University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Energy savings by using dynamic environmental controls in the cavity of double skin facades

(USC Thesis Other)

Energy savings by using dynamic environmental controls in the cavity of double skin facades

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

ENERGY SAVINGS BY USING DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS IN THE
CAVITY OF DOUBLE SKIN FACADES

Douglas Noble dnoble@usc.edu (213) 740-4589 (committee chair)
Karen Kensek kensek@usc.edu (213) 740-2723 (committee)
Joon-Ho Choi joonhoch@usc.edu (213) 740-4576 (committee)

By

Maria Spastri

______________________________________________________________________________

A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF BUILDING SCIENCE

December 2014

Copyright 2014 Maria Spastri
ii

Dedication
This thesis is dedicated to my family,
Mami and Tati your unconditional love, encouragement, support and sacrifices have made us
who we have come to be. You always pushed us to dream big, go after our goals and push our
limits to exceed our own expectations. This is what has brought me today expressing my deep
admiration and infinite gratitude for you. This research and my studies at the USC Building
Science Program could not have been implemented without you all, you’ve been there at every
step on the way and for it, I am forever thankful and grateful.
Thank you Mami, thank you Tati.

This thesis is also dedicated to my future family,
It’s a promise from me to you, that with the same love, dedication and support I will also make
my best for you, to help you fulfill your dreams, so that one day you will also find yourself
filling the very same page of life in your own words.
With love, Me.

iii

Acknowledgements
First and foremost I would like to thank Douglas Noble as the chair of my thesis for his support
throughout the thesis; but also for the two years of advice and guidance he has provided me with
during my studies at USC. Doug is always motivating, creating a positive inspiring environment
where you want to excel, explore and push yourself to go beyond your expectations. He is
always to the point, motivating us to stay on track and to keep a constant working pace for
development of the work. He was also very patient on the progress of this work during a difficult
time for me early last year and for this I am very grateful. Doug thank you for all your guidance,
support, feedback and the knowledge you have given me, it goes beyond this thesis work and it
was an honor for me to have you as my professor and thesis chair. I hope that we’ll collaborate in
future again.
I would also like to express my gratitude and deep appreciation to Karen Kensek. Karen’s
enthusiasm, inspirational questioning and laconic feedbacks always intrigue my curiosity and
stimulated my excitement to seek different perspectives. Her technical advice and critical
feedback helped me solve important obstacles of this work and further develop it till its
completion. Karen thank you for all your continuous excitement, guidance and assistance you
have provided me throughout the process but also during my studies at USC. It was an honor
working with you and I hope that we’ll have the chance to collaborate again in the future.
I would also like to thank Dr.Joon-Ho Choi and express my deep gratitude and admiration for his
mentoring and guidance not only during the thesis process but throughout my two years at USC.
Dr. Choi’s knowledge and critical thinking, expanded my understanding and comprehension of
the built environment, sharpened my thinking and enhanced my technical and analytical skills.
His hard work and has always been motivating me and without his inputs in the structure and
iv

outcomes this work could not had been completed. Dr.Choi thank you for all your valuable
guidance, advice and support during my studies at USC. It has always been great working with
you and I hope that we’ll keep collaborating in the future.
I would also like to thank Anders Carlson for his inputs, supervision and assistance for the
progress and development of the thesis. Thank you Anders for your contribution and for all your
help and advise you have given me.
I am very thankful to the MBS family and mostly to my friends Praveen, Juliana, Alejandro,
Oleksandra, Simon, Rui and Trent. Thank you all for the endless nights working in studio, the
laughter, the motivation with which we pushed each other to move forward and the great
memories we made during these two years at USC. My special thanks go to Simon Su Liu for his
encouragement and technical support; and especially to Praveen Kumar Sehrawat for his
continuous support, advice and help during all the difficult times I had to endure while I was
working on my thesis.
Last but not least, my greatest and deepest gratitude, respect and appreciation goes to my
beloved parents and brother for all their continuous encouragement, support, for believing in me;
and for helping me make to realize one of my biggest dreams. Without them I wouldn’t have
been be here. Thank you for everything.

v

Table of Contents
Dedication ............................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................... iii
List of Figures ........................................................................................................................ x
Chapter 1 ............................................................................................................................. x
Chapter 2 ............................................................................................................................. x
Chapter 3 ............................................................................................................................ xi
Chapter 4 ........................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter 6 ........................................................................................................................... xv
Appendix A ....................................................................................................................... xv
Appendix B ...................................................................................................................... xvi
Appendix C ...................................................................................................................... xvi
List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... xviii
Chapter 2 ........................................................................................................................ xviii
Chapter 3 ........................................................................................................................ xviii
Chapter 4 ........................................................................................................................ xviii
Chapter 5 ........................................................................................................................ xviii
Appendix D ....................................................................................................................... xx
Appendix E ...................................................................................................................... xxi
Terms and Abbreviations .................................................................................................... xxiii
Abstract .................................................................................................................................. 1
Hypothesis .............................................................................................................................. 2
Chapter 1: Introduction to double skin facades ................................................................. 3
1.1 The current energy problem .......................................................................................... 3
1.2 Double skin facades as building envelopes and their performance .............................. 8
1.3 Goals ........................................................................................................................... 11
1.4 The Dynamic Environmental Control System (DECS) principle for DSF cavities .... 14
1.5 Scope of Work ............................................................................................................ 16
Chapter 2: Background of Double Skin Facades.............................................................. 18
2.1 Terminology ................................................................................................................ 18
2.1.1 Major Components .............................................................................................. 20
2.2 Evolution of Double Skin Façade ............................................................................... 21
2.2.1 A reference in the history of double skin facades ............................................... 22
2.2.2 Dynamic Facades versus Dynamic Environmental Control System (DECS) ..... 24
vi

2.3 Typology of double skin facades ................................................................................ 25
2.3.1 Geometry Type - Multistory, Corridor, Shaft Box, Box Window ...................... 25
2.3.2 Cavity Ventilation Type - Natural, Mechanical, Hybrid..................................... 30
2.3.3 Ventilation Mode - Outdoor air curtain, Indoor air curtain, Air supply, Air
exhaust, Buffer zone..................................................................................................... 31
2.4. Advantages and disadvantages of DSF ...................................................................... 32
2.4.1 Advantages: ......................................................................................................... 33
2.4.2 Disadvantages: .................................................................................................... 34
2.5 Façade design decision making .................................................................................. 35
2.6 The physics behind DSF ............................................................................................. 37
2.6.1 Stack effect - buoyancy ....................................................................................... 38
2.6.2 Wind driven ventilation....................................................................................... 39
2.7 Previous Research on the Energy Performance of DSF ............................................. 40
2.7.1 Envelope .............................................................................................................. 40
2.7.2 Glazing ................................................................................................................ 42
2.7.3 Window to Wall Ratio (WWR)........................................................................... 47
2.7.4 Air supply mode .................................................................................................. 48
2.7.5 DSF façade type .................................................................................................. 49
2.7.6 Solar shading ....................................................................................................... 52
2.7.7 CO
2
Emissions ..................................................................................................... 54
2.8 Energy Modeling of DSF and controls of the cavity .................................................. 55
2.9 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 59
Chapter 3: Methodologies ................................................................................................... 61
3.1 Energy modeling software attempts for DSF performance simulations. .................... 62
3.1.1 Autodesk – Revit 2014 & Green Building Studio .............................................. 65
3.1.2. Autodesk - Revit 2014 & Project Falcon ........................................................... 65
3.1.3 Rhino – Grasshopper & Plug-ins ........................................................................ 65
3.2 DesignBuilder ............................................................................................................. 68
3.2.1 The DesignBuilder Interface for EnergyPlus ...................................................... 68
3.2.2 Limitations of E+ in DSF simulations ................................................................ 69
3.3 The energy performance simulations of DSF and DECS ........................................... 69
3.3.1 Selection of variables for the DSF and DECS models ........................................ 69
3.4 The DesignBuilder model ........................................................................................... 75
3.4.1. Parametric design using a shoebox model for decision making. ....................... 80
3.4.2 Parameters that were not examined .................................................................... 80
vii

3.4.3 Outputs ................................................................................................................ 81
3.4.4 CFD simulations ................................................................................................. 82
3.5 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 83
Chapter 4: Results ............................................................................................................... 84
4.1 Energy modeling software attempts for DSF performance simulation results ........... 84
4.2 Results of the energy models in DesignBuilder .......................................................... 90
4.2.1 Parametric simulations for decision making. ...................................................... 91
4.3 SSF, DSF and DECS energy performance comparison. ............................................. 97
4.3.1 SSF energy performance per climate zone.......................................................... 98
4.3.2 DSF energy performance per climate zone. ...................................................... 106
4.3.3. DECS energy performance and comparison to SSF and DSF per climate zone.
115
4.3.4 Conclusions ....................................................................................................... 138
4.4 CFD Simulations ....................................................................................................... 138
4.5 Summary ................................................................................................................... 140
Chapter 5: Analysis and discussion.................................................................................. 143
5.1 Overview of the study process and results ................................................................ 143
5.1.1Software limitations ........................................................................................... 144
5.1.2 Formation of DECS .......................................................................................... 144
5.1.3 Structure of analysis and discussion ................................................................. 145
5.2 Analysis of results in Los Angeles............................................................................ 146
5.2.1 The monthly performance ................................................................................. 147
5.2.2 The hottest day performance ............................................................................. 150
5.2.3 The coldest day performance ............................................................................ 153
5.3 Analysis of results in New York ............................................................................... 157
5.3.1 The monthly performance ................................................................................. 158
5.3.2 The hottest day performance ............................................................................. 161
5.3.3 The coldest day performance ............................................................................ 164
5.4 Analysis of results in Houston .................................................................................. 168
5.4.1 The monthly performance ................................................................................. 169
5.4.2 The hottest day performance ............................................................................. 171
5.4.3 The coldest day performance ............................................................................ 175
5.5 Summary ................................................................................................................... 178

viii

Chapter 6: Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 180
6.1 Thesis overview ........................................................................................................ 180
6.2 Synopsis of DSFs performance ................................................................................. 181
6.3 Synopsis of DECS performance ............................................................................... 183
6.3.1 The DECS energy savings ................................................................................ 184
6.3.2 The DECS patterns, similarities and differences in all climates ....................... 189
6.4 Limitations of the study ............................................................................................ 191
6.4.1 DSF Benchmark model ..................................................................................... 191
6.4.2 Natural ventilation and airflow ......................................................................... 191
6.4.3 Software limitations .......................................................................................... 192
6.5 Further potential and benefits of the DECS application ........................................... 194
6.5.1 Application of DECS in existing building facades ........................................... 195
6.5.2. LEED credentials ............................................................................................. 195
6.6 Summary ................................................................................................................... 196
Chapter 7: Future work .................................................................................................... 197
7.1 DSF Benchmark model and database of performance .............................................. 197
7.2 Software recommendations for dynamic facades ..................................................... 198
7.3 Possible alterations in DECS design ......................................................................... 199
7.4 Further studies on DSFs with the use of DECS ........................................................ 200
7.4.1 Proposed studies derived from this research results and conclusions ............... 200
7.4.2 Proposed studies beyond the research examined variables ............................... 201
7.5 Summary ................................................................................................................... 202
Bibliography - References ................................................................................................. 204
APPENDIX A (Chapter 2, section 2.4 Advantages and disadvantages) ....................... 211
APPENDIX B – Weather Data files for Los Angeles, New York and Houston (Chapter
3, Section 3.3.1.1 Location and climate). .......................................................................... 213
Los Angeles (Figures taken from Climate Consultant) .................................................. 213
New York (Figures taken from Climate Consultant) ...................................................... 215
Houston (Figures taken from Climate Consultant) ......................................................... 217
APPENDIX C - Energy modeling settings for the base case model in DesignBuilder
(Chapter 3, section 3.4 – The DesignBuilder model) ...................................................... 219
DesignBuilder settings .................................................................................................... 219
Schedules ........................................................................................................................ 225

ix

APPENDIX D - Tables and Pattern results of Electricity, Gas, Heating and Cooling
(Referred to Chapter 4) ..................................................................................................... 227
Section 4.3.2 DSF results in tables ................................................................................. 227
Los Angeles ................................................................................................................ 227
New York ................................................................................................................... 229
Houston ...................................................................................................................... 231
Section 4.3.3 DECS Vs. SSF and DSF results in tables ................................................. 233
Los Angeles ................................................................................................................ 233
New York ................................................................................................................... 248
Houston ...................................................................................................................... 263
APPENDIX E - DECS patterns and performance (Chapter 5) .................................... 278
Los Angeles ................................................................................................................ 278
New York ................................................................................................................... 282
Houston ...................................................................................................................... 288

x

List of Figures
Chapter 1
Fig.1 - 1 Primary energy Use in U.S. Commercial Buildings (Waide, Amann Thorne, and Hinge
2007). .............................................................................................................................................. 4
Fig.1 - 2 Commercial Buildings per State (U.S. Department of Energy 2014a). ........................... 5
Fig.1 - 3 Energy consumption by the commercial buildings per state. ........................................... 6
Fig.1 - 4 Energy consumption in heating and cooling for a sample of individual identified
buildings in Europe (Matos and Duarte 2007) .............................................................................. 10
Fig.1 - 5 GreenHouse effect in a double skin façade. ................................................................... 11
Fig.1 - 6 Diagram of the DSF types based on the cavity compartmentation. ............................... 13
Fig.1 - 7 The principle of the dynamic control of the cavity. ....................................................... 14
Fig.1 - 8 Transforming the double skin façade into the four basic types with DECS. ................. 15
Chapter 2
Fig.2 - 1 Detail of double skin façade and its components (ArchiExpo 2013). ............................ 21
Fig.2 - 2 Detail of the Double-Skin Façade in section, Steiff Factory (Fortmeyer and Linn 2014).
....................................................................................................................................................... 23
Fig.2 - 3 The Steiff factory today (Solla 2011). ............................................................................ 23
Fig.2 - 4 Multistory DSF. .............................................................................................................. 26
Fig.2 - 5 Corridor DSF. ................................................................................................................. 27
Fig.2 - 6 Shaft Box DSF. .............................................................................................................. 28
Fig.2 - 7 Box Window DSF. ......................................................................................................... 29
Fig.2 - 8 Box Window DSF – DECS. ........................................................................................... 29
Fig.2 - 9 Ventilation modes of DSF systems (Loncour et al. 2004). ............................................ 31
Fig.2 - 10 Combinations of ventilation type, mode and cavity partitioning (Loncour et al. 2004).
....................................................................................................................................................... 32
Fig.2 - 11 Façade Matrix for early design decision making (Knaack et al. 2007). ....................... 36
Fig.2 - 12 Process for a façade design: from decision making to implementation (Knaack et al.
2007). ............................................................................................................................................ 37
xi

Fig.2 - 13 Types of ventilation: (a) Single sided ventilation, (b) cross ventilation, (c) stack
ventilation. .................................................................................................................................... 38
Fig.2 - 14 The building surfaces and differences in air pressure change the wind direction and
airflow. .......................................................................................................................................... 39
Fig.2 - 15 Impact of insulation level and strategies used to the EUI of a DSF vs. SSF (Gratia and
De Herde 2007c). .......................................................................................................................... 41
Fig.2 - 16 Percentage of HVAC energy savings through façade – London (Stribling and Stigge
2003). ............................................................................................................................................ 42
Fig.2 - 17 Description of panes applied for different DSF (Poirazis 2006). ................................. 43
Fig.2 - 18 Comparison of SSF vs. DSF in Hot Arid climate (Hamza 2008). ............................... 44
Fig.2 - 19 Results of DSF simulations of glazing type vs. WWR for hot humid climate (Haase
and Amato 2006)........................................................................................................................... 45
Fig.2 - 20 Comparison of different DSF configuration and the base case (Chan et al. 2009). ..... 46
Fig.2 - 21 Energy consumption comparison for a conventional façade (LE) and a double façade
(DF) for different locations and climates (Stribling and Stigge 2003). ........................................ 47
Fig.2 - 22 The impact of shading and WWR to the EUI (Tzempelikos and Athienitis 2007). .... 48
Fig.2 - 23 Annual cooling loads Vs Cavity depth for Corridor DSF (Torres et al. 2007). ........... 50
Fig.2 - 24 Annual cooling loads vs. Cavity depth for Multistory DSF (Torres et al. 2007). ........ 51
Fig.2 - 25 Comparison of different DSF types vs. conventional, energy breakdown and savings.
....................................................................................................................................................... 51
Fig.2 - 26 Impact of the blinds location and color to the cooling loads (Gratia and De Herde
2007b). .......................................................................................................................................... 53
Fig.2 - 27 Estimated percentages of CO2 emissions/kwh in a building (The Royal Academy of
Engineering 2010). ........................................................................................................................ 54
Fig.2 - 28 MIT DesignAdvisor software (Source). ....................................................................... 57
Fig.2 - 29 Studies on DSF controls, software used and descriptions. ........................................... 57
Fig.2 - 30 Example of static vs. dynamic controls (Yoon et al. 2009). ........................................ 58
Chapter 3
Fig.3 - 1 Initial methodology and set of software diagram. .......................................................... 63
Fig.3 - 2SSF shoebox model for software test runs. ..................................................................... 64
xii

Fig.3 - 3 DSF shoebox model for software test runs. ................................................................... 64
Fig.3 - 4 Climate Zones by IECC (U.S. Department of Energy et al., 2013). .............................. 70
Fig.3 - 5 Typical DSF types: Multistory, Corridor, Shaft Box and Box Window. ....................... 72
Fig.3 - 6 Structural diagram of Methodology. .............................................................................. 74
Fig.3 - 7 Sample of the results with the use of DES per climate. ................................................. 75
Fig.3 - 8 The SSF basecase model as designed in DB. ................................................................. 78
Fig.3 - 9 The model with a Multistory DSF as designed in DB. .................................................. 78
Fig.3 - 10 Initial DECS design Vs. final design (as used for the energy modeling). .................... 79
Chapter 4
Fig.4 - 1 Shoebox model a: Revit+GBS SSF, shoebox model b: Revit+GBS ventilated DSF,
shoebox model c: Revit + GBS non ventilated DSF - Box Window ............................................ 85
Fig.4 - 2 Results of the Revit + GBS energy performance of the shoebox configurations. ......... 85
Fig.4 - 3 Revit + Falcon project SSF. ........................................................................................... 87
Fig.4 - 4 Revit + Falcon project: ventilated DSF. ......................................................................... 87
Fig.4 - 5 Revit 2014 + Falcon project: non ventilated DSF - Box Window ................................. 87
Fig.4 - 6 Revit + Falcon project: Solid geometry, no openings. ................................................... 88
Fig.4 - 7 Revit + Falcon project: a) Horizontal calculation plain through the opening, b)vertical
calculation plain through the opening. .......................................................................................... 88
Fig.4 - 8 Shoebox model for the parametric simulations. ............................................................. 92
Fig.4 - 9 Parametric analysis for Los Angeles - WWR range Vs. glazing type and EUI. ............ 93
Fig.4 - 10 Parametric simulation results for Los Angeles 80% & 100% WWR vs. glazing type. 94
Fig.4 - 11 Parametric simulation results for New York - 80% & 100% WWR vs. glazing type.
....................................................................................................................................................... 95
Fig.4 - 12 Parametric simulation results for Houston - 80% & 100% WWR vs. glazing type. .. 96
Fig.4 - 13 Annual results of SSF energy performance in Los Angeles. ....................................... 99
Fig.4 - 14 Monthly results of SSF energy performance in Los Angeles. ..................................... 99
Fig.4 - 15 Hourly results of SSF energy performance in Los Angeles for the hottest day, July
31st. ............................................................................................................................................. 100
Fig.4 - 16 Hourly results of SSF energy performance in Los Angeles for the coldest day,
February 2nd. .............................................................................................................................. 101
xiii

Fig.4 - 17 Annual results of SSF energy performance in New York. ......................................... 102
Fig.4 - 18 Monthly results of SSF energy performance in New York. ....................................... 102
Fig.4 - 19 Hourly results of SSF energy performance in New York for the hottest day, June 19
th
.
..................................................................................................................................................... 103
Fig.4 - 20 Hourly results of SSF energy performance in New York for the coldest day, February
6
th
. ............................................................................................................................................... 103
Fig.4 - 21 Annual results of SSF energy performance in Houston. ............................................ 104
Fig.4 - 22 Monthly results of SSF energy performance in Houston. .......................................... 104
Fig.4 - 23 Hourly results of SSF energy performance in Houston for the hottest day, August 2nd.
..................................................................................................................................................... 105
Fig.4 - 24 Hourly results of SSF energy performance in Houston for the coldest day, February
11th. ............................................................................................................................................ 105
Fig.4 - 25 Performance comparison and energy breakdown for the SSF in all climates. ........... 106
Fig.4 - 26 DSF cavity types as designed in DesignBuilder. ....................................................... 107
Fig.4 - 27 Annual performance comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs in LA. ....................................... 107
Fig.4 - 28 Total EUI monthly comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs in LA. .......................................... 108
Fig.4 - 29 Total EUI comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs for the hottest day in LA. .......................... 109
Fig.4 - 30 Total EUI comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs for the coldest day in LA. .......................... 109
Fig.4 - 31 Annual performance comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs in NY. ....................................... 110
Fig.4 - 32 Total EUI monthly comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs in NY. ......................................... 111
Fig.4 - 33 Total EUI comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs for the hottest day in NY. .......................... 111
Fig.4 - 34 Total EUI comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs for the coldest day in NY. ......................... 112
Fig.4 - 35 Annual performance comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs in HOU. .................................... 112
Fig.4 - 36 Total EUI monthly comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs in HOU. ....................................... 113
Fig.4 - 37 Total EUI comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs for the hottest day in HOU. ....................... 114
Fig.4 - 38 Total EUI comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs for the coldest day in HOU. ...................... 114
Fig.4 - 39 DSF cavity configurations and DECS as initially designed with HF and VF............ 116
Fig.4 - 40 Screenshot in DB creating the DECS interior cavity configurations. ........................ 117
Fig.4 - 41 Screenshot in DB creating the DECS external cavity configurations. ....................... 117
Fig.4 - 42 DSF and DECS cavity configurations as designed in DB for a single compartment. 118
xiv

Fig.4 - 43 Total EUI comparison pattern of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in LA.
Notice the trends exemplified by the colors with the most efficient façade types with blue and the
least with red (the values can be seen in a larger size of the chart in Appendix D, Table4-Appx.D-
..................................................................................................................................................... 122
Fig.4 - 44 Electricity savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in LA. ................ 122
Fig.4 - 45 Cooling savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in LA. .................... 123
Fig.4 - 46 Total EUI savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in LA. ................ 123
Fig.4 - 47 Total EUI comparison pattern of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in LA.
Notice the trends exemplified by the colors with the most efficient façade types with green and
the least with red (the values can be seen in a larger size of the chart in Appendix D, Table4-
Appx.D-17). ................................................................................................................................. 124
Fig.4 - 48 Gas savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in LA. .......................... 124
Fig.4 - 49 Heating savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in LA. ................... 125
Fig.4 - 50 Total EUI savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in LA. ................ 125
Fig.4 - 51 Total EUI comparison pattern of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in NY
Notice the trends exemplified by the colors with the most efficient façade types with blue and the
least with red (the values can be seen in a larger size of the chart in Appendix D, Table4-Appx.D-
25). .............................................................................................................................................. 128
Fig.4 - 52 Electricity savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in NY................. 128
Fig.4 - 53 Cooling savings of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in NY. ......................... 129
Fig.4 - 54 Total EUI savings of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in LA. ...................... 129
Fig.4 - 55 Total EUI comparison pattern of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in NY.
Notice the trends exemplified by the colors with the most efficient façade types with green and
the least with red (the values can be seen in a larger size of the chart in Appendix D, Table4-
Appx.D-28). ................................................................................................................................. 130
Fig.4 - 56 Gas savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in NY. ......................... 130
Fig.4 - 57 Heating savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in NY. ................... 131
Fig.4 - 58 Total EUI savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in NY. ............... 131
Fig.4 - 59 Total EUI comparison pattern of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in HOU.
Notice the trends exemplified by the colors with the most efficient façade types with blue and the
xv

least with red (the values can be seen in a larger size of the chart in Appendix D, Table4-Appx.D-
36). .............................................................................................................................................. 134
Fig.4 - 60 Electricity savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in HOU. ............. 134
Fig.4 - 61 Cooling savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in HOU. ................ 135
Fig.4 - 62 Total EUI savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in HOU. ............. 135
Fig.4 - 63 Total EUI comparison pattern of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in HOU.
Notice the trends exemplified by the colors (the values can be seen in a bigger size of the chart in
Appendix D, Table4-Appx.D-39). ............................................................................................... 136
Fig.4 - 64 Gas savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in HOU. ...................... 136
Fig.4 - 65 Heating savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in HOU. ................ 137
Fig.4 - 66 Total EUI savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in HOU. ............ 137
Fig.4 - 67 CFD simulation of LA_DECS_HF15°VF60° - Exterior view of the south façade. .. 139
Fig.4 - 68 CFD simulation of LA_DECS_HF15°VF60° - South facade and interior space. ..... 139
Fig.4 - 69 CFD simulation of LA_DECS_HF15°VF60° - building section. .............................. 140
Chapter 6
Fig.6 - 1 Excess in electricity loads: DECS Vs. DSFs in all climates for the hottest day. ......... 185
Fig.6 - 2 Excess in cooling loads: DECS Vs. DSFs in all climates for the hottest day. ............. 186
Fig.6 - 3 Excess in total EUI: DECS Vs. DSFs in all climates for the hottest day. .................... 186
Fig.6 - 4 Excess in gas loads: DECS Vs. DSFs in all climates for the coldest day. ................... 187
Fig.6 - 5 Excess in heating loads: DECS Vs. DSFs in all climates for the coldest day. ............. 187
Fig.6 - 6 Excess in total EUI: DECS Vs. DSFs in all climates for the coldest day. ................... 188
Fig.6 - 7 DECS pattern for the hottest day and energy savings per climate. .............................. 189
Fig.6 - 8 DECS pattern for the coldest day per climate and energy savings. ............................. 190
Fig.6 - 9 Process of generating results, analysis and conclusions. ............................................. 193
Appendix A
Table 2 - Appx.A – 1 Summary of DSF advantages by author (Poirazis 2004)......................... 211
Table 2 - Appx.A – 2 Summary of DSF disadvantages by author (Poirazis 2004). ................... 212

xvi

Appendix B
Fig.3 - Appx.B - 1 Criteria in Climate Consultant, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 2 Temperature range in LA.
..................................................................................................................................................... 213
Fig.3 - Appx.B - 33D chart of LA monthly temperatures, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 4 Monthly diurnal
averages in LA. ........................................................................................................................... 213
Fig.3 - Appx.B - 5 Sun shading chart for LA, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 6 Sky cover range in LA. ....... 214
Fig.3 - Appx.B - 7 Psychrometric chart for LA, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 8 Wind wheel for LA. ......... 214
Fig.3 - Appx.B - 9 Criteria in Climate Consultant, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 10 Temperature range in NY.
..................................................................................................................................................... 215
Fig.3 - Appx.B - 113D chart of NY monthly temperatures, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 12 Monthly diurnal
averages in NY. ........................................................................................................................... 215
Fig.3 - Appx.B - 13 Sun shading chart for NY, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 14 Sky cover range in NY ... 216
Fig.3 - Appx.B - 15 Psychrometric chart for NY, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 16 Wind wheel for NY. .... 216
Fig.3 - Appx.B - 17 Criteria in Climate Consultant, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 18 Temperature range in
HOU. ........................................................................................................................................... 217
Fig.3 - Appx.B - 193D chart of HOU monthly temperatures, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 20 Monthly
diurnal averages in HOU. ........................................................................................................... 217
Fig.3 - Appx.B - 21 Sun shading chart for HOU, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 22 Sky cover range in HOU.
..................................................................................................................................................... 218
Fig.3 - Appx.B - 23 Psychrometric chart for HOU, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 24 Wind wheel for HOU.
..................................................................................................................................................... 218
Appendix C
Fig.3 - Appx.C - 1 Activity Settings in DesignBuilder – part 1(the options not shown are the DB
defaults)....................................................................................................................................... 219
Fig.3 - Appx.C - 2 Activity Settings in DesignBuilder – part 2 (the options not shown are the DB
defaults)....................................................................................................................................... 220
Fig.3 - Appx.C - 3 Construction settings in DB (the options not shown are the DB defaults). .. 221
Fig.3 - Appx.C - 4 Opening settings in DB – part 1(the options not shown are the DB defaults).
..................................................................................................................................................... 222
xvii

Fig.3 - Appx.C - 5 Opening settings in DB – part 2 (the options not shown are the DB defaults).
..................................................................................................................................................... 223
Fig.3 - Appx.C - 6 Lighting settings in DB (the options not shown are the DB defaults). ........ 223
Fig.3 - Appx.C - 7 HVAC settings in DB – part 1 (the options not shown are the DB defaults).
..................................................................................................................................................... 224
Fig.3 - Appx.C - 8 HVAC settings in DB – part 2 (the options not shown are the DB defaults).
..................................................................................................................................................... 225
Fig.3 - Appx.C - 9 Building schedules from ASHRAE 90.1 Prototype Building Modeling
Specifications (PNNL 2014) ....................................................................................................... 226
xviii

List of Tables
Chapter 2
Table 2 - 1 Software used by researches examining various aspects in the performance of DSF.56
Chapter 3
Table 3 - 1 Comparison of Rhino/Grasshopper environmental analysis tools (Roudsari, Smith,
and Gill 2013). .............................................................................................................................. 67
Table 3 - 2 DesignBuilder Energy model Building Specifications (Torcellini et al. 2008), (PNNL
2014). ............................................................................................................................................ 76
Chapter 4
Table 4 - 1 Software engines and natural ventilation calculations. Part of original table. (Hand
2005, 30) ....................................................................................................................................... 89
Table 4 - 2 Results of the annual performance and comparison of DSF Vs. SSF in LA. ........... 108
Table 4 - 3 Results of the annual performance and comparison of DSF Vs. SSF in NY. .......... 110
Table 4 - 4 Results of the annual performance and comparison of DSF Vs. SSF in HOU. ....... 113
Table 4 - 5 Performance comparison and energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF in all climates. . 115
Table 4 - 6 Annual comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS performance in LA. ........................... 121
Table 4 - 7 Annual comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS performance in NY. .......................... 127
Table 4 - 8 Annual comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS performance in HOU. ....................... 133
Chapter 5
Table 5 - 1 Difference in EUI between the most and least performing DSF during the energy
consumption high peak months in LA. ....................................................................................... 148
Table 5 - 2 Difference in EUI between the most efficient DECS Vs. DSF type performance
during the months with high energy consumption in LA. .......................................................... 149
Table 5 - 3 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy demanding hours for July 31st in LA. .................................................................... 151
Table 5 - 4 DECS pattern and EUI performance Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in LA (gradient
color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient). .................................................. 152
xix

Table 5 - 5 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy demanding hours for February 2nd in LA. ............................................................ 154
Table 5 - 6 DECS pattern and performance Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in LA(gradient color
representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient). ......................................................... 156
Table 5 - 7 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy consumption months in NY. ................................................................................... 159
Table 5 - 8 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DECS Vs. DSF
type during the high energy consumption months in NY. .......................................................... 159
Table 5 - 9 DECS pattern and performance Vs. DSFs per month in NY (gradient color
representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient). ......................................................... 160
Table 5 - 10 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy demanding hours for June 19th in NY. ................................................................... 162
Table 5 - 11 DECS pattern and performance Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in NY (gradient color
representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient). ........................................................... 163
Table 5 - 12 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy demanding hours for February 6th in NY. .............................................................. 165
Table 5 - 13 DECS pattern and performance Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in NY (gradient color
representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient). ......................................................... 167
Table 5 - 14 Difference in EUI between the most and least performing DSF during the energy
consumption high peak months in HOU. .................................................................................... 169
Table 5 - 15 Difference in EUI between the most efficient DECS Vs. DSF type performance
during the energy consumption high peak months in HOU. ...................................................... 170
Table 5 - 16 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy demanding hours for August 2nd in HOU. ............................................................. 172
Table 5 - 17 DECS pattern and performance Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in HOU (gradient color
representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient). ........................................................... 174
Table 5 - 18 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy demanding hours for February 11th in HOU. ......................................................... 176
Table 5 - 19 DECS pattern and performance Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in HOU (gradient
color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient). ................................................ 177

xx

Appendix D
Table 4 - Appx.D - 1 LA Monthly energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF .................................... 227
Table 4 - Appx.D - 2 LA hottest and coldest day energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF. ............. 228
Table 4 - Appx.D - 3 NY Monthly energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF. ................................... 229
Table 4 - Appx.D - 4 NY hottest and coldest day energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF. ............ 230
Table 4 - Appx.D - 5 HOU Monthly energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF. ................................ 231
Table 4 - Appx.D - 6 HOU hottest and coldest day energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF. ......... 232
Table 4 - Appx.D - 7 Monthly electricity load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in LA. ..... 233
Table 4 - Appx.D - 8 Monthly gas load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in LA. ................ 234
Table 4 - Appx.D - 9 Monthly heating load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in LA. ......... 234
Table 4 - Appx.D - 10 Monthly cooling load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in LA. ....... 235
Table 4 - Appx.D - 11 Monthly total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in LA. ............ 235
Table 4 - Appx.D - 12 Electricity load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in
LA. .............................................................................................................................................. 236
Table 4 - Appx.D - 13 Cooling load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in
LA. .............................................................................................................................................. 238
Table 4 - Appx.D - 14 Total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in LA.
..................................................................................................................................................... 240
Table 4 - Appx.D - 15 Gas load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in LA.
..................................................................................................................................................... 242
Table 4 - Appx.D - 16 Heating load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in
LA. .............................................................................................................................................. 244
Table 4 - Appx.D - 17 Total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in LA.
..................................................................................................................................................... 246
Table 4 - Appx.D - 18 Monthly electricity load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in NY. .. 248
Table 4 - Appx.D - 19 Monthly gas load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in NY. ............. 249
Table 4 - Appx.D - 20 Monthly heating load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in NY. ....... 249
Table 4 - Appx.D - 21 Monthly cooling load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in NY. ...... 250
Table 4 - Appx.D - 22 Monthly total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in NY............ 250
Table 4 - Appx.D - 23 Electricity load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in
NY . ............................................................................................................................................. 251
xxi

Table 4 - Appx.D - 24 Cooling load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in
NY. .............................................................................................................................................. 253
Table 4 - Appx.D - 25 Total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in NY.
..................................................................................................................................................... 255
Table 4 - Appx.D - 26 Gas load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in NY.
..................................................................................................................................................... 257
Table 4 - Appx.D - 27 Heating load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in
NY ............................................................................................................................................... 259
Table 4 - Appx.D - 28 Total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in NY
..................................................................................................................................................... 261
Table 4 - Appx.D - 29 Monthly electricity load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in HOU. 263
Table 4 - Appx.D - 30 Monthly gas load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in HOU. .......... 264
Table 4 - Appx.D - 31 Monthly heating load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in HOU. .... 264
Table 4 - Appx.D - 32 Monthly cooling load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in HOU..... 265
Table 4 - Appx.D - 33 Monthly total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in HOU. ......... 265
Table 4 - Appx.D - 34 Electricity load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in
HOU. ........................................................................................................................................... 266
Table 4 - Appx.D - 35 Cooling load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in
HOU. ........................................................................................................................................... 268
Table 4 - Appx.D - 36 Total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in HOU.
..................................................................................................................................................... 270
Table 4 - Appx.D - 37 Gas load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in HOU.
..................................................................................................................................................... 272
Table 4 - Appx.D - 38 Heating load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in
HOU. ........................................................................................................................................... 274
Table 4 - Appx.D - 39 Total EUI load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in
HOU. ........................................................................................................................................... 276
Appendix E
Table 5-Appx.E- 1 DECS pattern and electricity loads Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in LA
(gradient color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient). ................................... 278
xxii

Table 5-Appx.E- 2 DECS pattern and cooling loads Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in LA (gradient
color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient). .................................................. 279
Table 5-Appx.E- 3 DECS pattern and gas loads Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in LA (gradient
color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient). ................................................ 280
Table 5-Appx.E- 4 DECS pattern and heating loads Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in LA (gradient
color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient). ................................................ 281
Table 5-Appx.E- 5 DECS pattern and electricity loads Vs. DSFs per month in NY (gradient color
representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient). ........................................................... 282
Table 5-Appx.E- 6 DECS pattern and gas loads Vs. DSFs per month in NY (gradient color
representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient). ......................................................... 282
Table 5-Appx.E- 7 DECS pattern and heating loads Vs. DSFs per month in NY (gradient color
representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient). ......................................................... 283
Table 5-Appx.E- 8 DECS pattern and cooling loads Vs. DSFs per month in NY (gradient color
representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient). ........................................................... 283
Table 5-Appx.E- 9 DECS pattern and electricity loads Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in NY
(gradient color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient). ................................... 284
Table 5-Appx.E- 10 DECS pattern and cooling loads Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in NY
(gradient color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient). ................................... 285
Table 5-Appx.E- 11 DECS pattern and gas loads Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in NY (gradient
color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient). ................................................ 286
Table 5-Appx.E- 12 DECS pattern and heating loads Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in NY
(gradient color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient). ................................. 287
Table 5-Appx.E- 13 DECS pattern and electricity loads Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in HOU
(gradient color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient). ................................... 288
Table 5-Appx.E- 14 DECS pattern and cooling loads Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in HOU
(gradient color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient). ................................... 289
Table 5-Appx.E- 15 DECS pattern and gas loads Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in HOU (gradient
color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient). ................................................ 290
Table 5-Appx.E- 16 DECS pattern and heating loads Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in HOU
(gradient color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient). ................................. 291

xxiii

Terms and Abbreviations
 EUI - Energy Use Intensity
o Used to measure a building’s energy use relative to its size (kbtu/sf/y)

 IAQ – Indoor Air Quality

 IEQ – Indoor Environmental quality

 Kbtu - Kilo-British Thermal Units
o A measure of energy equivalent to 1,000 British Thermal Units.

 R-Value - Resistance Value
o A measurement of thermal resistance, the inverse of the U-value.

 SHGC - Solar Heat Gain Coefficient
o Energy transmittance factor of a window or door.

 U-Value - Overall heat transfer coefficient
o A measurement of thermal resistance, the inverse of the R-value.

 HDD – Heating Degree Days
o The number of days that the outside temperature is below than the balanced point and
heating is required.

 CDD – Cooling Degree Days
o The number of days that the outside temperature is higher than the balanced point and
cooling is required.

 GHG – Green House Gas emissions
o Definition and units

 SSF – Single Skin Façade

 DSF – Double Skin Façade

 WWR – Window Wall Ratio

 DECS – Dynamic Environmental Control System

 CFD – Computational Fluid Dynamics

DSF

 MS – Multistory

 CO – Corridor

xxiv

 SB – Shaft Box

 BW – Box Window

Software

 GBS – Green Building Studio – Autodesk software

 DB – DesignBuilder

 Climate Consultant
o A climate analyses software (The Regents of the University of California 2012).

Organizations

 DOE – U.S. Department of Energy

 PPNL - Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

 EPA – Environmental Protection Agency

1

Abstract
Double Skin Facades (DSF) have been studied extensively in the past for different aspects such
as energy and thermal performance, daylight, acoustics, use as noise barriers, aesthetics etc. A
review of the current state and energy performance issues of DSF’s are being addressed and
mostly regarding their impact on the building’s performance. Moreover, the experimental
proposal provides a solution to enhance their efficiency. In order to achieve this goal a dynamic
airflow control system was proposed in the cavity. The effect of this system and its outcomes
were examined in energy simulation software. The proposed system offers the flexibility to
transform a DSF between the four basic types: multi-story, corridor, shaft box, and window box.
The results were compared among the types and a single skin façade system. This transformation
allows control of the airflow in the cavity, and increases or decreases the air velocity/air volume.
The study was made for a climate in each of the cities of: Los Angeles, New York and Houston.
The outcomes identified which façade typology performs better for which climate, time period
(day, season, year etc.); what the adopting transformation pattern should be for each location, the
time period that contributes to the energy savings; and finally identified the configurations that
should be avoided in every case. Depending on the climate the energy savings could be up to 4%
for the hottest day and up to 4.32% for the coldest day during a 24h cycle.
Keywords: double skin façade, energy performance, cavity, simulation, dynamic system, office
building, building envelope, control.

2

Hypothesis
Double skin facades have become more and more popular in high-rise and commercial buildings;
however, there is a debate whether their effect on a building’s performance is positive in terms of
energy savings. Studies have shown that cooling and heating loads during the year might not
perform as estimated in early stage design and energy simulation software; while in some cases
DSF contribute further to the energy consumption. Other cases and studies have shown that
double skin facades are an environmental and sustainable solution for this type of buildings, both
in terms of aesthetics and energy. A dynamic façade can have up to 4% contribution to the
energy savings compared to a static one, depending on the DSF type, climate and time period
examined.

3

Chapter 1: Introduction to double skin facades
Building envelopes are elements that carry multiple duties. In addition to being a natural barrier
between the indoor and exterior environments, they are also significant structural, financial, and
aesthetical attributes of a building. Facades also play an important role to the energy
performance, thermal conditions, acoustics, ventilation, daylight and visual comfort (Zelenay
Krystyna, Perepelitza Mark 2011). Double skin facades (DSF) are a specific type of façade. As
the term implies, DSFs are consisted by two facades; usually separated by an air space between
them characterized as the “cavity.” DSF, originally designed in Europe (Saelens 2002) have
become somewhat of a trend driven by the increased need of energy efficiency and building
performance, while maintaining the benefits of highly glazed surfaces. Moreover, DSF are being
used as a tool for indoor environmental quality (IEQ) and control when designed properly.
Various configurations of building facades could be implemented depending on the project
architectural and environmental goals, budget, durability, safety, maintenance and building life-
cycle ( Vaglio and Patterson 2013). The typical configurations are being analyzed in Chapter 2.

1.1 The current energy problem
The building industry has a large effect on the climate, resources, greenhouse gas emissions
(GHG), energy, and the economy. Regarding energy, the focus turns even more towards
alternative resources as the natural ones decline and become more expensive. A major energy
impact though is caused by the existing buildings and their performance. Today, about 32% of
the world energy use is consumed by buildings (International Energy Agency 2014). The USA’s
building sector represents 7% in the world energy consumption map (U.S. Department of Energy
2012a) while in US buildings are responsible for 40% for the energy (International Energy
4

Agency 2014). Out of the 40% of the energy usage, the residential sector is responsible for about
52%, followed by the commercial sector with 43% and the industry with 5%. For the
commercial buildings, the greatest amount of the energy goes to the HVAC systems for lighting
(20%), heating (11%), cooling (7%), hot water (5%), ventilation (3%), and refrigeration (3%).
The following graph represents the breakdown of the energy use by commercial buildings
(Waide, Amann Thorne, and Hinge 2007).

Fig.1 - 1 Primary energy Use in U.S. Commercial Buildings (Waide, Amann Thorne, and Hinge
2007).
According to the DOE Building’s performance database California, New York, Texas,
Washington, and Vermont have the highest number of commercial buildings in US. The figure
below represents the density of commercial buildings per state (U.S. Department of Energy
2014a) .
38%
20%
11%
8%
7%
5%
3%
3%
2%
Primary energy Use in U.S. Commercial Buildings (IEA 2007)
Other uses
Lighting
Space heating
Office Equipment
Space Cooling
Water Heating
Refrigeration
Ventilation
Cooking
5

Fig.1 - 2 Commercial Buildings per State (U.S. Department of Energy 2014a).
California, New York, and Texas were selected as the areas for the study due to large number of
commercial buildings they have. A specific climate from each state has been chosen. Even
though California has the highest amount of commercial buildings has the lowest mean site and
source consumption. Texas has the least number of buildings between these three states yet it has
the highest amount of energy usage (Fig.1-3). It is important to understand the amount of energy
the buildings use and further the need for more energy efficient buildings. With a simple
multiplication one can calculate an ‘en gros’ number of the energy used every year by the
commercial sector in these three states. These statistics further show how the enhancement of
energy savings at such a large number of buildings can decrease the energy demand.

6

Fig.1 - 3 Energy consumption by the commercial buildings per state
1
.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the Building Technology Office (BTO) are working
on engaging the building industry and professionals into designing the new and upgrading the
existing commercial buildings to be more energy efficient (U.S. Department of Energy
2014b).The Net-Zero Energy Commercial Building Initiative was created in order to support the
long-term net-zero energy targets. By 2030 all the new commercial buildings must be net-zero,
50% by 2040 and net-zero for all by 2050 (Torcellini et al. 2010). As the National Institute of
Building Sciences suggests and most professionals involved in Building Science and Energy
Consultancy agree that
Energy efficiency is generally the most cost-effective strategy with the highest return on
investment, and maximizing efficiency opportunities before developing renewable energy plans
will minimize the cost of the renewable energy projects needed (National Institute of Building
Sciences 2013).

1
Data gathered from (U.S. Department of Energy 2014a).
7

Energy efficiency can be achieved via various technological strategies and early stage design
decision making. One of the major parameters though affecting a building’s performance is its
envelope. The building envelope affects the energy usage and the IEQ parameters such as
lighting.
People in U.S. spend 90% of their time indoors (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2008).
Indoor environments need to provide healthy and comfortable conditions to the occupants.
According to the ASHRAE Strategic Plan for 2010-2015 (ASHRAE 2010), one of the goals was
to quantify the effect of the Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) to people’s productivity and
health. The main components of the IEQ are temperature, relative humidity, air velocity, CO
2
levels, lighting, acoustics, spatial conditions, view/open to exterior.
All the IEQ parameters are correlated to the exterior environment through the building enclosure.
In office buildings, envelopes usually consist of high glazed facades. Depending on the climate
and orientation of the glazed facades, this could be an advantage or disadvantage, but in every
case it affects significantly the energy loads and primarily cooling and heating. For instance a
conventional south façade with high glazing ratio would increase the heat gains during summer
and heat losses during winter. As a result the users would have to increase the HVAC use in the
office building in order to maintain the IEQ conditions of the space within the comfortable zones.
Artificial lighting operates even during the daytime; especially in the cores of the buildings since
daylight penetrates into a building within 15ft it’s not sufficient for the inner spaces. Glare is also
another common problem caused by the high glazed surfaces of a building that needs to be
tackled. Therefore, a key component for improving both the IEQ and efficiency of a building is
its envelope (Poirazis 2006).
8

1.2 Double skin facades as building envelopes and their performance
Curtain walls and double skin facades are not new elements in the building industry. High
glazing surfaces in commercial buildings have been around since the French revolution, and they
were aesthetically admired and technologically considered as great engineering achievements of
the time (Saelens 2002). Most commercial buildings use a 60% percentage of glazing surfaces
(Pless and Torcellini 2012). Many buildings have become known due to the architectural looks
and aesthetics that the transparency of the façade and its uniformity provides.
The double skin façade assembly has the following basic components: exterior skin, interior skin,
cavity and other components depending on the design (Poirazis 2006), (Gratia and De Herde
2007a).
The basic principle for the function of the DSF is to use the air buffer zone that the cavity forms
to capture heat, circulate, or exhaust it. More details on this principle are discussed in Chapter 2.
One of the current obstacles for measuring the impact of a façade on the overall performance of a
building is the difficulty of collecting and isolating the dedicated performance data. Controls and
sensors are required with constant monitoring, which is translated to additional financial
investment. At the same time, cooling, heating, ventilation, and lighting performance should be
monitored so that the correlation between the façade performance and loads can be determined.
When operable windows are part of the façade system, control is even harder in the case of room
to room partitioning since the comfort zone of the users is subjective, and they form their own
IEQ conditions. Moreover, the building owners and managers are not easily willing to share
energy use data and other relevant information by the fear of losing privacy (Matos and Duarte
2007). Commissioning, which should be done a year after the building occupancy, is one
available source but not often implemented. Post occupancy evaluations remain a challenge since
9

they require time and effort from the occupants, and they may choose not to complete the
surveys. Therefore, collection of data and performance assessment remains a difficult task
( Vaglio and Patterson 2013).
One of the recent studies managed to collect enough raw data with statistically significant results,
even though the outcomes can be antiphrastic among different cases. Physical and IEQ settings,
including location, climate, orientation, building attributes, scheduling, and occupant density are
architectural parameters that differ from case to case and that have a different impact on the
analysis. In many cases benchmarks were used for of a building’s performance evaluation
(Schiefer et al. 2005).
It has been shown that a single skin façade building may use 20% more energy for heating
compared to one with a double skin façade. If the glazing type of the single skin façade is
changed to a type with a higher U-value, the energy demand was shown to be almost equal
(Høseggen et al. 2008). A European study compared the cooling and heating loads of single skin
and double skin façade buildings, the DSFs showed higher cooling loads and lower heating (Fig
1-4). The same study stated that SSF with lower glazed surfaces perform better than high glazed
SSF and sometimes even better than high glazed DSF (Matos and Duarte 2007). Buildings with
DSF show higher cooling loads than the SSF is one of the current problems with some DSF
buildings; they don’t perform as expected. Diverse configurations of DSF and their cavity
properties affect in different ways the performance of the façade and eventually the building. The
location, orientation, materials, glazing type, shading devices, and the dimensions of the cavity
are some of the most important factors for examining the contribution of a DSF’s to the buildings’
efficiency.
10

Fig.1 - 4 Energy consumption in heating and cooling for a sample of individual identified
buildings in Europe (Matos and Duarte 2007)
2

In most of these cases, the problem is found with the cavity between the two skins, which in
summer times overheats causing the “greenhouse effect” (Fig.1-5). Studies have shown that the
temperature increase within the cavity transmits the heat into the inner skin, which is further
radiated to the interior. In addition to the solar gains, the interior gains such as occupancy,
activities, equipment, and lighting increase the cooling loads, and an excess use of the building’s
HVAC system is required for maintaining the indoor thermal and environmental conditions to
the desired levels and standards (Gratia and De Herde 2007a).

2
Figure and title taken from the paper “A comparison between energy performance of one DSF buildings studied
sample and office buildings benchmarks in Europe” written in 2007 by M. de Matos and R. Duarte during the
“BEST FAÇADE PROJECT” supported by the “Intelligent Energy Europe EIE/04/135/S07.38652 and presented in
28th AIVC and 2nd Palenc Conference " Building Low Energy Cooling and Ventilation Technologies in the 21st
Century", Crete, Greece, 27-29 September 2007. Source
11

Fig.1 - 5 GreenHouse effect in a double skin façade.
Cooling loads during the summer seasons may even exceed the savings from the heating during
the winter seasons (Schiefer et al. 2005). These information beg the question “which type of DSF
would be a more beneficial solution for both cooling and heating seasons in terms of
performance?” and moreover, in order to have the optimum contribution to the energy savings,
“what is further required for the DSF to achieve this?”.
The current DSF typologies don’t decrease both the cooling and heating demands. In order to
achieve this, a different type of DSF or system is required, one that will allow the façade to alter
its typology and adjust in different situations such as climatic conditions (Saelens 2002).
1.3 Goals
Reducing both the cooling and heating loads of a building with the existing systems a DSF
remains a challenge. Therefore, the creation of a new dynamic system in the DSF cavity that will
lower both the cooling and heating demands throughout the year is the main goal. A new set of
elements are being introduced in the façade cavity that will give greater flexibility and adaptation
capabilities to a DSF than the existing systems do. Furthermore, an analysis will show how such
12

a system, which is dynamic, contributes to the energy performance by minimizing or cancelling
the greenhouse effect in the cavity and enhances the energy saving potential both of the DSF and
the overall building EUI. Moreover, the importance of using a dynamic system compared to a
static one is not only for the current benefits of improving the energy performance of the
building and its followed consequences such as the IEQ and health, and even though these
parameters are not being examined, thermal comfort is a way to measure them.
The primary objective was to find the most advantageous set of parameters that should be used in
a DSF and identify the ones that should be avoided due to their effect on the buildings’
performance. In order to achieve this scope, some questions had to be answered; a baseline of
the cavity type and properties had to be set; and the range of these parameters needed to be
defined for the data creation, collection and analysis.
Questions that needed to be answered are the following:
o Which typologies of DSF are being examined?
o For which type of building, geometry and materials is the effect of the DSF being
examined?
o What kind of activities, schedules, systems and controls are included in the building that
affect its energy performance?
o What are the targets and outputs of the analysis?
The baseline model and the cavity characteristics can be defined and designed only when these
questions are answered. Chapter 2: Background of Double Skin Facades was the foundation for
this decision making while Chapter 3: Methodologies and Chapter 4: Results discuss in detail
and answer these questions.
13

The first step towards finding the answers of these objectives was to identify the catalytic
parameters that affect the performance of a double skin façade for the climates chosen in the
cities of: Los Angeles, New York, and Houston. These cities were chosen for the study because
they have the highest number of commercial buildings in U.S.. The second step was to specify
the structure and function of the new system of the dynamic environmental control system
(DECS). The principle behind this concept was to provide the DSF the ability of transition
among the four basic façade typologies according to the particular environmental conditions and
building needs: Multistory (MS), Corridor (CO), Shaft Box (SB) and Box Window (BW) (Fig.1-
6). The system responsible to do these transformations has been named DECS which stands for
Dynamic Environmental Control System for the cavity of DSF.

Fig.1 - 6 Diagram of the DSF types based on the cavity compartmentation.
Definitions, benefits and limitations of these typologies are analyzed extensively in Chapter 2.
Lastly, this system was modeled in the energy modeling software DesignBuilder, the
performance and contributions to the energy savings were evaluated and the results were
analyzed.
14

1.4 The Dynamic Environmental Control System (DECS) principle for DSF cavities
The Dynamic Environmental Control System (DECS) principle for DSF cavities is the system
proposed to be inserted in the cavity that will allow it to alter its configuration among the basic
four types, Multistory (MS), Corridor (CO), Shaft Box (SB) and Box Window (BW).
The goal was to decrease both the cooling and heating loads of a DSF for throughout a year, in
terms of EUI (kbtu/sf/y). In order to achieve these transformations new elements were integrated
into the dynamic environmental control system (DECS), transparent glazed dividers, vertical and
horizontal that will be referred to as “fins”: horizontal fins (HF) and vertical fins (VF). A
diagram which illustrates the conceptual idea of how the principle of the dynamic control in the
cavity of DSF works is illustrated (Fig.1-7).

Fig.1 - 7 The principle of the dynamic control of the cavity.
Glazed dividers wouldn’t thermally effect the environment of the cavities as much as solid or
metallic materials would. If they were solid metallic materials for instance, not only would they
shade and change the actual solar heat gains and daylight in the building, but they would also
absorb heat and increase the air temperature in the cavities especially during the cooling seasons
and later radiate it contributing to the cooling loads. This effect would be against the stated
objective to lower energy consumption.
15

All the fins could rotate and as a result open to unify the cavity into a single space or close and
divide it into smaller compartments. Therefore, in winter a multi-story façade could be
transformed to a box window or corridor by re-forming the buffer zones to smaller ones. Since
the air in the cavity acts as insulation from the exterior environmental conditions and as thermal
mass, the captured heat from the solar radiation would be almost equally divided throughout the
building façade. The inner skin would absorb this heat and radiate it to the interior space,
contributing to the heat gains and assisting to the decreasing of heating loads (Fig.1-8).

Fig.1 - 8 Transforming the double skin façade into the four basic types with DECS.
In summer the multi story (MS) configuration or the shaft box (SB) would be mostly preferable
for creating the stack effect, exhausting the hot air from the cavity, cooling the inner skin and as
a result decreasing the cooling loads. For the swing seasons it is estimated that a greater variety
of patterns – angle rotations of the VF and HF will be formed. Overall, the configuration patterns
aim to be changing throughout the day all year round maximizing the DSF performance potential.
16

During the study the following research questions will be answered:
o Which DSF configuration of the dynamic control system performs better for
which climate?
o Which DSF configuration of the dynamic control system performs better for
which season?
o Which are the overall savings of the DSF types examined compared to a
conventional façade system?
o Which DSF configuration patterns should be avoided in every climate zone?
o Which is the energy breakdown for heating and cooling per climate zone?
Answers to these questions will assist in the performance evaluation of DECS and the energy
savings accomplished in terms of EUI and fuel breakdown.
1.5 Scope of Work
The scope and structure as per the workflow that was followed for its implementation:
background research and studies, simulation of the proposed control models, analysis of the
results, and conclusions.
“Chapter 2: Background of Double Skin Facades” discusses the evolution of DSF in history,
typologies, previous works, and studies. This chapter provides the foundation of this research
and highlights the parameters are crucial to DSF design and performance. It ends with the
important energy modeling aspects of the DSF.
“Chapter 3: Methodologies” explains the selection of variables that were used and examined in
this research. Software attempts for modeling, details about the software used for this study, the
process of modeling, the base case energy model and the energy simulations that were performed.
17

“Chapter 4: Results” presents the results of all the energy modeling simulations, from the
Autodesk based software attempts to DesignBuilder. The outcomes of the DesignBuilder
simulations are presented per climate zone for the annual, monthly, hottest day and coldest day
energy loads in electricity, gas, heating, cooling and overall energy use intensity. Lastly the best
and worst performing DSF versus the SSF are identified.
“Chapter 5: Analysis and discussion” analyzes and evaluates the results. It explains how DECS
and its variables have affected the results. Most importantly concludes that the DECS application
is advantageous compared to the conventional DSFs. The study was made with a total of 27
facade assemblies per climate zone, out of which the optimum DECS pattern was made by an
aggregation of the most efficient configurations of DSF and DECS configurations.
“Chapter 6: Conclusions” presents an overview of the thesis and the conclusions based on the
study results and analysis. It references the results of DECS with other study results and aspects
mentioned in Chapter 1- Chapter 5. In summarizes the impact of DECS in the performance of
DSFs for the climates studied and concludes the benefits of DECS application especially in
energy savings. Finally it reviews the limitations of the study and identifies further potentials and
benefits of the DECS application.
“Chapter 7: Future work” makes recommendations for future work based on the research
conclusions, findings during the progress of the thesis, and other areas of the study that were not
developed in the research but which are believed to produce significant findings.
Finally, the “Appendices: Further documentation of the data and work” provide all the supported
documentation and data that are helpful for gaining a detailed understanding this study’s process
and outcomes.
18

Chapter 2: Background of Double Skin Facades
Chapter 1 analyzed some current problems with energy usage by the building sector and
more specifically from the commercial building sector. An introduction to double skin façades
(DSF) was made, and their function as part of the building envelope was described. The major
problem of DSF energy performance was described and based on that the goals of this study
were analyzed. The aim was to solve the overheating problem that occurs in the cavity during the
cooling seasons which leads to an excess use of HVAC systems and maintain or even improve
the performance during the heating season. The Dynamic Environmental Control System (DECS)
was introduced, and an outline to study this was proposed.
Chapter 2 gives a deeper understanding of the double skin façade system, its function and
principles behind its use including the following: definitions and terminologies used in the field,
a historical background, the typologies of DSF, advantages and disadvantages, the physics
behind their function, previous research regarding their performance, and issues regarding
controls in the cavity.

2.1 Terminology

Double skin façades have been defined in different ways by different researchers and
professionals based on their work focus and interests. A generic term “multiple skin facades” is
sometimes used in order to cover all the possible configurations and mechanisms that operate
them.
An envelope construction, which consists of two transparent surfaces separated by a cavity,
which is used as an air channel. This definition includes three main elements: (1) the envelope
19

construction, (2) the transparency of the bounding surfaces and (3) the cavity airflow. (Saelens
2002)
More specified definitions that match this thesis research scope are the following:
Compano (2002) described the cavity as a buffer zone aimed to insulate the building. The buffer
zone gets heated by solar radiation according to the orientation of the façade. He mentioned that
South facades should be vented to avoid overheating in periods other than winter when heating is
required (Poirazis 2006).
Kragh, (2000) highlighted that the internal and external skins can be single or double glazed
units and solar shading should be placed in the ventilated cavity. The type of ventilation, depth of
cavity and environmental systems depend on the environmental conditions. the depth of the
cavity and type of ventilation (Poirazis 2006).

(Köhl 2006) mentioned that the external skin can be out of single glass, double glass or PV cell
layers. In addition to the solar shading in the cavity alternatively glare protection systems should
be associated with the façade (Poirazis 2006).
A hybrid definition for DSF has been made, incorporating the role and the effect of the dynamic
environmental control system of the cavity. A DSF consists of two layers of skin with an
airspace called the cavity, which can be ventilated naturally, mechanically, or by a hybrid system.
The cavity can have a dynamic environmental control system that gives it the ability to change
its form depending on the outdoor and indoor conditions. These adaptive capabilities make the
façade an intelligent system able to transform itself to various configurations. Not only can it
change the airflow or air-tightness to enhance its performance and contribute to the building
20

energy savings, but its interactiveness makes the facade an even more interesting aesthetical
building attribute projecting the climatic conditions.
In the literature review, it has been mentioned that double skin facades in literature can also be
found under the following names (Poirazis 2006):
• Active Façade (usually when the air cavity
ventilation is mechanical)
• Passive Façade (usually when the air
cavity ventilation is natural)
• Double Façade
• Double Envelope (Façade)
• Dual-Layered Glass Façade
• Dynamic Façade
• Wall-Filter Façade
• Environmental Second Skin System
• Energy Saving Façade
• Ventilated Façade
• Double-Leaf Façade
• Energy Saving Façade
• Environmental Façade
• Multiple-Skin Façades
• Intelligent Glass Façade
• Second Skin Façade/System
• Airflow Window
• Supply Air Window
• Exhaust Window/Façade
• Double Skin Curtain
2.1.1 Major Components
The fundamental components that form the DSF assembly are the interior glazing, exterior
glazing, and the cavity. These can be expanded into a more descriptive structure of the assembly:
o Exterior glazing (usually single pane)
o Interior glazing (usually double pane)
o Walls (optional - as part of the inner skin or behind the inner glazed surface)
o Air cavity (from 4” to 6’)
o Operability of the inner surfaces – windows (optional)
o Solar shading (optional – usually in the cavity) or interior blinds
o Passive/active ventilation systems
o Other components (depending on the design)

21

Fig.2 - 1 Detail of double skin façade and its components
3
(ArchiExpo 2013).
The “other components” section was included to give a place for features such as lighting or
other attributes which may be necessary in DSF projects (Saelens 2002). The Horizontal Fins
(HF) and Vertical Fins (VF) proposed for the DECS go under the ’passive/active ventilation
system’ category since they are introduced for control of the cavity’s ventilation system.
2.2 Evolution of Double Skin Façade
Double skin facades were conceptualized by several people in different times for different
reasons. It’s been almost 150 years since the very first double skin façade illustration. Since then
DSF have evolved, nowadays they have become common trend, especially in commercial or
office buildings. A short reference to the history of the double skin facades and the evolution is
being presented in this chapter, as well as a definition for the “dynamic” façade and the
importance of DECS in terms of controls.

3
The original image has been edited for the purposes of the study.
22

2.2.1 A reference in the history of double skin facades

The history of double skin facades dates back to the 1850’s. Jean Baptiste Jobart was one of the
pioneers of the use of double skin façade. In 1849 he introduced the idea of mechanically
conditioning the air between two layers of glass and changing the thermal effect that the
increased glazing surfaces had on the building during summer and winter (Saelens 2002; Braham;
Poirazis 2006; Schiefer et all 2008). In 1903, the Steiff Machine Hall toy factory in Giengen,
Brenz in Germany was built. This is probably the first double skin facade building. Its material
selection and design were not made only for better thermal conditions and a modern aesthetic,
but also for lighting purposes (Jaeggi 2000). The inner skin was made out of a matte glass,
chosen to diffuse the light and create an ambient lighting condition proper for sewing. The cavity
had a depth of 18 inches enclosing the building frame; creating an unventilated space acting as a
buffer zone (Fortmeyer and Linn 2014). It is believed that its engineer Richard Steiff was
inspired by the Paxton Crystal Palace of London and his father’s exposure to the Chicago
skyscrapers in his trips (Murray 2013). The building was still in use at the time that the report
was made (Blomsterberg 2007).

23

Fig.2 - 2 Detail of the Double-Skin Façade in section, Steiff Factory (Fortmeyer and Linn 2014).
In the same year, 1903, Otto Wagner designed the first double- skin skylight for the main hall of
the Post Savings Bank in Vienna, Austria (Saelens 2002).

Fig.2 - 3 The Steiff factory today (Solla 2011).
Other buildings and professionals related to the history and first applications of double-skin
façade principle (Saelens 2002; Poirazis 2006; Schiefer et. all 2008):
24

Double skin facades were developed at the end of 1920’s in different places for different reasons.
Moisei Ginzburg in 1928 used double skin stripes at the communal housing blocks of the
Narkomfin building in Russia. Le Corbusier at that time was designing in Moscow the
Centrosoyus. One year later he started the design of Cite de Refuge (1929) and the Immeuble
Clarte (1930) in Paris for which he stated.
„la respiration exacte“4 („…an exactly regulated mechanical ventilation system…“) and „le
mur neutralisant“ („...neutralising walls are made of glass or stone or both of them. They
consist of two membranes which form a gap of a few centimeters. Through this gap which is
enveloping the whole building in Moscow hot and in Dakar cold air is conducted. By that the
inner surface maintains a constant temperature of 18° C. The building is tightened hermetically!
In the future no dust will find its way into the rooms. No flies, no gnats will enter. And no
noise!…“) (Le Corbusier, 1964).
Double skin façades gained more interest in late 70’s with the environmental concerns. In 90’s
the increase these concerns and started influencing architecture and politics towards “green
buildings” (Poirazis 2004).

2.2.2 Dynamic Facades versus Dynamic Environmental Control System (DECS)
The word ‘dynamic,’ whose etymology comes from the Greek δυναμικό< δύναμη, stands for
force or/and power, and indicates that there is a continuous energy in a body or a system. The
word is the antonym of στατικό< ‘static’. Their main difference is that dynamic carries an
amount of energy that must transfer or change its state; therefore the word when used for
buildings indicates that there is a constant change or transformation of its form, system, or other
building components. For facades dynamic implies that this energy changes its phase by

25

becoming usually kinetic and therefore moves part(s) of the façade. Frequently dynamic facades
are correlated to the solar energy and sun path. This is due to the fact that the daily lifecycle,
activities, and building operations are in a great percentage correlated to day and night; therefore
to the earth’s constant movement in relation to the sun; a process which is always dynamic, in
constant movement.
Based on the above explanation, the DSF is not characterized as a dynamic façade since only
parts of the cavity elements are able to move. The HF and VF can change from one position to
another; the inner and outer skins remain static. Therefore it is a DSF with a dynamic system
within the cavity, a dynamic environmental control system, since its goal is to control the
environmental conditions of the cavity.
4

2.3 Typology of double skin facades
Double skin facades can be grouped into three main categories depending on
o the geometry of the cavity and it’s partitioning
o the type of ventilation in the cavity, and
o the ventilation mode for exhausting the air from the cavity.
as found in the works of (Saelens 2002; Loncour et al. 2004; Poirazis 2006; Knaack et al. 2007).
2.3.1 Geometry Type - Multistory, Corridor, Shaft Box, Box Window
This category is defined as the 'Geometry Type' based on the way the cavity of a DSF is
partitioned. There are four basic types found: Multistory, Corridor, Shaft Box and Bow Window.
Each of the types is identified by different geometrical characteristics of the cavity, the air

4
It has to be noted that the above interpretation is based on the author’s acquaintance with Greek as a mother
language. It is not based on scientific definitions of the words or their boundaries as these are being used or defined
in the English language.
26

volume that circulates in the cavity and the effect that the cavity type has on the performance of a
building. The four types are being analyzed more extensively in this section.

2.3.1.1 Multistory
The term multistory DSF is used for a façade that covers multiple stories, usually the whole inner
building façade without the cavity space being divided into smaller segments. According to this
façade type has the advantage is the simplicity of the design, structure and technically has fewer
parts (Knaack et al. 2007). Moreover, it only receives air through openings at the bottom and
exhausts air from the top of the façade. The disadvantage is that is not easy to control the
environment of the cavity. Multistory facades also provide homogenous aesthetics, are easy to
prefabricate, maintain and repair or replace ( Vaglio, Patterson, and Hooper 2010). They can be
from a single story building to high rise with cavity depths among 1.5ft-5ft. disadvantage is that
the air within the cavity.

Fig.2 - 4 Multistory DSF.

27

2.3.1.2 Corridor
Corridor facades divide the façade cavity into horizontal strips forming corridors that if are wide
enough can also be used for circulation or maintenance purposes. This DSF type makes it easier
to control the cavity environmental conditions per floor as they are formed by one story. This
type was invented to avoid with the ventilation problem among different levels and therefore
staggered air inlets and outlets are used to ventilate it (Knaack et al. 2007). The advantage is that
the airflow is easier to control, and there is no noise circulation among different levels.

Fig.2 - 5 Corridor DSF.

2.3.1.3 Shaft Box
According to is the most effective type of DSF since the vertical compartmentation extends for
many floors; a fact which enhances the stack effect, increases the airflow speed and therefore
performs better than the other types this (Knaack et al. 2007). The shaft box façade type uses the
stack effect explained in section 2.6.1 Stack effect – buoyancy.
28

Fig.2 - 6 Shaft Box DSF.

2.3.1.4 Box Window
Box window DSF are one story high but also divided into smaller individual boxes when
compared to the corridor type. This type gives the users the ability to partially control their own
indoor environment (in the case of operable windows) since the air circulates only within that
space and the inlet and outlet are at the top and bottom of that floor level (Knaack et al. 2007).
The disadvantage is that the exhaust air of the lower level may interfere with the inlet air of the
above box window. This type is mostly preferred it’s very easy to install and replace in case of a
failure ( Vaglio and Patterson 2011). The depth usually is between 4-8in, and therefore the
disadvantages are that moisture, dirt and condensation are difficult to control unless the cavity is
sealed properly, and overall maintenance is difficult.
The Box Window ventilation system and its function are illustrated and the colored arrows show
the air entering and exhausting the cavity throughout the year (Fig. 2-7). The DECS Box

29

Window (BW) configuration can capture the hot air in the small compartments of the cavity
when heating demand is higher and therefore contribute to lowering the heating demand (Fig. 2-
8.

Fig.2 - 7 Box Window DSF.

Fig.2 - 8 Box Window DSF – DECS.

30

2.3.2 Cavity Ventilation Type - Natural, Mechanical, Hybrid
There are three ways to ventilate a DSF cavity (Loncour et al. 2004):
o Natural ventilation (passive façade)
o Mechanical ventilation (active façade)
o Hybrid system (interactive façade)
The performance of naturally ventilated facades is completely linked to the exterior
environmental conditions, such as wind and temperature. Façade dimensions, construction and
glazing are critical due to the risk of high pressures differences (Loncour et al. 2004). The
principal for the performance is based on the stack effect analyzed in section 2.6 – The Physics
behind DSF. For the case of ventilated facades, if the double glazing is installed on the exterior
skin higher noise insulations can be achieved (Poirazis 2006).
Mechanically ventilated facades are commonly found in the indoor air curtain configuration. In
this case the structure of the façade usually changes and the exterior skin carries the double
glazing. The reason is to provide better insulation purposes and avoid condensation inside the
cavity. Heat recovery systems can be used be with this system (Loncour et al. 2004).
Hybrid systems are a combination of mechanical and ventilation system. When the winds –
natural ventilation and buoyancy are not efficient enough to exhaust the hot air from the façade;
then the mechanical system assists the airflow in order to maintain low temperatures within the
cavity. Heat recovery systems can be used also in this case by inserting hot air from the cavity to
the indoor spaces (Loncour et al. 2004).

31

2.3.3 Ventilation Mode - Outdoor air curtain, Indoor air curtain, Air supply, Air
exhaust, Buffer zone
There five basic ventilation modes of the DSF systems for exhausting the hot air from the cavity:
outdoor air curtain, indoor air curtain, air supply, air exhaust, and buffer zone as shown in (Fig.
2-9), according to (Saelens 2002; Poirazis 2006; Knaack et al. 2007) and the Belgian Building
Research Institute (BBRI - (Loncour et al. 2004))
1) Outdoor Air Curtain: The air in the cavity is both introduced from and exhausted to the
exterior environment.
2) Indoor Air Curtain: The air in the cavity is both introduced from and exhausted towards
the indoor environment.
3) Air Supply: The air in the cavity is introduced from the exterior environment and
exhausted to the interior.
4) Air Exhaust: The air in the cavity is introduced from the interior environment and
exhausted to the exterior.
5) Buffer zone: There is no air circulating in the cavity, and it acts as a buffer zone.

Fig.2 - 9 Ventilation modes of DSF systems (Loncour et al. 2004).
32

Base on these three parameters of DSF (ventilation type, mode and cavity partitioning), various
configurations can be formed. Possible combinations of DSF systems are shown with the yellow
colors indicating the most common combinations for the formation of passive facades (using
only natural ventilation) implemented in practice (Fig. 2-10).

Fig.2 - 10 Combinations of ventilation type, mode and cavity partitioning (Loncour et al. 2004).

2.4. Advantages and disadvantages of DSF
Each DFS type has its advantages and disadvantages. Overall the DSF have both positive and
negative effects on the building behavior and performance are summarized below as described in
the works of (Saelens 2002; Poirazis 2004; Schiefer et. all 2005; Gratia and De Herde 2007b;
Köhl 2006; Braham 2005). Tables with the advantages and disadvantages by author can be found
in Appendix A: Table 2 - Appx.A – 1 Summary of DSF advantages by author, and Table 2 -
Appx.A – 2 Summary of DSF disadvantages by author.

33

2.4.1 Advantages:
 DSF provide greater thermal insulation to the building by increasing the heat transfer
resistance during winter while in summer the hot air gets exhausted cooling the inner
skin.
 The air cavity acts as a buffer zone and therefore the radiant temperature difference (ΔΤ)
among the inner skin and the indoor space is smaller; making the indoor spaces close to
the windows more comfortable and usable. As a result it also decreases the indoor
temperature fluctuations during the day providing greater overall thermal comfort.
 The solar shades when placed in the cavity are protected from the external weather
conditions, dust and pollution. They require less maintenance during their lifetime and
last longer compared to external shades. In summer they reduce the solar heat gains and
contribute to the energy savings.
 Acoustic insulation and comfort are major effects of the DSF towards the IEQ and
occupant’s productivity. The acoustic improvement is even more significant when the
buildings are in noisy places. Definition of the IEQ can be found in Chapter 1 section 1.1
The current energy problem (p.12).
 Operable windows towards the cavity in a windy location can assist in reducing the “sick
building syndrome”. Natural ventilation helps in removing dust, small particulates,
smells, VOC' particulates from the interior spaces which can cause this syndrome.
Moreover due to the fact that the windows don’t get very cold,
 Natural ventilation can be used without fear when high wind pressures occur on higher
floors. This is due to the fact that the existence of DSF reduces the speed and air pressure
of the wind that enters the building. In contrast, in buildings without DSF and operable
windows or doors are directly exposed towards the exterior environment, high wind
pressures are a concern.
 Night time ventilation during summer (when operable windows exist) cools down the
building by morning and increases the indoor air quality because natural ventilation
assists in removing dust, small particulates, smells, VOC’s which are parameters
34

important to the IEQ. Definition of the IEQ can be found in Chapter 1 section 1.1 The
current energy problem (p.12).
 Exterior view increases occupants comfort on the indoor spaces and productivity levels.
 Transparency and uniform give great aesthetic looks and a sense of openness and
transparency to the company/organization.
 The cost of a DSF can be lower than the use of an electrochromic, thermochromic or
photochromic panes in a building.
 Some designs of DSF can use the cavity as a fire escape.
 DSF contribute to the environment by decreasing the CO2 emissions and reduce the
running costs (Volovelskay 2008).

The above list is a summary of advantages for the use of DSF as described in the works of
(Saelens 2002; Poirazis 2004; Schiefer et al. 2005; Gratia and De Herde 2007b; Köhl 2006;
Braham 2005)

2.4.2 Disadvantages:
 Usually the biggest disadvantage is the higher cost compared to a conventional – single
skin façade.
 The space used for the cavity is subtracted by the useful space of a building and therefore
the economic value (ft
2
) can change.
 The operational costs and maintenance can be higher (this can be controversial to the
advantage section – it depends on the case)
 Overheating may occur in the cavity space and as a result additional cooling loads during
summer increase.
 If the building is not insulated properly the excessive glazed surfaces can cause great heat
losses during winter.
 If the air flow velocity is not controllable can cause temperature and pressure differences
among different floors.
 Daylight levels indoors are reduced compared to a single skin façade due to the cavity
depth and external skin.

35

 Glare is a common problem of buildings with high glazed surfaces if not examined
carefully.
 Sound transmission or odors may occur from room to room or floor to floor via the
cavity.
 Depending on the type of DSF: if the cavity size is not large can be difficult to maintain
while condensation is more likely to occur in small depth cavities or not sealed properly
frames.
 Some types of DSF depending on the design may transmit smoke from room to room
depending on the case while fire risks may get higher.
The above list is a summary of disadvantages as described in the works of (Saelens 2002;
Poirazis 2004; Schiefer et. all 2005; Gratia and De Herde 2007b; Köhl 2006; Braham 2005)
Further comparable charts can be found in Appendix A. The charts are not that significant for the
research, but useful in general.
2.5 Façade design decision making
DSF can be created in various configurations so the question becomes how to choose which
configuration is appropriate. The current lifespan of modern façades is about 30 years, therefore
is critical that the decision making takes into account climate and vernacular architecture
principles. Vernacular architecture provides the basic passive design strategies of a specific
climate, it was developed throughout time to optimize the efficiency of a building in terms of
thermal conditions and IEQ and therefore vernacular design strategies can be adopted to easierly
meet energy performance goals in buildings. Performance goals should be set from the beginning
to avoid future expensive alterations. The following matrix chart can be used to assist to the
façade design and decision making at an early stage of design (Knaack et al. 2007). The matrix
shown can be used by a designer for early decision making, whether the facade should be self-
regulated or regulated by the user depending on the services it provides such as control of
36

daylight, shading etc (Fig. 2-11). The climate is an important driven factor. In the matrix the red
areas define how the specific types of facades perform better. For instance, in hot and humid
climates, a self-regulating facade is preferred. In contrast, in a cold climate, a facade regulated by
the user is more common since it allows the occupant to adjust the services. For example, at a
sunny day the occupant can harvest daylight and the heat gains associated with it. For DECS in
the climates of Los Angeles, New York and Houston, a self-regulating façade is preferred.

Fig.2 - 11 Façade Matrix for early design decision making (Knaack et al. 2007).
From the preliminary design to the implementation of a facade, the process is a continuous cycle
of development and feedback. In every step more details are being introduced, the previous steps
are being updated, until the manufacture and implementation of the façade is complete (Fig.2-12).

37

Fig.2 - 12 Process for a façade design: from decision making to implementation (Knaack et al.
2007).
Generally, the type of a building façade, its design and performance depend on the climate,
building type, architectural design, energy performance goals, available budget, etc. Early stage
design decision making and performance will assist in less alterations and consequently in less
additional expenses during the development of a project. A designer can refer to the list of
advantages and disadvantages to define the techniques that can be adopted in a project and meet
the predefined goals. Regarding DSF decision making, an important factor which influences
greatly their performance is the physics behind their function. These are analyzed in section 2.6 -
The physics behind DSF.

2.6 The physics behind DSF
The most important parameter for naturally ventilated facades is the type of the force behind the
ventilation and secondly how well the façade is designed in order to take advantage of them.
There are three main types of natural ventilation: single-sided, cross, and stack (Fig. 2-13). For
DECS only the stack ventilation was used through the DSF cavity, no operable windows exist in
38

the building examined and therefore singe sided ventilation and cross ventilation were not being
applied.

Fig.2 - 13 Types of ventilation: (a) Single sided ventilation, (b) cross ventilation, (c) stack
ventilation.
Natural ventilation has two main driving forces: stack-buoyancy driven ventilation and wind
driven ventilation (Azarbayjani 2010).
2.6.1 Stack effect - buoyancy
The stack effect or buoyancy driven ventilation is very common in naturally ventilated buildings.
The principle is based on the temperature and pressure differences between two areas with a
height difference between them. Since the air flows from high to low pressure areas, it moves
from areas with lower temperatures towards areas with higher temperatures. Therefore, the
greater the height and the differences the more intense the airflow is (Azarbayjani 2010). The
stack effect has been used in vernacular architecture before the Minoan period and is still being
used in many areas around the world. The stack effect can be enhanced by the use of atriums,
stack devices, and ventilation shafts. In double skin facades, solar radiation heats the air which
rises to the higher levels of the cavity, creating temperature and pressure differences causing the
stack effect; increasing the air changes per hour (ACH) and exhausting the hot air from the top

39

(Ismail, Malek, and Rahman 2012). This effect is also known as the chimney effect. The deeper
the cavities are, the higher the pressure drop is and therefore the lower the air flow rates (Hamza
2008).
In the case of buoyancy driven ventilation, the size of inlets and outlets, the height of the space,
the strength of the heat sources which drive the airflow and the difference temperature between
the interior and exterior spaces, because of the interior heat sources, are not all dependent and
correlated between them. A fact which makes the analysis of this type of ventilation even more
complicated (Azarbayjani 2010).
2.6.2 Wind driven ventilation
Wind driven ventilation is dynamic and dependent on the climatic conditions. The wind’s
velocity, speed and direction change according to the season, time, sky condition etc. Moreover,
depending on the surrounding environment, the wind forces alter as the buildings, location and
nearby surfaces change the pressure differences and therefore the airflow (Azarbayjani 2010).
An example of the change of the airflow due to the building surfaces and differences in the air
pressure results to the change of the wind direction and airflow (Fig.2-14).

Fig.2 - 14 The building surfaces and differences in air pressure change the wind direction and
airflow.
40

2.7 Previous Research on the Energy Performance of DSF
Many factors contribute to the overall energy use intensity (EUI) of buildings; from buildings
components such as envelope, materials, location, climate (very sensitive parameter – especially
if comparing performance in different locations) to the age of the building, type of usage, surface
area/volume, occupancy, schedules, internal gains, proper use etc. (Matos and Duarte 2007).
Therefore the results among different studies might have controversial outcomes, but overall
several conclusions can be drawn regarding the performance of DSF and the parameters that
have the greatest impact on the performance. Most of the studies compare the results with a
benchmark building, usually with a SSF or a case study with real data. These include studies on
envelope, glazing, window to wall ratio (WWR), air supply mode, facade type, solar shading,
CO
2
emissions and energy modeling of DSF and controls of the cavity.
2.7.1 Envelope
Envelope is defined as the exterior skin of a building, the barrier between the interior and
exterior environment. It can be made out of solid materials such as concrete and steel, or lighter
materials such as glazed surfaces, as in curtain walls, SSF and DSF buildings etc. The envelope
usually carries openings but for office buildings in many cases, operable windows are not being
applied. The energy performance of a building is correlated greatly to the materials and their
properties. Studies have shown a significant correlation of a DSF building’s envelope to its
energy performance.
In a south facing DSF the cooling loads can be increased up to 19.7% while for east-west
oriented buildings up to 18.4% (Gratia and De Herde 2007b) . The same researches in a different
study mentioned that in the case of DSF it is important to have a well insulated building (Gratia
and De Herde 2007c). The study was made for the cold Belgium climate and shows that a well

41

insulated building can decrease up to 15.8% the heating loads for a south façade while the
cooling loads increase up to 41.1% if no natural heating or cooling loads are applied. In the same
study it was shown that for the case of a moderately insulated and poorly insulated building, the
cooling loads for a South DSF are higher than a SSF (Fig. 2-15).

Fig.2 - 15 Impact of insulation level and strategies used to the EUI of a DSF vs. SSF (Gratia and
De Herde 2007c).
Moreover the authors state that the addition of a double skin should be considered only if there
are natural cooling strategies applied. In this thesis, direct natural ventilation is only applied for
cooling the air cavity. Fresh air is being introduced into the building via a mechanical system but
not from operable widows. The reason is to examine the effect of the double skin to the energy
savings and therefore to the reduction of the cooling loads during the cooling season. If direct
natural ventilation would be applied by the use of operable windows it would be difficult to
separate the effect of the cavity from that; especially when it comes to the overall EUI of the
42

building. Therefore it was preferred to isolate and use the effect of natural ventilation in the DSF
cavity.
The orientation of the DSF envelope has been shown to effect on the HVAC energy savings and
costs. A study examined diverse DSF orientations of a building in London and a building in
London. The results showed that the use of a DSF has an impact both on the cost savings and
energy savings from the use of an HVAC system. Depending on the orientation, the percentage
of the savings differs. The results showed that a South facing façade has the highest percentage
of energy savings as well as savings from the operational cost of an HVAC system (Fig. 2-16).
The smallest savings in energy and operation are found in the use of a North facing DSF.
Therefore, the application of a DSF is preferred on a South orientation (Stribling and Stigge
2003).

Fig.2 - 16 Percentage of HVAC energy savings through façade – London (Stribling and Stigge
2003).
2.7.2 Glazing
Glass is a material commonly found on a building envelope. It can have various applications
such as in windows, doors, skylights, curtain walls and DSF. Glazing can be found in individual

43

pieces, or in the form of panels. The properties of the glazing affect its appearance and
contribution to the buildings performance. There are three commonly found types of glass: single
pane, double pane and triple pane. The U-value
5
, Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC)
6
, Visible
Transmittance (VT)
7
and Air Leakage
8
are the parameters that define the overall energy rating
and performance of a glazing. In the case of DSF, different types of glazing can be used for the
inner and outer skin. Studies have shown the effect of different DSF glazing combinations to the
energy performance of a building.
One study examined the different types of DSF pane configurations and the scope was to study
the airflow, heat losses and U-value of the assembly. These configurations are shown in Fig. 2-
17. Cases 1 and 3 had the highest U-values, higher airflow than cases 2,4 (about 35%-40%
higher) but at the same time they had greater heat losses from cases 2,4 (Poirazis 2006).

Fig.2 - 17 Description of panes applied for different DSF (Poirazis 2006).
For the case of DECS cases 1 and 3could be used as following: during the heating seasons and
enclosure of the cavity into the box-window configuration, the high U-value is maintained and

5
U-value is the thermal transmittance of a material and its units are: W/(m
2
K) of the SI system and BTU/(h °F ft
2
)
of the IP system (Wikipedia 2014b).
6
Solar heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) is defined as the solar energy transmittance of a glass and it is being indicated
with a value in a range of 0-1. The SI term for the SHGC is the g-value (Wikipedia 2014c).
7
Visible Transmittance (VT) is the fraction of visible spectrum of sunlight transmitted through the glazing, and it’s
being indicated with a value in the range of 0-1 (U.S. Department of Energy 2012b).
8
Air Leakage is defined as the amount of uncontrolled air movement through the envelope/ glazed surface to the
interior of a building. The IP units are cfm/ft
2
and the SI units m
3
/m
2
s (Zimmerman).
44

the heating losses are low. On the other hand, during the cooling seasons and the stimulation of
the stack effect the airflow increase will lead to greater heat losses, assisting to the reduction of
the cooling demand and energy savings.
For hot arid climates, such as in Cairo it has been shown that the façade configurations of office
buildings are responsible for up to 45% of the overall cooling loads in the area. The proper cavity
depth for this climate would be about 2ft-3.3ft (0.60m-1m) since dust and pollution require
access for cleaning purposes. In the study, different glazing materials were used compared to a
single skin. The results showed that the Benchmark Single Skin (BSS) had 12% less cooling
loads than the clear DSF (Fig. 2-18), (Hamza 2008). This indicates that clear glazing in a double
skin façade should not be used for this climate; a tinted or reflective DSF would be a more
appropriate solution for minimizing the cooling loads. For a similar climate, such as in Los
Angeles, CA, the results are expected to be analogous.

Fig.2 - 18 Comparison of SSF vs. DSF in Hot Arid climate (Hamza 2008).
For hot and humid climates, such as in Hong Kong, different glazing types of a DSF were
compared to SSF and the effect of the Wall to Window Ratio (WWR) to the EUI was examined

45

(Haase and Amato 2006). The WWR was shown to have a big impact on the cooling loads (Fig.
2-19). Moreover, the DSF in all three WWR cases with clear glass has the lowest cooling loads
when compared to the base cases as shown below. Notice that for this climate the 60% WWR
compared to the 32% does not have a significant effect on the cooling loads. Therefore, for a
similar climate such as in Houston, TX, the glass material can be clear, and the WWR up to 60%
without having a great impact on the cooling loads.

Fig.2 - 19 Results of DSF simulations of glazing type vs. WWR for hot humid climate (Haase
and Amato 2006).
For the same climate another study compared different glazing configurations among SSF and
DSF (Chan et al. 2009). The results showed that the most energy efficient glazing type
combination for a DSF in this climate, the double reflective and double absorbing glass had 17.7%
and 7.5% savings accordingly in cooling compared to the single clear glass. Also, the
configuration of single absorbent and double reflective for DSF was 26.3% less compared to the
46

single absorbent which was used as the base case model type for the comparisons in this study
(Fig.2-20).

Fig.2 - 20 Comparison of different DSF configuration and the base case (Chan et al. 2009).
The energy use breakdown of SSF (LE) and DSF for different locations and climates was
compared in the study of (Stribling and Stigge 2003). The impact of these parameters to the
energy usage is illustrated and the results show that the DSF buildings have lower energy usage
in all climates compared to SSF (Fig. 2-21). Furthermore it is indicated that the energy
consumption of the same building in various climates differs. Similarly, the energy simulations
for Los Angeles, New York and Houston are expected to have similar variation in the results for
the same building.

47

Fig.2 - 21 Energy consumption comparison for a conventional façade (LE) and a double façade
(DF) for different locations and climates (Stribling and Stigge 2003).
A parametric study examining the thermal performance of various DSF types in different
locations showed that the climate had greater impact to the performance than the stratification
type or the cavity depth. The results showed that the greatest energy savings were found in mild,
cold and cool climates. For warm, very cold and subarctic climates the energy savings were
average while in hot and very hot climates the savings were very low (Pekdemir and Muehleisen
2012). The outcomes of this study suggest that different results are expected in the energy
simulations of a DSF due to the different climates of Los Angeles, New York and Houston.
2.7.3 Window to Wall Ratio (WWR)
The WWR even in DSF is critical to the heat gains and therefore to the cooling and heating loads.
One study examined the effect of the WWR for the cold climate of Canada; not only for the
cooling and heating loads but also for lighting (Tzempelikos and Athienitis 2007). Depending on
the target goals the matrix chart can be used as a reference for the decision making (Fig. 2-22).
The chart shows that the higher the WWR ratio is, the more the heating loads increase, and the
48

energy consumption for the cooling loads becomes even higher. At the same time the Daylight
Availability Ratio (DAR) increases and consequently, the lighting demand decreases. For
instance, in a comparison between the 15% and 30% of WWR, the heating loads increase from
300W to about 500W, the cooling loads increase from 700W to about 900W, the DAR increases
from 65% to about 80% but the lighting demand decreases from about 800MJ to less 400MJ,
which is more than half.

Fig.2 - 22 The impact of shading and WWR to the EUI (Tzempelikos and Athienitis 2007).
Such a matrix chart can be used to identify the optimum combination of WWR and the loads for
conditioning a building, daylight and lighting in a cold climate.
2.7.4 Air supply mode
Air Supply is one of the techniques for the ventilation mode: how the air from the exterior
environment is introduced in the cavity and then exhausted to the interior; as described in section
2.3.3 Ventilation Mode - Outdoor air curtain, Indoor air curtain, Air supply, Air exhaust, Buffer

49

zone. It has been shown that a static air buffer is the most beneficial type of DSF for the heating
season, while supply air and external air curtain were the most effective for reducing the cooling
loads in summers (Pekdemir and Muehleisen 2012).
This indicates that in the case of DECS, the bow window configuration and DECS
configurations close to Box Window are expected to show a higher effect in the energy savings
during the heating season compared to the others.
2.7.5 DSF façade type
An important parameter for the building performance is the DSF façade type based on its
geometry characteristics as described in sections 2.3 Typology of double skin facades and 2.3.1
Geometry type – Multistory, Corridor, Shaft Box, Box Window. A study examined the different
geometry types of DSF and compared the dimensions of the cavity and the % of the external
opening for ventilation to the cooling and heating loads for the Mediterranean climate (Torres et
al. 2007). The results for the corridor DSF type are presented in and show that the cavity depth
has a more significant contribution to energy savings than the % of the opening for ventilation
(Fig. 2-23). The lowest cooling loads were found in the widest cavity depth of 1m (~3.3ft) with a
15% external opening area in the façade for natural ventilation of the cavity. It is concluded that
for this type of façade and climate, the widest the cavity is the more beneficial is in terms of
reducing the cooling loads. Also, the biggest the opening is, the higher the cooling energy
savings are.
50

Fig.2 - 23 Annual cooling loads Vs Cavity depth for Corridor DSF (Torres et al. 2007).
For the case of the Multistory DSF examined in the same study, it was shown that the narrowest
cavity depth 0.40m (~1.3ft) has the highest energy savings and consequently, the broader cavity
depth has the greatest energy consumption (Fig. 2-24).
In contrast to the corridor case, the multistory façade the percentage of opening for natural
ventilation was much smaller as a %, but the cooling loads were about the same. This shows that
the height of the DSF has a great effect on the airflow and buoyancy, which reduces the cooling
loads effectively. These data indicate that the type of the DSF and the depth of the cavity are
very significant to the energy performance of a building. The % in the façade for the ventilation
has a smaller impact.

51

Fig.2 - 24 Annual cooling loads vs. Cavity depth for Multistory DSF (Torres et al. 2007).
Another study that supports these conclusions showed that overheating occurs in the narrowest
cavities while the overall best performance is found in DSFs with cavity depth of 4ft (Pekdemir
and Muehleisen 2012).
A recent research examined three different types of DSF configurations and the energy
breakdown (Fig. 2-25). According to these results the shaft-corridor type, which is a combination
of the two basic types (shaft and corridor) has the greatest energy savings both from the cooling
and heating loads compared to the other types and the conventional one as shown in
(Azarbayjani 2010).

Fig.2 - 25 Comparison of different DSF types vs. conventional, energy breakdown and savings.
CASE
Energy Intensity
Kwh/m²
Heating
Consumption
Kwh/m²
Heating
reduction %
Cooling
consumption
Kwh/m² yr
Cooling
reduction %
Reference building 274.1 143.5 53
Corridor type 239.3 108.8 24 49.2 7
Shaft type 241.7 106.6 25 50.5 5
Shaft-Corridor type 192.7 71.6 50 37.9 28
52

The combination of the shaft and corridor façade showed the highest cooling and heating
reduction for the building. Based on this data, the results for DECS and the diverse
configurations of the cavity compartmentation are expected to show significant alterations in the
energy consumption, savings from cooling and heating and the fuel breakdown depending on the
type of the façade.
2.7.6 Solar shading
Solar shading is defined as any element whose existence in the interior, exterior of the building
and in the case of DSF even in the cavity, shades for a period of time during the day the glazed
surfaces, decreases the heat gains and consequently assists in the reduction of the cooling
demand
9
.
In highly glazed surfaces, solar heat gains, heat losses, cooling and heating demand alter greatly
depending on the % of the glazing, type of glazing etc as described in section 2.7. Previous
research on the energy performance of DSF – Glazing. In addition to the solar gains through the
high glazed surfaces; electric office equipment, electrical lighting, false ceilings increase the
internal heat gains and therefore the risk of overheating is greater. Therefore reducing the solar
heat gains with solar shading during the cooling season is a very important aspect for the energy
performance of a building.
One of the most efficient natural ways for decreasing the cooling loads is the use of solar shading
such as blinds (Gratia and De Herde 2007b). Solar shading even during the heating season can
assist in decreasing the solar heat gains and eventually the cooling loads. The combination of sun

9
The solar shading definition described is the author’s of this paper own definition, based on her background,
experiences, and acquaintance with solar shading elements.

53

shading, glass, ventilation of the intermediate space and angle in case of louvers, especially in
the case of large scale projects should be examined (Poirazis 2006).
The position of the blinds and color is critical to the effect on cavity’s temperature and therefore
to the cooling loads. If they are places too close to the inner surface ‘the conductive and radiative
heat transfer to the interior are increased’; therefore in the case of DSF they should be placed
towards the exterior skin allowing enough room for ventilation and should be secured when the
airflow is high to avoid fluttering and noise. The results of the study show that if the location,
size and color of the blinds are chosen properly the cooling loads can be reduced up to 14.1%
during summer (Fig 2-26), (Gratia and De Herde 2007b).

Fig.2 - 26 Impact of the blinds location and color to the cooling loads (Gratia and De Herde
2007b).
The results of these studies indicate that solar shading, especially in high glazed building is
mandatory. For DECS study, the solar shading will be considered “active” in the energy
modeling software when the solar heat gains will exceed a specific pre-defined level.

54

2.7.7 CO
2
Emissions
CO
2
emissions the last years have been under intense discussion due to their effect on the world
temperature increase, greenhouse gas emissions, ozone depletion, heat island effect, climate
change and various other problems. Energy usage is one of the main contributors to the increase
of CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Since the energy demand in buildings increases in time, it is
important to be aware how the buildings and the users contribute to the emissions (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency 2014). A diagram which shows the percentages of CO
2

emissions/kwh due to heat losses and gains by the use of fuel due to the occupant activities,
equipment and through its envelope (Fig. 2-27), (The Royal Academy of Engineering 2010).

Fig.2 - 27 Estimated percentages of CO2 emissions/kwh in a building (The Royal Academy of
Engineering 2010).

55

Based on the diagram, the envelope including its infiltration is responsible for 21% of the CO
2

emissions per kWh of energy required, and conditioning including the controls goes up to 33%.
The addition of DSF in an old building has shown that it can reduce the CO2 emissions up to
almost 43% in a cavity of 4ft compared to a conventional building’s CO
2
emissions (G. Kim,
Lim, and Kim 2012). These numbers project the importance of an energy efficient building and
its systems, but also the impact of the envelope and the existence of a DSF can have towards the
CO2 emissions. Consequently, the energy savings by the DECS system in the DSF also
contribute to lower CO2 emissions in the environment.

2.8 Energy Modeling of DSF and controls of the cavity
Past researches and professionals have approached DSF in different ways and used a number of
software depending on the purpose of the study. Some of them have coupled their results with
measured data out of existing or built up DSF. A table summarizing software used by various
researchers for their studies in DSF is presented (Table 2-1)
10
.

10
The information presented in the table are summarized through the papers, reports and works studied for this
research; and through information provided in the “Double-Skin Facades: A literature review” by (Poirazis 2006).
56

Table 2 - 1 Software used by researches examining various aspects in the performance of DSF.

Some of the researches have coupled their results with measured data out of existing or built up
DSF. The FLOVENT software was used for the CFD analysis in the works of (Manz 2002) and
(Köhl 2006). TAS software was used for the research works of (Gratia and De Herde 2004) and
(Gratia and De Herde 2007c). FLUENT software was used for the CFD analysis by (Safer,
Woloszyn, and Roux 2005). IESVE has been used for the DSF modeling by (Hamza 2008). Five
software were used and the results were compared with real data for validation in the work of,
these software are:VA114, ESP-r, TRNSYS-TUD, IDA ICE 3.0 and BSim (Kalyanova et al.
2009). EnergyPlus was used by (D.-W. Kim and Park 2011). CFD analysis in DesignBuilder was
Software
Liu et al. 2013
Hong et al. 2013
D.-W. Kim and Park 2011
Azarbayjani 2010
Kalyanova et al. 2009
Hamza 2008
Gratia and De Herde 2007b
Köhl 2006
Safer, Woloszyn, and Roux 2005
(Gratia and De Herde 2004
Manz and Simmler 2003
van Dijk and Oversloot 2003
Poirazis et al. 2003
Manz 2002
Saelens 2002
Di Maio and van Paaseen 2001
van Paassen and Stec 2001
Cho et al. 1995
FLOVENT • • •
TAS • •
FLUENT • •
IESVE •
VA114 •
ESP-r •
TRNSYS • • •
IDA ICE 3.0 •
BSim •
EnergyPlus •
DesignBuilder • •
WIS • • •
GLAD •
WINDOW •
MATLAB • •
SIMULINK •
MathCAD •

57

for the works of (Azarbayjani 2010) who also used the Fluent software, and (Hong et al.
2013).WIS software was used for dynamic calculation of performance and comparison with real
data in the work of (Liu et al. 2013). The paper ‘Experimental and numerical study of a
mechanically ventilated glass double envelope facade with integrated shading device’ based it’s
study on combination of GLAD, WINDOW and FLOVENT according to (Köhl 2006).
Controls in a system are another important factor of the DSF and eventually the energy use. A
fast way to see the performance of the exterior skin in combination with several variables such as
climate, geometry, type of glazing, dynamic control of shading etc is the MIT DesignAdvisor
software. The available glazing configurations are shown (Fig.2-28).

Fig.2 - 28 MIT DesignAdvisor software (Source).
Regarding DSF dynamic or adaptive controls two studies were found. Both used MATLAB and
the approach is described (Fig.2-29), (Y.-J. Kim et al. 2011; Moon, Yoon, and Kim 2013).

Fig.2 - 29 Studies on DSF controls, software used and descriptions.
Study Software Description
Y.-J. Kim et al. 2011 MATLAB+FMINCON
The study used two software to determine the control
variables for optimal dynamic control of the ventilation
damper openings. The study was made for one day in
summer and one day in winter using a 15min timestep
based on the Generalized Pattern Search and Generic
Algorithm.
Moon, Yoon, and Kim 2013 MATLAB
This study used an artificial Neural Network via MATLAB
to parametrically predict and accumulate an adaptive
control in order to regulate the openings of the DSF and
the heating systems of the building.
58

The controls can be dynamic or static (Yoon et al. 2009). An optimal control determines the
values of the control variables that minimize the cost function over a given time and as dynamic
they define a system that the response depends on the inputs received in the system while the
outputs are variables according to the inputs. In the case of DECS, response would be the change
of the angle for the HF and VF aiming to adjust and control the environmental conditions of the
cavity while the output would be maintaining them for as long as required and therefore lowering
the cooling or heating demands, and contributing to the energy savings. Static controls do not
change the outputs based on the inputs therefore the results tend to be more extreme (Yoon et al.
2009). A comparison between the performance of a dynamic versus a static system under control
is illustrated (Fig. 2-30). The hot air balloon in the dynamic system receives the information
regarding on the height of the balloon and therefore the line that projects the movement is
smoother and stabilizes when it reaches the aimed level. In contrast, the static system control is
not as responsive to the balloon’s movement. Consequently the balloon overshoots and as a
result it requires longer time to reach the desired level with greater fluctuations of height in its
path.

Fig.2 - 30 Example of static vs. dynamic controls (Yoon et al. 2009).

59

For DECS, similarly, depending on the environmental conditions of the cavity, the HF and VF
will dynamically adjust their angle to control and maintain the desired temperatures inside the
cavity. In contrast existing static systems which do not have the ability to respond to the input,
such as temperature of the air in the cavity, especially during cooling seasons overheats and as a
result the excess use of HVAC systems and overall energy usage is required in the building.

2.9 Summary
This Chapter discussed the evolution of DSF in history, typologies, previous works, and studies.
Based on the background research and questions asked in Chapter 1: Introduction to double skin
facades, section 1.3 Goals, this chapter set the foundation of the research and highlighted the
parameters which are crucial to DSF design and performance. Previous researches and energy
modeling aspects of the DSF were mentioned at the end of this chapter.
In summary DSFs are a design and technical solution for buildings and they have been
researched for decades. Depending on climate conditions, envelope, materials, WWR, DSF type,
shading and other parameters mentioned, various design and control options have been
researched and developed. These established DSF types have been estimated to generate
significant energy and environmental performance and mostly during the heating seasons.
Depending on the parameters mentioned the savings for heating can be up to 50% compared to a
SSF and for cooling up to 28% of the total building energy performance, even though in most of
the cases DSFs have shown an increase of the energy use in cooling seasons ranging from 12%
to 41.1%.
60

However, in spite of the DSF’s functional and technical merits, it is still challenging to achieve a
climate responsive DSF with consideration to climatic conditions, DSF typology and reduction
of the energy demand, especially during the cooling seasons.
Therefore, the introduction of a dynamic DSF is proposed with the aim to adapt to the climatic
typology, by altering the DSF typology and improve the energy performance. These parameters
have been investigated by adopting energy modeling simulations studying the performance of the
four basic DSF types and twenty-one intermediate configurations in three climates. The purpose
was to identify the optimum design of the dynamic system to promote the DSF energy and
environmental performance.
In continuation, Chapter 3 describes the methodology used to conduct this research, the selection
of the variables, the various software attempts for the energy modeling prior the use of
DesignBuilder, he decision making regarding the energy model and justification of the
parameters selected, the obstacles faced during the DECS modeling in DesignBuilder, the
solutions, and the parametric and computer-fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations.

61

Chapter 3: Methodologies
Chapter 2 provided a detailed description of the double skin façade system, its functions
and principles. The chapter included the definitions and terminologies, historical background and
evolution of double-skin façade (DSF), their main typologies, advantages and disadvantages, the
physics behind their function, and previous researches and works regarding their performance.
Chapter 3 describes the methodology used to conduct this research, from the selection of
the variables to the various software attempts for the energy modeling prior the use of
DesignBuilder. The second part of this chapter discusses the decision making regarding the
energy model and justification of the parameters selected, the obstacles faced during the
Dynamic Environmental Controls System (DECS) modeling in DesignBuilder, the solutions, and
the parametric and computer-fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations.
Originally two sets of software tools were selected, one Autodesk based and the other Rhino-
based. After several simulation test runs it was determined that there were issues with natural
ventilation and buoyancy with these tools that made their use inappropriate. Further research
showed that DesignBuilder has the capabilities required to conduct the study, and therefore it
was selected to examine the performance of DECS in comparison to the DSF and SSF. Three
climate zones were chosen: Los Angeles, New York, and Houston. Four general types of DSF
were selected for the study: multistory, corridor, shaft box, and box window. The vertical and
horizontal openings on the cavity partitions were the critical features, with the emphasis of the
variables in DECS and the cavity compartmentation. The initial variables were the angle of the
Horizontal Fins (HF) and Vertical Fins (VF) tilt angle, 0°, 15°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 75° and 90°
degrees horizontal, vertical and combination of horizontal and vertical tilts of the dividers. In
62

DesignBuilder it was discovered that the tilt did not make an impact due to their properties inside
DesignBuilder and how the software reads them. Therefore the variables had to be changes by
creating openings were created on the horizontal and vertical surfaces of the cavity with 0%,
25%, 50%, 75% and 100%. Shoebox models were designed according to the DOE benchmark
models
11
for middle size offices and parametric simulations in DesignBuilder were used to
define some of the materials. Better energy performance of the DSF system is the goal; daylight,
natural ventilation of the building’s interior, view, and cost were not examined. CFD simulations
were used to visually project the effect of HF and VF as initially designed. Finally the energy
performance of SSF, DSF, and DECS was examined and the results are shown in Chapter 4.

3.1 Energy modeling software attempts for DSF performance simulations.

Initially the study aimed to use two sets of software to run the simulations and compare the
results. The first set of software was a set of Autodesk products: Revit 2014, Vasari, and Green
Building Studio. The second set of software was Rhino with Grasshopper with several plug-ins
such as Diva, Ladybug, GECO with ECOTECT, and Gerilla. Both sets would be interconnected
with Hummingbird. The results of the simulations would then be compared in statistical data
analysis software such as Minitab, to examine which is the confidence interval among the results
but also which parameters have the greatest significant effect on the building’s EUI. Moreover,
the results would be compared to real data (if found or gathered from an existing building), for
validation. Finally, based on the results and the data extracted Minitab would be used to predict

11
The description of the DOE benchmark model can be found in section 3.4 The DesignBuilder model.

63

the transformation pattern of the dividers in the cavity, for enhancing the performance. The
methodology and the software initially chosen are shown in the diagram (Fig. 3-1).

Fig.3 - 1 Initial methodology and set of software diagram.
The shoebox models for the test runs were 30ft x 20ft x 10ft height with the longer sides facing
south - north. The initial models had no openings on other wall orientations and were SSF. The
reason was to examine how natural ventilation is perceived from the software and how the south
orientation façade configurations affect the shoebox model performance both in SSF and DSF.
After some tests it was required to create openings in other façade orientations in order to
examine the airflow within the building and around it to gain a clearer understanding of the
natural ventilation readings in the software. Since the first test models were designed in Revit
2014 the material description of the shoebox models was:
64

o Walls: Basic wall – Generic 8”
o Floor: Generic – 12”
o Roof: Basic Roof – 12”
o Glazing: Curtain wall both for the SSF and DSF.

Fig.3 - 2SSF shoebox model for software test runs.

Fig.3 - 3 DSF shoebox model for software test runs.

65

3.1.1 Autodesk – Revit 2014 & Green Building Studio
Green Building Studio (GBS) is an energy analysis software for a whole building analysis
including weather data, Energy Star, LEED, CO2 emissions, daylight studies, water usage, and
natural ventilation potential
12
(Autodesk 2013a). Green Building Studio (GBS) uses the DOE-2
as an engine for the calculations. Different configurations of the test shoebox model were made
in Revit 2014 and later uploaded to GBS for energy analysis and effect of the double skin façade
to the EUI.
3.1.2. Autodesk - Revit 2014 & Project Falcon
Project Falcon is incorporated as an add-in in Revit 2014. It’s a virtual wind tunnel with which
the wind airflow can be examined. Some of its quantified outputs include velocity, pressure, drag
force, and drag coefficient (Autodesk 2013b). Both the model and the runs were made in Revit
2014. The same shoe box model was used as in the case of Revit and GBS.
3.1.3 Rhino – Grasshopper & Plug-ins
Rhino was selected because it provides the ability of easily forming parametric designs and
dynamically changing the variables of a 3D model. Additionally, it allows has the capability of
adding and running instantly several plug-ins which can perform specific tasks. In this case, one
model would be used and run through the different plug-ins for simultaneous results. The plug-
ins were used for thermal analysis, solar radiation, calculation of solar heat gains, etc.
More specifically the DSF parameters would be set into Grasshopper and connected with the 3D
model. This set allows diverse types of correlations among the parameters and at the same time
provides the flexibility to follow the changes while calculating the effects on the performance.

12
”Estimate the mechanical cooling requirements versus the hours of outdoor air required to ventilate a building
naturally”(Autodesk 2013a).
66

The variables that would be examined are as mentioned earlier: height, width, depth, glazing
type, glazing type and room depth. While for the interior area in the model, the, at least 15’
would be left as open space in order to allow enough room to calculate the climatic effects for
both dominating seasons (ex. sun penetration in the space is deeper in winter than summer).
Solutions of the simulations would be exported and then imported into Excel. The exported data
would be categorized based on the outcome and set of desired results. For instance, the solar heat
gains and changes in the Energy Use Intensity (EUI) of the building would work as two major
set of filters for the identification of an efficient type of DSF.
DIVA-for-Rhino is a plug-in being used for various types of building simulations such as
thermal, daylight, solar and glare (Lagios 2013). LadyBug for Rhino is a plug-in targeting
designers to help them create environmental responsible buildings (Roudsari 2013a). HoneyBee
is another tool which works with Ladybug for Rhino and connects EnergyPlus with Rhino,
Grasshopper and Radiance (Roudsari 2013b). GECO works as a connection between Rhino-
Grasshopper and Autodesk Ecotect ([uto] 2013). Gerilla is another plug-in which used
EnergyPlus for the energy simulations (Dorvieto 2011). All these plug-ins would assist in
running different simulations out of the same model and compare the results for validation.
Through Rhino the results of the simulations would be exported in Excel spreadsheets for further
analysis.
Hummingbird is used to creative Revit geometries in Rhino by exporting properties and
parameters of the model into CVS text files and is very useful for Revit BIM geometries
(Meador 2013). This plug-in was chosen because it would work as a platform among the Revit
and Rhino model and therefore there would be no need to build separately the same model for

67

each set of software. Table 1 illustrates the abilities of existing Rhino-grasshopper plug-ins for
environmental analysis.
Table 3 - 1 Comparison of Rhino/Grasshopper environmental analysis tools (Roudsari, Smith,
and Gill 2013).

