Energy 111 (2016) 430e438

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

CFD modeling to evaluate the thermal performances of window

frames in accordance with the ISO 10077
Maria Malvoni, Cristina Baglivo, Paolo Maria Congedo*, Domenico Laforgia
Department of Engineering for Innovation, University of Salento, 73100 Lecce, Lecce, Italy

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

Article history: The main goal of the EPBD (Energy Performance Buildings Directive) is the improvement of the energy
Received 8 October 2015 performance of the European buildings. The internal comfort is critically dependent on the envelope that
Received in revised form plays a key role in the thermal balance of the entire building. In particular, the windows are one of the
30 May 2016
most critical elements in terms of solar gains, heat losses and thermal bridges; therefore, the design of
Accepted 1 June 2016
high efficiency frames is requested, both in cold and warm climate, but with different peculiarity. The
Available online 9 June 2016
UNI EN ISO 10077-2 provides a methodology to evaluate the frame thermal behaviour and it proposes
the criteria to validate the numerical model.
Keywords:
CFD
This paper presents a two-dimensional numerical method for the thermal behaviour evaluation of the
Thermal break frame sections using GAMBIT 2.2 and ANSYS FLUENT 14.5 CFD code. The results have been validated in
Window accordance with the UNI EN ISO 10077-2. The standard ISO replaces the air gas with a fictitious material
Frame “air solid” into the cavities. Besides the simulation carried out with ideal gas entails higher internal
10077 surface temperature than the air solid case. Therefore, the standard ISO imposes preventive computa-
EPBD tional conditions. The proposed numerical method can be implemented for several frame profiles with
different features in terms of geometry and materials, representing a valid support in the design of new
high thermal performance frames.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction several energy efficiency measures to identify the cost-optimal

In order to address the current global warming trend due to
greenhouse emissions, the European Union (EU) is involved to
develop strategies to reduce the negative effects on climate change
[1e3]. The renewable source integration in power systems [4e6]
and the home automation are some of the adopted solutions for
the energy-saving and to guarantee high-energy performance in
the buildings [7e10].
It has been noted that the building sector is responsible for
about 40% of the energy requirement [11]; therefore, the Energy
Efficiency Directive [12] aims to improve the level of the energy
performance and to reduce the energy consumption and environ-
mental impact [13].
In order to obtain high efficiency buildings, several studies show
how it is possible to reach, keeping costs down, a decreasing in
terms of primary energy consumption and CO2 gas emissions.
Studies [14e19] present a methodology based on the comparison of
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: paolo.congedo@unisalento.it (P.M. Congedo).
solutions for buildings located in a warm climate. The buildings
performances are also investigated in cold areas as Estonia [20],
Unit States and China [21].
Multi-objective analyses have been carried out in several studies
[22e26], to optimize the thermal performance of the building en-
velope; such an analysis allows to identify a set of optimal external
wall configurations in order to reduce winter energy consumption
and to increase summer thermal comfort. The multi-layer wall
system reduces heating energy consumption of 27%e38% respect to
single-layer wall system [27].
Once designed a highly efficient envelope, to ensure the comfort
to the end-users it is necessary to evaluate other physical factors
such as heat, light and sound [28].
A numerical study presented in the [29] show a comparison
between the behaviour of double, triple and quadruple pane win-
dows in order to demonstrate that the heat loss through the
transparent elements can be reduced by increasing the number of
panes especially in cold climate areas.
Several thermal benefits can be reached by adopting of the multi
pane window solutions considering that they cause around 30e50%
of the losses by transmission across the building envelope [29].

