Impact of wall discretization on the

modeling of heating/cooling energy

consumption of residential buildings
Mattia De Rosa, Vincenzo Bianco,
Federico Scarpa & Luca A.Tagliafico

Energy Efficiency
ISSN 1570-646X
Energy Efficiency
DOI 10.1007/s12053-015-9351-5

1 23

Impact of wall discretization on the modeling of heating/cooling energy consumption of

Mattia De Rosa, Vincenzo Bianco*, Federico Scarpa, Luca A. Tagliafico

rip

residential buildings

nus
c

University of Genoa, DIME/TEC, Division of Thermal Engineering and Environmental Conditioning

Via AllOpera Pia 15A, 16145 Genoa, Italy.
* corresponding author email: vincenzo.bianco@unige.it

The final publication is available at link.springer.com

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12053-015-9351-5

Abstract

Software tools able to predict heating and cooling energy demand can effectively support the improvement of energy

Ma

efficiency in buildings. The latest development of available technologies, such as free cooling and phase change
materials, which exploit the building inertia effects, cannot be analyzed through the commonly used steady-state
approaches, where the thermal inertia of the building envelope is neglected and monthly averaged climatic data are
taken into account. Furthermore, the need to implement innovative regulation criteria for heating and cooling systems
and the coupled study of plant and building dynamics push towards the use of dynamic tools with low computational
costs.

cep
ted

The present paper investigates the simulation of the thermal performance of a benchmark residential building by using a
self-developed dynamic code implemented in a dedicated software called BEPS (Building Energy Performance
Simulator), validated in a previous authors work.

To investigate the dynamic characteristics of a building in different working conditions, several simulations have been
performed for different European localities with different mathematical approaches. In particular, different levels of
wall discretization have been considered highlighting the importance of the inertia of the building envelope.
The results show that the use of a simplified description of the entire building leads to good predictions of its energy
demand in dynamic conditions with low computational costs. However, only heating demand prediction can be done if

Ac

the wall thermal capacitance is lumped in a single node, while at least two nodes are needed to correctly predict the
building cooling energy demand during the hot season.

Keywords: energy demand; building; wall modeling; energy efficiency; degree days.

Subscripts
b
cs
d
e
h
hs
i
is
j
s
sg
v
x1 ,x2, x3
w
win

Base temperature
Cooling system
Days
External
Hour
Heating system
Internal
Internal sources
Wall index for vertical walls and roof
Solar
Solar gain
Ventilation
Wall layers
Wall
Windows

rip

Absorbance coefficient
Thermal capacitance or Heat capacity (J K-1)
Cooling degree-days (C)
Heating degree-days (C)
Wall index
Heat flux (W)
Thermal resistance (K W-1)
Surface (m2)
Time (s, h)
Temperature (C)
Volume (m3)

Ac

cep
ted

Ma

nus
c

C
CDD
HDD
j
q
R
S
t
T
V

Nomenclature

1. Introduction

rip

The global increase of energy demand has assumed a paramount importance at international level, because it has a
relevant impact on the CO2 emissions, therefore its reduction can mitigate the climate changes.

Buildings are responsible of about 40% of the total energy consumption in Europe and households accounted for 25%
in 2011, representing the largest sector in all end-users area in Europe (BPIE 2011). Moreover, the growing trend in

nus
c

energy demand, both for heating and cooling purposes, causes a relevant issue on the adequate development of energy
systems and energy policies. In fact, several potential mitigation measures need to be implemented with the aim to
increase the energy efficiency regarding all the possible aspects of the building design (envelope, internal condition,
heating/cooling systems, renewable energies, etc.) and to this aim the 91/2002 Buildings Energy Performance
Directive (EU 2002) was emanated.

Generally, the use of new technologies, compared to current practice, leads to significant energy savings in new

Ma

buildings of all types and for all climatic zones. Moreover, the energy use of a building depends on how the various
energy-using devices (pumps, motors, fans, heaters, chillers, etc.) are put together as a system, rather than depending on
the efficiencies of the individual devices. In this context, the integrated design process (IDP), as defined by Harvey
(2009), can be useful to find the best solution in both energy performance and economic perspectives during the
building design process. It consists in several basic design step focused on different building aspects iteratively (such as
focusing on building shape, high performance envelope, passive heating and cooling, ventilation, efficient regulation

cep
ted

criteria, etc.), allowing to obtain relevant energy saving, in the order of 35-50% for a new building, compared with the
standard practice (Harvey 2009).

Vaidya et al. (2009) proposed a methodology for building design based on the use of energy simulations as means
towards integrated design and cost estimation with the aim to include in a single design process both the energetic
conservation measures and the cost interactions, in an energetic and economic optimization perspective.
This topic represents a crucial issue especially considering the expected increase of the energy demand in the buildings
sector, principally due to the increasing consumption of developing countries and to climate changes. Analyzing the
most important studies on the impact of climate change on energy use in buildings, Li et al. (2012) concludes that the

Ac

most significant adverse impact would occur in the hot summer and warm winter climate zones, where building energy
usage is generally dominated by cooling requirements. Moreover, considering that space heating is largely provided by
oil or gas-fired boiler plants, whereas space cooling mainly relies on electricity, a shift towards electrical power demand
can occur with significant implications for energy and environmental policies in a nationwide perspective.

Generally, a double assessment is expected (Isaac and van Vuuren 2009): (i) a decrease of the global heating energy

demand by over ~30% and, on the other hand, (ii) an increase of the cooling energy demand by about 70%.

rip

Therefore, the estimation of building energy demand, both for heating and cooling purposes, represents a crucial point

in order: (i) to complete energetic assessment for existent building in a maintenance and renovation perspectives, (ii) to
perform energetic consumption predictions for new constructions in preliminary design stage and, finally, (iii) to

nus
c

analyze the territory energy consumptions, also in a forecasting perspective.