For the Revit models different test cell models were made in order to explore how smaller units
and the DSF envelope perform, with and without openings for natural ventilation. The simulation
runs showed that the selected software are not sophisticated enough yet to calculate natural
ventilation which is crucial to the performance of DSF. More details about the test cells,
simulation runs and results can be found in Chapter 4 section 4.1 Energy modeling software
attempts for DSF performance simulation results. Regarding the Rhino software and the
available plug-ins via further literature research it was learned that that even though natural
ventilation is being taken into consideration, buoyancy it is not applicable yet in the Rhino plug-
ins for energy modeling. Therefore a software tool which was specialized to DSF design and
performance was required. Taking into consideration the existing bibliography, the author’s
68

experience with the energy modeling software, cost and most importantly the capability of
calculating natural ventilation and buoyancy for DSF buildings, DesignBuilder was chosen.
3.2 DesignBuilder
DesignBuilder (DB) is a state-of-the-art software tool for checking building energy, carbon,
lighting and comfort performance (DesignBuilder Software 2013a). It is more sophisticated in
terms of energy analysis than the Autodesk software but less flexible in terms of architectural
design than Rhino with Grasshopper. CAD or BIM files can be imported for the runs which
make it easy to use without the need of creating a different model (DesignBuilder Software
2014a). DB has various modules. All modules incorporate a 3D modeler and visualization option.
Additional capabilities and further to the energy simulations can also be used for daylighting,
HVAC modeling, cost calculations, LEED and ASHRAE 90.1 credits, building optimization and
CFDs (DesignBuilder Software 2013b). Regarding the energy performance simulations it
provides breakdowns of heating, cooling, lighting energy use etc. and is frequently used for the
study of DSF as seen in Chapter 2, section 2.8 Energy modeling of DSF and control of the
cavity.
3.2.1 The DesignBuilder Interface for EnergyPlus
DB was designed to use EnergyPlus as its engine for the performance calculations. EnergyPlus
(E+) was developed by the U.S. DOE for building energy modeling and simulations of the
energy flows and it was developed by a merge of the modules and features from the pre-existing
DOE-2 and BLAST DOE software (Crawley et al. 2001). E+ most specifically focuses on for on
energy simulations for heating, cooling, lighting and ventilation (DesignBuilder Software 2014b).
Twelve E+ interfaces including DB exist currently in the market (DOE 2013).

69

3.2.2 Limitations of E+ in DSF simulations
E+ is very common and accurate engine for thermal and energy flow calculations. For the study
of DSF performance though, higher accuracy is required regarding the heat transfer through
glazing or through the cavity, the airflow and cavity’s air temperatures since differences have
been found between simulation results when compared to real data for calibration ( Kim and
Park 2011; Pappas and Zhai 2006).
3.3 The energy performance simulations of DSF and DECS
As described in Chapter 2, there are many parameters which play a significant role to the design
and performance of a DSF building. DECS is the dynamic system suggested inside the cavity
space of a DSF which will alter the cavity’s compartmentation, aiming to improve the building’s
energy performance by reducing the cooling loads in summers and increasing the heat gains in
winters. In order to model, compare and analyze the energy performance of the DSF and DECS a
virtual building model had to be designed. Since no similar building has been found as a
reference or real data of such a system, for the model and calibration of the virtual building (base
case), a SSF building was designed based on the characteristics of the DOE Commercial
Benchmark Models for medium office size building. The description of the DOE benchmark
model can be found in section 3.4 The DesignBuilder model.
3.3.1 Selection of variables for the DSF and DECS models
One of the main interests of the research was to explore how the same DSF and DECS
configurations perform in different climates and locations. Therefore climate was the first
variable. The second most important variable for the scope of work is the type of the DSF or
DECS configuration. A comparison between the energy savings and fuel breakdown among the
diverse types DSF and DECS was compared to the SSF base case.
70

3.3.1.1 Location and climate

A series of parameters as simulation inputs have been identified as significant. One of the
primary parameters is climate zone. Three different locations had been chosen Los Angeles, New
York City, and Houston. The reason for choosing these cities as already mentioned in Chapter 1
is the large number of existing office buildings and the dramatically different climate zones.
According to the IECC climate regions a climate map was designed for DOE which ASHRAE
adopts (Fig.3-4). In this climate zone map Los Angeles belongs in climate 3B which is warm and
dry, New York in 4A which is mixed humid and Houston in 2A which is hot and humid. Below
is a graph of the climate zones in US by DOE; used by ASHRAE 90.1 and the thermal criteria
for each zone are shown ( Fig.3-4).

Fig.3 - 4 Climate Zones by IECC (U.S. Department of Energy et al., 2013).

71

At the ASHRAE CZ figure we can identify the locations of the cities according to the climate
zone while in Table 1 we can see what are the HDD and CDD for the respective climates. The
definition of HDD and CDD can be found in Terms & Abbreviations. More information and
charts for each climate can be found in Appendix B – Weather Data files for Los Angeles, New
York and Houston as extracted from the Climate Consultant software.
Table 3 - 1 Climate Zones and Thermal Criteria by ASHRAE 90.1 (part of the original table)
(ASHRAE n.d.)

3.3.1.2 Type of double skin facade and geometry

Only four types of double skin façade were examined based on the geometry of the cavity and its
partitioning as described in Chapter 2, section 2.3 Typology of Double skin facades. These are
Multistory (MS), Corridor (CO), Shaft Box (SB), and Box Window (BW). These types were
selected because the proposed dynamic system allows transformation only among these
configurations. For these types their geometry and their effect on the performance was further
examined by changing the % of opening areas between the compartments. The four basic types
are illustrated (Fig. 3-5) and described in more detail in Chapter 2 section 2.3.1 Geometry Type -
Multistory, Corridor, Shaft Box, Box Window.
City Zone Nr Zone Name Thermal criteria (I-P units) Thermal criteria (SI units)
Los Angeles 3B Warm - Dry 4500 < CDD50°F ≤ 6300 2500 < CDD10°C < 3500
New York 4A Mixed - Humid
CDD50°F ≤ 4500 and
3600 < HDD65°F ≤ 5400
CDD10°C ≤ 2500 and
HDD18°C ≤ 3000
Houston 2A Hot-Humid 6300 < CDD50°F ≤ 9000 3500 < CDD10°C ≤ 5000
72

Fig.3 - 5 Typical DSF types: Multistory, Corridor, Shaft Box and Box Window.
For the DECS system, the SSF base case was used with the creation of a DSF in the mode of the
Box Window. In order to examine diverse configurations different sizes of openings were
created between the vertical and horizontal elements that divided the cavity. The opening range
was from 0%, 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% of the surfaces.
It has to be noted that the configuration which has 100% openings in both horizontal and vertical
surfaces is the MS. The configuration with 0% openings in the horizontal surfaces and 100% in
the vertical is the CO. The configuration with 100% openings in the horizontal surfaces and 0%
in the vertical surfaces is the SB. Finally the configuration with 0% openings in both horizontal
and vertical surfaces is the BW. Initially DECS was designed with HF and VF but after
numerous simulations and analysis of the results the HF and VF as designed did not impact the
performance. Therefore the approach of the design had to be changed from fins to openings on
the surfaces. More details about the design of the HF, VF and failure of the simulations are
explained in Chapter 4 section 4.3.3. DECS energy performance and comparison to SSF and
DSF per climate zone.
The methodology for the conduction of the research is illustrated (Fig. 3-6). Firstly, a shoebox
model was designed and several parameters further to the DOE Commercial Benchmark
standards were tested to identify which perform well in all three climates. This shoe box model

73

was the foundation for the SSF base case. The SSF was simulated for the climates of LA, NY,
and HOU and the energy performance was recorded. The next step was to create the four basic
types of DSF based on the SSF: Multistory, Corridor, Shaft Box and Box Window. Again, the
simulations run for all three climates and the data were extracted. Finally, the DECS system was
designed and simulated. All the results were then compared between the different DSF types and
DECS configurations of the same climate. The unit for the results was the EUI and fuel
breakdown in savings. A comparison among the results gave a good understanding of how each
type performs, which types should be used in different times of the year and which should be
avoided. A CFD analysis was used for a visual demonstration of DECS, and how it can control
and change the airflow inside the DSF cavity. The CFD analysis was performed as initially
designed with the HF and VF while the energy simulations were run with % of openings. The
reason and the results are described in greater detail in Chapter 4 section 4.2 Results of the
energy models in DesignBuilder.
74

Fig.3 - 6 Structural diagram of Methodology.
There was also another step initially proposed step in the methodology, which was suggesting
building and testing a real model and gathering the data. This phase was finally eliminated due to
the fact that for getting actual and valuable results the model should be made in a scale 1:1; since
in a smaller scale the properties of the materials would be greatly different. Moreover, cost and
time were another important factor since a fund would be required to build it and at least a whole
year real data of performance should be gathered. Therefore this last step was cancelled. A
sample of the results is shown (Fig.3-7).

75

Fig.3 - 7 Sample of the results with the use of DES per climate.
3.4 The DesignBuilder model
The base case SSF building was designed following the latest Code compliant DOE Benchmark
Commercial offices (Torcellini et al. 2008) and the ASHRAE 90.1 Prototype Building Modeling
Specifications (PNNL 2014) including CBECS and IESNA standards. Construction of the
envelope set of schedules for occupancy, equipment, lighting and HVAC were customized in
DesignBuilder as per the prototype indications. The building, instead of 3 floors it was designed
as a 5 story office building in order to examine the effect of the DSF and DECS on the building’s
performance. The number of floors was selected based on the European DSF model (Gratia and
De Herde 2007a) since there isn’t a DOE DSF benchmark model yet. Furthermore the higher the
number of floors the higher the asymmetric behavior of a DSF building is and consequently the
heating, cooling and thermal comfort capacities are (Poirazis 2004). Since DECS aims to equally
distribute the cavity temperature throughout the façade and especially during the heating season,
the effect of DECS would be more apparent on a 5 story building than a 3 story one. The
building specifications and the source of the data are shown (Table 3-2).
76

Table 3 - 2 DesignBuilder Energy model Building Specifications (Torcellini et al. 2008), (PNNL
2014).
ITEM DESCRIPTION DATA SOURCE
Building dimensions 75 ft x 75 ft
Number of floors 5
Aspect Ratio 1
WWR 33% *except South façade (90%) 2003 CBECS Data and PNNL’s*
Floor to floor height 13ft (4ft above ceiling plenum)
ASHRAE 90.1 Prototype
Building Modeling
Specifications
Glazing Sill height 3.35 ft
ASHRAE 90.1 Prototype
Building Modeling
Specifications
Exterior walls
Steel-Frame Walls,
0.4 in. Stucco+5/8 in. gypsum
board + wall Insulation+5/8 in.
U-factor= 0.0904 Btu/h°F
ASHRAE 90.1 Requirements
Nonresidential; Walls, Above-
Grade, Steel-Framed
Roof
Built-up Roof:
Roof membrane+Roof
insulation+metal decking
U-factor= 0.040 Btu/h°F

Glazing Equal distribution on the W, N, E
facades

Window Parametric design was performed ASHRAE 90.1 Requirements
Nonresidential; Vertical Glazing
HVAC system
VAV terminal box with damper
and electric reheating coil

HVAC control
Thermostat setpoint: 75°F
Cooling/70°F Heating
Thermostat setback: 80°F
Cooling/60°F Heating

HVAC supply air temperature Maximum 104°F,
Minimum 55°F

Lighting
0.1 - 1 W/sf See schedules in Appendix C
Occupancy
0.005 person/sf

77

Further details per the benchmark model, schedules and settings can be found in Appendix C -
Energy modeling settings for the base case model in DesignBuilder.
The south orientation was chosen for examining the performance of DECS since most of the
daylight and heat gains occur in the south orientation, and therefore it’s more necessary to make
the transformations in the cavity in order to cool or heat down accordingly. As shown in Chapter
2 section 2.7 Previous Research on the Energy Performance of DSF the south orientation is the
most crucial to the greenhouse effect as well as the highest energy savings with the use of DSF
when it’s properly designed and implemented. A north façade for instance would not be that
interesting to examine since all the light is diffused and there are no direct solar heat gains,
which would make the existence of such a dynamic system non cost effective. For the DB model,
the percentage of the glazing for the SSF, DSF and DECS was 90% for the inner and outer skins.
No operable windows existed in the base case model (SSF), DSF or DECS models. In the case of
DSF and DECS natural ventilation occurred only in the cavity space since the effect of the
natural ventilation in the interior of the building and the EUI is not part of this study. The cavity
depth was set to 4ft and the shading was set to the default DesignBuilder “on/off” mode based on
the heat gains. The temperature set-points for the interior of the building were the same for all
the models as shown in Table 3. In DB a zone is from floor to floor, inside the space and
therefore it’s important to know the thickness of the materials while making the model
(DesignBuilder Software 2009). For the simplicity of the design every floor was a separate zone
and the floor was an open plan. The cavity had its own zones depending on the DSF
configuration. The multistory DSF had a single united cavity zone; the corridor had five cavity
zones – one per floor, the shaft box had four vertical zones and the box window twenty separate
78

cavity zones due to the five floors and four vertical divisions. For the case of DECS, the cavity
zone was united due to the openings in both vertical and horizontal surfaces.

Fig.3 - 8 The SSF basecase model as designed in DB.

Fig.3 - 9 The model with a Multistory DSF as designed in DB.

79

The number of building models for the energy performance simulations and comparison were 26
per climate, one SSF, four DSF and twenty-one DECS configurations. The total number of
models for all the three climates is 78. More models were made for the shoebox model, the
parametric simulations and CFD analysis. As no real building exists for the comparison of the
results, the alternative is to use a typical reference case with well defined factors and use of the
conditions as specified in the building project (Köhl 2006). Therefore the benchmark model and
its standards were used. As mentioned already the initial design was with HF and VF but the
final design was made with openings on the cavity compartmentation surfaces in % (Fig.3-10).

Fig.3 - 10 Initial DECS design Vs. final design (as used for the energy modeling).

80

3.4.1. Parametric design using a shoebox model for decision making.
Some of the specifications for the DSF were not defined from the standards because the
benchmark model is for SSF and not for DSF. Therefore a parametric design using a shoebox
SSF model in DB was made in order to decide the type of the glazing used for the second skin.
The decision making involved the type of glazing within the accepted range of U-value for
buildings from the standards mentioned and WWR variations. More specifically the shoebox
model for the parametric simulation was 75ftx75ftx13ft but 3 storey height with adiabatic floor
and roof. The objective for the dimensions of the shorter building was to make the simulations
faster. The existence of the adiabatic surfaces assured that the performance would be the same
with a simulation of the middle floors from the 5 story building. Ultimately the simulation
showed which glazing type is considered as an optimum solution for all three climates. The
results of the parametric analysis are shown in Chapter 4, section 4.2.1.4. Results and
conclusions of the parametric simulations.

3.4.2 Parameters that were not examined

Facades and DSF have an impact to the interior IEQ and IAQ as described in Chapter 2.
Daylight, natural ventilation, view and cost are some other areas that can be greatly affected by
the façade but are not being examined since they are not within the scope of this research. More
specifically a daylight study for DECS would require further simulations whilst the current
methodology was already intense for the energy modeling part and analysis of the results.
Natural ventilation in the building’s interior was not examined because the scope of the research
was to examine the effect of DSFs and DECS to the building’s performance. Consequently,

81

natural ventilation either through cavity openings or side windows would affect the building’s
performance and moreover would be difficult to isolate the effect that the DSF or DECS has to
the building’s efficiency. View is related to the IEQ and IAQ as well as to daylight, therefore a
daylight study would be more appropriate to include this parameter in the study. Finally, in
regards to the cost, an estimation would be feasible if a real model could be built and correlated
to the energy savings. As mentioned in section 3.3.1.2 Type of double skin facade and geometry
though it was not feasible due to required funds and time for data collection. All these
parameters and other are proposed as future works in Chapter 7.

3.4.3 Outputs
After all the models and simulation runs were completed, the results were compared to the
performance of the SSF base case for each climate. In order to have fast and simple outputs for
the performance of double skin facades while simulating the dynamic properties it is suggested
for the simulations to be hourly for the whole year with predefined settings for the indoor
environment both for the cooling and heating seasons (Liu et al. 2014). DesignBuilder can
generate multiple outputs depending on the scope of the simulations. In this case, the overall EUI,
the cooling and heating demand as well as the fuel breakdown were the ways to measure the
energy performance of the different façade types. The simulations were made with one time step
per hour, meaning every 1 hour for the annual, monthly and daily results since the four time
steps were more time demanding and overloading the system. Generally more time steps give
more accurate results BUT if there are too many then the software takes longer to run
simulations, more data are extracted, and this might affect the results since Longer time steps
introduce more lag and lead to more a dampened dynamic response. If there’s only one time step
82

per hour we cannot access the Temperature distribution results (DesignBuilder Software n.d.).
Thus, considering the resolution of data analysis in this research, and the author’s experiences in
the preliminary study, a one hour was empirically selected as a time step in the simulation.
From the outcomes the following were found and defined:
- Which months require more cooling for which configuration
- Which months require more cooling for which location
- Overall cooling demand comparison and savings per façade type
- Which months require more heating for which configuration
- Which months require more heating for which location
- Overall heating demand comparison and savings per façade type
- Total EUI per façade type, comparison and savings
- Fuel breakdown and savings per façade type
- During the hottest and coldest day of the year, which combination of the configurations
performs better
- Overall the most energy efficient patterns of DECS per location
The most significant results from the outputs are presented in Chapter 4 Results.
3.4.4 CFD simulations
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is part of the fluid mechanics using numerical methods and
algorithms to study the energy and fluid flows (Wikipedia 2014a). CFDs are also being used
from engineers for loads and dynamics, thermal, structural, acoustical, mechanical analysis and
other applications (ATA Engineering Inc 2014). One of the ways CFD’s can be used f building
energy performance simulations by calculating the temperature, velocity, airflow, and
temperature distribution (DesignBuilder Software 2013c). Moreover CFD have been proven to
be a useful tool for modeling flow and heat transfer including conduction, convection and
radiation heat transfer phenomena (Guardo et al. 2009). CFD analysis was part of this research

83

and used to visually demonstrate that DECS with the HF and VF, as designed as initial; and not
in the case of the surface openings. Indeed the existence of HF and VF was changing the airflow
and therefore the temperature distribution inside the DSF cavity when DECS was being used.
More details and the results of the CFD simulations are presented in Chapter 4 section 4.4 CFD
Simulations.

3.5 Summary
This chapter described the methodology used for the research: the first software modeling
attempted with the Autodesk and Rhino based software and the reasons why DesignBuilder by
DesignBuilder Software Ltd was chosen as the software for the research. It further discussed the
variables, building model characteristics, and the settings for the energy simulations within
DesignBuilder were analyzed. Chapter 4 presents both the results from the software attempts and
the outcomes of DECS performance compared to the SSF and DFS configurations.

84

Chapter 4: Results
Chapter 3 described the methodology, the selection of the variables, the software choices
and problems, and reasons why DesignBuilder was chosen. It further described the process of
decision making for the energy model, use of parametric simulations, problems within
DesignBuilder of the first building models, and eventually how DECS modeling, tests and
analysis were made. Lastly, CFD was used for visual representation of the initial DECS system.
Chapter 4 presents the results of the research. First, the Autodesk shoebox model
simulation results are presented and why the Rhino-based set of software and plug-ins and were
not used. The DesignBuilder simulation outcomes follow and are presented in four sections: the
parametric simulation results, the SSF results, the DSF results, the DECS results in the
comparison with all types per climate and finally the CFD simulations. In each section, the
results are shown per climate zone selected: Los Angeles, New York and Houston.

4.1 Energy modeling software attempts for DSF performance simulation results
The first set of software attempts for the energy simulations were Autodesk based and Rhino
based. The Autodesk based tools were with Revit 2014 with Green Building Studio and Revit
2014 with the Revit Falcon plug-in.
4.1.1 Autodesk – Revit 2014 & Green Building Studio
In Revit, the shoebox model described in Chapter 3 section 3.1 Energy modeling software
attempts for DSF performance simulations was used. Its south facade variations had different
configurations: single glazing, two layers of glazing, and DSF: Box Window, Multistory,
Corridor, and Shaft Box. The first three are presented since the conclusions were derived mainly

85

from those types (Fig. 4-1). The main goal was to understand how Green Building Studio runs
and calculates the results when it does the energy analysis. Moreover, the aim was to see if it
takes into consideration the natural ventilation or not, which it was shown that they don’t. The
simulation in GBS showed the same EUI of at 108 Kbtu/ft/y for the first two cases shoebox
model a) Revit + GBS SSF and shoebox model b) Revit + GBS ventilated DSF. The third
configuration c) Revit + GBS Box Window had a lower EUI of 103 Kbtu/sf/y since the cavity
was closed and no natural ventilation occurred (Fig. 4-2).

Fig.4 - 1 Shoebox model a: Revit+GBS SSF, shoebox model b: Revit+GBS ventilated DSF,
shoebox model c: Revit + GBS non ventilated DSF - Box Window

Fig.4 - 2 Results of the Revit + GBS energy performance of the shoebox configurations.
All the shoebox models were expected to have somewhat different results, and the results led to
the following conclusions:
86

o The existence of the second glazed layer in front of the SSF with air gap in between does
not alter the results.
o The existence of the second glazed layer in front of the SSF with air gap in between but
closed from all sides did alter the results.
The justification of these conclusions is based on the following:
o The software did not “read” the existence of the second ventilated glazing surface in front
shoebox model b, which represents a ventilated DSF, is an indication that it cannot
calculate the airflow between the two glazing surfaces and the effect they have on the
building energy performance.
o The third shoebox model c which has an enclosed non-ventilated cavity had a lower EUI
and therefore, the assumption is that it reads the cavity as a buffer zone or room.
Consequently, it is understood that the software does not take into consideration the natural
ventilation (at least not as expected) and therefore, Green Building Studio was not used
further.
4.1.2 Autodesk - Revit 2014 & Project Falcon
The same shoebox models were also used in runs with the Falcon Project in Revit 2014. Several
other variations though were required to be made in order to comprehend whether Falcon can
also do indoor airflow analysis for the purpose of the DSF cavities. Three of the variations in
creating the shoebox model were as a solid, a mass and in-place component. Falcon was shown
to run only with solids. It was shown that the airflow changes when it reaches the solid surfaces
with single glazing or no glazing. With the existence of the second glazing and DSF BW the
airflow seemed to be penetrating into the building and exiting on the other side as shown with
the light cyan color at the bottom of the side views; while no openings actually existed (Fig.4-3
to Fig. 4-6).

87

Fig.4 - 3 Revit + Falcon project SSF.

Fig.4 - 4 Revit + Falcon project: ventilated DSF.

Fig.4 - 5 Revit 2014 + Falcon project: non ventilated DSF - Box Window

88

Fig.4 - 6 Revit + Falcon project: Solid geometry, no openings.
From these set of runs it was not clear if the software calculates the effect of the airflow in the
interior space. Therefore, a second set of runs was made to understand the airflow in the interior
space by creating openings in the following forms:
o openings in wall
o windows without glass
o by edit profile (whole in wall)
In all these cases, Falcon did not work properly when the slice was going through those openings,
and the analysis section plane would inaccurately display as solid red (Fig. 4-7).
Fig.4 - 7 Revit + Falcon project: a) Horizontal calculation plain through the opening, b)vertical
calculation plain through the opening.

89

Other variations were made by creating “rooms” in Revit and spaces. The rooms were even
designed inside the shoebox model with a smaller area in ft² than the shoebox. The result of the
run would perform at the edge of the room but not beyond it. The interior space in this case was
also shown as blue. After examining the result of these runs, the assumption is that Falcon
cannot calculate the airflow in interior spaces and therefore, could not be used for the study of
ventilated DSF and DECS.
4.1.3 Conclusions from using the Autodesk Revit, GBS, and Falcon Project
Following the results of the GBS and Falcon simulations it was required to determine if their
engines take into consideration the natural ventilation and airflow from other sources than the
simulations. Some existing engines that run energy simulations and which do calculate natural
ventilation are shown in Table 4-1.
Table 4 - 1 Software engines and natural ventilation calculations. Part of original table. (Hand
2005, 30)

DOE-2, the engine of GBS, only calculates single zone infiltration but not natural ventilation or
other parameters which are significant for the effect of the DSF configurations to the building’s
90

EUI. In comparison, EnergyPlus is capable of doing these calculations. Therefore, a different
software should be used which use EnergyPlus. Some of the Rhino/Grasshopper plug-ins use
EnergyPlus as well as DesignBuilder. As for Falcon, Vasari, and Ecotect (through Rhino/GECO)
they all are virtual wind tunnels. Falcon though does not calculate buoyancy. Vasari on the other
hand is using the Ecotect virtual tunnel exports its models to the native file formats of
EnergyPlus, ESP-r, HTB-2 and Radiance, invoking calculations and then importing results for
display and analysis (Hand 2005, 22). The Autodesk software that is capable of doing such an
analysis is the Autodesk Simulation CFD which calculates buoyancy, velocity, temperature etc
(Autodesk Inc. 2014) and can be used though Revit2014 as an add-in. At this stage
DesignBuilder was deemed a good alternative software option since its being generally used for
energy simulations of DSF buildings.
4.1.4 Rhino – Grasshopper & Plug-ins
After the Autodesk based test simulations DesignBuilder was designated as the software for the
research and therefore, Rhino and the Grasshopper plug-ins were eliminated.

4.2 Results of the energy models in DesignBuilder
DesignBuilder (DB) is an energy modeling software that uses EnergyPlus as the engine. It is also
being used for the study of DSF buildings, and it further has the ability of running CFD
simulations. Even though the base case model was established based on the DOE benchmark
model as described in Chapter 3 section 3.4 The DesignBuilder model the material of the second
skin was not defined. Parametric simulations were used to find the optimum glazing for all
climates. Finally the design of the DSF models of Multistory (MS), Corridor (CO), Shaft Box

91

(SB) and Box Window (BW) the design of the DECS system took place. The simulations were
made for the climates of Los Angeles, New York, and Houston and presented in the same order.

4.2.1 Parametric simulations for decision making.
Parametric simulations give the capability to find the optimum solutions as an outcome for the
inputs given by the user within a software. In DesignBuilder the parametric simulations can only
run with two different variables. Since there isn't a DOE benchmark model for DSF buildings the
parametric simulations were used to define which glazing type should be used in the DSF and
DECS models. The second variable was the window to wall ratio WWR and since location and
climate could not be used as variables in the parametric simulations; separate simulations had to
be run for the three climate zones. The shoebox model for the parametric simulation was a single
floor SSF building as described in Chapter 3, section 3.4.1. Parametric design using a shoebox
model for decision making (Fig. 4-8). The red surfaces on the top and bottom of the model
represent the adiabatic slabs. In regard to the glazing options, DB provides a big selection. The
simulation was made only among the double pane glass varieties available because according to
the background research in Chapter 2, section 2.7.2 Glazing, at least one double pane glazing
pane is recommended for the skin, external or internal. The simulations were run for three groups
of double pane glazing type variations: clear, Low-E and Low Iron with a total of 33 variations.
In each climate the EUI performance of the every glazing was different as well as the ranking of
the most efficient one. Therefore, the optimum glazing was considered the one that was closest
to the lower EUI in all three climates.
92

Fig.4 - 8 Shoebox model for the parametric simulations.
The optimum glazing type for all was found to be the Double Clear Low-E (e2=.1) 6mm/13mm
air. The properties of the selected glass are the following: U-value: 0.312 Btu/hft
2°
F,
SHGC:0.563 and Tvis: 0.745.
The parametric results for Los Angeles, New York, and Houston are presented in charts (Fig.4-9
to Fig.4-12). For all climates, the EUI increased as the WWR increased in %. In DB by default
WWR parametric simulations are fixed every 20% of WWR, and therefore, the results are shown
at 20%, 40%, 60%, 80% and 100%.
For the 60% - 100% WWR the EUI followed the same pattern (Fig. 4-9). For instance, for Los
Angeles the bars from 60%-100% WWR the lowest EUI was accomplished with the Double
Low-e (e2=.1) tint 6mm/6mm air. In contrast, for the 20% and 40% the results differ. The glazing
type performance of the three double Low-e (e2=.1) tinted glasses do not follow the same pattern
with higher WWR. For the 20% and 40% WWR the building showed the highest EUI due to this
glazing, but for the WWR of 60% or higher the building's EUI was significantly lower than for

93

any other type of glazing and this is represented with the red spline line throughout the graph
(Fig.4-9).
For the parametric simulation results only one chart is being shown per climate zone, the one
with WWR range of 80%-100% since the DB base case designed has 90% WWR on the south
facade as the DSF and DECS have. The y-axis in the charts has the same EUI range in all
climates.

Fig.4 - 9 Parametric analysis for Los Angeles - WWR range Vs. glazing type and EUI.
It has to be noted that even though the colored bars seem to be spread left and right of every x20%
fractions, they represent the glazing types for the specific x20% WWR. The colored bars are in
the same order in every WWR and as written horizontally in the legend, on top of the chart (Fig.
4-9).
94

4.2.1.1 Simulation results for Los Angeles
The parametric analysis shoebox model for Los Angeles had the lowest EUI results compared to
the other two climate zones. For instance for the 100% WWR the highest energy consumption
was close to 70K kbtu/y (Fig. 4-10). Since the area of the building is 26704.16sf the highest EUI
was 13.10kbtu/sf/y and the lowest 10.67kbtu/sf/y. Notice the performance of the bar highlighted
with red. Even though it is not the most efficient type overall the glazing types, but it’s the most
efficient clear glazing type and the optimum for all climates. Tinted glassed can decrease
significantly the heat gains which are required for a heating dominant climate and therefore, even
though they are more efficient, are not the optimum glazing.

Fig.4 - 10 Parametric simulation results for Los Angeles 80% & 100% WWR vs. glazing type.

95

4.2.1.2 Simulation results for New York
The parametric analysis shoebox model for New York had the highest EUI results compared to
the other two climate zones. The highest energy consumption for the 100% WWR was close to
100K kbtu/y and therefore, the highest EUI was 18.72 kbtu/sf/y and the lowest 14.41 kbtu/sf/y
(Fig. 4-11). Similar to LA the optimum glazing is highlighted with red and even though it’s not
the most efficient it is the optimum for all climates. The tinted glass is shown to be more
efficient but is not the best solution; since it minimizes the heat gains which are required in a
heating dominant climate like the one in New York.

Fig.4 - 11 Parametric simulation results for New York - 80% & 100% WWR vs. glazing type.

96

4.2.1.3 Simulation results for Houston
The parametric analysis shoebox model for Houston the EUI results are lower but similar to the
NY results and are higher than the LA results. For 100% glazing the highest energy consumption
was close to 96K kbtu/y (Fig.4-12). As a result the highest EUI was 17.97kbtu/sf/y and the
lowest 14.60kbtu/sf/y. For the climate of Houston which is cooling dominant, the tinted glazing
is the most efficient and recommended since it reduces the solar heat gains. Considering the
climates of LA and NY though, the optimum is the one that serves better the needs of the
building in all three areas and therefore, the most efficient one is the one followed by the tinted
glazing types.

Fig.4 - 12 Parametric simulation results for Houston - 80% & 100% WWR vs. glazing type.

97

4.2.1.4. Results and conclusions of the parametric simulations.
From the parametric results, not only can we identify the optimum variable for the purposes of
the study, in this case the glazing type, but the data provided in the results give us more
information on the simulations and the variables used. Since climate is the third variable, from a
different set of simulation runs, it is easy to read how the glazing types affect the building EUI
and perform in different climates. For instance, Los Angeles, in all cases had the lowest EUI
compared to the other two climate zones. This indicates that probably any building with similar
characteristics, simulated in these three climates would perform better in Los Angeles than in the
other two.
Moreover comparing the charts from all climates it can be concluded that the correlation between
WWR and glazing can be analogous for higher WWR in most cases and be used to predict the
behavior or building performance (Fig. 4-10 to Fig. 4-12). For lower WWR the glazing type can
affect and alter more the energy performance of the building.
The low-e tinted glasses for high WWR were the ones with the lower EUI in every climate.
Since tinted glassed can decrease significantly the heat gains and heat gains are one of the goals
for the heating seasons for DFS and DECS they are as not the optimum glazing type for the study.
Therefore, the type with the greatest energy performance potential is with clear glass: the Double
Clear Low-E (e2=.1) 6mm/13mm air.
4.3 SSF, DSF and DECS energy performance comparison.
Following the parametric simulation results, the energy performances of the SSF, DSF, and
DECS were examined. The result outcomes in every case were the heating, cooling, total EUI
and fuel breakdown in gas and electricity. The base case model for all the runs and comparisons
98

is the base case SSF building as described in Chapter 3, section 3.4 The DesignBuilder model but
with 90% WWR on the south facade. The performance of the benchmark with the 33% WWR is
also presented. The settings for the base case model as designed in DB are shown in Appendix C.
The designation of the models and generated data files had to follow a consistent system in order
to facilitate the study and to be used as a reference for the outcomes. Therefore, the models were
named in the following order: name of climate zone, type of facade and sub-type which
represented the facade condition or cavity configuration. For instance: LA_SSF_90% stands for
Los Angeles, single skin facade and 90% WWR. In the type of facade the DSF and DECS were
placed. For the sub-type would be the MS, CO, SB, BW or cavity configuration which provides
the direction of the openings inside the cavity. For example, LA_DECS_50h_100v stands for the
DECS system used in LA with 50% horizontal openings and 100% vertical.
The exports of the results were organized depending on the climate and further the time frame
examined: annual, monthly, hottest day and coldest day.

4.3.1 SSF energy performance per climate zone
The results of the SSF are presented per climate zone. Therefore, three base cases exist, all
named after the locations name (for example LA_SSF 90% would be due to the 90% WWR of
the south façade). All the DSF and DECS performance results are compared to the SSF outcomes
of the specific climate. The performance of the SSF in every climate is presented in tables and
graphs as 100%, Kbtu/sf or Btu/sf. Any percentage below 100% indicates that there are savings
and any % above, that there is a greater consumption. The results are presented annually,
monthly and for the hottest and coldest day of the year for each climate. When the results are

99

presented both in percentile and EUI the first column is the energy consumption in Kbtu/sf and
the second column is the comparison in percentage to the SSF results. The weather data in DB
are from 2002.
4.3.1.1 SSF results for Los Angeles
The annual simulation results show that there isn't a significant amount of energy for required for
conditioning in Los Angeles (Fig.4-13). More energy is being consumed overall for lighting,
auxiliary, domestic hot water, etc., than from the HVAC system. This indicates that the use of a
DSF or DECS in this climate will not have a major impact to the building's EUI. The monthly
energy breakdown shows that January is the month when most of the energy is being consumed
followed by February and March (Fig. 4-14). Therefore, the greatest energy savings are expected
to be found during those months when compared to DSF and DECS.

Fig.4 - 13 Annual results of SSF energy performance in Los Angeles.

Fig.4 - 14 Monthly results of SSF energy performance in Los Angeles.

ANNUAL Electricity Gas Heating Cooling Total EUI
Model kBtu/sf kBtu/sf kBtu/sf kBtu/sf kBtu/sf
LA_SSF 90% 23.409 1.606 0.400 0.276 25.014
100

For Los Angeles, the hottest day that the SSF building was fully operated based on the ASHRAE
building schedules was July 31st, 2002 with highest temperature 80°F. The coldest day that the
building was fully operated was February 2nd, 2002 with highest temperature 63°F. The results
for the hottest and coldest day are being presented. The units in these results are Btu/(ft
2
h) and
not Kbtu/sf since the simulations were only for 24h and the amount of energy consumed is too
small for being presented in Kbtu (=1000Btu). No heating demand exists during the hottest day
of the year and similarly no cooling demand exists for the coldest day of the year. For the hottest
day the greatest cooling demand and energy usage is at 12PM (Fig. 4-15). For the coldest day the
highest heating requirement and energy consumption is at 8AM (Fig. 4-16).

Fig.4 - 15 Hourly results of SSF energy performance in Los Angeles for the hottest day, July
31st.

101

Fig.4 - 16 Hourly results of SSF energy performance in Los Angeles for the coldest day,
February 2nd.
4.3.1.2 SSF results for New York
The annual simulation results for New York show higher energy usage compared to Los
Angeles and as expected mostly for heating since the climate is heating dominant (Fig. 4-17). In
contrast a small amount of energy is required for cooling. Consequently, the use of DSF or
DECS has higher potential to improve the building's efficiency than in Los Angeles, and
especially during the heating season. The monthly energy breakdown for New York
demonstrates in greater detail that the heating needs excesses the cooling (Fig.4-17). February,
January and December show the higher gas consumption, heating demand and overall energy
usage (Fig.4-18). Therefore, the greatest energy savings are expected to be found during those
months when compared to DSF and DECS. In contrast, there isn't a great expectation of
electricity and cooling reduction for this climate.
102

Fig.4 - 17 Annual results of SSF energy performance in New York.

Fig.4 - 18 Monthly results of SSF energy performance in New York.
For New York the hottest day that the SSF building was fully operated based on the ASHRAE
building schedules was June 19th, 2002 with highest temperature 98°F. The coldest day that the
building was fully operated was February 6th, 2002 with highest temperature 20°F. No heating
demand exists during the hottest day of the year and similarly no cooling demand exists for the
coldest day of the year. For the hottest day the greatest cooling demand and energy usage is at 12
PM (Fig.4-19). For the coldest day the highest heating requirement and energy consumption is at
10AM even though an increased demand is until 6pm (18:00), (Fig.4-20).
ANNUAL Electricity Gas Heating Cooling Total EUI
Model kBtu/sf kBtu/sf kBtu/sf kBtu/sf kBtu/sf
NY_SSF 90% 29.699 73.969 72.763 5.815 103.668

103

Fig.4 - 19 Hourly results of SSF energy performance in New York for the hottest day, June 19
th
.

Fig.4 - 20 Hourly results of SSF energy performance in New York for the coldest day, February
6
th
.

104

4.3.1.3 SSF results for Houston
The annual simulation results for Houston show that the climate is cooling dominant even though
heating is required to some extend as well (Fig.4-21). Consequently, the use of DSF or DECS
have the potential to decrease more the cooling needs and improve the building's efficiency both
during the cooling and heating seasons. The greatest effects are expected in July and August
where the total EUI is found at the highest levels as shown at the monthly energy breakdown. In
terms of heating and gas loads, January and February were the months with the greatest
consumption (Fig. 4-22). Therefore, when compared to DSF and DECS the greatest energy
savings are expected to be in a broader span of months than in Los Angeles and New York.

Fig.4 - 21 Annual results of SSF energy performance in Houston.

Fig.4 - 22 Monthly results of SSF energy performance in Houston.
For Houston the hottest day that the SSF building was fully operated based on the ASHRAE
building schedules was August 2nd, 2002 with highest temperature 102.7°F. The coldest day that
ANNUAL Electricity Gas Heating Cooling Total EUI
Model kBtu/sf kBtu/sf kBtu/sf kBtu/sf kBtu/sf
HOU_SSF 90% 49.217 9.051 7.845 26.009 58.268

105

the building was fully operated was February 11th, 2002 with highest temperature 21°F. No
heating demand exists during the hottest day of the year and similarly no cooling demand exists
for the coldest day of the year. In this climate, cooling and heating are required through the day
with the cooling peak load at 4PM (16:00) and heating peak load at 10AM (Fig. 4-23, Fig. 4-24).

Fig.4 - 23 Hourly results of SSF energy performance in Houston for the hottest day, August 2nd.

Fig.4 - 24 Hourly results of SSF energy performance in Houston for the coldest day, February
11th.
106

4.3.1.4 Comparison of the SSF models
As expected the SSF base case model showed different performance in the three climates.
Overall the SSF in New York showed the highest EUI followed by Houston and with the least
energy use in Los Angeles. The highest percentile of the energy consumption among all was
found in New York for gas and heating. The least one was found in Los Angeles for cooling. The
results are being illustrated based on their annual energy performance (Fig. 4-25).

Fig.4 - 25 Performance comparison and energy breakdown for the SSF in all climates.

4.3.2 DSF energy performance per climate zone.
Following the SSF energy simulations the DSF configurations of MS, CO, SB and BW were
examined. The result outcomes in every case were the heating, cooling, total EUI and fuel
breakdown in gas and electricity. The results are presented per climate zone. Regarding the DSF
configurations, the cavity models are being illustrated (Fig. 4-26). The green lines represent the
openings within the cavity, horizontal, vertical or both. The pink lines represent the openings
towards the exterior environment and in DB were designed as vent openings.

107

Fig.4 - 26 DSF cavity types as designed in DesignBuilder.
In regard to the outcomes, due to the large amount of data only the Total EUI results for the
annual, monthly, hottest and coldest day are being presented. The energy breakdown in
electricity, gas, heating and cooling can be found in Appendix D tables Table4-Appx.D-1 to
Table4-Appx.D-6. The performance comparison of the DSF configurations is compared to the
SSF 90% but the benchmark model with 33% WWR is also included as a reference.
4.3.2.1 DSF results for Los Angeles
The annual simulation results for the DSF configurations show that most of the energy goes to
electricity used for lighting, auxiliary, domestic hot water etc but not for cooling (Fig. 4-27).
Table 4-2 presents the comparison of the DSF types to the SSF in EUI and percentile.

Fig.4 - 27 Annual performance comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs in LA.
108

Table 4 - 2 Results of the annual performance and comparison of DSF Vs. SSF in LA.

The monthly results show the energy distribution throughout the year (Fig. 4-28). For this
climate, all facade types use more energy for heating even though the difference with the cooling
loads in terms of EUI is very small.

Fig.4 - 28 Total EUI monthly comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs in LA.
For the hottest and coldest day all facades show a similar energy pattern. During the hottest day
the peak load is at noon but high demand starts at 9AM and ends at 5PM (17:00), (Fig.4-49). For
the coldest day the peak load is from 10AM- 1PM (13:00) with high demand from 8AM until
6PM (18:00), (Fig. 4-30). The performance of DECS is consequently expected to be more
effective during these hours.
LA ANNUAL PERFORMANCE COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90% (kbtu/sf, %)
Model Nr Electricity Gas Heating Cooling Total EUI
LA_SSF_90% 23.409 100.00% 1.606 100.00% 0.400 100.00% 0.276 100.00% 25.014 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 24.207 103.41% 1.683 104.80% 0.477 119.30% 0.187 67.59% 25.889 103.50%
LA_DSF_MS 24.304 103.82% 1.664 103.61% 0.458 114.51% 0.187 67.81% 25.967 103.81%
LA_DSF_CO 24.674 105.40% 1.624 101.12% 0.417 104.49% 0.189 68.64% 26.297 105.13%
LA_DSF_SB 24.061 102.79% 1.663 103.56% 0.457 114.29% 0.184 66.54% 25.724 102.84%
LA_DSF_BW 24.570 104.96% 1.596 99.39% 0.390 97.56% 0.198 71.81% 26.166 104.60%

109

Fig.4 - 29 Total EUI comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs for the hottest day in LA.

Fig.4 - 30 Total EUI comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs for the coldest day in LA.

110

4.3.2.2 DSF results for New York
For New York the annual simulation results for the DSF configurations and show that most of
the energy goes to heating and gas (Fig.4-31). The comparisons of the DSFs performance to the
base case are presented in EUI and percentile of energy consumption (Table 4-3).

Fig.4 - 31 Annual performance comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs in NY.
Table 4 - 3 Results of the annual performance and comparison of DSF Vs. SSF in NY.

The monthly results show the distribution of the loads throughout the year (Fig.4-32). All
facades have a similar pattern but the difference in terms of EUI between the cooling and heating
loads is greater than the one found in the climate of LA.
NY ANNUAL PERFORMANCE COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90% (kbtu/sf, %)
Model Nr Electricity Gas Heating Cooling Total EUI
NY_SSF_90% 29.699 100.00% 73.969 100.00% 72.763 100.00% 5.815 100.00% 103.668 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 29.899 100.67% 76.955 104.04% 75.749 104.10% 5.113 87.94% 106.853 103.07%
NY_DSF_MS 29.960 100.88% 77.562 104.86% 76.356 104.94% 5.200 89.42% 107.522 103.72%
NY_DSF_CO 30.427 102.45% 75.998 102.74% 74.792 102.79% 5.261 90.47% 106.425 102.66%
NY_DSF_SB 29.729 100.10% 77.364 104.59% 76.158 104.67% 5.182 89.11% 107.093 103.30%
NY_DSF_BW 30.450 102.53% 74.853 101.19% 73.647 101.21% 5.390 92.69% 105.302 101.58%

111

Fig.4 - 32 Total EUI monthly comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs in NY.
In this, all facades have a similar pattern also, both for the hottest and coldest day. During the
hottest day the peak load is at noon with the high demand starting at 9AM and ending at 5PM
(17:00), (Fig. 4-33). For the coldest day the peak load starts at 10AM and ends at 6PM (18:00)
with a big reduction during around 2PM due to the occupancy schedule of the building (Fig.4-
34). The performance of DECS consequently is expected to be more effective during these hours.

Fig.4 - 33 Total EUI comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs for the hottest day in NY.
112

Fig.4 - 34 Total EUI comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs for the coldest day in NY.
4.3.2.3 DSF results for Houston
For Houston, the annual simulation results for the DSF configurations show that most of the
energy use goes to electricity and cooling, even though the gas and heating loads as mentioned in
the SSF results for Houston, are also significant (Fig.4-35). For this reason greater savings were
expected in this climate with the DSF and DECS both in heating and cooling. The comparison of
all types in EUI and percentile of performance are shown (Table 4-4).

Fig.4 - 35 Annual performance comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs in HOU.

113

Table 4 - 4 Results of the annual performance and comparison of DSF Vs. SSF in HOU.

The monthly results show the energy distribution throughout the year and in this case also the
pattern is similar for all the facade types (Fig.4-36).

Fig.4 - 36 Total EUI monthly comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs in HOU.
During the hottest and coldest day the performance among the facade types is similar in every
case. At the hottest day the peak load is at 4PM (16:00) with the high demand starting at 9AM,
ending at 6PM (18:00) with a reduction at 1PM (13:00) due to building occupancy schedule
(Fig.4-37). For the coldest day the peak load starts at 9AM and ends at 8PM (18:00) with a big
reduction during around 2PM (14:00), (Fig.4-38). The performance of DECS is expected to be
more effective during these hours.
HOU ANNUAL PERFORMANCE COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90% (kbtu/sf, %)
Model Nr Electricity Gas Heating Cooling Total EUI
HOU_SSF_90% 49.217 100.00% 9.051 100.00% 7.845 100.00% 26.009 100.00% 58.268 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 48.713 98.97% 9.747 107.68% 8.541 108.86% 24.377 93.73% 58.459 100.33%
HOU_DSF_MS 49.291 100.15% 9.756 107.79% 8.550 108.99% 24.708 95.00% 59.048 101.34%
HOU_DSF_CO 49.831 101.25% 9.421 104.09% 8.215 104.72% 24.930 95.85% 59.252 101.69%
HOU_DSF_SB 49.071 99.70% 9.726 107.46% 8.520 108.61% 24.717 95.03% 58.797 100.91%
HOU_DSF_BW 50.114 101.82% 9.218 101.85% 8.012 102.13% 25.305 97.29% 59.332 101.83%
114

Fig.4 - 37 Total EUI comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs for the hottest day in HOU.

Fig.4 - 38 Total EUI comparison of DSF Vs. SSFs for the coldest day in HOU.
4.3.2.4 Comparison of the DFS models
The results among the SSF and DSF show a similar pattern in every climate for the time period
examined. Overall in all climates the base case SSF 90% performs better than the DSFs (Table 4-
5). In some cases though the DSF configurations have lower less energy consumption for heating
or cooling (Table 4-2 to Table 4-4).

115

Table 4 - 5 Performance comparison and energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF in all climates.

More detailed comparisons of the results exist in section 4.3.3 DECS energy performance and
comparison to SSF and DSF per climate zone. Greater analysis of the results and discussion can
be found in Chapter 5.
4.3.3. DECS energy performance and comparison to SSF and DSF per climate zone.
The DECS system was designed as initially proposed with Horizontal Fins (HF) and Vertical
Fins (VF). The HF and VF were designed as standard component blocks in DB. An illustration
of the DSF and DECS as designed with the HF and VF (Fig. 4-39). After analyzing the results of
the simulations it was proved that the strategy of design for DECS had to change. The tilt of the
fins inside the cavity did not make any difference to the energy performance or the fuel
breakdown because the cavity zone would remain one and didn’t have separate zones
interconnecting. The same problem in the results occurred when the fins were designed as
partitions inside the cavity. Therefore, instead of fins, the DECS design was revised and as a
solution, openings were created on the horizontal and vertical surfaces of the cavity
compartments (Fig. 4-42).
ANNUAL TOTAL EUI COMPARISON OF DSF Vs. SSF IN ALL CLIMATES
Model Nr LA Total EUI NY Total EUI HOU Total EUI
SSF_90% 25.014 100.00% 103.668 100.00% 58.268 100.00%
SSF_t002 (33%) 25.889 103.50% 106.853 103.07% 58.459 100.33%
DSF_MS 25.967 103.81% 107.522 103.72% 59.048 101.34%
DSF_CO 26.297 105.13% 106.425 102.66% 59.252 101.69%
DSF_SB 25.724 102.84% 107.093 103.30% 58.797 100.91%
DSF_BW 26.166 104.60% 105.302 101.58% 59.332 101.83%
116

Fig.4 - 39 DSF cavity configurations and DECS as initially designed with HF and VF.
For the new design approach and in order to create the 0%, 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% from
glazing to opening, each element had to be manually changed and adjusted to the desired
percentile of glazing on the surface material. The modeling of LA_DECS_75h50v (“75h” stands
for “75% horizontal” opening and the “50v stands” for the “50% vertical” opening), (Fig. 4-40).
The 50% fitted glazing shown in red was customized and used in the interior partition surfaces. It
only has 50% of glazing in order to allow 50% of the vertical surface to be used as opening
between the cavity compartments.

117

Fig.4 - 40 Screenshot in DB creating the DECS interior cavity configurations.
For the openings towards the external environment, similarly the surface of glazing which
carried the opening had to be adjusted. For the modeling of the LA_DECS_50h75v the external
windows had to be adjusted at the 25% WWR of glazing in order to allow 75% surface for the
openings (Fig. 4-41). The openings were designed on the sides of the facade, East and West, on
top of the roof and in a small potion on the lowest side of the 1st floor of the building. The South
facade remained 90% WWR.

Fig.4 - 41 Screenshot in DB creating the DECS external cavity configurations.
118

Fig.4 - 42 DSF and DECS cavity configurations as designed in DB for a single compartment.

119

The DECS results vary both for the total EUI and the energy breakdown in electricity, gas,
heating and cooling. Different combinations of configurations achieve the most energy efficient
performance in every climate also. In some cases the optimum configuration is found in one of
the DSF types. In the annual or monthly results the effect is not as significant due to the large
time span of the changes in the cavity formation but in some cases the potential of better
performance is indicated, especially if the time span of the dynamic system is smaller than
annual or monthly. The effect of DECS was effectively seen in the hottest and coldest day results
since the cavity configurations change per hour and show the effect of the cavity’s dynamic
formation change to the energy use intensity and energy breakdown. The tables in this section
are being presented in percentiles compared to the base case and not in Kbtu/sf. The reason is to
make it easier to read and correlate the energy breakdown among the tables in all climates. Since
no heating is required during the hottest day and no cooling during the coldest day, for the hottest
day the results focus on electricity and cooling and for the coldest day the results focus on
heating and gas. For both days the total EUI is also presented. The energy pattern in the tables is
presented with two colors. A gradation from blue to red is used for electricity and cooling; and
from green to red is used for heating, gas and the total EUI. The reds are the least efficient
formations, the green and blue are the most efficient. When the schedules of loads are constant
the colors remain constant. For instance, in summers, no heating is required but there is gas
consumption due to the building schedules for domestic hot water and therefore, the loads are the
same for those summer months.

120

4.3.3.1 DECS results for Los Angeles
For Los Angeles, the annual energy breakdown results show that the base case performs better in
terms of electricity loads and overall EUI and the least efficient is the LA_DSF_CO. For gas and
heating the most efficient is the LA_DSF_BW and the least efficient is the LA_SSF 33%. In
regard to cooling the base case has the worst performance and the most efficient is the
LA_DECS_25h0v (Table 4-6).
The monthly, hottest and coldest day comparison results are illustrated in tables and can be found
in Appendix D Table4-Appx.D-7 to Table4-Appx.D-17. The energy patterns of comparison for
the total EUI for the hottest and coldest day in LA are shown (Fig.4-43 and Fig.4-47).
In the monthly results, the most efficient model for electricity is the base case and worst is the
LA_DSF_CO (Table4-Appx.D-7). For gas and heating the LA_DSF_BW has the best energy
performance and worse is the SSF 33% (Table4-Appx.D-8 and Table4-Appx.D-9). For cooling
all types perform better than the base case with the most efficient being the LA_DECS_25h0v
(Table4-Appx.D-10). For the overall EUI the base case is the most efficient and the worst is the
LA_DSF_CO (Table4-Appx.D-11).
For the hottest day the LA_DECS_BEST represents the performance of the dynamic pattern and
is the most efficient in electricity loads after the base case (Fig. 4-44). For cooling, all types
perform better than the base case with the LA_DECS_25h0v having the greatest savings (Fig.4-
45). For the TOTAL EUI the base case is shown to be the most efficient and the LA_DSF_CO
the least one (Fig.4-46).

121

For the coldest day LA_DECS_BEST is the representation of performance for the dynamic
pattern, is the most efficient for gas, heating and overall EUI after the base case while the SSF 33%
has the worst performance in all cases (Fig. 4-7 to Fig. 4-49).
For these two days the results can be found in greater detail in tables Table4-Appx.D-12 to
Table4-Appx.D-17.
LA annual results
Table 4 - 6 Annual comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS performance in LA.