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.06.002
0360-5442/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 M. Malvoni et al. / Energy 111 (2016) 430e438
Hence, the window design is strategic to reach the highest
performance and reduce the overall energy demand for heating and
cooling [30,31].
The thermal performance of the window depends on the ther-
mal and geometrical characteristics of the framework and the
interaction effects between its components. The thermal trans-
mittance is evaluated by International Standard ISO 10077. In
particular, the first part of the ISO 10077 [32] specifies a simple
calculation method for a set of fenestration. The main disadvantage
is that the calculation procedure does not take into account the
effects of solar radiation and the heat transfer caused by air leakage
and does not consider the ventilation and the condensation phe-
nomena. In addition, it does not consider other additional elements,
as gaskets, inserts, etc., that can be introduced to reach high per-
formance solutions. Therefore, it can be used for a first estimation
of the thermal transmittance.
The second part of ISO 10077 [33] details a method for the
calculation of the thermal transmittance of frame profiles Uf and of
the linear thermal transmittance of their junction with glazing or
opaque panels L2D f , providing information about the input data
useful for the calculation. Also, it provides the criteria to validate
the numerical methods.
Several works show the application of numerical models in or-
der to evaluate the frame thermal performance in accordance with
standard ISO 10077. Cardinale & Al [34]. have investigated several
window frames with rolling shutters-boxes by a Finite Element
Method (FEM) analysis and the thermal transmittance has been
checked using the software FRAME SIMULATOR 2 Dartwin.
In Ref. [35] the thermal performance of the glazing on the frame
and the edge-of glazing behaviour in a wood-frame window, with
regard to condensation risk, have been analysed using THERM and
WINDOW software packages.
An artificial neural network (ANN) model has been developed to
predict the thermal transmittance of wooden windows; the results
show an error of about 1% compared to the solutions provided by
the Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) numerical procedure [36].
A comparison between the methods suggested by ASHRAE and
ISO for the calculation of the thermal transmittance has been per-
formed using the FRAMEplus Toolkit Version 3.0 and THERM 2
software [37].
Numerical simulations in two-dimensional and three-
dimensional domains have been implemented with the CFD code
Fluent to investigate the wood and aluminium framed windows
[38]. The geometry and the characteristics of the cavities influence
the overall performance of the profile. A numerical analysis was
carried by CFD code Fluent to simulate the effects due to the insert
of ethyleneepropylene diene monomer (EPDM) gaskets inside the
frame cavities and to evaluate the emissivity of the cavities [39].
The present study proposes a two-dimensional numerical
method to investigate the thermal performance of frame profiles.
The procedure is performed using the fluid-dynamic calculation
ANSYS FLUENT Release 14.5 and the pre-processor GAMBIT 2.2. A
detailed analysis of the thermal performance is carried out. More-
over, the proposed model verifies the criteria of validation for the
ten frame sections, illustrated in annex D of the ISO 10077-2. The
work is organized into three sections. The main concepts of the
standard ISO are reported in the Section 1, the Section 2 show a
detailed description of the geometry, boundary condition,
computational grid model and settings solver. The results are re-
ported in the final section.
2. International standard ISO 10077: numerical method for
frame
The UNI EN ISO 10077-2 specifies the methodology and the
431
input data to calculate the thermal transmittance of the frame
profiles Uf and the linear thermal transmittance jg of their junction
with glazing or opaque panels. It also provides the criteria to vali-
date the implemented numerical model.
In according to the UN EN ISO 10211:2008 [40] the geometrical
model must consider an adequate number of sub-sections. Solid
materials, boundary conditions and cavities must fulfil particular
features, as explained below.
2.1. Treatment of solid sections and boundary conditions
Thermal conductivity l is calculated in accordance with the
Annex A of ISO 10077-2. The reference winter temperatures of in-
ternal and external side are, respectively, 293 K and 273 K, while
the thermal resistance values of the external and internal surfaces
of the node are defined in accordance to the Annex B of ISO 10077.
The node surfaces in junction with the wall are considered adia-
batic, as well as the outer edge of the insulating panel.
2.2. Treatment of cavities
The air cavities must be replaced with a solid material, therefore
the heat flow in cavities is represented by an equivalent thermal
conductivity leq that includes the various mechanisms of heat
transfer, such as thermal conduction, convection and radiation. The
geometry, the ventilation degree and the materials of the cavities
influence the thermal conductivity. In case of the width of the slit is
not over than 2 mm or completely closed, the air cavity shall be
treated as unventilated. Otherwise, the cavity can be considered
ventilated. Slightly ventilated air cavities are characterized by small
cross-sections and connected to the external or internal air through
a slit of 2e10 mm. When the width of the groove is over than
10 mm, the entire surface is exposed to the external or internal
environment. In the case of a large cavity connected by a single slit
and a developed surface exceeding the width of the slit by a factor
of ten, the surface resistance with reduced radiation can be used.
Unventilated and slightly ventilated air cavities have the same
value of equivalent thermal conductivity leq.
2.3. Determination of the thermal performance
To calculate the thermal transmittance of the frame section, an
insulation panel with thermal conductivity l ¼ 0,035 W/m k re-
places the existing glazing or the opaque panel of the thickness d or
dg. The length of insulated panel bp must be more than 190 mm and
its height is equal to 1000 mm. The surface of the panel is
considered an adiabatic boundary.
The thermal transmittance of the frame section Uf [W/m2 K] is
defined as follows [33]:
L2D
f
 Up b p
Uf ¼ (1)
bf
where
 L2D
f [W/m K] is the thermal conductance of the frame section;
 Up [W/m2 K] is the thermal transmittance of the central area of
the panel;
 bp [m] is the visible width of the panel;
 bf [m] is the width of the frame section.
The two-dimensional thermal conductance L2D
f is defined as
[40]:
432 M. Malvoni et al. / Energy 111 (2016) 430e438

- “Segregated numerical scheme” involves the resolution of the

FS equation of the moment, continuity and transport in sequential
L2D
f ¼ (2)
DT steps;
- “Steady” condition, because of fixed wall temperatures on the
with
frame and glasses;
- The standard k-epsilon turbulence model has been enabled;
 FS [W/m] is the total heat flow rate for length through the
- Operating conditions with pressure equal to the standard at-
section;
mospheric one (101.325 Pa) and gravity enabled.
 DT [K] is the temperature difference between both adjacent
environments.

The thermal transmittance of the panel Up is calculated as

follows: 3.1. Geometrical model: aluminium frame section with thermal
break and insulation panel (D.1)
qP
UP ¼ (3)
AP DT The mesh is constituted by cells or elements, which represent
the geometry of the phenomena. In this study GAMBIT 2.2 tool has
where been used to generate the computational grid.
Fig. 1 show D.1 frame section. It is characterized by a fixed and
 qP [W] is the total heat flow rate through the visible width of the mobile frame in aluminium (thermal break) with a maximum
panel; thickness equal to 63 mm and width bf of 110 mm. The insulation
 AP [m2] is the central area of the panel; thickness is of 28 mm and width bp at least 190 mm. The thermal
 DT [K] is the temperature difference between both adjacent break is achieved through the polyamide with 25% glass fibre,
environments. which carries out the breakdown of the single aluminium profiles
into two parts, external and internal side. The continuous elements
The linear thermal transmittance of the junction with the of the frame perimeter have been considered: the rebate seal be-
glazing or opaque panel jg [W/m K] is defined as follows [33]: tween sash and frame, the central gasket, the internal and external
gasket of glass. The profile section is considered as a barrier be-
Jg ¼ L2D
J  Uf bf  Ug bg (4)
tween the external (B) and the internal (C) side.
Fig. 2 show the computational grid for the selected area high-
with
lighted by a circle in Fig. 1. The maximum value of the equiangle and
equisize skew are 0.43 and 0.54 respectively. As regards the Aspect
 Uf [W/m2 K] is the thermal transmittance of the frame section;
Ratio, the 99.9% of the cells differs from the cell with the value 1 for
 Ug [W/m2 K] is the thermal transmittance of the central area of
a maximum of 20%.
the glazing;
The “reticular” structure of frames shows several air cavities,
 bg [m] is the visible width of the glazing.
identified with red numbers in Fig. 1, enclosed between the
aluminium walls, gaskets and thermal break.

2.4. Criteria to validate the numerical model

In order to validate the proposed calculation method, the results
of thermal conductance and transmittance must be in the range as
specified in the Annex D of standard ISO. The calculation must be
verified for frame sections reported in Refs. [33], figures from D.1 to
D.10. It is observed that the thermal conductance L2D and the
thermal transmittance Uf must be calculated for the first nine frame
sections, instead, for the last frame section, the two-dimensional
thermal conductance L2D and the linear thermal transmittance j
must be evaluated.
3. CFD numerical analysis
The CFD ANSYS FLUENT Release 14.5 has been used to investi-
gate the thermal flux through the frames. In order to evaluate the
thermal performance of aluminium-framed windows, the adopted
approach requested the following steps:
1. Definition of geometrical model;
2. Settings of boundaries conditions: materials, temperatures, etc.;
3. Numerical calculation;
4. Post processing analysis of simulations and validation of the
results.
The main parameters for the CFD setup are reported in Table 1;
in particular, the following settings have been used:
3.2. Boundary conditions
According to the UNI EN ISO 10077-2, the following assump-
tions have been considered:
 analysis of continuous elements (not punctual elements);
 vertical orientation of frame sections;
 the emissivity of air cavity surfaces must be of 0.9;
 an insulation panel with thermal conductivity l ¼ 0,035 W/m K
replaces the existing glazing (the visible panel length could be
less than 190 mm);
 the heat flow is normal at the surfaces adjacent to the internal
(C) and the external side (B). The vertical surfaces to the heat
flow direction are considered as adiabatic planes. The thermal
resistances are illustrated in Table 2;
 the density of the solid sections and the thermal conductivity
are reported in Table 3;
 the cavity 11 is considered as slightly ventilated cavity and its
thermal conductivity results twice the unventilated cavity;
 the internal and external surface temperature are 293 K and
273 K, respectively.
The wall interface and the lateral side of the insulating panel are
set by an adiabatic boundary (A in Fig. 1). A fictitious material “air-
solid” has been introduced to characterize the air cavities of the
Section D.1.
 M. Malvoni et al. / Energy 111 (2016) 430e438 433

Table 1
Details of CFD setting.

Solver 2D double precision

Numerical scheme Segregated
Linearization Implicit
Pressure Standard
Pressure velocity coupling Standard
Momentum, turbulence kinetic energy, turbulence dissipation rate 2nd order upwind
Fluid Ideal gas
Turbolence model Standard k-є (only for gas air)
Time step Steady
Number of faces (Section D.1) 24
Typology of elements (Section D.1) Triangular
Total number of elements (Section D.1) 108.374

3.3. Sensitivity analysis of grid spacing

A sensitivity analysis of the grid has been carried out to evaluate

the error caused by the spatial discretization. The Grid Convergence
Index (GCI) shows how the computed value is far from the
asymptotic numerical value. This study uses three different grids
and the GCI is calculated as follows:

Fs jε12 j
GCI12 ¼ p
with fine and medium grids; (5)
r12  1

Fs jε23 j
GCI23 ¼ p
with coarse and medium grids; (6)
r23  1

The factor of safety Fs is equal to 1.25 for the comparison of three

grids with:

h1 < h2 < h3 (7)

Fig. 1. Aluminium frame section with thermal break and insulation panel (D.1).

fnþ1  fn
εnnþ1 ¼ (8)
fn

hnþ1
rnnþ1 ¼ (9)
hn

fnþ1
ln fnþ2
f f
p¼ nþ1 n
(10)
ln r

where h is the grid spacing i.e. the minimum value of the distance of
the nodes, p is the order of convergence, f is the value of the
parameter chosen for the comparison. When the result of the
considered grid is in the asymptotic range means that if the number
of cells grows, the value of the solution f does not change:

GCI23
y1 (11)
r p GCI12
The evaluated value of the grid is:

f1  f2
f ¼ f1 þ p
(12)
Fig. 2. Grid convergence indexes, auditing ratio and order of convergence (grid spacing r12 1
analysis).
The sensitivity analysis has been performed by the use of the
average volume temperature of the cavities and the total heat flux
through internal and external surfaces. The results of the sensitivity
analysis are shown in Table 4 and Fig. 3.
Table 2
Thermal resistance of external and internal surfaces.
4. Simulation results
External side Internal side

Plane surface Rse ¼ 0.04 m2 K/W Rsi ¼ 0.13 m2 K/W This section shows the simulation results and the comparison with
Corners (enhanced resistance) Rse ¼ 0.04 m2 K/W Rsi ¼ 0.20 m2 K/W
the values provided by the ISO 10077 in order to validate the model.
434 M. Malvoni et al. / Energy 111 (2016) 430e438

Table 3
Thermo-physical properties of the materials.

Key Material Density r [kg/m3] Thermal conductivity l [W/m K]

a Insulation panel 37 0.035

b Soft wood 500 0.13
c PVC 1390 0.17
d EPDM 1150 0.25
e Polyamide 6.6 with 25% glass 1450 0.30
f Glass 2500 1.00
g Still 7800 50
h Aluminium 2800 160
i Pile weather stripping 30 0.14
k Polyamide 1150 0.25
l PU rigid 1200 0.25
m Polysulfide 1400 0.40
n Silica gel 720 0.13
o Gas filling 1.784 0.034

Table 4
Sensitivity analysis.

No Description f1 (K) f2 (K) f3 (K) p ASS(e 1-2) ASS (e 2-3) GCI 1-2 GIC 2-3 f Band Er (%) Error

1 Cavity1 281.9614 281.9616 281.9662 4.536 7.093E-07 1.646E-05 3.994E-06 9.266E-05 281.96 0.00000 0.00001
2 Cavity10 281.0831 281.0847 281.0898 1.733 5.479E-06 1.822E-05 2.946E-04 9.794E-04 281.08 0.00029 0.00083
3 Cavity11 275.3985 275.3978 275.3942 2.465 2.360E-06 1.304E-05 6.523E-05 3.603E-04 275.40 0.00007 0.00018
4 Cavity2 284.4085 284.4094 284.4177 3.278 3.024E-06 2.932E-05 4.346E-05 4.214E-04 284.41 0.00004 0.00012
5 Cavity3 279.7850 279.7851 279.7872 4.728 2.859E-07 7.577E-06 1.402E-06 3.714E-05 279.78 0.00000 0.00000
6 Cavity4 285.6529 285.6554 285.6666 2.144 8.857E-06 3.914E-05 3.238E-04 1.431E-03 285.65 0.00032 0.00092
7 Cavity5 279.8074 279.8080 279.8110 2.158 2.395E-06 1.069E-05 8.644E-05 3.858E-04 279.81 0.00009 0.00024
8 Cavity6 286.2426 286.2463 286.2596 1.880 1.265E-05 4.653E-05 5.900E-04 2.171E-03 286.24 0.00059 0.00169
9 Cavity7 281.1049 281.1064 281.1114 1.768 5.265E-06 1.793E-05 2.736E-04 9.317E-04 281.10 0.00027 0.00077
10 Cavity8 275.6754 275.6747 275.6710 2.459 2.467E-06 1.357E-05 6.852E-05 3.769E-04 275.68 0.00007 0.00019
11 Cavity9 286.3072 286.3109 286.3243 1.870 1.278E-05 4.673E-05 6.017E-04 2.200E-03 286.31 0.00060 0.00172
12 Panel 281.9487 281.9489 281.9497 1.506 8.867E-07 2.518E-06 6.024E-05 1.711E-04 281.95 0.00006 0.00017
13 Frame internal 284.4006 284.4014 284.4098 3.278 3.024E-06 2.932E-05 4.346E-05 4.214E-04 284.40 0.00004 0.00012
14 Polyamide1 frame 279.7962 279.7970 279.7980 0.291 3.038E-06 3.717E-06 1.699E-03 2.079E-03 279.79 0.00170 0.00475
15 Polyamide2 frame 279.7433 279.7435 279.7447 2.843 6.077E-07 4.361E-06 1.230E-05 8.826E-05 279.74 0.00001 0.00003
16 Polyamide2 shutter 281.1568 281.1583 281.1633 1.693 5.513E-06 1.782E-05 3.087E-04 9.978E-04 281.16 0.00031 0.00087
17 Polyamide1 shutter 281.1885 281.1902 281.1958 1.721 6.010E-06 1.981E-05 3.272E-04 1.078E-03 281.19 0.00033 0.00092
18 Gasket glass2 275.5854 275.5849 275.5817 2.730 1.778E-06 1.179E-05 3.946E-05 2.617E-04 275.59 0.00004 0.00011
19 Gasket glass1 286.3035 286.3069 286.3200 1.916 1.205E-05 4.548E-05 5.430E-04 2.049E-03 286.30 0.00054 0.00155
20 Shutter external 275.6573 275.6566 275.6529 2.419 2.503E-06 1.339E-05 7.196E-05 3.849E-04 275.66 0.00007 0.00020
21 Gasket central 284.7211 284.7216 284.7283 3.592 1.932E-06 2.329E-05 2.184E-05 2.633E-04 284.72 0.00002 0.00006
22 Gasket jamb 285.6387 285.6406 285.6501 2.354 6.547E-06 3.347E-05 1.990E-04 1.017E-03 285.64 0.00020 0.00057
23 Shutter internal 286.2639 286.2675 286.2809 1.876 1.268E-05 4.653E-05 5.938E-04 2.179E-03 286.26 0.00059 0.00170
24 Frame external 275.2688 275.2681 275.2651 2.095 2.543E-06 1.086E-05 9.717E-05 4.150E-04 275127 0.00010 0.00027
25 Internal heat flux 11.0960 11.0927 11.0799 1.959 2.956E-04 1.149E-03 1.280E-02 4.976E-02 11110 0.01280 0.00142
26 External heat flux 11.0961 11.0927 11.0799 1.930 3.028E-04 1.154E-03 1.347E-02 5.134E-02 11110 0.01347 0.00150

