institutional

Residential

Single detached
houses

7,566,000 units (1.2 billion m2)

Row/attached houses

1,453,000 units (200 million m2)

High-rise residential

4,104,000 units (368 million m2)

Commercial/institutional

717.1 million m2

11

Internal vs. envelope load dominated

buildings

12

Internal load dominated buildings: the majority of

energy is used for equipment, lighting, and process
loads. A mild climate or low surface area to volume
ratio minimizes heat transfer through the envelope
and minimizes heating/cooling loads (e.g., large
commercial buildings)
Envelope load dominated buildings: internal loads
are insignificant compared to heating and cooling
loads caused by high heat transfer through the
envelope (e.g., detached houses)
(notes on board)

Energy vs. GHG emissions for buildings

13

Sector energy use by country

14

Energy inequality

GHG abatement by costeffectiveness

Building types: classified by occupancy

patterns and space uses

Residential: houses, townhouses, multi-unit

residential buildings (MURBS e.g.,
apartments, condos)
Commercial: office, retail, institutional
(schools, universities, govt, hospitals)

17

Occupants/engagement

Controls/operations

Renewables

HVAC

Building Envelope

3 + 2 pillars of Green Buildings

18

Green Buildings

19

Integrated Design

High-performance buildings do not work well

and are very expensive if integrated design is
not practiced!

From this.

to this.

Integrated vs. conventional design

ROADMAP FOR THE INTEGRATED DESIGN PROCESS Busby Perkins and Will, and Stantec

Conventional Design
Process
Involves team members
only when essential
Less time and collaboration
in early stages
Decisions made by fewer
people
Linear process
Systems often considered
in isolation
Emphasis on up-front costs
Typically finished when
construction is complete

Integrated Design Process

Inclusive from the outset
Front-loaded - time and energy
invested early
Team influences decisions
Iterative process
Whole-systems thinking
Life-cycle costing
Process continues through postoccupancy

Design team

Process is iterative, but approx. order

of design should be:
1.

2.

3.

4.
5.

Massing,
orientation
Envelope design,
layout and finishes
Daylighting
HVAC
Renewables

22

Building capital cost

Example of integrated design: how much insulation?

Point where peak heating
load drops and smaller
HVAC system can be
chosen

Larger HVAC system

Smaller HVAC system

Insulation level

Simulation facilitates integrated design considerations

23

Toolbox for design

Case studies, rules of thumb

Simple tools: single-system, simplified

models

High-Performance Building Magazine, SABMag,

ASHRAE Journal

RETScreen, HOT2000, Screening Tool, PV

Watts, MIT Design Advisor

Detailed integrated tools

EnergyPlus, eQUEST, TRNSYS

24

Example tools for passive building design

Climate Analysis/Visualization
Climate Consultant
Sustainable by Design
Ecotect

Building Level (residential)

HOT2000/HOT3000
PHPP
BEOpt
RESFEN

Systems and Components

RETScreen
LBNL Window/Therm
ParaSol
WUFI; WUFI Passive
SketchUp (also good for
geometry generation for other
tools)
TRNSYS
IA-QUEST; CONTAM

Building Level (all)

EnergyPlus/OpenStudio
ESP-r
COMFEN
Screening Tool

Comprehensive database of tools here:

Daylighting
DAYSIM
SPOT (sensor position
optimization tool)

25

Relationship between building subsystems

Mutualistic: subsystems #1
benefits subsystem #2 and
vice versa. (HVAC and
Envelope)
Commensalistic: subsystem
#1 benefits subsystem #2,
but subsystem #2 has no
effect on subsystem #1.
(Windows and walls)
Parasitic: subsystem #1
exploits subsystem #2 with
nothing in return. (large eastfacing windows and HVAC)

Net-Zero Energy Housing &

EcoTerra Case Study
Liam OBrien

28

EcoTerra EQuilibrium House

2.84 kW (peak)
Buildingintegrated
photovoltaicthermal system

Passive solar
design:
Optimized
triple glazed
windows and
mass
Groundsource heat
pump

Net-Zero Definitions
1. Electricity imports = Site electricity exports
(boundary at houses electrical meter)
2. Electricity imports = site + off-site electricity
exports (boundary expanded to include off-site
generation)
3. Primary energy use = primary energy use
offset (boundary expanded to fuel source)
4. Zero life-cycle energy (boundary includes
materials)
5. Zero net operating GHG emissions
6. Zero operating or life-cycle costs

Net-Zero Measurement Period

All definitions pertain to

the period of a year

During this period, all

usual weather conditions
are experienced good
and bad.

This is suitable for all

houses without longterm storage
The testing period would
usually be the first 1-2
years.

NZEH Design Objectives

Achieve predicted NZE for least cost (capital

or life cycle)
Use simple and robust systems
Dont sacrifice too much on comfort
Practice integrated design

Objectives of Net-Zero Concept

Self-sufficiency

Implied zero net impact on environment

Encourages state-of-the-art development of

technologies and construction techniques
Encourages both energy efficiency measures and
renewables (NZE necessarily includes
renewables)
Simplicity; understandable by lay person (e.g., vs.
LEED)
Universality (e.g., no dependency on climate
zones, etc.)