LA ANNUAL PERFORMANCE COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90% (kbtu/sf, %)
Model Nr Electricity Gas Heating Cooling Total EUI
LA_SSF_90% 23.409 100.00% 1.606 100.00% 0.400 100.00% 0.276 100.00% 25.014 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 24.207 103.41% 1.683 104.80% 0.477 119.30% 0.187 67.59% 25.889 103.50%
LA_DSF_MS 24.304 103.82% 1.664 103.61% 0.458 114.51% 0.187 67.81% 25.967 103.81%
LA_DSF_CO 24.674 105.40% 1.624 101.12% 0.417 104.49% 0.189 68.64% 26.297 105.13%
LA_DSF_SB 24.061 102.79% 1.663 103.56% 0.457 114.29% 0.184 66.54% 25.724 102.84%
LA_DSF_BW 24.570 104.96% 1.596 99.39% 0.390 97.56% 0.198 71.81% 26.166 104.60%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 24.636 105.25% 1.617 100.71% 0.411 102.85% 0.192 69.47% 26.253 104.95%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 24.649 105.30% 1.620 100.87% 0.414 103.50% 0.191 69.15% 26.268 105.01%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 24.662 105.36% 1.622 101.05% 0.416 104.21% 0.190 68.80% 26.285 105.08%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 24.043 102.71% 1.646 102.50% 0.440 110.04% 0.178 64.37% 25.688 102.70%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 24.231 103.51% 1.642 102.27% 0.436 109.14% 0.183 66.33% 25.873 103.43%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 24.255 103.62% 1.644 102.40% 0.438 109.65% 0.182 66.02% 25.900 103.54%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 24.282 103.73% 1.646 102.54% 0.440 110.21% 0.181 65.71% 26.297 105.13%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 24.061 102.79% 1.663 103.56% 0.457 114.29% 0.184 66.54% 25.952 103.75%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 24.093 102.92% 1.652 102.86% 0.445 111.48% 0.178 64.53% 25.744 102.92%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 24.279 103.72% 1.649 102.72% 0.443 110.91% 0.184 66.69% 25.928 103.65%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 24.302 103.82% 1.651 102.86% 0.445 111.47% 0.183 66.41% 25.954 103.76%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 24.326 103.92% 1.653 102.98% 0.447 111.97% 0.182 66.08% 25.979 103.86%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 24.348 104.01% 1.654 103.02% 0.448 112.14% 0.182 65.91% 26.002 103.95%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 24.052 102.75% 1.660 103.39% 0.454 113.63% 0.184 66.77% 25.712 102.79%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 24.221 103.47% 1.657 103.22% 0.451 112.94% 0.191 69.13% 25.879 103.45%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 24.247 103.58% 1.659 103.34% 0.453 113.43% 0.190 68.85% 25.906 103.57%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 24.274 103.70% 1.662 103.49% 0.456 114.01% 0.189 68.54% 25.936 103.68%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 24.299 103.80% 1.662 103.53% 0.456 114.18% 0.189 68.31% 25.961 103.78%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 24.230 103.51% 1.660 103.39% 0.454 113.61% 0.191 69.09% 25.890 103.50%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 24.258 103.63% 1.662 103.50% 0.456 114.05% 0.189 68.56% 25.919 103.62%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 24.285 103.74% 1.664 103.62% 0.458 114.54% 0.188 68.30% 25.948 103.73%
122

LA hottest day results

Fig.4 - 43 Total EUI comparison pattern of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in LA.
Notice the trends exemplified by the colors with the most efficient façade types with blue and the
least with red (the values can be seen in a larger size of the chart in Appendix D, Table4-Appx.D-

Fig.4 - 44 Electricity savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in LA.

LA TOTAL EUI USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY JuLY 31st
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.45% 102.44% 109.97% 102.93% 98.02% 96.24% 91.95% 99.29% 104.05% 104.98% 108.66% 103.32% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 114.97% 110.40% 94.38% 95.39% 94.49% 106.00% 112.11% 112.56% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 115.12% 112.43% 99.05% 99.24% 97.48% 109.29% 113.32% 112.74% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.99% 103.65% 114.15% 106.86% 91.35% 93.07% 92.48% 102.44% 108.20% 108.04% 110.10% 103.78% 100.32% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.11% 103.66% 114.91% 111.61% 99.72% 99.85% 98.64% 109.25% 112.32% 111.46% 112.78% 104.63% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.13% 103.66% 114.97% 111.96% 99.20% 99.53% 97.90% 109.19% 112.66% 111.80% 113.05% 104.72% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.66% 115.02% 112.12% 99.15% 99.42% 97.74% 109.22% 112.88% 112.12% 113.33% 104.80% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.16% 103.66% 115.08% 112.29% 99.07% 99.31% 97.58% 109.25% 113.12% 112.46% 113.62% 104.89% 100.42% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.98% 103.65% 114.13% 106.66% 92.06% 92.31% 91.06% 101.60% 108.05% 107.96% 110.05% 103.76% 100.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.07% 103.65% 114.58% 109.27% 95.06% 95.33% 93.79% 104.95% 110.43% 110.11% 111.76% 104.30% 100.37% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.10% 103.66% 114.71% 109.68% 95.09% 95.24% 93.66% 105.16% 111.02% 110.95% 112.48% 104.53% 100.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.66% 114.85% 110.10% 95.14% 95.13% 93.51% 105.37% 111.62% 111.81% 113.21% 104.77% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 114.97% 110.47% 95.18% 95.08% 93.43% 105.58% 112.15% 112.57% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.00% 103.65% 114.25% 107.45% 92.14% 93.35% 91.93% 102.67% 108.74% 108.53% 110.49% 103.90% 100.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.08% 103.65% 114.65% 109.78% 94.82% 96.03% 94.48% 105.69% 110.85% 110.43% 112.00% 104.38% 100.37% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.11% 103.66% 114.77% 110.14% 94.85% 95.94% 94.35% 105.88% 111.37% 111.17% 112.63% 104.58% 100.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.66% 114.89% 110.51% 95.21% 95.79% 94.14% 106.03% 111.91% 111.94% 113.29% 104.79% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 115.00% 110.84% 95.16% 95.70% 94.05% 106.21% 112.37% 112.60% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.98% 103.65% 114.13% 106.69% 91.92% 92.90% 92.41% 102.25% 108.07% 107.96% 110.04% 103.76% 100.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.06% 103.65% 114.54% 109.06% 93.96% 95.68% 95.01% 105.33% 110.25% 109.95% 111.63% 104.26% 100.37% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.10% 103.66% 114.69% 109.50% 94.02% 95.58% 94.88% 105.56% 110.87% 110.84% 112.39% 104.51% 100.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.13% 103.66% 114.83% 109.94% 94.03% 95.48% 94.74% 105.79% 111.51% 111.76% 113.18% 104.75% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 114.96% 110.33% 94.36% 95.39% 94.63% 106.00% 112.07% 112.56% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.06% 103.65% 114.55% 109.16% 94.12% 95.85% 95.25% 105.50% 110.31% 109.98% 111.65% 104.27% 100.36% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.10% 103.66% 114.70% 109.62% 94.46% 95.72% 94.95% 105.70% 110.96% 110.88% 112.42% 104.51% 100.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.13% 103.66% 114.84% 110.06% 94.45% 95.60% 94.79% 105.92% 111.58% 111.78% 113.18% 104.76% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

123

Fig.4 - 45 Cooling savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in LA.

Fig.4 - 46 Total EUI savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in LA.
124

LA coldest day results

Fig.4 - 47 Total EUI comparison pattern of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in LA.
Notice the trends exemplified by the colors with the most efficient façade types with green and
the least with red (the values can be seen in a larger size of the chart in Appendix D, Table4-
Appx.D-17).

Fig.4 - 48 Gas savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in LA.

LA TOTAL EUI USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 2nd
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.68% 105.33% 108.03% 108.95% 111.20% 110.54% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.91% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.69% 103.73% 108.56% 107.29% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.60% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.51% 101.81% 107.48% 105.27% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.40% 104.06% 108.75% 107.73% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 104.95% 103.92% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.88% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.45% 107.11% 104.96% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.93% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.13% 101.62% 107.26% 105.07% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.95% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.41% 102.03% 107.42% 105.20% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.97% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.81% 107.56% 106.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.17% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.19% 107.22% 105.97% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.46% 107.35% 106.18% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.56% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.75% 107.49% 106.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.60% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.81% 107.54% 106.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.63% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.27% 102.64% 108.16% 107.45% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.21% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.59% 102.28% 107.77% 106.44% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.56% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.88% 102.42% 107.90% 106.64% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.59% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.17% 102.56% 108.04% 106.85% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.63% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.26% 102.60% 108.09% 106.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.65% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.13% 103.87% 108.62% 107.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.17% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.32% 103.44% 108.18% 106.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.50% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.30% 103.37% 108.31% 106.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.55% 103.60% 108.44% 106.94% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.62% 103.66% 108.48% 107.08% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.60% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.60% 103.60% 108.32% 106.78% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.49% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.57% 103.63% 108.45% 107.02% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.82% 103.84% 108.57% 107.21% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

125

Fig.4 - 49 Heating savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in LA.

Fig.4 - 50 Total EUI savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in LA.
126

4.3.3.2 DECS results for New York
For New York, the annual results show that for electricity the most efficient is
NY_DECS_25h0v and NY_DSF_BW the least efficient. For gas and heating the base case has
the best performance and the least performing is the NY_DECS_50h100v. For the total EUI the
base case is the most efficient and the least is the NY_DECS_50h100v (Table 4-7).
The monthly, hottest and coldest day comparison results can be found in Appendix D in tables
Table4-Appx.D-18 to Table4-Appx.D-28. The energy pattern of comparison for the total EUI for
the hottest and coldest day in New York are shown (Fig.4-51 and Fig.4-55).
In the monthly results, the most efficient in electricity is the NY_DECS_25h0v and the least
efficient the NY_DSF_BW shown in Table4-Appx.D-18. For gas and heating the base case has
the best performance and the worst is the NY_DECS_50h100v (Table4-Appx.D-19 and Table4-
Appx.D-20). For cooling, the dynamic formation NY_DECS_BEST_Cooling is the most
efficient followed by NY_DECS_25h_0v and the base case is the least efficient (Table4-Appx.D-
21). For the total EUI the base case has the best performance and the worst is shown by the
NY_DECS_50h100v (Table4-Appx.D-22).
For the hottest day the best performing in electricity, cooling and total EUI is the NY_SSF 33%.
Second best performing for all is the NY_DECS_BEST (the dynamic configuration in every
case). The worst performing in all is the NY_DSF_BW (Fig.4-52 to Fig.4-54).
For the coldest day the base case performs better in gas, heating and total EUI and
NY_DECS_BEST is second in performance for all along with the NY_DSF_BW. The least
efficient for all; gas, heating and total EUI is the NY_DSF_MS (Fig.4-56 to Fig.4-58). For these

127

two days the results can be found in greater detail in tables Table4-Appx.D-23 to Table4-Appx.D-
28.
NY annual results
Table 4 - 7 Annual comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS performance in NY.

NY ANNUAL PERFORMANCE COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90% (kbtu/sf, %)
Model Nr Electricity Gas Heating Cooling Total EUI
NY_SSF_90% 29.699 100.00% 73.969 100.00% 72.763 100.00% 5.815 100.00% 103.668 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 29.899 100.67% 76.955 104.04% 75.749 104.10% 5.113 87.94% 106.853 103.07%
NY_DSF_MS 29.960 100.88% 77.562 104.86% 76.356 104.94% 5.200 89.42% 107.522 103.72%
NY_DSF_CO 30.427 102.45% 75.998 102.74% 74.792 102.79% 5.261 90.47% 106.425 102.66%
NY_DSF_SB 29.729 100.10% 77.364 104.59% 76.158 104.67% 5.182 89.11% 107.093 103.30%
NY_DSF_BW 30.450 102.53% 74.853 101.19% 73.647 101.21% 5.390 92.69% 105.302 101.58%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 30.439 102.49% 75.721 102.37% 74.515 102.41% 5.305 91.22% 106.160 102.40%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 30.434 102.47% 75.864 102.56% 74.658 102.60% 5.289 90.96% 106.298 102.54%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 30.429 102.46% 76.012 102.76% 74.806 102.81% 5.273 90.68% 106.441 102.67%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 29.656 99.85% 77.257 104.45% 76.051 104.52% 5.121 88.07% 106.914 103.13%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 29.895 100.66% 77.232 104.41% 76.025 104.48% 5.184 89.15% 107.126 103.34%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 29.901 100.68% 77.342 104.56% 76.136 104.64% 5.171 88.92% 107.244 103.45%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 29.909 100.71% 77.433 104.68% 76.227 104.76% 5.158 88.71% 106.425 102.66%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 29.729 100.10% 77.364 104.59% 76.158 104.67% 5.182 89.11% 107.360 103.56%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 29.713 100.05% 77.413 104.66% 76.206 104.73% 5.132 88.26% 107.126 103.34%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 29.962 100.89% 77.367 104.59% 76.161 104.67% 5.200 89.43% 107.330 103.53%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 29.967 100.90% 77.456 104.72% 76.250 104.79% 5.186 89.19% 107.423 103.62%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 29.972 100.92% 77.564 104.86% 76.357 104.94% 5.173 88.96% 107.535 103.73%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 29.978 100.94% 77.570 104.87% 76.364 104.95% 5.162 88.78% 107.548 103.74%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 29.727 100.09% 77.258 104.45% 76.052 104.52% 5.189 89.24% 106.985 103.20%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 29.949 100.84% 77.251 104.44% 76.045 104.51% 5.255 90.37% 107.200 103.41%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 29.955 100.86% 77.353 104.58% 76.147 104.65% 5.241 90.13% 107.308 103.51%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 29.962 100.88% 77.464 104.73% 76.258 104.80% 5.227 89.89% 107.426 103.63%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 29.970 100.91% 77.478 104.74% 76.272 104.82% 5.216 89.70% 107.447 103.65%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 29.952 100.85% 77.350 104.57% 76.143 104.65% 5.248 90.25% 107.301 103.50%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 29.958 100.87% 77.454 104.71% 76.248 104.79% 5.233 89.99% 107.412 103.61%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 29.965 100.90% 77.538 104.83% 76.332 104.91% 5.219 89.74% 107.504 103.70%
128

NY hottest day results

Fig.4 - 51 Total EUI comparison pattern of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in NY.
Notice the trends exemplified by the colors with the most efficient façade types with blue and the
least with red (the values can be seen in a larger size of the chart in Appendix D, Table4-Appx.D-
25).

Fig.4 - 52 Electricity savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in NY.
NY TOTAL EUI COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY June 19th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.76% 94.44% 99.76% 99.96% 99.66% 99.54% 97.09% 98.18% 98.89% 100.78% 100.26% 96.23% 89.55% 90.70% 92.74% 95.18% 91.36% 100.00%
NY_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.44% 94.30% 100.74% 100.29% 99.22% 98.93% 97.23% 99.32% 101.18% 103.13% 101.91% 99.04% 95.52% 95.35% 95.63% 97.35% 94.75% 100.00%
NY_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.08% 99.50% 101.35% 101.20% 100.47% 100.21% 97.99% 99.73% 101.04% 102.98% 101.90% 99.36% 99.03% 99.53% 100.42% 100.50% 102.33% 100.00%
NY_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.06% 94.69% 99.47% 99.38% 98.36% 98.16% 96.51% 98.68% 100.90% 102.81% 101.33% 99.19% 96.68% 96.13% 96.20% 97.62% 95.15% 100.00%
NY_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 106.29% 103.78% 101.32% 101.37% 100.63% 100.36% 98.38% 99.92% 101.34% 103.35% 102.15% 100.78% 103.07% 103.83% 104.35% 103.20% 106.91% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.69% 100.85% 101.31% 101.24% 100.56% 100.32% 98.17% 99.81% 101.14% 103.08% 101.92% 99.84% 100.60% 101.05% 101.76% 101.36% 103.98% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.05% 100.32% 101.32% 101.22% 100.52% 100.28% 98.11% 99.78% 101.10% 103.04% 101.91% 99.67% 100.08% 100.52% 101.26% 101.06% 103.38% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.44% 99.82% 101.34% 101.21% 100.49% 100.24% 98.04% 99.75% 101.07% 103.01% 101.90% 99.50% 99.53% 99.98% 100.80% 100.73% 102.79% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.71% 95.31% 99.53% 99.22% 98.15% 97.88% 95.91% 98.25% 100.46% 102.36% 101.04% 98.46% 95.53% 95.87% 96.57% 98.14% 96.50% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 96.04% 95.70% 100.45% 100.11% 99.14% 98.86% 96.89% 98.96% 100.83% 102.72% 101.46% 98.95% 96.38% 96.54% 97.13% 98.41% 97.02% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.62% 95.43% 100.59% 100.17% 99.13% 98.82% 96.83% 98.97% 100.83% 102.73% 101.54% 98.81% 95.89% 96.11% 96.77% 98.20% 96.69% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.18% 95.16% 100.72% 100.21% 99.12% 98.78% 96.77% 98.97% 100.82% 102.74% 101.62% 98.69% 95.38% 95.75% 96.40% 98.00% 96.36% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.87% 94.95% 100.84% 100.26% 99.12% 98.75% 96.73% 98.98% 100.81% 102.76% 101.68% 98.57% 94.92% 95.41% 96.12% 97.83% 96.08% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.02% 94.96% 99.71% 99.46% 98.37% 98.06% 96.14% 98.46% 100.62% 102.52% 101.18% 98.70% 95.90% 96.00% 96.48% 97.99% 96.11% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.47% 95.41% 100.53% 100.29% 99.41% 99.16% 97.24% 99.20% 100.98% 102.87% 101.58% 99.14% 96.65% 96.54% 97.05% 98.25% 96.58% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.04% 95.11% 100.64% 100.32% 99.39% 99.13% 97.18% 99.20% 100.97% 102.87% 101.64% 99.02% 96.16% 96.18% 96.63% 98.05% 96.27% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.64% 94.84% 100.76% 100.36% 99.37% 99.09% 97.12% 99.20% 100.96% 102.87% 101.71% 98.88% 95.66% 95.80% 96.26% 97.85% 95.96% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.31% 94.60% 100.86% 100.39% 99.36% 99.06% 97.07% 99.20% 100.94% 102.88% 101.75% 98.76% 95.20% 95.44% 96.00% 97.68% 95.68% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.24% 94.81% 99.45% 99.33% 98.34% 98.14% 96.51% 98.67% 100.91% 102.82% 101.35% 99.26% 96.89% 96.32% 96.40% 97.73% 95.36% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.70% 95.30% 100.36% 100.16% 99.26% 99.04% 97.46% 99.34% 101.26% 103.15% 101.73% 99.57% 97.34% 96.62% 96.67% 97.94% 95.70% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.30% 94.99% 100.50% 100.21% 99.24% 99.00% 97.40% 99.35% 101.26% 103.17% 101.81% 99.45% 96.85% 96.28% 96.37% 97.77% 95.41% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.89% 94.69% 100.64% 100.26% 99.23% 98.96% 97.35% 99.35% 101.25% 103.19% 101.89% 99.31% 96.32% 95.90% 96.03% 97.59% 95.12% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.54% 94.43% 100.76% 100.29% 99.22% 98.93% 97.29% 99.36% 101.25% 103.20% 101.96% 99.21% 95.86% 95.56% 95.76% 97.43% 94.85% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.46% 95.11% 100.36% 100.19% 99.31% 99.09% 97.49% 99.36% 101.25% 103.13% 101.71% 99.53% 97.11% 96.42% 96.47% 97.81% 95.46% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.09% 94.85% 100.50% 100.24% 99.30% 99.06% 97.44% 99.36% 101.24% 103.15% 101.79% 99.36% 96.60% 96.07% 96.16% 97.65% 95.19% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.68% 94.55% 100.63% 100.28% 99.28% 99.02% 97.38% 99.37% 101.24% 103.16% 101.87% 99.22% 96.07% 95.69% 95.83% 97.47% 94.90% 100.00%

129

Fig.4 - 53 Cooling savings of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in NY.

Fig.4 - 54 Total EUI savings of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in LA.
130

NY coldest day results

Fig.4 - 55 Total EUI comparison pattern of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in NY.
Notice the trends exemplified by the colors with the most efficient façade types with green and
the least with red (the values can be seen in a larger size of the chart in Appendix D, Table4-
Appx.D-28).

Fig.4 - 56 Gas savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in NY.
NY TOTAL EUI COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.52% 95.00% 94.82% 94.54% 94.19% 93.83% 93.41% 100.04% 102.42% 101.20% 101.37% 101.34% 101.93% 102.22% 101.13% 100.87% 100.61% 100.50% 100.95% 101.52% 100.90% 100.39% 99.97% 99.35%
NY_DSF_MS 102.35% 107.07% 107.36% 106.94% 105.74% 105.00% 103.36% 103.29% 105.02% 101.97% 102.07% 101.75% 102.64% 102.70% 101.49% 101.25% 101.02% 100.96% 102.35% 105.42% 104.44% 103.82% 103.20% 104.04%
NY_DSF_CO 97.90% 94.27% 95.26% 95.26% 94.64% 94.02% 93.35% 100.69% 103.78% 101.72% 101.85% 101.62% 102.42% 102.21% 101.21% 100.89% 100.58% 100.48% 101.01% 102.05% 101.16% 100.56% 100.20% 99.14%
NY_DSF_SB 102.08% 105.41% 105.16% 104.88% 104.23% 103.13% 101.64% 102.69% 104.78% 101.96% 102.08% 101.76% 102.65% 102.57% 101.41% 101.18% 100.96% 100.91% 102.21% 104.87% 104.08% 103.54% 102.85% 103.78%
NY_DSF_BW 93.66% 82.43% 82.35% 82.39% 82.81% 82.98% 83.14% 97.75% 102.30% 101.48% 101.57% 101.34% 102.06% 101.46% 100.73% 100.42% 100.10% 100.00% 99.46% 97.73% 97.18% 96.79% 96.50% 93.93%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 96.69% 90.83% 91.61% 91.83% 91.57% 91.45% 91.03% 99.89% 103.23% 101.60% 101.72% 101.50% 102.28% 101.96% 101.07% 100.75% 100.45% 100.36% 100.56% 100.83% 100.06% 99.56% 99.23% 97.84%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 97.43% 92.83% 93.67% 93.76% 93.34% 93.12% 92.60% 100.38% 103.51% 101.65% 101.77% 101.56% 102.35% 102.10% 101.15% 100.83% 100.53% 100.44% 100.81% 101.50% 100.66% 100.14% 99.79% 98.62%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 98.04% 94.66% 95.53% 95.50% 94.95% 94.60% 93.99% 100.79% 103.77% 101.70% 101.83% 101.61% 102.41% 102.22% 101.22% 100.91% 100.60% 100.51% 101.04% 102.10% 101.20% 100.65% 100.28% 99.33%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 101.25% 102.49% 101.78% 101.48% 101.11% 100.06% 98.77% 102.06% 104.70% 102.02% 102.19% 101.87% 102.79% 102.76% 101.48% 101.20% 100.91% 100.84% 101.94% 103.93% 103.12% 102.74% 102.04% 102.61%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 101.11% 103.29% 103.48% 103.18% 102.38% 101.77% 100.46% 102.49% 104.69% 101.94% 102.07% 101.76% 102.67% 102.69% 101.45% 101.17% 100.91% 100.83% 101.96% 104.32% 103.38% 102.86% 102.29% 102.65%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 101.30% 103.93% 104.21% 103.87% 102.97% 102.41% 101.07% 102.72% 104.81% 101.96% 102.09% 101.78% 102.68% 102.73% 101.47% 101.20% 100.95% 100.87% 102.04% 104.54% 103.59% 103.02% 102.45% 102.92%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 101.49% 104.58% 104.91% 104.53% 103.54% 103.02% 101.64% 102.90% 104.92% 101.98% 102.11% 101.79% 102.70% 102.77% 101.49% 101.23% 100.98% 100.90% 102.13% 104.78% 103.78% 103.18% 102.61% 103.12%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 101.48% 104.47% 104.76% 104.35% 103.38% 102.77% 101.39% 102.86% 104.94% 101.99% 102.12% 101.80% 102.71% 102.78% 101.50% 101.23% 100.97% 100.89% 102.13% 104.75% 103.76% 103.17% 102.60% 103.11%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 101.27% 103.20% 103.06% 102.90% 102.34% 101.57% 100.29% 102.39% 104.72% 101.97% 102.11% 101.80% 102.70% 102.69% 101.45% 101.19% 100.94% 100.87% 102.00% 104.36% 103.47% 103.00% 102.30% 102.91%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 101.46% 104.38% 104.66% 104.42% 103.53% 103.00% 101.61% 102.77% 104.75% 101.94% 102.06% 101.75% 102.64% 102.72% 101.47% 101.20% 100.95% 100.88% 102.05% 104.63% 103.68% 103.12% 102.53% 103.07%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 101.62% 104.95% 105.27% 104.99% 104.03% 103.52% 102.08% 102.96% 104.86% 101.96% 102.07% 101.77% 102.66% 102.76% 101.49% 101.23% 100.98% 100.90% 102.13% 104.80% 103.86% 103.26% 102.67% 103.25%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 101.80% 105.51% 105.87% 105.54% 104.51% 104.01% 102.54% 103.11% 104.97% 101.98% 102.09% 101.78% 102.67% 102.80% 101.51% 101.26% 101.01% 100.93% 102.20% 105.00% 104.03% 103.40% 102.81% 103.43%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 101.80% 105.50% 105.83% 105.48% 104.44% 103.88% 102.40% 103.10% 105.00% 101.99% 102.11% 101.79% 102.69% 102.80% 101.52% 101.26% 101.00% 100.93% 102.21% 105.01% 104.03% 103.41% 102.81% 103.43%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 101.87% 104.89% 104.72% 104.49% 103.82% 102.82% 101.38% 102.57% 104.71% 101.94% 102.05% 101.73% 102.62% 102.51% 101.38% 101.15% 100.93% 100.88% 102.13% 104.70% 103.92% 103.39% 102.72% 103.56%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 101.96% 105.82% 106.13% 105.84% 104.77% 104.10% 102.54% 102.93% 104.70% 101.90% 101.99% 101.67% 102.56% 102.54% 101.40% 101.16% 100.95% 100.89% 102.16% 105.00% 104.06% 103.49% 102.89% 103.60%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 102.09% 106.33% 106.70% 106.36% 105.22% 104.57% 102.98% 103.09% 104.80% 101.91% 102.01% 101.69% 102.58% 102.58% 101.42% 101.19% 100.98% 100.92% 102.23% 105.16% 104.22% 103.61% 103.01% 103.77%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 102.24% 106.88% 107.26% 106.88% 105.68% 105.04% 103.41% 103.24% 104.91% 101.94% 102.03% 101.71% 102.59% 102.62% 101.45% 101.22% 101.01% 100.95% 102.30% 105.35% 104.37% 103.74% 103.13% 103.92%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 102.25% 106.82% 107.19% 106.79% 105.59% 104.89% 103.27% 103.23% 104.94% 101.95% 102.04% 101.72% 102.61% 102.63% 101.45% 101.22% 101.00% 100.95% 102.31% 105.34% 104.37% 103.74% 103.14% 103.92%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 102.16% 106.35% 106.63% 106.30% 105.21% 104.44% 102.82% 103.03% 104.77% 101.92% 102.01% 101.70% 102.59% 102.60% 101.43% 101.19% 100.97% 100.92% 102.23% 105.14% 104.23% 103.65% 103.03% 103.83%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 102.24% 106.73% 107.04% 106.68% 105.52% 104.80% 103.18% 103.16% 104.87% 101.93% 102.03% 101.71% 102.60% 102.63% 101.45% 101.22% 101.00% 100.94% 102.30% 105.30% 104.35% 103.74% 103.12% 103.94%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 102.38% 107.22% 107.59% 107.19% 105.96% 105.25% 103.60% 103.31% 104.98% 101.95% 102.05% 101.73% 102.62% 102.68% 101.48% 101.25% 101.03% 100.97% 102.36% 105.47% 104.50% 103.86% 103.23% 104.08%

131

Fig.4 - 57 Heating savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in NY.

Fig.4 - 58 Total EUI savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in NY.

132

4.3.3.3 DECS results for Houston
For Houston, the annual results depict the most efficient facade type for electricity to be the
HOU_DECS_25h0v and the least efficient is the HOU_DSF_BW (Table 4-8). For heating and
gas the base case has the greatest performance and the HOU_DSF_MS the worst. For cooling,
the base case is the least efficient and the most efficient is the HOU_DECS_25h0v. Finally for
the overall EUI the base case was found the most efficient and the HOU_DSF_BW the least
efficient.
The monthly, hottest and coldest day comparison results can be found in Appendix D in tables
Table4-Appx.D-29 to Table4-Appx.D-39. The energy patterns of comparison for the total EUI for
the hottest and coldest day in Houston are shown (Fig.4-59 and Fig.4-63).
In the monthly results, the most efficient in electricity is the HOU_SSF 33% followed by the
HOU_DECS_25h0v (Table4-Appx.D-29). For gas and heating the most efficient is the base case
followed by the HOU_ DSF_BW and the least efficient in both cases is the HOU_DSF_MS
(Table4-Appx.D-30 and Table4-Appx.D-31). For cooling and total EUI the HOU_SSF_33% has
the best performance followed by the HOU_DECS_25h0v (Table4-Appx.D-32 and Table4-
Appx.D-33). The worst for cooling is the base case and for the total EUI is the HOU_DSF_BW.
For the hottest day the HOU_DECS_BEST has the greatest savings after the HOU_SSF_33% in
electricity, cooling and total EUI. The least efficient in all cases is the HOU_DSF_BW. The
results are shown (Fig. 4-60 to Fig. 4-62).
Similarly for the coldest day, HOU_DECS_BEST with the configuration of HOU_DSF_BW are
the most efficient in gas, heating and total EUI after the SSF 33%. The least performing in all
cases is the HOU_DSF_MS. The results are shown (Fig.4-64 to Fig.4-66).

133

For these two days the results can be found in greater detail in tables Table4-Appx.D-34 to
Table4-Appx.D-39.
HOU annual results
Table 4 - 8 Annual comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS performance in HOU.

HOU ANNUAL PERFORMANCE COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90% (kbtu/sf, %)
Model Nr Electricity Gas Heating Cooling Total EUI
NY_SSF_90% 49.217 100.00% 9.051 100.00% 7.845 100.00% 26.009 100.00% 58.268 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 48.713 98.97% 9.747 107.68% 8.541 108.86% 24.377 93.73% 58.459 100.33%
NY_DSF_MS 49.291 100.15% 9.756 107.79% 8.550 108.99% 24.708 95.00% 59.048 101.34%
NY_DSF_CO 49.831 101.25% 9.421 104.09% 8.215 104.72% 24.930 95.85% 59.252 101.69%
NY_DSF_SB 49.071 99.70% 9.726 107.46% 8.520 108.61% 24.717 95.03% 58.797 100.91%
NY_DSF_BW 50.114 101.82% 9.218 101.85% 8.012 102.13% 25.305 97.29% 59.332 101.83%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 49.930 101.45% 9.375 103.58% 8.169 104.13% 25.063 96.37% 59.305 101.78%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 49.897 101.38% 9.394 103.79% 8.188 104.38% 25.019 96.19% 59.291 101.76%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 49.861 101.31% 9.419 104.06% 8.213 104.68% 24.971 96.01% 59.280 101.74%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 48.900 99.35% 9.682 106.97% 8.476 108.05% 24.559 94.43% 58.582 100.54%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 49.220 100.00% 9.662 106.75% 8.456 107.78% 24.698 94.96% 58.881 101.05%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 49.201 99.97% 9.680 106.95% 8.474 108.02% 24.656 94.80% 58.881 101.05%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 49.183 99.93% 9.709 107.27% 8.503 108.39% 24.614 94.64% 59.252 101.69%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 49.071 99.70% 9.726 107.46% 8.520 108.61% 24.717 95.03% 58.882 101.05%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 49.299 100.17% 9.700 107.17% 8.494 108.27% 24.731 95.09% 58.999 101.25%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 48.978 99.51% 9.718 107.37% 8.512 108.50% 24.586 94.53% 58.696 100.73%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 49.276 100.12% 9.723 107.42% 8.516 108.56% 24.687 94.92% 58.999 101.25%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 49.255 100.08% 9.741 107.62% 8.535 108.79% 24.644 94.75% 58.996 101.25%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 49.238 100.04% 9.746 107.68% 8.540 108.86% 24.607 94.61% 58.984 101.23%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 49.081 99.72% 9.708 107.26% 8.502 108.38% 24.737 95.11% 58.789 100.89%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 49.383 100.34% 9.681 106.96% 8.475 108.02% 24.877 95.65% 59.063 101.36%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 49.363 100.30% 9.713 107.31% 8.507 108.43% 24.834 95.48% 59.076 101.39%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 49.344 100.26% 9.734 107.55% 8.528 108.71% 24.789 95.31% 59.078 101.39%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 49.328 100.23% 9.740 107.61% 8.534 108.78% 24.751 95.16% 59.068 101.37%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 49.369 100.31% 9.714 107.33% 8.508 108.45% 24.855 95.56% 59.084 101.40%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 49.350 100.27% 9.732 107.52% 8.525 108.67% 24.810 95.39% 59.082 101.40%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 49.330 100.23% 9.751 107.73% 8.545 108.92% 24.765 95.22% 59.081 101.39%
134

HOU hottest day results

Fig.4 - 59 Total EUI comparison pattern of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in HOU.
Notice the trends exemplified by the colors with the most efficient façade types with blue and the
least with red (the values can be seen in a larger size of the chart in Appendix D, Table4-Appx.D-
36).

Fig.4 - 60 Electricity savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in HOU.

HOU TOTAL EUI COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY August 2nd
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.19% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.48% 96.42% 100.48% 99.84% 99.88% 100.08% 98.85% 99.60% 99.40% 99.77% 100.05% 98.15% 92.93% 93.61% 93.38% 93.40% 94.76% 100.00%
HOU_DSF_MS 98.50% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.22% 96.68% 102.17% 101.29% 100.79% 100.59% 99.33% 100.38% 100.46% 100.81% 100.89% 99.18% 96.93% 96.96% 96.64% 96.39% 97.02% 102.63%
HOU_DSF_CO 104.06% 100.87% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.81% 103.06% 102.59% 101.72% 101.40% 101.29% 99.91% 100.74% 100.56% 100.79% 100.90% 99.34% 98.64% 99.40% 100.10% 100.87% 100.89% 108.05%
HOU_DSF_SB 98.72% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.83% 96.95% 100.43% 100.43% 100.23% 100.15% 98.96% 99.96% 100.01% 100.28% 100.32% 99.09% 98.04% 97.83% 97.55% 97.25% 97.61% 103.20%
HOU_DSF_BW 103.46% 101.70% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 103.72% 106.67% 102.28% 101.89% 101.60% 101.50% 100.29% 100.89% 100.68% 100.88% 100.99% 100.11% 101.45% 101.98% 103.16% 104.16% 103.88% 110.76%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 104.61% 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 103.04% 104.16% 102.47% 101.70% 101.46% 101.39% 100.09% 100.80% 100.58% 100.78% 100.87% 99.59% 99.82% 100.40% 101.20% 102.18% 101.94% 109.14%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 104.47% 101.07% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.95% 103.78% 102.51% 101.73% 101.44% 101.36% 100.03% 100.78% 100.58% 100.79% 100.88% 99.51% 99.43% 100.08% 100.84% 101.80% 101.59% 108.81%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 104.38% 100.97% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.87% 103.39% 102.56% 101.72% 101.42% 101.32% 99.97% 100.76% 100.57% 100.79% 100.89% 99.42% 99.08% 99.74% 100.52% 101.32% 101.26% 108.46%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 101.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.83% 98.13% 100.56% 100.40% 100.09% 99.93% 98.54% 99.69% 99.75% 100.04% 100.10% 98.61% 96.60% 97.11% 97.32% 97.53% 98.36% 104.46%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 101.85% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.00% 98.49% 102.12% 101.01% 100.66% 100.54% 99.18% 100.18% 100.14% 100.40% 100.47% 98.94% 97.18% 97.43% 97.63% 97.92% 98.60% 104.70%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 101.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.08% 98.28% 101.80% 101.11% 100.69% 100.52% 99.13% 100.19% 100.18% 100.48% 100.56% 98.91% 96.79% 97.16% 97.37% 97.50% 98.33% 104.40%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 101.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 98.08% 102.02% 101.22% 100.71% 100.50% 99.07% 100.19% 100.22% 100.55% 100.65% 98.88% 96.41% 96.83% 97.03% 97.15% 98.05% 104.09%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 101.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.22% 97.91% 102.21% 101.33% 100.74% 100.48% 99.02% 100.19% 100.25% 100.62% 100.72% 98.85% 96.07% 96.54% 96.72% 96.83% 97.80% 103.80%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 102.67% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.87% 97.77% 100.76% 100.53% 100.25% 100.13% 98.78% 99.87% 99.89% 100.17% 100.23% 98.78% 97.05% 97.43% 97.54% 97.68% 98.31% 104.29%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 100.10% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.03% 98.08% 101.64% 101.03% 100.78% 100.70% 99.37% 100.32% 100.25% 100.51% 100.57% 99.08% 97.47% 97.69% 97.72% 97.90% 98.37% 104.36%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 101.29% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.09% 97.85% 101.82% 101.13% 100.79% 100.67% 99.31% 100.32% 100.28% 100.57% 100.63% 99.03% 97.11% 97.32% 97.37% 97.53% 98.16% 104.07%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.16% 97.63% 102.01% 101.22% 100.81% 100.64% 99.25% 100.31% 100.31% 100.63% 100.71% 98.99% 96.73% 96.96% 97.03% 97.18% 97.89% 103.77%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 100.93% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.22% 97.44% 102.17% 101.34% 100.82% 100.62% 99.20% 100.31% 100.34% 100.68% 100.77% 98.95% 96.36% 96.71% 96.73% 96.87% 97.64% 103.51%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 98.81% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.82% 97.07% 100.34% 100.42% 100.20% 100.11% 98.93% 99.94% 100.00% 100.28% 100.32% 99.11% 98.14% 97.92% 97.66% 97.38% 97.72% 103.34%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 98.71% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.99% 97.41% 101.55% 100.97% 100.74% 100.69% 99.56% 100.40% 100.37% 100.60% 100.65% 99.37% 98.37% 98.03% 97.74% 97.42% 97.78% 103.40%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 98.68% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.07% 97.17% 101.76% 101.08% 100.76% 100.66% 99.49% 100.40% 100.41% 100.69% 100.75% 99.33% 97.95% 97.68% 97.40% 97.09% 97.55% 103.15%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 98.48% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 96.95% 101.99% 101.20% 100.78% 100.63% 99.43% 100.40% 100.45% 100.77% 100.83% 99.29% 97.52% 97.39% 97.12% 96.79% 97.31% 102.90%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 98.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.22% 96.74% 102.18% 101.30% 100.80% 100.60% 99.37% 100.40% 100.49% 100.83% 100.91% 99.25% 97.16% 97.09% 96.82% 96.50% 97.07% 102.67%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 98.66% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.99% 97.18% 101.53% 100.97% 100.75% 100.71% 99.57% 100.41% 100.37% 100.59% 100.64% 99.33% 98.21% 97.91% 97.61% 97.25% 97.64% 103.23%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 98.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.07% 97.01% 101.76% 101.09% 100.78% 100.68% 99.51% 100.42% 100.42% 100.69% 100.74% 99.30% 97.82% 97.57% 97.28% 96.94% 97.41% 102.99%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 98.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 96.78% 101.98% 101.20% 100.79% 100.65% 99.45% 100.41% 100.45% 100.76% 100.82% 99.26% 97.39% 97.27% 96.97% 96.62% 97.16% 102.74%

135

Fig.4 - 61 Cooling savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in HOU.

Fig.4 - 62 Total EUI savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the hottest day in HOU.
136

HOU coldest day results

Fig.4 - 63 Total EUI comparison pattern of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in HOU.
Notice the trends exemplified by the colors (the values can be seen in a bigger size of the chart in
Appendix D, Table4-Appx.D-39).

Fig.4 - 64 Gas savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in HOU.

HOU TOTAL EUI USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.52% 95.00% 94.82% 94.54% 94.19% 93.83% 93.41% 100.04% 102.42% 101.20% 101.37% 101.34% 101.93% 102.22% 101.13% 100.87% 100.61% 100.50% 100.95% 101.52% 100.90% 100.39% 99.97% 99.35%
HOU_DSF_MS 102.35% 107.07% 107.36% 106.94% 105.74% 105.00% 103.36% 103.29% 105.02% 101.97% 102.07% 101.75% 102.64% 102.70% 101.49% 101.25% 101.02% 100.96% 102.35% 105.42% 104.44% 103.82% 103.20% 104.04%
HOU_DSF_CO 97.90% 94.27% 95.26% 95.26% 94.64% 94.02% 93.35% 100.69% 103.78% 101.72% 101.85% 101.62% 102.42% 102.21% 101.21% 100.89% 100.58% 100.48% 101.01% 102.05% 101.16% 100.56% 100.20% 99.14%
HOU_DSF_SB 102.08% 105.41% 105.16% 104.88% 104.23% 103.13% 101.64% 102.69% 104.78% 101.96% 102.08% 101.76% 102.65% 102.57% 101.41% 101.18% 100.96% 100.91% 102.21% 104.87% 104.08% 103.54% 102.85% 103.78%
HOU_DSF_BW 93.66% 82.43% 82.35% 82.39% 82.81% 82.98% 83.14% 97.75% 102.30% 101.48% 101.57% 101.34% 102.06% 101.46% 100.73% 100.42% 100.10% 100.00% 99.46% 97.73% 97.18% 96.79% 96.50% 93.93%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 96.69% 90.83% 91.61% 91.83% 91.57% 91.45% 91.03% 99.89% 103.23% 101.60% 101.72% 101.50% 102.28% 101.96% 101.07% 100.75% 100.45% 100.36% 100.56% 100.83% 100.06% 99.56% 99.23% 97.84%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 97.43% 92.83% 93.67% 93.76% 93.34% 93.12% 92.60% 100.38% 103.51% 101.65% 101.77% 101.56% 102.35% 102.10% 101.15% 100.83% 100.53% 100.44% 100.81% 101.50% 100.66% 100.14% 99.79% 98.62%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 98.04% 94.66% 95.53% 95.50% 94.95% 94.60% 93.99% 100.79% 103.77% 101.70% 101.83% 101.61% 102.41% 102.22% 101.22% 100.91% 100.60% 100.51% 101.04% 102.10% 101.20% 100.65% 100.28% 99.33%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 101.25% 102.49% 101.78% 101.48% 101.11% 100.06% 98.77% 102.06% 104.70% 102.02% 102.19% 101.87% 102.79% 102.76% 101.48% 101.20% 100.91% 100.84% 101.94% 103.93% 103.12% 102.74% 102.04% 102.61%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 101.11% 103.29% 103.48% 103.18% 102.38% 101.77% 100.46% 102.49% 104.69% 101.94% 102.07% 101.76% 102.67% 102.69% 101.45% 101.17% 100.91% 100.83% 101.96% 104.32% 103.38% 102.86% 102.29% 102.65%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 101.30% 103.93% 104.21% 103.87% 102.97% 102.41% 101.07% 102.72% 104.81% 101.96% 102.09% 101.78% 102.68% 102.73% 101.47% 101.20% 100.95% 100.87% 102.04% 104.54% 103.59% 103.02% 102.45% 102.92%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 101.49% 104.58% 104.91% 104.53% 103.54% 103.02% 101.64% 102.90% 104.92% 101.98% 102.11% 101.79% 102.70% 102.77% 101.49% 101.23% 100.98% 100.90% 102.13% 104.78% 103.78% 103.18% 102.61% 103.12%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 101.48% 104.47% 104.76% 104.35% 103.38% 102.77% 101.39% 102.86% 104.94% 101.99% 102.12% 101.80% 102.71% 102.78% 101.50% 101.23% 100.97% 100.89% 102.13% 104.75% 103.76% 103.17% 102.60% 103.11%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 101.27% 103.20% 103.06% 102.90% 102.34% 101.57% 100.29% 102.39% 104.72% 101.97% 102.11% 101.80% 102.70% 102.69% 101.45% 101.19% 100.94% 100.87% 102.00% 104.36% 103.47% 103.00% 102.30% 102.91%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 101.46% 104.38% 104.66% 104.42% 103.53% 103.00% 101.61% 102.77% 104.75% 101.94% 102.06% 101.75% 102.64% 102.72% 101.47% 101.20% 100.95% 100.88% 102.05% 104.63% 103.68% 103.12% 102.53% 103.07%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 101.62% 104.95% 105.27% 104.99% 104.03% 103.52% 102.08% 102.96% 104.86% 101.96% 102.07% 101.77% 102.66% 102.76% 101.49% 101.23% 100.98% 100.90% 102.13% 104.80% 103.86% 103.26% 102.67% 103.25%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 101.80% 105.51% 105.87% 105.54% 104.51% 104.01% 102.54% 103.11% 104.97% 101.98% 102.09% 101.78% 102.67% 102.80% 101.51% 101.26% 101.01% 100.93% 102.20% 105.00% 104.03% 103.40% 102.81% 103.43%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 101.80% 105.50% 105.83% 105.48% 104.44% 103.88% 102.40% 103.10% 105.00% 101.99% 102.11% 101.79% 102.69% 102.80% 101.52% 101.26% 101.00% 100.93% 102.21% 105.01% 104.03% 103.41% 102.81% 103.43%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 101.87% 104.89% 104.72% 104.49% 103.82% 102.82% 101.38% 102.57% 104.71% 101.94% 102.05% 101.73% 102.62% 102.51% 101.38% 101.15% 100.93% 100.88% 102.13% 104.70% 103.92% 103.39% 102.72% 103.56%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 101.96% 105.82% 106.13% 105.84% 104.77% 104.10% 102.54% 102.93% 104.70% 101.90% 101.99% 101.67% 102.56% 102.54% 101.40% 101.16% 100.95% 100.89% 102.16% 105.00% 104.06% 103.49% 102.89% 103.60%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 102.09% 106.33% 106.70% 106.36% 105.22% 104.57% 102.98% 103.09% 104.80% 101.91% 102.01% 101.69% 102.58% 102.58% 101.42% 101.19% 100.98% 100.92% 102.23% 105.16% 104.22% 103.61% 103.01% 103.77%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 102.24% 106.88% 107.26% 106.88% 105.68% 105.04% 103.41% 103.24% 104.91% 101.94% 102.03% 101.71% 102.59% 102.62% 101.45% 101.22% 101.01% 100.95% 102.30% 105.35% 104.37% 103.74% 103.13% 103.92%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 102.25% 106.82% 107.19% 106.79% 105.59% 104.89% 103.27% 103.23% 104.94% 101.95% 102.04% 101.72% 102.61% 102.63% 101.45% 101.22% 101.00% 100.95% 102.31% 105.34% 104.37% 103.74% 103.14% 103.92%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 102.16% 106.35% 106.63% 106.30% 105.21% 104.44% 102.82% 103.03% 104.77% 101.92% 102.01% 101.70% 102.59% 102.60% 101.43% 101.19% 100.97% 100.92% 102.23% 105.14% 104.23% 103.65% 103.03% 103.83%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 102.24% 106.73% 107.04% 106.68% 105.52% 104.80% 103.18% 103.16% 104.87% 101.93% 102.03% 101.71% 102.60% 102.63% 101.45% 101.22% 101.00% 100.94% 102.30% 105.30% 104.35% 103.74% 103.12% 103.94%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 102.38% 107.22% 107.59% 107.19% 105.96% 105.25% 103.60% 103.31% 104.98% 101.95% 102.05% 101.73% 102.62% 102.68% 101.48% 101.25% 101.03% 100.97% 102.36% 105.47% 104.50% 103.86% 103.23% 104.08%

137

Fig.4 - 65 Heating savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in HOU.

Fig.4 - 66 Total EUI savings of DSF and DECS Vs. SSF for the coldest day in HOU.
138

4.3.4 Conclusions
In conclusion, the parametric studies showed that the most efficient type is not necessarily the
optimum type when decision making is required for building performance comparison in
different climates. Furthermore, DECS pattern has been shown to be more efficient than the
DSFs in all three climates, even though the savings differ per climate. The SSF buildings were in
many cases more efficient than DSFs or DECS.

4.4 CFD Simulations
A set of CFD simulations was performed with the initial design of the DECS system with
horizontal fins (HF) and vertical fins (VF) as described in Chapter 3, section 3.4.4 CFD
simulations. The aim of the CFD simulations was to visually show the effect of the HF and VF in
the cavity. The metrics were the air velocity and temperature distribution. The direction of the
vectors displays the direction of the airflow and their color represents the temperature. The
model had the HF inclined at 15° and the VF at 60°. Due to the HF the speed of the upward
airflow slows and changes direction (Fig.4-67). The air circulation between the cavity
compartments is presented by the direction of the vectors which move in greater density by the
VF (white tilted element in the cavity), (Fig.4-68). In the same image the vertical yellow vectors
from the cavity’s interior indicate the movement towards the upper compartment through the HF.
Similarly in the whole building and DECS section the arrows represent the airflow and the colors
the temperature (Fig.4-29). At the lower part of the cavity, the darker blue indicates the lower air
temperature in the cavity which is repeated but in less density per floor. This indicates the effect
of the tilt with the colder air remaining at the bottom (on a floor level) and the warmer at the top.

139

Fig.4 - 67 CFD simulation of LA_DECS_HF15°VF60° - Exterior view of the south façade.

Fig.4 - 68 CFD simulation of LA_DECS_HF15°VF60° - South facade and interior space.

140

Fig.4 - 69 CFD simulation of LA_DECS_HF15°VF60° - building section.
Concluding, the CFD analysis showed that the tilt of the angles, as DECS was initially designed,
can change the airflow and consequently affect the temperature changes throughout the cavity
space and at a floor level as aimed.

4.5 Summary
This chapter presented the results of the software attempts for modeling the DSF configurations.
The Revit+Green Building Studio use DOE2 as its engine which does not calculate natural
ventilation. The Revit+Falcon results also indicated that it does not calculate interior airflow and
buoyancy. Therefore, both Autodesk based set of software were eliminated. Since DesignBuilder
was defined as an alternative software the Rhino based + Grasshopper set of plug-ins were not
further explored.

141

In DesignBuilder (DB) the parametric simulations showed that the optimum glazing type for all
three climates is the Double Clear Low-E (e2=.1) 6mm/13mm air.
The performance of the base case SSF 90%, the four DSF types and all the DECS configurations
for the climates of LA, NY and HOU were shown. The outcomes were presented in the order of
annual, monthly, hottest and coldest day results. In every case the electricity, gas, heating,
cooling demands and energy use intensity were shown. The most efficient DSF and DECS
results vary depending on the time period examined. The SSF, DSF and DECS heating
requirements were dominant in NY while the cooling ones were found in HOU; for LA the
demand was minimal both for cooling and heating compared to the other two. Generally the
energy consumption of all façade types was the least in LA followed by HOU and with the
greatest energy demand being in NY.
Overall the performance of DECS has been found more effective during the daily cycles.
Monthly and annual results as examined in DesignBuilder don't depict effectively the potential of
such a system; a more sophisticated software is required to do annual-per hour simulations for
dynamic systems.
In regard to the hottest days, DECS has minimized the cooling demand of the buildings in all
climates and in NY and HOU improved the overall building's performance. During the coldest
days DECS has been shown to be less efficient than the base case even though the difference
from the base case for LA and NY is minimal. In these two climates the advantages during the
hottest day are greater than the losses during the coldest day. For HOU the savings during the
hottest day are less than the excess energy use required during the coldest day. In conclusion, the
142

DECS system has shown to be more beneficial if used in the LA and NY climate and is not
indicated for HOU.
The CFD analysis illustrated that DECS as initially designed performed as intended.
Further analyses of the results and discussion are followed in Chapter 5.

143

Chapter 5: Analysis and discussion
Chapter 4 documented and presented the results of all the energy modeling
simulations, starting from the Autodesk based software attempts to DesignBuilder. The outcomes
of the DesignBuilder simulations were presented in four stages: parametric, SSF, DSF, DECS
and CFD. All the data were presented per climate zone for the annual, monthly, hottest day and
coldest day energy loads in electricity, gas, heating, cooling and overall energy use intensity. In
that chapter the best and worst performing DSF versus the SSF were identified. The results were
incorporated in Appendix D.
Chapter 5 analyzes and evaluates the results. The objective of the analysis is to
examine in greater depth and understand the performance of the DSF and DECS per climate. It
additionally explains how DECS and its variables have affected the results. Most importantly
conclude that the DECS application is advantageous compared to the conventional DSFs. The
study was made with a total of 27 facade assemblies per climate zone, out of which the optimum
DECS pattern was made by an aggregation of the most efficient configurations of DSF and
DECS configurations.
5.1 Overview of the study process and results
Double skin facades (DSF) are recognized for assisting a building's energy performance by
contributing to the energy savings when compared to a single skin facade (SSF) as described in
Chapter 2. The purpose of the double skin is to maintain the benefits the highly glazed surfaces
and the advantages the cavity has to offer as described in Chapter 2 section 2.4 Advantages and
disadvantages of DSF.
144

The results were presented comparing the DSF to the SSF and then of DECS with all of them.
The analysis and discussion though focuses on the performance of the DSFs and how much the
application of DECS has improved their efficiency since the main objective upon its creation was
to improve the performance of buildings with DSFs.
5.1.1Software limitations
In regard to the annual results, the effect of DECS could not be implemented via DesignBuilder
(DB) since the efficiency of a dynamic system should be examined in shorter timeframes (at
least on hour by hour simulations) in order to create the formation of the pattern which will allow
improvement of the DSFs performance. DB though does not have the capability currently to
examine the performance of such a dynamic system cost effectively. Therefore, the hour by hour
simulations were performed. The annual results and comparisons were made in order to
understand the efficiency differential among the DSFs to the base case and to gain an
understanding of their performance. Having this data would make it easier to perceive a potential
of the performance improvement with the existence of DECS based on the results from shorter
time spans like the monthly and most importantly the daily outcomes. Further discussion of the
software limitations is in Chapter 6.
5.1.2 Formation of DECS
As already mentioned the intention of DECS is to improve the performance of DSF buildings by
placing a kinetic system in the cavity, which alters dynamically the cavity configuration. In
reality this would be accomplished by sensors detecting the temperature of the cavity. Depending
on the building energy demand and outdoor environmental conditions the system would adjust
the formation accordingly as a state-of-art facade. In the case of the energy simulations inside an
energy modeling software as DesignBuilder these automations cannot be designed and tested.

