University of South Florida

Digital Commons @ University of

South Florida

USF Tampa Graduate Theses and Dissertations USF Graduate Theses and Dissertations

October 2019

Modeling of Buildings with Electrochromic Windows and

Thermochromic Roofs
Hua-Ting Kao
University of South Florida

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/etd

Part of the Mechanical Engineering Commons, and the Oil, Gas, and Energy Commons

Scholar Commons Citation

Kao, Hua-Ting, "Modeling of Buildings with Electrochromic Windows and Thermochromic Roofs" (2019).
USF Tampa Graduate Theses and Dissertations.
https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/etd/8039

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the USF Graduate Theses and Dissertations at Digital
Commons @ University of South Florida. It has been accepted for inclusion in USF Tampa Graduate Theses and
Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ University of South Florida. For more
information, please contact [email protected].
 Modeling of Buildings with Electrochromic Windows and Thermochromic Roofs

by

Hua-Ting Kao

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering
Department of Mechanical Engineering
College of Engineering
University of South Florida

Major Professor: Elias K. Stefanakos, Ph.D.

Rasim Guldiken, Ph.D.
Arash Takshi, Ph.D.

Date of Approval:
October 29, 2019

Keywords: Simulations, Energy Savings, Electrochromism, Thermochromism, Smart Materials

Copyright © 2019, Hua-Ting Kao

 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express my deep gratitude to my research professor Elias K. Stefanakos,

for his patient guidance, enthusiastic encouragement and useful critiques during the preparation

of this thesis.

Most importantly, I want to thank my family and friends who have support me since I

came to U.S.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables ………………………………………………………….……….…………..…….iii

List of Figures ……………………………………………………………………………………iv

Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………………...v

1. Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………….1

2. Background - Electrochromism and Thermochromism ………………………………….....….3

2.1. Electrochromic Devices and Technologies………………………………...…………3
2.2. Thermochromic Materials and Technologies……………………..…………………..3

3. Methodology …………………………………………………………………………………...5
3.1. Analyzed Structures ……………………………………………………………….....5
3.2. Introduction of Windows …………………………………………………………….7
3.2.1. Clear Glass……………………………………………………….…………8
3.2.2. Low-E Glass………………………………………………...………………8
3.2.3. Electrochromic Glass……………………………………………………….9
3.2.4. Glass Assessment ……………………………………………………...……9
3.2.4.1. U-factor…………………………………………………...……..10
3.2.4.2. SHGC……………………………………………………………10
3.2.4.3. VT……………………………………………………………….11
3.3. Introduction of Roofs …………………………………………………………….…11
3.3.1. Commercial Roofs ......…………………………………………….……...11
3.3.1.1. Built-up Roofing…………………………………..…………….12
3.3.2. Residential Roofs ……………………………………………...…….……12
3.3.2.1. Asphalt Shingles…………………………………...…...……….13
3.3.3. Roof Assessment …………………………………………………….……13
3.4. Variable Parameters …………………………………………………………….…..14
3.4.1. Different types of Windows……………………………….………………14
3.4.2. TC coating on the Roofs…………………………………………………..14
3.4.3. Different Locations…………………………………………….………….15
3.5. Electricity Consumption Calculations ...…………..........................................……..16
3.5.1. Commercial Building………………………………………….…………..16
3.5.2. Residential Building……………………………………………………….17
3.6. Simulation Results and Discussion………………………………………...…….….19

i
4. Conclusions …………………………………...……………………………………...……….25

References ……………………………………………………………………………………….26

Appendix A. DOE Glass Library ………………………………….…………………………….32

Appendix B. eQUEST Building Simulation Wizard ……………………………………….…...33

ii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Table of nomenclature…………………………………………………………………2

Table 2: Basic information for the office building………………………..………………...…..7

Table 3: Basic information for the residential house…………………………………..…….....7

Table 4: Annual bill for an office building in Tampa (Windows)………………………….….19

Table 5: Annual bill for a residential house in Tampa (Windows)……………………….…...20

Table 6: Average weather temperatures over the past 30 years in Tampa (1985-2015)……....21

Table 7: Annual electricity bill - office building in Chicago (Windows)……………..……....22

Table 8: Annual electricity bill - residential house in Chicago (Windows)………..….……....23

Table 9: Average weather temperatures over the past 30 years in Chicago (1985-2015)..........24

iii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: 3D illustration of a commercial office building…………………….……...………….6

Figure 2: 3D illustration of a residential house………………………….………………………6

Figure 3: Double pane clear glass window data……………………………………..………....15

Figure 4: Double pane low-E glass window data………………………………………………15

Figure 5: Double pane low-E EC glass window data………………………………………..…15

Figure 6: ASHRAE climate zones………………………………………...…………………....16

Figure 7: Electricity bill calculation method for an office building in Tampa……………...….17

Figure 8: Electricity bill calculation method for an office building in Chicago………….....…17