Underlying Fundamental Concept

Energy Efficiency Measures
(negawatts)

On-site Energy Collection

Energy
Savings

Objective: Find the path to the performance goal with

the least resistance (cost, complexity).

The Optimal Mix

Energy efficiency
measures provide
diminishing returns
At some point, its
cheaper to move
forward with
renewable energy
systems (based on
additional $/kWh)

Energy Efficiency
Measures

Economically
Optimal

PV

EcoTerra House Timeline

Design Team
Engineering,
R&D, and
Systems Design
Andreas Athienitis
and graduate
students,
Concordia
University

Architectural
Design
Masa Noguchi,
Architect

Builder (and
technicians/trades)
Alouette Homes

Assembly of Modules

Prefabricated homes can reduce cost of BIPV through integration

The house was delivered in five modules; with the basement pre-poured

BIPV/T roof construction in Maisons Alouettes

factory as one system a first
Sun

Building
integrated PV
arrays

Air cavity
Air intakes
in soffit

Warm/hot air
flow from
BIPV/T

Key features of EcoTerraTM House

Passive Solar Heating

BIPV/T

Large south-facing
windows (RSI 1)
Passive Charge
Concrete Slab & Brick
Wall
Motorized Blinds
PV panel Cooling
Drying Clothes
DWH heating
Ventilated Concrete
Slab heating

Geothermal HP

Forced-Air Space
heating/cooling
DWH heating

Ventilation
Fan
Potable Water

BIPV/T
System

Outdoor
Air Inlet

Non-potable Water

Variable
Speed Fan

Desuperheater from
Heatpump

Supply Air

Interior
Brick Wall

Exhaust Air
Fresh Air

Dryer

Passive Charge Slab

(direct solar gain)

Exhaust Air
Geothermal
Heatpump
(source is
well water)

A/W Heat
Exchanger

HRV
Return Air
Preheat
Tank

Ventilated Slab
Circulator
Air Flow
Direction

Exhaust
DHW
Drain Water
Heat Recovery

Water Flow
Direction
Damper

DHW
Tank

Electrical
Heater

Well Water

Well Water

Key features of EcoTerraTM House

3-ton, 2-stage heat

pump

80 meter boreholes

Major envelope parameters: EcoTerraTM

Heated Volume: 671.4 m3

Heated floor area (with basement): 230 m2
Two bedrooms
Ceiling Area: 87.06 m2
Exposed Wall Area: 219.73 m2
Glazing area:

South Glazing to Floor Ratio: 9.1% (42% of south faade)

Air-tightness: 0.85 ach @ 50 Pa (measured)

North: 0.65m2
South: 20.9 m2
East: 6.67 m2
West:5.2m2

(0.047 ach under typical conditions)

Roof RSI- 9.1 ; Walls RSI- 6.3

Basement floor RSI - 1.5; basement walls RSI - 5

Wall Constructions/Thermal Mass

Thermal mass
locations (highdensity concrete):

Basement floor
slab: 4 (10 cm);
ventilated
Main floor slab
(south half): 6 (15
cm)
Dividing wall
(bottom 3 ft of main
floor): 10 (25 cm)

Innovative Technologies

Building-integrated
photovoltaic/thermal
(BIPV/T) system that
was built in factory as a
manufactured model.
Hollow core thermal
storage system in floor
connected to BIPV/T.

Ventilated Slab

Th_cnc

Normal Density Plain Concrete

Steel Deck (Canam P-2436, galvanized steel)
Ventilation Channel (cavity)
Metal Mesh (e > 5mm)
Rigid Insulation
Water/vapor Barrier
Gravel (earth)

Concrete
64

76

89

38

Unit in mm

Air
115

Site/Shading Analysis

Vegetation was cleared to prevent shading on south faade and roof

Major Decisions

Form - 1 vs. 2 storeys, shape, aspect ratio

Envelope windows, opaque construction
insulation
Thermal mass location, type, quantity
Heating/cooling/ventilation type, distribution
Domestic hot water heating source/recovery
Controls interface, control zones, schedules
Renewables type, quantity, storage

The NZE goal provides one more reason

to practice integrated design

Key Design Objectives

Energy efficient design

airtight, optimal insulations
levels.
Passive solar design south
facing windows to reduce
winter heat loads and mass
to prevent overheating;
active control also studied.
Building-integrated solar:
BIPV/T; geothermal heat
pump.