In these perspectives, software tools able to predict the heating and cooling energy demand are useful to find the best
solution to enhance energy efficiency and, for this purpose, several numerical models to simulate the energy
performances of buildings have been developed over the years.

Usually, steady state approaches, such as the degree-days method (CISBE 2006) and the common standards (ASHRAE
1980; ISO 2008), are used to perform simple energetic assessments, essentially related to the renovation of existent
buildings, and to preliminary design stage for new constructions. Moreover, a lot of works have been done with the aim

Ma

(i) to analyze the historical and actual energy consumption of a specific region, taking into account the existent building
stocks, the heating/cooling system typologies and the demographic distribution, and (ii) to realize scenario analyses in
terms of energy consumption forecasting in view of suitable actions to guarantee the maximum energy saving.
On the other hand, new technologies exploiting the building thermal inertia, like free cooling (Ghiaus and Allard 2006)
or phase change materials (Baetens et al. 2010), can be modeled only by transient thermal models, which result

cep
ted

fundamental in order to propose optimal energy saving solutions and to develop optimized control criteria, especially
for integrated systems in which short time regulation rules assume an important role in the global energy performance
(Tagliafico et al., 2014). Furthermore, dynamic approaches are essential to investigate thermal performances of new
construction materials which tend to delay the fluctuations of the external climatic conditions, such as the lightweight
aggregate concrete shown in Dargahi-Zaboli and Alizadeh (2013).
Therefore, several dynamic approaches have been developed and tested in the last years, most of them implemented by
using commercial tools, e.g. TRNSYS, Energy Plus, etc. An overview of their capabilities is reported in Crawley et al.
(2008). Despite that, the increase of the computer performances allows the use of mathematical packages, such as
Matlab/Simulink, to create in-house custom adaptable tools for evaluating the building energy demand with a relative

Ac

low strength and without excessive computational costs. Following these purposes, a simplified dynamic tool, called
BEPS, Building Energy Performance Simulator, has been developed at the DIME/TEC - University of Genoa.

BEPS is implemented in the Matlab/Simulink environment, which permits a high level of customization in terms of
building and heating/cooling systems design, and it is based on a simplified transient thermal model, which couples a

lumped capacitance approach with the thermal network (RC) model. The simulation code was validated in previous

works (Bianco et al., 2014; De Rosa et al., 2014) by comparing its results with those obtained by consolidated

rip

commercial codes. More in detail, in De Rosa et al. (2014) the model was validated using two types of wall structure,

namely heavy and light configurations. Preserving the wall transmittances, the two typical configurations differ by the
thermal capacitance and the superficial mass of vertical walls and roof. Taking the vertical walls as reference, the total
thermal capacitances were about 600 kJ/(m2K) and 40 kJ/(m2K) for the heavy and light configurations respectively,

nus
c

whereas the transmittance was 0.4 W/(m2K) for both configurations. The validation showed that BEPS is able to predict
the heating and cooling energy demand accurately for the tested configurations in all climatic conditions, guaranteeing a
very high degree of flexibility and customization for the analysis of specific problems.

Starting from this previous work, the aim of the present paper is to analyze the model behavior by adopting different
external wall discretizations in various climatic conditions for a benchmark building. Several simulations have been
performed for different European cities, both for heating and cooling seasons, studying the effect of the different wall

Ma

discretizations on the prediction performance of the model, in order to highlight the importance of the building envelope
inertia. In the first part of this paper, a short description of the mathematical framework has been provided to introduce
the model, while a significant selection of simulations is reported in the second part in order to show and explain the
obtained results. Finally a short analysis on heating and cooling yearly energy demand is presented for all the
considered localities, assuming HDD and CDD as characteristic climatic parameters. Further, discussions about the

cep
ted

effects of the inertia effects, especially for low CDD localities, are reported.

2. Mathematical model

The thermal model implemented in BEPS is based on the nodal approach (Boyer et al., 1994) in which each building
component (such as external walls, roof, floor, heating zones, etc.) is modeled as a node where its thermal capacitance
is lumped in order to consider the thermal inertia. The energy conservation law is applied considering one-dimensional
transient conduction across the walls by adopting the electrical analogy, as shown in Nielsen (2005). Therefore, the
entire building is described by a system of ordinary differential equations, which is solved using standard numerical
techniques (Dorman and Prince, 1980). The description of the whole model can be found in De Rosa et al. (2014).

Ac

BEPS describes the whole net volume of a building by adopting a single isothermal air volume, with a single thermal
capacitance, corrected in order to take into account also internal furniture and walls. This internal node exchanges heat
with the internal layer of the walls and with the external air through the windows. The ventilation heat flow is accounted
for by considering the minimum suitable value of air exchange according to UNI EN (2008). The free gains due to

persons and equipment can be assumed constant, with a global averaged value depending on the useful surface of the

building and its intended use (ISO, 2008), but a time profile can be added by the user, depending on the supposed

rip

occupation profile. The heating/cooling system provides an input thermal power (positive or negative) depending on the
external conditions, system configurations and regulation criteria. Figure 1 provides a schema of the heat fluxes
involving the internal air.

q cs

qq ww

Heated / Cooled
zone
q is

q sg

1 f q sg

q win

q v

Ma

q hs

nus
c

Solar
radiation

Figure 1. Internal air volume heat exchange (De Rosa et al., 2014)