Fs ¼ 1.25, h1 ¼ 0.125 mm (Fine), h2 ¼ 0.250 mm (Medium), h3 ¼ 0.500 mm (Coarse), r1-2 ¼ 2.00, r2-3 ¼ 2.00.

Fig. 4. Temperature distribution of D.1 section in case of solid material.

Fig. 3. Computational grid detail of aluminium frame section.
 M. Malvoni et al. / Energy 111 (2016) 430e438
Fig. 5. Temperature distribution of D.1 section in case of ideal gas.
Figs. 4 and 5 shows the isotherms of the frame Section D.1 for a
temperature difference between internal and external side of 20 K.
In the first case, the cavities are constituted by the “air solid” and in
the second one by air ideal gas. The air velocity magnitude with
ideal gas air in cavities is underlined in Fig. 6.
In Fig. 7 the isotherms are shown for the frame Section D.1 with
air solid material in the cavities. The thermal bridge between the
fixed frame and the wall is overlooked.
Table 5 summarizes the main values of internal surface tem-
perature and total heat flow for the D.1 frame section in the case of
solid material, ideal gas and solid material without thermal breaks.
It is noted that when the ideal gas is considered into the cavities,
the temperature assumes a higher value than the “air solid” case.
Furthermore, the standard ISO imposes computational conditions,
which are more preventive than to consider ideal gas in the cavities.
In order to validate the calculation model in according to stan-
dard ISO, the simulations were performed for the ten sections. The
results for the two-dimensional thermal conductance L2D f and the
thermal transmittance Uf are reported in Table 6. The comparison
between the obtained values and the limits imposed by the stan-
dard ISO demonstrates that the proposed numerical model is
validated.
A comparison of the thermal performance of the different
frame materials for the frame section from D.1 to D.9 is illustrated
in Fig. 8. It is observed that the thermal transmittance generally
depends on the combined effects of the geometry, the total
Fig. 6. Velocity vectors coloured by velocity magnitude on frame with ideal gas air in
cavities.
435
Fig. 7. Temperature distribution of D.1 section in case of solid material without ther-
mal break.
number of cavities, the internal insulating materials and their
width. Considering the Sections D.3, D.7, D.8, D.9 characterized by
Poly Vinyl Chloride (PVC) material, in Fig. 9 it is possible to note
that there is no correlation between the thermal transmittance
and the width bf .
Finally, the proposed model is implemented using ideal gas into
the cavities. The simulation results are reported in Table 7. The
percentage difference has been computed to compare the results
with the lowest values of the standard ISO. The percentage varia-
tion is positive except for the Section D.9 that does not improve the
final thermal performance respect to the case of the air solid
material.
5. Conclusion
The building sector causes significant environmental impacts,
therefore there is an urgent need to decrease the energy con-
sumption and the greenhouse gas emissions in such a sector in
accordance with the European Commission challenges. By a correct
design of the envelope it is possible to reduce the energy require-
ment of the whole building providing, at the same time, comfort to
the end-users. The windows are considered the weak point of the
building, causing energy losses and several criticisms that decrease
the interior comfort.
This study shows an accurate calculation procedure based on
the CFD approach, according to ISO 10077-2 to investigate the
thermal performance of window frames. The proposed numerical
model is applied to the ten frame sections, as requested by the
standard ISO 10077-2, in which the air solid material replaces the
ideal air gas.
The results demonstrate that the implemented method ver-
ifies the criteria of validation for all sections. Additional simu-
lation has been performed in the real operating conditions. The
obtained values of the thermal conductance and transmittance
are lower than values proposed in the ISO, confirming that
the standard provided values are more preventive than the real
one.
Since the numerical method can evaluate the thermal trans-
mittance of several frame profiles with different features in terms
of glazing, cavities and thickness of the frame connection; it rep-
resents a valid support in the design of new products with higher
thermal performance, keeping in mind the convective motions and
the heat exchange into the cavities.
436 M. Malvoni et al. / Energy 111 (2016) 430e438