Demand
side

Integrated
Design
Supply
side

High-Level Design Process

Rules of thumb and experience
for passive solar, form, fabric

Proposal of design by architect

2-day design charrette mainly for
design of solar collector, thermal
storage
1-day follow-up meeting to
discuss ventilated slab

Aloutte in-house design for

lighting, forced-air system,
electrical, etc.
Detailed design by architect
Control system design by
commercial building controls
company and researchers

Design Charrette

Members: University research team (energy systems

design), architect, builder, municipality representative,
PV expert, utility representative, GSHP distributor
Advance work:
proposed architectural drawings, predicted plug
loads (lighting, appliances, etc.)
Major geometry fixed beforehand to reduce size of
design space
During:
Parametric simulations (HOT2000) to size insulation,
windows, form.
Design day calculations (Mathcad) performed to
assess passive solar performance and thermal
comfort.
BIPV/T thermal output estimated
PV sized to achieve desired net-energy level; priority
to reach target while maintaining affordability. 45
slope assumed.
GSHP chosen and sized (by distributor) in charette;
later downsized to account for passive solar
performance.

Passive Solar Strategies

Size window area and mass to avoid overheating.

Aspect ratio, form; passive solar design rule of thumb
aspect ratio of 1.2 1.3 get more south faade
but minimum practical depth is 8 m.
Higher ceiling height on first floor 9 - 10.
Need to size mass to prevent overheating
Exterior shading?
Mass where? Distributed mass on floor and walls is
better than thick mass in one location; active and
passive storage.

Passive Solar Design: EcoTerra House

50

One-day follow-up meeting: Slab Design

Basement is cooler; enabling greater heat

storage capacity and lower minimum BIPV/T
outlet temperature threshold
Construction/ductwork easier

Th_cnc

Meeting objective: determine how to

actively store heat for space heating
from BIPV/T roof.
Approach: brainstorming, followed by
parametric analysis with different slab
materials, channel geometry, thickness,
and insulation.
Ventilated slab position in basement
floor so that:

64

89
76

Normal Density Plain Concrete

Steel Deck (Canam P-2436, galvanized steel)
Ventilation Channel (cavity)
Metal Mesh (e > 5mm)
Rigid Insulation
Water/vapor Barrier
Gravel (earth)

38

Unit in mm

115

Design Approaches

Simultaneous consideration of active and passive

approaches at the early design stage (similar to
combined building HVAC simulation).
For example, the GSHP distributor sized the system
without considering the passive solar performance.
The distributed suggested 3.5-4 ton; 3 was used
(while 2.2 would have been sufficient).

Other Key Design Decisions

Solar DHW system would have been expensive and

added complexity. Instead, the its cost was reallocated
to a larger PV array.
Original plan was to use GSHP to completely heat water
but instead, BIPV/T and desuperheater pre-heat DHW
and a second tank with electric heater is used to bring
temperature up to 55C.
Awning added to upper floor windows because there is
little thermal mass there.

How much insulation?

Space Heating vs. Wall Insulation

Heating Energy (kWh)

5800
5700
5600
5500
5400
5300
5200
5100
5000
4900
4800
6

10

Wall (RSI)

Note that benefit in going from 6 to 8 RSI is

twice that of going from 8 to 10 RSI
Diminishing returns

Insulation: parametric study results

Purpose: quickly establish most significant

affects and point at which return on
investment in minimal.

(based on HOT2000 calculations)

Thermal analysis clear winter day

Case
Window
Mass
Aspect Heating
Energy
(similacase)
(cm
area (% of
consumption
kWh

Max room
temp.
C

conv

54

24

1.3

conv

51

27

20 cm

1.3

conv

36

25

40 (RSI 1)

20 cm

conv

39

24.5

50 (RSI 1)

20 cm

1.3

conv

27

28.5

50 (RSI 1)

20 cm

1.3

Radiantconv.

26 (50 on
avg day)

28

50 (RSI 0.6)

20 cm

1.3

Radiantconv.

46 (69 on
avg day)

27

Ratio

south face)
and R-value

concrete
on first
floor)

30

5 cm

1.3

40 (RSI 1)

5 cm

2a

40 (RSI 1)

(RSI 1)

Type

57

Passive Solar/Daylighting Efficiency

Useful

Good passive
solar/
daylighting
design is
complex.

Solar Gains

Overheating

Solar on
Occupants
Daylight
Displaced
Lighting

Reduced
Cooling
Airflow

Glare

Heat Loss
Ventilation
Increased
Heating

Air
Leakage

58

Sample
Performance
Temperature
Swing
Lag

Source: Chen, Y. et al (2010)

Sample Passive Solar Performance

Only minimal heat
in morning at time
of setpoint
increase
Temperature
briefly falls below
setpoint before
nighttime setback

Spikes mostly from garage heater

The demand profile can be analyzed to modify control strategies
for energy savings. E.g. change time of nighttime setback

Sample Passive Solar Performance

Indicates that
heating is being
supplied by GSHP

Stratification of 2-3C occurs between rooms and peaks around

13:00-14:00.
Potential energy savings are possible with a more advanced
control system for circulation fan.

