SMART SOLUTIONS FOR SOLAR ADAPTIVE FAÇADE

PRELIMINARY STUDIES FOR AN INNOVATIVE SHADING

DEVICE

Michele SAUCHELLI*, Gabriele LOBACCARO*, Gabriele MASERA*,

Francesco FIORITO**

* Politecnico di Milano, Department of Architecture, Built Environment and Construction

Engineering, Milan, Italy.

** The University of Sydney, Faculty of Architecture Design & Planning, Sydney, Australia.

Keywords: Zero Energy Building; Solar Optimization; Dynamic Shading; Shape

Memory Alloys.

Field of Interest: Building Design; Topic of Interest: Design Strategies and Tools.
Main paper focus: Specific Topic; Paper Content Classification: Technical.

Abstract
The EU policy of increasing urban density and implementing the Nearly Zero-Energy
Building standard leads to the exploitation of façades as the largest surfaces available for
energy production. The integration of solar energy production devices can cause interior
discomfort due to overheating of the building shell. This paper presents an optimization
of both solar energy production and solar gain control through an innovative, kinetic
shading device integrating PV technology. The study includes the application to a case
study in Milan, Italy, optimizing the building’s shape and the smart shading system. The
former derives from a process of generative modelling and volume-finding, conducting
solar dynamic analyses. The latter is the result of thermal dynamic analyses to define
which parameters should activate the system. Further detailed analyses are needed to
evaluate the internal comfort, as well as the technology and the materials that should be
used. The innovative solutions for future smart, adaptive façade components, coupled
with control systems of the overall building, will be used for new buildings and for the
energy retrofit of existing buildings.

1. Introduction
Nowadays around half of the world’s population lives in urban areas and in next four
decades it is expected that this percentage will increase to 70% [1]. Furthermore, up to
75% of global resources are consumed within urban settlements, which cover only 2% of
the Earth’s surface [2, 3, 4]. The minimization of energy consumption in the urban
environment represents one of the most important issues for the future: the energy
conservation and the increase of renewable energy use could improve the situation and
reduce the fossil sources widely used today. The development of compact city models,
and the improvement of the existing ones, could represent a solution for limiting land
use, reducing the pollution due to the use of cars and improving public transportation,
but is challenging in terms of on-site renewable energy production, required by the
European Directive 2010/31/EU on the Energy Performance of Buildings (EPBD).
This paper presents the first part of a research work proposing a design process for the
solar optimisation of building shapes and shading systems in dense urban settings.

2. Research Goals and Method

This paper is part of a wider study providing a new design approach to optimize the
shape of a building, located in existing urban areas, harvesting as much solar radiation
as possible on the building envelope – including façades – and at the same time
optimising the energy need for heating, cooling and lighting through the design of
efficient and adaptable shading devices.

Figure 1. Solar Irradiation analysis: comparison of initial design scenario (on the
left) and solar optimized scenario (on the right). The analyses were conducted
using ‘DIVA’ simulation tool.

This work is divided in two parts: one follows the process of solar optimization of the
building’s shape, the second analyses the potential energy impact of a smart/dynamic
shading device on a solar optimized building.
In detail the process starts from the initial phase, focused on the building volume’s
optimization. Its shape is studied in order to guarantee the highest possible level of solar
access within an existing urban setting [5]. The next step is related to a sensitivity
analysis of the levels of total solar radiation on the building envelope considering
different volumetric configurations created with geometrical transformations [6]. They
are obtained changing the height of the building and its footprint’s percentage and
shape; changing the orientation related to the reference building; and altering the shape
of the volume through more complex transformations.
The method used for calculating the solar irradiation values and solar access has been
developed through the combined use of dynamic simulations tools, ‘Autodesk Ecotect
Analysis’, ‘Daysim’ and ‘DIVA’. The generative modelling tools, ‘AutoCAD’, ‘Rhinoceros’ and
‘Grasshopper’, have been adopted to optimize the building’s shape. The method is
constituted by different phases linked to each other: the building’s shape, created with
the modelling tools, is exported to urban performance analysis software, ‘Radiance
Software Package’, and finally the spatial distributions of solar irradiation on the overall
building façades were calculated using ray-tracing simulation techniques and the annual
solar radiation was determined.
In the second part of the study, one room in the upper part of the building (Figure 2) was
selected in order to analyse the potential energy impact of a smart/dynamic shading
device considering the overall primary energy need for cooling, heating and lighting
(CHL).

