Energy efficiency is more than skin deep: Improving construction quality control in new-build housing using thermography

Taylor, Tim; Counsell, John; Gill, Steve

doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.07.051

Cited by 81 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Draught stripping has a relatively low cost and is therefore easy to implement, while window replacement could be considered as part of general asset management, which may go some way to explaining the increase in these measures. Overall, this does seem to reflect that a fabric first (Taylor et al, 2013) approach, albeit supported by grants, has been adopted by the social housing sector.…”

Section: Levels Of Adoptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adoption of sustainable retrofit in UK social housing 2010-2015

Swan

Fitton

Smith

et al. 2017

IJBPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The Retrofit State of the Nation Survey has tracked the perceptions of social housing sector professionals’ views of retrofit since 2010. It has taken the form of three surveys conducted in 2010, 2013 and 2015. Here, the authors bring together the three surveys to specifically address the adoption and perceived effectiveness of retrofit technology in social housing projects. The purpose of this paper is to identify the changing perceptions of social housing professionals over a period of significant policy change within in the sector. Design/methodology/approach The research takes the form of a cross-sectional attitudinal, self-completion survey, covering sections considering the adoption levels and perceived effectiveness of different retrofit technologies. The target sample was medium to larger scale registered social housing providers. The surveys were conducted in 2010, 2013 and 2015. Findings In terms of effectiveness, the reliance on tried and tested technologies is apparent. Emerging or more complex technologies have declined in perceived effectiveness over the period. It is clear that social housing has adopted a wide range of technologies, and the larger providers, with whom this survey is undertaken, potentially represent a significant pool of UK retrofit experience. Originality/value The survey provides a record of the changing attitudes of social housing providers to specific technologies over the period of 2010-2015, which has seen significant changes in the energy and social housing policy. The findings show the link between policy instruments and adoption, with policy instruments mapping to adoption in the sector. Perceived effectiveness reflects a preference for more established technologies, an issue that is highlighted in the recent Bonfield Review.

show abstract

Section: Levels Of Adoptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adoption of sustainable retrofit in UK social housing 2010-2015

Swan

Fitton

Smith

et al. 2017

IJBPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whilst kWh is more accepted, it is not entirely understood (Wood & Newborough, 2007). Petkov et al (2011) found that in all cases interviewees considered temporal selfcomparison (a history feature) essential Website/mobile application energy trackers Similar to the energy display monitor but must login to a website to view the information -a higher level of analytical potential (Eisenbach Consulting, 2016;Froehlich, 2009) Peer educators Point of contact to assist with specific individual questions on how to reduce (Carrico & Riemer, 2011) Personalized energy report/advice Personalized advice regarding the energy and financial consequences of energy consumption behaviour (Midden, Meter, Weenig, & Zieverink, 1983;Rowe, 2014) Thermal imaging Thermal imaging has been used to evaluate the performance of the building fabric during construction to avoid performance issues and manage construction quality (Taylor, Counsell, & Gill, 2013) and to promote energy-conservation behaviours (Goodhew, Pahl, Auburn, & Goodhew, 2015) Comparative Social sharing online (detailed or generalized)…”

Section: Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring innovative community and household energy feedback approaches

Gupta

Barnfield

Gregg

2017

Building Research & Information

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most research to date on the provision of energy feedback to households has focused on assessing the efficacy of numeric-based feedback. This paper describes the application and evaluation of more visual energy feedback techniques (carbon mapping, thermal imaging) at different scales, alongside traditional methods (web-based energy and environmental visualization platform, home energy reports) delivered through community workshops, home visits and the internet, across six low-carbon communities in the UK. Overall, most of the feedback approaches were able to engage and raise awareness amongst the householders. Whilst carbon mapping was felt to be aimed more at community groups and local councils by providing evidence of past and future community action, displaying carbon maps at community workshops helped to show that others were also engaged in energy action. Thermal imaging was successful in engaging individual local residents through both community workshops and home visits, especially when included in the home energy reports. This stimulated discussions on future energy savings through building fabric upgrade. However, the data-driven web-based platform had limited uptake due to online log-in requirement and information overload. Such insights are useful for those involved in scaling up the deployment of energy feedback to encourage energy demand reduction.

show abstract

“…No solar irradiation allowed during 3h prior to investigation [2] No solar irradiation allowed during 8h prior to investigation [2] IR possible several h after exposure [3,4] IR possible 24 h after exposure [3,4] IR possible 48 h after exposure [3,4] IR possible 2-3 h after exposure [5] IR possible 4-6 h after exposure [5] IR possible 8 h after exposure [5] Not allowed 12h prior to IR [6,7,8] Structures with high thermal mass need more attention [6,7] Not allowed [9,10,11,12,13,14,15] Temperature gradient ∆Ts = 0,5 *∆Te,grad [3,4] ∆Ts = 0,35 *∆Te,grad [3,4] ∆Ts = 0,2 *∆Te,grad [3,4] ∆T, grad low and stable during IR [10] ∆Te, grad < 10°C 24h prior to IR, < 5°C during IR [6,7,12] ∆Ti, grad < 2°C during IR [6,7,16] ∆Te, grad < 5°C during IR [6,7,16] …”

Section: Solar Irradiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of environmental parameters on the thermographic analysis of the building envelope

Vijver¹,

Steeman²,

Bossche³

et al. 2014

Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Quantitative InfraRed Thermography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Typically, thermographic measurements are used to analyze the building envelope in a qualitative way (e.g. detection of thermal bridges, missing insulation, etc.). Besides, thermography can also be used to obtain surface temperatures, which can give an indication of the thermal performance of the building envelope. In this paper the influence of the most important environmental parameters on the thermographic analysis of different wall types is examined using a multivariable parameter study. This results in guidelines that are in good accordance with the existing guidelines. Furthermore some remarks were made concerning the ambiguities in the existing guidelines. INTRODUCTIONEurope has high ambitions concerning energy efficiency and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. By 2050, one of the goals is to reduce the CO2-emissions by more than 80 %, which is impossible with the current policy. In order to reach this goal, the percentage of renovated buildings has to increase from 1% to around 2,5% per year by 2020 [1]. For new buildings, one of the key factors to satisfy the need for energy efficiency is a high performing building envelope, which can be achieved by a high insulation level and an excellent airtightness. In this context, infrared thermography (IR) is a valuable non-destructive tool which can be used both for evaluating the execution quality of the building envelope or for determining where renovation of the building envelope is necessary. For a proper assessment of the wall surface temperature the building envelope has to be as close as possible to steady-state conditions. Therefore an adequate knowledge of the influence of environmental parameters (solar irradiation, wind velocity, sky radiation, etc.) and building parameters (thermal mass of the structure) on the dynamic behavior of the building envelope is needed. Due to the large number of parameters that influence this dynamic behavior together with the limitations of the existing thermographic cameras, additional research is necessary to make quantitative surveys more reliable. In what follows an overview of the currently existing guidelines is given. Starting from the existing guidelines, simulations were conducted to investigate the dynamic behaviour of the wall surface temperature for different combinations of environmental parameters. Finally, feedback on the currently existing standards is given taking into account the results obtained by the simulations.

show abstract

Energy efficiency is more than skin deep: Improving construction quality control in new-build housing using thermography

Cited by 81 publications

References 6 publications

Adoption of sustainable retrofit in UK social housing 2010-2015

Adoption of sustainable retrofit in UK social housing 2010-2015

Exploring innovative community and household energy feedback approaches

Influence of environmental parameters on the thermographic analysis of the building envelope

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About