Why Solar Buildings: Diverse Forms

Photovoltics (PV)
Efficiency: 3 - 25%

Daylighting/
Passive Solar
Efficiency: 5 - 20%

Quantity
Timing
Comfort
Form
Solar Thermal
Efficiency: up to 70%

PV/Thermal
Efficiency: up to 80%

61

The 4 Pillars of Solar Energy Harvesting

Orienta
tion

Conver
sion
Storage

62

Solar Conversion Efficiency

Useful Energy
Efficiency
Incident Solar Energy

63

Roof Design: Constraints/Considerations

PV modules should extend along the length of the

roof (sloped direction) for integration
Voltage and current outputs had to match inverter
Collectors limited to south roof areas
Slope selected to optimize combined electrical and
thermal output
Width had to fit house width
The municipality required metal roof
Shading (trees, neighbours, etc.) should be avoided
A slope of 40 degrees or greater is needed to fully
shed snow

50 degree slope

Avalon Discovery 3 - March 21st Shadow Patterns

Shading study seems accurate for Avalon

Roof Design: Modules and the Inverter

The number of modules

should be selected so that the
array power output is just
under the capacity of the
inverter.
The configuration (number of
modules per string) must also
be compatible with the
inverter.
Strings
1

74%

98%

86%

100%

Modules/String

9
10

76%

Roof Design: Type

Gable

Hip

Cross-Gable

1481

1481

1214

18 %

80 %

66 %

76 %

Visualization

Average Annual
Solar Radiation
on Roof (kWh/m2)
% Shaded
Annually

Optimal Panel
Layout

% Area Covered
by Cells

Roof Design: Intermediate Solution

30 slope (changed from 45 for shipping)

9 meters wide
Amorphous Silicon modules (low efficiency but
large area)
Extension added for
electrical compatibility
(19 21 modules; 10
meters)

71

Hybrid Solar Collectors

Doubling-up can increase yields, but not

double them.

Photovoltaic/thermal at Concordia
University

Semi-transparent PV

Solar Fraction: Fraction of Total Energy

Provided by Solar Energy

Solar Fraction

Net-zero

Thermal energy needs

Solar Collector Area

72

73

Green Building Challenges

1. Daily incongruence between solar
availability and demand.
Peak
demand
occurs
outside of
daylight
hours.

74

Generation

Loads and Generation Profiles

Net

24 hr

Load

12 hr

Rectilinear
street pattern

Generation

Undiversified

Net

Curved
street pattern

Load

12 hr

24 hr

Green Building Challenges

2. Seasonal incongruence between solar
availability and demand.

Peak energy demand is in the winter, but peak

solar availability is in the summer. Therefore,
you have to store the energy for ~6 months.

75

76

Green Building Challenges

3. Geometrical limitations: shading from
neighbouring obstructions, limited space,
unfavourable orientations.

Vegetation cleared to ensure no

winter solstice shading of roof
Solar collector positioned
near-south (S30W) and
above shadows from
neighbours

Green Building Challenges

Monthly generation (kWh)

4. Complex systems rarely perform to their full

potential; simpler is better

Summertime
performance is
close to predicted
Wintertime
performance is
much worse
because of snow
cover

77

78

Site/Shading Analysis

Mean Temperautre (C)

Solar Altitude at noon (deg.)

Overhang Design
No window
80
25 shading
during winter
70
solstice20
(required by
CMHC).
60
Majority15of south50
facing windows
shaded10
by fixed
40
overhang on
5
1-2 month lag
summer
solstice; but
30
not in shoulder
0
Overheating
can
occur
in
shoulder
seasons
when
outdoor
20
seasons.
Solar Altitude
temperature is warm but sun is low.
-5
10
o
Retractable
awnings are used on upper floor
to
minimize
Mean Temperature
unwanted
gains. (only on upper windows because of lack
0
-10
of thermal mass here)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
o
Interior shades are less effective because not all solar
gains are rejected; but also offer privacy.

Building Performance Simulation

Outputs
Model
Weather
data

Building geometry & envelope

Controls
HVAC
Lighting
Occupants
Renewable energy systems

Accuracy

Boundary
conditions

Time/Effort/Detail

Energy use
Energy generation
Temperatures
Pressures
Airflow
Air quality
Acoustics
Daylight
Thermal comfort
Visual comfort

79

80

Elements of Building Simulation

(Clarke, 2001)

81

The Power of Performance Simulation

200

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

x 10

0.3

1.7
0.25

Mean Shade Position (Fraction

Closed)

400

Overhang (depth as a fraction of glazing height)

Test new strategies

Examine many
design possibilities
Performance path
for building
performance
standards
Meet current
expectations of with
absolute targets
like Net-Zero

0.2

0.15

0.1

200

400

0.05

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
600
0.3 800
0.2
0.1
0

1.6
1.5
South East

South West
1.4
North East

North West
1.3
1.2
1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

1.1
1
58

9 10
10 11 15
12 13 20
14 15 25
16
2 2
Window
size(m(m) )
A*SHGC
Time of Day

82

Building Simulation: Visualization

Waldorf school in West Virginia

Light shelves/
Sunshades
NREL RSF Building

No Light shelves/
Sunshades
Annual daylight
availability

NREL RSF daylight rendering

The Challenges of Building Simulation

Designers cannot
control how well the
building is built
Designers cannot
control how the
building is used
Excessive data
availability
Simulation does not
replace designers;
its just a tool

7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
e
g
e
e
n
o
S
n
le
w
nc ett va alo ES ave int No dal ipe
a
u
n
v
H
M
er inn
H
nd Alo sto
A
v
C
i
o
o
l
b
h
W
R
A
A
Ec

Predicted

Measured

Extrapolated from data

83

Model Details (EnergyPlus)

Ground boundary conditions applied.