Following the above mentioned assumptions, the equation of the transient energy balance for the internal air volume is
obtained:

dTi
q hs / cs qis q v q w q win
dt

cep
ted

Ci

(1)

where Ci and Ti are the lumped thermal capacitance and temperature of the internal air respectively. The other terms in
Eq. 1 are: the heating/cooling input thermal power ( q hs / cs ), the internal heat source ( q is ), the heat transfer due to
ventilation ( q v ), the total heat transfer through all external walls ( q w ) and the heat transfer across the windows ( q win ).
Moreover, solar radiation transmitted across the windows is taken into account by considering that it is absorbed only
by the floor according with its absorbance, whereas the reflected part is assumed to be uniformly distributed on all
interior surfaces (EnergyPlus, 2012)

The user can adopt three different discretization assumptions, furnished in BEPS, to model the external walls (called

Ac

wall-mode), anyway a different user-defined discretization schema can be easily implemented (user defined wallmode). In particular, three different default wall-modes have been provided with discretization of one, two and three
nodes and called respectively: 1n wall-mode, 2n wall-mode and 3n wall-mode. For all wall-modes, the soil temperature

is calculated starting from the external temperature by introducing a correction factor in order to take into account the

rip

damping due to the characteristic of the ground.

2.1 The 1n wall-mode

In the 1n wall-mode all the wall thermal capacitance is lumped in a single node and two distinct layers are considered:

nus
c

the internal layer, which exchanges heat with the internal mass of air, and the external one, which is subjected to the
combined effect of external air convection and solar irradiation (Figure 2). Generally, the node capacitance point, which
accounts for the entire wall, is normally located in the center of the wall, but it is possible to move it by changing the
associated thermal resistances, depending on the characteristics of the wall. In the present work, the different behavior
of the various parts of the wall is taken into account by locating the nodes associated to the wall slabs by adopting a
barycentric approach with respect to the thermal capacities.

Ma

The energy balance of the opaque external wall j in a 1node wall-mode is shown in Eq. 2, where C w, j and Tw, j
represent the thermal capacitance and the node temperature of the wall respectively.

C w, j

dTw, j

q w / i , j q w / e, j

dt

The terms

q w / i , j and q w / e, j represent the heat flux between the wall node and the internal/external wall surface, and

they can be calculated as follows:

Tw, j

cep
ted

q w / i , j

q w / e, j

(2)

wi , j

Rw / i , j

we , j

Tw, j

Rw / e, j

(3)

(4)

The temperatures Twi,j and Twe,j in Eq. 3-4 are the internal and external surface temperatures respectively and they can
be determined by considering an energy balance in steady state, as shown in Eq. 5-6.
(5)

q w / e, j q s , j q e, j

(6)

Ac

q w / i , j q sg , j q i , j

where q i , j and qe, j are the heat flow rate on the internal and external wall surface respectively and they depend on the
internal heat transfer coefficient (hi), supposed to be dependent only on convection and assumed constant, and the
external one (he). The external heat transfer coefficient depends on different phenomena, namely natural convection,

due to the temperature difference between external air and the wall surface (generally due to the solar irradiation),

forced convection as consequence of the wind speed and its direction, and radiative heat exchange between the external

rip

surface of the wall and the environment. The terms q s , j and q sg , j in Eq. 5-6 represent the solar radiation normal to the
j-walls on the exterior surface and the solar heat transfer rate reflected from the floor, respectively.
Further details about this approach can be found in De Rosa et al. (2014).

q i , j

Ti

Twi,j

nus
c

q s , j

q w / e , j

q w / i , j
Ti

Ri,j

Te

q e, j

qs,j

Rw/i,j T Rw/e,j
w, j

Ma

q sg , j

Twe,j

Tw, j

Twi,j

Cw, j

Twe,j

Te

Re,j

Figure 2: Schematization of the 1n wall-mode.

cep
ted

2.2 The 2n and 3n wall-modes

By assuming the same schematization presented above, it is possible to divide the entire wall in two or three zone with
different thermal capacitances, obtaining the 2n (Figure 3a) and the 3n (Figure 3b) wall-modes respectively.
Consequently, each j-wall is described by a set of ordinary differential equations as follows:

Ac

dTx1, j

C
q i / x1, j q x1 / x 2, j
2n wall-mode: x1, j dt

dT
C x 2, j x 2, j q x1 / x 2, j q x 2 / e, j

dt
dTx1, j

q i / x1, j q x1 / x 2, j
C x1, j
dt

dTx 2, j
3n wall-mode:
q x1 / x 2, j q x 2 / x 3, j
C x 2, j
dt

dTx 3, j

C x 3, j dt q x 2 / x 3, j q x 3 / e, j

The term

(7)

(8)

qi / x1, j represents the heat flux between the wall node and the internal one, while q x 2 / e, j and q x 3 / e, j are the

heat fluxes between the external wall node (x2 or x3 for the 2n and 3n wall-mode respectively) and the external surface
temperatures. As in the 1n wall-mode, Twi,j and Twe,j, (Figure 3) are the internal and external surface temperatures

respectively and they can be determined by considering an energy balance in steady state, as shown in Eqs. 5-6, with the

same assumptions described above.

rip

All the internal wall heat fluxes are calculated by considering the heat conduction between the nodes, defining a thermal
resistance which depends on the exact location of each node inside the wall-zone and on the thermo-physical

characteristics of each zone. Obviously, the sum of the various thermal capacities always equate the value of the single

a)

Twi,j

b)

Zone 2

Tx1, j

Tx2, j Twe,j

Ri/x1,j

Rx1/x2,j

Rx2/e,j

Twe,j Re

Ri,j Twi,j
Cx1, j

Cx2, j

Ti Twi,j

Tx1, j

Tx2 j

Zone 3

Tx3,j

Twe,j

Te

q sg , j

q s , j

q sg , j
Ti

Te

Zone 2

Zone 1

Ti

Ri/x1,j

Ma

Ti

Zone 1

nus
c

node, Cw,j.

