Applied Thermal Engineering 50 (2013) 217e224

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Determination of optimum insulation thickness of external walls

with two different methods in cooling applications
Muhammet Kayfeci a, Ali Keçebaş b, *, Engin Gedik c
a
Department of Energy Systems Engineering, Technology Faculty, Karabük University, TR78050 Karabük, Turkey
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technology Faculty, Afyon Kocatepe University, TR03200 Afyonkarahisar, Turkey
c
Department of Machine Education, Technical Education Faculty, Karabük University, TR78050 Karabük, Turkey

h i g h l i g h t s

< The optimum insulation thickness on external walls is analyzed in cooling applications.
< One of the methods is the degree-hours method (Method 1).
< The other is the annual equivalent full load cooling hours operation (Method 2).
< The energy saving is overestimated by Method 2.
< The optimum insulation thickness and payback period are overestimated by Method 1.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Thermal insulation is one of the most effective energy conservation for the cooling applications. For this
Received 21 January 2011 reason, determination of the optimum thickness of insulation and its selection is the main subject of
Accepted 13 June 2012 many engineering investigations. In this study, the optimum insulation thickness on the external walls in
Available online 30 June 2012
the cooling applications is analyzed based on two different methods used to determine annual energy
consumption. One of the methods is the degree-hours method (Method 1) that is the simplest and most
Keywords:
intuitive way of estimating the annual energy consumption of a building. The other is the method
Cooling applications
(Method 2) which using the annual equivalent full load cooling hours operation of system. In this paper,
Thermal insulation
External wall
a Life Cycle Cost (LCC) analysis is used to evaluate accuracy of these methods, and the results are
Optimum insulation thickness compared. The results show that the life cycle savings are overestimated by up to 44% in Method 2, while
LCC analysis the optimum insulation thickness and payback period are respectively overestimated by up to 74% and
69% in Method 1.
Crown Copyright Ó 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Energy consumption is rapidly increasing in worldwide because
of expanding population, urbanization, immigration to big cities
and improvement of life standards. The energy consumption is
inevitable for decreasing of life standards at industrialized coun-
tries and recovering the situation in the developing countries; but
energy can be used more efficiently, and also renewable energy
consumption can be performed. The energy consumption is higher
in some areas such as industrial, building, transportation and
agriculture. The building sector has the widest energy consump-
tion. In many countries, the energy demand for heating and cooling
of buildings has the biggest part compared with the others. Energy
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ90 272 2281311; fax: þ90 272 2281319.
E-mail addresses: alikecebas@aku.edu.tr, alikecebas@gmail.com (A. Keçebaş).
saving is very important for the energy strategy of a country. It has
become compulsory due to the limited energy sources and envi-
ronmental pollution arisen from using fuels.
Turkey is one of the fastest growing energy markets in the
world. Annual electricity demand growth rate became 6.6%
between 1995 and 2004, and it will be 8.5% between 2005 and 2015
according to the project. It was estimated that the electricity
consumption increased 4 folds from 150 billion kW h to 499 billion
kW h in 2004. It was about 38,500 MW in 2005, and the installed
capacity is required to increase 3 folds about 96,000 MW by 2020
[1]. Turkey has dynamic economical development and rapid pop-
ulation growth. It also has macro-economic, and especially mone-
tary, instability. The net effect of these factors is that energy
demand of Turkey is increasing approximately every year due to the
need of investment is not adequate for that growth and the
investment requirement to cover the growing demand has not
been forthcoming at the desired pace, and is expected to continue