EnergyPlus does not calculate solar
gains for windows below z=0.

For early stage design, grouping windows is appropriate; however they were
explicitly modeled since the house is designed.

Thermal Zoning

Having more zones is more conservative in

characterizing the risk of stratification.
Only mechanical airflow was considered.

Future work could consider natural airflow using an airflow

network of CFD.
Roof
(unconditioned)
Overhangs;
lower roof
modeled as
shading
surfaces

Upper Zone

Mid-height
massive wall

South Zone

Garage Zone
North Zone

Basement Zone

Preliminary Results
Occupied and monitored
period

800

Heating Load (kWh)

700
600

Simulation Results

500

Monitored (occupied)
Results

400
300

200
100
0
Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Tools Used and Their Purpose

HOT2000 (required): used for whole house

annual energy analysis.
RETScreen (required): used for design of
renewables (PV, in this case).
MathCAD: design day analysis of passive
solar performance and design of BIPV/T and
ventilated slab.

RETScreen Demo

HOT3000 Demo

Design Approaches: Simulation

Period

Yearly simulation: necessary for net energy

determination, economic analysis and proper
optimization.
Design day simulation: useful for understanding
daily dynamics (e.g. passive solar performance).

Solar Design Days for Passive Solar Behaviour

Glazing and thermal mass added

Heating Load
8

25
20

15

10
2

5
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
h3 2 h3 4 h3 6 h3 8 h3 0 h3 2 h3 4 h3 6 h3 8 h3 0 h3 2 h3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
2

35
Temperature (C)

30

12
10

30
8

25
20

15

10
2

5
0

Zero
heating
load at
time of
high
total grid
load

00
h3
02 0
h3
04 0
h3
06 0
h3
08 0
h3
10 0
h3
12 0
h3
14 0
h3
16 0
h3
18 0
h3
20 0
h3
22 0
h3
0

10

40
Solar Gain or Heating Load (kW)

South Zone Temp

Solar Gain

Temperature (C)

Cold Sunny Day

35

12

Solar Gain or Heating Load (kW)

40

time

tim e

Peak Indoor Temperature:

25.6C

Peak Indoor Temperature:

25.6C

Daily Purchased Heating:

64.24 kWh

Daily Purchased Heating:

38.0 kWh

Annual Purchased Heating:

12,441 kWh

Annual Purchased Heating:

9,804 kWh

91

-40%

-21%

HOT 2000 Preliminary analysis

Space Heating vs. Window Area
9200

86
85.8

Solar gains

7200

85.6

EGH
6200

85.4

5200

85.2

Heating - Gas

4200

85

3200

84.8

Heating - GSHP

2200

84.6

1200

84.4
25.0

9.0

11.0

13.0

15.0

17.0

19.0

21.0

23.0

Window Area as % of Floor Area

Solar Heat Gain

Space Heating Load

Heating Load w/ GSHP

EGH Score

EGH rating

Heating Energy (kWh)

8200

1
293
585
877
1169
1461
1753
2045
2337
2629
2921
3213
3505
3797
4089
4381
4673
4965
5257
5549
5841
6133
6425
6717
7009
7301
7593
7885
8177
8469

Heating/Cooling Energy (W)

Simulation Approach: Annual

Annual data can be overwhelming if not
presented properly
20000

15000
Heating

10000

-5000

-10000
Cooling

5000

93

94

Simulation Approach: Annual

If presented properly, annual results are ideal
o We want to confirm that the building performs well
under all expected conditions
Space Heating vs. Wall Insulation

Heating Energy (kWh)

5800
5700
5600
5500
5400
5300
5200
5100
5000
4900
4800
6

8
Wall (RSI)

10

Integrated Design: Major Questions

What parameters have the greatest impact

on design?
What model aspects deserve the most
attention?

What if?

95

Rules of Thumb vs. Simulation

Good starting point

Usually limited to
relating only 1-2
variables
Limited to preconceived
configurations/technolo
gies
Only predicts good
design characteristics;
not performance

Rules of thumb:

The thermal mass

should be 9 times
the area of southfacing glass.
Do not exceed 6
in thickness for
thermal mass
materials

96

97

When Rules of Thumb Fail

Solar obstructions
Advanced technologies
Non-standard controls
Non-standard use of
space

Trees (opaque)
PV Array

Trees (50%
transmittance)
Trees (opaque)

98

Parametric Analysis

Establish trends
Determine the
most critical
parameters

Combined heating and cooling

energy (kWh/year)

8,000
WWR2 (East)

7,000

WWR4 (West)

6,000
WWR3 (North)

5,000

WWR1 (South)

4,000
0.05

0.2

0.35
0.5
0.65
Window-to-wall ratio

0.8

Parameter Interactions

Example of a weak interaction

Example of a strong interaction

99

System Interactions
Fractional
Full Factorial

Each circle represents a unique case.