Te

Ri,j

Twi,j

Rx1/x2,j

Cx1, j

q s , j

Rx3/e,j
Twe,j Re

Rx2/x3,j

Cx2, j

Te

Cx3, j

cep
ted

Figure 3: Schematization of (a) two and (b) three node wall-modes for the external walls

3. Benchmark test case

In order to compare the performance of the different wall discretizations, a standard building block is considered. It is
represented by a parallelepiped with a heated/cooled useful surface of 200 m2 and a total internal volume of 600 m3.
The total thickness of all vertical walls is 480 mm, made by 380 mm of bricks and 70 mm of insulation located on the
external part of the wall (the remaining part is plasters on both surfaces). The total thickness of the roof is 445 mm,
essentially made by concrete (about 220 mm) and insulator (80 mm semi-rigid panels). Finally, the floor has a total
thickness of 360 mm , made by ceramic tiles (20 mm), screed (50 mm), insulator (70 mm) and concrete (220 mm). The
main geometrical and thermo-physical characteristics of the benchmark building are shown in Table 1.

Ac

The required internal temperature has been set to 18.3 C in winter and to 26.7 C in summer, with a dead-band of 1
C. The control of heating/cooling system is based on an ON-OFF criterion set on the internal air temperature.
A specific orientation is also considered, because it largely influences the heating needs in winter and the cooling
requirements in summer. The glazed surfaces of the building are constituted by the same type of windows for all

configurations. The glass thermal transmittance is assumed equal to 2.465 W/(m2K) and its radiation transmission

rip

coefficient is equal to 0.571.

nus
c

Table 1. Geometric data of the benchmark building analyzed in the present work
Units
Value
Units
Value
Height
m
6
Type of floor
on the ground
Base
mxm
10 x 10
Floor transmittance
W/m2K
0.42
Number of floors
2
Floor specific thermal capacity kJ/m2K
320.65
Useful (heated/cooled) surface
m2
200
Vertical walls orientation
N-S-E-W
Volume
m3
600
for each orientation
Total dissipating surface
m2
440
Total Wall surface
m2
60.00
-1
S/V
m
0.73
Opaque surface
m2
53.75
Roof surface
m2
100
Windows surface
m2
6.25
Roof transmittance
W/m2K
0.35
Wall transmittance
W/m2K
0.4
Roof specific thermal capacity kJ/m2K
395.28
Specific thermal capacity
kJ/m2K
622.90
Note: an external insulation is considered for roof and vertical wall, according to the common standards

3.1 Climatic data

Ma

Frequent climatic data are necessary in order to perform a detailed energy analysis of a building to assess the heating
and cooling needs. BEPS permits to set the time discretization of the input climatic data and requires the profiles of the
following variables:

external temperature;

normal direct radiation and diffused horizontal radiation, in order to determine the value of the total incident

cep
ted

radiation on the surface;

wind intensity and direction, utilized to determine the external convection coefficients for each surface.

Moreover, latitude and altitude of specific locations are taken into account, because latitude is utilized to calculate the
solar radiation, whereas altitude is necessary to estimate the diffused incident radiation. These two parameters allow
estimating the thermal load due to solar radiation. In the present paper, hourly profiles taken from the climate database
of the U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE, 2013) are utilized for all the calculations.
The heating (HDD) and cooling (CDD) degree days are assumed as climatic parameter of each localities. Generally, the
degree days are based on the idea to capture the variations of the outdoor temperature, in terms of amplitude and
frequency, with respect to a reference temperature, also called base temperature. In building applications the

Ac

reference temperature is the temperature which guarantees comfort conditions and, consequently, the heating/cooling
system is turned off. In the present work, both HDD and CDD are calculated according to the hourly method
(Mourshed, 2012), reported in Eqs. 9-10.

10

365 24

Te, h Tb, cs

24
d

rip

d 1 h 1

(9)

Tb, hs Te, h

24
d

HDD

d 1 h 1

CDD

365 24

(10)

where Tb,hs and Tb,cs are the base temperature for heating and cooling respectively and they represent the temperature set

nus
c

point of the inner heated/cooled zones. In the present work, a base temperature of 18.3C and 26.7C for HDD and
CDD calculations, have been adopted respectively. The superscript + means that the sum is extended only to positive
terms.

In the present work, DDs are used as climatic parameters in order to analyze the influence that weather conditions may
have on the choice of the different wall-mode approaches.

Ma

4. Results

Several simulations have been performed by using BEPS in order to observe the differences in terms of yearly energy
demand predictions among the different wall-mode approaches. The analysis have been peformed by using the
benchmark building previously described and adopting an ON-OFF regulation system operating for all the 24 hours.
The internal temperature setting point is 18.3 C (Tb,cs) in winter and 26.7 C (Tb,hs) in summer with a dead-band setting
of 1 C. Several European cities have been analyzed in the present work in order to cover different typical climatic

Ac

cep
ted

conditions in Europe.

11

b)

15
10
5

5
Days

15
10

2n wall-mode

ON
OFF

10

5
Days

10

35

18.3 C

15
10
5

5
Days

10

20
15

10

ON
OFF

5
Days

10

Ma

25

ON
OFF

26.7 C

30

Temperature [C]

20

3n wall-mode
25

3n wall-mode

35

18.3 C

20

15
10
5

ON
OFF

0
2

5
Days

10

cep
ted

External temperature

26.7 C

30

Temperature [C]

Temperature [C]

2n wall-mode

25

Temperature [C]

20

nus
c

25

ON
OFF

26.7 C

30

Temperature [C]

Temperature [C]

18.3 C

20

1n wall-mode

35

25

1n wall-mode

rip

a)

25
20
15
10

ON
OFF

0
0

Internal temperature

5
Days

10

Heating-Cooling ON/OFF

Figure 4: External and internal temperature profiles obtained by BEPS in a) winter (January) and b) summer (July) in
Rome with the different wall-mode approaches.