Table 5
Internal surface temperature and total heat flow for the D.1 frame section in different cases.

Internal surface temperature [K] Total heat flow [W/m2]

Solid material 288.21 11.08

Ideal gas 289.18 8.98
Solid material without thermal breaks 285.14 18.09

Table 6
Thermal conductance and transmittance to validate the calculation procedure.

Section Model e L2D [W/m K] ISO e L2D [W/m K] Model e Uf [W/m2 K] ISO e Uf [W/m2 K]

D.1 0.554 0.550 ± 0.007 3.25 3.22 ± 0.06

D.2 0.263 0.263 ± 0.001 1.44 1.44 ± 0.03
D.3 0.429 0.424 ± 0.006 2.10 2.07 ± 0.06
D.4 0.346 0.346 ± 0.001 1.37 1.36 ± 0.01
D.5 0.402 0.408 ± 0.007 2.07 2.08 ± 0.08
D.6 0.667 0.659 ± 0.008 4.76 4.67 ± 0.09
D.7 0.285 0.285 ± 0.002 1.33 1.31 ± 0.03
D.8 0.178 0.181 ± 0.003 1.03 1.05 ± 0.02
D.9 0.207 0.207 ± 0.001 3.63 3.64 ± 0.01
D.10 0.477 0.481 ± 0.004 0.08 0.084 ± 0.004a
a
Referred to linear thermal transmittance.

Fig. 8. Thermal transmittance in ascending order for frame sections from D.1 to D.9.

Fig. 9. Thermal transmittance of the PVC sections in order of increasing width.

 M. Malvoni et al. / Energy 111 (2016) 430e438 437

Table 7 Energy Build 2015;104:122e30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/