1359-4311/$ e see front matter Crown Copyright Ó 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2012.06.031
218 M. Kayfeci et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 50 (2013) 217e224
growing. On the other hand, meeting energy demand is very
significant in Turkey [2]. Energy savings are more vital for Turkey
which imports most of the energy used up. An important part of
energy which consumed in Turkey is used in heating and gradually
in cooling applications [3].
In Turkey, cooling systems are used in almost all dwelling and
commercial buildings. These systems are used to cool the space or
room in a building due to hot air outside building and to absorb
heat produced by people and appliances from inside building in
order to provide comfortable working environment. Since these
systems are operated continuously all the time, the energy
consumption and cost for these systems are quite high. Therefore,
building sectors in Turkey have to spend lots of money for elec-
tricity of cooling systems every year.
The external walls and roof of a building are the interface
between indoor and outdoor environment. Buildings should be
insulated according to outside environment conditions and inside
thermal comfort. In general, thermal insulation is used in the
components of building envelope in order to decrease energy
consumption and costs in space cooling. The cooling cost decreases
while the insulation cost increases owing to thickness. Thus, the
fuel cost will be the lowest value at optimum thickness of the
insulation. There will be no energy savings to increase additional
insulation beyond the economic thickness. Thermal insulation
products that are natural or human made, display some charac-
teristics which are changeable according to products’ nature and
effected from heat interval. Thermal insulation materials like other
natural or man-made materials exhibit temperature dependent
properties that vary with the nature of the material and the influ-
encing temperature range.
In Turkey, the buildings have an important part of the energy
consumption. TS 825 “Thermal Insulation Rules in Buildings”
standard [4] stipulates minimum requirements so as to limit the
need for cooling and heating energies in buildings. Besides, insu-
lation cost with availability of material and application convenience
is an important factor in the choice of insulation materials.
Life Cycle Cost (LCC) analysis is often applied to energy tech-
nologies and building projects. The LCC analysis can show that
spending more initially on additional building insulation can
produce a net savings (due to reduced heating and cooling costs)
over the lifetime of a building. The concept of LCC is used to
determine the optimum insulation thickness in order to take effects
of the change in interest and inflation that directly affect both the
cost of insulation materials and fuels.
In cooling applications, determining of the annual energy
demands for LCC analysis and the optimum insulation thickness are
a very significant situation. The energy demands can be defined by
the degree-time or annual equivalent full load cooling hours.
The topic of degree time is applied for many practical applica-
tions such as power production, energy supply demand
consumption, expanding of business and agriculture. Also, varia-
tion in space heating/cooling needs can be measured in degree-
time methods using the design and outdoor temperatures. The
degree-time is one of the proper methods to use in order to forecast
energy consumption of residential heating/cooling [5].
The annual heating and cooling requirements of buildings in
different regions can be obtained by means of the degree-days or
degree-hours concepts. The heating/cooling degree-days or
degree-hours are determined by using long-term measured data.
Cooling degree-days are an indicator of the energy demand to cool
buildings. This indicator is calculated by subtracting 18  C (65  F)
from the average daily or hourly temperature, and summing only
positive values over a fixed period such as an entire year. An
analogous indicator for the energy demand for heating is repre-
sented by heating degree-days or degree-hours. Heating degree-
days or degree-hours are widely used in building energy manage-
ment. For the construction of building performance lines, it is
necessary to have the correct building design temperature with the
meteorological station as close as possible to the building being
monitored. Applications of the degree time methods are used
together with optimum insulation thickness in many studies. In
these applications, either degree-days (i.e., [3,6,7]) or degree-hours
(i.e., [8e10]) are performed. Besides, in some studies [11,12], annual
heating and cooling consumptions in buildings are calculated by
considering solar radiation.
As far as the optimization of insulation thickness is concerned,
various studies can be categorized into four groups as: (i) the
optimization of optimum insulation thickness according to LCC
analysis by determining of annual heating/cooling energy demands
[6,8,9,11e15], (ii) the optimization of optimum insulation thickness
by using various fuels for energy saving [3,7,16e18], (iii) the effects
on environment of the optimization of optimum insulation thick-
ness [19,20], and (iv) the effects on fuels of the optimization of
optimum insulation thickness according to exergy analyses [21,22].
In this study, a comparison between optimum insulation
thickness and results of LCC analysis is made by using two different
methods, which determined the annual energy requirement in
cooling applications. A government office on housing in Turkey has
issued a new regulation in 1999 [4]. “Thermal Insulation Rules in
Buildings” for setting certain standards for insulating buildings
according to four climate regions are chosen. The fourth region has
the most severe winter conditions with respect to the first region.
Representative city from first climatic zone is chosen to make this
a comprehensive study as the results of selected city may be
conveniently used to make reasonable estimation for other cities.
The city of Mersin located in first region of Turkey is chosen as
a model city. Besides, three different insulation materials (styro-
foam, rock wool and glass wool) are used. Firstly, annual cooling
energy demand of cooling space is determined by degree-hours
with using long-term measured data. Second one is determined
by the annual equivalent full load cooling hours operation which
will be explained in chapter of Material and methods (see [8,10] for
detail information). Furthermore, an optimization model is per-
formed depending on LCC analysis via P1eP2 method. By using the
optimization model, optimum insulation thicknesses, saving and
payback period for exterior walls of buildings are calculated for
electricity tariff and results obtained from this study are presented
with comparisons.
2. Material and methods
2.1. The structure of the external walls
The cooling applications are applied to cool the space or room in
the buildings due to hot air outside building and to absorb heat
produced by people and appliances from inside building in order to
provide comfortable environment. Since these applications are
operated continuously all the time in the temperate countries, the
energy consumption and cost for these applications are quite high.
Consequently, the cooling sectors need to spend a lot of money for
electricity for each cooling system every year. Any reduction in this
cooling load results in reducing the electricity consumption by
cooling system. Therefore, a proper insulation material with the
objective of achieving the acceptable comfort for building occu-
pants and the reduced cooling load is imperative. Insulation is
made to estimate the heat gains in a building. Heat load of
a building is calculated in terms of these gains. Heat gains in
buildings consist of the characteristics of building (i.e., transmission
and ventilation in the external walls, roof, door and windows, etc.),
the characteristics of cooling system, climate conditions, outside air
 M. Kayfeci et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 50 (2013) 217e224 219