Each dimension represents a design decision.

10
0

10
1

Subsystem Coupling/Decoupling
Geometry,
Demand,
Thermal

Poor Prospects for

Decoupling

BIPV/T

Moderate
Prospect for
Decoupling
Solar
Thermal
(space
heating)

Energy Efficient
Measures

BIPV

Geometry,
Thermal

Passive Solar
Heating/Cooling
BI Solar
Envelope &
Base Loads

Good
prospects for
Decoupling

DHW

Why Solar Buildings? Source Close to Sink

Solar Footprint
of Toronto
If all energy is
converted and
all land is used
Solar Footprint of Toronto

Roofs Only (21% of area)

10% Conversion Efficiency

But Canadas best solar potential is near population centres

10
2

Energy Flows and Boundaries

Externalities: health, quality of life, ecosystems

NetZEB: Lessons Learned

Liam OBrien, Subtask B Co-leader

(with Andreas Athienitis)

Assistant Professor, Civil & Environmental Engineering

Carleton University

Objective/Background

Present anecdotes from four international

case studies that can be generalized as
lessons learned.
The buildings were used as archetypes
Details can be found in our book: Modelling,
Design, and Optimisation of Net-Zero Energy
Buildings

EcoTerra, Eastman, Quebec

LEAF House, Italy

EnerPos, Reunion Island,

France

NREL RSF, USA

Dont ignore localized comfort

Comfort is more than air temperature.

Seek efficient means

to deliver comfort

EnerPos, Reunion Island

No significant air-conditioning required

Comfort maintained through natural ventilation and fan use alone

Comfort is key: thermal, visual, acoustic

Visual
Comfort

Heating/cooling

Indoor Air
Quality

nd
a
ion air s
t
a
til oor ent
n
d
Ve out irem
qu
re

He
co atin
oli g/
ng

Energy
N
an atur
d al
ou ve
td nt
oo ila
r n tio
oi n
se
Openness for daylight
penetration

g
in
t
gh gn
i
l
y i
Da des

Surface finishes: dust

collecting vs. sound
absorbing

Fixed and movable

solar shading

Thermal
Comfort

Acoustic
Comfort

Acoustics is repeatedly ranked low for high-performance buildings

The 1:10:100 Ratio of Building Costs

Rent

1:10:100
Energy Costs

Salaries

Bottom line: Dont sacrifice comfort for energy savings; BUT they are not
mutually-exclusive market reports indicate sustainable features are
desirable.

11
0

Comfort is key: thermal, visual, acoustic

Open
windows
allow both air
and sound
through

EnerPos clothing level

ASHRAE Recommends 0.5 clo in summer; 0.36

clo was measured in EnerPos

Occupants are Creative

If discomfort occurs, occupants will adapt

themselves or the building

Other occupant adaptations

Dark shades
significantly
reduce heatrejection
capability
Can be
thermally
worse than no
shades at all

Know your occupants: anticipate diversity

Design for flexibility. Example: EcoTerra

Garage was turned into a workshop

Basement was converted to bedroom
Occupants are retired (not middle-aged with two
kids)

Design for comfort and occupant

behaviour

But no future opportunities for adjustment; so get it right!

Design for comfort and occupant

behaviour

But extreme care must be taken to not irritate occupants

Design for comfort and occupant

behaviour

But disaggregate as much as possible

Plug loads add up

Aux HP
Controls
Heater
2.2%
1.0%
Aux Garage
Heater
7.3%

Lighting,
Appliances,
Plug Load
34.5%

EcoTerra basement

BIPV/T Fan &

Pump
1.4%
HRV/Air
Cleaner
7.2%
Fan, Misc
Equip
13.2%

DHW
11.7%

Heat Pump
21.3%

EcoTerra house

Avg. existing
Canadian house

If you cant measure it, you cant

manage it

Sub-meter as much as
possible and make data
readily available (including
to occupants).
After 6 months of
operation, it was
discovered that 13% of
EnerPos energy use was
for the elevator. Why? The
lighting.