Thermal conductance and transmittance in case of the ideal gas. j.enbuild.2015.06.083.
[15] Baglivo Cristina, Congedo Paolo Maria, D'Agostino Delia, Zac a Ilaria. Cost-
Section Ideal gas e L2D [W/m K] [%] Ideal gas e Uf [W/m2 K] [%] Optimal analysis and technical comparison between standard and high effi-
cient mono-residential buildings in a warm climate. Energy 2015;83:560e75.
D.1 0.449 1.6 2.31 2.6
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.02.062.
D.2 0.252 3.7 1.33 6.1  Ilaria, D'Agostino Delia, Congedo Paolo Maria, Baglivo Cristina. Data of
[16] Zaca
D.3 0.347 6.1 1.36 10.4 cost-optimality and technical solutions for high energy performance buildings
D.4 0.333 2.0 1.26 3.4 in warm climate. Data Brief 2015;4:222e5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
D.5 0.372 3.6 1.72 5.5 j.dib.2015.05.015.
D.6 0.642 0.5 4.50 0.6 [17] Zaca Ilaria, D'Agostino Delia, Maria Congedo Paolo, Baglivo Cristina. Assess-
D.7 0.261 1.3 0.85 5.1 ment of cost-optimality and technical solutions in high performance multi-
D.8 0.150 0.1 0.85 0.5 residential buildings in the mediterranean area. Energy Build 2015;102:
D.9 0.180 0.6 3.16 0.1 250e65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.04.038.
[18] Congedo Paolo Maria, Baglivo Cristina, D'Agostino Delia, Zac a Ilaria. Cost-
optimal design for nearly zero energy office buildings located in warm cli-
mates. Energy November 2015;91. ISSN: 0360-5442:967e82. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.08.078.
Funding [19] Congedo Paolo Maria, Baglivo Cristina, Zac a Ilaria, D'Agostino Delia. High
performance solutions and data for nZEBs offices located in warm climates.
Data Brief 13 October 2015 ISSN: 2352-3409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
This work is supported by the Project PON02_00323_2938699 j.dib.2015.09.041. Available online.
EFFEDIL of Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research. [20] Pikas Ergo, Thalfeldt Martin, Kurnitski Jarek, Liias Roode. Extra cost analyses of
two apartment buildings for achieving nearly zero and low energy buildings.
Energy 1 May 2015;84. ISSN: 0360-5442:623e33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
Author contributions j.energy.2015.03.026.
[21] Liu Long, Zhao Jing, Liu Xin, Wang Zhaoxia. Energy consumption comparison
All authors participated in preparing the research from the analysis of high energy efficiency office buildings in typical climate zones of
China and U.S. based on correction model. Energy 1 February 2014;65. ISSN:
beginning to end, such as establishing research design, method and 0360-5442:221e32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.12.012.
analysis. All authors discussed and finalized the analysis results to [22] Sambou V, Lartigue B, Monchoux F, Adj M. Thermal optimization of multi-
prepare the manuscript according to the progress of the research. layered walls using genetic algorithms. Energy Build October 2009;41(10).
ISSN: 0378-7788:1031e6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.05.007.
[23] Baglivo Cristina, Congedo Paolo Maria, Fazio Andrea, Laforgia Domenico.
References Multi-objective optimization analysis for high efficiency external walls of zero
energy buildings (ZEB) in the Mediterranean climate. Energy Build December
[1] Wu Peng, Xia Bo, Zhao Xianbo. The importance of use and end-of-life phases 2014;84. ISSN: 0378-7788:483e92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
to the life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of concrete e a review. j.enbuild.2014.08.043.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev September 2014;37:360e9. http://dx.doi.org/ [24] Baglivo Cristina, Congedo Paolo Maria, Fazio Andrea. Multi-criteria optimi-
10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.070. ISSN 1364-032. zation analysis of external walls according to ITACA protocol for zero energy
[2] United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Kyoto protocol to buildings in the Mediterranean climate. Build Environ December 2014;82.
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. 1997. ISSN: 0360-1323:467e80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.09.019.
[3] Xu Xianshuo, Zhao Tao, Liu Nan, Kang Jidong. Changes of energy-related GHG [25] Baglivo Cristina, Congedo Paolo Maria. Design method of high performance
emissions in China: an empirical analysis from sectoral perspective. Appl precast external walls for warm climate by multi-objective optimization
Energy 1 November 2014;132. ISSN: 0306-2619:298e307. http://dx.doi.org/ analysis. Energy 23 July 2015 ISSN: 0360-5442. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.07.025. j.energy.2015.06.132. Available online.
[4] De Giorgi MG, Congedo PM, Malvoni M. Photovoltaic power forecasting using [26] Baglivo Cristina, Congedo Paolo Maria. Data of high performance precast
statistical methods: impact of weather data. IET Sci Meas Technol 2014;8(3): external walls for warm climate. Data Brief September 2015;4. ISSN: 2352-
90e7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/iet-smt.2013.0135. 3409:447e9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2015.07.004.
[5] De Giorgi MG, Congedo PM, Malvoni M, Tarantino M. Short-term power [27] El Mankibi Mohamed, Zhai Zhiqiang (John), Al-Saadi Saleh Nasser,
forecasting by statistical methods for photovoltaic plants in south Italy. In: 4th Zoubir Amine. Numerical modeling of thermal behaviors of active multi-layer
IMEKO TC19 symposium on environmental instrumentation and measure- living wall. Energy Build 11 July 2015 ISSN: 0378-7788. http://dx.doi.org/
ments 2013: protection environment, climate changes and pollution control; 10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.06.084. Available online.
2013. p. 171e5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/iet-smt.2013.0135. [28] Oral Gül Koçlar, Yener Alpin Ko € knel, Bayazit Nurgün Tamer. Building envelope
[6] De Giorgi MG, Congedo PM, Malvoni M, Laforgia D. Error analysis of hybrid design with the objective to ensure thermal, visual and acoustic comfort
photovoltaic power forecasting models: a case study of mediterranean conditions. Build Environ March 2004;39(3). ISSN: 0360-1323:281e7. http://
climate. Energy Convers Manag 2015;100:117e30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1323(03)00141-0.
j.enconman.2015.04.078. [29] Arıcı Müslüm, Karabay Hasan, Kan Miraç. Flow and heat transfer in double,
[7] Desideri U, Arcioni L, Leonardi D, Cesaretti L, Perugini P, Agabitini E, et al. triple and quadruple pane windows. Energy Build January 2015;86. ISSN:
Design of a multipurpose “zero energy consumption” building according to 0378-7788:394e402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.10.043.
European Directive 2010/31/EU: architectural and technical plants solutions. [30] Van Den Bergh Sofie, Hart Robert, Jelle Bjørn Petter, Gustavsen Arild. Window
Energy 1 September 2013;58. ISSN: 0360-5442:157e67. http://dx.doi.org/ spacers and edge seals in insulating glass units: a state-of-the-art review and
10.1016/j.energy.2013.02.063. future perspectives. Energy Build March 2013;58. ISSN: 0378-7788:263e80.
[8] Congedo PM, Malvoni M, Mele M, De Giorgi MG. Performance measurements http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.10.006.
of monocrystalline silicon PV modules in South-eastern Italy. Energy Convers [31] Asdrubali Francesco, Baldinelli Giorgio, Bianchi Francesco. Influence of cavities
Manag 2013;68:1e10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2012.12.017. geometric and emissivity properties on the overall thermal performance of
[9] Lu Y, Wang S, Shan K. Design optimization and optimal control of grid- aluminum frames for windows. Energy Build May 2013;60. ISSN: 0378-7788:
connected and standalone nearly/net zero energy buildings. Appl Energy 298e309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.01.028.
2015;155:463e77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.06.007. [32] EC 2-2012 UNI EN ISO 10077-1. Thermal performance of windows, doors and
[10] Donateo T, Congedo PM, Malvoni M, Ingrosso F, Laforgia D, Ciancarelli F. An shutters - calculation of thermal transmittance - Part 1: General. 2007.
integrated tool to monitor renewable energy flows and optimize the recharge [33] UNI EN ISO 10077-2. Thermal performance of windows, doors and shutters -
of a fleet of plug-in electric vehicles in the campus of the University of calculation of thermal transmittance - Part 2: numerical method for frames.
Salento: preliminary results. IFAC Proc Vol 2014;19:7861e6. http://dx.doi.org/ 2012.
10.3182/20140824-6-ZA-1003.01184 (IFAC-PapersOnline). [34] Cardinale N, Rospi G, Cardinale T. Numerical and experimental thermal
[11] Perez-Lombard Luis, Ortiz Jose, Pout Christine. A review on buildings energy analysis for the improvement of various types of windows frames and rolling-
consumption information. Energy Build 2008;40(3). ISSN: 0378-7788:394e8. shutter boxes. Int J Energy Environ Eng 2015;6(2):101e10. http://dx.doi.org/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2007.03.007. 10.1007/s40095-014-0140-2.
[12] Directive 2012/27/EU of the European parliament and of the council of 25 [35] Elek L, Kov acs Z. Impact of the glazing system on the U-factor and inside
October 2012 on energy efficiency. surface temperature of windows. Acta Polytech Hung 2014;11(8):197e213.
[13] Directive 2010/31/EU of the European parliament and of the council of 19 May [36] Buratti C, Barelli L, Moretti E. Application of artificial neural network to predict
2010 on the energy performance of buildings; 2010. thermal transmittance of wooden windows. Appl Energy 2012;98:425e32.
[14] Cholewa T, Siuta-Olcha A. Long term experimental evaluation of the influence http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.04.004.
of heat cost allocators on energy consumption in a multifamily building. [37] Blanusa P, Goss WP, Roth H, Weitzmannn P, Jensen CF, Svendsen S, et al.
438 M. Malvoni et al. / Energy 111 (2016) 430e438