Generally, the most important differences among the proposed dynamic models can be detected on the short-time
behavior. To highlight this aspect, Figure 4 shows the trend of external and internal air temperature and the ON-OFF
profile of heating/cooling system for 10 reference days in winter (Figure 4a) and in summer (Figure 4b), obtained by
using different wall-mode approaches. These simulations have been carried out with the climatic data of the city of

Ac

Rome (HDD: 1626.8; CDD = 3.6) over a limited series of days and using an internal temperature constrained around
the set point temperature for both winter (18.3 C) and summer (26.7 C). In general, it is possible to note that in winter
the internal temperature and, consequently, the ON-OFF cycle of the heating system are governed by the external
temperature profile which drives the building heat loss. Instead, in summer (Figure 4b) the influence of solar irradiation

12

and thermal inertia become more significant, rising the internal temperature also when the external one is lower and

causing the turn on of the cooling system.

rip

The results show that a great difference occurs in the ON/OFF cycle of both heating and cooling system between the 1n
wall-mode with respect to the 2n and 3n wall-modes. Usually, the one-node model presents a low number of times
where the heating/cooling system is switched on and a high average working time. On the contrary, the 2n and 3n wall-

nus
c

modes show a high number of times in which the heating/cooling system is switched on and a low average working
time. Finally, no large differences are detected between the 2n and 3n-nodes approaches, which furnish very similar
results both in heating and in cooling operating conditions.

This difference can be explained by considering that the internal air volume exchanges heat directly with the internal
wall node, in which the entire wall thermal capacitance is lumped for the 1n wall-node approach. Therefore, the high
thermal capacitance node influences the internal temperature profile, and consequently the operating cycles of the
heating/cooling systems, depending on the transmittance of the internal thermal resistance Ri/w. In other words, the

Ma

changes in the temperature profile are driven by the whole thermal capacitance of the wall, which becomes
predominant, determining an increase of the time constant of the entire circuit and, consequently, a longer period of
functioning of the heating/cooling system. On the contrary, a lower thermal capacitance of the internal wall zone (zone
1) is connected with the internal node for both 2n and 3n wall-mode, reducing the time in which the heating/cooling
system is switched on, and increasing the number of operating cycles.

cep
ted

This phenomenon is confirmed by observing Figure 5 in which the comparison between the temperature profiles of the
internal south-facing wall obtained by the three different wall-mode approaches are reported for two typical days (10th
of January for winter and 15th of July in summer). It is possible to note that in the winter case (Figure 5a), during the
coldest hours of the day the wall temperature is affected by the on/off cycles of the heating system, whereas in the
middle of the day the incoming solar radiation and the increase of the external temperature permit to turn off the heating
system. Moreover, a substantial difference is detected between the 1n wall and the other two approaches, confirming
that the larger thermal capacitance lumped in the single wall node increases the time constant of the entire circuit.
The same result can be observed in the cooling case showed in Figure 5b, where the effect of the building inertia causes
a displacement of the cooling load avoiding the activation of the cooling system in the first part of the day. Whereupon,

Ac

the high solar radiation together with the increase of the external temperature produces an increase of the thermal load,
which is demonstrated by the activation of the cooling system in the second part of the day. Finally, it is possible to note
the increase of temperature in the last part of the day due to the residual energy stored in the wall which tends to be
released to the internal environment because of the presence of the external insulation.

13

200

12

150

10
8

100

50

4
2

6
1n

12
Time[h]
2n

18

24
3n

31

900

28

600

25

26.3

22

300

19
16

12
Time [h]
External temperature

18

Solar radiation [W/m2]

14

250

Cooling

nus
c

Temperature [C]

16

b) 34

rip

18

300

Temperature [C]

Heating

Solar radiation [W/m2]

18.3

a) 20

0
24

Solar radiation

Ma

Figure 5: Internal surface temperature profiles of the south-facing wall obtained using the different wall-mode
approaches for the city of Rome (HDD: 1626.8, CDD: 3.6), referred (a) to winter (10th January) and (b) to summer (15th
July)

Therefore, the dynamic interaction between the internal environment and the internal wall node becomes fundamental if
there is an insulation of the wall, in order to highlight the differences in terms of dynamic effects between internal and
external insulation. If an internal insulation is adopted, the wall is decoupled from the internal zone and, consequently,
the wall thermal capacitance does not affect the internal dynamic behavior. In this case, a lower inertia produces a

cep
ted

higher number of ON/OFF cycles of the heating system with a short working time.
On the contrary, if an external insulation is adopted, the larger inertia contributes to maintain the comfort of the internal
environment, reducing the number of ON/OFF cycles of the heating system, with a longer working time.
Usually, the use of transient simulation tools, such as BEPS, permits to analyze the performance of different design

Ac

solutions and to consider the impact due to the usage profile.