145

Therefore, a simplified method was established to create DECS formation in every case. This has
been accomplished through analysis of the hourly simulation results for every model and length
of time examined per climate. When all the data of the models were generated and merged
together, the most efficient configuration for the total EUI per hour was detected and the sum of
all created the DECS formation for that day.
For example, in LA during the hottest day the energy usage is the same for all models from
midnight to 6AM because the building is not occupied. Therefore, during those hours the cavity
configuration is not important since it does not impact the building’s total EUI or the energy
breakdown. At 7AM though when the building starts operating and the energy consumption
changes the LA_DECS_25h_0v is the most efficient configuration. At 8AM the
LA_DECS_50h_0v had the best performance and so forth. Collection of all the hours results to
the formation of the DECS configuration for that day also called the DECS pattern. The same
process was used for processing and identifying the worst DECS configuration for that specific
day which have been included in the results in Chapter 4. These two patterns were then
imprinted to the electricity, gas, heating and cooling comparison templates in the excel
spreadsheets to identify the savings in those categories. The pattern is presented by the bolded
outlined cells with bold numbers letters or numbers in the results tables found in Appendix D. In
some cases more efficient patterns per category were identified than the one derived from the
total EUI results. These were highlighted with bold letters or numbers but their cells were not
outlined.
5.1.3 Structure of analysis and discussion
The results discussion and analysis is organized by climate. Due to the large amount of data
generated the focus has been made on the most significant outcomes. First, the annual results are
146

analyzed and interpretations on the performance differences between the most and the least
efficient facade types are mentioned. Second are the monthly results. The months with high and
low peak energy demands are identified. The performance of the DSF is being analyzed, and the
DECS potential discussed. The DECS performance follows with focus on the most and least
performing configurations, and the performance differential with the most efficient DSF type.
Lastly, the hottest and coldest day result interpretations follow. The date, high peak, and low
peak temperatures of the day examined are being reminded. The DSF comparison between the
most and least efficient type is being analyzed. The DECS potential is also mentioned. Finally,
the formed DECS is being explain and the hours during the day in which it affects mostly the
building's performance. Finally, the formed DECS performance is being compared to the most
efficient DSF type.
5.2 Analysis of results in Los Angeles
Los Angeles has a temperate climate, warm and dry, without extreme switches of the weather
pattern. Therefore, it was expected that it would be the climate with the least performance
differentials among all facade types.
The findings from the annual results confirm that for this climate the performance of the DSF
types is not very is very close to the base case model’s performance. All types had higher
electricity loads than the base case and the explanation lies to the fact that DSFs are known to
provide less daylight penetration to the interior of the building compared to a SSF due to the
existence of the cavity and its depth (Motevalian 2014). As a result the demand of artificial light
is greater. The existence of smaller WWR at the benchmark model also leads to a greater
demand for lighting. In regard to gas and heating loads, only one DSF type impacted the
performance and reduced the EUI. Even though the LA_DSF_BW was the most efficient the

147

results were very close to the performance of the base case. Cooling had the least energy
consumption as expected in a heating dominant climate and the LA_DSF_SB was the most
efficient.
5.2.1 The monthly performance
Comparison between the DSFs
Overall in the monthly results, the most efficient DSF type is LA_DSF_SB. It also showed the
best performance in electricity and cooling. For heating and gas is the LA_DSF_BW as expected
since it captures heat in the facade cavity more efficiently than the other types. The worst
performing DSF types are LA_DSF_CO for electricity and total EUI; the LA_DSF_MS for gas
and heating; and the LA_DSF_BW for cooling. Since the climate is heating dominant, and the
greatest energy consumption occurs in January, February and March, one could argue that the
LA_DSF_BW should be the most efficient type, but it is not. The explanation lies in the monthly
results and tables showing the fuel consumption and energy breakdown shown in Chapter 4
section 4.3.2.1 DSF results for Los Angeles. The reason is because a much greater amount of
energy is being consumed for electricity than for gas, heating or cooling. Therefore, the most
efficient is the one that causes the greatest savings in electricity and this is the LA_DSF_SB.
For the months with high energy consumption the differences between the best and worst
performing DSFs are shown (Table 5-1). For the simplicity of the table the DSF types are
presented by their abbreviation name MS, CO, SF and BW. The most efficient DSF is bolded
and the results are presented in absolute number. The diversity of the results demonstrates that a
system likes DECS has a potential to adjust the cavity configuration and improve the building
performance, even if in the case of LA the savings are not significant.
148

Table 5 - 1 Difference in EUI between the most and least performing DSF during the energy
consumption high peak months in LA.
LA_DSF_ comparison of differential of performance during the peak months - Kbtu/sf per month
Source January February December
Electricity SB - CO = 0.048 SB - CO = 0.039 SB - CO = 0.046
Gas BW - MS = 0.032 BW - MS = 0.016 BW - MS = 0.006
Heating BW - MS = 0.031 BW - MS = 0.012 BW - MS = 0.013
Cooling SB - BW = 0.001 0 BW - SB = 0.002
Total EUI SB - BW = 0.029 SB - BW = 0.03 SB - CO = 0.040

DECS Vs. DSFs
From the monthly performance comparison of DECS versus the DSFs the LA_DECS_25h_0v is
the most efficient. Even though the DECS configurations on a monthly time span are actually
static, some interesting findings should be mentioned. The results comparison of DSFs and
DECS configurations show that for gas and heating the LA_DSF_BW remains the most efficient
type (Table 5-2). For electricity, cooling and total EUI though it is indicated that the
LA_DECS_25h_0v is more efficient than any DSF type even the LA_DSF_SB. For the months
with high energy consumption their differences are shown and the greatest savings were in
January (Table 5-2). For the sum of the 12 months LA_DECS_25h0v is more efficient than
LA_DSF_SB by 0.609 Kbtu/sf.
Regarding the overall EUI, it is surprising because LA_DECS_25h_0v is also a shaft box
configuration but with 75% smaller horizontal openings than the LA_DSF_SB. The explanation
of this outcome is that the SB configuration with smaller openings creates higher buoyancy and
airflow inside the cavity which assists in reduction of the electricity loads for cooling. Since
though the electricity loads are very small, it indicates that a SB facade configuration with

149

smaller openings assists in further electricity reduction. This could be justified with the following
arguments, which either one or both together can sustain the outcome:
o monthly and consequently, throughout the year the smaller openings leave bigger
horizontal solid glazed surfaces within the cavity. These allow greater amount of
daylight to bounce from the surface towards the interior of the building. As a result the
loads for lighting are being reduced.
o during the cooling seasons the smaller openings also affect the auxiliary loads. The
reason it is significant is because fans are considered auxiliary and not a cooling system
such an HVAC. Therefore, the higher the reduction for the cooling needs is, the lower
the demand for auxiliary systems, such as fans.
These possible reasons indicate that the DSF or DECS configurations not only influence the
fuels or energy breakdown demands, but the attributes of the facade affect in more ways the
building performance.
Table 5 - 2 Difference in EUI between the most efficient DECS Vs. DSF type performance
during the months with high energy consumption in LA.
LA_DECS_ Vs. LA_DSF_ comparison of differential of performance during the peak months -
Kbtu/sf per month
Source January February March
Electricity 25h0v - SB = 0.001 25h0v - SB = 0.001 25h0v - SB = 0.001
Gas LA_DSF_BW LA_DSF_BW LA_DSF_BW
Heating LA_DSF_BW LA_DSF_BW LA_DSF_BW
Cooling 25h0v - SB = 0.001 0 0
Total EUI 25h0v - SB = 0.008 25h0v - SB = 0.004 25h0v - SB = 0.003

In conclusion, overall the monthly results can provide an idea of the DECS prospective but
cannot project efficiently its potential due to the long time span between the facade cavity
changes as mentioned before. Therefore, more subtle results can be found in the hottest and
coldest day comparison results.
150

5.2.2 The hottest day performance
Comparison between the DSFs
As mentioned already the hottest day in LA was July 31st, 2002 with high peak temperature of
80°F at 12PM and lowest temperature of 66°F at midnight. DECS has a potential to affect mostly
the building performance between 11AM-2PM (14:00) when the highest energy consumption
takes place. It is being reminded that during the hottest day there is no heating demand.
For the hottest day the most efficient DSF type is the LA_DSF_SB. Among the DSF types
examined the results in Chapter 4 section 4.3.2.1 DSF results for Los Angeles showed that
LA_DSF_SB is the most efficient also in electricity and cooling. The least performing for
electricity and total EUI is the LA_DSF_CO and for cooling is the LA_DSF_BW. During the
high peak temperature, LA_DSF_SB remains the most efficient and the least performing is the
LA_DSF_BW. The difference in their performance both for the 24h and during the hours of high
energy demand is showed that the greatest savings were as anticipated at 12PM (Table 5-3). One
observation in the results is that every time the electricity and total EUI difference are the same
in Btu/sf, the cooling always differs. A second observation is that for 2PM the LA_DSF_BW is
not the least efficient anymore, but the LA_DSF_CO is instead. This indicates a fact on which
the DECS concept is being reinforced. The different DSF types show different performances
throughout the day. Consequently, DECS can switch between those types and contribute to
greater energy savings. For the simplicity of the table the DSF types are presented by their
abbreviation name MS, CO, SF and BW. The most efficient DSF is shown with bold letters and
the results are presented in absolute number.

151

Table 5 - 3 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy demanding hours for July 31st in LA.
LA_DSF_ comparison of differential of performance for July 31st- btu/sf
Source In 24h 11AM 12PM 1PM
2PM
Electricity SB - CO = 3.36 SB - BW = 0.775 SB - BW = 0.793 SB - BW = 0.398 SB - CO = 0.426
Cooling SB - BW = 0.90 SB - BW = 0.346 SB - BW = 0.285 SB - BW = 0.176 SB - BW = 0.091
Total EUI SB - CO = 3.36 SB - BW = 0.775 SB - BW = 0.793 SB - BW = 0.398 SB - CO = 0.426

DECS Vs. DSFs
From the comparison between the DSF types and DECS the LA_DECS_25h_0v is the most
efficient. It also performed better for the hottest day among all facade types, even as a static
formation as shown in Chapter 4 section 4.3.3.1 DECS results for Los Angeles. Compared to the
LA_DSF_SB the LA_DECS_25h_0v performed better by 0.19Btu/sf in 24h even though it was
less efficient in electricity by 0.10Btu/sf. These data indicate if the changes in the facade cavity
were performed daily instead of hourly during the hottest day in this climate the
LA_DECS_25h_0v would be preferred.
Since though during the day, the temperature fluctuates, the most efficient facade type or
configuration changes and consequently, forms the best DECS configuration, the DECS pattern.
For the hours 7AM-10AM and 12PM -6PM (18:00) the LA_DECS_25h_0v was the most
advantageous cavity formation and for 11AM and 7PM (19:00) the LA_DSF_SB. Both types are
shaft box configurations with the difference that the first one has 75% smaller openings than the
second one as described in this chapter section 5.2.1 The monthly performance. As a result this
difference of the opening assists in increasing the buoyancy effect and speed of the airflow in the
cavity and consequently, exhausts faster the hot air and reduces the energy demand.
152

Overall in terms of performance the formed DECS performed better than all DSF types which
used 0.22% to 3.92% more energy than the DECS system or in EUI 0.19 Btu/sf to3.55 Btu/sf in
the 24h cycle. The DECS pattern and performance are shown in comparison to all the DSF types’
performance per hour, with the greatest energy demand during the high peak temperature hours
(Table 5-4).
Table 5 - 4 DECS pattern and EUI performance Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in LA (gradient
color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient).

For electricity DSFs used 0.03% - 4.19% more energy than the formed DECS or 0.261Btu/sf to
3.615 Btu/sf within the 24h cycle. For cooling DSFs used 1.80% to 11% more energy than
LA TOTAL EUI COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR HOTTEST DAY JuLY 31st
Time LA_DECS pattern and performance LA_DSF_MS LA_DSF_CO LA_DSF_SB LA_DSF_BW
1:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
2:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
3:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
4:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
5:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
6:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
7:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 1.992 1.996 1.996 1.992 1.995
8:00 LA_DECS_50h_0v 2.790 2.790 2.790 2.790 2.790
9:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 7.139 7.191 7.201 7.140 7.188
10:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 5.875 6.081 6.193 5.886 6.148
11:00 LA_DSF_SB 8.530 8.744 9.177 8.464 9.239
12:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 10.802 11.163 11.614 10.892 11.685
13:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 5.891 6.112 6.306 5.983 6.381
14:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 6.323 6.596 6.801 6.375 6.798
15:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 5.906 6.128 6.194 5.914 6.139
16:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 5.901 6.153 6.162 5.905 6.092
17:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 6.414 6.637 6.637 6.417 6.574
18:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 3.275 3.314 3.314 3.276 3.303
19:00 LA_DSF_SB 2.143 2.145 2.145 2.143 2.144
20:00 any 2.142 2.142 2.142 2.142 2.142
21:00 any 2.142 2.142 2.142 2.142 2.142
22:00 any 2.100 2.100 2.100 2.100 2.100
23:00 any 1.700 1.700 1.700 1.700 1.700
0:00 any 1.700 1.700 1.700 1.700 1.700
Btu/sf for 24h 90.567 92.635 94.116 90.762 94.062
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -2.068 -3.549 -0.195 -3.495
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 102.28% 103.92% 100.22% 103.86%

153

DECS or 0.177 Btu/sf to 1.08 Btu/sf for the 24h cycle. The illustration of the DECS performance
versus the DSF types for electricity and cooling can be found in tables Table 5-Appx.E- 1 and
Table 5-Appx.E- 2 in Appendix E.
In conclusion the outcomes indicate that the existence of DECS affects positively the
performance of the DSFs during the hottest day in LA. In summary the changes in the DECS
pattern for the hottest day in LA should use the LA_DSF_SB, LA_DECS_25h0v and
LA_DECS_50h_0v (Table 5-4).

5.2.3 The coldest day performance
The coldest day in LA was February 2nd, 2002 with highest temperature 63°F at12PM and the
low peak temperature 49°F from 5AM-7AM. The hours that DECS could have the most impact
on the buildings efficiency is from 7AM to 9AM and at 5PM (19:00). During the intermediate
hours the gas and heating demand were constant per hour for all facade types based on the
building schedules. During the coldest day there is no cooling demand.
For the coldest day the most efficient DSF type is the LA_DSF_BW. Among the DSF types
examined the results in Chapter 4 section 4.3.2.1 DSF results for Los Angeles showed that the
LA_DSF_BW is also most efficient DSF type in gas and heating. During the high peak heating
demand hours the LA_DSF_BW has the best performance expect for 5PM (17:00) where the
LA_DSF_SB is more efficient in the total EUI. The least performing in gas, heating and total
EUI is the LA_DSF_SB (at 5PM in total EUI), which was the most efficient type during the
hottest day. The difference in their performance both for the 24h and during the high peak
demand hours is shown and the greatest energy savings were at 8AM (Table 5-5). It has been
154

observed that the difference in the amount of heating and gas between LA_DSF_BW and
LA_DSF_SB is the same for every hour listed in the table. This means that all the savings occur
in heating demand and therefore, the equal amount is being saved in gas. In regard to the total
EUI the amount in savings is either as much as gas or heating; but for the total EUI in the 24h
cycle and at 8AM and 5PM they are slightly different.
This indicates that there can be some loses in energy which could be either due to the different
facade type being the least performing for that hour like at 5PM which is the LA_DSF_CO, or
due to an increase in the electricity uses in equipment, auxiliary etc. because of the building
schedules. For the simplicity of the table the DSF types are presented by their abbreviation name
MS, CO, SF and BW. The most efficient DSF is shown with bolded letters and the results are
presented in absolute number.
Table 5 - 5 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy demanding hours for February 2nd in LA.
LA_DSF_ comparison of differential of performance for February 2nd- btu/sf
Source In 24h 7AM 8AM 9AM
5PM
Gas BW - SB = 0.238 BW - SB = 0.053 BW - SB = 0.085 BW - SB = 0069 BW - SB = 0
Heating BW - SB = 0.238 BW - SB = 0.053 BW - SB = 0.085 BW - SB = 0.069 BW - SB = 0
Total EUI BW - SB =0.230 BW - SB = 0.053 BW - SB = 0.081 BW - SB = 0.069 SB - CO = 0.015

155

DECS Vs. DSFs
From the comparison between the DSF types and DECS the LA_DSF_BW was also the most
efficient for the coldest day. It performed better among all facade types, even as a static
formation as shown in Chapter 4 section 4.3.3.1 DECS results for Los Angeles. The
LA_DSF_BW was the most efficient as a static throughout the 24h cycle even though at 5PM
(17:00) the LA_DSF_SB performed better. Hence the formed DECs configuration used the
LA_DSF_BW but included the LA_DSF_SB at 5PM . This alteration improved the DECS
performance compared to LA_DSF_BW by 0.013Btu/sf in total EUI. Since the LA_DSF_SB
performs better at 5PM when the heating and gas demand are constant, the pattern for gas and
heating does not get affected by DECS and therefore, the difference of performance between
DECS and the best performing DSF in these aspects its equal to zero.
Overall in terms of performance the formed DECS performed better than all DSF types which
used 0.03% to 0.55% more energy than the DECS system or in EUI 0.013 Btu/sf to 0.23 Btu/sf
in the 24h cycle. The DECS pattern and performance to all the DSF types per hour are presented
with the high peak energy demand at 1PM (13:00), (Table 5-6). The other DSF types used excess
energy for gas from 0% to 5.19% or from 0Btu/sf to 2.31Btu/sf during the 24h cycle. Similarly
for heating they had 0% to 0.24% or 0 Btu/sf to 0.24 Btu/sf within the 24h.

156

Table 5 - 6 DECS pattern and performance Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in LA(gradient color
representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient).

In summary, even though the LA_DSF_BW was expected to be the most performing, as it has
been shown there is room for improvement for the building's performance. Even though in LA
the savings due to DECS are not very significant, they do exist. Thus in a climate with more
extreme temperature fluctuations throughout the day and the seasons, DECS has a potential of
contributing more to the energy savings. The illustration of the DECS performance and pattern
LA TOTAL EUI COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR COLDEST DAY February 2nd
Time LA_DECS pattern and performance LA_DSF_MS LA_DSF_CO LA_DSF_SB LA_DSF_BW
1:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
2:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
3:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
4:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
5:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
6:00 any 1.300 1.335 1.307 1.332 1.300
7:00 any 1.300 1.349 1.324 1.353 1.300
8:00 LA_DSF_BW 2.249 2.326 2.303 2.330 2.249
9:00 LA_DSF_BW 1.869 1.930 1.894 1.938 1.869
10:00 LA_DSF_BW 2.649 2.649 2.649 2.649 2.649
11:00 LA_DSF_BW 2.692 2.692 2.692 2.692 2.692
12:00 LA_DSF_BW 2.692 2.692 2.692 2.692 2.692
13:00 LA_DSF_BW 2.734 2.734 2.734 2.734 2.734
14:00 LA_DSF_BW 1.877 1.877 1.877 1.877 1.877
15:00 LA_DSF_SB 1.877 1.877 1.877 1.877 1.877
16:00 any 1.835 1.835 1.835 1.835 1.835
17:00 any 1.873 1.881 1.888 1.873 1.886
18:00 any 2.142 2.142 2.142 2.142 2.142
19:00 any 1.700 1.700 1.700 1.700 1.700
20:00 any 1.700 1.700 1.700 1.700 1.700
21:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
22:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
23:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
0:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
Btu/sf for 24h 42.195 42.424 42.319 42.429 42.208
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -0.230 -0.124 -0.234 -0.013
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 100.54% 100.29% 100.55% 100.03%

157

versus the DSF types for gas and heating can be found in tables Table 5-Appx.E- 3 and Table 5-
Appx.E- 4 in Appendix E.
In conclusion for the coldest day in LA a combination of LA_DSF_BW and LA_DSF_SB should
be used. The changes in the pattern should be as presented (Table 5-6).

5.3 Analysis of results in New York
The climate of New York is a mixed humid climate the results were expected to be different than
in LA but, due to the fact that they both are heating dominant, similar behavioral patterns of
performance were anticipated.
Even in New York the performance of the DSF buildings was close to the SSF but the
performance difference is bigger than in Los Angeles. In NY the climate is more heating
dominant than in LA and therefore, the necessity of capturing the heat during the heating season
is increased. The impact of the climate is more apparent to the building's efficiency in this case
and consequently, to the most efficient DSF type. For gas and heating the NY_DSF_BW has the
best performance and the NY_DSF_MS was the worst one. For electricity and cooling the
NY_DSF_SB is performing better and NY_DSF_BW is the least performing.
It was expected that the SSF would have a lower performance than any DSF, at least for gas,
heating and total EUI but the results indicated the opposite. The most logical explanations of this
phenomenon are the following:
o The envelope of the SSF based on DOE and ASHRAE standards is very well designed
and performing even for this colder climate.
158

o Therefore, when the envelope is a very well performing the existence of the DSF does not
necessarily affect advantageously or improves the building's performance.
These though are the conclusions for the annual performance. When the breakdown in the
monthly, hottest day or coldest day performance occurs, some DSF types indeed perform better
than the base case. This indicates that a macroscopic view in the building performance such as
annual overview shows the overall performance; but is not capable of giving sufficient
conclusions on the DSF efficiency in detail.
5.3.1 The monthly performance
Comparison between the DSFs
In contrast to the LA monthly results, for NY the most efficient DSF type is NY_DSF_BW. It
also showed the best performance in gas and heating as expected, since there are greater heating
requirements in this climate. For electricity and cooling is the NY_DSF_SB. The worst
performing DSF types are NY_DSF_CO for electricity, NY_DSF_MS for gas and heating and
total EUI; and NY_DSF_BW for cooling.
The months with the highest energy consumption are January, February and December and the
energy usage goes mostly in gas and heating as shown Chapter 4 section 4.3.2.2 DSF results for
New York. The difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF types is
greater in February (Table 5-7). The DSF types are presented by their abbreviation name MS,
CO, SF and BW for simplicity. The most efficient DSF is shown with bolded letters and the
results are presented in absolute number. An interesting finding from the displayed differences in
consumption is that for gas and heating the numbers are the same per month. Which points out
that there are not any other parameters affecting the performance differential other than the DSF
type while in LA for the analogous table, the results were slightly different.

159

Table 5 - 7 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy consumption months in NY.
NY_DSF_ comparison of differential of performance during the peak months - Kbtu/sf per month
Source January February December
Electricity SB - CO = 0.005 SB - CO = 0.048 SB - CO = 0.046
Gas BW - MS = 0.584 BW - MS = 0.616 BW - MS = 0.488
Heating BW - MS = 0.584 BW - MS = 0.616 BW - MS = 0.488
Cooling 0 0 0
Total EUI BW - MS = 0.565 BW - MS = 0.588 BW - MS = 0.460

DECS Vs. DSFs
From the monthly performance comparison of DECS versus the DSFs the NY_DSF_BW
remains the most efficient. Even though the DECS configurations on a monthly time span are
actually static as explained before, similar notable findings were found as in the case of LA. The
comparison of DSFs and DECS configurations during those months showed the NY_DSF_BW is
also the most efficient for gas and heating (Table 5-8). For electricity the NY_DECS_25h_0v
and NY_DECS_75h_0v have the same performance and its better than the NY_DSF_SB even
though the differences are insignificant. No cooling was required during those months and
therefore, the result is zero as shown in Table 5-8.
Table 5 - 8 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DECS Vs. DSF
type during the high energy consumption months in NY.
NY_DECS_ Vs. NY_DSF_ comparison of differential of performance during the months with peak
energy loads - Kbtu/sf per month
Source January February December
Electricity 25h0v - SB = 0 25h0v - SB = 0.001 25h0v - SB = 0.001
Gas NY_DSF_BW NY_DSF_BW NY_DSF_BW
Heating NY_DSF_BW NY_DSF_BW NY_DSF_BW
Cooling 0 0 0
Total EUI NY_DSF_BW NY_DSF_BW NY_DSF_BW
160

An interesting finding though in this climate for the total of all months and consequently,
forming the annual performance, is that in NY DECS formation can be applied even with a
monthly time span. In the case of LA, during that span, the LA_DECS_25h0v was constantly the
most efficient in total EUI. But in NY there is a greater fluctuation in the performance of the
different facades types forming the monthly pattern of DECS (Table 5-9). All DSF types
consumed more energy that the NY_DSF_BW by 0.51% to 2.63% or from 0.53Kbtu/sf to 2.75
Kbtu/sf for the total of the12 months.
Table 5 - 9 DECS pattern and performance Vs. DSFs per month in NY (gradient color
representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient).

The fact that a DECS formation can show improvement in a buildings performance even for a
monthly time span indicates that it is suitable for a climate like the one in NY. Therefore, more
substantial results are expected to be found in the daily cycle, such as for the hottest and coldest
day. The illustration of the DECS performance and pattern versus the DSF types for electricity,
NY TOTAL EUI COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs per month
Time NY_DECS pattern and performance NY_DSF_MS NY_DSF_CO NY_DSF_SB NY_DSF_BW
Jan NY_DSF_BW 21.323 21.888 21.571 21.826 21.323
Feb NY_DSF_BW 22.362 22.950 22.610 22.905 22.362
Mar NY_DSF_BW 11.535 11.977 11.734 11.914 11.535
Apr NY_DSF_BW 5.106 5.261 5.199 5.222 5.106
May NY_DECS_25h_0v 2.303 2.335 2.370 2.307 2.362
Jun NY_DECS_25h_0v 2.785 2.826 2.858 2.794 2.868
Jul NY_DECS_25h_0v 4.112 4.171 4.218 4.135 4.259
Aug NY_DECS_25h_0v 4.206 4.266 4.346 4.232 4.382
Sep NY_DECS_25h_0v 2.250 2.277 2.315 2.256 2.315
Oct NY_DSF_BW 2.888 2.932 2.937 2.918 2.888
Nov NY_DSF_BW 9.230 9.509 9.376 9.490 9.230
Dec NY_DSF_BW 16.671 17.131 16.891 17.094 16.671
Kbtu/sf for 12 months 104.771 107.522 106.425 107.093 105.302
EUI savings in Kbtu/sf in 12 months 0.000 -2.751 -1.654 -2.322 -0.531
EUI comparison Vs. DECS % (12 mo) 100.00% 102.63% 101.58% 102.22% 100.51%

161

gas, heating and cooling can be found in tables Table 5-Appx.E- 5 to Table 5-Appx.E- 8 in
Appendix E.
In conclusion, the changes in the DECS pattern for the monthly changes in NY should use the
NY_DSF_BW and NY_DECS_25h0v (Table 5-9).
5.3.2 The hottest day performance
Comparison between the DSFs
As mentioned already the hottest day in NY was June 19th, 2002 with high temperatures are
from 11AM to 2PM and the peak at 12PM at 98°F. The low peak temperature 74°F occurred at
2AM and 5am. DECS would mostly improve the building performance from 11am-2PM (14:00)
during the highest hours of energy demand. During the hottest day there is no heating demand.
For the hottest day the most efficient DSF type is the NY_DSF_SB. It was also the most efficient
in electricity and cooling among the DSF types examined as shown in the results presented in
Chapter 4 section 4.3.2.2 DSF results for New York. The least efficient was the NY_DSF_BW.
These remain the most and least performing DSF types during the high energy demand hours.
The difference in their performance both for the 24h and during the hours with peak energy
requirements was greater at 12PM (Table 5-10). The DSF types are presented by their
abbreviation name MS, CO, SF and BW. The most efficient DSF is shown with bolded letters
and the results are presented in absolute number.
One observation made through the table is that the electricity and total EUI difference every time
is the same in Btu/sf while the cooling always differs. This was also an observation made in LA
with the difference that in LA for 2PM the LA_DSF_CO was the least efficient instead. This
162

indicates that for this climate, during the peak energy demanding hours, the formed DECS would
not change its configuration.
Table 5 - 10 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy demanding hours for June 19th in NY.
NY_DSF_ comparison of differential of performance for June 19th - btu/sf
Source In 24h 11AM 12PM 1PM
2PM
Electricity SB - BW = 8.378 SB - BW = 1.004 SB - BW = 1.068 SB - BW = 0.483 SB - BW = 0.527
Cooling SB - BW = 5.125 SB - BW = 0.316 SB - BW = 0.301 SB - BW = 0.151 SB - BW = 0.144
Total EUI SB - BW = 8.378 SB - BW = 1.004 SB - BW = 1.068 SB - BW = 0.483 SB - CO = 0.527

DECS Vs. DSFs
From the comparison between the DSF types and DECS for the hottest day the
NY_DECS_25h_0v performed better among all facade types, even as a static formation as
shown in Chapter 4 section 4.3.3.2 DECS results for New York. Compared to the NY_DSF_SB it
performed better in electricity by 1.05Btu/sf, in cooling by 0.96 Btu/sf and in total EUI by 1.05
Btu/sf for the 24h cycle. The difference in NY compared to LA, is that in LA the
LA_DECS_25h_0v was less efficient in cooling than the LA_DSF_SB. Therefore, for this
climate, even if the cavity changes would be every 24h, the NY_DECS_25h_0v would be
preferred.
During the day the most efficient facade types change and these alterations form the best DECS
configuration. For the hours 7AM-8AM and 8PM -11PM (20:00-23:00) the NY_DSF_MS was
the most advantageous cavity formation, at 9AM the NY_DSF_SB, from 10AM-6PM (18:00)
the NY_DECS_25h_0v and for 7PM (19:00) the NY_DECS_25h_100v. Between 1am-6PM and
at midnight the consumption remains constant for all facade types.

163

Overall DECS performed better than all DSF types which used 0.37% to 2.25% more energy or
in EUI 1.445 Btu/sf to 7.339 Btu/sf in the 24h cycle. The DECS pattern and performance to all
the DSF types per hour are presented in Table 5-11 which also includes the performance during
the high peak temperature hours. For electricity DSFs used 0.46% - 2.09% more energy than the
formed DECS or 1.39Btu/sf to 6.51 Btu/sf within the 24h cycle. For cooling DSFs used 0.37% to
2.55% more energy than DECS or 1.45 Btu/sf to 9.82 Btu/sf for the 24h cycle.
Table 5 - 11 DECS pattern and performance Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in NY (gradient color
representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient).

NY TOTAL EUI COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR HOTTEST DAY June 19th
Time NY_DECS pattern and performance NY_DSF_MS NY_DSF_CO NY_DSF_SB NY_DSF_BW
1:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
2:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
3:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
4:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
5:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
6:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
7:00 NY_DSF_MS 3.064 3.064 3.314 3.084 3.486
8:00 NY_DSF_MS 6.328 6.328 6.677 6.354 6.964
9:00 NY_DSF_SB 29.444 29.821 30.002 29.444 29.994
10:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 35.072 35.451 35.771 35.128 35.834
11:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 43.364 43.833 44.386 43.454 44.459
12:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 47.630 48.142 48.767 47.768 48.836
13:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 24.821 25.164 25.359 24.978 25.461
14:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 41.656 42.108 42.283 41.838 42.366
15:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 39.001 39.279 39.224 39.171 39.341
16:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 32.601 32.847 32.799 32.744 32.916
17:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 36.645 36.960 36.957 36.753 37.049
18:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 14.135 14.218 14.264 14.240 14.468
19:00 NY_DECS_25h_100v 7.403 7.450 7.723 7.540 8.039
20:00 NY_DSF_MS 6.429 6.429 6.711 6.481 7.000
21:00 NY_DSF_MS 5.146 5.146 5.404 5.177 5.615
22:00 NY_DSF_MS 4.405 4.405 4.547 4.417 4.669
23:00 NY_DSF_MS 3.658 3.658 3.951 3.674 4.128
0:00 any 1.700 1.700 1.700 1.700 1.700
Btu/sf for 24h 390.304 393.805 397.643 391.749 400.127
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -3.502 -7.339 -1.445 -9.823
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 100.90% 101.88% 100.37% 102.52%
164

The illustration of the DECS performance and pattern versus the DSF types for electricity and
cooling can be found in tables Table 5-Appx.E- 9 and Table 5-Appx.E- 10 in Appendix E. In
conclusion the cavity formation during the hottest day in NY is more diverse than the one in LA
and with greater energy savings.
In conclusion the outcomes indicate that the existence of DECS affects positively the
performance of the DSFs during the hottest day in NY. In summary the changes in the DECS
pattern for the hottest day in NY are greater than in LA; and the configurations to be used are the
NY_DSF_MS, NY_DSF_SB, NY_DECS_25h_0v and NY_DECS_50h_100v (Table 5-11).

5.3.3 The coldest day performance
The coldest day in NY was February 6th, 2002 with highest temperature 20°F at 6PM and lowest
7.25°F at 3am. DECS could have an impact on the buildings efficiency more effectively during
the hours of increased energy demand which are from 10AM to 6PM (18:00) but mostly between
10AM to 1PM (13:00). During the coldest day there is no cooling demand.
For the coldest day the most efficient DSF type is the NY_DSF_BW. Among the DSF types
examined the results in Chapter 4 section 4.3.2.2 DSF results for New York showed that is also
the most efficient in gas and heating. The least performing in gas, heating and total EUI
throughout the day is the NY_DSF_MS but for the peak hours it's between the NY_DSF_MS
and NY_DSF_SB. The difference with LA in this case is that the LA_DSF_SB was better
performing at 5PM, while in NY the most efficient DSF is constantly the same NY_DSF_BW.
The difference in their performance both for the 24h and during the high peak demand hours
with the greatest difference at 1PM (13:00), (Table 5-12). The DSF types are presented by their

165

abbreviation name MS, CO, SF and BW. The most efficient DSF is shown with bolded and the
results are presented in absolute number.
As in LA, in this climate the amount of heating and gas between the most and the least efficient
DSF is the same for every hour listed in the table. This means that all the savings from the
heating demand are equal to the amount of savings in gas. In some cases the total EUI savings
are slightly different than in gas or heating, which indicates that the existence of different facade
types affects the energy demand in other areas as well such as lighting, auxiliary, etc., which are
being added to or subtracted from the total EUI.
Table 5 - 12 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy demanding hours for February 6th in NY.
NY_DSF_ comparison of differential of performance for February 6th- btu/sf
Source In 24h 10am 11am 12PM
1PM
Gas BW - MS = 36.447 BW - MS = 0.973 BW - SB = 1.050 BW - SB = 1.247 BW - SB = 1.293
Heating BW - MS =36.447 BW - MS = 0.973 BW - SB = 1.050 BW - SB = 1.247 BW - SB = 1.293
Total EUI BW - MS =34.85 BW - SB =0.973 BW - SB =0.984 BW - SB =0.780 BW - SB =1.051

DECS Vs. DSFs
From the comparison between the DSF types and DECS for the coldest day the NY_DSF_BW
remained the most efficient. It performed better among all facade types, even as a static
formation as shown in Chapter 4 section 4.3.3.2 DECS results for New York. Since the
NY_DSF_BW was the most efficient as a static throughout the 24h cycle and therefore, the
DECS configuration would take its formation. In comparison to LA, the configuration remains
constant while in LA the LA_DSF_SB was performing better at 5PM (17:00). In this case there
wasn't any DECS configuration found more efficient than the NY_DSF_BW, which reaches to
166

the conclusion that in this climate, during the coldest day the cavity compartmentation would be
the same and static. This creates the question of whether for all the days during the heating
season the cavity should maintain this formation in order to save more energy. The answer can
be found in Table 5-13 even if not in great detail; where the DECS pattern was created for month
to month performance and shows that from October to April, the NY_DSF_BW was the most
efficient type between all the possible combinations of DSFs and DECS configurations.
In terms of performance the DECS was anticipated to have greater savings than the DSFs during
the coldest day, possibly from the least demanding hours in heating or gas where the cavity
transformation would need to change. In this climate though, the NY_DSF_BW was the most
efficient in all cases. The savings compared to the other DSF throughout the day and during the
peak heating demand hours are shown (Table 5-13). The other DSF types had an increased total
EUI by 1.02% to 1.90% or 18.71 Btu/sf to 34.85 Btu/sf for the whole day.
The other DSF types used excess energy for gas from 1.04% to 2.08% or from 18.23Btu/sf to
34.97Btu/sf during the 24h cycle. Similarly for heating they had 1.05% to 2.09% or 18.23 Btu/sf
to 36.44 Btu/sf within the 24h.
In summary, it has been shown that DECS in some cases will use only the formation of a single
DSF and might need to maintain it for longer than expected, meaning daily or even for monthly
time spans. This further rises the question if overall DECS is more advantageous than having a
single DSF type. Further conclusions and recommendations can be found in Chapter 6.
The illustration of the DECS performance and pattern versus the DSF types for gas and heating
can be found in tables Table 5-Appx.E- 11 and Table 5-Appx.E- 12in Appendix E.

167

Table 5 - 13 DECS pattern and performance Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in NY (gradient color
representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient).

In conclusion for the coldest day in NY and in contrast to the LA results, only a single formation
should be used which is the NY_DSF_BW (Table 5-13).

NY TOTAL EUI COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Time NY_DECS pattern and performance NY_DSF_MS NY_DSF_CO NY_DSF_SB NY_DSF_BW
1:00 NY_DSF_BW 15.910 17.387 16.631 17.342 15.910
2:00 NY_DSF_BW 5.399 7.013 6.175 6.904 5.399
3:00 NY_DSF_BW 5.632 7.343 6.516 7.193 5.632
4:00 NY_DSF_BW 5.887 7.641 6.806 7.494 5.887
5:00 NY_DSF_BW 6.285 8.025 7.183 7.911 6.285
6:00 NY_DSF_BW 6.500 8.225 7.365 8.078 6.500
7:00 NY_DSF_BW 6.858 8.526 7.700 8.384 6.858
8:00 NY_DSF_BW 28.721 30.347 29.582 30.172 28.721
9:00 NY_DSF_BW 48.803 50.101 49.508 49.984 48.803
10:00 NY_DSF_BW 204.618 205.591 205.088 205.577 204.618
11:00 NY_DSF_BW 198.835 199.803 199.374 199.819 198.835
12:00 NY_DSF_BW 190.497 191.268 191.018 191.277 190.497
13:00 NY_DSF_BW 180.612 181.643 181.264 181.663 180.612
14:00 NY_DSF_BW 93.642 94.783 94.335 94.670 93.642
15:00 NY_DSF_BW 171.337 172.625 172.150 172.505 171.337
16:00 NY_DSF_BW 170.191 171.600 170.986 171.484 170.191
17:00 NY_DSF_BW 167.566 169.118 168.368 169.003 167.566
18:00 NY_DSF_BW 166.676 168.289 167.492 168.193 166.676
19:00 NY_DSF_BW 57.321 58.992 58.214 58.906 57.321
20:00 NY_DSF_BW 20.807 22.446 21.729 22.329 20.807
21:00 NY_DSF_BW 21.139 22.720 22.005 22.640 21.139
22:00 NY_DSF_BW 22.040 23.640 22.897 23.576 22.040
23:00 NY_DSF_BW 22.369 23.923 23.228 23.843 22.369
0:00 NY_DSF_BW 13.445 14.892 14.190 14.855 13.445
Btu/sf for 24h 1831.092 1865.944 1849.803 1863.801 1831.092
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -34.852 -18.711 -32.709 0.000
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 101.90% 101.02% 101.79% 100.00%
168

5.4 Analysis of results in Houston
The last climate examined was the one in Houston. Houston has a hot and humid climate, a fact
which predisposed that different performance patterns should emerge than in the cases of LA and
NY. The climate is cooling dominant and the energy consumption was expected to shift towards
the cooling season.
The findings from the annual results as in the case of LA and NY, DSFs performance was not
very different from the base case. Compared to LA and NY though, the results were higher than
LA and lower than NY in terms of EUI. For HOU also the most efficient DSF type was shown to
be the HOU_DSF_SB as in LA with their electricity needs being higher. The cooling needs
nevertheless were greater than in LA due to the climate. For the same reason the heating and gas
demands were lower than the ones found in NY. The least efficient DSF type for this climate is
the HOU_DSF_BW since it's the type that captures the most heat and consequently, increases the
energy usage in a cooling dominant climate. For electricity and cooling HOU_DSF_SB remains
the most efficient type but during the heating seasons HOU_DSF_BW is the preferred one as in
LA and NY.
These DSF were the most performing ones in LA and NY as well. Consequently, the question is
whether DECS is required and if, a dynamic switch only between these two types would be more
advantageous. The discussion on the monthly, hottest and coldest day gives a deeper insight in
these aspects while the conclusions from this analysis can be found in Chapter 6.

169

5.4.1 The monthly performance
Comparison between the DSFs
Overall for the monthly results, the most efficient DSF type was HOU_DSF_SB. The results of
the DSFs monthly performance portrayed a more fluctuated energy pattern than in LA and NY.
The HOU_DSF_SB was also the most efficient also for electricity and cooling. For heating and
gas was the HOU_DSF_BW. In contrast to LA and NY the energy usage was higher from June
until September and reached its peak in August as shown in Chapter 4 section 4.3.2.3 DSF
results for Houston. The difference in performance between the most and the least efficient DSF
types during the months of high energy demand was greater in August (Table 5-14). The DSF
types are presented by their abbreviation name MS, CO, SF and BW, the most efficient DSF is in
bolded letters and the results are presented in absolute number. No heating was required during
those months; therefore, the result is zero while for gas the usage is constant due to the building
schedules like domestic hot water for instance.
Table 5 - 14 Difference in EUI between the most and least performing DSF during the energy
consumption high peak months in HOU.
HOU_DSF_ comparison of differential of performance during the peak months - Kbtu/sf per month
Source June July August
September
Electricity SB - BW = 0.115 SB - BW = 0.148 SB - BW = 0.176
SB - BW = 0.156
Gas constant constant constant
constant
Heating 0 0 0
0
Cooling MS - BW = 0.116 MS - BW = 0.143 MS - BW = 0.135
SB - BW = 0.101
Total EUI SB - BW = 0.115 SB - BW = 0.148 SB - BW = 0.176
SB - BW = 0.156

A very surprising and unexpected finding is the fact that in June, July and even August with the
high peak cooling demand the HOU_DSF_MS is slightly more efficient in cooling than the
170

HOU_MS_SB; even though for total EUI and electricity is not. The differences in EUI are
0.015Kbtu/sf for June, 0.005Kbtu/sf in July and 0.003 Kbtu/sf in August which are not that
significant. This difference in results indicates that HOU_DSF_SB cannot be absolutely the most
efficient DSF type for cooling and thus DECS has even greater potential to improve a building's
energy performance.
DECS Vs. DSFs
From the monthly performance comparison of DECS versus the DSFs the HOU_DECS_25h_0v
was the most efficient. It also had the best performance for electricity and cooling. It has been
already mentioned that the DECS configurations on a monthly time span are actually static. The
results comparison of DSFs and DECS configurations show that for gas and heating the
HOU_DSF_BW is in this case also is the most efficient type. For the high peak months their
differences in performance is greater in September (Table 5-15). For the sum of the 12 months
the HOU_DECS_25h0v is more efficient in total EUI from the HOU_DSF_MS by 0.477 Kbtu/sf.
No heating was required and therefore, the result is zero while the gas the usage is constant due
to the building schedules.
Table 5 - 15 Difference in EUI between the most efficient DECS Vs. DSF type performance
during the energy consumption high peak months in HOU.
HOU_DECS_ Vs. LA_DSF_ comparison of differential of performance during the peak months - Kbtu/sf
per month
Source June July August September
Electricity 25h0v - SB = 0.024 25h0v - SB = 0.026 25h0v - SB = 0.028 25h0v - SB = 0.030
Gas constant constant constant
constant
Heating 0 0 0 0
Cooling 25h0v - MS = 0.023 25h0v - MS = 0.026 25h0v - MS = 0.026 25h0v - MS = 0.029
Total EUI 25h0v - SB = 0.024 25h0v - SB = 0.026 25h0v - SB = 0.028 25h0v - SB = 0.030

171

In conclusion, overall the monthly results can provide an idea of the DECS prospective but
cannot project efficiently its potential due to the long time span between the facade cavity
changes as mentioned before. Therefore, more subtle results can be found in the hottest and
coldest day comparison results.

5.4.2 The hottest day performance
Comparison between the DSFs
The hottest day in HOU was August 2nd, 2002 with high temperatures are from 2PM (14:00) to
5PM (17:00) and the peak temperature 102.7°F at 4PM (16:00). The low peak temperature was
75°F at4AM and 6AM. It is being reminded that during the hottest day there is no heating
demand.
For the hottest day the most efficient DSF type was the LA_DSF_SB. Among the DSF types
examined the results in Chapter 4 section 4.3.2.3 DSF results for Houston showed that it was
also the most efficient in electricity and with the HOU_DSF_MS in cooling. The least
performing in electricity, cooling and total EUI was the HOU_DSF_BW. During the high peak
temperature hours the HOU_DSF_SB remains the most efficient and the least performing is the
LA_DSF_BW. The difference in their performance both for the 24h and during the high peak
temperature is shown with the greatest difference at 2PM (Table 5-16). One observation that can
already be made is that in contrast to the monthly results, during the hottest day the
HOU_DSF_MS is not the most efficient.
In regard to the hours of peak energy demand and in contrast to the analogous results in LA and
NY, in HOU the results do not show different DSF types as more efficient whilst are constant
172

here. This indicated that the formation of DECS could be less dynamic than initially anticipated
for this climate. For the simplicity of the table the DSF types are presented by their abbreviation
name MS, CO, SF and BW. The most efficient DSF is shown with bolded letters and the results
are presented in absolute number.
Table 5 - 16 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy demanding hours for August 2nd in HOU.
HOU_DSF_ comparison of differential of performance for August 2nd - Btu/sf
Source In 24h 2PM 3PM 4PM
5PM
Electricity SB - BW = 8.00 SB - BW = 0.50 SB - BW = 0.38 SB - BW = 0.35 SB - BW = 0.39
Cooling SB - BW = 5.62 SB - BW = 0.17 SB - BW = 0.15 SB - BW = 0.14 SB - BW = 0.17
Total EUI SB - BW = 8.00 SB - BW = 0.50 SB - BW = 0.38 SB - BW = 0.35 SB - BW = 0.39

DECS Vs. DSFs
From the comparison between the DSF types and DECS for the hottest day the
HOU_DECS_25h_0v was the most efficient. It performed better among all facade types, even as
a static formation as shown in Chapter 4 section 4.3.3.3 DECS results for Houston. This is the
formation that was also the best performing in LA and NY for the hottest day. Compared to the
HOU_DSF_SB it performed better by 0.86Btu/sf in EUI, 0.86Btu/sf in electricity while for
cooling it was more efficient by 0.78 Btu/sf for the 24h cycle. Once again, these data indicate if
the changes in the facade cavity were performed daily instead of hourly during the hottest day in
this climate the HOU_DECS_25h_0v would be preferred.
Due to the temperature changes throughout the day DECS was formed aiming to reduce even
further the energy consumption. It was found that in this climate the most plethora of dynamic
changes have been formed between the DSF and DECS configurations to create the most

173

performing DECS pattern. At 1AM the HOU_DECS_100h_75v was used. From 2AM to 6 AM
any facade type would be appropriate since the energy usage is constant due to the building
schedules. At 7AM the HOU_DECS_75h_0v was applied and at 8AM the HOU_DSF_MS.
From 9AM until 6PM (18:00) the HOU_DECS_25h_0v was the most efficient. At 7PM (19:00)
and 8PM (20:00) was the HOU_25h_100v. Finally from 9PM (21:00) until midnight the
HOU_DSF_MS was used.
Overall in terms of performance the formed DECS performed better than all DSF types which
used 0.33% to 1.97% more energy than the DECS system or in EUI 1.60 Btu/sf to 7.12 Btu/sf in
the 24h cycle. The DECS pattern and performance to all the DSF types per hour are presented in
Table 5-17 which also includes the performance during the high peak temperature hours. For
electricity the DSFs used 0.33% - 1.99% more energy than the formed DECS or 1.60Btu/sf to
9.60 Btu/sf within the 24h cycle. For cooling DSFs used 0.33% to 1.77% more energy than
DECS or 1.33 Btu/sf to 7.19 Btu/sf for the 24h cycle.
The illustration of the DECS performance and pattern versus the DSF types for electricity and
cooling can be found in tables Table 5-Appx.E- 13and Table 5-Appx.E- 14 in Appendix E.

174

Table 5 - 17 DECS pattern and performance Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in HOU (gradient color
representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient).

In conclusion the outcomes indicate that the existence of DECS affects positively the
performance of the DSFs during the hottest day in HOU. The changes in the DECS pattern for
the hottest day in HOU are greater than in LA and NY. In summary the ones that should be used
are the HOU_DSF_MS, HOU_DECS_25h_0v, HOU_DECS_25h_100v, HOU_DECS_75h_0v
and HOU_DECS_100h_75v (Table 5-17).
HOU TOTAL EUI COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR HOTTEST DAY August 2nd
Time HOU_DECS pattern and performance HOU_DSF_MS HOU_DSF_CO HOU_DSF_SB HOU_DSF_BW
1:00 HOU_DECS_100h_75v 2.659 2.662 2.812 2.668 2.796
2:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.312 1.300 1.323
3:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
4:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
5:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
6:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
7:00 HOU_DECS_75h_0v 1.967 1.974 1.986 1.967 2.003
8:00 HOU_DSF_MS 6.766 6.766 7.212 6.784 7.465
9:00 HOU_DECS_75h_0v 25.334 25.796 25.902 25.356 25.822
10:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 31.171 31.446 31.582 31.182 31.634
11:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 38.319 38.588 38.820 38.375 38.898
12:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 45.054 45.353 45.669 45.154 45.762
13:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 26.957 27.175 27.332 27.074 27.438
14:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 53.643 54.010 54.208 53.787 54.285
15:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 57.039 57.445 57.505 57.187 57.571
16:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 59.387 59.843 59.833 59.532 59.887
17:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 58.930 59.395 59.400 59.061 59.456
18:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 21.115 21.239 21.272 21.219 21.437
19:00 HOU_DECS_25h_100v 10.004 10.093 10.272 10.209 10.564
20:00 HOU_DECS_25h_100v 10.923 10.970 11.246 11.069 11.538
21:00 HOU_DSF_MS 10.662 10.662 11.045 10.763 11.382
22:00 HOU_DSF_MS 8.638 8.638 9.039 8.715 9.334
23:00 HOU_DSF_MS 6.244 6.244 6.493 6.282 6.685
0:00 HOU_DSF_MS 5.506 5.506 5.797 5.536 5.942
Btu/sf for 24h 486.819 490.308 493.940 488.422 496.422
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -3.489 -7.121 -1.602 -9.603
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 100.72% 101.46% 100.33% 101.97%

175

5.4.3 The coldest day performance
The coldest day in HOU was February 11th, 2002 with highest temperature 39°F at 4PM and the
lowest temperature 21°F at 7AM and 8AM. The hours that DECS could have the biggest impact
on the buildings efficiency is from 10AM to 1PM (13:00) during the peak heating demand hours.
During the coldest day there is no cooling demand.
For the coldest day the most efficient DSF type was the HOU_DSF_BW as in LA and NY.
Among the DSF types examined the results in Chapter 4 section 4.3.2.3 DSF results for Houston
showed that it was also the most efficient in gas and heating. It had the best performance during
the peak heating demand hours but from 3PM (15:00) to 5PM (17:00) HOU_DSF_SB was more
efficient while the HOU_DSF_SB during the rest of the day is the least efficient. A similar
occurrence was in LA were the LA_DSF_SB was more efficient at 5PM (17:00). The least
performing DSF in gas, heating and total EUI was the HOU_DSF_MS. The difference in their
performance both for the 24h and during the hours of high energy demand is shown with the
greatest difference at 1PM (13:00), (Table 5-18).
This is the only case where the difference between the most and least performing DSF in gas,
heating and total EUI are the same per hour. The DSF types are presented by their abbreviation
name MS, CO, SF and BW, the most efficient DSF is shown in bolded letters and the results are
presented in an absolute number.

176

Table 5 - 18 Difference in performance between the most and least performing DSF during the
high energy demanding hours for February 11th in HOU.
HOU_DSF_ comparison of differential of performance for February 11th- btu/sf
Source In 24h 10AM 11AM 12PM 1PM
Gas BW - MS = 39.37 BW - MS = 1.268 BW - MS = 1.488 BW - MS = 1.573 BW - MS = 1.666
Heating BW - MS = 39.37 BW - MS = 1.268 BW - MS = 1.488 BW - MS = 1.573 BW - MS = 1.666
Total EUI BW - MS =38.94 BW - MS = 1.268 BW - MS = 1.488 BW - MS = 1.573 BW - MS = 1.666

DECS Vs. DSFs
From the comparison between the DSF types and DECS for the coldest day the HOU_DSF_BW
remained the most efficient performed better as in LA and NY. The comparison was made
among all facade types, even as a static formation as shown in Chapter 4 section 4.3.3.3 DECS
results for Houston. It was also the most efficient as a static type throughout the 24h cycle but
the HOU_DSF_SB performed better from 3PM -6PM. Therefore, the formed DECS
configuration included this DSF type during those hours.
Overall in terms of performance the formed DECS performed better than all DSF types which
used 0.05% to 4.00% more energy than the DECS system or in EUI 0.46Btu/s to39.40 Btu/sf in
the 24h cycle. The DECS pattern and performance to all the DSF types per hour are presented in
Table 5-19 which also includes the performance during the high peak heating demand hours.
An interesting finding for the DECS formation in this climate is that indeed reduces the energy
usage in total EUI the most when compared to the other facade types, but it does not reduce the
gas and heating consumption to its maximum potential. An even better energy pattern than the
one created targeting the total EUI could be formed if the goal was the reduction of gas or
heating loads. The difference in the pattern would be at 5PM. Instead of HOU_DSF_SB, the

177

HOU_DSF_BW type would be used then further reduction of the loads would occur, 0.264
Btu/sf for gas and 0.264 Btu/sf for heating loads. The reason that this alternative DECS pattern
formation was not chosen is because it the total EUI would be using more energy by 0.148 Btu/sf
than the current one.
The other DSF types used excess energy for gas from 0.01% to 4.32% or from 0.051Btu/sf to
39.43Btu/sf during the 24h cycle. Similarly for heating they had 0.01% to 4.35% or 0.051 Btu/sf
to 39.43 Btu/sf within the 24h.
Table 5 - 19 DECS pattern and performance Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in HOU (gradient
color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient).

HOU TOTAL EUI COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR COLDEST DAY February 11th
Time HOU_DECS pattern and performance HOU_DSF_MS HOU_DSF_CO HOU_DSF_SB HOU_DSF_BW
1:00 HOU_DSF_BW 7.948 9.428 8.302 9.105 7.948
2:00 HOU_DSF_BW 2.188 3.503 2.457 3.266 2.188
3:00 HOU_DSF_BW 2.391 3.825 2.761 3.548 2.391
4:00 HOU_DSF_BW 2.860 4.352 3.317 4.118 2.860
5:00 HOU_DSF_BW 3.327 4.813 3.810 4.596 3.327
6:00 HOU_DSF_BW 3.570 4.988 4.046 4.782 3.570
7:00 HOU_DSF_BW 3.942 5.305 4.430 5.095 3.942
8:00 HOU_DSF_BW 19.328 20.659 19.807 20.230 19.328
9:00 HOU_DSF_BW 32.422 33.584 32.872 33.298 32.422
10:00 HOU_DSF_BW 138.276 139.544 138.686 139.315 138.276
11:00 HOU_DSF_BW 125.744 127.232 126.043 126.944 125.744
12:00 HOU_DSF_BW 108.025 109.597 108.372 109.188 108.025
13:00 HOU_DSF_BW 96.134 97.801 96.403 96.657 96.134
14:00 HOU_DSF_BW 42.377 44.082 42.630 42.424 42.377
15:00 HOU_DSF_SB 74.339 76.360 74.784 74.339 74.499
16:00 HOU_DSF_SB 71.485 73.670 71.995 71.485 71.641
17:00 HOU_DSF_SB 74.893 77.083 75.493 74.893 75.041
18:00 HOU_DSF_BW 88.110 90.373 88.546 88.416 88.110
19:00 HOU_DSF_BW 31.416 33.521 31.673 32.079 31.416
20:00 HOU_DSF_BW 10.317 12.185 10.758 11.259 10.317
21:00 HOU_DSF_BW 11.697 13.466 12.099 12.745 11.697
22:00 HOU_DSF_BW 13.293 14.969 13.655 14.376 13.293
23:00 HOU_DSF_BW 14.067 15.666 14.408 15.175 14.067
0:00 HOU_DSF_BW 7.340 8.888 7.672 8.470 7.340
Btu/sf for 24h 985.489 1024.896 995.019 1005.801 985.952
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -39.408 -9.530 -20.313 -0.463
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 104.00% 100.97% 102.06% 100.05%
178

In summary, even though the HOU_DSF_BW was expected to be the most performing as in the
case of LA, it has been shown there is room for improvement in the building's performance.
Furthermore, it was shown that the DECS pattern it's not always the most effective in all aspects,
meaning electricity and cooling, or gas and heating when is the most performing in terms of total
EUI. The illustration of the DECS performance pattern versus the DSF types for gas and heating
can be found in Table 5-Appx.E- 15and Table 5-Appx.E- 16 in Appendix E.
In conclusion for the coldest day in HOU DECS in contrast to the NY results, uses the same
configurations as used in LA. the configurations that should be used are the HOU_DSF_BW and
the HOU_DSF_SB (Table 5-19).

5.5 Summary
This chapter analyzed and discussed the results presented in Chapter 4. More specifically it
clarified which DSF perform better for which period of time.
For LA overall in monthly results the most efficient DSF was the LA_DSF_SB. For the hottest
day was the DECS pattern with the configurations: LA_DSF_SB, LA_DECS_25h0v and
LA_DECS_50h_0v (Table 5-4). For the coldest day was the DECS pattern with the
configurations: LA_DSF_BW and LA_DSF_SB (Table 5-6).
For NY in the monthly results the most efficient DSF was the NY_DSF_BW. For the hottest day
was the DECS pattern with the configurations: NY_DSF_MS, NY_DSF_SB,
NY_DECS_25h_0v and NY_DECS_50h_100v (Table 5-11). For the coldest day was the
NY_DSF_BW (Table 5-13).

