umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Skillnaden i energiförluster mellan 2-glas och 2-glas i glasade burspråk på Designhögskolan i Umeå
Umeå University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Department of Applied Physics and Electronics.
2011 (Swedish)Independent thesis Basic level (professional degree), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesisAlternative title
The difference in energy loss between double glazed and tripl glazed bay wondows at Umeå Institute of Design (English)
Abstract [sv]

Syftet med rapporten var att undersöka skillnaden i transmissionsförluster mellan 2 glas och 3-glas i burspråk av glas anslutna till Designhögskolans fasad. Även vilken påverkan glasfogarna hade, undersöktes. Energiförbrukningen hos respektive glas beräknades och jämfördes med energikrav enligt BBR. En kostnadsberäkning med Pay off metoden och Nuvärdesmetoden gjordes, för att studera lönsamheten hos de olika glastyperna.

Beräkningar visade att ingen av glastyperna klarade energikraven för specifik energianvändning. En huvudsaklig anledning till detta var att den specifika energin beräknades baserat på golvarean på burspråken, istället för att slås ut på hela byggnaden.

Alla typer av 3-glas som studerades, gav en vinst jämfört med 2-glas och resultaten visade att det lönades sig ekonomiskt att sätta in 3-glas istället för 2-glas på burspråk av glas på Designhögskolan. Eftersom 3-glasen gav en lägre energiförbrukning jämfört med 2-glas, gav det därmed även en miljömässig vinst. Sammanfattningsvis gör man en ekonomisk och miljömässig vinst genom att sätta in 3-glas istället för 2-glas i burspråken på Designhögskolan belägen i Umeå.

Abstract [en]

The purpose of this report was to investigate the difference in transmission loss between 2-glass and 3-glass bay windows of glass connected to the Design School's facade. Also the impact of the glass joints was investigated. Energy consumption of each glass was calculated and compared with the energy requirements of the BBR. Pay-off method and the Net present value (NPV) method was used to study the viability of the different glass types.

Calculations showed that none of the types of glass examined passed the energy requirements of specific energy. The reason is mainly that the area used to calculate the specific energy was based on the area of the bay window, instead of the area of the whole building. Therefor the energy consumption was too high in relation to its calculated area.

All types of three-glass studied, resulted in profit, compared with the 2-glass window. It does pay off to put 3-glass instead of 2-glass windows in bay windows at the Design School. Since 3-slides gave a lower energy consumption compared with 2-glass, it gave an environmental gain. In conclusion, you make a financial and environmental benefit by putting three-glass windows instead of the 2-glass bay windows at the Design School located in Umeå.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2011. , 50 p.
Series
BY, 1128
National Category
Building Technologies
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-58275OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-58275DiVA: diva2:547585
External cooperation
White arkitekter AB
Educational program
Bachelor of Science Programme in Civil Engineering
Uppsok
Technology
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2012-08-29 Created: 2012-08-28 Last updated: 2012-08-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

By organisation
Department of Applied Physics and Electronics
Building Technologies

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 62 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf