Report to Australian Building Codes Board

on

Optimum Window Size for Energy Efficiency:

BCA Volume One

December 2008

Peter Lyons & Associates • Building Energy Consultants

ABN 84 160 401 737 • 24 Bellinger Crescent, Kaleen ACT 2617, AUSTRALIA • +61 (408) 808 556 • Fax +61 (2) 6103 9033
www.fenestralia.com peter.lyons@fenestralia.com
 Optimum Window Size for Energy Efficiency:
BCA Volume One

Table of Contents
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 3
2. Methodology and Calculations .............................................................................................. 3
2.1 Glazing systems ............................................................................................................. 3
2.2 Building energy modelling software.............................................................................. 3
3. Results .................................................................................................................................... 5
4. Discussion and Conclusions................................................................................................... 7

____________________________________________________ 2
Peter Lyons & Associates • Building Energy Consultants
ABN 84 160 401 737 • 24 Bellinger Crescent, Kaleen ACT 2617, AUSTRALIA • +61 (408) 808 556 • Fax +61 (2) 6103 9033
www.fenestralia.com peter.lyons@fenestralia.com
 Optimum Window Size for Energy Efficiency:
BCA Volume One

1. Introduction
The brief addressed by this study was to determine the approximate window area to façade area ratio that
would provide the minimum energy consumption from artificial lighting and air-conditioning together whilst
maintaining internal comfort conditions.

Using typical perimeter lighting and air-conditioning zone, the study:

1. Evaluated the increase in artificial lighting energy used to achieve 320 lux in an office space with
progressively reduced window size. This was done for three latitudes (Darwin, Sydney and Hobart) and
four window orientations and the visible transmittance of (i) single clear glass and (ii) double clear glass.
2. Evaluated the decrease in air-conditioning energy used with the reduced window size. For refrigerated
cooling a coefficient of performance of 2.5 was used and for artificial heating a gas boiler with an
efficiency of 0.8 was assumed.

The modeled building was the ABCB ‘B Form’ building, 2000m2 with three levels and 320 lux illuminance
maintained 4m from the glazing plane. To find the optimum at each orientation and latitude, graphs were
generated showing the increase in artificial lighting energy and the decrease in air-conditioning energy as a
function of reduced window size.

2. Methodology and Calculations

2.1 Glazing systems

The U-value and solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) of the two glazing systems were modelled at NFRC 100­
2001 conditions, using the WINDOW 5.2 software in the normal way 1 and are shown in -

Table 1:

Description U-value Solar heat gain Visible transmittance

coefficient (SHGC) (VT)
Clear single, 6mm 5.8 0.82 0.88
Clear double, 6mm / 12 air / 6mm 2.7 0.70 0.78

2.2 Building energy modelling software

DesignBuilder and EnergyPlus were both used to model Building B in this study. DesignBuilder version
1.8.1.1 was used to create the initial building geometry and define construction materials, BCA-compliant
insulation levels and thermostat setpoints for each of the three BCA climate zones 1, 5, and 7. The chosen
building was the ABCB ‘Building B’ with specifications in Section 1 and Table 2. EnergyPlus reports for the

1
Note that WINDOW 5.2 from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (windows.lbl.gov/software) is unrelated to Microsoft
Windows.
____________________________________________________ 3
Peter Lyons & Associates • Building Energy Consultants
ABN 84 160 401 737 • 24 Bellinger Crescent, Kaleen ACT 2617, AUSTRALIA • +61 (408) 808 556 • Fax +61 (2) 6103 9033
www.fenestralia.com peter.lyons@fenestralia.com
 Optimum Window Size for Energy Efficiency:
BCA Volume One

two glazing options were created in WINDOW 5.2 and used as window input files for EnergyPlus v.2.2
simulations in Darwin, Sydney and Hobart.

Figure 1. ABCB ‘Building B’ used for DesignBuilder / EnergyPlus simulations (see Table 2).

Table 2: ‘Building B’ specifications

Three storeys, 2000 m2 total, all floors above ground and no carpark underneath. 90 mm concrete block
walls, 150 mm high density concrete roof, 150 mm high density concrete floors and the envelope elements
with insulation to provide the required thermal R-value.

36.5 m long x 18.3 m wide x 3.6 m floor-to-floor; 2.7 m ceilings.

External surface area / net lettable area ~ 1.1.

Two equal-sized tenancies of 18.25 m x 18.25 m.

Daylight sensors in perimeter zones on all levels, threshold 320 lux.

Air-conditioning - 8 fan-coil units per floor (4 per tenancy), two air cooled chillers, heating and primary and
secondary pumping and heating in the fan-coil units.

Condenser water loop for tenant supplementary cooling.

Allowances for domestic hot water and lifts.

____________________________________________________ 4
Peter Lyons & Associates • Building Energy Consultants
ABN 84 160 401 737 • 24 Bellinger Crescent, Kaleen ACT 2617, AUSTRALIA • +61 (408) 808 556 • Fax +61 (2) 6103 9033
www.fenestralia.com peter.lyons@fenestralia.com
 Optimum Window Size for Energy Efficiency:
BCA Volume One

DesignBuilder creates a building simulation file in its own, native DSB format and also exports an
EnergyPlus IDF file for optional further development in a pure EnergyPlus environment. Using the IDF
Editor utility, variants of the IDF files were created from the original DSB files, to comply with the
specifications given in Section 1 and Table 2. Window-to-wall ratios of 0%, 10%, 20% and 40% were
simulated, where WWR is the ratio of glazed area to inside-facing wall area. For all values of WWR, sill and
head heights were kept constant at 0.8m and 2.3m respectively, while window width was varied to achieve
the desired WWR.

Since the project focused on daylighting and its potential energy savings, all DesignBuilder and EnergyPlus
simulations were performed with active daylight sensors positioned at the inside edge of the perimeter zone
on each level, at a depth of 4m.

3. Results
Figures 2, 3 and 4 summarise the EnergyPlus v.2.2 simulation results for all three climates.

2
Lighting (kWh/m )

35 DAR 6/12/6
SYD 6/12/6
HOB 6/12/6
DAR 6

30 SYD 6
HOB 6

25

20
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Cooling (kWh/m 2)

Figure 2. Lighting energy vs. cooling energy for Darwin, Sydney and Hobart, for clear double and clear single glazing.
.

____________________________________________________ 5
Peter Lyons & Associates • Building Energy Consultants
ABN 84 160 401 737 • 24 Bellinger Crescent, Kaleen ACT 2617, AUSTRALIA • +61 (408) 808 556 • Fax +61 (2) 6103 9033
www.fenestralia.com peter.lyons@fenestralia.com
 Optimum Window Size for Energy Efficiency:
BCA Volume One

2
Lighting (kWh/m )

35 DAR 6/12/6
SYD 6/12/6
HOB 6/12/6
DAR 6
SYD 6
30
HOB 6

25

20
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
WWR (% )

Figure 3. Lighting energy vs. window-to-wall ratio for Darwin, Sydney and Hobart,
for clear double and clear single glazing.

2
Cooling (kWh/m )

140
DAR 6/12/6
120 SYD 6/12/6
HOB 6/12/6
100 DAR 6
SYD 6
80 HOB 6

60

40

20

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
WWR (% )

Figure 4. Cooling energy vs. window-to-wall ratio for Darwin, Sydney and Hobart,
for clear double and clear single glazing.

____________________________________________________ 6
Peter Lyons & Associates • Building Energy Consultants
ABN 84 160 401 737 • 24 Bellinger Crescent, Kaleen ACT 2617, AUSTRALIA • +61 (408) 808 556 • Fax +61 (2) 6103 9033
www.fenestralia.com peter.lyons@fenestralia.com
 Optimum Window Size for Energy Efficiency:
BCA Volume One

4. Discussion and Conclusions

(All energy results are averaged over the 3-storey, 2000m2 B-form building.)

4.1 Figure 4 shows that for a WWR of approximately 15% or less, cooling energy becomes relatively
constant. This applies in all climates.
4.2 Figure 3 shows that lighting energy begins to rise steeply below 15% WWR. This also applies in all
climates.
4.3 These trends are independent of whether it is single or double glazing. This is unsurprising, since
both glazing types have high VT and high SHGC. Since cooling energy is mostly driven by SHGC,
similar cooling loads are to be expected.
4.4 Figure 2 directly illustrates the trade-offs between cooling and lighting energy, as a function of
window size. Cooling energy is very sensitive to climate.
4.5 The sum of cooling energy + lighting energy, as a function of WWR in Figure 5 below, shows that
for these glazing options only the optimum window size is WWR = 10% in all climates.
4.6 The results are remarkably constant and insensitive to latitude. This implies that the sky luminance
– the source of the daylight resource – is relatively high and consistent from low to high
latitudes.across Australia.

2
Cooling + Lighting (kWh/m )

160

140 DAR 6/12/6

SYD 6/12/6
HOB 6/12/6
120 DAR 6
SYD 6
HOB 6
100

80

60

40

20
0 10 20 30 40 50
WWR (%)

Figure 5. Cooling energy + lighting energy vs. window-to-wall ratio for Darwin, Sydney and Hobart,
for clear double and clear single glazing.
____________________________________________________ 7
Peter Lyons & Associates • Building Energy Consultants
ABN 84 160 401 737 • 24 Bellinger Crescent, Kaleen ACT 2617, AUSTRALIA • +61 (408) 808 556 • Fax +61 (2) 6103 9033
www.fenestralia.com peter.lyons@fenestralia.com