Abstract
This paper presents a life-cycle cost (LCC) informed co-design framework for building structures and envelope systems, holistically considering the influences of energy and natural hazard performance. The proposed method is consisted of a two-stage design and decision-making process, aiming to provide a quantitative guideline for building's structural and envelope co-design based on the its geographic locations. First, the building's structural configuration and envelope type are selected based on the life cycle cost. Then, the long-term cost effectiveness of various energy-saving building envelope options (e.g., high-performance glazing and insulation) is evaluated to refine the envelope design. The proposed co-design framework was demonstrated through the case study of a medium-size office building archetype in three locations with distinct climate conditions and seismic activities (i.e., Los Angeles, Memphis, and Boston). The results highlighted the interplay between building's structural (seismic) performance and the cost-effectiveness of energy-saving design options – e.g., for buildings located in high-seismic regions, seismic enhancing designs greatly reduce the paybak period of high performance building envelope by reducing the seismic loss; whereas for buildings located in regions with cold climate and low seismic risk such as Boston, spatial frame with high insulation building envelope shows the lowest LCC.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | 102061 |
Journal | Journal of Building Engineering |
Volume | 35 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Mar 2021 |
Funding
This research was in part supported by the US National Science Foundation ( CMMI-1954517 , DEG-1623657 ) and the U. S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office . An exterior insulation finishing system (EIFS) cladding is normally comprised of EIFS panels and window fenestrations attached to the cold-formed steel framing. The damage states of EIFS are mostly attributed to the damages of silica caulking, the EIFS panel, windows (both frame and glazing), fasteners, and the supporting cold-formed steel framing. Table 2 lists the damage states and corresponding repair costs of the EIFS cladding with different insulation and glazing options ? i.e., three insulation options: the R-13 EPS baseline, the vacuum insulated panels with fumed silica core (VIP), and the modified atmosphere insulation (MAI) recently developed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory [25], in conjunction with two glazing options: the double-pane glazing (DPG) and triple-glazed low-E glass (TriLE). The damage of EIFS system starts with minor cracking of the EIFS panels and caulking, followed by window glazing damage, crushing of EIFS panels and buckling of the cold-formed steel framing members, and finally glass fallout, where the damage state definitions for caulking, window glazing, and EIFS panel are adopted from Refs. [6,26,27], respectively.This research was in part supported by the US National Science Foundation (CMMI-1954517, DEG-1623657) and the U. S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office.
Funders | Funder number |
---|---|
EIFS | |
U. S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office | |
National Science Foundation | DEG-1623657, 1954517, CMMI-1954517 |
Oak Ridge National Laboratory | 6,26,27 |
Keywords
- Building envelope
- Energy efficiency
- Hazard resistance
- Life-cycle cost