temperature, intensity of radiation and internal heat gains (i.e., Table 1

people and appliances from inside building). The physical properties of external wall materials.

In this study, the optimum insulation thickness (OIT) is calcu- Material Thickness (m) k (W/m K) R (m2 K/W)
lated take account of heat losses occurred the external walls. The Internal plaster 0.020 0.870 0.023
external walls in a building preserve external environment and its Hollow brick 0.135 0.450 0.300
effects. At the same time, these walls are locations in which a high Insulation e e e
Hollow brick 0.135 0.450 0.300
rate of heat gaining occurs. Here, external wall (sandwich) cross-
External plaster 0.030 1.400 0.021
section is shown in Fig. 1. And, the sandwich wall consists of an 1/hi 0.130
insulation layer in the middle of the two hollow brick layers and 1/hd 0.040
two plaster layers on the inside and outside surfaces. Also, the Rwall (un-insulated) 0.814
physical properties of its wall materials are given in Table 1.

important role in the selection of a cooling system. There are

2.2. Method 1 for the cooling loads, OIT and insulation economy via
the CDH
The building envelope is affected by three heat transfer mecha-
nisms: conduction, convection and radiation. The outer surface of wall
absorbs the solar radiation and transmits it into the inner surface of
building by conduction. At the same time, convective thermal trans-
mission occurs between ambient air and the outer surface of wall, also
between the inner surface of the wall and indoor air. The wall heat
gain load through the building envelope may be calculated from


Qw ¼ UA To;des  T s ¼ UADT
where A is surface area of wall, To,des is the design temperature of
outside air, Ts is the design temperature of cooled spaces, and U is
the overall heat transfer coefficient.
The total resistance of wall, Rw, is equal to the summation of the
surface resistances of convective heat transfer over the inside and
outside surfaces of the wall and the total internal resistance of all
layers of the wall as given by the following equation.
various methods for calculation of annual energy consumption. The
simplest and most intuitive way of estimating the annual energy
consumption of a building is the degree-hours method, which is
a steady-state approach. The number of annual cooling degree-
hours (CDH) using hourly data is determined from
X
365 X
24
CDH ¼ ð1 yearÞ ð1 dayÞ ðTsa  Tb Þ* (4)
1 1
where Tb is the design temperature and Tsa is solar-air temperature
(1) for each hour. The * sign above the parenthesis indicates that only
positive values are to be counted, and the temperature difference is
to be taken to be zero when Tsa < Tb.
A cooling system is designed with respect to the indoor air
temperature. Annual cooling load of cooling system should be
calculated in order to estimate the total amount of energy
consumption used. Total annual energy consumption of cooling
system can be calculated by

1 x1 x2 xn 1 U
Rw ¼ þ þ þ/ þ (2) EA;1 ¼ CDH (5)
hi k1 k2 kn ho COP
where CDH is the annual cooling degree-hours from Eq. (4), CE is
where hi and ho are convection heat transfer coefficient for inside and
cost of electricity, and COP is coefficient of performance of cooling
outside surface of cooled space, respectively. And k1, k2, etc. are thermal
system.
conductivity of layer of wall, and x1, x2, etc. are their thicknesses.
For many thermal systems, the amount of energy that must be
The difference between the overall heat transfer coefficients of
purchased in order to operate the equipment does not change
un-insulated and insulated walls can be written as
significantly from year to year. In this case, the LCC analysis can be
1 1 calculated using the method presented in [23] where the LCC is
DU ¼ Uun-ins  Uins ¼  (3) considered to be the sum of two terms. The first term is propor-
Rw Rw þ ðx=kÞins
tional to the first year operating cost (F), and the second term is
An analysis of annual energy consumption and cost usually proportional to the first costs of the system (E).
accompanies the design heat load calculations and plays an
LCC ¼ P1 F þ P2 E (6)

