Figure 1
(left) Layout of the west-facing semi-detached dwelling modelled in TRYNSYS; and (right) three semi-detached units.
Note: The east-facing dwellings have the same plan but are mirror reflections along the north–south axis.
Table 1
Building and systems characteristics.
| BUILDING ID | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WA1 | WA2 | WZ1 | WZ2 | WZ3 | |
| Floor area (m2) | 150 | ||||
| Measured total heat loss coefficient (W/K) | 116.1 | ||||
| Wall thermal transmittance (W/(m2K)) | 0.1 | ||||
| Windows thermal transmittance (W/(m2K)) | 0.8 | ||||
| Mechanical ventilation (MVHR) | Yes | ||||
| Heat source for space heating and domestic hot water | AWHP | AWHP + wood stovea | AWHP | AWHP | AWHP + wood stove with a water jacket (back boiler) |
| Space heating | Underfloor | ||||
[i] Note: AWHP = air–water heat pump; MVHR = mechanical ventilation with heat recovery. For more details, see Baborska-Narożny et al. (2023a).
aWood stove for space heating only.
Figure 2
TRNSYS 18 (TRNBuild) model of one of the analysed buildings: south facade (top) and north facade (bottom).
Table 2
Parameters of the shading types for a TRNSYS model representing actual shading contexts in the case study homes.
| TRNSYS MODEL | SHADING TYPE | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | A (LIVING ROOM) | C/C1 | D | |
| tsh down (°C) | – | 26 | – | 26/24 | 26 |
| tsh up (°C) | – | 24 | – | 24/23 | 24 |
| Shading in other rooms | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Indoor/outdoor shading | – | Indoor | Outdoor | Outdoor | Outdoor |
| Shading factor (%) | 0% | 90% | 0% | 70% | 70% |
 |  |  |  |  | |
| Case study homes | WZ1, WZ2, WA2 | WZ3 | WA1 | ||
 |  |  |  | ||
 |  |  |  |  | |
Figure 3
Shading objectives expressed by inhabitants (left) and the TRNSYS triggers for shading (right).
Note: The type of line indicates how well the shading triggers models for TRNSYS simulation would support the inhabitants’ shading objectives identified through interviews (solid line = clear overlap; dashed line = partial overlap; dotted line = minimal overlap; no line = no overlap).
Figure 4
Temp algorithm: the only temperature-based model of the shading operation.
Note: tsh,down = temperature above which shading is down; tsh,up = temperature below which shading is up.
Figure 5
Temp-rad algorithm: temperature and radiation-based model of the shading operation. Solar radiation is considered in relation to room floor area.
Note: tsh,down = temperature above which shading is down; tsh,up = temperature below which shading is up; αsh = elevation angle of the sun below which the sun is already shining directly on the whole floor and starts to shine on the wall opposite the window (for the living room, 40°; and for the first floor south-facing bedroom, 24°).
Figure 6
Temp-rad-solH algorithm: temperature and radiation-based model of the shading operation with occupant passive solar heating anticipation.
Note: tsh,down = temperature above which shading is down; tsh,up = temperature below which shading is up; αsh = elevation angle of the sun below which the sun is already shining directly on the whole floor and starts to shine on the wall opposite the window (for the living room, 40°; and for the south bedroom, 24°) (Figure 7).
Figure 7
Elevation angle of the sun below which the sun is shining directly on the whole floor and starts shining on the wall opposite the window (for the second-floor bedroom, αsh,1 = 24°; and for the double-height living room, αsh,2 = 40°).
Table 3
Window treatments.
| FLOOR | ROOM AND ORIENTATION OF WINDOW | WINDOW TREATMENTS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WA1 | WA2 | WZ1 | WZ2 | WZ3 | ||||
| First | Entrance area | N | – | –a | – | –a | –a | |
| Living room/kitchen | S | External roller blinds | –a | – | –a | Curtain | ||
| Room | N + E/W | Curtain | – | Curtain | Pleated shades | Curtain | ||
| Second | Upstairs corridor | N | Curtain | – | – | Pleated shades | ||
| Bedroom | Master | N + S/E | Curtain | Curtain | – | Curtain | Curtain | |
| Child | N + E/W | Curtain | – | Pleated shades | Pleated shades | Curtain | ||
| Teenager | S + E/W | Roman shades | – | Curtain | Pleated shades | Curtain | ||
| Interviewees + walk-through contributors | P | P + T | P + S + YA | P + S | P + S | |||
[i] Note: aOther.
Orientation: a solidus ‘/’ indicates either side of the semi-detached houses.
Interviewees: main participant (P), spouse (S), teenager (T) and young adult (YA).
Figure 8
Temporary shading solutions created by residents.
Figure 9
Living room temperature daily profiles for the four seasons (rows) and five houses (columns).
Note: The number of overheating hours is also shown. Blue line = 20°C; red line = 26°C.
Figure 10
Adaptive thermal comfort in kitchen/living room area within the case study homes, with shading on the 20 m2 living room window (WA1, WZ3) and without shading (WA2, WZ1, WZ2).
Figure 11
Living room/kitchen total hourly window-opening duration for the four seasons (rows) in five houses (columns).
Figure 12
Electrical energy daily profiles for the four seasons (rows) and five houses (columns).
Note: The total seasonal electrical energy consumption and biomass energy consumption (wood burners) are also shown.
Figure 13
Simulated overheating hours for all analysed shading types and shading strategies and both building modelling approaches.
Note: A = no shading; B = internal shading (90%) on the lower part of the living room window; C = external shading (70%) on the upper part of the living room window; C1 = C, but lower shading trigger thresholds; and D = external shading (70%) on the whole living room window (Table 2).
Figure 14
Simulated heating energy needs (usable energy) for all analysed shading types and scenarios and both modelling approaches.
Note: A = no shading; B = internal shading (90%) on the lower part of the living room window; C = external shading (70%) on the upper part of the living room window; C1 = C, but lower shading trigger thresholds; and D = external shading (70%) on the whole living room window (Table 2).
Figure 15
Seasonal comparison of overheating hours between measurements and simulations (based on an advanced modelling approach).
Table 4
Simulated annual impacts of different shading options and usage scenarios.
| LACK OF SHADING | CURTAINS | EXTERNAL ROLLER BLINDS | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B, TRNSYS18 | B, temp | B, temp-rad | B, temp-rad-solH | C, TRNSYS18 | C, temp | C, temp-rad | C, temp-rad-solH | C1, temp | C1, temp-rad | C1, temp-rad-solH | D, TRNSYS18 | D, temp | D, temp-rad | D, temp-rad-solH | |
| Simulated useful energy for heating (kWh/m2/yr) | 33.7 | 36.4 | 34.4 | 40.2 | 35.4 | 40.7 | 33.9 | 34.9 | 34.8 | 34.4 | 35.1 | 35.0 | 50.4 | 34.9 | 45.2 | 38.4 |
| Annual total hours in living room > 26°C (h) | 1,693 | 1,214 | 449 | 119 | 366 | 822 | 1,424 | 1,353 | 1,402 | 1,237 | 1,220 | 1,254 | 11 | 242 | 67 | 157 |
| Annual occupancy hours in living room > 26°C (h) | 615 | 433 | 166 | 66 | 131 | 325 | 513 | 488 | 503 | 456 | 453 | 460 | 6 | 52 | 28 | 47 |
[i] Note: Based on useful energy for heating, total hours in the living room > 26°C and occupancy hours in the living room > 26°C. Numbers shown in bold exceed the Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers’ (CIBSE) threshold for occupancy hours (102 h/yr for the simulated occupancy profile; see the supplemental data online).