Figure 9: Electricity bill calculation method for a residential house in Tampa………...............18

Figure 10: Electricity bill calculation method for a residential house in Chicago……………....18

Figure 11: Electricity consumption for an office building in Tampa (Windows)…………….....19

Figure 12: Electricity consumption for a residential house in Tampa (Windows)……………....20

Figure 13: Electricity consumption for an office building in Chicago (Windows)…………...…22

Figure 14: Electricity consumption for a residential house in Chicago (Windows)…………..…23

Figure A1: DOE glass library………………….……………………………………………...….32

Figure A2: General information on the eQUEST Building Simulation Wizard……………....…33

Figure A3: Building footprint on the eQUEST Building Simulation Wizard…………...…….....34

Figure A4: Building envelope construction on the eQUEST Building Simulation Wizard…...…35

iv
 ABSTRACT

Air conditioning and heating have increased substantially during the past two decades.

According to a survey, buildings consume about 73% of the total electricity in the United States,

accounting for 41% of all other energy in the world. At the same time, building skin technologies

are constantly improving. Electrochromic and thermochromic are two exciting new technologies

that can help reduce the energy consumption of a building. The purpose of this work is to

increase our understanding of how much the use of electrochromic (EC) and thermochromic

(TC) technologies can reduce the energy consumption of residential and commercial buildings in

two different climate zones. With the use of the software eQUEST and specific parameters for

EC and TC materials and devices, the energy performance of these buildings is simulated.

Furthermore, simulations are used to compare the difference in energy consumption between a

building that uses low-E double pane windows and a cool roof and a building that uses EC

windows and a TC roof. The results for two cities, Tampa and Chicago, are obtained to

determine the performance of EC windows and TC roofs in two different climates. These results

suggest that the utilization of both EC windows and TC roofs can save 27.8% - 35% and 6.2% -

23.8% of the energy consumed by commercial and residential buildings, respectively. Although

these results are only an estimate, they do demonstrate the potential of EC and the TC

technologies to reduce the energy consumption of buildings.

v
 1. INTRODUCTION

Florida temperature data show that the annual high temperature is about 81.7 °F. In the

warmest month, August, the average daytime temperature rises to 90°F [1]. According to the

Energy Information Administration (EIA), the average monthly electricity bill in the United

States (U.S.) was $118 in 2018. However, in Florida the average electricity bill was $128, which

is 9% higher than the average U.S. total electricity bill [2]. In addition, energy consumption has

become an important issue because higher energy use leads to higher environmental pollution. A

recent survey by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) shows that buildings consume about

73% of the total electricity in the United States, accounting for 41% of all other energy in the

world, while emitting 38% of the total carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year [3]. Modern

buildings usually have large facades of windows, known as glazings. Glazings provide good

daytime illumination but reduce the energy efficiency of buildings [4]. In particular, cooling has

increased significantly in recent years. According to the EIA, energy lost through conventional

windows accounts for about 30% of the heating and cooling energy costs [5]. Shadows, blinds,

shutters, fins or other mechanized solar control devices are used, but they can cut off connection

to the outdoors.

Fortunately, new technologies are developed that can be used to provide comfort and

reduced energy consumption. New emerging technologies that utilize “electrochromism” and

“thermochromism” can control the inflow of solar energy and produce higher energy efficiency

than traditional glass windows that use static solutions or conventional roofs [6].

1
 All abbreviations listed and explained in Table 1. The purpose of this research is to

understand the impact electrochromic windows and thermochromic roofs can have on the energy

consumption of buildings. At this time, there is no research paper published that addresses the

use of both electrochromic windows and thermochromic roof coatings to simulate the energy

consumption of a building [7-13].

Table 1. Table of nomenclature

TC Thermochromic EC Electrochromic
NFRC National Fenestration NRCA National Roofing Contractors Association
Rating Council
FL Florida IL Illinois
EIA Energy Information ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating
Administration and Air-Conditioning Engineers
DOE Department of Energy SHGC Solar Heat Gain Coefficient
VT Visible Transmittance CR Condensation Resistance
AL Air Leakage USGBC U.S. Green Building Council
SPF Spray Polyurethane Foam Low-E Low Emissivity
SC Shading Coefficient BUR Built-Up Roofing
UV Ultraviolet U.S. United States

2
 2. BACKGROUND - ELECTROCHROMISM AND THERMOCHROMISM

In recent years, these two new technologies are receiving more and more attention. More

detailed information about electrochromic and thermochromic technologies is presented in the

following section.

2.1. Electrochromic Devices and Technologies

Electrochromism is a property of some materials that reversibly change color under an

applied electric potential. Electrochromic (EC) glass or "Smart Glass" is a common name for EC

windows. The EC window allows the user to control the light and heat passing through the

window. In addition, the EC window can be completely transparent or tinted to reduce light and

heat without the need for louvers or curtains. Some can also be set to block light while

maintaining a view.