Here, it is necessary to identify the ratio of life cycle energy (P1) and
the ratio of life cycle expenditures incurred to the initial investment
(P2) because of the additional capital investment. P1 has relation
with electricity price increase rate (d), electricity discount price rate
(i), and lifetime (N) as expressed by the following
   
1 1þi N
P1 ¼ 1 if isd (7)
ðd  iÞ 1þd
If the electricity price increase rate (d) is equal to discount price rate
(i), P1 is calculated from

N
P1 ¼ if isd (8)
1þi
P2 is the ratio of the life cycle expenditures incurred because of the
Fig. 1. External wall cross-section. additional capital investment to the initial investment. P2 is defined by
220 M. Kayfeci et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 50 (2013) 217e224

Rv outside surfaces of the air conditioned space are exposed to an

P2 ¼ 1 þ P1 Ms  N
(9) interior part of a neighboring wall with an area of Aint, the annual
ð1 þ dÞ
average temperature of this interior space, To,int, must be taken into
where Ms is the ratio of the annual maintenance and operation cost account for calculating a corrected average outside temperature
to the original first cost, Rv is the ratio of the resale value to the first which can be calculated by the following equation.
cost. In this study, P2 can be taken as 1 if the maintenance and
operation costs are zero. To;out Aout þ To;int Aint
To;av ¼ (19)
The total cost of insulation (Cins) depends on the cost of insu- Aout þ Aint
lation material per unit volume (CI) and insulation thickness (x) can
An air conditioning system is generally designed to meet the
be calculated by the following equation
setting temperature inside the room, when the temperature in the
Cins ¼ CI x (10) room is reaching setting temperature, the system will stop auto-
matically. Thus, the total operating hour of air conditioner needs to
The total cost of the fuel can be calculated by: be used in calculating energy consumption. In this case, the total
amount of energy consumption for air conditioner can be deter-
Cf ¼ P1 EA;1 CE (11) mined by
The total cost of the insulation material and the fuel can be
Qw Dt
calculated by the following equation EA;2 ¼ (20)
COP
Ct ¼ Cf þ P2 Cins (12) where Qw is given from Eq. (1), Dt is from Eq. (18), and COP is the
coefficient of performance of cooling system. While, the total cost
The saving is the difference between the saved energy cost over
of fuel for insulation material can be calculated as follow
the lifetime and the insulation payout:
Cf ¼ P1 EA;2 CE (21)
P1 CE DU
S ¼ Cf  P2 Cins or S ¼ CDH  P2 CI x (13)
COP The total cost of cooling along life cycle in an insulation building
The effect of insulation thickness on the thermal transmission is found by
efficiency can be obtained by differentiating Eq. (3) and the result is
Ct ¼ Cf þ P2 Cins (22)
as follow
The savings from the use of insulation then become as follow
vðDUÞ R2w kins
¼  2 (14)
vx P1 CE DU DT Dt
R2w kins þ Rw x S ¼ Cf  P2 Cins or S ¼  P2 CI x (23)
COP
The OIT can be determined by minimizing Eq. (13) or maxi- The OIT can also be determined by minimizing Eq. (23) or
mizing Eq. (12). So the differential of S or Ct with respect to x is maximizing Eq. (22). So the differential of S or Ct with respect to x is
taken and set equal to zero, then the OIT, xopt, is obtained as: taken. Here, Eq. (14) can be used and it is set equal to zero. Finally,
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi the OIT, xopt, can be performed in terms of:
P1 kins CE CDH 2sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 3
xopt ¼  Rw kins (15) 2 k P C DT Dt
P2 CI COP 4 R w ins 1 E
 R2w kins 5
P2 CI COP
By setting Eq. (13) to be zero, the payback period, Np, can be xopt ¼ (24)
calculated as follow Rw
 The payback period of insulation cost, Np, can be calculated by
P2 CI COP Rw x þ R2w kins ð1 þ iÞ setting the net savings function (Eq. (23)) to zero. The payback
Np ¼ if i ¼ d (16)
CE CDH period for cooling is given by