Comparison between ASHRAE and ISO thermal transmittance calculation cp: specific heat capacity (J/kg K)
methods. Energy Build 2007;39(3):374e84. GCI: Grid Convergence Index
[38] Baldinelli G, Bianchi F. Windows thermal resistance: infrared thermography Fs: factor of safety
aided comparative analysis among finite volumes simulations and experi- h: grid spacing
mental methods. Appl Energy 31 December 2014;136. ISSN: 0306-2619: p: order of convergence
250e8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.09.021. r, f: parameter for comparison in sensitivity nalysis
[39] Asdrubali Francesco, Baldinelli Giorgio, Bianchi Francesco. Influence of cavities
geometric and emissivity properties on the overall thermal performance of Greek letters
aluminum frames for windows. Energy Build May 2013;60. ISSN: 0378-7788:
298e309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.01.028.
[40] UNI EN ISO 10211. Thermal bridges in building construction - heat flows and l: thermal conductivity (W/m K)
surface temperatures - detailed calculations. 2008. r: density (kg/m3)
FS: total heat flow rate for length through the section (W/m)
j: linear thermal trasmittance (W/m K)
Nomenclature 3: turbulent dissipation

L2D Subscripts
f : thermal conductance of the frame section (W/m K)
Up: thermal trasmittance of the central area of the panel (W/m2 K)
Ug: thermal transmittance of the central area of the glazing (W/m2 K) p: panel
Uf: thermal trasmittance of the frame section (W/m2 K) f: frame
bp: visible width of the panel (m) s: section
bf: project width of the frame section (m) g: glazing
bg: visible width of the glazing (m) se: external surface
qP: total heat flow rate through the visible width of the panel (W) si: internal side
AP: central area of the panel (m2) eq: equivalent
DT: temperature difference between both adjacent environments (K) s: space (air or gas space)
Rse: thermal resistance, external side (m2 K/W)
Rsi: thermal resistance, internal side (m2 K/W)