On the other hand, even though EC glass was proposed in 1984, it was introduced to the

market during 2010s [7]. The EC technology is presently being used in windows for commercial

buildings, to combine energy efficiency with good indoor comfort.

2.2. Thermochromic Materials and Technologies

Thermochromism is a property of some materials that change color due to a change in

temperature. According to Warwick (2016), an idealized spectrum can be used to understand the

TC properties of materials and determine the materials that are most important for energy saving

3
applications. The results indicate that the optimum TC material can lead to energy savings up to

30% to 45% in different environments, while maximizing efficiency in hot environments [8].

The two main types of TC are “liquid crystals” and “leuco dyes.” By far the most

frequent TC applications use liquid crystals [14]. Today, liquid crystals are used in many

products, including forehead thermometers, indoor and refrigerated thermometers, and other

applications including food quality indicators. Liquid crystals TCs are very good materials, but

are difficult to use and require highly specialized manufacturing techniques. Another type of TC

material, leuco dyes, are commonly used in manufacturing and control processes, advertising,

consumer packaging, product labeling, security printing, novel applications, promotional items,

toys and textiles. In this thesis, leuco dyes are used because they are more common and easier to

work with.

4
 3. METHODOLOGY

The eQUEST software is currently the most popular energy modeling program and is

used by energy modelers and engineers around the world. Important factors for its popularity are

its low cost (free) and that it is based on the department of energy 2 (DOE-2) simulation engine

[15].

The eQUEST building creation wizard guides the user through the process of creating a

building model. The eQUEST, DOE-2.2, provides hourly data for a building taking into

consideration windows, walls, people, glass, plug loads, and ventilation. DOE-2.2 also simulates

the performance of pumps, fans, chillers, boilers, and other energy consuming devices. eQUEST

allows users to create multiple simulations and view alternate results in parallel graphics. It

provides energy cost estimates, daylighting and lighting system control, and automatic

implementation of energy efficiency measures [16]. An additional benefit of eQUEST is that it

can be used at every stage of a building’s development, from an early design to the final product.

Therefore, in this research, the eQUEST software is used to simulate the energy consumption of

buildings that incorporate EC windows and TC roofs.

3.1. Analyzed Structures (Buildings)

In this study, eQUEST has been used to create two prototype models of an office building

and a residential house. These building models are shown in Figures 1 and 2. The commercial

office building is eight stories, has a flat brown roof and concrete walls (See Figure A4,

Appendix B). Some basic information for this building is shown in Table 2, with additional
5
information given in Appendix B.

Figure 1. 3D illustration of a commercial office building

Figure 2. 3D illustration of a residential house

6
Table 2. Basic information for the office building

Building orientation North

Building area (per floor) 31,250 (ft2)
Number of floors 8
Number of windows 285
Number of doors 3
Material of roof Built-up roofing
Material of window Double clear glass
Type of door Revolving door

The residential house has a pitched roof and one floor. The roof color is dark brown and

the walls are wood. Some of the essential information is presented in Table 3. Moreover, there

are no louvers or curtains to block the sun light. In fact, with a few exceptions, all the default

settings in eQUEST were used in the design of this model. The software default data is presented

in Appendix B. In this paper, we focus on the window and roof. Hence, the next two sections will

introduce the details of windows and roofs.

Table 3. Basic information for the residential house

Building orientation North

Building area (per floor) 2,500 (ft2)
Number of floors 1
Number of windows 6
Number of doors 2
Material of roof Shingle
Material of window Double clear glass
Type of door Opaque (wood)

3.2. Introduction of Windows

In this research, three types of glass were used: “clear glass”, “low emissivity (low-E)

glass”, and “electrochromic glass.” This section will introduce the information of these glass

windows and how to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages.

7
3.2.1. Clear Glass

Clear glass is the most commonly used basic glass in doors and windows [17]. It is

almost colorless and the edges are green or blue. Typically, the thickness is between 3/32 inches

and 3/4 inches. A clear 1/4 inch thick glass will allow approximately 90% of the visible light to

pass through and will reflect about 8% of visible light [18]. When viewed through the glass, as

the glass becomes thicker, the light green color becomes more pronounced and the light

transmittance decreases.

3.2.2. Low-E Glass

Low-E glass is a type of reflective glass that looks transparent when it reflects heat back

to its source. The “E” in low-E glass refers to emissivity. Emissivity is the ability of a material or

surface to radiate energy. Thus, low-E glass refers to the surface of the glass, which minimizes

the increase in solar heat. This is achieved by coating the surface of the glass with a special

coating made of microscopic, transparent metal or metal oxide. Low-E glass provides maximum

light transmission while reducing heat loss and helps protect against ultraviolet (UV) rays. A

slight tint can be seen depending on the angle of view and the sun. Glass from different batches

or with different metal oxide coatings will show excellent phase or color differences, making it

difficult to match multiple low-E glasses. However, low-E glass improves insulation and

therefore helps reduce heating and energy costs. It also can be used for annealing, toughening

and lamination.