 ! P2 CI Rw x þ R2w kins COPð1 þ iÞ
P2 CI COP Rw x þ R2w kins ðd  iÞ Np ¼ if i ¼ d (25)
ln 1  CE DT Dt
CE CDH
Np ¼   if isd (17) 
1þi !
ln P2 CI Rw x þ R2w kins COPðd  iÞ
1þd ln 1 
CE DT Dt
2.3. Method 2 for the cooling loads, OIT and insulation economy via Np ¼   if isd (26)
1þi
the annual equivalent full load cooling hours operation ln
1þd
Based on the assumption of minimizing of internal loads, the For more detailed information on this topic, it can be referred to
annual equivalent full load cooling hours operation can be formu- Ref. [8].
lated in terms of full load hours time period which can be calculated
by the follow expression [8,10].
3. Results and discussion
T  Ts
Dt ¼ Oh o;av (18) The aim of this study is to determine optimum insulation
To;des  Ts
thickness for typical exterior wall by calculating cooling loads
where To,des, To,av and Ts indicate the outside design, annual average according to two different methods (Method 1 for degree-hours
outside and inside design temperatures, respectively. If any of the and Method 2 for the annual equivalent full load cooling hours
 M. Kayfeci et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 50 (2013) 217e224 221

operation) in Mersin chosen as a model city in Turkey. Methods 1

a 25
and 2 have been used in many of the previous studies on optimum
Insulation (1) Fuel(1) Total(1)
insulation thickness. In this study, LCC analysis is used to accurately
20 Insulation(2) Fuel(2) Total(2)
evaluate these two different methods, and the results are
compared. The parameters used in calculations for Methods 1 and 2

Cost ($/m²)
15
are given in Table 2.
It is significant to evaluate cooling loads for cold store, dwelling
and commercial buildings. For this reason, Method 1 is used to 10
determine cooling loads in Mersin. The values of monthly cooling
degree-hours are calculated using 18  C design temperature 5
according to literature and the data are given in Table 2. In Ref. [9],
the heating and cooling degree-hours at various design tempera- 0
tures are calculated for Mersin and it is clearly indicated that 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14
cooling degree-hours are bigger than heating degree-hours. Thus,
Insulation thickness (m)
the determination of optimum insulation thickness is supported to
cooling loads for gaining maximum energy saving. Moreover, it is
utilized on cooling applications to compare two methods in this
b 25 Insulation (1) Fuel(1) Total(1)
study. 20
Insulation(2) Fuel(2) Total(2)
In Method 2, it is calculated the annual equivalent full load

Cost ($/m²)
cooling hours operation of air conditioner by using Eq. (17). In
15
Turkey, the annual operating hour of air conditioner, (Oh), can be
accepted as 8760 (24  365) when it is considered all-day operation
10
of its device in cooling applications.
Fig. 2 shows the fuel, insulation and total costs versus insulation
5
thickness obtained from Method 1 (blue curve) and Method 2 (red
curve) over the lifetime of 20 years for (a) styrofoam, (b) rock wool
and (c) glass wool as insulation materials. Here, increasing the 0
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14
insulation thickness shows increasing the insulation cost. But the
fuel cost shows decreasing quickly up to intersection point of the
Insulation thickness (m)
insulation and fuel costs. The total cost is the sum of the insulation
and fuel costs. The total cost decreases up to a certain value and
c 25
Insulation (1) Fuel(1) Total(1)
then it starts to increase beyond this level. The value which is Insulation(2) Fuel(2) Total(2)
20
minimized the total cost will give the insulation thickness. The
lowest value of optimum insulation thickness for Method 1 is found
Cost ($/m²)

as glass wool, and its value is 4.09 cm. Then, the optimum insu- 15
lation thickness is 4.20 cm for styrofoam while it is 4.70 cm for rock
wool. In Method 2, the lowest value of optimum insulation thick- 10
ness is determined as Styrofoam with 3.00 cm, and then come
5

Table 2 0
The parameters used in calculations for Method 1 and Method 2. 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14