Figure 2. Sketch of the extracted room (in red) located in the upper part of the
building.

2.1. First Optimization: Solar Optimization of the Building’s Shape

The case study here presented is located in the city of Milan (Italy). The parametric solar
design approach summarized above, aims to maximise the solar access and solar
potential of a new development in an existing urban environment. The influence of
building and façade design in terms of total amount of solar radiation incident on the
building envelope has been analysed as well as the localization of the best areas to install
integrated photovoltaic systems (BIPV).
The parametric solar optimization process starts from the initial design scenario created
by the developer, with fixed urban parameters: number of storeys, volume, footprint
area and height of each building. The parametric transformations examined in this case
study are the floor twist and the global building’s slope from the vertical. In particular the
floor twist varies from 45° West (Twist_W45) to 45° East (Twist_E45) with steps of 15°
(Twist_W45, Twist_W30, Twist_W15, Twist_S0, Twist_E15, Twist_E30, Twist_E45); instead
the slope from the vertical direction on South (Slope_S), East (Slope_E) and West
(Slope_W) orientations varies from 0° to 20° considering steps of 5° (Slope_S5/E5/W5,
Slope_S10/E10/W10, Slope_S15/E15/W15, Slope_S20/E20/W20). These parametric
transformations follow linear equation values of twist and movement deviation of the
storeys, further developing previous studies where the analyses were conducted on a
constant volume, varying the covering ratio of the development [6].

Table 1 shows the data obtained from the case study with the highest incident solar
irradiance. This configuration was reached with both a twist of 45° on the West
orientation and a double slope of 20° on the South and East fronts. The increment in the
average superficial solar radiation, equal to 9.2% compared to the initial shape, was
achieved also thanks to the increment in total exposed surfaces, 7.7% more than the
initial reference regular shape.
Furthermore, it is important to underline that, considering the complex transformations,
2 2
there are significant losses of usable floor area, with up to 970 m lost over 11,400 m
(about 8.5%).
Figure 1 shows the comparison between the initial design scenario and the solar
optimized design.

Table 1: Building A. Results of solar radiation analysis. ES: total exposed area (external
envelope). L: loss of usable floor area. R: total solar radiation impacting on external
envelope. RA: average solar radiation on external envelope. ∆: percentage of variation of
solar radiation.
Parametric ES L R RA
2 2 2 ∆ [%]
Transformation [m ] [m ] [kWh/year] [kWh/m year]
T_W45 & S_S20 &
5,993.00 963.5 3,407,463 569 18.3%
S_E20

2.2. Second Optimization: Smart/Dynamic Shading Device

Following the analysis conducted in order to optimize the shape of the entire building, a
reference room has been selected for further and detailed studies on the solar façade
(Figure 2). The previous phases of the work, described above, have demonstrated the
feasibility of solar optimization of building’s shape through an iterative and optimized
form finding process. The idea is to develop further this approach, focusing on the scale
of the façade component.

Dimension of room: 5 m x 3 m.
South facing ribbon window: 4.8 m x 1 m.
A daylight object for the lighting analysis was
located in the middle on the volume at 0.92 m of
height.

Figure 3. Sketch of analysed room and its features in ‘EnergyPlus v.7.2’.

