Search

The selection of insulation material and the determination of the optimal insulation thickness are very important for saving energy and ensuring thermal comfort. There are numerous studies in the literature for determining the optimum insulation thickness. In these studies, the thermal conductivity coefficient (k) of the insulation material is taken directly from the standardized tables and the optimum insulation thickness is calculated. In real applications, the k value of the insulation material varies depending on the production conditions, density and temperature. For this reason, the density of the insulation material and the operating temperature should be considered when determining the optimum insulation thickness. In this study, expanded polystyrene (EPS), extrude polystyrene (XPS), glass wool and rock wool with different densities were used as insulation materials, coal and natural gas were used as fuel. For Konya and Sivas provinces, which are in the 3rd and 4th climate zones of Turkey, a comparison was made using the degree-day method as a function of energy cost, and the insulation thicknesses were determined as a function of density and temperature. As a result of the calculations for the k value of the insulation material for Konya, which is in the 3rd climatic zone, the optimum insulation thickness was found to be 0.076 m for EPS with a density of 30 kg·m−3, 0.037 m for XPS with a density of 30 kg·m−3, 0.082 m for glass wool with a density of 100 kg·m−3, 0.051 m for rock wool with a density of 150 kg·m−3. When coal is used as fuel, the optimum insulation thicknesses for EPS, XPS, glass wool and rock wool are 0.092, 0.061, 0.104, and 0.078, respectively. As a result of the calculations for the k value of the insulation material for Sivas province, which is in the 4th climate zone, the optimum insulation thickness for EPS with density of 30 kg·m−3 was found to be 0.086 m, for XPS with density of 30 kg·m−3 was found to be 0.044 m, for glass wool with density of 100 kg·m−3 was found to be 0.092 m, for rock wool with a density of 150 kg·m−3 was found to be 0.058 m. When coal is used as fuel, the optimal insulation thicknesses for EPS, XPS, glass wool and rock wool are 0.098, 0.069, 0.106, 0.081, respectively. When comparing the insulation materials, although the unit price of the XPS material is higher, its optimal thickness is lower than that of the other insulation materials in all situations due to its low thermal conductivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study determines the optimum insulation layer thickness to be applied to external building walls considering the heating degree-day (HDD) method, then energy saving costs, payback periods, and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are calculated accordingly. The optimisation analysis is performed for four different thermal insulation materials (glass wool, rock wool, extruded polystyrene, and expanded polystyrene). Natural gas is chosen as fuel for heating purposes, and horizontal perforated brick is preferred in the wall. One of the original features in this study is environmental analysis to determine the CO2 emission for the insulated wall in Turkey provinces. Another feature is that it has the most up-to-date data about HDD values and fuel and insulation material costs. The worst and best insulation materials are obtained as rock wool and glass wool, respectively. The optimum insulation layer thickness for the best case is varied between 0.07 m and 0.23 m, depending on the HDD values of provinces. The annual total energy saving cost is in the range of 4.4-53.5 $/(m²year), and the payback period is 0.11-0.38 years. Besides, the reduction in annual CO2 emission is changed between 53.2% and 94% for the best case, compared to the uninsulated wall. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, economic and environmental impact of thermal insulation have been determined for building wall in the cities of İzmir, İstanbul, Ankara, and Erzurum, located in different climates of Turkey. Three different realistic scenarios have been determined and the analysis have been carried out through these scenarios. The calculations have been made considering four different insulation materials, expanded polystyrene (EPS), glass wool (GW) rock wool (RW) and extruded polystyrene (XPS). Environmental assessments have been carried out by the life cycle assessment (LCA) method for all scenarios. Environmental analysis were carried out by combining 17 environmental effects with the ReCiPe method. The novelty of this study is the determination of environmental payback periods by combining 17 environmental effects using the ReCiPe method. As a result, economic payback times for all scenarios have the lowest value for RW. While the lowest environmental payback period was found as EPS, the highest environmental payback period was found as XPS for all scenarios. The highest economic payback time was assessed at XPS for all scenarios. The thermal insulation material with the highest economic payback period was found as XPS for all scenarios. It has been observed that thermal insulation is more effective in colder climates in terms of economic and annual avoided environmental impact. In all scenarios, environmental payback period was found to be considerably lower than economic payback period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cold storage have heat gain resulting from walls, roof, lighting, human, cooled products, and infiltration. The biggest of these gains is the heat gain through the walls. In this study, the optimum insulation thickness which should be used on the walls of cold storage was calculated. Calculations were made for 5 cities of Turkey (Izmir, Istanbul, Ankara, Sivas, and Erzurum) with different degree-day values. Extruded polystyrene (XPS), Expanded polystyrene (EPS), glass wool, rock wool, polyurethane were chosen as insulants to be used on the walls. Cooling degree-day values of the selected cities were calculated by using the average external temperature of the cities and the cold storage temperature (4, 0, -5, - 10, -15, -20, -25 and -30°C). Calculations were repeated for different cold storage temperature values, and optimum insulation thicknesses that should be used for each temperature were found. In addition, energy savings and payback periods when optimum insulation thickness is used were also calculated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]