Showing posts with label equation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label equation. Show all posts

Saturday, October 17, 2009

042. From Minergie to Minergie-P (rejoice!)

Figure 33. The new calculated energy balance for the house. The numbers are in kWh/(m2). Compare to figure 23.

Back in April I had started to write a little about the calculations of the projected energy usage that had been done based on the components making up the house. Since then much has changed and the structure of the house is now going to be made entirely of wood[1]. The windows have been upgraded to have better energy performance. We also have a new energy planner who is a better fit for our project. He changed the heat pump to a better-tested model, added 4 m2 of solar collector (for hot water) and an Erdregister (earth tube heat-exchanger). The result of all these changes is that we now have an optimized system with lower numbers. Numbers that put us firmly in Minergie-P territory!! Read on for more information...

First, the quantities listed in the diagram above are:

- QiP: heat generated by the residents.
- QiE: heat generated by the electrical equipment.
- The total internally generated energy is Qi = QiP + QiE.

- QS: heat delivered by the sun.
- The total gain Qg = Qi + QS.

It is assumed that only 60% of Qg can be used by the house:
- Qg,u = 0.60 Qg
- QV is the energy lost through the ventilation system.
- Qt is the energy lost via transmission through the shell.

Also back in April, in post 021, I had written about the requirements of Minergie. Here again is the relevant equation (refer to the old post for details):

With the new construction plan, the various energy demands are computed to be:
QH,eff = 13.9 kWh/(m2·a)
QWW = 6.7 kWh/(m2·a) and the rest is met via solar energy
QV = 2.51 kWh/(m2·a)

This gives a weighted energy demand of 20.7 kWh/(m2·a). The limit for Minergie-P is 30 kWh/(m2·a), so we are comfortably within this requirement. This is great news!


[1] In the earlier plan, the lower level was going to be made of concrete and bricks, and the upper level out of wood.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

021. Calculation of our energy demand (Minergie-Nachweis)

We received a copy of our Minergie-Nachweis (der Nachweis = certificate), computed by an energy planning firm, several weeks ago and since then I've been busy with the different aspects of it. What this is is the calculation of the projected energy needs of the house and how they are to be met. It's a detailed document with inputs ranging from the location and orientation of the house (to calculate the solar gain and also heating needs based on the average monthly temperatures) to the construction details of the connection between the walls and the foundation (to calculate the amount of heat lost through thermal-bridges[1]). Not all the details are finalized yet; however no subsequent change should increase the heat demand so let's take a look at the end results of the calculations. I'll explore the individual parts of the work-up later as time permits.

I'll start off by referring to these two old posts where I had talked about the Minergie limit on the weighted energy demand: The weighted energy demand The weighted energy demand, part II

We had the following relationship (click on the equation to see a larger version) which states that the weighted energy demand of a standard Minergie house may not exceed 38 kWh/(m2·a). So per year,

where (i) QH,eff is the amount of heat required to maintain a comfortable indoor temperature (usually taken to be 20°C) (ii) QWW is the amount of heat used to prepare hot water, and (iii) QV is the amount of energy required to run the ventilation system.

The g terms are the weighting factors for the particular type of energy source chosen and the η's (eta) are (or are analogous to) the efficiencies of the devices used. Small g's and large η's are good, for lists of some of the commonly used ones see the old posts.

For our house, the energy demands are computed to be: QH,eff = 31.4 kWh/(m2·a) QWW = 13.9 kWh/(m2·a) QV = 3.02 kWh/(m2·a)

You will note that this adds up to (31.4+13.9+3.02) kWh/(m2·a) = 48.3 kWh/(m2·a). This exceeds the limit of Minergie, but this is not yet weighted. Let's do that now. Some additional information specific to the heat pump chosen for the house is necessary for this step. The heating device is an air-source heat pump which runs on electricity and covers 100% of the room heating needs (ηH = 3.88) and 80% of the hot water needs (ηWW = 3.04). The remaining 20% of the hot water needs is covered by an electrical heater (ηWW = 0.9). Some of you might recall that the weighting factor g for electricity is 2.0. The weighted energy demand is then calculated to be 35.7 kWh/(m2·a) and thus satisfies the Minergie requirement. Here it is written out in equation 2 (click on the image to enlarge it):


[1] Wikipedia entry on thermal bridges → Thermal bridge

Sunday, March 29, 2009

The weighted energy demand

All this talk of insulation, but I haven't yet gone over the fundamental point of Minergie which is to reduce the energy demand of buildings, in this case our house. I've mentioned several times that the limiting value for houses is 38 kWh/(m2·a). Then the question is how this energy demand is defined. Different systems of certification (e.g. the German KfW-40) have different ways of calculating this and in the Minergie system under consideration here it is a weighted sum of the energy required to
(i) maintain a comfortable indoor temperature (usually taken to be 20°C), call this QH,eff
(ii) to heat water QWW and
(iii) to run the ventilation system[1], QV.

We have the following relationship (click on the equation to see a larger version):

In Equation 1 the g terms are the weighting factors for the particular type of energy source chosen and the η's (eta) are (or are analogous to) the efficiencies of the devices used. You can see from the inequality that small g's and large η's are good.

More about the η's in the next post, here I'll just say a few words about the weighting factors g. This is where the differences in the different certification systems become apparent[2]. They are basically an attempt to compare the losses associated with the conversion of the energy from different sources to heat (see Table 2 below for the list). Burning fossil fuels to generate heat is taken to have a g of unity. Using the sun directly, as in absorbing the radiation and storing it as heat 'costs' nothing so it is given a weighting of 0. Using electricity, say to run a heat pump or (horror!) a resistance heater is considered least desirable (I imagine because the electricity itself is generated from other sources and there are losses in that chain of production and in the transmission). However, in the case of heat pumps this is mitigated by the ability of these devices to extract energy from the surroundings and this should be clear in tomorrow's post. The energy source to run the ventilation system is almost certainly electricity. A typical value for the QV is between 3 kWh/(m2·a) and 4 kWh/(m2·a).

Table 2. Weighting factors for different energy sources. Smaller is better.
Weighting factor
Source g
Solar, geothermal, ambient 0
Biomass (Wood, biogas) 0.5
Waste heat 0.6
Fossil fuels 1.0
Electricity 2.0

[1] A little aside about the ventilation system: The aspect of the building envelope that I've talked about so far, namely the insulation, deals with the loss of heat via conduction through the shell. Another very important mechanism of heat loss is the movement of warm air from (i.e. leakage) and cold air into (i.e. infiltration) the house through gaps in the shell. In a well-insulated house, this can account for upto 50% of the total heat loss. It turns out that it is possible to neutralize this effect and still have good air quality by building a very tight shell and by relying on a high-efficiency mechanical ventilation system with a heat exchanger to capture back more than 80% of the heat of the exhaust air. A topic for other posts.

[2] An entry on the German language Wikipedia compares three systems: Primärenergiebedarf