Starting from the optimized shape, the energy model of a typical room receiving a high
amount of solar radiation has been built.
For the energetic analysis conducted the closest plain shape to the most irradiative one
has been selected (Figures 2 and 3).
The scope of the dynamic energy model is to evaluate the potential advantages and
disadvantages of a dynamic shading device in a ‘solar optimized’ South façade in Milan
(Italy) in terms of energy demand, internal lighting, comfort and possible energy
production (e.g. BIPV). The room’s dimensions are 5 m x 3 m, with a South facing ribbon
window 4.8 m x 1 m wide. For the preliminary lighting analysis, a daylight control object
has been created and its position has been fixed in the middle of the room (Figure 3).The
energy model has been created in ‘EnergyPlus v7.2’ and the room has been ideally
modelled with the South front facing the outside and with the other walls, the floor and
the ceiling as adiabatic partitions. For the preliminary analysis an Ideal Loads Heating
and Cooling system has been simulated. The internal thermal conditions, the internal
loads and the time schedule of the internal loads have been taken both from the Italian
standard UNI TS 11300 and the Building Code of Australia (BCA) part J. The Australian
code has been taken in consideration for the time schedule and the input data used for
the dynamic energy analysis as in the Italian standard they are not considered. The main
input data of the energy simulations are listed in the Table 2, while in
Table 3 the adopted time schedules are summarized. In order to analyse the achievable
benefits of a solar shading device optimized both in shape and position (dynamic),
different simulations have been carried out. In this preliminary study, the dynamic
behaviour of the shading system was simplified to six fixed configurations, representing
different possible positions of the adjustable system. In each configuration, the
properties of visible and reflected light transmission are set in accordance with the
desired amount of shading.

Table 2: Energy model main input data.

Input Value/Item Unit/Value
Weather Data ITA_Milano. 160660_IWEC.epw ---
Simulation run st st
1 Jan – 31 Dec, Hourly ---
ruperiod
Conductivity = 0.89 W/m·K
3
[Out] M01, 100 mm Brick Density = 1920 kg/m
Specific heat = 840 J/kg·K
M15, 200 mm Heavyweight Conductivity = 1.95 W/m·K
3
Density = 2240 kg/m
concrete Specific heat = 900 J/kg·K
Exterior Wall Conductivity = 0.03 W/m·K
3
I02, 50 mm Insulation board Density = 43 kg/m
Specific heat = 1210 J/kg·K
2
F04, Wall air space resistance Thermal resistance = 0.15 m K/W
Conductivity = 0.16 W/m·K
[In] G01a, 19 mm Gypsum 3
Density = 800 kg/m
board Specific heat = 1090 J/kg·K
Solar transmittance at normal incidence =
0.837
Front/Back Side Solar Reflectance at normal
incidence = 0.075
Visible transmittance at normal incidence =
[Out] Clear 3 mm 0.898
Exterior
Front/Back side visible Reflectance at normal
Window incidence = 0.081
Front/Back side infrared hemispherical
emissivity = 0.84
Conductivity = 0.9 W/m·K
Air 13 mm
Clear 3 mm [see above]
People No.2 * 130 W/p * Occupancy Schedule
2
15 W/m * Lights Schedule [if present, see text
Lights
Internal Gain below for further detail]
2
Electric Equipment 10 W/m * Equipment Schedule
Daylighting Controls Illuminance setpoint = 500 lux
Outside air zone infiltration 0.3 Vol/h
Thermostat
Heating Set point 20°C
setpoint
Cooling Set point 26°C
Table 3: Input schedule from Monday to Friday.
Occupancy and Operation Profiles
Occupancy 0% 15% 60% 100 50% 15% 5% 5% 0%
Artificial lighting 10% 40% 80% 100
% 80% 60% 40% 20% 10%
Appliances/equipment 10% 25% 70% 100
% 60% 25% 15% 15% 10%
%

from 00:00 AM

from 07:00 AM

from 08:00 AM

from 09:00 AM

from 05:00 AM

from 07:00 PM

from 08:00 PM

from 09:00 PM
to 07:00 AM

to 08:00 AM

to 09:00 AM

to 00:00 AM
to 05:00 PM

to 06:00 PM

to 07:00 PM

to 08:00 PM

to 09:00 PM
from 06 PM
Saturday/Sunday: 10% of continuous artificial lighting – 10% of continuous appliances –
Equipment, no occupancy.

In each simulation an internal lighting set point of 500 lux has been fixed, with an input
of a continuous lighting control: in this way the artificial lights are considered switched
on proportionally (continuous dimming) to the internal natural light level at the
reference point. The overall energy consumptions for artificial lighting, heating and
cooling were analysed. The six different adopted configurations are: 100% shading
(totally shaded); 80% shading; 60% shading; 40% shading; 20% shading; 0% shading (not
shaded) (Figure 4). The values adopted for the shading device during the simulation have
been derived considering a metallic shading system installed on the external side of the
window (Table 4).

Table 4: Properties of the solar shading devices.

Parameter 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
Shading Shading Shading Shading Shading Shading
Solar 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 -
Transmittance
Solar Reflectance 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 -
Visible 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 -
Transmittance
Visible 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 -
Reflectance
Infrared 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 -
Emissivity
Infrared 0 0 0 0 0 -
Transmittance

Figure 4. Six different configurations of shading: 100%, 80%, 60%, 40%, 20% and
0%.
On the six models, comparative analyses of the results obtained with or without the
artificial lights are conducted. These refer to the primary energy need for cooling,
heating and lighting, considering a COP of the heating and cooling system equal to 3.5
and a primary energy conversion factor equal to 0.46. The simulations are conducted on
an annual basis and the results are shown for significant weeks of the selected year
analysing the climate data and identifying one week per season with air temperature and
solar radiation values close to the seasonal averages. As one of the outcomes of this
research is to investigate the use of smart materials, like shape memory alloys and
polymers (SMAP), for innovative thermally activated solar shading devices, calculations of
the daily temperature range of the shading system have been carried out. For this
preliminary study, an external thin metallic profile has been adopted as solar shading,
the simplified sol-air temperature [7] has been considered. A typical value of the
absorption coefficient (α = 0.9) for a dark metal profile has been used, while an external
2
coefficient of convection and radiation of 23 W/m K [8, 9] has been used. The results are
focused on the weeks of maximum and minimum solar radiation and air temperature as
well.

Figure 5. Primary Energy Need for Heating, Cooling and Lighting.!

3. Energy Analyses: Results and Discussion

Combined analyses of the benefits of dynamic solar shading devices in terms of energy and
lighting demand have been already conducted for cold and hot climates [10],
demonstrating the advantages of such systems. Therefore the aim here is to assess how a
dynamic shading device can be implemented for a solar-optimized South facing façade in
Mediterranean climate, evaluating the possible benefits both for heating/cooling energy
demand and lighting. Interesting results are obtained with an activation set point of the
artificial light if, at the reference point, the natural lighting level is lower than 500 lux, and
2
with electric lighting consumption equal to 15 W/m (as for BCA). In this situation, looking
to the primary energy need for CHL and concentrating the analysis on significant weeks
of the year, apparently there are no remarkable advantages in using a dynamic shading
device. In fact only for the hottest week there can be a potential energy saving of around
5% compared to the same model without any shading device (Figure 5). This preliminary
Figure 6. Primary Energy Need for Heating and Cooling (no artificial lights).!

results need to be investigated more as no thermal and visual comfort analyses have
been conducted and considered in the results. If the results are compared to the same
analyses conducted without considering any artificial lights, the outcomes are totally
different and it is clear that electrical energy need for lighting can influence significantly
the overall primary energy need. In this second case (Figure 6) the results show that the
use of a dynamic shading device can positively improve the building’s energy
performance. Comparing the results to a baseline model without any shading device, a
completely shaded façade in spring and summer can assure an energy reduction (for
cooling) around 80%; in autumn and winter, where the free solar energy gain can
positively influence the energy need for heating, a 20% of shading is instead the best
solution. These results have shown that apparently a dynamic shading device can
optimize the exploitation of free solar energy gains whilst reducing the overheating in
hot and warm seasons. It is necessary to investigate more the local benefits of a
smart/dynamic shading device working on a single day analysis basis with combined
analysis for natural/artificial lighting, visual and thermal comfort.
Figures 5 and 6 summarize the results obtained from simulations conducted with and
without considering the electrical energy need for artificial lighting. All the results are
expressed as a per cent increment or decrement of primary energy compared to a
‘baseline’ model without any shading device, ideally representing 100% of energy need
(shown as a red dashed line).

4. Conclusion and Future Work

Considering both Figure 5 and Figure 6, as described in paragraph 3, potentially there
can be advantages in using a dynamic shading device in Mediterranean climate. Further
analyses need to be carried out in order to define more accurately the benefits in using a
smart/dynamic shading device in a solar-optimized façade. In particular it is necessary to
analyse in detail the combination of artificial light with natural light considering visual
comfort; furthermore it is necessary to develop thermal comfort analyses comparing not
only the primary energy need of the models with different shading devices, but also the
different indoor thermal comfort (with different scenarios of real HVAC systems).
The research is also investigating the possibility of the application of smart materials
(SMAP) [11, 12, 13] in solar shading devices. Shape Memory materials can be thermally
activated and they can change their shape only with the temperature variation. In order
to define when the SMAP can be activated and what kind of alloys should work properly,
it was necessary to understand the daily temperature range of the solar shading device
and how this can be translated into a system that delivers the expected shading
performances. For the week of maximum solar radiation and of minimum solar
radiation, as well as for the hottest week of the year, the daily temperature range of the
shading system was calculated.
The calculated temperature range varies with the seasons. Generally the highest
temperatures are achieved around noon and the lowest early in the morning (around
5/6:00am): during the week of highest solar radiation the temperature range is from
30°C to 20/15°C; during the hottest week it varies from 35°C to 20°C; in winter it is
around 10/8°C to 0°C. According to the preliminary results obtained it is necessary to
think a SMAP working as an actuator with two different properties: most likely two or
more actuators would be required changing the shape of the solar shading device in two
or three configurations with different activation temperatures. In this sense further
studies are needed in order to define: an optimized shape of the solar shading device
that allows both natural light ingress and energy demand reduction using generative
modelling tools; the correct smart material that can be used; the combined energy and
comfort analyses. As the shape of the building has been optimized to receive as much
solar radiation as possible, the possibility to integrate PV systems in the shading device
will be investigated as well.

List of References
!
[1] UN – United Nations. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2007 Revision, 2007, Available:
<http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wup2007/2007WUP_Highlights_web.pdf
> (accessed 2013).
[2] Girardet, H. and Schumacher Society – Creating Sustainable Cities, Green Books for The
Schumacher Society, Totnes, Devon, Great Britain, 1999.
[3] Carpenter, S. – Learning from Experiences with Advanced Houses of the World, CADDET
Analysis Series 14, Centre for the Analysis and Dissemination of Demonstrated Energy
Technologies, Sittard, The Netherlands, 1995.
[4] Peippo, K.; Lund P.; Vartiainen, E. – Multivariate Optimization of Design Trade-Offs for
Solar Low Energy, in Energy and Buildings, Vol. 29, (1999), pp.189-205.
[5] Lobaccaro, G., Masera, G.; Poli, T. – Solar District: Design Strategies to Exploit the Solar
Potential of Urban, Proceedings of the XVIII IAHS World Congress, Istanbul, Turkey, 2012.
[6] Lobaccaro, G; Fiorito, F, Masera, G.; Poli, T. – District Geometry Simulation: A Study for the
Optimization of Solar Façades in Urban Canopy Layers, in Energy Procedia, Vol. 30, (2012),
pp.1163-1172.
[7] Mackey, C.O. and Wright Jr, L.T. – Periodic Heat Flow – Homogeneous Walls or Roof, ASHVE
Trans, Vol. 50, (1944), p.293.
[8] UNI EN 12831:2006 – Heating Systems in Buildings - Method for Calculation of the Design Heat
Load.
[9] UNI EN ISO 10077-1:2006 –Thermal Performance of Windows, Doors and Shutters -
Calculation of Thermal Trasmittance – Part 1: General.
[10 Nielsen, M.; Svendsen S.; Jensen, L. – Quantifying the Potential of Automated Dynamic
Solar
] Shading in Office Building through Integrated Simulations of Energy and Daylight, in
Solar Energy, Vol. 85, (2011), pp.757-768.
[11 Lelieveld, C. and Teuffel, P. – Smart Composite for Architectural Applications, Proceedings
of
] the International Association for Shell and Spatial Structures (IASS) Symposium 2010,
Shanghai, 2010.
[12 Lignarolo, L.; Lelieveld, C.; Teuffel, P. – Shape Morphing Wind-Responsive Façade Systems
Realized
] With Smart Materials, Adaptive Architecture: An International Conference,
London, UK, 2011.
[13 Mingallon, M.; Ramaswamy, S.; Karatzas, K. – Associative Modelling of Multiscale Fibre
Composite
] Adaptive Systems, Proceeding SpringSim '10 Proceedings of the 2010 Spring
Simulation Multiconference, The Society for Modeling & Simulation International, San
Diego, CA, USA, 2010.