Commissioning is Essential

Efficiency has its limits

Redesign studies showed that efficiency
measures tended to approach their upper
limits of practicality.
14000
12000
Controls

10000
8000

Equipment

6000

HRV/Air Cleaner

4000

DHW

2000

Heat Pump: Cooling

-8000
-10000
-12000

Added PV

Basement and Wall insulation

-6000

Shading Control

-4000

Remove Dividers

-2000

Removed air cleaner and

reduced fan use

Base Case (as built)

Electricity Use (kWh/year)

Heat Pump: Heating

Lighting, appliances, and
plug loads
PV generation

Keep it simple

LEAF House mechanical systems schematic

12
4

Roof Design
30 slope (changed from 45 for module shipping
constraints)

Constraint could be removed through panelized construction

Amorphous Silicon modules (only 6% efficiency but large

area)
Extension added for
electrical compatibility
(19 21 modules)

The NetZEB goal is a game-changer

0 is an arbitrary number

But it is challenging and forces integrated design

with energy as a central goal for designers and
occupants

$13 of PV per continuous Watt

This realization justified snipping backlight power

in all phones

Building performance simulation is a

life-cycle tool; not just for design

Normal density plain concrete (125mm (5"))

Steel deck (0.7mm (1/32") galvanized steel)
Ventilation channel (air cavity)
Metal mesh (8mm (1/4"))
Vapor barrier
Insulation (50mm(2") EXPS, RSI-1.7(R10))
Gravel backfill
TC-1

125

NREL RSF model used to commission

building
Can be used to evaluate more sophisticated
operations

89

Locations
of TC
63

TC-2

76

114

38

TC-3

TC-5

TC-4

Education of occupants was critical

EcoTerra garage
heater
EcoTerra setpoints
NREL RSF
cleaning schedule
But we must rely
less on researcher
intervention!

Use of multiple tools is prevalent: for

features and for model resolution

Dont overlook significant interactions; but

dont be afraid to decouple for some situations

Design day/short/simple simulations

are valuable

But remember: its only a moment/day in time.

Design day/short/simple simulations

are valuable

Tools cannot model everything!

Closing thoughts

Comfort is king
For NetZEBs, subtleties count
The road to achieving NetZEB just starts at
construction
Simulation is invaluable, but care must be
taken

Controls Systems Design

Controls are key to low-energy design.

For example, the best use of the BIPV/T thermal

energy must be determined.
Small changed to the setpoint schedule can affect
whether auxiliary heating (COP=1) is used instead of
the GSHP (COP=3.6)

Collaboration between Regulvar (commercial

building controls company) and Concordia.
Two step process:

Concordia generated pseudocode

Regulvar implemented algorithms into the control
system

Strengths of Design Process

Proper integrated design with formal
design charette
Many experts included in design
process
Excellent co-operation between all
stakeholders (e.g. builder and
researchers/designers).

Limitation of Design Process

Ducting design was un-integrated. Could

have been better with improved
communication between engineers and
builder. Result: indirect ducting with
moderate heat loss between BIPV/T and
loads.
Fragmented models; unable to capture
some effects of interactions.
Should have had one owner for the
design of each major subsystem.

ECOTERRA PREDICTED AND

MEASURED PERFORMANCE
DATA

Pre-construction Predictions

Unoccupied Year Monitored Data

Energy Consumption and Production Density
Space
Heating

Water
Heating

Appliances

Lighting

Cooling

Solar
Electricity

Solar
Thermal

Ground Source
HP

10

-10

Total Annual Enegy Densities

0.00

-50

-70

National Average
-90

R-2000 Home
coTerra

Energy Density (kWh/m2)

Energy Density (kWh/m2)

-30

-50.00
-100.00
-150.00

-200.00
-250.00

-110
-300.00
-130

-150

National
Average

R-2000 Home

coTerra

Reasons for Discrepancies

Occupancy daytime heating setpoints (22.5C) is less energy-conscious

than designed for (21C). (simulation shows this affects heating load by ~
20%)
Significant heat losses (~ 5C drop) occur in the ducting from BIPV/T to
loads. Prediction of BIPV/T performance was optimistic.
Air cleaner was unexpected (consumes ~400 kWh/year)
Additional installed lighting (daylighting poorer than expected)/second fridge.
Snow cover and inverter downtime hurt PV electrical production. (~30%
worse than expected)
Garage heating consumes a predicted 2000 kWh/year (2/3 of the heat pump
energy consumption!)
Dryer not properly installed on BIPV/T ducting (system does not work as
expected because of duct design).

Electrical consumption for lights and appliances

7000

kWh/year

6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0

te ale lon SS ven nto ow ale peg

ce
t
n
v
i
E
d
a
N
a oue
a Mi
r
n
n
v
d
H
e
H
n Al
A
to
in
v
C
i
s
o
o
l
h
W
R
A
c
Ab
E
Predicted

Measured

Extrapolated from data

Recommendations: Operational

Temperature control setpoints:

Garage electric resistance heater:

If possible, delay daytime increase until after sunrise to permit solar

gains to do some of warming.
Set auxiliary (electric) heater on GSHP to have higher temperature
threshold (i.e. higher than difference between day and nighttime
setpoints).
Minimize use to when garage is occupied

Ventilation and circulation:

Circulation rate should be controlled by temperature differences between

rooms; not always on.
Ventilation rate should be reduced saves energy and prevents dryness
of air (owners mentioned this issue).
Air cleaner could be removed/bi-passed.