8
3.2.3. Electrochromic (EC) Glass

EC glass (a.k.a. smart glass or dynamic glass) is an electronically tinted glass for

windows, skylights, exterior walls and curtain walls. EC glass, which can be directly controlled

by building dwellers, is popular for its ability to improve occupant comfort, maximize daylight

and outdoor visibility, reduce energy costs, and provide architects with more design freedom.

EC glass is an intelligent building solution for buildings facing the challenges of solar

control, including classroom environments, medical facilities, commercial offices, retail spaces,

museums and cultural institutions. Interior spaces with atrium or skylights can also benefit from

the use of smart glass.

For example, SageGlass, a well-known EC glass product, has been installed on many

buildings that provide solar control to protect people from high temperatures and glare. It

maximizes indoor daylight, maintains visibility, and keeps people connected to the outdoors. EC

glass also saves energy by using the warm rays of the sun during the winter and deflecting the

light during the hot summer months. In addition, it offers a variety of control options. With

advanced algorithms, users can automate control settings to manage light, glare, energy usage

and color rendering. Controls can also be integrated into existing building automation systems

[5].

3.2.4. Glass Assessment

The National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC) is a non-profit public/private

organization created for doors and windows, the skylight industry. It consists of manufacturers,

suppliers, regulatory officials, researchers and government agencies. All major standards and

programs for window energy efficiency, including building energy regulations, tax credits and

9
utility incentives, ENERGY STAR, etc. Their standards are based on NFRC certification levels.

To ensure that their products are recognized, manufacturers must participate in the NFRC

certification and labeling program.

The NFRC label is the only reliable way to determine window energy characteristics and

compare products. It is attached to all NFRC certified products and all ENERGY STAR designed

windows and skylights. The energy performance ratings include U-factor, Solar Heat Gain

Coefficient (SHGC), Visible Transmittance (VT) and, optionally, Air Leakage (AL) and

Condensation Resistance (CR) ratings [19].

Typically, U-factor, SHGC, and VT are sufficient to evaluate windows. Hence, this

section only describes these three energy performance levels.

3.2.4.1. U-factor (U-value)

A method of measuring the amount of heat or loss obtained by glass due to the difference

between indoor and outdoor air temperatures. The U-factor or U-value is also referred to as the

total heat transfer coefficient. A lower U-value indicates better insulation performance (0-1) [20],

and its unit is Btu/(hr)(ft²)(°F).

3.2.4.2. SHGC (Solar Heat Gain Coefficient)

The percent of solar energy incident on the glass that is transferred indoors both directly

and indirectly through the glass. The direct gain portion is equal to the transmittance of the solar

energy, and the indirect gain portion is the ratio of incident sunlight that is incident on the glass

and is absorbed and re-radiated or convected indoors. For reference, the SHGC of 1/8 inch

uncoated clear glass is about 0.86, with 0.84 being the direct gain (sun transmittance) and 0.02

10
being the indirect gain (convection/ re-radiation).

The Shading Coefficient (SC) is a measure of the amount of heat that the glass receives

from solar radiation. In particular, SC is the ratio of the solar heat gain of a particular type of

glass to a dual strength transparent glass. A lower SC indicates lower solar heat gain. For

example, the value of 1/8 inch clear glass is 1.00 (SC is the old term replaced by SHGC) [21].

3.2.4.3. VT (Visible transmittance)

The VT is an optical property that indicates the proportion of visible light passing

through the window. This is separate from SHGC because many modern windows contain

spectrally selective coatings that allow transmittance of different amounts of visible light,

infrared and UV light.

The NFRC’s VT is an overall window specification level that includes the impact of the

frame area. Since the frame does not transmit any light, VT may be lower than expected.

However, this is done to match the overall window level of the U-factor and SHGC. Although

VT theoretically varies from 0 and 1, most of the values in the dual and three pane windows are

between 0.3 and 0.7 [22]. The higher the VT, the more light is transmitted. Thus, a high VT is

required to maximize daylight.

3.3. Introduction of Roofs

3.3.1. Commercial Roofs

In general, there are currently five basic commercial roof types with flat or low slope

configurations, which are “Built-up roofing”, “Metal roofing”, “Modified bitumen roofing”,

“Single-ply roofing”, and “Spray polyurethane foam (SPF roofing).” In this paper, built-up

11
roofing has been chosen for use in the simulation program because this is a very old low-slope

roof system and is one of the most cost-effective and sturdy roof types in the market today [23].

Thus, information about built-up roofing is described below.

3.3.1.1. Built-up Roofing (BUR)

Built-up roofing has been popular in North America for more than a hundred years and is

often referred to as "BUR" and "tar and gravel" roofs [24]. This is a flexible roof type because

the number of layers can be changed to help control costs or meet some of the durability

requirements. Typically, it consist of alternating layers of bitumen and layers of reinforcing

fabric that together form the final roofing membranes. These membranes are arranged on a cross

section of the top surface of the building. In most cases, built-up roofing is fixed to the roof deck

and insulation to maintain adhesion. The membranes are generally known as plies, but the

reinforcement layers are also known as “roof felts” or “ply sheets.” The number of plies on the

roof indicates the number of layers. For instance, three-plies means a three-layer flat roof

membrane system.

