Achieving energy efficiency and indoor climate : A comparison of varying control system and building envelope modification

Abstract: This thesis investigates the performance of varied control systems in a office building in the southern parts of Sweden. The control system is designed according to standard EN15232 with three levels of building automation and control systems with a multi-zone approach. Highest standard, class A, is a demand control system with VAV controlled by temperature and CO2-levels in each zone. The lighting in class A is controlled by user demand and dimmers with regard to daylight to meet lighting regulations. The ventilation in the middle system, class B, is VAV controlled by temperature and demand in a zone. lighting is only on when a zone is used but no opportunity to dimmer. The reference object, class C, uses constant air volume CAV based on Swedish regulation and has lighting as in class B. The building envelope is varied between an existing model with 70Às building standard, according to todayÀs standard, and passive house standard in Sweden. All simulations is evaluated through energy performance and indoor climate in terms of temperature, PMV, PPD and CO2-levels. Simulations showed that the class A system has the highest possibility to decrease the energy use compared to the other systems. The reduction in total energy use differs from about 9-27% compared to class C and about 29-34% in electric energy use. Simulations also showed that class A and B are more advantageous to apply in a passive house rather than in the existing building if the total energy is evaluated. With regards to electric energy use, the difference between the building envelopes is too small to state that any difference exists. Neither one of the systems corresponds to ”good” indoor climate in the critical zones, all three is between the range ”good” and ”acceptable” according to standard SE-EN15251. Class A and B show an overall improvement of PMV and PPD compared to class C system. The class B system is closest to fulfill a ”good” indoor climate, especially in the passive house model. Evaluation with respect to CO2-levels class A and C showed acceptable levels.