179

For HOU in the monthly results the most efficient DSF was the HOU_DSF_SB. For the hottest
day was the DECS pattern with the configurations: HOU_DSF_MS, HOU_DECS_25h_0v,
HOU_DECS_25h_100v, HOU_DECS_75h_0v and HOU_DECS_100h_75v (Table 5-17). For
the coldest day was the DECS pattern with the configurations: HOU_DSF_BW and the
HOU_DSF_SB (Table 5-19).
Furthermore this chapter explained how the DECS configuration was formed in every case and
how much it has affected the performance of the DSFs examined. Moreover, similarities and
differences in the behavior of the buildings in the different climates were mentioned and
explained in further detail. Finally it concluded in which climates and chronicles periods in
which DECS is recommended as summarized above. The conclusions of the analysis can be
found more extensively in Chapter 6.

180

Chapter 6: Conclusions
Chapter 5 analyzed and evaluated the results generated through this study. It examined
in greater depth the performance of DSF and DECS per climate and identified how the DECS
variables have affected the performance of DSF. It further projected the DECS patterns which
formed the cavity dynamic changes that improved the DSF building's efficiency. Finally it was
illustrated were DECS was mostly advantageous and what the energy savings were.
Chapter 6 presents an overview of the thesis and the conclusions based on the study
results and analysis. It references the results of DECS with other study results and aspects
mentioned in Chapters 1- Chapter 5. In addition it summarizes the impact of DECS in the
performance of DSFs for the climates studied and concludes the benefits of DECS application
especially in energy savings. Finally it reviews the limitations of the study and identifies further
potentials and benefits of the DECS application.
6.1 Thesis overview
As described in Chapter 1 and Chapter 2, there are contradictions regarding the use and
performance of DSFs versus SSFs. Some research and post occupancy evaluations of buildings
with DSFs showed improvement in the energy use intensity of the buildings versus the SSFs. As
presented in Chapter 2 other studies and reports demonstrated that DSFs increase the energy
usage and do not deliver in terms of performance the initial efficiency calculated via energy
modeling simulations. Therefore, the goal of this research was to use a Dynamic Environmental
Control System (DECS) as a denouement towards the improvement of performance via the
reduction of both cooling and heating loads in buildings with DSFs.

181

The base case model was created in DesignBuilder based on the DOE benchmark model for
medium size office buildings. The simulations were made for the city climates of Los Angeles,
New York, and Houston. The results were defined as the threshold of efficiency to which the
DSFs performance was compared to.
The climate zone was the first variable of the study. The second variable was the DSF typology
which had four types based on the geometrical compartmentation of the cavity: multistory (MS),
corridor (CO), shaft box (SB) and box window (BW). The results were generated and their
performance was compared to the base case. Their energy behavior was further analyzed and a
potential of improvement via DECS was identified. The third step was the design and
performance of DECS. The DECS system was initially designed with horizontal and vertical fins
but due to software limitations was later modified with openings on the vertical and horizontal
surfaces of the cavity dividers and the external skin. The percentage of the openings was the
third variable of the study, which allowed the cavity to alter its configuration among the four
basic DSF types and other intermediate configurations. The performance of DECS was studied
and the optimized cavity configurations were formed in type of patterns. The patterns projected
the dynamic formation of the cavity for the time span examined. Finally DSF and DECS
performance were compared and the savings were calculated.

6.2 Synopsis of DSFs performance
Based on the introduction and background research presented in Chapters 1 and 2, it was initially
estimated that DSF would improve the building's energy performance overall but the outcomes
showed that the DSF in all three climates had a slight increase in the energy use intensity
182

compared to the base case (SSF). The fuel breakdown though revealed the advantageous DSF
types per load type. The aftermath showed as firstly expected that the MS and SB configurations
would perform more efficiently during the cooling seasons; and the CO and BW more
adequately in the heating seasons. The BW was found the most efficient DSF type during the
heating season in all three climates both for gas and heating loads. It was also the type with the
least energy use intensity in NY overall. The SB type was the most efficient in LA and HOU and
had the lowest electricity loads in all three climates and the least cooling loads in LA and NY. In
Houston the most efficient type for cooling was the MS. These results portrayed at a primary
stage the configurations that the DECS would verge into, aiming to improve the building's
efficiency.
It was further demonstrated that the time span examined is an important factor relevant to their
performance. The annual generated results portrayed the overall energy loads per DSF type, but
the monthly data pictured the distribution of the energy loads throughout the year. This
dispersion allowed further scrutiny of the deviation in their performance on a month to month
pivot throughout the 12 month cycle. The sequel was a first impression of the DECS potential
which was more clearly exhibited in the climate of NY. Finally the months with peak loads of
energy consumption were identified per climate and the differentiation between the most and
least efficient in performance was distinguished. Overall, the LA_DSF_SB was the most
efficient in the LA climate, the NY_DSF_BW for the NY climate and the HOU_DSF_SB for
HOU.
The focus on their performance for the hottest and coldest day in every climate aimed to
determine the capacity of DSFs to perform in extreme weather conditions. The rationale was to
locate the boundaries of their efficiency and thus to convey the utmost prospective of

183

improvement via DECS. The energy use intensity and fuel breakdown intended to discern the
disadvantages of every type evaluate the benefits of each and altogether evoke the impact of the
DSF type to the building's performance.

6.3 Synopsis of DECS performance
Subsequent to the DSF efficiency per climate, the intermediate configurations amongst the four
basic types were modeled by synthesizing horizontal and vertical openings on the cavity surfaces.
The total number of intermediate assemblies formed 21 DECS configuration which incorporated
combinations of openings from 0% to 100% per surface plain, either horizontal (h), vertical (v),
or combinations of both (h_v). The four basic types of DSFs were the margins of these with
combinations of 0% and 100%. More specifically, MS:100h_100v, CO:0h_100v, SB:0h_100v
and BW:0h_0v.
The performance of DSF and DECS configurations was calculated in a static state regardless the
time frame examined; annual, monthly, and hour to hour for the hottest and coldest day. This
was a consequence of the software limitations. The optimum DECS formation was implemented
by aggregating the most efficient configuration per month or hour accordingly. A correlation of
results was found between the DSF and DECS configurations among all climates and times
examined. The DECS assemblies which resembled towards the least efficient DSF type were
also the least performing. Analogous correspondence had the most efficient types. For the cases
that any of the DSF showed greater performance DECS would adapt its cavity compartmentation
to the specific type, for instance into BW during the time span that heating was required, from
hours to months.
184

DECS was found more advantageous for the climate of HOU; followed by LA and NY for the
hottest day; and NY and LA for the coldest day. In terms of energy savings compared to the SSF,
DSFs or dynamic systems such as DECS are not recommended in HOU. In contrast, when
compared to the DFSs, for the majority of the cases examined DECS was found or more efficient
in juxtaposition to the DSF with the best performance or of equal performance. This
demonstrates that the challenge of improving the performance of DSFs as aimed via DECS has
been found efficacious.
6.3.1 The DECS energy savings
Overall, the potential and effectiveness of DECS for all climates versus the DSFs was effectively
seen under the microscopic assessment of the hottest and coldest day studies. It was affirmed that
DECS had the least effect in fuel, energy breakdown and EUI both for the hottest and coldest day
at the temperate climate of LA.
DECS achieved the most significant amount of savings during the hottest day in the NY climate
in comparison to the DSF_BW as the least efficient; and followed by the same type in HOU with
a small differential. For the coldest day DECS savings were attained in HOU in comparison to
the DSF_MS followed by the same type in NY. The performance of DSFs and the formed DECS
for all climates were summarized. The graphs represent the performance differential of DECS
versus the DSFs (Fig.6-1 to Fig.6-6). The y-axis is the metric of the excess energy loads that
DSFs showed when compared to DECS.
The fact that the MS are the least performing during the heating seasons affirms the intention of
DECS. When the idea of DECS was initially inspired, was due to the logical expectation based
on common physic's knowledge that a DSF_MS has not the ability to perform well or improve

185

significantly a building's performance. In the same way the anticipated performance of DSF_BW
for the cooling seasons was proved and DECS had the greatest savings from these types.
DECS was the most efficient for electricity in all climates during the hottest day followed by
DSF_SB (Fig.6-1).

Fig.6 - 1 Excess in electricity loads: DECS Vs. DSFs in all climates for the hottest day.
DECS was the most efficient in cooling in all climates during the hottest day followed by
DSF_SB in LA and NY, and DSF_MS in HOU (Fig.6-2).
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
LA NY HOU
Btu/sf day
Climate zone
Hottest day - Electricity - DECS Vs. DSFs
DSF_MS
DSF_CO
DSF_SB
DSF_BW
DECS
186

Fig.6 - 2 Excess in cooling loads: DECS Vs. DSFs in all climates for the hottest day.
DECS was the most efficient in EUI in all climates during the hottest day followed by DSF_SB
(Fig.6-3).

Fig.6 - 3 Excess in total EUI: DECS Vs. DSFs in all climates for the hottest day.
DECS was the most efficient in gas in all LA and HOU during the coldest day followed by
DSF_BW. In NY DECS took the DSF_BW formation (Fig.6-4).
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
LA NY HOU
Btu/sf day
Climate zone
Hottest day - Cooling - DECS Vs. DSFs
DSF_MS
DSF_CO
DSF_SB
DSF_BW
DECS
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
LA NY HOU
Btu/sf day
Climate zone
Hottest day - EUI - DECS Vs. DSFs
DSF_MS
DSF_CO
DSF_SB
DSF_BW
DECS

187

Fig.6 - 4 Excess in gas loads: DECS Vs. DSFs in all climates for the coldest day.
DECS was the most efficient in heating in all LA and HOU during the coldest day followed by
DSF_BW. In NY DECS took the DSF_BW formation (Fig.6-5).

Fig.6 - 5 Excess in heating loads: DECS Vs. DSFs in all climates for the coldest day.
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
45.00
LA NY HOU
Btu/sf day
Climate zone
Coldest day - Gas - DECS Vs. DSFs
DSF_MS
DSF_CO
DSF_SB
DSF_BW
DECS
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
45.00
LA NY HOU
Btu/sf day
Climate zone
Coldest day - Heating - DECS Vs. DSFs
DSF_MS
DSF_CO
DSF_SB
DSF_BW
DECS
188

DECS was the most efficient in EUI in LA and HOU during the coldest day followed by
DSF_BW. In NY DECS took the DSF_BW formation (Fig.6-6).

Fig.6 - 6 Excess in total EUI: DECS Vs. DSFs in all climates for the coldest day.
As seen DECS for the coldest day in LA and HOU was more efficient than the BW which broke
the stereotype of BW being the most efficient DSF type during heating seasons. The detailed
results can be found in Chapter 5 sections 5.2.3 Analysis of results in Los Angeles – the coldest
day performance; and 5.4.3 Analysis of results in Houston - the coldest day performance and the
corresponding Appendix.
In conclusion, DECS has been found to be effective. However the effectiveness of the system
cannot yet be considered absolute. Further improvements on the system's design and simulation
time spans are required in order to predict more accurately its capacity for energy savings,
especially in comparison to the base case.
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
45.00
LA NY HOU
Btu/sf day
Climate zone
Coldest day - EUI - DECS Vs. DSFs
DSF_MS
DSF_CO
DSF_SB
DSF_BW
DECS

189

6.3.2 The DECS patterns, similarities and differences in all climates
The DESC patterns presented not only the best performing configurations per hour; but also the
least ones of the DSFs. In Chapters 4 and 5 the color gradation in the results and DECS patterns
projected the energy load intensity with red the least efficient options and blue or green the most
efficient. Via the DECS patterns created it was realized that DECS improves the efficiency of the
DSFs and the fuel breakdown in all cases but the two exceptions, the gas and the heating loads
for the coldest day in HOU.
The cavity patterns for the cooling season in the monthly and hottest day studies showed similar
patterns in all three climates with DECS_25h_0v being the dominant configuration and the
DSF_SB the second one. The climate with the greatest alterations in the cavity for the cooling
times was HOU (Fig. 6-7).

Fig.6 - 7 DECS pattern for the hottest day and energy savings per climate.
Similarly, for the monthly results of the heating season and coldest day studies the DSF_BW was
the dominant type and the DSF_SB appeared for a short time in the LA and HOU case. From the
190

coldest day the cavity alterations in LA and HOU were minimal. In NY for the coldest day the
DECS formation showed that the cavity compartmentation should be constant without any
dynamic changes (Fig. 6-8). Furthermore it was shown that it should remain with the DSF_BW
formation from October to April.

Fig.6 - 8 DECS pattern for the coldest day per climate and energy savings.
These outcomes signify that DECS can use its dynamic features mostly in the cooling seasons. It
could be argued that it should be remained static to the DSF_BW configuration for the heating
dominant climates and to the DECS_25h_0vn for the cooling climates. The counterweight is that
the static formations have great losses and increase of the energy usage in summers as already
shown when compared to DECS and as explained and documented in Chapter 1 and Chapter 2.
Furthermore the conclusions showed that DECS is advantageous but also set the question if a
facade with the cavity formations of DECS_25h_0v and DSF_BW only would be efficient
enough rather than having the complex mechanism of allowing more DECS variations. It is
believed that it would still improve the energy performance of the DSFs but not to the extent that
it has currently been achieved. Further studies though would be able to provide this answer
clearly.

191

6.4 Limitations of the study
6.4.1 DSF Benchmark model
The study was performed based on the DOE Benchmark model for middle size offices as already
mentioned. A DOE benchmark model for DSFs does not exist, and as a consequence the
accurateness and validation of results might not be as accurate as if a DSF benchmark model
existed. A European benchmark model for DSFs based on the European codes, standards and
metrics exists. The model was discovered late during the research and therefore, was not used.
More information on the European model can be found at the BESTFACADE report. Real time
data from an existing building are a common approach for this type of studies, since DECS
though is a new proposed system, this was could had been an option if
o A 1:1 scale model was constructed and real data would be gathered. This would had been
extremely useful. The available time of the research and most importantly the cost of its
construction would not make it a feasible solution.
o The DECS could be implemented in a building already built or being under construction.
A system using DECS either as initially designed or as examined was not found. Similar
systems though exist.

6.4.2 Natural ventilation and airflow
At first the approach of DECS efficiency was intended to be examined and presented by focusing
on the airflow rates found within the cavity of DSFs. EnergyPlus even though takes into
consideration natural ventilation as described in Chapter 3, section 3.2.2 Limitations of E+ in
DSF simulations it requires further improvements for the accuracy on the heat transfer airflow
and air temperature through the cavity. Therefore, the simulation of natural airflow is a
192

procedure more complicated than initially considered for DB and any software using EnergyPlus
as its engine.
6.4.3 Software limitations
DesignBuilder (DB) is a software capable of examining the efficiency of DSFs, but it is not
sophisticated enough to extract effectively the yearly performance of a dynamic system like
DECS. Effectively in this case can be defined as a series of optimization simulations with
various variables in order to identify and determine faster which of the outputs are the desired
ones. In DB the DSF cavities of the models are static and for the purposes of the study the
changes in the model can occur only via manual edits. Time could not be set as a variable for the
simulations. As a consequence the results are not as precise as they could had been if there was a
possibility to alter the percentage of the openings based on the environmental conditions of the
cavity the such as a temperature, airflow etc.
For instance, in order to obtain the performance data for the hottest and coldest day separate
simulations had to be made for every model in every location. Then the exported results, had to
be organized in Excel spreadsheets and altered in such way that give the results as required for
the study; meaning forming the results in a way to be easy to compare the performance of the
models in EUI and %. Additionally every set of results had to be manually renamed and altered
before were all combined in order to create the comparison template in the spreadsheets (Fig. 6-
9).

193

Fig.6 - 9 Process of generating results, analysis and conclusions.
All this process it was intensively time consuming. Ideally another software would be able to
export the results in the desired form faster and easier. Furthermore, obtaining the results sub-
hourly as initially intended in order to produce the optimum DECS configuration would require
multiple times the process already described. One could suggest that with a single the outputs for
the annual, monthly and hourly or sub-hourly results could be obtained. This strategy was
194

already tested and there are multiple reasons of why it was not used. Firstly, the software itself
every time gave the warning:
The options you have selected will results in large amounts of output data being generated.
Continuing with the simulation could result in a program crash when processing the output data.
Are you sure you want to continue?
The warning was ignored and multiple tests runs were made in order to obtain the data. In most
cases the sub-hour runs resulted to the software crush. In the cases when it managed to generate
the data, when attempted to export them, the data generated did not fit in the .csv files. This
resulted to conducting the simulations in hourly time steps and examining the performance for
the hottest and coldest day per climate. Having the yearly data would definitely result to more
precise results, but a more sophisticated software is required to perform such a study.
Kinetic, dynamic or adaptive facades at this point remain difficult to model and evaluate their
energy performance. Further research and development of the software is required since these
types of buildings are appearing more frequently, but it is difficult to predict accurately their
performance results.

6.5 Further potential and benefits of the DECS application
The application of DECS has been found advantageous in the performance of DSFs in every
climate. Its application though can provide more benefits than to the energy savings of a building.

195

6.5.1 Application of DECS in existing building facades
Currently the majority of the cities, especially the high populated ones, have a higher percentile
of existing buildings compared to the new ones being constructed. Reuse and refurbishment of
existing buildings are being promoted for sustainability purposes. They can also be cost effective
and further assist in reducing the energy demand in a larger city scale. DECS could be added
during the refurbishment of buildings on existing facades; or even in sections of the building
envelope. It's application as already demonstrated contributes to the energy savings, but it also
carries all the benefits that DSFs have and which were described in Chapter 2.
6.5.2. LEED credentials
LEED accreditation is one path towards the recognition of a building's sustainable design,
applied strategies and calculated and recorded performance. The ratings vary depending on the
features and characteristics of every building and the credits are being gathered from different
categories. As the DSFs, DECS depending on how it’s designed can fall into the energy &
atmosphere category under the performance optimization. It could further be used as a tool in the
materials & resources in case of existing buildings, when part or the whole facade of a historic
building is permitted to be renovated or reconstructed by the local authorities. Furthermore, it
can receive more points in the indoor environmental quality category since thermal comfort,
interior lighting, daylight, quality of view and acoustic performance are some of the advantages
that DECS carries by maintaining the benefits of a DSF. Lastly, DECS could earn points in the
innovation category due to its design and possibly further achieve the pilot point and/or the
exemplary performance.
196

6.6 Summary
DECS was inspired by the fact that DSF buildings often show increased energy consumption
during the cooling seasons because of the greenhouse effect that occurs in their cavities as
explained in Chapters 1 and 2. DECS was designed tackle this problem by introducing a dynamic
system within the cavity. The attempt made aimed to improve the DSF building performance, not
only during the cooling seasons but throughout the year via its adaptive capabilities to the
climate and the environmental conditions. The outcomes of the research showed a potential of
the system and further demonstrated its capabilities in energy savings per climate as shown in
Chapters 4 and 5.
The greatest savings were made in HOU during the coldest day reaching 4%. The smallest
savings were made in LA also during the coldest day at 0.55% (Fig.6-7 and Fig.6-8).
Even though the DSFs didn't show a significant reduction of energy consumption compared to
the base case SSF building and consequently, a well insulated SSF would be preferred, DECS
improved the DSF performance and even reduced the cooling loads during the cooling seasons,
an outcome which can be considered as a successful attempt. The system can definitely be
improved and in order to form a clearer image of its effect on a DFS building further studies
should be carried. Recommendations and future work are presented in Chapter 7.

197

Chapter 7: Future work
Chapter 6 made an overview of the thesis and presented the conclusions based on the
study results and analysis. It referred the results of DECS to other study results and aspects
mentioned in Chapters 1 - 5. In addition it summarized the impact of DECS in the performance
of DSFs for the climates studied and concludes the benefits of DECS application. Finally it
reviewed the limitations of the study and identified further potentials and benefits of the DECS
application.
Chapter 7 makes recommendations for future work based on the research conclusions,
findings during the progress of the thesis, and other areas of the study that were not developed in
the research but which are believed to produce significant findings.
7.1 DSF Benchmark model and database of performance
The lack of a DSF benchmark model creates difficulties and obstacles to the professionals and
researchers who want to examine or improve the efficiency of a DSF building. Alternatively, the
European DSF benchmark model can be used for easier calibration and validation of the results.
It is recommended that a DSF benchmark be created in collaboration with DOE and other
authorities or organizations such as ASHRAE, IESNA etc model. Another recommendation
would be the creation of a database collecting the real data of energy usage from buildings with
DSFs. Even anonymous documents accompanied with all the required building specifications
and performance data would ease greatly the study of DSF buildings. Such a database on a
global level would expand the international research for improvement and validation of the DSFs
and energy models. It would further promote additional research, and the outcomes would
provide more correlations between the climates, location, building attributes, DSF systems and
other variables that affect their performance.
198

7.2 Software recommendations for dynamic facades
DECS was designed and developed initially with the horizontal fins (HF) and vertical fins (VF).
The cavity dimensions and more specifically the structure of the cavity was such that would
allow the fins to rotate in both horizontal and vertical directions without clashes between them,
in order to be able to maintain their intermediate positions. More over the fins sizes had to ensure
that they could be able to completely open within the cavity space by staying parallel to the skins.
They further had to ensure that they could be completely closed, staying perpendicular to the
internal and external skin. The purpose of these safety measures was to assure the effective
creation, function and performance of the DECS configurations. Such that would be able to be
build tomorrow if required, exactly as designed.
In DesignBuilder (DB) though the DECS design had to be altered based on the software
capabilities for calculating the energy performance and not based on its real function and design
attempt. Therefore, the concept of the fins was cancelled and the concept with percentiles of
openings on the vertical and horizontal cavity surfaces was introduced. Realistically, the first
design approach can be applied in a real building but the second is would be more difficult.
Furthermore, the generated results and format were another important aspect of the software
limitations extensively explained in Chapter 6 section 6.4.3 Software limitations. Therefore, the
recommendation for future studies on dynamic or kinetic facades and systems would be the use
of software which that allows the user to
o Maintain the design of the dynamic system at a realistically buildable level.
o Allow for objects that can move.
o Have an easy process for organizing and altering the exported documents to compare the
results.

199

o Allow time to be variable. This is the most important parameter in the simulation of
dynamic facades such as DSFs with the DECS incorporated. A software that has the
flexibility to instantly calculate the performance changes during the dynamic alterations
of the facade, is the one that can provide the most accurate results of its efficiency.
Therefore, an extensive research should be made before the software selection. Other software
that have been used in similar studies can be found in Chapter 2 section 2.6 Previous research
on the energy performance of DSF - Energy modeling and controls of the cavity.
7.3 Possible alterations in DECS design
The base case and DSF models were based on the DOE model. The parametric simulations
described in Chapter 4 section 4.2.1 Parametric simulations for decision making determined the
glazing material that should be used for the DSF. Similarly, other parametric or optimization
simulations could improve the DECS design and performance by finding the optimum inputs
required, such as
o WWR of the inner skin while maintaining the DECS as it is.
o Material selection of the horizontal and vertical surfaces. For instance if a phase change
material would be applied could contribute to the electricity and cooling loads during the
cooling seasons by shading the inner skin and reducing the solar heat gains.
o Glazing types through a larger variety of options and their characteristics such as u-value
and SHGC.
o Geometry of the DECS system. Would a denser grid have a greater impact?
o The external skin to be altered and incorporated in the DECS system. For instance if it
would allow parts of the external surface to open and close more air would enter the
cavity. Would this be even more beneficial?
o Other
200

7.4 Further studies on DSFs with the use of DECS
This thesis examined the improvement in performance of the DSFs with the application of DECS.
Further research using different variables or examining other impacts on the building could give
a solid conclusion of the benefits that DECS can provide in a building with a DSF.
7.4.1 Proposed studies derived from this research results and conclusions
o Other climate zones could be studied. Comparison of the results would provide a more
subtle conclusion regarding a potential for energy savings via DECS.
o Other adjustments or further improvements should be made in the system in every
climate for greater energy savings.
o Use of other software simulating DSFs with DECS and comparison with the outcomes of
this research can give a better understanding and value to the results and it's impacts on
the buildings performance.
o The DECS patterns in Chapter 5 and conclusions in Chapter 6 showed that
DECS_25h_0v and DSF_BW were the dominant configurations in all climates. A study
that would examine the cost and life-cycle assessment of the DECS used or a DECS with
only these two alterations would reach to the conclusion if multiple step (alterations
possible) or duo step DECS is preferred.
o A study that would use the European benchmark model of DSFs, apply DECS and
compare the results and codes of energy standards between U.S. and Europe.
o The new glazing transparent solar collectors seem to be a promising material for
buildings (Stauffer W. N. 2013). Its application as the glazing material of the DECS
glazed surfaces and the DSF external skin would give more value to DECS and
contribute further to the impact it can have on the building's performance.

201

7.4.2 Proposed studies beyond the research examined variables
Other research topic areas were suggested by this study.
o Buildings with high glazed surfaces even with DSF are known to cause glare or
reflectivity problems. Researchers could examine the effect of DECS to the daylight
autonomy and glare or reflectivity that DECS causes to the interior and exterior
environment. The results could give further directions on the improvement of the system.
o The studies presented in Chapter 2 - Background of Double Skin Facades have
demonstrated that fewer temperature fluctuations exist in the interior spaces of buildings
with DSFs compared to the SSFs. A study on the thermal comfort and PMV, temperature
distribution and fluctuation of the interior spaces would determine whether DECS also
contributes to the IEQ. Energy modeling simulations may succeed to reduce energy use
and maintain the IEQ conditions within the standards but occupant behavior which can be
unexpected, can affect greatly the pro-estimated energy performance of the building and
load calculations (Gunay, O’Brien, and Beausoleil-Morrison 2013). This study has not
coupled/predicted the thermal comfort of the occupants during the operation of DSFs or
DECS. The fact that the standardized DOE schedules were used, minimizes the potential
of this disturbance in the energy modeling performance calculations. Furthermore, the
occupants’ behavior is difficult to predict and simulate. In reality though this is an
important parameter and therefore, should be taken into consideration.
o Commonly DSFs are examined with the cavity depth as a variable to note the differences
in the impact of DECS to the building's performance when its dimensions change. The
dimensions of DECS would have to be altered and adjusted to the cavity geometry. This
might draw some limitations on the possible range of cavity depths to be examined.
o Acoustic performance is known to be enhanced in DSF buildings compared to SSFs
(Poirazis 2004). The glazed surfaces of DECS within the cavity might result in instability
of the acoustic performance depending on the configuration used every time. This would
be due to the way sound bounces on them every time the DECS formation changes.
Consequently, a research comparing the DSF and DECS acoustic performance would
determine if DECS impacts the acoustics and in case it does negatively, further
improvements could be recommended for the system.
202

o A study examining the impact of DECS to the performance of a taller office building
would discern if the height of the building affects the efficiency of DECS.
o The CO
2
emissions could be an additional variable in a future study of DECS. As
explained in Chapter 2 section 2.7.7 Previous research on the energy performance of
double skin facade buildings - CO
2
emissions increase through the use of energy. The
energy savings of DECS can calculate the decrease of the building’s footprint.
o Natural ventilation assists in reducing the energy loads especially for cooling and as
mentioned in Chapter 2 section 2.4 Advantages and disadvantages of DSF can also
increase the IEQ. Therefore, a similar study with openings inside the cavity of the DSF
with DECS would examine the effect of DECS to the increase or decrease of air changes
and consequently, to the use of the mechanical systems for air supply and conditioning of
the building.
o A study with a parametric software would be able to incorporate natural ventilation, the
buoyancy effect, wind and the airflow within enclosed spaces such as cavities. This
would assist greatly in executing faster the energy simulations of DSFs and DECS. It
would also help in the format the results are being generated and ease the analysis
process than the one performed with the use of DB.
o Cost was also a variable that was not been examined. The cost and return of the
investment (ROI) are significant for the decision making of a building's design. Such a
study would determine if the savings through DECS in the long-term make it a feasible
solution for buildings with DSFs.
o A parametric study where all the DECs variables mentioned in this section would be
examined as well as the transient behavior of the system throughout the time frame
studied. This would determine if DECS is indeed an intrigued advantageous system and
whether further research and development should be invested in it.

7.5 Summary
DECS was conceptualized aiming to improve the performance of buildings that have DSFS. The
hypothesis was to examine whether a dynamic system as DECS could improve the performance

203

both during the cooling and heating seasons. The study has answered its hypothesis by showing
improvement of the DSFs performance in all three climates both during the cooling and heating
seasons concerning the hottest and coldest day of the year per climate. The energy savings with
the use of DECS compared to the DFSs were:
o 3.9% during the hottest day in LA o 0.55% during the coldest day in LA
o 2.25% during the hottest day in NY o 1.90% during the coldest day in NY
o 4% during the hottest day in HOU o 4.32% during the coldest day in HOU
Several difficulties were encountered throughout the process and development of the project, but
the results are valuable, and indicate the need for continued study in order to reach to these
results and conclusions. The series of steps implemented are described in different Chapters of
this study.
The introduction and background research presented showed the current issues of buildings with
DSFs as well as the benefits they have (Chapters 1 and 2). The methodology was created in order
to determine the process of the research and the required steps to be followed which was
explained (Chapter 3). The simulation results were generated, categorized, presented and the first
interpretation of results was made (Chapter 4). The analysis and discussion of results showed the
outcomes and the effect of DECS to the DSF buildings’ performance (Chapter 5). The
conclusions, limitations of the study and further potential with the use of DECS in DSF buildings
were presented (Chapter 6). Finally, future works based on study conclusions and limitations
were suggested in this chapter (Chapter 7).
204

Bibliography - References

[uto]. 2013. “GECO.” http://www.grasshopper3d.com/group/geco.
ArchiExpo. 2013. “Aluminium Ventilated Double Skin Facade.”
http://www.archiexpo.com/prod/feal-croatia-ltd/aluminium-ventilated-facades-57866-
587842.html.
ASHRAE. “International Climate Zone Definitions.” https://www.ashrae.org/File
Library/docLib/Public/20081111_CZTables.pdf.
———. 2010. “ASHRAE Research Strategic Plan 2010-2015”. ASHRAE.
https://www.ashrae.org/File Library/docLib/Public/20101011_strategicplan20102015.pdf.
ATA Engineering Inc. 2014. “Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and Fluid Interaction (fsi)
Analysis.” http://www.ata-e.com/services/computational-fluid-dynamics-cfd-and-fluid-
structure-interaction-fsi-analysis-services.
Autodesk. 2013a. “Autodesk Green Building Studio.” Green Building Studio.
http://www.autodesk.com/products/green-building-studio/overview.
———. 2013b. “Autodesk Falcon Project.” Falcon Project.
http://labs.autodesk.com/utilities/falcon.
Autodesk Inc. 2014. “Natural Ventilation - CFD.” Autodesk Inc.
http://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/simulation-cfd/learn-
explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2015/ENU/SimCFD-Learning/files/GUID-F6011744-
B69B-47D0-BB2B-50E1BA8DC32D-htm.html.
Azarbayjani, Mona. 2010. “BEYOND ARROWS : ENERGY PERFORMANCE OF A NEW ,
NATURALLY VENTILATED DOUBLE-SKIN FACADE CONFIGURATION FOR A
HIGH-RISE OFFICE BUILDING IN CHICAGO BY Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Architecture I”. University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/17026/Azarbayjani_Mona.pdf?seque
nce=4.
Braham, William. “Active Glass Walls : A Typological and Historical Account.”
———. 2005. “Active Glass Walls: A Typological and Historical Account”. Las Vegas.
http://works.bepress.com/william_braham/2/.
Chan, a.L.S., T.T. Chow, K.F. Fong, and Z. Lin. 2009. “Investigation on Energy Performance of
Double Skin Façade in Hong Kong.” Energy and Buildings 41 (11) (November): 1135–
1142. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.05.012.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378778809001182.
Crawley, Drury B, Linda K Lawrie, Frederick C Winkelmann, W F Buhl, Y Joe Huang, Curtis O
Pedersen, Richard K Strand, et al. 2001. “EnergyPlus : Creating a New-Generation Building
Energy Simulation Program.” Energy and Buildings 33: 319–331.
http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic1136043.files/06 EnergyPlus paper-Crawley.pdf.
Crawley Drury B., Jon W. Hand, Kummert Michael, Griffith Brent T. 2005. “CONTRASTING
THE CAPABILITIES OF BUILDING ENERGY PERFORMANCE SIMULATION
PROGRAMS A Joint Report by.”
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/tools_directory/pdfs/contrasting_the_capabilities_of
_building_energy_performance_simulation_programs_v1.0.pdf.

205

DesignBuilder Software. “Calculation Options in DesignBuilder.”
http://www.designbuilder.co.uk/helpv3.4/#Calculation_Options.htm?Highlight=operative.
———. 2009. “DesignBuilder Simulation + CFD Training Guide”. DesignBuilder Software.
http://www.designbuilder.co.uk/downloadsv1/doc/DesignBuilder-Simulation-Training-
Manual.pdf.
———. 2013a. “DesignBuilder Software Ltd.” http://www.designbuilder.co.uk/.
———. 2013b. “DesignBuilder CFD - Computational Fluid Dynamics. Calculate and View
Airflow and 3-D Temperature Distribution.”
http://www.designbuilder.co.uk/content/view/152/226/.
———. 2013c. “What Is CFD?” http://www.designbuilder.co.uk/content/view/40/61/.
———. 2014a. “DesignBuilder 3-D CAD Model Import (gbXML). Import BIM Models from
Revit, Sketchup and gbXML.” http://www.designbuilder.co.uk/content/view/67/106/.
———. 2014b. “Energy Plus - DesignBuilder Is Built around the EnergyPlus Data
Requirements.” http://www.designbuilder.co.uk/content/view/29/44/.
DOE. 2013. “EnergyPlus Energy Simulation Software.” U.S. Department of Energy.
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/ep_interfaces.cfm.
Dorvieto. 2011. “Gerilla - Grasshopper to EnergyPlus.”
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/group/pae-lab/forum/topics/gerilla-grasshopper-to-energy-
plus.
Fortmeyer, Russell, and Charles Linn. 2014. Kinetic Architecture: Designs for Active Envelopes.
Mulgrave Victoria: Images Publishing Group.
Gratia, Elisabeth, and André De Herde. 2004. “Natural Cooling Strategies Efficiency in an
Office Building with a Double-Skin Façade.” Energy and Buildings 36 (11) (November):
1139–1152. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2004.05.004.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778804001495.
———. 2007a. “Greenhouse Effect in Double-Skin Facade.” Energy and Buildings 39 (2)
(February): 199–211. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2006.06.004.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378778806001836.
———. 2007b. “The Most Efficient Position of Shading Devices in a Double-Skin Facade.”
Energy and Buildings 39 (3) (March): 364–373. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2006.09.001.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378778806002106.
———. 2007c. “Are Energy Consumptions Decreased with the Addition of a Double-Skin?”
Energy and Buildings 39 (5) (May): 605–619. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2006.10.002.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778806002362.
Guardo, a., M. Coussirat, E. Egusquiza, P. Alavedra, and R. Castilla. 2009. “A CFD Approach to
Evaluate the Influence of Construction and Operation Parameters on the Performance of
Active Transparent Façades in Mediterranean Climates.” Energy and Buildings 41 (5)
(May): 534–542. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2008.11.019.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378778808002648.
Gunay, H. Burak, William O’Brien, and Ian Beausoleil-Morrison. 2013. “A Critical Review of
Observation Studies, Modeling, and Simulation of Adaptive Occupant Behaviors in
Offices.” Building and Environment 70 (December): 31–47.
doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.07.020.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360132313002187.
Haase, M, and A Amato. 2006. “Design Considerations For Double-Skin Façades in Hot and
Humid Climates PhD Candidate Department of Architecture Department of Architecture
206

The University of Hong Kong.” Envelope Technologies for Building Energy Efficiency II-5-
1 (ESL-IC-06-11-59): 8.
Hamza, Neveen. 2008. “Double versus Single Skin Facades in Hot Arid Areas.” Energy and
Buildings 40 (3) (January): 240–248. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2007.02.025.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378778807000758.
Hong, Taehoon, Jimin Kim, Juyoung Lee, Choongwan Koo, and Hyo Park. 2013. “Assessment
of Seasonal Energy Efficiency Strategies of a Double Skin Façade in a Monsoon Climate
Region.” Energies 6 (9) (August 23): 4352–4376. doi:10.3390/en6094352.
http://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/6/9/4352/.
Høseggen, R., B.J. Wachenfeldt, and S.O. Hanssen. 2008. “Building Simulation as an Assisting
Tool in Decision Making. Case Study: With or without a Double-Skin Facade?” Energy and
Buildings 40 (5) (January): 821–827. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2007.05.015.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378778807001740.
International Energy Agency. 2014. “Energy Efficiency.”
https://www.iea.org/aboutus/faqs/energyefficiency/.
Ismail, Mazran, Abdul Malek, and Abdul Rahman. 2012. “STACK VENTILATION
STRATEGIES IN ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT : A BRIEF REVIEW OF
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT ,” International Journal of Research and Reviews in
Applied Sciences 11 (May): 291–301.
http://www.arpapress.com/Volumes/Vol11Issue2/IJRRAS_11_2_14.pdf.
Jaeggi, Annemarie. 2000. Fagus: Industrial Culture from Werkbund to Bauhaus. New York:
Princeton Architectural Press.
Kalyanova, Olena, Per Heiselberg, Clemens Felsmann, Harris Poirazis, Paul Strachan, and Aad
Wijsman. 2009. “AN EMPIRICAL VALIDATION OF BUILDING SIMULATION
SOFTWARE FOR MODELLING OF DOUBLE-SKIN FACADE ( DSF ) Department of
Civil Engineering , Aalborg University , Aalborg , Denmark Technical University of
Dresden , Dresden , Germany Department of Architecture and.” In Eleventh International
IBPSA Conference, 1107–1114. Glasgow, Scotland: Building Simulation 2009.
http://www.sbi.dk/download/bsim/BS09_P493.pdf.
Kim, Deuk-Woo, and Cheol-Soo Park. 2011. “Difficulties and Limitations in Performance
Simulation of a Double Skin Façade with EnergyPlus.” Energy and Buildings 43 (12)
(December): 3635–3645. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.09.038.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378778811004403.
Kim, Gon, Hong Soo Lim, and Jeong Tai Kim. 2012. “Development of a Double-Skin Façade
for Sustainable Renovation of Old Residential Buildings.” In , 1–16. Seoul: 7th
International Symposium on Sustainable healthy Buildings.
http://www.sustainablehealthybuildings.org/PDF/7TH/KIMGON.pdf.
Kim, Young-Jin, Kyuong-Soo Yoon, Cheol-Soo Park, and Lee Keon-Ho Suh, Won-Jun. 2011.
“Comparison of Different Optimal Control Strategies of a Double-Skin Facade.” In , 14–16.
Sydney: 12th Conference of International Building Performance Simulation Association.
Knaack, Ulrich, Tillmann Klein, Marcel Bilow, and Thomas Auger. 2007. Façades Principles of
Construction. English. Berlin: Birkhäuser Architecture.
Köhl, Michael. 2006. “TASK 27 Performance of Solar Facade Components Performance ,
Durability and Sustainability Subtask A : Performance Project A3: Solar Building
Components and Integrated Assemblies.” https://www.iea-
shc.org/data/sites/1/publications/task27-a3.pdf.

207

Lagios, Kera. 2013. “DIVA-for-Rhino.” http://diva4rhino.com/.
Liu, Mingzhe, Kim Bjarne Wittchen, Per Kvols Heiselberg, and Frederik Vildbrad Winther.
2013. “Development of a Simplified and Dynamic Method for Double Glazing Façade with
Night Insulation and Validated by Full-Scale Façade Element.” Energy and Buildings 58
(March): 163–171. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.11.031.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778812006457.
———. 2014. “Development and Sensitivity Study of a Simplified and Dynamic Method for
Double Glazing Facade and Verified by a Full-Scale Façade Element.” Energy and
Buildings 68 (January): 432–443. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.03.056.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778813006051.
Loncour, X, A Deneyer, M Blasco, G Flamant, and P Wouters. 2004. “Ventilated Double
Facades, Classification & Illustration of Facade Concepts”. Brussel.
http://www.cstc.be/activefacades/new/download/Ventilated Doubles Facades -
Classification & illustrations.dvf2 - final.pdf.
Manz, Heinrich. 2002. “Numerical Simulation of Heat Transfer by Natural Convection in
Cavities of Facade Elements” 35 (2003): 305–311.
Matos, M, and R Duarte. 2007. “A Comparison between Energy Performance of One DSF
Buildings Studied Sample and Office Buildings Benchmarks in Europe”: 6.
http://www.inive.org/members_area/medias/pdf/Inive/PalencAIVC2007/Volume1/PalencAI
VC2007_053.pdf.
Meador, Tim. 2013. “Hummingbird.” http://www.grasshopper3d.com/group/hummingbird.
Moon, Jin Woo, Sung-Hoon Yoon, and Sooyoung Kim. 2013. “Development of an Artificial
Neural Network Model Based Thermal Control Logic for Double Skin Envelopes in
Winter.” Building and Environment 61 (March): 149–159.
doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.12.010.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360132312003320.
Motevalian, Elham. 2014. “Double Skin Façades Performance: Effects on Daylight and Visual
Comfort in Office Spaces”. University of Southern California.
Murray, Scott. 2013. Translucent Building Skins: Material Innovations in Modern and
Contemporary Architecture. London: Routledge.
National Institute of Building Sciences. 2013. “Whole Building Science Guide, Net Zero Energy
Buildings.” http://www.wbdg.org/resources/netzeroenergybuildings.php.
Pappas, Alexandra Aleka, and Zhiqiang John Zhai. 2006. “ENERGY SIMULATION OF A
DOUBLE SKIN FAÇADE : A PROCESS USING CFD AND ENERGYPLUS Enermodal
Engineering , Inc ., Denver , CO University of Colorado at Boulder , Boulder , CO.”
SimBuild. http://gundog.lbl.gov/dirpubs/SB06/pappas.pdf.
Pekdemir, Emir Aykut, and Ralph T Muehleisen. 2012. “A Parametric Study of the Thermal
Performance of Double Skin Façades at Principal Building Scientist at Argonne National
Laboratory Parameters Used Results of the Parametric Simulation.” In , 44. Madison, WI:
IBPSA - USA SimBuild 2012.
http://www.ibpsa.us/simbuild2012/Presentations/TS04a_2_Pekdemir.pdf.
Pless, Shanti, and Paul Torcellini. 2012. “Controlling Capital Costs in High Performance Office
Buildings : A Review of Best Practices for Overcoming Cost Barriers Preprint.”
PNNL. 2014. “ASHRAE 90.1 Prototype Building Modeling Specifications for Medium Office
Buildings.”
208

https://www.energycodes.gov/sites/default/files/documents/PNNL_Scorecard_90_1Prototyp
es_Retail_Standalone.xls.
Poirazis, Harris. 2004. “Double Skin Façades for Office Buildings Literature Review”. Lund.
http://www.ebd.lth.se/fileadmin/energi_byggnadsdesign/images/Publikationer/Bok-EBD-
R3-G5_alt_2_Harris.pdf.
———. 2006. “Double Skin Facades a Literature Review”. Lund.
http://www.ecbcs.org/docs/Annex_43_Task34-
Double_Skin_Facades_A_Literature_Review.pdf.
Roudsari, Mostapha Sadeghipour. 2013a. “Ladybug + Honeybee for Rhino - Grasshopper.”
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/group/ladybug.
———. 2013b. “Honeybee for Ladybug for Grasshopper.”
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/video/honeybee-for-ladybug-for-grasshopper.
Roudsari, Mostapha Sadeghipour, Adrian Smith, and Gordon Gill. 2013. “LADYBUG : A
PARAMETRIC ENVIRONMENTAL PLUGIN FOR GRASSHOPPER TO HELP
DESIGNERS CREATE AN ENVIRONMENTALLY-CONSCIOUS DESIGN Mostapha
Sadeghipour Roudsari , Michelle Pak.” In , 8. Chambery: IBPSA - 13th Conference of
International Building Performance Simulation Association.
http://www.ibpsa.org/proceedings/BS2013/p_2499.pdf.
Saelens, Dirk. 2002. ENERGY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF SINGLE STOREY
MULTIPLE-SKIN FACADES. Leuven, Katholieke Universiteit: KATHOLIEKE
UNIVERSITEIT LEUVEN. https://bwk.kuleuven.be/bwf/PhDs/PhDSaelens.
Safer, Nassim, Monika Woloszyn, and Jean Jacques Roux. 2005. “Three-Dimensional
Simulation with a CFD Tool of the Airflow Phenomena in Single Floor Double-Skin
Facade Equipped with a Venetian Blind.” Solar Energy 79 (2) (August): 193–203.
doi:10.1016/j.solener.2004.09.016.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0038092X04002920.
Schiefer, Christian, Herwig Heimrath, Richard Hengsberger, Thomas Mach, Matheos Streicher,
Wolfgang Santamouris, Ifigenia Farou, Hans Erhorn, Heike Erhorn-Kluttig, and
Blomsterberg Åke Matos Mario de, Duarte Rogerio. 2005. “Best Practice for Double Skin
Façades WP 1 Report ‘ State of the Art ’” EIE/04/135/S07.38652. Graz, Austria: Intelligent
Energy, Europe. http://www.bestfacade.com/pdf/downloads/Bestfacade_WP1_Report.pdf.
Schiefer Christian, Heimrath Richard, Hengsberger Herwig, Mach Thomas, Streicher Wolfgang,
Santamouris Matheos, Farou Ifigenia, Erhorn Hans, Erhorn-Kluttig Heike, Matos Mario de,
Duarte Rogerio, Blomsterberg Åke. 2008. “BESTFACADE - Best Practice for Double Skin
Facades”. EIE/04/135/S07.38652. Intelligent Energy, Europe. http://www.bestfacade.com.
Solla, Ignacio Fernández. 2011. “The Steiff Factory and the Birth of Curtain Walling.”
November. http://facadesconfidential.blogspot.com/2011/11/steiff-factory-and-birth-of-
curtain.html.
Stauffer W. N. 2013. “Transparent Solar Cells.” MIT Energy Initiative.
http://mitei.mit.edu/news/transparent-solar-cells.
Stribling, David, and Byron Stigge. 2003. “A Critical Review of the Energy Savings and Cost
Payback Issues of Double Facades”. Glasgow, New York.
https://www.cibse.org/pdfs/8cstribling.pdf.
The Royal Academy of Engineering. 2010. “Engineering a Low Carbon Built Environment The
Discipline of Building Engineering Physics”. London.
http://www.raeng.org.uk/publications/reports/engineering-a-low-carbon-built-environment.

209

Torcellini, Paul, Michael Deru, Brent Griffith, and Kyle Benne. 2008. “DOE Commercial
Building Benchmark Models.” ACEEE (Eia 2005).
http://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2008/data/papers/4_520.pdf.
Torcellini, Paul, Shanti Pless, Chad Lobato, and Tom Hootman. 2010. “Main Street Net-Zero
Energy Buildings: The Zero Energy Method in Concept and Practice.” In Phoenix, Arizona:
4th Itnernational Conference on Energy Sustainability.
http://www.nrel.gov/sustainable_nrel/pdfs/47870.pdf.
Torres, Mauricio, Pere Alavedra, Amado Guzmán, Eva Cuerva, Carla Planas, Vanessa Escalona,
Grup Jg, and Enginyers Consultors. 2007. “DOUBLE SKIN FAÇADES – CAVITY AND
EXTERIOR OPENINGS DIMENSIONS FOR SAVING ENERGY ON
MEDITERRANEAN CLIMATE Department of Construction Engineering , Universidad
Politécnica de Cataluña ,” In Building and Environment, 198–205.
Tzempelikos, Athanassios, and Andreas K. Athienitis. 2007. “The Impact of Shading Design and
Control on Building Cooling and Lighting Demand.” Solar Energy 81 (3) (March): 369–
382. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2006.06.015.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038092X06001897.
U.S. Department of Energy. 2012a. “Buildings Energy Data Book.”
http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/ChapterIntro1.aspx.
———. 2012b. “Energy Performance Ratings for Windows, Doors, and Skylights.”
http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/energy-performance-ratings-windows-doors-and-
skylights.
———. 2014a. “DOE Buildings Performance Database.” https://bpd.lbl.gov/.
U.S. Department of Energy, and Pacific Northwest. 2013. “Building Science-Based Climate
Maps”. U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy.
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/building_america/4_3a_ba_innov_
buildingscienceclimatemaps_011713.pdf.
U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. 2014b.
“Improving the Energy Efficiency of Commercial Buildings.”
http://energy.gov/eere/buildings/improving-energy-efficiency-commercial-buildings.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008. “U.S. EPA’s 2008 Report on the Environment
(Final Report)”. EPA/600/R-07/045F (NTIS PB2008-112484). Washington: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=190806.
———. 2014. “Overview of Greenhouse Gases.” EPA.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/co2.html.
Vaglio, Jeff, and Mic Patterson. 2011. “Seeing Double: Double-Skin Facade Designs on the Rise
in North America.” Architect’s Guide to Glass & Metal 25 (4): 24.
http://www.glassguides.com/digital/2011/JulAug2011.pdf.
Vaglio, Jeff, Mic Patterson, and Stacey Hooper. 2010. “Emerging Applications and Trends of
Double-Skin Facades.” Enclos Corp. http://enclos.com/assets/docs/Insight01-Chapter03-
Emerging_Applications_and_Trends_of_Double-Skin_Facades.pdf.
Vaglio, Jeffrey, and Mic Patterson. 2013. “Divergence in Scale: Double-Skin Facade
Applications in the United States.” In Tampere, Finland: Glass Performance Days.
http://www.glassfiles.com/videos/divergence-scale-double-skin-façade-applications-united-
states.
210

Volovelskay, Diana. 2008. “The Future Is Triple Zero Supergreen Building.” Sustainability
Matters. http://www.glumac.com/greenresources/GR_FutureTripleGreen.html.
Waide, Paul, Jenniifer Amann Thorne, and Adam Hinge. 2007. “Energy Efficiency in the North
American Existing Building Stock”. Paris: OECD/IEA.
http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/NAM_Building_Stock.pdf.
Wikipedia. 2014a. “Computational Fluid Dynamics.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_fluid_dynamics.
———. 2014b. “U-factor/U-Value.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-value_(insulation)#U-
factor.2FU-Value.
———. 2014c. “Solar Gain.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_gain.
Yoon, Seong-hwan, Cheol-soo Park, Joon-woo Lee, and South Korea. 2009. “COMPARATIVE
STUDY OF STATIC VS . DYNAMIC CONTROLS OF DOUBLE-SKIN SYSTEMS
Deptartment of Architectural Engineering , College of Engineering ,” In Eleventh
International IBPSA Conference, 968–975. Glasgow, Scotland: Building Simulation 2009.
http://www.ibpsa.org/proceedings/BS2009/BS09_0968_975.pdf.
Zelenay Krystyna, Perepelitza Mark, Lehrer David. 2011. “High-Performance Facades Design
Strategies and Applications in North America and Northern Europe”. Berkeley.
http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu/research/pdf_files/Zelenay2011-High-performance-
facades.pdf.
Zimmerman, Allen. “Air Leakage, Air Sealing and the Airtight Drywall Approach.” The Ohio
State University. http://www.oardc.ohio-
state.edu/bioenergy/images/pdf_zimmerman_hndt.pdf.

211

APPENDIX A (Chapter 2, section 2.4 Advantages and disadvantages)
Table 2 - Appx.A – 1 Summary of DSF advantages by author (Poirazis 2004).

212

Table 2 - Appx.A – 2 Summary of DSF disadvantages by author (Poirazis 2004).

213

APPENDIX B – Weather Data files for Los Angeles, New York and Houston (Chapter 3,
Section 3.3.1.1 Location and climate).
Los Angeles (Figures taken from Climate Consultant)

Fig.3 - Appx.B - 1 Criteria in Climate Consultant, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 2 Temperature range in LA.

Fig.3 - Appx.B - 33D chart of LA monthly temperatures, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 4 Monthly diurnal
averages in LA.
214

Fig.3 - Appx.B - 5 Sun shading chart for LA, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 6 Sky cover range in LA.

Fig.3 - Appx.B - 7 Psychrometric chart for LA, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 8 Wind wheel for LA.

215

New York (Figures taken from Climate Consultant)

Fig.3 - Appx.B - 9 Criteria in Climate Consultant, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 10 Temperature range in NY.

Fig.3 - Appx.B - 113D chart of NY monthly temperatures, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 12 Monthly diurnal
averages in NY.
216

Fig.3 - Appx.B - 13 Sun shading chart for NY, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 14 Sky cover range in NY

Fig.3 - Appx.B - 15 Psychrometric chart for NY, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 16 Wind wheel for NY.

217

Houston (Figures taken from Climate Consultant)

Fig.3 - Appx.B - 17 Criteria in Climate Consultant, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 18 Temperature range in
HOU.

Fig.3 - Appx.B - 193D chart of HOU monthly temperatures, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 20 Monthly
diurnal averages in HOU.
218

Fig.3 - Appx.B - 21 Sun shading chart for HOU, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 22 Sky cover range in HOU.

Fig.3 - Appx.B - 23 Psychrometric chart for HOU, Fig.3 - Appx.B - 24 Wind wheel for HOU.

219

APPENDIX C - Energy modeling settings for the base case model in DesignBuilder
(Chapter 3, section 3.4 – The DesignBuilder model)
DesignBuilder settings

Fig.3 - Appx.C - 1 Activity Settings in DesignBuilder – part 1(the options not shown are the DB
defaults).

220

Fig.3 - Appx.C - 2 Activity Settings in DesignBuilder – part 2 (the options not shown are the DB
defaults).

221

Fig.3 - Appx.C - 3 Construction settings in DB (the options not shown are the DB defaults).

222

Fig.3 - Appx.C - 4 Opening settings in DB – part 1(the options not shown are the DB defaults).

223

Fig.3 - Appx.C - 5 Opening settings in DB – part 2 (the options not shown are the DB defaults).

Fig.3 - Appx.C - 6 Lighting settings in DB (the options not shown are the DB defaults).

224

Fig.3 - Appx.C - 7 HVAC settings in DB – part 1 (the options not shown are the DB defaults).