Parameter Data for Method 1 Data for Method 2

Insulation thickness (m)
Cooling degree-hours (CDH) 30180  C-h e
Annual operating hour of e 8760 h Fig. 2. Effect of insulation thickness on the cost for Method 1 (blue curves) and
cooling system (Oh) Method 2 (red curves) for the insulation materials ((a) styrofoam, (b) rock wool, and (c)
Lifetime (N) 10 years glass wool). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the
reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Insulation
Styrofoam
Conductivity (kins) 0.037 W/m K
Cost (CI) 105 $/m3 respectively glass wool and rock wool with the values of 3.20 and
Rock wool
3.40 cm. It can be noted that the values of fuel and total costs
Conductivity (kins) 0.040 W/m K calculated for Method 2 are higher than the values of those for
Cost (CI) 95 $/m3 Method 1. In addition, the thickness of insulation material is an
Glass wool important part in designing of building since thick insulation
Conductivity (kins) 0.040 W/m K material will reduce the space of building significantly.
Cost (CI) 110 $/m3 A comparison of the energy savings over lifetime versus insu-
lation thickness for the selected insulation materials is given in
Resistance of the un-insulated wall (Rwall) 0.814 W/m  C
Fig. 3(a) for Method 1 and Fig. 3(b) for Method 2. Here, Fig. 3(a)
Coefficient of performance (COP) (cooling) 2.9
Unit cost of electricity (CE) 0.15 $/kWh
presents the effect on saving of insulation thickness for insulation
Discount rate (i) 5% materials for Method 1. For rock wool, styrofoam and glass wool,
Electricity price increase rate (d) 5% the savings are 6.3, 6.2 and 5.6 $/m2, respectively. Fig. 3(b) shows
Total heat transfer area 1 m2 energy saving variations for Method 2. The savings for the same
Inside temperature 18  C
insulation materials are 8.98, 8.75 and 8.31 $/m2, respectively. Rock
Average annual outside temperature 39  C
wool insulation has the highest saving rate for both two methods.
222 M. Kayfeci et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 50 (2013) 217e224

a 7

5
Saving ($/m²)

3
Styrofoam
2 Rock wool
1 Glass wool

0
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12
Insulation thickness (m)
b 12
10
Saving ($/m²)

4 Styrofoam
Rock wool
2 Glass wool

0
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12
Insulation thickness (m) Fig. 4. Variation of the payback period due to insulation thickness for (a) Method 1
and (b) Method 2.
Fig. 3. Comparison of the savings on insulation thickness in all insulation materials for
(a) Method 1 and (b) Method 2.

material is the less heat transmission will be. Therefore, there

should be a relationship between the heat conductivity and
According to the results, it is clearly understand that the energy
optimum thickness for every insulation material. This relation-
saving values of insulation materials for Method 1 remained under
ship will be very important in the future since the optimum
the values of those for Method 2.
thickness of insulation material can be estimated easily by
Variation of the payback period due to insulation thickness is
knowing its heat conductivity only. This relationship for both two
shown in Fig. 4(a) for Method 1 and Fig. 4(b) for Method 2. In
methods is shown in Fig. 8. Here, the optimum insulation thick-
both two graphics, the highest payback period is from the rock
ness increases with increasing heat transmission for Method 1,
wool, followed by the styrofoam and glass wool. It can be seen
and it is found that this relationship is a linear fitting. But, for
that the payback periods obtained from Method 2 are found
Method 2, the optimum insulation thickness decreases in the low
lower than those of Methods 1. Therefore, this clearly indicates
and high values of heat transmission. The relationship is a non-
that the payback period of insulation in Method 2 is more
linear, and obeys a polynomial fitting. With this fitting process,
advantageous.
the optimum insulation thickness can be found easily only having
The chosen value of design temperature is an important
information about heat transmission value in insulation
parameter in calculating cooling loads according to Methods 1 and
applications.
2. In Fig. 5, the results obtained in both two methods for different
design temperatures are compared for styrofoam insulation
material. Selecting a lower design temperature, the optimum
insulation thickness increases for cooling load calculations. From 0.06
Optimum insulation thickness (m)

graphic, it is clearly appeared that the optimum insulation thick-

ness decreases with increasing design temperatures. On the other 0.05
hand, the optimum insulation thickness calculated in Method 1 is
0.04
remained under that in Method 2. The effects of payback period and
savings on design temperatures for two different methods are also 0.03
shown in Figs. 6 and 7 for styrofoam insulation material, respec-
tively. It is clear understood that with increasing design tempera- 0.02
tures, the payback period increases but the savings decrease. In
Method 1
Figs. 5e7, it can be also noted that while the optimum insulation 0.01
Method 2
thickness and payback period are overestimated in Method 1, the
life cycle savings are overestimated in Method 2. 0.00
Heat transmission in a solid material depends upon the 16 17 18 19 20 21
Design temperature (°C)
thermal property (in this case the thermal conductivity) and the
thickness of that material. The lower value heat conductivity is Fig. 5. Variation of the optimum insulation thickness on the design temperature in
the less heat transmission will be. Similarly, the thicker insulation two different methods (i.e., styrofoam).
 M. Kayfeci et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 50 (2013) 217e224 223

6 Table 3
Optimum insulation thickness, and the payback period and saving in its values for
Payback period (Years)

5 the selected insulation materials.