14

80
60

rip

Heating energy
demand[kWh/m2]

a)

40
20

nus
c

b)

15
10
5

1n

Ma

Cooling energy
demand[kWh/m2]

20

2n

3n

steady state

cep
ted

Figure 6: Comparison between the different discretization schemas in terms of predicted yearly energy consumption for
(a) heating and (b) cooling for different Italian cities.
Figure 6 shows the comparison between the wall-modes and the steady state approach provided by ISO (2008), both for
heating (Figure 6a) and cooling (Figure 6b). It is possible to observe that no significant differences occur among the
three wall-modes in the heating energy demand predictions. On the contrary, in the cooling demand prediction the 1n
wall mode shows a significant variation with respect to 2n and 3n wall-mode approaches. These differences essentially
depends on the thermal inertia of the building envelope: in fact in cooling conditions the dynamic effects, which are
strictly connected with the incoming solar radiation, assume a relevant role causing the deviation in the results obtained
by the different wall discretization, due to the different arrangements of the thermal capacitances lumped in the internal
wall layer (zone 1 in Figure 3), which affects the time constant of the internal air zone. On the other hand, considering

Ac

that in the Italian winter climate the differences between the external and internal temperatures are generally high, the
energy losses in heating conditions are mainly driven by the heat transmission, reducing the impact of the different wall
discretization in heating energy demand calculations.

15

Finally, Figure 6 shows that the steady state approach is not able to reproduce the building energy demand correctly,

showing an overestimation in the heating cases and an underestimation in the cooling cases. These results can be

rip

explained by considering that the implemented steady state approach is derived from the common standards (ISO,

2008), according to which monthly averaged temperature and radiation are assumed, neglecting all the effects due to the
daily variation. Moreover, the correction factors, generally considered in these standards in order to take into account

nus
c

the inertia of the building envelope, are not sufficient to reproduce all inertia effects, especially when these assume a
paramount importance as in the cooling cases, where the effect of thermal storage of the walls is relevant.

30

25
20
15
10
5
0

Ma

Heating energy demand

[kWh/m2]

a)

C/C0 = 0.1

14
12
10

C/C0 = 10

C/C0 = 1

C/C0 = 10

8
6

cep
ted

Heating energy demand

[kWh/m2]

b)

C/C0 = 1

4
2
0

C/C0 = 0.1

1n wall-mode

2n wall-mode

3n wall-mode

Figure 7: Comparison between the wall-mode approaches using different values of in terms of (a) heating and (b)
cooling energy demand estimation for the city of Rome (HDD: 1626.8, CDD: 3.6)

Figure 7 shows the effect of a change in thermal capacity on the performances of the different wall-mode approaches.

Ac

Starting from the reference thermal capacity C0 (Table 1) and maintaining the overall transmittance of the wall, an
increase and a decrease of one order of magnitude are considered, in order to assess the impact on the energy
consumption. As it is possible to see, for both heating (Figure 7a) and cooling (Figure 7b) energy demand estimations,
the increase of the wall thermal capacity causes a deviation between the three wall-mode approaches. In particular, the

16

Heating energy demand[kWh/m2]

and (b) cooling energy demand resulting from the different wall-mode approaches are presented, confirming the

previous results. In fact, it is possible to observe that the deviations in the cooling energy demand predictions (Figure

8b) between the 1n wall-mode and the other two approaches occur for all the analyzed cities. On the other hand, no

significant discrepancies are shown in the heating energy demand predictions (Figure 8a).

a)
90

80

occur between the 2n and 3n wall-modes in all the tested cases, confirming that the choice between them in these

conditions has no influence.

In order to extend the analyses to different climatic conditions, several simulations have been performed for different

European cities using the same benchmark building. The results are shown in Figure 8, where the simulated (a) heating

60

50

40

30

20

10

rip

nus
c

70

Ma

Larnaca (CY)
Faro (P)
Palermo (I)
Messina (I)
Siviglia (E)
Gela (I)
Valencia (E)
Lisboa (P)
Athens (GR)
Ustica (I)
Catania (I)
Andravida (GR)
Lecce (I)
Olbia (I)
Evora (P)
Naples (I)
Santander (E)
Izmir (TR)
Barcelona (E)
Rome (I)
Grosseto (I)
Montpellier (F)
Marseille (F)
Salonicco (GR)
Instanbul (TR)
Florence (I)
Madrid (E)
Bordeaux (F)
Nantes (F)
Rimini (I)
Perugia (I)
Trieste (I)
Venice (I)
Braganca (P)
Milan (I)
Brest (F)
Parma (I)
Lyon (F)
Paris (F)
Turin (I)
Dijon (F)
London (GB)
Bolzano (I)
Strasburgo (F)
Nancy (F)
Dublin (IRL)
Berlin (D)
Belfast (GB)
Ankara (TR)
Stuttgart (D)
Hamburg (D)
Aberdeen (GB)
Munich (D)
Tarvisio (I)

b)
35

30

25

20

15

10

cep
ted

Ac

Larnaca (CY)
Faro (P)
Palermo (I)
Messina (I)
Siviglia (E)
Gela (I)
Valencia (E)
Lisboa (P)
Athens (GR)
Ustica (I)
Catania (I)
Andravida (GR)
Lecce (I)
Olbia (I)
Evora (P)
Naples (I)
Santander (E)
Izmir (TR)
Barcelona (E)
Rome (I)
Grosseto (I)
Montpellier (F)
Marseille (F)
Salonicco (GR)
Instanbul (TR)
Florence (I)
Madrid (E)
Bordeaux (F)
Nantes (F)
Rimini (I)
Perugia (I)
Trieste (I)
Venice (I)
Braganca (P)
Milan (I)
Brest (F)
Parma (I)
Lyon (F)
Paris (F)
Turin (I)
Dijon (F)
London (GB)
Bolzano (I)
Strasburgo (F)
Nancy (F)
Dublin (IRL)
Berlin (D)
Belfast (GB)
Ankara (TR)
Stuttgart (D)
Hamburg (D)
Aberdeen (GB)
Munich (D)
Tarvisio (I)

Cooling energy demand[kWh/m2]

1n wall-mode approach starts to deviate with respect to 2n and 3n wall-mode approaches also in the heating energy

demand predictions for higher wall thermal capacity. Besides, it is possible to observe that no significant differences

1n

2n

3n

Figure 8: Comparison between the different wall-mode approaches for (a) heating and (b) cooling energy demand
predictions for different European cities.