Recommendations: Design

Ductwork should be simplified to reduce pressure drops and allow

faster flow rate in BIPV/T roof. This will allow greater flow rates (and
quantifies of extracted energy).
A greater roof slope would enhance show-shedding ability and
increase surface area.
Use of BIPV/T air in garage usefulness threshold is much lower in
garage since it is maintained at a cooler temperature.
Possible use of lower roof section for solar energy collection, if more
aggressive targets are set.
Higher daylight levels through larger non-South windows. Cost of
additional heat loss should be balanced with daylighting.

MODELING AND REDESIGN

Redesign Strategies
Best first steps: biggest energy
consumers. Operations before
physical systems.
Better control over circulation fan
Less energy-intense source for
garage heat
Roof re-design for higher
performance
Additional PV/higher efficiency PV
Remove air cleaner
Daylighting
Envelope improvements

HP Circulation Fan,
2509.1, 16%
Kitchen
Appliances, Lights,
Laundry, 5084.0,
31%
Heat Pump,
3151.8, 19%

Aux. Heater,
263.0, 2%
BIPV/T Fan, 69.4,
0%
Controls,
390.4, 2%

Garage Heater,
1965.5, 12%

DHW, 1425.2,
9%
HRV/Air
Cleaner,
1260.4,
8%

Inverter, 18.0, 0%

Assumption: Appliance loads cannot be reduced though the re-design

Actuators,
0.2, 0%
Sump
Pump, 0.8,
0%
Water Filter, 0.0,
0%
Well Pump, 6.0,
0%
Alarm System,
83.6, 1%

Upgrade #1: Smarter airflow controls

Issue: fan is currently on (low-speed) all the

time. Significant stratification only occurs in
early afternoon. Mean T = 0.45C
Solution: turn fan on only if temperature
between thermal zones exceeds 2C.
Result: Fan is on for 32.8% of year; mean T
= 1.40C. Energy savings of 1690 kWh.
Modest effect on comfort.

Upgrade #2: Smarter airflow controls

Issue: air cleaner (in line with

HRV) is arguably unneeded
(house is far from pollution
sources)
Solution: Remove it.
Result: 429 kWh savings.

Upgrade #3a: Garage heating

Issue: Garage is used as

workshop; electric resistance
heating unexpected added.
Predicted 2660 kWh heating load.
Solution: Supply heat with GSHP
(assumed setpoint 12C during
daytime only; as requested by
owners)
Result: 1920 kWh savings (over
electric resistance heater)

PV Upgrade

Under ideal conditions, PV performance is relatively insensitive

to slope.
With snow considered, higher slopes (>40-45 deg.) are better.
Higher slopes also mean a greater area for the given house
footprint.
Time of generation (especially thermal energy) must be a
consideration.

Annual Electricity Generation (kWh/m2)

120
115

Snow Ignored

110

Snow Modeled

105
100
95
90
85
80

10

20

30

40

50

60

Roof Slope (deg)

70

80

90

Upgrade #4: Increased PV efficiency

and slope

Issue: Slope is slightly below

optimal and accumulates snow
Solution: Increase slope to 40
and double nominal PV efficiency
to 12.6%.
Result: Predicted additional
4320 kWh/year of generation.

THE FUTURE OF NET-ZERO

ENERGY AND OTHER BIG
PICTURE TOPICS

Net-Zero Energy Buildings in the Future

NZE will become more feasible with:

More efficient appliances and lighting

More efficient and economical renewable energy
systems
Better building-occupant interaction

Energy monitoring, display, and interface

Net-zero ready focus on envelope upgrade

appliances, lighting, renewables later.

Problems with Net-Zero Energy

Somewhat arbitrary definition. So what if its

90% or 110% of the way there?
Focus is exclusively on energy; no recognition
of comfort, health, water, other resources, social
considerations (e.g., affordability)
Probably not economically optimal; diminishing
returns on energy efficiency and renewable
energy generation. Incentives would be better
spent by distributing them equally.

Problems with Net-Zero Energy

NZE is a marketing label with no requirements

for monitoring
Occupants can impact energy use by 50% so
when can you call a house net-zero? After
design? After occupancy?
The definition is very home-centric; zero regard
for neighbours and co-operation
No consideration of temporal effect of electricity;
what if everyone has peak generation at one
time and peak consumption 6 months later?

Problems with Net-Zero Energy

Is the universal definition fair? Some climates

much more cooperative (e.g., on Reunion
Island, they often dont use heating or cooling
and the days are all about 12 hours long)
No recognition of spatial considerations

Urban areas pose more constraints, but are likely

more sustainable (less transportation and land use)
Net-zero energy standard could lead to more urban
sprawl

Societies/Organizations/Projects

IBPSA-Canada (free to join; discussions of

starting Ottawa Chapter)
ASHRAE Carleton Student Chapter ($20/year
for students, but free monthly dinners and
magazine!; see my website for application
form)
Canada Green Building Council (CaGBC)
Emerging Green Builders (EGBs) ($35/year)
Design competitions galore
SAB Mag (free industry magazine)

1/7/2015

156