Hi All,
I have a unique issue where I am parametrically changing the U-value of a simple glazing construction and opaque construction, keeping SHGC of the glazing constant, and my solar gain total extracted from the energy balance is different… how is this possible? I would expect the solar gains to remain the same across the two tests when only the U-value is changed.
Kindest Regards
Elly
SHGC is only about radiation the total solar gain consits of solar radiation and conduction through the construction.
Try glazing details, because simplified construction won’t consider more detailed properties influencing solar gain.
Hiya,
I’ll try this method instead, but how do you account for the framing? There doesn’t seem to be an option to add framing as part of this calculation. Do you typically just approximate the conductivity until the u-value of the construction matches? Seems awfully risky.
I’ve been trying to find the definition of the solar gains that we are getting as an output, but weirdly to not much success as most is just a single line and doesn’t break down where the sources come from such as this example. If the solar gains is radiation AND conduction - are you meaning the conduction attributed to the solar absorption of the facade?
you can use real window data from the manufacturer, this will be more realistic.
85% sure this is not the correct nomenclature so I’ll try and circle back with a reference but if I’m not mistaken included in the ‘solar’ output of the energy balance is the solar loads on the opaque envelope; and windows still factor into the equation in terms of thermal performance as apart of the clear wall assembly
Coming back to this conversation - how do I add the frame to this construction? It seems like a fairly detailed window can be constructed - but I also need to add in the framing to arrive at my total system U-value…