17

The same comparison is shown in Figure 9 where the yearly (a) heating and (b) cooling consumptions of the benchmark

rip

building obtained using the different wall-modes are shown as function of HDD and CDD. It is possible to note that the
energy consumption for heating purposes (Figure 9a) results to be a linear function of HDD. On the other hand, the
cooling energy demand as a function of CDD shows a scattered trend which tends to decrease at the increase of CDD.

nus
c

Considering that in Europe the degree days are generally high in winter (HDD > 800), the building heat transfer is
governed by the difference between the internal and the external temperature and, consequently, the heating energy
demand results to be a linear function of HDD. Instead, the cooling degree-days are generally low in Europe (CDD <
200) and the cooling energy demand is also affected by other factors (e.g. solar irradiation, thermal inertia of the
building envelope and the set-point temperature) causing the scattering showed in Figure 9b. Additionally, Figure 10
shows the difference between the three approaches adopted to discretize the external walls, confirming that the only

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

cep
ted

Heating energy demand

[kWh/m2]

a)

Ma

relevant discrepancies occur in the cooling energy demand predictions.

500

b)

1000

1500

2000

2500
HDD

3000

3500

4000

4500

Cooling energy demand

[kWh/m2]

50
40
30
20
10
0

20

40

Ac

1n

60
CDD

2n

80

100

120

3n

Figure 9: (a) Heating and (b) cooling energy demand trends against HDD and CDD respectively

18

a)

b)
30%

20%

R = 0.8061

rip

15%
20%

10%
10%
5%

1000

2000
3000
HDD [C]

4000

nus
c

0%

0%

5000

500

1000
CDD [C]

1500

2000

Figure 10: Deviation trends between 1n and 2n wall-modes results as functions of HDD and CDD for (a) heating and
(b) cooling.

In particular, Figure 10 reports the deviation trends between 1n and 2n wall-modes as functions of HDD and CDD for

Ma

(a) heating and (b) cooling respectively. In particular, the resulting trend for the heating cases (Figure 10a) shows that as
the degree days increase, the choice between 1n and 2 n wall-modes become irrelevant: in fact, in these conditions, the
thermal balance on the wall is influenced only by the difference between internal and external temperature, which are
predominant with respect to the inertial effects. On the other hand, if HDD tends to decrease the deviation between the
two solutions increases due to the more consistent dynamic contributions. Generally, it is possible to conclude that if
HDD are greater than 1000 the use of the simpler 1n wall-mode is sufficient to estimate the yearly heating energy

cep
ted

demand with errors lower than 5%.

In the hot season, the deviation between the one node and the two nodes solutions reaches relevant values, especially for
low CDD values, which are common in Europe. In these conditions, the cooling energy demand is affected by the
dynamic behavior of the building components, due to the thermal inertia of the building envelope and it is strictly
connected with the solar radiation, resulting in the scattering shown in Figure 9b. Also, the different treatment of the
building inertia provided by the different wall-mode approaches is evident in the scattered deviation reported in Figure
10b. Therefore, for lower CDD, the choice of the wall-mode represents a relevant issue in order to highlight the
dynamic behavior of the building. On the other hand, by extending the analysis to warmer localities outside the EU
(CDD>200 with Tb,c = 26.7C), it is possible to note that the deviation between 1n and 2n wall-modes tends to be

Ac

reduced.

6. Conclusions

19

The present paper reports a dynamic analysis of a benchmark building executed by means of an in-house developed

tool, called BEPS, implemented at the University of Genoa. This tool provides a dynamic thermal model based on the

rip

lumped capacitance approach, coupled with a RC thermal network and it was validated in previous works.

The aim of the present paper is to compare different discretizations of the external walls in terms of prediction of yearly
heating and cooling energy demand. In particular, three approaches are currently available in BEPS: 1 node, 2 nodes

nus
c

and 3 nodes wall-modes. The comparison among these approaches has been accomplished by performing several
simulations in different European cities with different climatic conditions.

The results show that a significant influence occurs in terms of heating/cooling system operating mode. In fact, the 1node wall-mode approach presents a low number of times in which the heating/cooling system is switched on and a
high average working time. On the contrary, the 2n and 3n wall-modes show a high number of times where the
heating/cooling system is switched on and a low average working time.

These effects mean that the thermal inertia of the wall-node, which is directly connected with the internal air node, has a

Ma

great influence in the dynamic of the heating/cooling systems, affecting the global performance of the model, especially
in the cooling energy demand calculations.

The comparison performed in terms of HDD and CDD shows that the heating energy demand results to be a linear
function of HDD, whereas the cooling energy demand as a function of CDD shows a scattered trend.
In fact, the heating degree days are generally high in Europe (HDD > 800) and, consequently, the heating energy

cep
ted

demand results to be a linear function of HDD, because the heat transfer from the building is governed by the difference
between the internal and the external temperature. On the other hand, the cooling degree-days are generally low in
Europe (CDD < 150) and the cooling energy demand is also affected by other factors (e.g. solar irradiation, thermal
inertia of the building envelope and the set-point temperature), causing a scattering which influences the wall-models
behavior. In particular, the resulting trend for the heating cases shows that the choice between 1n and 2n wall-modes
become irrelevant with high values of degree-days: generally if HDDs are greater than 1000 the use of the simpler 1n
wall-mode is sufficient to estimate the yearly heating energy demand with errors lower than 5%.
On the other hand, the deviation between the 1n and the 2n wall-modes observed for the summer season does not permit
the use of the simpler 1n wall-mode, especially for low CDD values, which are generally typical in Europe for the

Ac

common internal set-point temperature.

The choice among the three methods will also depend on the computational cost which is required to perform the target
analysis. In those cases in which the computational cost is not a fundamental parameter, it is advised the use of the 2n
wall mode.

20

Acknowledgements

The authors want to express their gratitude to three anonymous reviewers for their interesting comments, which were

rip

useful to improve the quality of the present paper.

References

ASHRAE (1980) Standard 90A-1980. Energy conservation in new building design. Atlanta: American Society of
Heating Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers.

review. Energy and Buildings, 42, 1361-1368.

nus
c

Baetens, R., Jelle, B.P., & Gustavsen, A. (2010). Phase change materials for building applications: A state-of-the-art

Bianco, V., De Rosa, M., Scarpa, F. & Tagliafico, L.A. (2014). Analysis of energy demand in residential buildings for
different climates by means of dynamic simulation. International Journal of Ambient Energy, DOI:
10.1080/01430750.2014.907207

Boyer, H., Chabriat, J.P., Grondin-Perez, B., Tourrand, C., & Brau, J. (1994). Thermal building simulation and
computer generation of nodal models. Building and Environment, 31, 207-214.

BPIE. (2011). Buildings Performance Institute Europe. Europes buildings under the microscope.

London (UK).

Ma

CIBSE. (2006). Degree-days: Theory and Application. TM41. Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineering.

Crawley, D.B., Hand, J.W., Kummert, M. & Griffith, B.T. (2008). Contrasting the capabilities of building energy
performance simulation programs. Building and Environment, 43, 661-73

Dargahi-Zaboli, M. & Alizadeh, R. Using dynamic model for determination of heat losses in cold weather from a
typical house in Tabriz constructed by lightweight concrete blocks. Energy Efficiency, doi:10.1007/s12053-013-9243-5.
De Rosa, M., Bianco, V., Scarpa, F., & Tagliafico, L.A. (2014) Heating and cooling building energy demand
evaluation; a simplified model and a modified degree days approach. Applied Energy. DOI:

cep
ted

10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.04.067

Dormand, J.R., & Prince, P.J. (1980). A family of embedded Runge-Kutta formulae. Journal of Computational and
Applied Mathematics, 6, 19-26.

Energy Plus. (2012). The reference to EnergyPlus Calculations.

EU. (2002). On the energy performance of buildings. Directive 2002/91/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council. Official Journal of the European Communities.

Ghiaus, C., Allard, F. (2006). Potential for free-cooling by ventilation. Solar Energy, 80, 402-413.
Harvey, L.D.D. (2009). Reducing energy use in the buildings sector: measures, costs, and examples. Energy Efficiency,
2, 139-163.

Isaac, M., & van Vuuren, D.P. (2009). Modeling global residential sector energy demand for heating and air
conditioning in the context of climate change. Energy Policy, 37, 507-521.
ISO (2008). UNI EN ISO 13790:2008. Energy performance of buildings Calculation of energy use for space heating

Ac

and cooling.

Lechtenbhmer, S., & Schring, A. (2011). The potential for large-scale savings from insulating residential buildings in
the EU. Energy Efficiency, 4, 257-270.

21

Mourshed, M. (2012). Relationship between annual mean temperature and degree-days. Energy and Building, 54, 418-

425.

rip

Nielsen, T.R. (2005) Simple tool to evaluate energy demand and indoor environment in the early stages of building
design. Solar Energy, 78, 73-83.

Tagliafico, L.A., Scarpa F. & De Rosa, M. (2014) Dynamic thermal models and CFD analysis for flat-plate thermal
solar collectors A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 30, 526-37.

UNI EN 15251. (2008). Indoor environmental input parameters for design and assessment of energy performance of

nus
c

buildings addressing indoor air quality, thermal environment, lighting and acoustics.
USDOE (2013). U.S. Department of Energy. Wheater Data for Energy Plus.

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/weatherdata_about.cfm. (last time accessed: 11.05.2014)

Vaidya, P., Greden, L., Eijadi, D., McDougall, T., & Cole, R. (2009). Integrated cost-estimation methodology to

Ac

cep
ted

Ma

support high-performance building design. Energy Efficiency, 2, 69-85.

22

Figure 2: Schematization of the 1n wall-mode.

rip

Figure 1. Internal air volume heat exchange (De Rosa et al., 2014)

Figure Captions

Figure 3: Schematization of (a) two and (b) three node wall-modes for the external walls

Figure 4: External and internal temperature profiles obtained by BEPS in a) winter (January) and b)
summer (July) in Rome with the different wall-mode approaches.

nus
c

Figure 5: Internal surface temperature profiles of the south-facing wall obtained using the different
wall-mode approaches for the city of Rome (HDD: 1626.8, CDD: 3.6), referred (a) to winter (10th
January) and (b) to summer (15th July)

Figure 6: Comparison between the different discretization schemas in terms of predicted yearly
energy consumption for (a) heating and (b) cooling for different Italian cities.

Figure 7: Comparison between the wall-mode approaches using different values of in terms of (a)
heating and (b) cooling energy demand estimation for the city of Rome (HDD: 1626.8, CDD: 3.6)

Ma

Figure 8: Comparison between the different wall-mode approaches for (a) heating and (b) cooling
energy demand predictions for different European cities.

Figure 9: (a) Heating and (b) cooling energy demand trends against HDD and CDD respectively
Figure 10: Deviation trends between 1n and 2n wall-modes results as functions of HDD and CDD

Ac

cep
ted

for (a) heating and (b) cooling.

23