The bitumen found in BUR is typically composed of asphalt, coal tar, or cold compress

adhesive. For surface layers, this roof type may include a layer of hot asphalt applied on the

entire surface of the top of the building, an aluminum coating, an elastomeric coating, an

aggregate “mixture” (such as gravel or slag), or a fiber glass surface or mineral surface cap

sheets [25].

3.3.2. Residential Roofs

For residential roofs, there are six common roof types: “Asphalt shingle roof”, “Clay tile

12
roof”, “Metal roof”, “Slate roof tiles”, “Wood roof shingles”, and “Rubber roof tiles.” In this

study, asphalt tile roofs were chosen in the simulation program because asphalt is available in a

variety of colors and is widely used and is one of the cheapest materials, therefore, relevant

information is provided below.

3.3.2.1. Asphalt Shingles

The most common residential roofing materials used in the United States are asphalt

shingles because they are economical and easy to install. These shingles can be reinforced with

fiberglass or organic materials without altering the appearance of the shingle. However, asphalt

has a shorter life than other roofing materials, does not provide insulation from other materials

and varies in quality. Asphalt shingles have a variety of architectural styles, the most popular of

which is the traditional suburban style. For cost and life span, the price range is $0.7 to $1.2 per

square foot, and if properly maintained, shingles will last for 20 to 25 years [26].

3.3.3. Roof Assessment

The National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA) is one of the most respected

industry associations in the construction industry and is the voice and leading authority in the

field of information, education, technology and communications in the roof industry [27]. It has

a powerful website and resources to provide contractors with all relevant information about the

roof. Their easy to navigate website provides a comprehensive overview of materials,

applications, courses and other resources for contractors and building professionals. In general,

any issues related to the roof can be addressed by NRCA.

13
 On the other hand, insulation is critical to a comfortable and energy efficient home. The

commonality between insulation varieties is the R-value. R-value is a measure of thermal

resistance that measures the ability of heat to pass from one side of the object to the other. In

addition, R-value is generally not used as a measure in glazing products. Along with knowing the

R-value of a particular insulation, it is also important to calculate the R-value of the entire

system.

For example, a wall with 3-1/2 inch fiberglass batt (R-value 10.8-11.9) may have a total

R-value of approximately 14 due to the siding, sheath and drywall [28]. Several factors

determine the insulation required when selecting a roofing material. These factors include

geographic location and type of heating system used.

3.4. Variable Parameters

In this study we use different parameters to compare the energy consumption of a

building. These are generally divided into three parts:

3.4.1. Different types of Windows

The baseline window design is the double pane clear glass. Its performance will be

compared to the double pane low-E glass and double pane low-E EC glass. Information for these

windows is shown in Figure 3, 4, and 5.

3.4.2. TC coating on the Roofs

Next a TC roof coating will be introduce and the results will be compared with previous

results obtained for the low-E EC glass.

14
 Figure 3. Double pane clear glass window data

Figure 4. Double pane low-E glass window data

Figure 5. Double pane low-E EC glass window data

3.4.3. Different Locations

In this research, two different locations were chosen that represent warm and cold

climates: the first location Tampa, a city located in the climatic zone 2 (2A), and the second

location Chicago, a city located in the climatic zone 5 (5A), as shown in Figure 6. Comparison of

the two different climates will give us a better idea of the impact of EC windows and TC roofs

on buildings.

15
 Figure 6. ASHRAE climate zones [29]

3.5. Electricity Consumption Calculations

3.5.1. Commercial Building

The data for electricity cost calculations for Tampa and Chicago are very different. Based

on the “Electricity Local”, the average commercial electricity rate in Tampa is 10.21¢/kWh and

in Chicago is 4.05 ¢/kWh [30]. The average (commercial) electricity rate in Tampa is 5.69%

greater than the Florida average rate of 9.66¢/kWh. For the power calculation method used in the

software (See Figures 7 and 8), the type is selected as “Block Charges” and the block type is

selected as “Incremental Block.” For example, for an office building in Tampa in the summer,

the electricity rate is 0.102 $/kWh for the first 1,000 kWh, and the remainder is 0.065 $/kWh.

16
 Figure 7. Electricity bill calculation method for an office building in Tampa

Figure 8. Electricity bill calculation method for an office building in Chicago

3.5.2. Residential Building

As mentioned before, the data for these two locations are very different. According to the

“Electricity Local”, the average residential electricity rate in Tampa is 11.42¢/kWh and in

Chicago is 10.44¢/kWh [30]. This average (residential) electricity rate in Tampa is equal to the

Florida average rate of 11.42¢/kWh.

