Applications of the infrared thermography in the energy audit of buildings: A review

Lucchi, Elena

doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.10.031

Cited by 189 publications

(113 citation statements)

References 84 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Over the last years, the use of IRT technique has increased in building energy audit. In a recent paper, Lucchi [74] presents a critical review on the use of this technique, describing: Balaras and Argiriou [75] also pointed out that the use of IRT is a valuable tool for building diagnostics. It can be used for inspecting and performing non-destructive testing of building elements in order to detect where and how energy is leaking from the envelope of the building, to evaluate operation conditions of HVAC systems, and to identify problems with electrical and mechanical installations.…”

Section: Infrared Thermography (Irt)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Laboratory and in-situ non-destructive methods to evaluate the thermal transmittance and behavior of walls, windows, and construction elements with innovative materials: A review

Soares

Martins

Gonçalves

et al. 2019

Energy and Buildings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The experimental characterization of the overall thermal transmittance of homogeneous, moderately-and non-homogeneous walls, windows, and construction elements with innovative materials is very important to predict their thermal performance. It is also important to evaluate if the standard calculation methods to estimate the U-value of new and existing walls can be applied to more complex configurations, since the correct estimation of this value is a critical requirement when performing building energy simulations or energy audit. This paper provides a survey on the main methods to measure the thermal transmittance and thermal behaviour of construction elements, considering laboratory conditions and in-situ non-destructive measurements. Five methods are described: the heat flow meter (HFM); the guarded hot plate (GHP); the hot box (HB), considering the guarded HB (GHB) and the calibrated HB (CHB); and the infrared thermography (IRT). Then, previous studies dedicated to the assessment of the thermal performance of different heavy-and light-weight walls are discussed. Particular attention is devoted to the measurement of the U-value of nonhomogeneous walls, including the effect of thermal bridging caused by steel framing or mortar joints, and the presence of PCMs or new insulation materials in the configuration of the walls. hot box; calibrated hot box; infrared thermography. Highlights: -Review on the main methods to measure the U-value of non-homogeneous walls. -Methods: heat flow meter, guarded hot plate, guarded and calibrated hot box, infrared thermography. -Standards framework and discussion of the main advantages and drawbacks of each method. -Description of methodologies and working principles of laboratory and in-situ measurements. -Measurement of the thermal transmittance of different heavy-and light-weight walls.

show abstract

Section: Infrared Thermography (Irt)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Laboratory and in-situ non-destructive methods to evaluate the thermal transmittance and behavior of walls, windows, and construction elements with innovative materials: A review

Soares

Martins

Gonçalves

et al. 2019

Energy and Buildings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lucchi [42] goes on to discuss solutions to these problems can be sought by controlling these factors, in order to reduce the impact on the results; suggestions of limiting IRT measurements to dry days with low solar incidence, performing IRT during steady conditions, and the acquisition of compensation terms, are all made [44][45][46] Internal and external variables can have a significant effect on U-value measurement outcomes [35]. Researchers have found that external variables, such as wind, precipitation, long wave radiation, and solar gain can have a major impact.…”

Section: Infrared Thermographymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lucchi [42] gave an extensive review of the application of IRT for building energy audits, identifying a common factor of difficulty in its field application.…”

Section: Infrared Thermographymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lucchi [42] goes on to discuss solutions to these problems can be sought by controlling these factors, in order to reduce the impact on the results; suggestions of limiting IRT measurements to dry days with Buildings 2018, 8, 46 6 of 17 low solar incidence, performing IRT during steady conditions, and the acquisition of compensation terms, are all made [44][45][46] Further studies have also sought to perform IRT under controlled conditions, to eliminate the influence of weather, though on a much smaller scale than for whole buildings [47,48]. The following methodology section explores how, in this paper, the effects of weather have been mitigated, and the presence of controlled, steady-state conditions were used to reduce uncertainty and bias in the application of IRT for a whole dwelling.…”

Section: Infrared Thermographymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Variations in the U-Value Measurement of a Whole Dwelling Using Infrared Thermography under Controlled Conditions

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

U-values of building elements are often determined using point measurements, where infrared imagery may be used to identify a suitable location for these measurements. Current methods identify that surface areas exhibiting a homogeneous temperature-away from regions of thermal bridging-can be used to obtain U-values. In doing so, however, the resulting U-value is assumed to represent that entire building element, contrary to the information given by the initial infrared inspection. This can be problematic when applying these measured U-values to models for predicting energy performance. Three techniques have been used to measure the U-values of external building elements of a full-scale replica of a pre-1920s U.K. home under controlled conditions: point measurements, using heat flux meters, and two variations of infrared thermography at high and low resolutions. U-values determined from each technique were used to calibrate a model of that building and predictions of the heat transfer coefficient, annual energy consumption, and fuel cost were made. Point measurements and low-resolution infrared thermography were found to represent a relatively small proportion of the overall U-value distribution. By propagating the variation of U-values found using high-resolution thermography, the predicted heat transfer coefficient (HTC) was found to vary between 183 W/K to 235 W/K (±12%). This also led to subsequent variations in the predictions for annual energy consumption for heating (between 4923 kWh and 5481 kWh, ±11%); and in the predicted cost of that energy consumption (between £227 and £281, ±24%). This variation is indicative of the sensitivity of energy simulations to sensor placement when carrying out point measurements for U-values.

show abstract

“…LSF walls [11]) is the Infrared Thermography (IRT). Besides its qualitatively use, IRT could also be used to quantitatively determine the thermal transmittance of building elements [22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thermal transmittance of lightweight steel framed walls: Experimental versus numerical and analytical approaches

Santos

Gonçalves

Martins

et al. 2019

Journal of Building Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the great influence of the thermal transmittance of the building envelope on the overall thermal performance and energy efficiency of the building, it is essential to accurately determine the U-value of the main building envelope elements. Due to the great heterogeneity of the thermal conductivity of the elements presented in a lightweight steelframed (LSF) wall, and to the geometric complexity of some steel framed structures, a reliable estimation of the thermal transmittance of LSF elements is even more challenging. Indeed, thermal bridging originated by steel studs must be considered in the assessment of the thermal transmittance of LSF walls. In this work, the thermal transmittance (U-value) of three LSF walls with different configurations will be investigated based on four different approaches: experimental laboratorial measurements based on the Heat Flow Meter (HFM) method; 3D finite element method (FEM) simulations using ANSYS CFX ® software; 2D FEM-based simulations using THERM software; analytical estimations based on the ISO 6946 procedure for building components with inhomogeneous layers. Several verification procedures were performed to ensure the reliability of the results. It was found that a secondary wood stud can mitigate the thermal bridging effect of the steel frame and improve the LSF thermal performance, which is more noticeable when there is no thermal insulation. Furthermore, a good agreement was found between the results of the 2D FEM and the analytical ISO 6946 approaches for the LSF wall with only vertical steel studs.

show abstract

Applications of the infrared thermography in the energy audit of buildings: A review

Cited by 189 publications

References 84 publications

Laboratory and in-situ non-destructive methods to evaluate the thermal transmittance and behavior of walls, windows, and construction elements with innovative materials: A review

Laboratory and in-situ non-destructive methods to evaluate the thermal transmittance and behavior of walls, windows, and construction elements with innovative materials: A review

Variations in the U-Value Measurement of a Whole Dwelling Using Infrared Thermography under Controlled Conditions

Thermal transmittance of lightweight steel framed walls: Experimental versus numerical and analytical approaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About