4 Insulation Method 1 Method 2

materials
Optimum Payback Saving Optimum Payback Saving
3 insulation period ($/m2) insulation period ($/m2)
thickness (m) (years) thickness (m) (years)
2 Method 1
Glass wool 0.0409 4.22 5.60 0.0320 2.98 8.31
1 Method 2 Styrofoam 0.0420 3.96 6.20 0.0300 2.67 8.75
Rock wool 0.0470 3.92 6.30 0.0340 2.65 8.98
0
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
4. Conclusion
Design temperature (°C)
Energy consumption is rapidly increasing because of increasing
Fig. 6. Variation of the payback period on the design temperature in two different
methods (i.e., styrofoam).
population and urbanization. Energy saving can be done with
decreasing energy consumption. In some developing countries
such as Turkey, the energy consumption increases more when the
24 electricity tariffs become high values in cooling applications.
Therefore, energy savings are obtained by using proper insulation
20 materials to exterior walls. It is significant to determine cooling
Method 1
Method 2
loads for cold store, dwelling and commercial buildings. In this
Saving ($/m²)

16
study, the optimum insulation thickness, payback period and
12
savings are computed using an economical model depend on LCC
analysis over a lifetime of 10 years by taking into account climate
8 conditions, construction of wall, type and cost of insulation, costs of
energy, and other economic parameters for cooling applications.
4 The results of the optimum insulation thickness, savings and
payback period are performed by using two different methods. For
0
17 18 19 20 21 22
both two methods, although insulation cost increases with
increasing insulation thickness, the fuel cost decreases when
Design temperature (°C)
insulation thickness is reach to optimum insulation thickness, that
Fig. 7. Variation of the saving on the design temperature in two different methods (i.e., is, total cost is in minimum value. Also, optimum insulation thick-
styrofoam). ness is maximum lifetime saving. The lifetime savings are over-
estimated in Method 2 while the optimum insulation thickness and
payback period are overestimated in Method 1.
In Table 3, the optimum insulation thickness, payback period
Consequently, this study will be an efficient guide for the people
and savings for both two methods as the results of LCC analysis are
working in the field for better design, analysis and operation of the
given in the values of the same magnitude order and the same
insulation. The proper insulation materials at optimum insulation
design temperature. According to this table, it is presented that the
thickness provide the economical and environmental advantages
optimum insulation thickness and payback period for Method 2
with decreasing heat transmission from walls. This can be achieved
have approximately 74% and 69% lower values than those of
by only using the most suitable and simple methods.
Method 1. On the contrary, the savings have more value from
average 44%. The results show that in comparing with Method 1,
Method 2 overestimates the optimum insulation thickness and Nomenclature
payback period, but underestimates the savings.
A surface area of wall (m2)
CE cost of electricity ($/kWh)
Cf total cost of energy consumption ($)
0.06
Cins total cost of insulation ($)
Optimum insulation thickness (m)

CI cost of insulation material per unit volume ($/m3)

0.05
CDH annual cooling degree-hours ( C-h)
COP coefficient of performance
0.04
d electricity price increase rate (%)
E first costs of system ($)
0.03 EA total annual energy consumption of cooling system (kWh)
F first year operating cost ($)
Method 1
0.02 hi convection heat transfer coefficient for inside surface of
Method 2
cooled spaces (W/m2 K)
0.01 ho convection heat transfer coefficient for outside surface of
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 cooled spaces (W/m2 K)
Heat conductivity (W/m°C) i electricity discount price rate (%)
kins thermal conductivity of insulation material (W/m K)
Fig. 8. Optimum insulation thickness as a function of heat conductivity for (a) Method kn thermal conductivity of nth layer of wall (W/m K)
1 (pink line is a linear fitting as k ¼ 0.7484xopt þ 2E05) and (b) Method 2 (blue line is
a polynomial fitting as k ¼ 5.6503xopt 2
þ 0.6318xopt þ 0.0282) (e.g., styrofoam). (For
LCC life cycle cost
interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to N lifetime (years)
the web version of this article.) Np payback period (years)
224 M. Kayfeci et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 50 (2013) 217e224

Oh annual operating hour of cooling system (h) [7] A. Bolatturk, Determination of optimum insulation thickness for building
walls with respect to various fuels and climate zones in Turkey, Applied
OIT optimum insulation thickness (m)
Thermal Engineering 26 (2006) 1301e1309.
P1 life cycle energy [8] M.S. Soylemez, M. Unsal, Optimum insulation thickness for refrigeration
P2 life cycle expenditures for additional investment applications, Energy Conversion and Management 40 (1999) 13e21.
Qw instantaneous wall heat gain load (W) [9] A. Bolatturk, Optimum insulation thicknesses for building walls with respect
to cooling and heating degree-hours in the warmest zone of Turkey, Building
Rins internal resistance of insulation material (m2 K/W) and Environment 43 (2008) 1055e1064.
Rw total resistance of wall (m2 K/W) [10] A. Kecebas, M. Kayveci, Effect on optimum insulation thickness, cost and
S savings ($) saving of storage design temperature in cold storage in Turkey, Energy
Education Science and Technology Part A Energy Science and Research 25
Tb design temperature ( C) (2010) 117e127.
To,av average temperature of outside air ( C) [11] M.J. Al-Khawaja, Determination and selecting the optimum thickness of
To,des Design temperature of outside air ( C) insulation for buildings in hot countries by accounting for solar radiation,
Applied Thermal Engineering 24 (2004) 2601e2610.
Ts design temperature of cooled spaces ( C) [12] S.A. Al-Sanea, M.F. Zedan, Optimum insulation thickness for building walls in
Tsa solar-air temperature ( C) a hot-dry climate, International Journal of Ambient Energy 23 (2002)
U overall heat transfer coefficient (W/m2 K) 115e126.
[13] N. Sisman, E. Kahya, N. Aras, H. Aras, Determination of optimum insulation
Uins overall heat transfer coefficient of insulated wall (W/m2 K) thicknesses of the external walls and roof (ceiling) for Turkey’s different
Uun-ins overall heat transfer coefficient of un-insulated wall degree-day regions, Energy Policy 35 (2007) 5151e5155.
(W/m2 K) [14] O. Kaynakli, A study on residential heating energy requirement and optimum
insulation thickness, Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 1164e1172.
x insulation thickness (m)
[15] A. Bolukbasi, K. Comakli, S. Sahin, Domestic energy savings: investigation of
xn thickness of nth layer of wall (m) optimum insulation thicknesses for the external wall of rural houses in
xopt optimum insulation thickness (m) Turkey, Energy Education Science and Technology Part A Energy Science and
Dt annual equivalent full load cooling hours operation (h) Research 24 (2009) 25e37.
[16] O.A. Dombayci, M. Golcu, Y. Pancar, Optimization of insulation thickness for
DT difference between inside and outside design external walls using different energy-sources, Applied Energy 83 (2006)
temperature 921e928.
DU difference between overall heat transfer coefficients of [17] A. Ucar, F. Balo, Effect of fuel type on the optimum thickness of selected
insulation materials for the four different climatic regions of Turkey, Applied
un-insulated and insulated walls Energy 86 (2009) 730e736.
[18] A. Ucar, F. Balo, Determination of the energy savings and the optimum
insulation thickness in the four different insulated exterior walls, Renewable
References Energy 35 (2010) 88e94.
[19] K. Comakli, B. Yuksel, Environmental impact of thermal insulation thickness in
[1] R.T. Ogulata, Energy sector and wind energy potential in Turkey, Renewable buildings, Applied Thermal Engineering 24 (2004) 933e940.
and Sustainable Energy Reviews 7 (2003) 469e484. [20] O.A. Dombayci, The environmental impact of optimum insulation thickness
[2] K. Kaygusuz, Environmental impacts of energy utilization and renewable for external walls of buildings, Building and Environment 42 (2007)
energy policies in Turkey, Energy Policy 30 (2002) 689e698. 3855e3859.
[3] K. Comakli, B. Yuksel, Optimum insulation thickness of external walls for [21] O. Arslan, R. Kose, Thermoeconomic optimization of insulation thickness
energy saving, Applied Thermal Engineering 23 (2003) 473e479. considering condensed vapor in buildings, Energy and Buildings 38 (2006)
[4] TS 825, Thermal Insulation Rules in Buildings, Turkish Standard Institution, 1400e1408.
Ankara, Turkey, 1998. [22] O. Arslan, M.A. Ozgur, H.D. Yildizay, R. Kose, Fuel effects on optimum insu-
[5] A. Satman, N. Yalcinkaya, Heating and cooling degree-hours for Turkey, lation thickness: an exergitic approach, Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery,
Energy 24 (1999) 833e840. Utilization, and Environmental Effects 32 (2010) 128e147.
[6] A. Hasan, Optimizing insulation thickness for buildings using lifecycle cost, [23] J.A. Duffie, W.A. Beckman, Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes, third ed.,
Applied Energy 63 (1999) 115e124. Wiley Interscience, New York, 2006.