17
 However, the average (residential) electricity price in Chicago is 8.26% lower than the

average electricity price in Illinois at 11.38¢/kWh. The power calculation method used in the

software (See Figures 9 and10) is the same as that for the office building. For instance, for a

residential building in Chicago in the winter, the electricity rate is 0.1 $/kWh for the first 1,000

kWh, and above that it is 0.06 $/kWh.

Figure 9. Electricity bill calculation method for a residential house in Tampa

Figure 10. Electricity bill calculation method for a residential house in Chicago

18
3.6. Simulation Results and Discussion

Using the eQUEST software, energy savings were obtained from the simulation model

when using low-E glass and low-E EC glass. The base design uses clear glass in Tampa and there

is no TC coating on the roof. The simulation results for an office building indicate that the low-E

glass saves 13% of energy or $29,179 per year, while the Low-E EC glass saves 18% of energy

or $41,016 each year (See Figure 11 and Table 4).

Figure 11. Electricity consumption for an office building in Tampa (Windows).

Run 1 is the base design with clear glass (blue line). Run 2 with low-E glass (gray line). Run
3 with low-E EC glass (green line).

Table 4. Annual bill for an office building in Tampa (Windows)

Windows Dollars ($)

Clear glass (Base design) 224,719
Low-E glass 195,540
Low-E EC glass 183,703

19
 For the residential house (See Figure 12 and Table 5), the use of low-E glass saves 4% of

the energy or $110 per year, while the Low-E EC glass saves 5.3% of the energy or $146 each

year. As can be seen from these results, office buildings can save more energy than residential

buildings because of the large difference in the overall window area. The larger the area of the

glass, the more energy the EC glass can save.

Figure 12. Electricity consumption for a residential house in Tampa (Windows). Run
1 is the base design with clear glass (blue line). Run 2 with low-E glass (gray line). Run 3
with low-E EC glass (green line).

Table 5. Annual bill for a residential house in Tampa (Windows)

Windows Dollars ($)

Clear glass (Base design) 1,776
Low-E glass 1,666
Low-E EC glass 1,630

In the second phase a TC roof is added to the simulation. As the temperature changes, the

TC roof color reversibly changes from white to black. 30 years of Tampa average weather data

(1985-2015) were used in the simulations [31].

20
 In the simulations it was assumed at temperatures above 77℉ (25℃), the roof will turn

white and turn black below 77℉ (25℃). Based on the weather data (See Table 6), we can

estimate the time when the roof is white or black. In addition, we have assumed that the roof

temperature follows the average weather temperatures, and that solar reflectance and infrared

emittance do not affect the roof temperature. From calculations, the roof is white for an average

41.67% of the time each year. In contrast, the roof is black for 58.33% of the time.

Table 6. Average weather temperatures over the past 30 years in Tampa (1985-2015)

Month Average temperature (℉) Temperature range (℉)

January 61.5 52-71
February 63.5 54-73
March 67.5 58-77
April 72.5 63-82
May 78.5 69-88
June 82 74-90
July 83 75-91
August 83 75-91
September 82 74-90
October 76 67-85
November 69.5 60-79
December 64 54-74

Next, when the roof is white the “cool roof calculator” is used. The results show that

saves 0.095 $/ft2 per year for the office building. The cool roof calculator uses certain values,

such as the R-value, solar reflectance, and infrared emittance [32]. For our model, the R-value is

18, the solar reflectance is 70, and the infrared emittance is 90. The rest of the data relates to

electricity calculation, climate, and location. Subsequently, the data is combined with the weather

data to obtain results for the TC roof. The results show that for the office building the TC roof

saves 0.1504 $/ft2 per year, this corresponds to $37,600 per year. Similarly, the “cool roof

calculator” for the residential building gives savings of 0.07 $/ft2 per year. Data integration

21
shows that the TC roof can save 0.1108 $/ft2 per year or $277 per year. Finally, the simultaneous

use of low-E EC glass and TC roof provides energy savings of 35% for the office building and

23.8% for the residential building in Tampa.

The final stage is to identify a location in Chicago to run the simulations. For this case,

only the low-E glass and low-E EC glass were used and the results are shown in Figure 13 and

Table 7. For the office building, the low-E glass saves 12% of the energy or $16,800 per year,

while the Low-E EC glass saves 18% of energy or $26,055 each year. Comparing the two

locations, Tampa and Chicago, the effects of EC windows are roughly the same and even though

Tampa consumes more electricity than Chicago, the energy savings are almost the same.

Figure 13. Electricity consumption for an office building in Chicago (Windows). Run
1 is the base design with clear glass (blue line). Run 2 with low-E glass (gray line). Run 3
with low-E EC glass (green line).