225

Fig.3 - Appx.C - 8 HVAC settings in DB – part 2 (the options not shown are the DB defaults).
Schedules
Details on the DOE commercial building Benchmark models and schedules can be found here:
http://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2008/data/papers/4_520.pdf.
https://www.energycodes.gov/sites/default/files/documents/PNNL_Scorecard_90_1Prototypes_
Office_Medium.xls
226

Fig.3 - Appx.C - 9 Building schedules from ASHRAE 90.1 Prototype Building Modeling
Specifications (PNNL 2014)

227

APPENDIX D - Tables and Pattern results of Electricity, Gas, Heating and Cooling
(Referred to Chapter 4)
Section 4.3.2 DSF results in tables
Los Angeles
Table 4 - Appx.D - 1 LA Monthly energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF

LA MONTHLY COMPARISON OF DSFs Vs. SSF Breakdown in Kbtu/sf
LA TOTAL EUI MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
LA_SSF_90% 2.257 2.156 2.156 2.173 2.016 1.929 2.026 1.991 1.979 2.102 2.077 2.152
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 2.369 2.248 2.231 2.239 2.100 2.000 2.089 2.067 2.033 2.157 2.115 2.241
LA_DSF_MS 2.323 2.233 2.226 2.259 2.163 2.074 2.160 2.101 2.025 2.137 2.080 2.187
LA_DSF_CO 2.342 2.251 2.252 2.295 2.181 2.083 2.180 2.142 2.069 2.171 2.108 2.222
LA_DSF_SB 2.313 2.221 2.212 2.238 2.132 2.048 2.121 2.070 2.005 2.122 2.069 2.175
LA_DSF_BW 2.321 2.239 2.237 2.286 2.174 2.076 2.172 2.131 2.056 2.162 2.101 2.211
LA ELECTRICITY MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
LA_SSF_90% 1.942 1.977 1.971 2.065 1.912 1.832 1.922 1.885 1.883 1.998 1.982 2.040
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 2.016 2.050 2.039 2.131 1.995 1.903 1.985 1.961 1.937 2.053 2.018 2.118
LA_DSF_MS 1.974 2.038 2.0381 2.15134 2.058 1.977 2.056 1.996 1.929 2.032 1.984 2.069
LA_DSF_CO 2.013 2.06573 2.07124 2.1883 2.077 1.986 2.076 2.037 1.973 2.067 2.013 2.108
LA_DSF_SB 1.965 2.02612 2.02497 2.13084 2.027 1.951 2.017 1.964 1.909 2.018 1.973 2.057
LA_DSF_BW 2.004 2.05962 2.0622 2.17985 2.070 1.979 2.068 2.025 1.959 2.058 2.007 2.099
LA GAS MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
LA_SSF_90% 0.315 0.179 0.185 0.108 0.104 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.104 0.095 0.112
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.353 0.198 0.192 0.109 0.104 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.104 0.097 0.122
LA_DSF_MS 0.349 0.195 0.188 0.108 0.104 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.104 0.096 0.118
LA_DSF_CO 0.329 0.186 0.181 0.107 0.104 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.104 0.095 0.114
LA_DSF_SB 0.348 0.195 0.187 0.107 0.104 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.104 0.096 0.118
LA_DSF_BW 0.317 0.179 0.175 0.106 0.104 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.104 0.095 0.112
LA HEATING MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
LA_SSF_90% 0.214 0.084 0.084 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.012
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.252 0.103 0.091 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.022
LA_DSF_MS 0.248 0.100 0.086 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.017
LA_DSF_CO 0.229 0.091 0.080 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.014
LA_DSF_SB 0.248 0.100 0.086 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.018
LA_DSF_BW 0.217 0.084 0.074 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.012
LA COOLING MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
LA_SSF_90% 0.006 0.003 0.014 0.117 0.000 0.000 0.021 0.002 0.027 0.035 0.047 0.005
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.002 0.001 0.010 0.102 0.000 0.000 0.016 0.002 0.015 0.017 0.022 0.002
LA_DSF_MS 0.003 0.000 0.009 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.001 0.014 0.019 0.025 0.001
LA_DSF_CO 0.003 0.000 0.010 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.016 0.001 0.014 0.018 0.025 0.001
LA_DSF_SB 0.003 0.000 0.009 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.001 0.013 0.018 0.024 0.001
LA_DSF_BW 0.004 0.000 0.011 0.102 0.000 0.000 0.018 0.001 0.015 0.019 0.026 0.001
228

Table 4 - Appx.D - 2 LA hottest and coldest day energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF.

LA HOTTEST DAY COMPARISON OF DSFs Vs. SSF Breakdown in Kbtu/sf
LA TOTAL EUI HOTTEST DAY COMPARISON for hottest day
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.95 2.69 6.26 5.51 9.27 11.70 6.47 6.22 5.47 5.47 5.83 3.16 2.14 2.14 2.14 2.10 1.70 1.70
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.98 2.76 6.88 5.67 9.08 11.26 5.95 6.18 5.69 5.74 6.33 3.26 2.14 2.14 2.14 2.10 1.70 1.70
LA_DSF_MS 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 2.00 2.79 7.19 6.08 8.74 11.16 6.11 6.60 6.13 6.15 6.64 3.31 2.14 2.14 2.14 2.10 1.70 1.70
LA_DSF_CO 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 2.00 2.79 7.20 6.19 9.18 11.61 6.31 6.80 6.19 6.16 6.64 3.31 2.14 2.14 2.14 2.10 1.70 1.70
LA_DSF_SB 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.99 2.79 7.14 5.89 8.46 10.89 5.98 6.37 5.91 5.91 6.42 3.28 2.14 2.14 2.14 2.10 1.70 1.70
LA_DSF_BW 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.99 2.79 7.19 6.15 9.24 11.69 6.38 6.80 6.14 6.09 6.57 3.30 2.14 2.14 2.14 2.10 1.70 1.70
LA ELECTRICITY HOTTEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.91 2.52 5.96 5.17 8.93 11.32 5.96 5.76 5.17 5.17 5.45 2.94 1.97 2.01 2.01 2.01 1.66 1.66
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.94 2.59 6.58 5.33 8.74 10.88 5.44 5.71 5.39 5.44 5.95 3.05 1.97 2.01 2.01 2.01 1.66 1.66
LA_DSF_MS 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.95 2.62 6.89 5.74 8.40 10.78 5.60 6.13 5.83 5.86 6.25 3.10 1.98 2.01 2.01 2.01 1.66 1.66
LA_DSF_CO 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.95 2.62 6.90 5.85 8.84 11.23 5.80 6.33 5.90 5.87 6.25 3.10 1.98 2.01 2.01 2.01 1.66 1.66
LA_DSF_SB 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.95 2.62 6.84 5.55 8.12 10.51 5.47 5.91 5.62 5.61 6.04 3.06 1.97 2.01 2.01 2.01 1.66 1.66
LA_DSF_BW 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.95 2.62 6.89 5.81 8.90 11.30 5.87 6.33 5.84 5.80 6.19 3.09 1.97 2.01 2.01 2.01 1.66 1.66
LA COOLING HOTTEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.76 6.15 2.62 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.35 5.42 1.97 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_DSF_MS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.70 5.08 1.96 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_DSF_CO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.89 5.21 2.02 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_DSF_SB 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.64 5.03 1.93 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_DSF_BW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.99 5.32 2.11 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA COLDEST DAY COMPARISON OF DSFs Vs. SSF Breakdown in Kbtu/sf
LA TOTAL EUI COLDEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 2.14 1.80 2.65 2.69 2.69 2.73 1.88 1.88 1.83 1.85 2.14 1.70 1.70 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.32 1.37 1.40 1.42 2.38 1.99 2.65 2.69 2.69 2.73 1.88 1.88 1.83 1.89 2.14 1.70 1.70 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30
LA_DSF_MS 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.34 1.35 2.33 1.93 2.65 2.69 2.69 2.73 1.88 1.88 1.83 1.88 2.14 1.70 1.70 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30
LA_DSF_CO 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.31 1.32 2.30 1.89 2.65 2.69 2.69 2.73 1.88 1.88 1.83 1.89 2.14 1.70 1.70 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30
LA_DSF_SB 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.33 1.35 2.33 1.94 2.65 2.69 2.69 2.73 1.88 1.88 1.83 1.87 2.14 1.70 1.70 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30
LA_DSF_BW 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 2.25 1.87 2.65 2.69 2.69 2.73 1.88 1.88 1.83 1.89 2.14 1.70 1.70 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30
LA GAS COLDEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.36 0.09 0.13 0.17 0.17 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.07 0.10 0.12 0.57 0.28 0.13 0.17 0.17 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_DSF_MS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.05 0.52 0.22 0.13 0.17 0.17 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_DSF_CO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.49 0.19 0.13 0.17 0.17 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_DSF_SB 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.05 0.52 0.23 0.13 0.17 0.17 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_DSF_BW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.16 0.13 0.17 0.17 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA HEATING COLDEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.07 0.10 0.12 0.53 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_DSF_MS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.05 0.47 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_DSF_CO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.45 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_DSF_SB 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.05 0.48 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LA_DSF_BW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

229

New York
Table 4 - Appx.D - 3 NY Monthly energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF.

NY TOTAL EUI MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
NY_SSF_90% 21.167 22.083 11.321 4.997 2.236 2.765 4.216 4.441 2.277 2.742 9.018 16.405
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 21.710 22.801 11.899 5.241 2.299 2.774 4.086 4.214 2.276 2.971 9.500 17.081
NY_DSF_MS 21.888 22.950 11.977 5.261 2.335 2.826 4.171 4.266 2.277 2.932 9.509 17.131
NY_DSF_CO 21.571 22.610 11.734 5.199 2.370 2.858 4.218 4.346 2.315 2.937 9.376 16.891
NY_DSF_SB 21.826 22.905 11.914 5.222 2.307 2.794 4.135 4.232 2.256 2.918 9.490 17.094
NY_DSF_BW 21.323 22.362 11.535 5.106 2.362 2.868 4.259 4.382 2.315 2.888 9.230 16.671
NY ELECTRICITY MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
NY_SSF_90% 2.082 2.009 2.004 2.017 2.117 2.668 4.112 4.336 2.180 1.984 2.032 2.159
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 2.146 2.082 2.064 2.093 2.179 2.677 3.981 4.109 2.180 2.051 2.098 2.239
NY_DSF_MS 2.122 2.047 2.059 2.099 2.217 2.729 4.066 4.160 2.180 2.015 2.070 2.194
NY_DSF_CO 2.147 2.084 2.084 2.136 2.253 2.761 4.114 4.241 2.219 2.059 2.102 2.228
NY_DSF_SB 2.114 2.037 2.048 2.082 2.190 2.697 4.030 4.126 2.160 2.004 2.059 2.181
NY_DSF_BW 2.142 2.076 2.077 2.125 2.248 2.771 4.155 4.277 2.219 2.045 2.095 2.221
NY GAS MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
NY_SSF_90% 19.084 20.074 9.317 2.980 0.119 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.758 6.987 14.246
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 19.565 20.719 9.835 3.148 0.120 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.920 7.403 14.842
NY_DSF_MS 19.766 20.903 9.918 3.162 0.118 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.916 7.439 14.938
NY_DSF_CO 19.424 20.525 9.650 3.063 0.117 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.878 7.275 14.663
NY_DSF_SB 19.711 20.869 9.866 3.140 0.118 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.914 7.430 14.913
NY_DSF_BW 19.181 20.286 9.458 2.981 0.114 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.843 7.135 14.450
NY HEATING MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
NY_SSF_90% 18.984 19.979 9.216 2.876 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.654 6.893 14.145
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 19.464 20.623 9.734 3.044 0.016 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.815 7.309 14.742
NY_DSF_MS 19.665 20.808 9.816 3.058 0.014 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.812 7.345 14.837
NY_DSF_CO 19.324 20.430 9.548 2.960 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.774 7.181 14.562
NY_DSF_SB 19.611 20.774 9.764 3.037 0.013 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.810 7.337 14.813
NY_DSF_BW 19.081 20.191 9.357 2.877 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.739 7.042 14.350
NY COOLING MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
NY_SSF_90% 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.171 0.791 2.154 2.433 0.257 0.001 0.000 0.000
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.153 0.720 1.931 2.130 0.177 0.000 0.000 0.000
NY_DSF_MS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.155 0.724 1.964 2.171 0.183 0.000 0.000 0.000
NY_DSF_CO 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.157 0.733 1.985 2.200 0.185 0.000 0.000 0.000
NY_DSF_SB 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.155 0.722 1.958 2.166 0.180 0.000 0.000 0.000
NY_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.161 0.750 2.033 2.250 0.194 0.000 0.000 0.000
230

Table 4 - Appx.D - 4 NY hottest and coldest day energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF.

NY HOTTEST DAY COMPARISON OF DSFs Vs. SSF Breakdown in Kbtu/sf
NY TOTAL EUI HOTTEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 3.28 6.71 29.60 35.35 44.18 48.66 25.88 42.40 38.82 31.85 36.27 14.36 7.80 6.74 5.38 4.52 3.86 1.70
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 3.07 6.34 29.53 35.33 44.03 48.44 25.13 41.63 38.39 32.10 36.36 13.81 6.98 6.11 4.99 4.31 3.53 1.70
NY_DSF_MS 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 3.06 6.33 29.82 35.45 43.83 48.14 25.16 42.11 39.28 32.85 36.96 14.22 7.45 6.43 5.15 4.40 3.66 1.70
NY_DSF_CO 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 3.31 6.68 30.00 35.77 44.39 48.77 25.36 42.28 39.22 32.80 36.96 14.26 7.72 6.71 5.40 4.55 3.95 1.70
NY_DSF_SB 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 3.08 6.35 29.44 35.13 43.45 47.77 24.98 41.84 39.17 32.74 36.75 14.24 7.54 6.48 5.18 4.42 3.67 1.70
NY_DSF_BW 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 3.49 6.96 29.99 35.83 44.46 48.84 25.46 42.37 39.34 32.92 37.05 14.47 8.04 7.00 5.62 4.67 4.13 1.70
NY ELECTRICITY HOTTEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 3.24 6.54 29.30 35.01 43.84 48.28 25.37 41.93 38.52 31.55 35.89 14.14 7.63 6.61 5.25 4.44 3.82 1.66
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 3.03 6.17 29.23 34.99 43.69 48.06 24.62 41.16 38.09 31.80 35.98 13.60 6.81 5.99 4.86 4.22 3.48 1.66
NY_DSF_MS 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 3.02 6.16 29.52 35.11 43.49 47.76 24.65 41.64 38.98 32.55 36.58 14.01 7.28 6.30 5.02 4.32 3.62 1.66
NY_DSF_CO 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 3.27 6.51 29.71 35.43 44.05 48.38 24.85 41.82 38.93 32.50 36.58 14.05 7.55 6.58 5.28 4.46 3.91 1.66
NY_DSF_SB 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 3.04 6.18 29.15 34.79 43.11 47.39 24.47 41.37 38.87 32.45 36.37 14.03 7.37 6.35 5.05 4.33 3.63 1.66
NY_DSF_BW 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 3.44 6.79 29.70 35.49 44.12 48.45 24.95 41.90 39.04 32.62 36.67 14.26 7.87 6.87 5.49 4.58 4.09 1.66
NY COOLING HOTTEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.44 4.41 24.14 29.84 38.67 43.11 22.03 36.76 33.36 26.20 30.43 11.27 5.87 4.60 3.24 2.42 2.16 0.00
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.19 3.91 23.81 29.40 38.03 42.34 21.11 35.83 32.57 25.70 29.96 10.62 5.04 3.97 2.85 2.21 1.83 0.00
NY_DSF_MS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.16 3.83 23.71 29.30 37.88 42.19 21.12 36.01 32.92 26.07 30.26 10.97 5.50 4.29 3.00 2.31 1.96 0.00
NY_DSF_CO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.41 4.18 23.84 29.42 38.01 42.30 21.10 35.96 32.84 26.02 30.26 11.01 5.78 4.57 3.26 2.45 2.25 0.00
NY_DSF_SB 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.19 3.90 23.60 29.27 37.82 42.12 21.07 35.95 32.91 26.08 30.26 11.04 5.60 4.34 3.03 2.32 1.97 0.00
NY_DSF_BW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.58 4.48 23.90 29.54 38.14 42.42 21.22 36.09 32.98 26.17 30.41 11.23 6.09 4.86 3.47 2.57 2.43 0.00
NY COLDEST DAY COMPARISON OF DSFs Vs. SSF Breakdown in Kbtu/sf
NY TOTAL EUI COLDEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 16.99 6.55 6.84 7.15 7.59 7.83 8.25 29.38 47.71 201.62 195.75 187.98 176.97 92.29 170.10 169.48 167.40 166.68 57.63 21.29 21.75 22.77 23.18 14.31
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 16.74 6.22 6.49 6.76 7.15 7.35 7.71 29.39 48.86 204.04 198.44 190.50 180.39 94.34 172.02 170.95 168.42 167.51 58.19 21.62 21.95 22.86 23.18 14.22
NY_DSF_MS 17.39 7.01 7.34 7.64 8.03 8.23 8.53 30.35 50.10 205.59 199.80 191.27 181.64 94.78 172.63 171.60 169.12 168.29 58.99 22.45 22.72 23.64 23.92 14.89
NY_DSF_CO 16.63 6.18 6.52 6.81 7.18 7.36 7.70 29.58 49.51 205.09 199.37 191.02 181.26 94.33 172.15 170.99 168.37 167.49 58.21 21.73 22.00 22.90 23.23 14.19
NY_DSF_SB 17.34 6.90 7.19 7.49 7.91 8.08 8.38 30.17 49.98 205.58 199.82 191.28 181.66 94.67 172.51 171.48 169.00 168.19 58.91 22.33 22.64 23.58 23.84 14.85
NY_DSF_BW 15.91 5.40 5.63 5.89 6.29 6.50 6.86 28.72 48.80 204.62 198.84 190.50 180.61 93.64 171.34 170.19 167.57 166.68 57.32 20.81 21.14 22.04 22.37 13.45
NY GAS COLDEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 15.33 5.25 5.54 5.84 6.29 6.53 6.95 27.48 45.59 196.46 190.58 182.81 171.80 88.85 164.13 162.50 159.48 158.60 54.19 19.28 19.74 20.76 21.17 12.66
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 15.08 4.92 5.19 5.45 5.85 6.05 6.41 27.45 46.59 198.66 192.90 184.59 174.76 90.24 165.18 163.55 160.44 159.43 54.74 19.60 19.93 20.84 21.16 12.56
NY_DSF_MS 15.73 5.71 6.04 6.34 6.73 6.92 7.23 28.44 47.99 200.42 194.63 186.10 176.47 90.98 165.88 164.26 161.11 160.20 55.55 20.43 20.70 21.63 21.91 13.23
NY_DSF_CO 14.97 4.87 5.22 5.51 5.88 6.06 6.40 27.64 47.31 199.92 194.07 185.22 175.75 90.16 165.09 163.48 160.36 159.41 54.77 19.71 19.99 20.88 21.21 12.53
NY_DSF_SB 15.68 5.60 5.89 6.19 6.61 6.78 7.08 28.29 47.87 200.41 194.65 186.11 176.49 91.12 166.00 164.29 161.00 160.11 55.46 20.31 20.63 21.56 21.83 13.20
NY_DSF_BW 14.25 4.10 4.33 4.59 4.98 5.20 5.56 26.78 46.64 199.45 193.60 184.86 175.20 89.51 164.32 162.71 159.56 158.59 53.88 18.79 19.12 20.03 20.35 11.79
NY HEATING COLDEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 15.29 5.25 5.54 5.84 6.29 6.53 6.95 27.44 45.42 196.16 190.25 182.47 171.42 88.34 163.67 162.21 159.18 158.22 53.98 19.11 19.61 20.63 21.08 12.61
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 15.04 4.92 5.19 5.45 5.85 6.05 6.41 27.41 46.42 198.36 192.56 184.25 174.38 89.73 164.72 163.25 160.14 159.05 54.53 19.43 19.81 20.72 21.08 12.52
NY_DSF_MS 15.69 5.71 6.04 6.34 6.73 6.92 7.23 28.40 47.82 200.13 194.29 185.76 176.09 90.47 165.41 163.96 160.81 159.82 55.34 20.26 20.58 21.50 21.82 13.19
NY_DSF_CO 14.93 4.87 5.22 5.51 5.88 6.06 6.40 27.60 47.14 199.62 193.73 184.88 175.37 89.65 164.63 163.19 160.06 159.02 54.56 19.54 19.86 20.75 21.13 12.49
NY_DSF_SB 15.64 5.60 5.89 6.19 6.61 6.78 7.08 28.25 47.70 200.11 194.31 185.77 176.11 90.62 165.53 163.99 160.70 159.73 55.25 20.14 20.50 21.43 21.74 13.15
NY_DSF_BW 14.21 4.10 4.33 4.59 4.98 5.20 5.56 26.74 46.47 199.15 193.26 184.52 174.82 89.00 163.85 162.42 159.26 158.21 53.67 18.62 19.00 19.90 20.27 11.75

231

Houston
Table 4 - Appx.D - 5 HOU Monthly energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF.

HOU MONTHLY COMPARISON OF DSFs Vs. SSF Breakdown in Kbtu/sf
HOU TOTAL EUI MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
HOU_SSF_90% 4.987 4.787 2.719 2.813 4.269 6.059 8.088 8.357 6.543 3.595 2.296 3.756
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 5.393 5.053 2.831 2.850 4.271 5.942 7.900 8.140 6.274 3.485 2.344 3.974
HOU_DSF_MS 5.363 5.077 2.837 2.896 4.368 6.079 8.080 8.268 6.344 3.485 2.316 3.935
HOU_DSF_CO 5.301 4.999 2.839 2.932 4.389 6.121 8.140 8.349 6.426 3.529 2.343 3.884
HOU_DSF_SB 5.340 5.045 2.813 2.870 4.349 6.077 8.074 8.240 6.314 3.456 2.298 3.921
HOU_DSF_BW 5.225 4.935 2.809 2.939 4.421 6.193 8.222 8.416 6.470 3.536 2.333 3.833
HOU ELECTRICITY MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
HOU_SSF_90% 1.933 2.004 2.108 2.706 4.165 5.962 7.984 8.252 6.447 3.484 2.116 2.057
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 2.036 2.095 2.169 2.743 4.167 5.845 7.796 8.035 6.178 3.372 2.144 2.135
HOU_DSF_MS 2.015 2.102 2.160 2.789 4.264 5.982 7.976 8.163 6.247 3.373 2.119 2.101
HOU_DSF_CO 2.051 2.126 2.199 2.825 4.285 6.024 8.035 8.243 6.329 3.418 2.158 2.136
HOU_DSF_SB 2.000 2.091 2.139 2.763 4.245 5.980 7.970 8.135 6.218 3.344 2.102 2.086
HOU_DSF_BW 2.045 2.122 2.190 2.833 4.317 6.095 8.118 8.311 6.374 3.426 2.155 2.129
HOU GAS MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
HOU_SSF_90% 3.053 2.783 0.611 0.107 0.104 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.111 0.180 1.699
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 3.358 2.958 0.662 0.108 0.104 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.113 0.200 1.840
HOU_DSF_MS 3.348 2.974 0.677 0.107 0.104 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.112 0.197 1.834
HOU_DSF_CO 3.250 2.872 0.640 0.107 0.104 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.111 0.185 1.748
HOU_DSF_SB 3.340 2.955 0.674 0.107 0.104 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.112 0.196 1.835
HOU_DSF_BW 3.181 2.813 0.618 0.106 0.104 0.097 0.104 0.105 0.096 0.111 0.178 1.704
HOU HEATING MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
HOU_SSF_90% 2.953 2.688 0.509 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.087 1.598
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 3.257 2.863 0.561 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.009 0.107 1.739
HOU_DSF_MS 3.247 2.879 0.575 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.103 1.734
HOU_DSF_CO 3.149 2.777 0.539 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.091 1.648
HOU_DSF_SB 3.240 2.860 0.573 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.103 1.734
HOU_DSF_BW 3.081 2.718 0.517 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.085 1.604
HOU COOLING MONTHLY COMPARISON
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
HOU_SSF_90% 0.000 0.027 0.188 0.740 2.235 4.100 6.076 6.315 4.579 1.531 0.182 0.036
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.000 0.019 0.164 0.668 2.126 3.888 5.794 6.009 4.228 1.325 0.131 0.024
HOU_DSF_MS 0.000 0.019 0.161 0.672 2.152 3.951 5.886 6.080 4.288 1.344 0.132 0.024
HOU_DSF_CO 0.000 0.019 0.163 0.679 2.166 3.991 5.941 6.140 4.326 1.344 0.136 0.023
HOU_DSF_SB 0.000 0.018 0.160 0.669 2.154 3.966 5.901 6.083 4.281 1.334 0.129 0.023
HOU_DSF_BW 0.000 0.020 0.166 0.695 2.204 4.067 6.029 6.215 4.382 1.363 0.141 0.023
232

Table 4 - Appx.D - 6 HOU hottest and coldest day energy breakdown of DSF Vs. SSF.

HOU HOTTEST DAY COMPARISON OF DSFs Vs. SSF Breakdown in Kbtu/sf
HOU TOTAL EUI HOTTEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 2.70 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.93 7.00 25.25 31.05 38.29 45.09 27.36 53.81 57.18 59.36 58.87 21.41 10.41 11.31 11.03 8.96 6.44 5.67
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 2.65 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.96 6.75 25.37 31.00 38.24 45.12 27.04 53.59 56.84 59.23 58.90 21.02 9.68 10.59 10.30 8.37 6.10 5.36
HOU_DSF_MS 2.66 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.97 6.77 25.80 31.45 38.59 45.35 27.18 54.01 57.45 59.84 59.39 21.24 10.09 10.97 10.66 8.64 6.24 5.51
HOU_DSF_CO 2.81 1.31 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.99 7.21 25.90 31.58 38.82 45.67 27.33 54.21 57.51 59.83 59.40 21.27 10.27 11.25 11.04 9.04 6.49 5.80
HOU_DSF_SB 2.67 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.97 6.78 25.36 31.18 38.38 45.15 27.07 53.79 57.19 59.53 59.06 21.22 10.21 11.07 10.76 8.71 6.28 5.54
HOU_DSF_BW 2.80 1.32 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 2.00 7.46 25.82 31.63 38.90 45.76 27.44 54.29 57.57 59.89 59.46 21.44 10.56 11.54 11.38 9.33 6.69 5.94
HOU ELECTRICITY HOTTEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 2.70 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.89 6.83 24.95 30.71 37.95 44.71 26.85 53.34 56.89 59.07 58.49 21.20 10.24 11.19 10.91 8.88 6.39 5.62
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 2.65 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.92 6.58 25.07 30.66 37.90 44.74 26.53 53.12 56.55 58.93 58.52 20.81 9.51 10.46 10.18 8.28 6.06 5.32
HOU_DSF_MS 2.66 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.93 6.60 25.50 31.11 38.25 44.97 26.67 53.54 57.15 59.55 59.01 21.03 9.92 10.84 10.53 8.55 6.20 5.46
HOU_DSF_CO 2.81 1.31 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.94 7.04 25.61 31.24 38.48 45.29 26.82 53.74 57.21 59.54 59.02 21.06 10.10 11.12 10.92 8.95 6.45 5.75
HOU_DSF_SB 2.67 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.92 6.61 25.06 30.84 38.04 44.77 26.56 53.32 56.89 59.24 58.68 21.01 10.04 10.94 10.64 8.63 6.24 5.49
HOU_DSF_BW 2.80 1.32 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.96 7.30 25.52 31.29 38.56 45.38 26.93 53.82 57.27 59.59 59.07 21.22 10.39 11.41 11.25 9.25 6.64 5.90
HOU COOLING HOTTEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 1.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.65 19.78 25.54 32.78 39.54 23.51 48.17 51.72 53.88 53.17 18.36 8.46 9.17 8.89 6.86 4.74 3.97
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 1.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.29 19.59 25.22 32.35 39.03 22.88 47.51 51.06 53.35 52.71 17.86 7.70 8.45 8.16 6.27 4.40 3.66
HOU_DSF_MS 1.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.25 19.63 25.25 32.34 39.00 22.90 47.60 51.25 53.58 52.91 18.02 8.12 8.83 8.52 6.54 4.54 3.81
HOU_DSF_CO 1.51 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 4.70 19.74 25.35 32.44 39.09 22.92 47.63 51.24 53.56 52.92 18.06 8.29 9.10 8.90 6.94 4.79 4.10
HOU_DSF_SB 1.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.31 19.47 25.23 32.33 38.98 22.89 47.57 51.21 53.55 52.89 18.07 8.24 8.93 8.62 6.62 4.58 3.84
HOU_DSF_BW 1.50 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 4.96 19.74 25.46 32.56 39.21 23.04 47.74 51.36 53.69 53.06 18.24 8.59 9.40 9.24 7.23 4.99 4.24
HOU COLDEST DAY COMPARISON OF DSFs Vs. SSF Breakdown in Kbtu/sf
HOU TOTAL EUI COLDEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 8.65 2.82 3.23 3.84 4.38 4.66 5.02 19.74 31.38 135.64 121.68 102.75 90.34 36.79 69.25 67.45 72.36 87.12 31.32 10.42 12.00 13.77 14.64 7.99
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 9.08 3.09 3.39 3.91 4.35 4.55 4.85 20.11 32.63 138.07 125.36 107.57 95.80 42.38 74.90 72.58 76.59 89.93 33.24 11.89 13.18 14.68 15.35 8.55
HOU_DSF_MS 9.43 3.50 3.83 4.35 4.81 4.99 5.31 20.66 33.58 139.54 127.23 109.60 97.80 44.08 76.36 73.67 77.08 90.37 33.52 12.18 13.47 14.97 15.67 8.89
HOU_DSF_CO 8.30 2.46 2.76 3.32 3.81 4.05 4.43 19.81 32.87 138.69 126.04 108.37 96.40 42.63 74.78 71.99 75.49 88.55 31.67 10.76 12.10 13.66 14.41 7.67
HOU_DSF_SB 9.10 3.27 3.55 4.12 4.60 4.78 5.09 20.23 33.30 139.31 126.94 109.19 96.66 42.42 74.34 71.48 74.89 88.42 32.08 11.26 12.74 14.38 15.18 8.47
HOU_DSF_BW 7.95 2.19 2.39 2.86 3.33 3.57 3.94 19.33 32.42 138.28 125.74 108.02 96.13 42.38 74.50 71.64 75.04 88.11 31.42 10.32 11.70 13.29 14.07 7.34
HOU GAS COLDEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 6.99 1.52 1.93 2.54 3.08 3.36 3.72 17.86 29.26 130.47 116.51 97.58 85.18 33.45 64.08 62.28 67.03 79.53 27.88 8.41 9.99 11.76 12.63 6.33
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 7.42 1.79 2.09 2.61 3.05 3.25 3.55 18.18 30.44 132.80 120.09 102.24 90.45 38.97 69.62 67.21 70.66 82.18 29.80 9.88 11.16 12.67 13.33 6.90
HOU_DSF_MS 7.77 2.20 2.52 3.05 3.51 3.69 4.00 18.78 31.47 134.38 122.06 104.43 92.63 40.75 71.19 68.50 71.85 82.65 30.08 10.17 11.45 12.95 13.65 7.23
HOU_DSF_CO 6.64 1.16 1.46 2.02 2.51 2.75 3.13 17.89 30.73 133.52 120.87 103.20 91.23 39.29 69.62 66.79 69.78 80.76 28.23 8.74 10.08 11.64 12.39 6.01
HOU_DSF_SB 7.45 1.97 2.25 2.82 3.30 3.48 3.79 18.38 31.18 134.15 121.78 104.02 91.49 39.09 69.17 66.32 69.72 80.77 28.64 9.24 10.73 12.36 13.16 6.81
HOU_DSF_BW 6.29 0.89 1.09 1.56 2.03 2.27 2.64 17.42 30.30 133.11 120.57 102.86 90.97 39.04 69.33 66.47 69.46 80.34 27.97 8.30 9.68 11.28 12.05 5.68
HOU HEATING COLDEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 6.95 1.52 1.93 2.54 3.08 3.36 3.72 17.82 29.09 130.17 116.17 97.24 84.79 32.94 63.61 61.99 66.73 79.15 27.66 8.24 9.86 11.63 12.54 6.29
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 7.38 1.79 2.09 2.61 3.05 3.25 3.55 18.14 30.27 132.50 119.75 101.90 90.07 38.46 69.15 66.91 70.36 81.80 29.59 9.71 11.03 12.54 13.25 6.85
HOU_DSF_MS 7.73 2.20 2.52 3.05 3.51 3.69 4.00 18.73 31.30 134.08 121.72 104.09 92.25 40.24 70.72 68.20 71.55 82.27 29.87 10.00 11.32 12.83 13.57 7.19
HOU_DSF_CO 6.60 1.16 1.46 2.02 2.51 2.75 3.13 17.84 30.56 133.22 120.53 102.86 90.85 38.78 69.15 66.50 69.48 80.38 28.02 8.57 9.96 11.51 12.31 5.97
HOU_DSF_SB 7.40 1.97 2.25 2.82 3.30 3.48 3.79 18.34 31.01 133.85 121.44 103.68 91.11 38.58 68.70 66.02 69.43 80.39 28.42 9.07 10.60 12.23 13.08 6.77
HOU_DSF_BW 6.25 0.89 1.09 1.56 2.03 2.27 2.64 17.37 30.13 132.81 120.24 102.52 90.58 38.53 68.86 66.17 69.16 79.96 27.76 8.13 9.56 11.15 11.97 5.64

233

Section 4.3.3 DECS Vs. SSF and DSF results in tables
Los Angeles
LA monthly results
Table 4 - Appx.D - 7 Monthly electricity load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in LA.

LA ELECTRICITY MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 103.84% 103.66% 103.45% 103.20% 104.37% 103.91% 103.26% 104.03% 102.88% 102.74% 101.78% 103.85% 103.41%
LA_DSF_MS 101.66% 103.07% 103.40% 104.19% 107.67% 107.95% 106.96% 105.87% 102.45% 101.73% 100.11% 101.43% 103.82%
LA_DSF_CO 103.65% 104.47% 105.09% 105.98% 108.66% 108.41% 107.99% 108.03% 104.80% 103.45% 101.52% 103.33% 105.40%
LA_DSF_SB 101.17% 102.47% 102.74% 103.20% 106.05% 106.50% 104.92% 104.18% 101.37% 100.99% 99.53% 100.82% 102.79%
LA_DSF_BW 103.19% 104.16% 104.63% 105.57% 108.26% 108.04% 107.58% 107.42% 104.07% 102.99% 101.24% 102.91% 104.96%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 103.58% 104.41% 104.95% 105.82% 108.43% 108.17% 107.73% 107.75% 104.56% 103.33% 101.47% 103.27% 105.25%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 103.60% 104.43% 104.99% 105.87% 108.51% 108.25% 107.82% 107.85% 104.64% 103.37% 101.48% 103.29% 105.30%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 103.63% 104.45% 105.04% 105.93% 108.59% 108.34% 107.91% 107.95% 104.72% 103.41% 101.50% 103.31% 105.36%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 101.13% 102.42% 102.71% 103.06% 105.98% 106.44% 104.80% 104.11% 101.26% 100.89% 99.41% 100.77% 102.71%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 101.62% 103.01% 103.25% 103.81% 107.11% 107.33% 106.23% 105.29% 102.07% 101.54% 100.01% 101.40% 103.51%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 101.64% 103.04% 103.31% 103.91% 107.31% 107.55% 106.49% 105.50% 102.19% 101.59% 100.02% 101.42% 103.62%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 101.66% 103.07% 103.37% 104.02% 107.52% 107.77% 106.75% 105.73% 102.31% 101.65% 100.04% 101.44% 103.73%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 101.69% 103.10% 103.44% 104.13% 107.70% 107.97% 106.98% 105.93% 102.43% 101.70% 100.05% 101.46% 103.83%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 101.24% 102.58% 102.85% 103.25% 106.27% 106.70% 105.22% 104.41% 101.47% 101.05% 99.57% 100.93% 102.92%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 101.79% 103.19% 103.40% 104.04% 107.36% 107.49% 106.50% 105.62% 102.28% 101.73% 100.17% 101.61% 103.72%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 101.81% 103.22% 103.46% 104.14% 107.54% 107.68% 106.72% 105.82% 102.40% 101.78% 100.18% 101.63% 103.82%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 101.83% 103.25% 103.52% 104.24% 107.72% 107.88% 106.95% 106.02% 102.52% 101.83% 100.20% 101.65% 103.92%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 101.86% 103.27% 103.58% 104.34% 107.88% 108.05% 107.15% 106.20% 102.63% 101.88% 100.22% 101.66% 104.01%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 101.14% 102.43% 102.71% 103.17% 106.00% 106.45% 104.84% 104.12% 101.33% 100.96% 99.51% 100.79% 102.75%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 101.57% 102.96% 103.20% 103.85% 107.01% 107.26% 106.15% 105.17% 102.06% 101.55% 100.05% 101.34% 103.47%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 101.59% 102.99% 103.26% 103.96% 107.22% 107.49% 106.42% 105.39% 102.18% 101.60% 100.07% 101.36% 103.58%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 101.61% 103.02% 103.33% 104.07% 107.44% 107.73% 106.70% 105.62% 102.31% 101.66% 100.08% 101.38% 103.70%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 101.64% 103.05% 103.39% 104.18% 107.64% 107.94% 106.93% 105.83% 102.43% 101.72% 100.10% 101.40% 103.80%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 101.60% 103.00% 103.23% 103.88% 107.06% 107.29% 106.20% 105.23% 102.11% 101.59% 100.08% 101.39% 103.51%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 101.63% 103.03% 103.29% 104.00% 107.28% 107.53% 106.48% 105.46% 102.22% 101.64% 100.10% 101.41% 103.63%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 101.65% 103.06% 103.36% 104.11% 107.50% 107.76% 106.75% 105.69% 102.35% 101.70% 100.11% 101.43% 103.74%
234

Table 4 - Appx.D - 8 Monthly gas load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in LA.

Table 4 - Appx.D - 9 Monthly heating load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in LA.

LA GAS MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 111.99% 110.87% 103.73% 100.56% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.05% 102.47% 108.90% 104.80%
LA_DSF_MS 110.72% 108.94% 101.30% 99.64% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.82% 104.85% 103.61%
LA_DSF_CO 104.57% 103.79% 97.83% 98.85% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.12% 101.71% 101.12%
LA_DSF_SB 110.70% 108.98% 100.97% 99.21% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.87% 104.97% 103.56%
LA_DSF_BW 100.84% 100.21% 94.53% 98.19% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 99.72% 99.67% 99.39%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 103.73% 102.89% 97.11% 98.61% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.02% 101.19% 100.71%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 104.06% 103.25% 97.41% 98.72% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.05% 101.35% 100.87%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 104.47% 103.68% 97.68% 98.80% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.08% 101.52% 101.05%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 108.51% 107.32% 99.68% 98.68% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.09% 101.94% 102.50%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 107.80% 106.75% 99.49% 98.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.03% 101.70% 102.27%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 108.11% 107.01% 99.69% 99.03% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.06% 101.85% 102.40%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 108.44% 107.35% 99.87% 99.09% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.09% 102.00% 102.54%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 108.51% 107.44% 99.96% 99.11% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.10% 102.05% 102.58%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 109.44% 107.93% 100.02% 98.81% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.28% 102.64% 102.86%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 108.94% 107.46% 99.99% 99.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.24% 102.53% 102.72%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 109.26% 107.78% 100.20% 99.21% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.28% 102.70% 102.86%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 109.56% 107.98% 100.40% 99.26% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.32% 102.86% 102.98%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 109.65% 108.08% 100.46% 99.28% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.33% 102.91% 103.02%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 110.33% 108.61% 100.77% 99.17% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.99% 100.80% 104.69% 103.39%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 109.83% 107.86% 100.78% 99.51% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.74% 104.52% 103.22%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 110.11% 108.14% 100.95% 99.56% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.78% 104.66% 103.34%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 110.39% 108.61% 101.14% 99.62% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.81% 104.81% 103.49%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 110.49% 108.71% 101.21% 99.64% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.82% 104.84% 103.53%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 110.25% 108.17% 100.95% 99.56% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.83% 104.82% 103.39%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 110.49% 108.40% 101.13% 99.62% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.86% 104.96% 103.50%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 110.77% 108.67% 101.32% 99.66% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.89% 105.11% 103.62%
LA HEATING MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 117.61% 123.20% 108.26% 114.33% 58.32% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 474.50% 257.90% 183.65% 119.30%
LA_DSF_MS 115.74% 119.07% 102.87% 90.71% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 105.97% 152.43% 145.58% 114.51%
LA_DSF_CO 106.71% 108.09% 95.21% 70.51% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 69.14% 107.45% 116.04% 104.49%
LA_DSF_SB 115.71% 119.17% 102.15% 79.89% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 69.65% 155.56% 146.73% 114.29%
LA_DSF_BW 101.23% 100.44% 87.90% 53.84% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.32% 81.77% 96.86% 97.56%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 105.48% 106.16% 93.60% 64.47% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 48.28% 101.17% 111.17% 102.85%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 105.96% 106.93% 94.27% 67.34% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 55.59% 102.98% 112.69% 103.50%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 106.56% 107.85% 94.86% 69.25% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 62.50% 105.32% 114.30% 104.21%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 112.50% 115.63% 99.29% 66.17% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 13.59% 105.76% 118.28% 110.04%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 111.45% 114.40% 98.88% 73.89% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 19.59% 101.68% 115.97% 109.13%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 111.90% 114.96% 99.31% 75.28% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 28.05% 103.67% 117.38% 109.65%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 112.39% 115.70% 99.72% 76.62% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 38.72% 105.75% 118.82% 110.21%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 112.49% 115.87% 99.91% 77.15% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 45.06% 106.61% 119.30% 110.37%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 113.86% 116.93% 100.05% 69.64% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 32.59% 118.07% 124.80% 111.48%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 113.13% 115.91% 99.97% 78.43% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 47.62% 115.55% 123.74% 110.91%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 113.59% 116.60% 100.43% 79.78% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 53.69% 117.88% 125.34% 111.47%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 114.04% 117.03% 100.89% 81.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 63.77% 120.62% 126.84% 111.97%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 114.17% 117.25% 101.03% 81.68% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 68.29% 121.33% 127.36% 112.14%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 115.17% 118.37% 101.69% 78.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 58.66% 151.03% 144.06% 113.63%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 114.44% 116.78% 101.73% 87.53% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 79.33% 147.59% 142.49% 112.94%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 114.85% 117.38% 102.11% 88.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 87.07% 150.11% 143.78% 113.43%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 115.26% 118.38% 102.53% 90.24% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 94.93% 152.14% 145.18% 114.01%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 115.41% 118.58% 102.68% 90.69% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.61% 152.45% 145.48% 114.18%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 115.06% 117.44% 102.10% 88.63% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.28% 152.91% 145.32% 113.61%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 115.40% 117.94% 102.50% 90.26% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 97.36% 154.92% 146.65% 114.05%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 115.82% 118.51% 102.93% 91.41% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 105.82% 157.02% 148.01% 114.54%

235

Table 4 - Appx.D - 10 Monthly cooling load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in LA.

Table 4 - Appx.D - 11 Monthly total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in LA.

LA COOLING MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 28.29% 23.24% 72.63% 86.73% 0.00% 0.00% 76.69% 78.13% 55.25% 48.87% 45.84% 32.46% 67.59%
LA_DSF_MS 45.40% 13.26% 68.08% 85.27% 0.00% 0.00% 71.02% 52.78% 52.29% 53.48% 53.11% 24.99% 67.81%
LA_DSF_CO 52.84% 13.14% 75.32% 85.04% 0.00% 0.00% 77.70% 61.04% 54.13% 52.55% 52.01% 23.13% 68.64%
LA_DSF_SB 42.61% 11.77% 65.60% 85.22% 0.00% 0.00% 69.06% 51.95% 50.65% 51.29% 50.70% 22.32% 66.54%
LA_DSF_BW 61.99% 14.53% 80.25% 87.02% 0.00% 0.00% 83.78% 68.53% 56.53% 55.64% 56.04% 25.36% 71.81%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 53.51% 13.45% 76.34% 85.71% 0.00% 0.00% 79.96% 62.68% 55.10% 53.26% 52.66% 23.46% 69.47%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 53.21% 13.32% 75.92% 85.46% 0.00% 0.00% 79.16% 62.01% 54.66% 52.99% 52.39% 23.29% 69.15%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 52.91% 13.15% 75.38% 85.20% 0.00% 0.00% 78.41% 61.34% 54.25% 52.68% 52.07% 23.08% 68.80%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 41.17% 10.46% 66.91% 83.59% 0.00% 0.00% 66.96% 53.81% 46.69% 48.14% 47.66% 19.31% 64.37%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 44.81% 12.01% 69.89% 84.28% 0.00% 0.00% 71.06% 55.72% 49.47% 50.69% 50.30% 22.64% 66.33%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 44.42% 11.84% 69.44% 83.99% 0.00% 0.00% 70.50% 55.21% 49.11% 50.40% 50.08% 22.46% 66.02%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 43.89% 11.68% 68.99% 83.73% 0.00% 0.00% 69.77% 54.72% 48.70% 50.21% 49.87% 22.29% 65.71%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 44.17% 11.62% 68.81% 83.60% 0.00% 0.00% 69.55% 54.41% 48.54% 50.09% 49.78% 22.27% 65.59%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 40.48% 10.23% 66.27% 83.76% 0.00% 0.00% 67.39% 53.37% 47.28% 48.35% 47.77% 19.62% 64.53%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 44.17% 12.02% 69.81% 84.61% 0.00% 0.00% 71.20% 55.58% 50.17% 51.36% 50.77% 22.39% 66.69%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 43.74% 11.88% 69.39% 84.39% 0.00% 0.00% 70.65% 55.11% 49.83% 51.09% 50.51% 22.24% 66.41%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 43.28% 11.73% 68.98% 84.17% 0.00% 0.00% 69.66% 54.59% 49.48% 50.75% 50.28% 22.10% 66.08%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 43.17% 11.63% 68.77% 84.02% 0.00% 0.00% 69.14% 54.27% 49.26% 50.69% 50.14% 22.08% 65.91%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 43.39% 12.00% 65.85% 85.33% 0.00% 0.00% 69.12% 52.08% 50.96% 51.66% 51.09% 22.66% 66.77%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 47.60% 14.20% 69.68% 86.23% 0.00% 0.00% 73.15% 54.59% 54.04% 54.93% 54.47% 26.10% 69.13%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 47.09% 13.98% 69.28% 85.99% 0.00% 0.00% 72.64% 54.07% 53.66% 54.68% 54.25% 25.98% 68.85%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 46.62% 13.85% 68.83% 85.74% 0.00% 0.00% 72.08% 52.98% 53.36% 54.46% 53.96% 25.87% 68.54%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 46.51% 13.79% 68.56% 85.57% 0.00% 0.00% 70.85% 52.22% 53.12% 54.37% 53.89% 25.88% 68.31%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 46.50% 15.34% 69.36% 86.15% 0.00% 0.00% 73.39% 54.46% 54.53% 55.24% 53.94% 26.58% 69.09%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 46.24% 13.85% 69.03% 85.87% 0.00% 0.00% 72.49% 53.89% 53.33% 54.28% 53.68% 25.57% 68.56%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 45.84% 13.61% 68.57% 85.62% 0.00% 0.00% 71.94% 52.79% 53.02% 54.04% 53.60% 25.46% 68.30%
LA_DECS_BEST 41.17% 10.23% 66.27% 83.59% 0.00% 0.00% 66.96% 51.95% 46.69% 48.14% 47.66% 19.31% 64.32%
LA TOTAL EUI MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 104.97% 104.26% 103.48% 103.07% 104.15% 103.72% 103.09% 103.81% 102.74% 102.61% 101.82% 104.11% 103.50%
LA_DSF_MS 102.92% 103.56% 103.22% 103.96% 107.27% 107.55% 106.60% 105.56% 102.33% 101.64% 100.14% 101.61% 103.81%
LA_DSF_CO 103.78% 104.42% 104.46% 105.62% 108.21% 107.99% 107.58% 107.61% 104.57% 103.28% 101.46% 103.25% 105.13%
LA_DSF_SB 102.49% 103.01% 102.59% 103.00% 105.74% 106.17% 104.67% 103.96% 101.30% 100.94% 99.60% 101.04% 102.84%
LA_DSF_BW 102.86% 103.84% 103.76% 105.20% 107.83% 107.64% 107.19% 107.03% 103.88% 102.84% 101.17% 102.74% 104.60%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 103.60% 104.28% 104.28% 105.46% 107.99% 107.76% 107.33% 107.34% 104.34% 103.16% 101.40% 103.16% 104.95%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 103.67% 104.33% 104.34% 105.52% 108.07% 107.84% 107.41% 107.43% 104.41% 103.20% 101.42% 103.19% 105.01%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 103.75% 104.39% 104.41% 105.57% 108.14% 107.92% 107.51% 107.53% 104.49% 103.24% 101.44% 103.22% 105.08%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 102.16% 102.83% 102.45% 102.84% 105.68% 106.12% 104.55% 103.90% 101.20% 100.85% 99.44% 100.83% 102.70%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 102.48% 103.32% 102.93% 103.57% 106.74% 106.96% 105.91% 105.01% 101.97% 101.46% 100.01% 101.42% 103.43%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 102.54% 103.37% 103.00% 103.67% 106.94% 107.17% 106.16% 105.21% 102.08% 101.51% 100.02% 101.44% 103.54%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 102.61% 103.43% 103.07% 103.78% 107.13% 107.38% 106.40% 105.42% 102.20% 101.56% 100.04% 101.47% 103.65%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 102.64% 103.46% 103.14% 103.88% 107.30% 107.56% 106.62% 105.61% 102.31% 101.61% 100.06% 101.49% 103.75%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 102.39% 103.03% 102.60% 103.03% 105.95% 106.36% 104.95% 104.18% 101.40% 101.00% 99.61% 101.02% 102.92%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 102.79% 103.54% 103.11% 103.80% 106.98% 107.11% 106.17% 105.32% 102.17% 101.64% 100.17% 101.66% 103.65%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 102.85% 103.59% 103.18% 103.89% 107.15% 107.30% 106.38% 105.51% 102.28% 101.69% 100.19% 101.68% 103.76%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 102.91% 103.64% 103.25% 104.00% 107.32% 107.48% 106.59% 105.70% 102.39% 101.74% 100.21% 101.71% 103.86%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 102.94% 103.67% 103.31% 104.09% 107.48% 107.65% 106.78% 105.88% 102.50% 101.79% 100.22% 101.73% 103.95%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 102.42% 102.95% 102.54% 102.97% 105.69% 106.13% 104.59% 103.91% 101.26% 100.91% 99.57% 100.99% 102.79%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 102.72% 103.36% 102.99% 103.63% 106.65% 106.90% 105.83% 104.90% 101.96% 101.47% 100.09% 101.51% 103.45%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 102.78% 103.41% 103.06% 103.74% 106.85% 107.12% 106.09% 105.10% 102.07% 101.52% 100.10% 101.53% 103.57%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 102.84% 103.48% 103.14% 103.85% 107.06% 107.34% 106.35% 105.32% 102.20% 101.58% 100.12% 101.56% 103.68%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 102.87% 103.51% 103.20% 103.95% 107.24% 107.54% 106.57% 105.52% 102.31% 101.63% 100.13% 101.58% 103.78%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 102.81% 103.43% 103.03% 103.67% 106.70% 106.92% 105.88% 104.96% 102.00% 101.51% 100.11% 101.57% 103.50%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 102.87% 103.48% 103.11% 103.78% 106.91% 107.15% 106.14% 105.17% 102.12% 101.56% 100.13% 101.60% 103.62%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 102.93% 103.53% 103.18% 103.89% 107.11% 107.37% 106.40% 105.39% 102.24% 101.61% 100.15% 101.63% 103.73%
236

LA hottest day results
LA ELECTRICITY USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY JuLY 31st
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.48% 102.61% 110.46% 103.12% 97.95% 96.12% 91.26% 99.23% 104.29% 105.26% 109.26% 103.56% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.21% 103.90% 115.71% 111.08% 94.16% 95.23% 94.02% 106.48% 112.81% 113.28% 114.83% 105.33% 100.46% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.21% 103.90% 115.88% 113.24% 99.01% 99.22% 97.27% 110.05% 114.08% 113.48% 114.83% 105.33% 100.46% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.03% 103.90% 114.86% 107.31% 91.02% 92.83% 91.84% 102.64% 108.67% 108.50% 110.81% 104.05% 100.35% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.16% 103.90% 115.65% 112.38% 99.71% 99.85% 98.52% 110.00% 113.03% 112.12% 113.67% 104.96% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.18% 103.90% 115.72% 112.75% 99.17% 99.51% 97.72% 109.94% 113.38% 112.48% 113.97% 105.05% 100.44% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.19% 103.90% 115.77% 112.92% 99.11% 99.40% 97.55% 109.97% 113.62% 112.82% 114.26% 105.15% 100.45% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.20% 103.90% 115.83% 113.09% 99.04% 99.29% 97.37% 110.00% 113.87% 113.18% 114.57% 105.25% 100.46% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.03% 103.90% 114.84% 107.10% 91.76% 92.05% 90.30% 101.73% 108.51% 108.42% 110.75% 104.03% 100.36% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.11% 103.90% 115.30% 109.87% 94.87% 95.17% 93.26% 105.35% 111.03% 110.69% 112.58% 104.61% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 103.90% 115.45% 110.31% 94.90% 95.08% 93.11% 105.58% 111.65% 111.58% 113.35% 104.86% 100.42% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.18% 103.90% 115.59% 110.76% 94.95% 94.97% 92.96% 105.81% 112.29% 112.49% 114.14% 105.11% 100.45% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.21% 103.90% 115.72% 111.16% 95.00% 94.91% 92.87% 106.03% 112.85% 113.29% 114.83% 105.33% 100.47% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.05% 103.90% 114.96% 107.94% 91.84% 93.12% 91.25% 102.89% 109.24% 109.02% 111.23% 104.18% 100.36% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.12% 103.90% 115.38% 110.42% 94.63% 95.90% 94.00% 106.15% 111.47% 111.03% 112.84% 104.70% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 103.90% 115.51% 110.81% 94.66% 95.81% 93.87% 106.35% 112.02% 111.81% 113.52% 104.91% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.19% 103.90% 115.64% 111.21% 95.03% 95.64% 93.64% 106.52% 112.59% 112.62% 114.22% 105.13% 100.45% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.21% 103.90% 115.75% 111.55% 94.97% 95.55% 93.54% 106.71% 113.08% 113.33% 114.83% 105.33% 100.47% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.03% 103.90% 114.83% 107.13% 91.61% 92.66% 91.76% 102.43% 108.53% 108.41% 110.75% 104.03% 100.36% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.11% 103.90% 115.27% 109.66% 93.73% 95.53% 94.58% 105.76% 110.84% 110.52% 112.45% 104.57% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.90% 115.42% 110.12% 93.79% 95.43% 94.44% 106.01% 111.50% 111.47% 113.26% 104.83% 100.42% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.18% 103.90% 115.57% 110.60% 93.80% 95.33% 94.30% 106.26% 112.17% 112.44% 114.10% 105.10% 100.45% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.21% 103.90% 115.71% 111.01% 94.14% 95.23% 94.17% 106.48% 112.77% 113.28% 114.83% 105.33% 100.47% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.11% 103.90% 115.27% 109.76% 93.90% 95.71% 94.85% 105.95% 110.91% 110.55% 112.46% 104.58% 100.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.90% 115.43% 110.25% 94.25% 95.57% 94.52% 106.16% 111.58% 111.51% 113.29% 104.84% 100.42% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.18% 103.90% 115.58% 110.72% 94.24% 95.45% 94.34% 106.40% 112.25% 112.46% 114.11% 105.10% 100.44% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Table 4 - Appx.D - 12 Electricity load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in LA.