Table 7. Annual electricity bill - office building in Chicago (Windows)

Windows Dollars ($)

Clear glass (Base design) 138,245
Low-E glass 121,445
Low-E EC glass 112,190

22
 The results for the residential house are shown in Figure 14 and Table 8. Low-E glass

saves 3.8% of the energy or $59 per year, while Low-E EC glass saves 4.6% of energy or $73

each year. From the chart (See Figure 14), we found that most savings are obtained in the

summer. Regardless of the location, Tampa or Chicago, EC glass can actually save energy.

Figure 14. Electricity consumption for a residential house in Chicago (Windows).Run 1 is the
base design with clear glass (blue line). Run 2 with low-E glass (gray line). Run 3 with low-E EC
glass (green line).

Table 8. Annual electricity bill - residential house in Chicago (Windows)

Windows Dollars ($)

Clear glass (Base design) 1,369
Low-E glass 1,310
Low-E EC glass 1,296

In the last part, low-E EC glass and TC roof in Chicago were used to run the simulation.

From the calculations through weather data (See Table 9), the average white roof usage per year

is 8.33% and the roof is black for 91.67% of the time. For the office building, when the roof is

white the “cool roof calculator” gives savings of 0.032 $/ft2 per year, and when the roof is black
23
the simulations indicate savings of 0.05 $/ft2 or $12,500 per year.

For the residential building, with a cool roof the energy savings correspond to 0.0048

$/ft2 or $12 per year. When both low-E EC glass and TC roof are used, the energy savings are

27.8% for a commercial building and 6.2% for the residential building.

Table 9. Average weather temperatures over the past 30 years in Chicago (1985-2015)

Month Average temperature (℉) Temperature range (℉)

January 26.5 20-33
February 29 22-36
March 39 31-47
April 50.5 41-60
May 61.5 52-71
June 71.5 62-81
July 76.5 68-85
August 74 66-82
September 67 58-76
October 54.5 46-63
November 42 35-49
December 31 25-37

24
 4. CONCLUSIONS

This study aims to assess the impact EC and TC technologies can have on buildings.

eQUEST software is used to simulate and evaluate the energy performance of a commercial

office building and a residential house. The simulations include modeling of low-E glass, low-E

EC glass and TC roof for two climatic zones in the US, zones 2 and 5. The simulation results

show the use of EC glass in an office building can produce 12% to 18% energy savings, while in

residential buildings 3.8% to 5.3%. The influence of EC glass on a commercial office building is

much greater than that in a residential unit because of the number of glass windows used in a

commercial building. A cool roof calculator was used to estimate the energy savings resulting

from the use of a white reflecting roof. When both a TC roof and EC glass windows are used, the

results show that the energy savings for an office building are 27.8% to 35%, while for

residential buildings about 6.2% to 23.8%, depending on the climatic zones. These are important

results and suggest the significance. This is an important energy saving measure for buildings,

depending on location, which may have a greater impact.

In summary, all the results show that using EC glass and TC roofs significant impact on a

building’s energy use. Although this results are approximate and only just one piece of data,

because we ignored some factors that may affect them, it is significant enough to encourage

additional, more detailed, studies. In addition, cost, a very significant part of this analysis, was

not considered in this study. In the future, these technologies may turn into mainstream products.

25
 REFERENCES

[1] Data, U. S. C. (n.d.). Temperature - Precipitation - Sunshine - Snowfall. Retrieved from

https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/tampa/florida/united-states/usfl0481/2018/1

[2] U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis.

(n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.eia.gov/electricity/sales_revenue_price/

[3] How Buildings Impact the Environment. (2016, September 27). Retrieved from

https://bosscontrols.com/buildings-impact-environment/

[4] Granqvist, C. (2016). Electrochromics and Thermochromics: Towards a New Paradigm

for Energy Efficient Buildings. Materials Today: Proceedings, 3, pp.S2-S11. doi:

10.1016/j.matpr.2016.01.002

[5] What is Electrochromic Glass? (2018, January 25). Retrieved from

https://www.sageglass.com/en/article/what-electrochromic-glass

[6] Granqvist, C. (2016). Recent progress in thermochromics and electrochromics: A brief

survey. Thin Solid Films, 614, pp.90-96. doi: 10.1016/j.tsf.2016.02.029

26
[7] Granqvist, C., Arvizu, M., Bayrak Pehlivan, İ., Qu, H., Wen, R. and Niklasson, G.

(2018). Electrochromic materials and devices for energy efficiency and human comfort in

buildings: A critical review. Electrochimica Acta, 259, pp.1170-1182. doi:

10.1016/j.electacta.2017.11.169

[8] Warwick, M., Ridley, I. and Binions, R. (2016). Variation of Thermochromic Glazing

Systems Transition Temperature, Hysteresis Gradient and Width Effect on Energy

Efficiency. Buildings, 6(2), p.22. doi: 10.3390/buildings6020022

[9] Kamalisarvestani, M., Saidur, R., Mekhilef, S., & Javadi, F. (2013). Performance,

materials and coating technologies of thermochromic thin films on smart windows.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 26, 353–364. doi:

10.1016/j.rser.2013.05.038

[10] Kokogiannakis, G., Darkwa, J., & Aloisio, C. (2014). Simulating Thermochromic and

Heat Mirror Glazing Systems in Hot and Cold Climates. Energy Procedia, 62, 22–31.

doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2014.12.363

[11] Garshasbi, S., & Santamouris, M. (2019). Using advanced thermochromic technologies in

the built environment: Recent development and potential to decrease the energy

consumption and fight urban overheating. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells, 191,

21–32. doi: 10.1016/j.solmat.2018.10.023

27
[12] Dussault, J.-M., Sourbron, M., & Gosselin, L. (2016). Reduced energy consumption and

enhanced comfort with smart windows: Comparison between quasi-optimal, predictive

and rule-based control strategies. Energy and Buildings, 127, 680–691. doi:

10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.06.024

[13] Piccolo, A., Marino, C., Nucara, A., & Pietrafesa, M. (2018). Energy performance of an

electrochromic switchable glazing: Experimental and computational assessments. Energy

and Buildings, 165, 390–398. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.12.049

[14] Thermochromic Technology. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.hallcrest.com/color-

change-basics/thermochromic

[15] Hirsch, J. (n.d.). DOE2.com Home Page. Retrieved from http://www.doe2.com/

[16] Crawley, D. B., Hand, J. W., Kummert, M., & Griffith, B. T. (2008). Contrasting the

capabilities of building energy performance simulation programs. Building and

Environment, 43(4), 661–673. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.10.027

[17] Different Glass Types. (2016, June 29). Retrieved from https://winsulation.com.au/glass-

types/

[18] Glass Types. (2019). Retrieved from

http://www.glensideglass.com/ggc_lr_glass_types.html

28
[19] National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC): Efficient Windows Collaborative. (n.d.).

Retrieved from https://www.efficientwindows.org/nfrc.php

[20] What is the difference between U-factor, U-value and R-value? (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.guardianglass.com/us/en/tools-and-resources/library/faqs/commercial/u-

factor-u-value-and-r-value

[21] What is the difference between SHGC (Solar Heat Gain Coefficient) and SC (Shading

Coefficient)? (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.guardianglass.com/us/en/tools-and-

resources/library/faqs/commercial/solar-heat-gain-and-shading-coefficient

[22] Visible Transmittance: Efficient Windows Collaborative. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.efficientwindows.org/vt.php

[23] 6 Most Common Commercial Roofs and Roofing Materials. (2019, May 8). Retrieved

from https://www.heidlerroofing.com/blog/6-common-commercial-roofs-roofing-

materials/

[24] A Complete Guide to Commercial Flat Roofing Systems & Materials. (n.d.). Retrieved

from https://www.iko.com/comm/complete-guide-commercial-flat-roofing-systems-

materials/

29
[25] Lacatena, J., & Butler, J. (2017, September 22). Different Commercial Roofing Types.

Retrieved from https://www.choiceroofcontractors.com/different-commercial-roofing-

types/

[26] Top 6 Roofing Materials. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.hgtv.com/remodel/outdoors/top-6-roofing-materials

[27] About: NRCA, National Roofing Contractors Association. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://beta.nrca.net/About/

[28] Great Day Improvements - General Home Improvement Contractors & Builders In

Chicago IL, Cleveland OH, Atlanta GA, New York NY, & More. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.greatdayimprovements.com/insulation-r-value-chart.aspx

[29] ASHRAE climate zone map. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.iaqsource.com/article.php/ashrae-climate-zone-map/?id=194

[30] Tampa, FL Electricity Rates. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.electricitylocal.com/states/florida/tampa/

[31] Timeanddate.com. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.timeanddate.com/

30
[32] Cool Roof Calculator. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://web.ornl.gov/sci/buildings/tools/cool-roof/peak/

31
APPENDIX A. DOE GLASS LIBRARY

Figure A1. DOE glass library [15]

32
 APPENDIX B. eQUEST BUILDING SIMULATION WIZARD

With a few exceptions, all the default settings in eQUEST are used, as shown below:

Figure A2. General information on the eQUEST Building Simulation Wizard

The picture shows the first screen of the Building Creation Wizard. In this window, the type of
building, its location, utility rates, and analysis year were all adjusted. For example, the buildings
used were Office Bldg, High-Rise. The location is in Tampa, Florida. Data files for these
locations can be downloaded from the DOE2.com through eQUEST.

33
 Figure A3. Building footprint on the eQUEST Building Simulation Wizard
This window can adjust the shape of the building. Roof area can also be calculated by
multiplying the X1 and Y1 footprint dimensions. On the right hand side, people can select a flat
roof or a pitched roof. The angle of the roof can also be controlled.

34
 Figure A4. Building envelope construction on the eQUEST Building Simulation Wizard
In this window, the building envelope can be adjusted. For instance, the roof type is built-up
roofing and the color is dark brown. The wall is made of concrete. In addition, R-value is 18 for
this roof.

35