237

LA ELECTRICITY USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY JuLY 31st
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.48% 102.61% 110.46% 103.12% 97.95% 96.12% 91.26% 99.23% 104.29% 105.26% 109.26% 103.56% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.21% 103.90% 115.71% 111.08% 94.16% 95.23% 94.02% 106.48% 112.81% 113.28% 114.83% 105.33% 100.46% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.21% 103.90% 115.88% 113.24% 99.01% 99.22% 97.27% 110.05% 114.08% 113.48% 114.83% 105.33% 100.46% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.03% 103.90% 114.86% 107.31% 91.02% 92.83% 91.84% 102.64% 108.67% 108.50% 110.81% 104.05% 100.35% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.16% 103.90% 115.65% 112.38% 99.71% 99.85% 98.52% 110.00% 113.03% 112.12% 113.67% 104.96% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.18% 103.90% 115.72% 112.75% 99.17% 99.51% 97.72% 109.94% 113.38% 112.48% 113.97% 105.05% 100.44% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.19% 103.90% 115.77% 112.92% 99.11% 99.40% 97.55% 109.97% 113.62% 112.82% 114.26% 105.15% 100.45% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.20% 103.90% 115.83% 113.09% 99.04% 99.29% 97.37% 110.00% 113.87% 113.18% 114.57% 105.25% 100.46% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.03% 103.90% 114.84% 107.10% 91.76% 92.05% 90.30% 101.73% 108.51% 108.42% 110.75% 104.03% 100.36% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.11% 103.90% 115.30% 109.87% 94.87% 95.17% 93.26% 105.35% 111.03% 110.69% 112.58% 104.61% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 103.90% 115.45% 110.31% 94.90% 95.08% 93.11% 105.58% 111.65% 111.58% 113.35% 104.86% 100.42% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.18% 103.90% 115.59% 110.76% 94.95% 94.97% 92.96% 105.81% 112.29% 112.49% 114.14% 105.11% 100.45% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.21% 103.90% 115.72% 111.16% 95.00% 94.91% 92.87% 106.03% 112.85% 113.29% 114.83% 105.33% 100.47% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.05% 103.90% 114.96% 107.94% 91.84% 93.12% 91.25% 102.89% 109.24% 109.02% 111.23% 104.18% 100.36% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.12% 103.90% 115.38% 110.42% 94.63% 95.90% 94.00% 106.15% 111.47% 111.03% 112.84% 104.70% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 103.90% 115.51% 110.81% 94.66% 95.81% 93.87% 106.35% 112.02% 111.81% 113.52% 104.91% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.19% 103.90% 115.64% 111.21% 95.03% 95.64% 93.64% 106.52% 112.59% 112.62% 114.22% 105.13% 100.45% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.21% 103.90% 115.75% 111.55% 94.97% 95.55% 93.54% 106.71% 113.08% 113.33% 114.83% 105.33% 100.47% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.03% 103.90% 114.83% 107.13% 91.61% 92.66% 91.76% 102.43% 108.53% 108.41% 110.75% 104.03% 100.36% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.11% 103.90% 115.27% 109.66% 93.73% 95.53% 94.58% 105.76% 110.84% 110.52% 112.45% 104.57% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.90% 115.42% 110.12% 93.79% 95.43% 94.44% 106.01% 111.50% 111.47% 113.26% 104.83% 100.42% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.18% 103.90% 115.57% 110.60% 93.80% 95.33% 94.30% 106.26% 112.17% 112.44% 114.10% 105.10% 100.45% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.21% 103.90% 115.71% 111.01% 94.14% 95.23% 94.17% 106.48% 112.77% 113.28% 114.83% 105.33% 100.47% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.11% 103.90% 115.27% 109.76% 93.90% 95.71% 94.85% 105.95% 110.91% 110.55% 112.46% 104.58% 100.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.90% 115.43% 110.25% 94.25% 95.57% 94.52% 106.16% 111.58% 111.51% 113.29% 104.84% 100.42% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.18% 103.90% 115.58% 110.72% 94.24% 95.45% 94.34% 106.40% 112.25% 112.46% 114.11% 105.10% 100.44% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
238

Table 4 - Appx.D - 13 Cooling load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in
LA.

LA COOLING USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY JuLY 31st
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 89% 88% 75% 58% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_MS 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 75% 63% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_CO 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 77% 85% 77% 69% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_SB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 70% 82% 74% 60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_BW 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 80% 86% 80% 75% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 78% 85% 78% 71% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 77% 85% 78% 70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 77% 85% 77% 69% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 73% 81% 71% 54% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 74% 82% 73% 59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 74% 82% 73% 58% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 74% 82% 72% 58% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 74% 82% 72% 57% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 71% 81% 71% 55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 74% 61% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 73% 60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 73% 82% 73% 59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 82% 73% 59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 82% 74% 60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 76% 65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 76% 65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 71% 83% 76% 64% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 75% 64% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 77% 66% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 76% 65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 75% 64% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

239

LA COOLING USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY JuLY 31st
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 89% 88% 75% 58% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_MS 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 75% 63% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_CO 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 77% 85% 77% 69% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_SB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 70% 82% 74% 60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_BW 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 80% 86% 80% 75% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 78% 85% 78% 71% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 77% 85% 78% 70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 77% 85% 77% 69% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 73% 81% 71% 54% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 74% 82% 73% 59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 74% 82% 73% 58% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 74% 82% 72% 58% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 74% 82% 72% 57% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 71% 81% 71% 55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 74% 61% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 73% 60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 73% 82% 73% 59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 82% 73% 59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 82% 74% 60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 76% 65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 76% 65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 71% 83% 76% 64% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 75% 64% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 77% 66% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 76% 65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72% 83% 75% 64% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
240

Table 4 - Appx.D - 14 Total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in LA.

LA TOTAL EUI USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY JuLY 31st
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.45% 102.44% 109.97% 102.93% 98.02% 96.24% 91.95% 99.29% 104.05% 104.98% 108.66% 103.32% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 114.97% 110.40% 94.38% 95.39% 94.49% 106.00% 112.11% 112.56% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 115.12% 112.43% 99.05% 99.24% 97.48% 109.29% 113.32% 112.74% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.99% 103.65% 114.15% 106.86% 91.35% 93.07% 92.48% 102.44% 108.20% 108.04% 110.10% 103.78% 100.32% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.11% 103.66% 114.91% 111.61% 99.72% 99.85% 98.64% 109.25% 112.32% 111.46% 112.78% 104.63% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.13% 103.66% 114.97% 111.96% 99.20% 99.53% 97.90% 109.19% 112.66% 111.80% 113.05% 104.72% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.66% 115.02% 112.12% 99.15% 99.42% 97.74% 109.22% 112.88% 112.12% 113.33% 104.80% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.16% 103.66% 115.08% 112.29% 99.07% 99.31% 97.58% 109.25% 113.12% 112.46% 113.62% 104.89% 100.42% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.98% 103.65% 114.13% 106.66% 92.06% 92.31% 91.06% 101.60% 108.05% 107.96% 110.05% 103.76% 100.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.07% 103.65% 114.58% 109.27% 95.06% 95.33% 93.79% 104.95% 110.43% 110.11% 111.76% 104.30% 100.37% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.10% 103.66% 114.71% 109.68% 95.09% 95.24% 93.66% 105.16% 111.02% 110.95% 112.48% 104.53% 100.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.66% 114.85% 110.10% 95.14% 95.13% 93.51% 105.37% 111.62% 111.81% 113.21% 104.77% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 114.97% 110.47% 95.18% 95.08% 93.43% 105.58% 112.15% 112.57% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.00% 103.65% 114.25% 107.45% 92.14% 93.35% 91.93% 102.67% 108.74% 108.53% 110.49% 103.90% 100.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.08% 103.65% 114.65% 109.78% 94.82% 96.03% 94.48% 105.69% 110.85% 110.43% 112.00% 104.38% 100.37% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.11% 103.66% 114.77% 110.14% 94.85% 95.94% 94.35% 105.88% 111.37% 111.17% 112.63% 104.58% 100.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.66% 114.89% 110.51% 95.21% 95.79% 94.14% 106.03% 111.91% 111.94% 113.29% 104.79% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 115.00% 110.84% 95.16% 95.70% 94.05% 106.21% 112.37% 112.60% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.98% 103.65% 114.13% 106.69% 91.92% 92.90% 92.41% 102.25% 108.07% 107.96% 110.04% 103.76% 100.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.06% 103.65% 114.54% 109.06% 93.96% 95.68% 95.01% 105.33% 110.25% 109.95% 111.63% 104.26% 100.37% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.10% 103.66% 114.69% 109.50% 94.02% 95.58% 94.88% 105.56% 110.87% 110.84% 112.39% 104.51% 100.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.13% 103.66% 114.83% 109.94% 94.03% 95.48% 94.74% 105.79% 111.51% 111.76% 113.18% 104.75% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 114.96% 110.33% 94.36% 95.39% 94.63% 106.00% 112.07% 112.56% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.06% 103.65% 114.55% 109.16% 94.12% 95.85% 95.25% 105.50% 110.31% 109.98% 111.65% 104.27% 100.36% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.10% 103.66% 114.70% 109.62% 94.46% 95.72% 94.95% 105.70% 110.96% 110.88% 112.42% 104.51% 100.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.13% 103.66% 114.84% 110.06% 94.45% 95.60% 94.79% 105.92% 111.58% 111.78% 113.18% 104.76% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

241

LA TOTAL EUI USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY JuLY 31st
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.45% 102.44% 109.97% 102.93% 98.02% 96.24% 91.95% 99.29% 104.05% 104.98% 108.66% 103.32% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 114.97% 110.40% 94.38% 95.39% 94.49% 106.00% 112.11% 112.56% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 115.12% 112.43% 99.05% 99.24% 97.48% 109.29% 113.32% 112.74% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.99% 103.65% 114.15% 106.86% 91.35% 93.07% 92.48% 102.44% 108.20% 108.04% 110.10% 103.78% 100.32% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.11% 103.66% 114.91% 111.61% 99.72% 99.85% 98.64% 109.25% 112.32% 111.46% 112.78% 104.63% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.13% 103.66% 114.97% 111.96% 99.20% 99.53% 97.90% 109.19% 112.66% 111.80% 113.05% 104.72% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.66% 115.02% 112.12% 99.15% 99.42% 97.74% 109.22% 112.88% 112.12% 113.33% 104.80% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.16% 103.66% 115.08% 112.29% 99.07% 99.31% 97.58% 109.25% 113.12% 112.46% 113.62% 104.89% 100.42% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.98% 103.65% 114.13% 106.66% 92.06% 92.31% 91.06% 101.60% 108.05% 107.96% 110.05% 103.76% 100.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.07% 103.65% 114.58% 109.27% 95.06% 95.33% 93.79% 104.95% 110.43% 110.11% 111.76% 104.30% 100.37% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.10% 103.66% 114.71% 109.68% 95.09% 95.24% 93.66% 105.16% 111.02% 110.95% 112.48% 104.53% 100.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.66% 114.85% 110.10% 95.14% 95.13% 93.51% 105.37% 111.62% 111.81% 113.21% 104.77% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 114.97% 110.47% 95.18% 95.08% 93.43% 105.58% 112.15% 112.57% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.00% 103.65% 114.25% 107.45% 92.14% 93.35% 91.93% 102.67% 108.74% 108.53% 110.49% 103.90% 100.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.08% 103.65% 114.65% 109.78% 94.82% 96.03% 94.48% 105.69% 110.85% 110.43% 112.00% 104.38% 100.37% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.11% 103.66% 114.77% 110.14% 94.85% 95.94% 94.35% 105.88% 111.37% 111.17% 112.63% 104.58% 100.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 103.66% 114.89% 110.51% 95.21% 95.79% 94.14% 106.03% 111.91% 111.94% 113.29% 104.79% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 115.00% 110.84% 95.16% 95.70% 94.05% 106.21% 112.37% 112.60% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.98% 103.65% 114.13% 106.69% 91.92% 92.90% 92.41% 102.25% 108.07% 107.96% 110.04% 103.76% 100.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.06% 103.65% 114.54% 109.06% 93.96% 95.68% 95.01% 105.33% 110.25% 109.95% 111.63% 104.26% 100.37% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.10% 103.66% 114.69% 109.50% 94.02% 95.58% 94.88% 105.56% 110.87% 110.84% 112.39% 104.51% 100.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.13% 103.66% 114.83% 109.94% 94.03% 95.48% 94.74% 105.79% 111.51% 111.76% 113.18% 104.75% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.17% 103.66% 114.96% 110.33% 94.36% 95.39% 94.63% 106.00% 112.07% 112.56% 113.86% 104.97% 100.43% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.06% 103.65% 114.55% 109.16% 94.12% 95.85% 95.25% 105.50% 110.31% 109.98% 111.65% 104.27% 100.36% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.10% 103.66% 114.70% 109.62% 94.46% 95.72% 94.95% 105.70% 110.96% 110.88% 112.42% 104.51% 100.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.13% 103.66% 114.84% 110.06% 94.45% 95.60% 94.79% 105.92% 111.58% 111.78% 113.18% 104.76% 100.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
242

LA coldest day results
Table 4 - Appx.D - 15 Gas load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in LA.

LA GAS USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 2nd
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.18% 6.93% 10.44% 11.64% 157.69% 307.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_MS 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.50% 4.85% 141.96% 243.56% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_CO 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.67% 2.36% 134.98% 203.78% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_SB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.12% 5.27% 143.78% 252.14% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_BW 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 120.26% 177.08% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.88% 132.89% 197.66% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.17% 2.11% 133.76% 199.73% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.54% 2.64% 134.65% 202.44% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.35% 136.78% 237.30% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.54% 134.16% 217.59% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.90% 134.90% 221.61% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.27% 135.67% 225.78% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.35% 135.91% 228.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.65% 3.43% 140.22% 246.69% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.77% 2.96% 137.40% 226.66% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.15% 3.15% 138.11% 230.68% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.52% 3.33% 138.83% 234.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.63% 3.37% 139.10% 237.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.77% 5.04% 142.96% 248.08% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.72% 4.48% 139.87% 228.30% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.99% 4.38% 140.58% 232.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.32% 4.68% 141.23% 236.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.41% 4.76% 141.47% 239.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.08% 4.68% 140.76% 233.54% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.35% 4.72% 141.46% 238.10% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.66% 5.00% 142.08% 241.95% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

243

LA GAS USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 2nd
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.18% 6.93% 10.44% 11.64% 157.69% 307.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_MS 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.50% 4.85% 141.96% 243.56% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_CO 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.67% 2.36% 134.98% 203.78% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_SB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.12% 5.27% 143.78% 252.14% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_BW 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 120.26% 177.08% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.88% 132.89% 197.66% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.17% 2.11% 133.76% 199.73% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.54% 2.64% 134.65% 202.44% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.35% 136.78% 237.30% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.54% 134.16% 217.59% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.90% 134.90% 221.61% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.27% 135.67% 225.78% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.35% 135.91% 228.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.65% 3.43% 140.22% 246.69% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.77% 2.96% 137.40% 226.66% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.15% 3.15% 138.11% 230.68% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.52% 3.33% 138.83% 234.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.63% 3.37% 139.10% 237.41% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.77% 5.04% 142.96% 248.08% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.72% 4.48% 139.87% 228.30% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.99% 4.38% 140.58% 232.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.32% 4.68% 141.23% 236.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.41% 4.76% 141.47% 239.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.08% 4.68% 140.76% 233.54% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.35% 4.72% 141.46% 238.10% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.66% 5.00% 142.08% 241.95% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
244

Table 4 - Appx.D - 16 Heating load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in
LA.

LA HEATING COLDEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 32.11% 0.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_MS 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 33.50% 41.62% 89.23% 70.25% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_CO 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.40% 20.23% 84.45% 51.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_SB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 29.83% 45.29% 90.47% 74.24% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_BW 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 74.37% 39.25% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16.16% 83.02% 48.85% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.61% 18.14% 83.61% 49.81% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5.12% 22.68% 84.22% 51.08% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 20.19% 85.68% 67.33% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 13.26% 83.89% 58.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16.32% 84.39% 60.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 19.51% 84.92% 61.95% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 20.21% 85.09% 63.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 15.84% 29.44% 88.04% 71.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 7.40% 25.45% 86.11% 62.37% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 11.00% 27.02% 86.59% 64.24% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 14.54% 28.57% 87.08% 66.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 15.64% 28.98% 87.27% 67.38% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 26.52% 43.25% 89.92% 72.35% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16.46% 38.45% 87.80% 63.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 28.60% 37.65% 88.29% 65.12% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 31.81% 40.19% 88.73% 66.97% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 32.66% 40.85% 88.90% 68.30% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 19.96% 40.18% 88.41% 65.57% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 32.05% 40.52% 88.89% 67.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 35.06% 42.94% 89.31% 69.49% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

245

LA HEATING COLDEST DAY COMPARISON
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 32.11% 0.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_MS 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 33.50% 41.62% 89.23% 70.25% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_CO 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.40% 20.23% 84.45% 51.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_SB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 29.83% 45.29% 90.47% 74.24% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DSF_BW 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 74.37% 39.25% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16.16% 83.02% 48.85% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.61% 18.14% 83.61% 49.81% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5.12% 22.68% 84.22% 51.08% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 20.19% 85.68% 67.33% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 13.26% 83.89% 58.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16.32% 84.39% 60.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 19.51% 84.92% 61.95% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 20.21% 85.09% 63.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 15.84% 29.44% 88.04% 71.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 7.40% 25.45% 86.11% 62.37% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 11.00% 27.02% 86.59% 64.24% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 14.54% 28.57% 87.08% 66.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 15.64% 28.98% 87.27% 67.38% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 26.52% 43.25% 89.92% 72.35% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16.46% 38.45% 87.80% 63.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 28.60% 37.65% 88.29% 65.12% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 31.81% 40.19% 88.73% 66.97% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 32.66% 40.85% 88.90% 68.30% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 19.96% 40.18% 88.41% 65.57% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 32.05% 40.52% 88.89% 67.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 35.06% 42.94% 89.31% 69.49% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
246

Table 4 - Appx.D - 17 Total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in LA.
LA TOTAL EUI USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 2nd
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.68% 105.33% 108.03% 108.95% 111.20% 110.54% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.91% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.69% 103.73% 108.56% 107.29% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.60% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.51% 101.81% 107.48% 105.27% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.40% 104.06% 108.75% 107.73% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 104.95% 103.92% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.88% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.45% 107.11% 104.96% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.93% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.13% 101.62% 107.26% 105.07% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.95% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.41% 102.03% 107.42% 105.20% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.97% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.81% 107.56% 106.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.17% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.19% 107.22% 105.97% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.46% 107.35% 106.18% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.56% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.75% 107.49% 106.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.60% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.81% 107.54% 106.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.63% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.27% 102.64% 108.16% 107.45% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.21% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.59% 102.28% 107.77% 106.44% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.56% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.88% 102.42% 107.90% 106.64% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.59% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.17% 102.56% 108.04% 106.85% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.63% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.26% 102.60% 108.09% 106.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.65% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.13% 103.87% 108.62% 107.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.17% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.32% 103.44% 108.18% 106.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.50% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.30% 103.37% 108.31% 106.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.55% 103.60% 108.44% 106.94% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.62% 103.66% 108.48% 107.08% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.60% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.60% 103.60% 108.32% 106.78% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.49% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.57% 103.63% 108.45% 107.02% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.82% 103.84% 108.57% 107.21% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

247

LA TOTAL EUI USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 2nd
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
LA_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.68% 105.33% 108.03% 108.95% 111.20% 110.54% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.91% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.69% 103.73% 108.56% 107.29% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.60% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.51% 101.81% 107.48% 105.27% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.40% 104.06% 108.75% 107.73% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 104.95% 103.92% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.88% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.45% 107.11% 104.96% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.93% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.13% 101.62% 107.26% 105.07% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.95% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.41% 102.03% 107.42% 105.20% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.97% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.81% 107.56% 106.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.17% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.19% 107.22% 105.97% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.46% 107.35% 106.18% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.56% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.75% 107.49% 106.39% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.60% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.81% 107.54% 106.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.63% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.27% 102.64% 108.16% 107.45% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.21% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.59% 102.28% 107.77% 106.44% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.56% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.88% 102.42% 107.90% 106.64% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.59% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.17% 102.56% 108.04% 106.85% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.63% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.26% 102.60% 108.09% 106.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.65% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.13% 103.87% 108.62% 107.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.17% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.32% 103.44% 108.18% 106.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.50% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.30% 103.37% 108.31% 106.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.55% 103.60% 108.44% 106.94% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.62% 103.66% 108.48% 107.08% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.60% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.60% 103.60% 108.32% 106.78% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.49% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.57% 103.63% 108.45% 107.02% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
LA_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.82% 103.84% 108.57% 107.21% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
248

New York
NY monthly results
Table 4 - Appx.D - 18 Monthly electricity load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in NY.

NY ELECTRICITY MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.97% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 103.84% 103.66% 103.45% 103.20% 104.37% 103.91% 103.26% 104.03% 102.88% 102.74% 101.78% 103.85% 100.67%
NY_DSF_MS 101.66% 103.07% 103.40% 104.19% 107.67% 107.95% 106.96% 105.87% 102.45% 101.73% 100.11% 101.43% 100.88%
NY_DSF_CO 103.65% 104.47% 105.09% 105.98% 108.66% 108.41% 107.99% 108.03% 104.80% 103.45% 101.52% 103.33% 102.45%
NY_DSF_SB 101.17% 102.47% 102.74% 103.20% 106.05% 106.50% 104.92% 104.18% 101.37% 100.99% 99.53% 100.82% 100.10%
NY_DSF_BW 103.19% 104.16% 104.63% 105.57% 108.26% 108.04% 107.58% 107.42% 104.07% 102.99% 101.24% 102.91% 102.53%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 103.58% 104.41% 104.95% 105.82% 108.43% 108.17% 107.73% 107.75% 104.56% 103.33% 101.47% 103.27% 102.49%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 103.60% 104.43% 104.99% 105.87% 108.51% 108.25% 107.82% 107.85% 104.64% 103.37% 101.48% 103.29% 102.47%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 103.63% 104.45% 105.04% 105.93% 108.59% 108.34% 107.91% 107.95% 104.72% 103.41% 101.50% 103.31% 102.46%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 101.13% 102.42% 102.71% 103.06% 105.98% 106.44% 104.80% 104.11% 101.26% 100.89% 99.41% 100.77% 99.85%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 101.62% 103.01% 103.25% 103.81% 107.11% 107.33% 106.23% 105.29% 102.07% 101.54% 100.01% 101.40% 100.66%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 101.64% 103.04% 103.31% 103.91% 107.31% 107.55% 106.49% 105.50% 102.19% 101.59% 100.02% 101.42% 100.68%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 101.66% 103.07% 103.37% 104.02% 107.52% 107.77% 106.75% 105.73% 102.31% 101.65% 100.04% 101.44% 100.71%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 101.69% 103.10% 103.44% 104.13% 107.70% 107.97% 106.98% 105.93% 102.43% 101.70% 100.05% 101.46% 100.73%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 101.24% 102.58% 102.85% 103.25% 106.27% 106.70% 105.22% 104.41% 101.47% 101.05% 99.57% 100.93% 100.05%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 101.79% 103.19% 103.40% 104.04% 107.36% 107.49% 106.50% 105.62% 102.28% 101.73% 100.17% 101.61% 100.89%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 101.81% 103.22% 103.46% 104.14% 107.54% 107.68% 106.72% 105.82% 102.40% 101.78% 100.18% 101.63% 100.90%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 101.83% 103.25% 103.52% 104.24% 107.72% 107.88% 106.95% 106.02% 102.52% 101.83% 100.20% 101.65% 100.92%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 101.86% 103.27% 103.58% 104.34% 107.88% 108.05% 107.15% 106.20% 102.63% 101.88% 100.22% 101.66% 100.94%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 101.14% 102.43% 102.71% 103.17% 106.00% 106.45% 104.84% 104.12% 101.33% 100.96% 99.51% 100.79% 100.09%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 101.57% 102.96% 103.20% 103.85% 107.01% 107.26% 106.15% 105.17% 102.06% 101.55% 100.05% 101.34% 100.84%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 101.59% 102.99% 103.26% 103.96% 107.22% 107.49% 106.42% 105.39% 102.18% 101.60% 100.07% 101.36% 100.86%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 101.61% 103.02% 103.33% 104.07% 107.44% 107.73% 106.70% 105.62% 102.31% 101.66% 100.08% 101.38% 100.88%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 101.64% 103.05% 103.39% 104.18% 107.64% 107.94% 106.93% 105.83% 102.43% 101.72% 100.10% 101.40% 100.91%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 101.60% 103.00% 103.23% 103.88% 107.06% 107.29% 106.20% 105.23% 102.11% 101.59% 100.08% 101.39% 100.85%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 101.63% 103.03% 103.29% 104.00% 107.28% 107.53% 106.48% 105.46% 102.22% 101.64% 100.10% 101.41% 100.87%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 101.65% 103.06% 103.36% 104.11% 107.50% 107.76% 106.75% 105.69% 102.35% 101.70% 100.11% 101.43% 100.90%

249

Table 4 - Appx.D - 19 Monthly gas load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in NY.

Table 4 - Appx.D - 20 Monthly heating load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in NY.

NY GAS MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 102.52% 103.21% 105.56% 105.64% 101.10% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.97% 121.27% 105.96% 104.19% 104.04%
NY_DSF_MS 103.57% 104.13% 106.44% 106.10% 99.49% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.89% 120.86% 106.47% 104.86% 104.86%
NY_DSF_CO 101.78% 102.25% 103.56% 102.81% 98.19% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.87% 115.82% 104.13% 102.93% 102.74%
NY_DSF_SB 103.28% 103.96% 105.89% 105.39% 98.90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.87% 120.52% 106.35% 104.68% 104.59%
NY_DSF_BW 100.51% 101.06% 101.51% 100.05% 96.26% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.80% 111.18% 102.12% 101.43% 101.19%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 101.49% 101.94% 103.02% 102.06% 97.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.85% 114.64% 103.63% 102.63% 102.37%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 101.65% 102.10% 103.28% 102.42% 97.82% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.85% 115.20% 103.90% 102.79% 102.56%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 101.81% 102.26% 103.55% 102.78% 98.06% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.86% 115.79% 104.17% 102.96% 102.76%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 103.09% 103.79% 105.73% 105.44% 97.82% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.82% 120.01% 106.26% 104.61% 104.45%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 103.15% 103.73% 105.85% 105.38% 97.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.83% 119.44% 106.05% 104.49% 104.41%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 103.28% 103.87% 106.04% 105.71% 98.12% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.84% 119.91% 106.21% 104.59% 104.56%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 103.38% 103.97% 106.21% 105.97% 98.26% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.84% 120.35% 106.36% 104.70% 104.68%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 103.38% 103.99% 106.26% 106.06% 98.36% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.84% 120.40% 106.36% 104.69% 104.70%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 103.27% 103.96% 106.06% 105.66% 98.07% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.84% 120.67% 106.49% 104.79% 104.66%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 103.33% 103.90% 106.07% 105.62% 98.35% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.85% 120.00% 106.23% 104.64% 104.59%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 103.42% 104.00% 106.25% 105.87% 98.51% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.85% 120.60% 106.38% 104.74% 104.72%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 103.51% 104.13% 106.45% 106.17% 98.68% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.86% 120.96% 106.65% 104.84% 104.86%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 103.52% 104.11% 106.49% 106.26% 98.76% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.86% 121.06% 106.67% 104.84% 104.87%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 103.16% 103.85% 105.70% 105.10% 98.77% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.86% 120.11% 106.15% 104.56% 104.45%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 103.26% 103.78% 105.90% 105.16% 99.10% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.88% 119.31% 105.96% 104.46% 104.44%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 103.35% 103.88% 106.07% 105.55% 99.24% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.88% 119.85% 106.10% 104.64% 104.58%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 103.49% 104.03% 106.24% 105.82% 99.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.89% 120.26% 106.31% 104.73% 104.73%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 103.50% 104.03% 106.29% 105.91% 99.47% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.89% 120.34% 106.32% 104.73% 104.74%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 103.35% 103.88% 106.06% 105.49% 99.22% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.88% 119.76% 106.10% 104.62% 104.57%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 103.47% 104.01% 106.20% 105.72% 99.36% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.89% 120.29% 106.30% 104.74% 104.71%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 103.55% 104.10% 106.37% 105.99% 99.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.89% 120.72% 106.44% 104.84% 104.83%
NY HEATING MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 102.53% 103.22% 105.62% 105.84% 108.94% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 89.79% 124.66% 106.04% 104.22% 104.10%
NY_DSF_MS 103.59% 104.15% 106.52% 106.32% 95.87% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 63.46% 124.19% 106.56% 104.89% 104.94%
NY_DSF_CO 101.79% 102.26% 103.60% 102.91% 85.30% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 55.37% 118.34% 104.18% 102.95% 102.79%
NY_DSF_SB 103.30% 103.98% 105.95% 105.59% 91.08% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 56.25% 123.79% 106.44% 104.72% 104.67%
NY_DSF_BW 100.51% 101.06% 101.53% 100.05% 69.56% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 32.88% 112.96% 102.15% 101.44% 101.21%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 101.50% 101.95% 103.05% 102.14% 80.25% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 49.93% 116.98% 103.68% 102.64% 102.41%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 101.66% 102.11% 103.31% 102.51% 82.27% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 51.62% 117.62% 103.95% 102.81% 102.60%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 101.82% 102.27% 103.59% 102.88% 84.18% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 53.90% 118.30% 104.22% 102.98% 102.81%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 103.10% 103.81% 105.80% 105.63% 82.23% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 40.76% 123.20% 106.35% 104.64% 104.52%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 103.17% 103.75% 105.91% 105.57% 83.54% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 44.61% 122.54% 106.13% 104.53% 104.48%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 103.30% 103.89% 106.10% 105.92% 84.69% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 46.29% 123.08% 106.29% 104.63% 104.64%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 103.39% 103.99% 106.28% 106.19% 85.86% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 47.63% 123.59% 106.44% 104.74% 104.76%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 103.40% 104.01% 106.33% 106.28% 86.63% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 47.77% 123.65% 106.44% 104.73% 104.78%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 103.29% 103.98% 106.12% 105.86% 84.26% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 45.43% 123.97% 106.58% 104.83% 104.73%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 103.35% 103.92% 106.14% 105.82% 86.59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 50.29% 123.19% 106.32% 104.67% 104.67%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 103.44% 104.02% 106.32% 106.08% 87.89% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 51.67% 123.88% 106.46% 104.77% 104.79%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 103.53% 104.15% 106.52% 106.39% 89.28% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 52.93% 124.30% 106.74% 104.87% 104.94%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 103.54% 104.13% 106.56% 106.48% 89.89% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 53.44% 124.42% 106.76% 104.88% 104.95%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 103.18% 103.87% 105.76% 105.28% 89.97% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 54.86% 123.31% 106.23% 104.59% 104.52%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 103.28% 103.80% 105.97% 105.34% 92.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 60.50% 122.39% 106.04% 104.50% 104.51%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 103.36% 103.90% 106.13% 105.75% 93.80% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 61.79% 123.01% 106.18% 104.67% 104.65%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 103.50% 104.04% 106.31% 106.03% 94.99% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 63.18% 123.49% 106.40% 104.76% 104.80%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 103.51% 104.05% 106.36% 106.12% 95.72% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 63.58% 123.58% 106.41% 104.77% 104.82%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 103.37% 103.90% 106.12% 105.69% 93.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 61.60% 122.91% 106.18% 104.66% 104.65%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 103.49% 104.03% 106.27% 105.93% 94.79% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 62.92% 123.52% 106.38% 104.77% 104.79%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 103.57% 104.12% 106.44% 106.21% 96.19% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 64.26% 124.03% 106.53% 104.87% 104.91%
250

Table 4 - Appx.D - 21 Monthly cooling load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in NY.

Table 4 - Appx.D - 22 Monthly total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in NY.

NY COOLING MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
NY_SSF_90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 25.98% 89.80% 91.01% 89.64% 87.55% 68.63% 18.83% 0.00% 0.00% 87.94%
NY_DSF_MS 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.32% 90.75% 91.53% 91.18% 89.23% 71.25% 8.52% 0.00% 0.00% 89.42%
NY_DSF_CO 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 23.95% 91.89% 92.64% 92.15% 90.39% 71.81% 4.67% 0.00% 0.00% 90.47%
NY_DSF_SB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 20.92% 90.46% 91.21% 90.92% 89.00% 69.99% 6.31% 0.00% 0.00% 89.11%
NY_DSF_BW 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 29.22% 94.18% 94.78% 94.38% 92.45% 75.52% 2.90% 0.00% 0.00% 92.69%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 25.02% 92.66% 93.35% 92.92% 91.09% 72.92% 4.85% 0.00% 0.00% 91.22%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 24.54% 92.38% 93.07% 92.65% 90.85% 72.49% 4.78% 0.00% 0.00% 90.96%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 24.04% 92.10% 92.82% 92.37% 90.59% 72.04% 4.68% 0.00% 0.00% 90.68%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.06% 89.12% 90.24% 89.93% 87.99% 68.05% 5.63% 0.00% 0.00% 88.07%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.69% 90.21% 91.34% 91.00% 88.95% 70.23% 7.52% 0.00% 0.00% 89.15%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.40% 89.99% 91.13% 90.79% 88.73% 69.86% 7.40% 0.00% 0.00% 88.92%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.11% 89.76% 90.92% 90.59% 88.50% 69.59% 7.27% 0.00% 0.00% 88.71%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.03% 89.60% 90.75% 90.37% 88.33% 69.34% 7.21% 0.00% 0.00% 88.52%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 20.44% 89.41% 90.42% 90.15% 88.16% 68.21% 5.81% 0.00% 0.00% 88.26%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.50% 90.64% 91.59% 91.28% 89.21% 70.71% 8.27% 0.00% 0.00% 89.43%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.25% 90.42% 91.35% 91.04% 88.99% 70.33% 8.16% 0.00% 0.00% 89.19%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.04% 90.18% 91.13% 90.80% 88.77% 69.98% 8.04% 0.00% 0.00% 88.96%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 20.92% 90.01% 90.95% 90.60% 88.61% 69.73% 7.99% 0.00% 0.00% 88.78%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.13% 90.54% 91.29% 91.03% 89.14% 70.28% 6.45% 0.00% 0.00% 89.24%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 22.80% 91.65% 92.40% 92.12% 90.16% 72.82% 9.49% 0.00% 0.00% 90.37%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 22.43% 91.43% 92.17% 91.88% 89.93% 72.45% 9.33% 0.00% 0.00% 90.13%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 22.01% 91.20% 91.95% 91.63% 89.71% 72.07% 9.15% 0.00% 0.00% 89.89%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.68% 91.02% 91.77% 91.43% 89.52% 71.85% 9.04% 0.00% 0.00% 89.70%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 22.37% 91.59% 92.32% 92.00% 90.03% 72.54% 11.31% 0.00% 0.00% 90.25%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 22.00% 91.35% 92.06% 91.75% 89.78% 72.13% 9.21% 0.00% 0.00% 89.99%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.52% 91.13% 91.84% 91.50% 89.55% 71.75% 9.02% 0.00% 0.00% 89.74%
NY_DECS_BEST Cooling 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 20.44% 89.12% 90.24% 89.93% 87.99% 68.05% 2.90% 0.00% 0.00% 77.16%
NY TOTAL EUI MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.80% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 103.84% 103.66% 103.45% 103.20% 104.37% 103.91% 103.26% 104.03% 102.88% 102.74% 101.78% 103.85% 103.07%
NY_DSF_MS 101.66% 103.07% 103.40% 104.19% 107.67% 107.95% 106.96% 105.87% 102.45% 101.73% 100.11% 101.43% 103.72%
NY_DSF_CO 103.65% 104.47% 105.09% 105.98% 108.66% 108.41% 107.99% 108.03% 104.80% 103.45% 101.52% 103.33% 102.66%
NY_DSF_SB 101.17% 102.47% 102.74% 103.20% 106.05% 106.50% 104.92% 104.18% 101.37% 100.99% 99.53% 100.82% 103.30%
NY_DSF_BW 103.19% 104.16% 104.63% 105.57% 108.26% 108.04% 107.58% 107.42% 104.07% 102.99% 101.24% 102.91% 101.58%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 103.58% 104.41% 104.95% 105.82% 108.43% 108.17% 107.73% 107.75% 104.56% 103.33% 101.47% 103.27% 102.40%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 103.60% 104.43% 104.99% 105.87% 108.51% 108.25% 107.82% 107.85% 104.64% 103.37% 101.48% 103.29% 102.54%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 103.63% 104.45% 105.04% 105.93% 108.59% 108.34% 107.91% 107.95% 104.72% 103.41% 101.50% 103.31% 102.67%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 101.13% 102.42% 102.71% 103.06% 105.98% 106.44% 104.80% 104.11% 101.26% 100.89% 99.41% 100.77% 103.13%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 101.62% 103.01% 103.25% 103.81% 107.11% 107.33% 106.23% 105.29% 102.07% 101.54% 100.01% 101.40% 103.34%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 101.64% 103.04% 103.31% 103.91% 107.31% 107.55% 106.49% 105.50% 102.19% 101.59% 100.02% 101.42% 103.45%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 101.66% 103.07% 103.37% 104.02% 107.52% 107.77% 106.75% 105.73% 102.31% 101.65% 100.04% 101.44% 103.54%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 101.69% 103.10% 103.44% 104.13% 107.70% 107.97% 106.98% 105.93% 102.43% 101.70% 100.05% 101.46% 103.56%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 101.24% 102.58% 102.85% 103.25% 106.27% 106.70% 105.22% 104.41% 101.47% 101.05% 99.57% 100.93% 103.34%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 101.79% 103.19% 103.40% 104.04% 107.36% 107.49% 106.50% 105.62% 102.28% 101.73% 100.17% 101.61% 103.53%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 101.81% 103.22% 103.46% 104.14% 107.54% 107.68% 106.72% 105.82% 102.40% 101.78% 100.18% 101.63% 103.62%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 101.83% 103.25% 103.52% 104.24% 107.72% 107.88% 106.95% 106.02% 102.52% 101.83% 100.20% 101.65% 103.73%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 101.86% 103.27% 103.58% 104.34% 107.88% 108.05% 107.15% 106.20% 102.63% 101.88% 100.22% 101.66% 103.74%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 101.14% 102.43% 102.71% 103.17% 106.00% 106.45% 104.84% 104.12% 101.33% 100.96% 99.51% 100.79% 103.20%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 101.57% 102.96% 103.20% 103.85% 107.01% 107.26% 106.15% 105.17% 102.06% 101.55% 100.05% 101.34% 103.41%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 101.59% 102.99% 103.26% 103.96% 107.22% 107.49% 106.42% 105.39% 102.18% 101.60% 100.07% 101.36% 103.51%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 101.61% 103.02% 103.33% 104.07% 107.44% 107.73% 106.70% 105.62% 102.31% 101.66% 100.08% 101.38% 103.63%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 101.64% 103.05% 103.39% 104.18% 107.64% 107.94% 106.93% 105.83% 102.43% 101.72% 100.10% 101.40% 103.65%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 101.60% 103.00% 103.23% 103.88% 107.06% 107.29% 106.20% 105.23% 102.11% 101.59% 100.08% 101.39% 103.50%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 101.63% 103.03% 103.29% 104.00% 107.28% 107.53% 106.48% 105.46% 102.22% 101.64% 100.10% 101.41% 103.61%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 101.65% 103.06% 103.36% 104.11% 107.50% 107.76% 106.75% 105.69% 102.35% 101.70% 100.11% 101.43% 103.70%

251

NY hottest day results
Table 4 - Appx.D - 23 Electricity load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in
NY .
NY ELECTRICITY USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY June 19th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.68% 94.29% 99.75% 99.96% 99.66% 99.53% 97.03% 98.16% 98.88% 100.79% 100.26% 96.17% 89.32% 90.52% 92.56% 95.09% 91.26% 100.00%
NY_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.35% 94.16% 100.75% 100.29% 99.21% 98.92% 97.18% 99.31% 101.19% 103.16% 101.93% 99.03% 95.42% 95.26% 95.52% 97.30% 94.69% 100.00%
NY_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.09% 99.49% 101.37% 101.21% 100.47% 100.22% 97.95% 99.72% 101.05% 103.01% 101.92% 99.35% 99.01% 99.52% 100.43% 100.51% 102.35% 100.00%
NY_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.98% 94.55% 99.46% 99.37% 98.35% 98.15% 96.44% 98.67% 100.91% 102.83% 101.35% 99.18% 96.60% 96.06% 96.11% 97.58% 95.10% 100.00%
NY_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 106.38% 103.88% 101.34% 101.39% 100.64% 100.36% 98.35% 99.92% 101.35% 103.38% 102.17% 100.79% 103.14% 103.90% 104.45% 103.26% 106.99% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.73% 100.87% 101.33% 101.26% 100.56% 100.32% 98.14% 99.81% 101.15% 103.11% 101.94% 99.83% 100.62% 101.07% 101.80% 101.38% 104.03% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.08% 100.33% 101.34% 101.24% 100.53% 100.28% 98.07% 99.77% 101.11% 103.07% 101.93% 99.66% 100.08% 100.53% 101.30% 101.08% 103.42% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.46% 99.81% 101.35% 101.22% 100.50% 100.25% 98.00% 99.75% 101.07% 103.04% 101.92% 99.49% 99.52% 99.98% 100.82% 100.75% 102.83% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.65% 95.19% 99.53% 99.21% 98.14% 97.86% 95.83% 98.23% 100.47% 102.38% 101.05% 98.44% 95.43% 95.79% 96.49% 98.11% 96.46% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.99% 95.59% 100.46% 100.11% 99.14% 98.85% 96.83% 98.95% 100.84% 102.74% 101.48% 98.93% 96.30% 96.47% 97.06% 98.38% 96.99% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.57% 95.31% 100.59% 100.17% 99.12% 98.81% 96.77% 98.95% 100.83% 102.76% 101.56% 98.80% 95.79% 96.03% 96.69% 98.17% 96.65% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.12% 95.04% 100.73% 100.22% 99.11% 98.77% 96.71% 98.96% 100.82% 102.77% 101.64% 98.67% 95.27% 95.66% 96.32% 97.96% 96.32% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.81% 94.82% 100.85% 100.26% 99.11% 98.74% 96.66% 98.96% 100.82% 102.78% 101.70% 98.55% 94.81% 95.32% 96.03% 97.79% 96.03% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.96% 94.83% 99.71% 99.45% 98.36% 98.05% 96.06% 98.44% 100.63% 102.54% 101.19% 98.69% 95.81% 95.92% 96.40% 97.95% 96.07% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.41% 95.29% 100.54% 100.29% 99.40% 99.16% 97.18% 99.19% 100.99% 102.89% 101.60% 99.12% 96.58% 96.48% 96.98% 98.21% 96.54% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.98% 94.99% 100.65% 100.32% 99.39% 99.12% 97.12% 99.19% 100.98% 102.90% 101.66% 99.00% 96.08% 96.11% 96.54% 98.01% 96.23% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.57% 94.71% 100.77% 100.36% 99.37% 99.08% 97.06% 99.19% 100.96% 102.90% 101.72% 98.86% 95.56% 95.71% 96.17% 97.81% 95.91% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.23% 94.46% 100.87% 100.39% 99.36% 99.05% 97.01% 99.19% 100.95% 102.91% 101.77% 98.74% 95.09% 95.35% 95.90% 97.64% 95.64% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.17% 94.67% 99.45% 99.32% 98.33% 98.12% 96.44% 98.65% 100.92% 102.85% 101.36% 99.25% 96.82% 96.25% 96.31% 97.69% 95.31% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.63% 95.17% 100.36% 100.17% 99.25% 99.03% 97.41% 99.33% 101.27% 103.18% 101.75% 99.57% 97.28% 96.55% 96.59% 97.90% 95.65% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.22% 94.86% 100.50% 100.21% 99.24% 98.99% 97.35% 99.34% 101.27% 103.20% 101.83% 99.44% 96.78% 96.21% 96.28% 97.72% 95.36% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.81% 94.56% 100.64% 100.26% 99.22% 98.96% 97.29% 99.35% 101.26% 103.22% 101.91% 99.30% 96.24% 95.82% 95.93% 97.54% 95.06% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.46% 94.28% 100.76% 100.30% 99.21% 98.92% 97.24% 99.35% 101.26% 103.23% 101.98% 99.20% 95.77% 95.48% 95.65% 97.38% 94.79% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.38% 94.98% 100.36% 100.19% 99.30% 99.09% 97.44% 99.35% 101.26% 103.16% 101.72% 99.52% 97.04% 96.35% 96.38% 97.77% 95.41% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.01% 94.72% 100.50% 100.24% 99.29% 99.06% 97.38% 99.36% 101.25% 103.18% 101.81% 99.35% 96.53% 96.00% 96.06% 97.60% 95.14% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.60% 94.41% 100.64% 100.29% 99.28% 99.02% 97.33% 99.36% 101.25% 103.19% 101.89% 99.21% 95.99% 95.61% 95.73% 97.42% 94.84% 100.00%
252

NY ELECTRICITY USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY June 19th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.68% 94.29% 99.75% 99.96% 99.66% 99.53% 97.03% 98.16% 98.88% 100.79% 100.26% 96.17% 89.32% 90.52% 92.56% 95.09% 91.26% 100.00%
NY_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.35% 94.16% 100.75% 100.29% 99.21% 98.92% 97.18% 99.31% 101.19% 103.16% 101.93% 99.03% 95.42% 95.26% 95.52% 97.30% 94.69% 100.00%
NY_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.09% 99.49% 101.37% 101.21% 100.47% 100.22% 97.95% 99.72% 101.05% 103.01% 101.92% 99.35% 99.01% 99.52% 100.43% 100.51% 102.35% 100.00%
NY_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.98% 94.55% 99.46% 99.37% 98.35% 98.15% 96.44% 98.67% 100.91% 102.83% 101.35% 99.18% 96.60% 96.06% 96.11% 97.58% 95.10% 100.00%
NY_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 106.38% 103.88% 101.34% 101.39% 100.64% 100.36% 98.35% 99.92% 101.35% 103.38% 102.17% 100.79% 103.14% 103.90% 104.45% 103.26% 106.99% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.73% 100.87% 101.33% 101.26% 100.56% 100.32% 98.14% 99.81% 101.15% 103.11% 101.94% 99.83% 100.62% 101.07% 101.80% 101.38% 104.03% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.08% 100.33% 101.34% 101.24% 100.53% 100.28% 98.07% 99.77% 101.11% 103.07% 101.93% 99.66% 100.08% 100.53% 101.30% 101.08% 103.42% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.46% 99.81% 101.35% 101.22% 100.50% 100.25% 98.00% 99.75% 101.07% 103.04% 101.92% 99.49% 99.52% 99.98% 100.82% 100.75% 102.83% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.65% 95.19% 99.53% 99.21% 98.14% 97.86% 95.83% 98.23% 100.47% 102.38% 101.05% 98.44% 95.43% 95.79% 96.49% 98.11% 96.46% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.99% 95.59% 100.46% 100.11% 99.14% 98.85% 96.83% 98.95% 100.84% 102.74% 101.48% 98.93% 96.30% 96.47% 97.06% 98.38% 96.99% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.57% 95.31% 100.59% 100.17% 99.12% 98.81% 96.77% 98.95% 100.83% 102.76% 101.56% 98.80% 95.79% 96.03% 96.69% 98.17% 96.65% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.12% 95.04% 100.73% 100.22% 99.11% 98.77% 96.71% 98.96% 100.82% 102.77% 101.64% 98.67% 95.27% 95.66% 96.32% 97.96% 96.32% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.81% 94.82% 100.85% 100.26% 99.11% 98.74% 96.66% 98.96% 100.82% 102.78% 101.70% 98.55% 94.81% 95.32% 96.03% 97.79% 96.03% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.96% 94.83% 99.71% 99.45% 98.36% 98.05% 96.06% 98.44% 100.63% 102.54% 101.19% 98.69% 95.81% 95.92% 96.40% 97.95% 96.07% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.41% 95.29% 100.54% 100.29% 99.40% 99.16% 97.18% 99.19% 100.99% 102.89% 101.60% 99.12% 96.58% 96.48% 96.98% 98.21% 96.54% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.98% 94.99% 100.65% 100.32% 99.39% 99.12% 97.12% 99.19% 100.98% 102.90% 101.66% 99.00% 96.08% 96.11% 96.54% 98.01% 96.23% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.57% 94.71% 100.77% 100.36% 99.37% 99.08% 97.06% 99.19% 100.96% 102.90% 101.72% 98.86% 95.56% 95.71% 96.17% 97.81% 95.91% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.23% 94.46% 100.87% 100.39% 99.36% 99.05% 97.01% 99.19% 100.95% 102.91% 101.77% 98.74% 95.09% 95.35% 95.90% 97.64% 95.64% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.17% 94.67% 99.45% 99.32% 98.33% 98.12% 96.44% 98.65% 100.92% 102.85% 101.36% 99.25% 96.82% 96.25% 96.31% 97.69% 95.31% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.63% 95.17% 100.36% 100.17% 99.25% 99.03% 97.41% 99.33% 101.27% 103.18% 101.75% 99.57% 97.28% 96.55% 96.59% 97.90% 95.65% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.22% 94.86% 100.50% 100.21% 99.24% 98.99% 97.35% 99.34% 101.27% 103.20% 101.83% 99.44% 96.78% 96.21% 96.28% 97.72% 95.36% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.81% 94.56% 100.64% 100.26% 99.22% 98.96% 97.29% 99.35% 101.26% 103.22% 101.91% 99.30% 96.24% 95.82% 95.93% 97.54% 95.06% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.46% 94.28% 100.76% 100.30% 99.21% 98.92% 97.24% 99.35% 101.26% 103.23% 101.98% 99.20% 95.77% 95.48% 95.65% 97.38% 94.79% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.38% 94.98% 100.36% 100.19% 99.30% 99.09% 97.44% 99.35% 101.26% 103.16% 101.72% 99.52% 97.04% 96.35% 96.38% 97.77% 95.41% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.01% 94.72% 100.50% 100.24% 99.29% 99.06% 97.38% 99.36% 101.25% 103.18% 101.81% 99.35% 96.53% 96.00% 96.06% 97.60% 95.14% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.60% 94.41% 100.64% 100.29% 99.28% 99.02% 97.33% 99.36% 101.25% 103.19% 101.89% 99.21% 95.99% 95.61% 95.73% 97.42% 94.84% 100.00%

253

Table 4 - Appx.D - 24 Cooling load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in
NY.

NY COOLING USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY June 19th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 82.55% 88.86% 98.65% 98.52% 98.35% 98.21% 95.82% 97.46% 97.64% 98.09% 98.45% 94.20% 85.84% 86.36% 87.94% 91.01% 84.56% 0.00%
NY_DSF_MS 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 80.18% 86.97% 98.24% 98.20% 97.95% 97.87% 95.85% 97.95% 98.71% 99.51% 99.45% 97.30% 93.74% 93.18% 92.74% 95.06% 90.61% 0.00%
NY_DSF_CO 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 97.55% 94.88% 98.78% 98.58% 98.28% 98.11% 95.74% 97.82% 98.44% 99.31% 99.45% 97.70% 98.40% 99.32% 100.69% 100.94% 104.16% 0.00%
NY_DSF_SB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 82.67% 88.48% 97.77% 98.09% 97.80% 97.69% 95.63% 97.78% 98.67% 99.52% 99.44% 97.91% 95.31% 94.33% 93.68% 95.57% 91.33% 0.00%
NY_DSF_BW 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 109.72% 101.67% 99.04% 99.00% 98.61% 98.39% 96.31% 98.17% 98.86% 99.87% 99.93% 99.63% 103.78% 105.61% 107.22% 105.97% 112.35% 0.00%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 101.45% 97.13% 98.94% 98.74% 98.42% 98.23% 95.97% 97.97% 98.61% 99.52% 99.61% 98.40% 100.49% 101.55% 102.92% 102.53% 107.12% 0.00%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 99.92% 96.27% 98.88% 98.68% 98.37% 98.19% 95.89% 97.91% 98.55% 99.44% 99.56% 98.15% 99.79% 100.76% 102.10% 101.97% 106.04% 0.00%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 98.44% 95.42% 98.82% 98.62% 98.32% 98.14% 95.80% 97.86% 98.49% 99.37% 99.50% 97.91% 99.07% 99.97% 101.33% 101.37% 104.99% 0.00%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 86.43% 89.43% 97.87% 97.96% 97.60% 97.41% 94.95% 97.32% 98.17% 98.98% 99.09% 96.98% 93.78% 93.95% 94.31% 96.54% 93.74% 0.00%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 86.71% 89.61% 98.41% 98.24% 97.91% 97.75% 95.45% 97.65% 98.42% 99.23% 99.29% 97.41% 94.90% 94.92% 95.23% 97.03% 94.68% 0.00%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 85.55% 89.02% 98.39% 98.21% 97.87% 97.71% 95.37% 97.61% 98.37% 99.17% 99.26% 97.16% 94.23% 94.29% 94.63% 96.65% 94.08% 0.00%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 84.33% 88.43% 98.36% 98.16% 97.82% 97.66% 95.29% 97.57% 98.32% 99.11% 99.23% 96.92% 93.55% 93.76% 94.03% 96.27% 93.49% 0.00%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 83.45% 87.95% 98.35% 98.14% 97.79% 97.63% 95.22% 97.54% 98.27% 99.05% 99.19% 96.70% 92.94% 93.27% 93.55% 95.95% 92.99% 0.00%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 84.75% 88.79% 97.93% 98.00% 97.67% 97.49% 95.12% 97.45% 98.30% 99.13% 99.18% 97.24% 94.27% 94.14% 94.16% 96.25% 93.06% 0.00%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 85.34% 89.11% 98.41% 98.29% 98.00% 97.88% 95.67% 97.80% 98.56% 99.38% 99.40% 97.62% 95.26% 94.94% 95.11% 96.73% 93.89% 0.00%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 84.18% 88.50% 98.38% 98.24% 97.96% 97.83% 95.59% 97.76% 98.51% 99.32% 99.35% 97.40% 94.60% 94.40% 94.39% 96.36% 93.33% 0.00%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 83.08% 87.93% 98.36% 98.20% 97.91% 97.79% 95.51% 97.72% 98.46% 99.25% 99.32% 97.15% 93.92% 93.84% 93.79% 95.99% 92.78% 0.00%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 82.16% 87.42% 98.33% 98.16% 97.88% 97.75% 95.44% 97.68% 98.41% 99.20% 99.27% 96.94% 93.30% 93.31% 93.35% 95.68% 92.29% 0.00%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 83.10% 88.67% 97.78% 98.08% 97.80% 97.69% 95.65% 97.79% 98.69% 99.55% 99.46% 98.00% 95.59% 94.61% 94.01% 95.77% 91.71% 0.00%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 83.69% 89.03% 98.34% 98.36% 98.12% 98.04% 96.18% 98.14% 98.94% 99.77% 99.63% 98.22% 96.17% 95.04% 94.46% 96.15% 92.32% 0.00%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 82.56% 88.38% 98.31% 98.32% 98.07% 97.99% 96.10% 98.10% 98.88% 99.71% 99.60% 97.97% 95.51% 94.55% 93.96% 95.83% 91.80% 0.00%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 81.41% 87.73% 98.28% 98.27% 98.02% 97.95% 96.02% 98.05% 98.83% 99.65% 99.56% 97.72% 94.81% 93.99% 93.40% 95.50% 91.28% 0.00%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 80.42% 87.15% 98.26% 98.22% 97.98% 97.90% 95.95% 98.02% 98.79% 99.60% 99.52% 97.51% 94.18% 93.50% 92.95% 95.21% 90.80% 0.00%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 83.13% 88.74% 98.32% 98.35% 98.12% 98.04% 96.17% 98.13% 98.92% 99.74% 99.61% 98.16% 95.87% 94.76% 94.13% 95.92% 91.89% 0.00%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 82.08% 88.15% 98.30% 98.31% 98.08% 98.00% 96.09% 98.08% 98.86% 99.68% 99.57% 97.86% 95.19% 94.24% 93.62% 95.61% 91.41% 0.00%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 80.93% 87.50% 98.27% 98.26% 98.03% 97.95% 96.01% 98.04% 98.81% 99.62% 99.53% 97.60% 94.48% 93.69% 93.08% 95.28% 90.88% 0.00%
254

NY COOLING USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY June 19th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 82.55% 88.86% 98.65% 98.52% 98.35% 98.21% 95.82% 97.46% 97.64% 98.09% 98.45% 94.20% 85.84% 86.36% 87.94% 91.01% 84.56% 0.00%
NY_DSF_MS 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 80.18% 86.97% 98.24% 98.20% 97.95% 97.87% 95.85% 97.95% 98.71% 99.51% 99.45% 97.30% 93.74% 93.18% 92.74% 95.06% 90.61% 0.00%
NY_DSF_CO 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 97.55% 94.88% 98.78% 98.58% 98.28% 98.11% 95.74% 97.82% 98.44% 99.31% 99.45% 97.70% 98.40% 99.32% 100.69% 100.94% 104.16% 0.00%
NY_DSF_SB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 82.67% 88.48% 97.77% 98.09% 97.80% 97.69% 95.63% 97.78% 98.67% 99.52% 99.44% 97.91% 95.31% 94.33% 93.68% 95.57% 91.33% 0.00%
NY_DSF_BW 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 109.72% 101.67% 99.04% 99.00% 98.61% 98.39% 96.31% 98.17% 98.86% 99.87% 99.93% 99.63% 103.78% 105.61% 107.22% 105.97% 112.35% 0.00%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 101.45% 97.13% 98.94% 98.74% 98.42% 98.23% 95.97% 97.97% 98.61% 99.52% 99.61% 98.40% 100.49% 101.55% 102.92% 102.53% 107.12% 0.00%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 99.92% 96.27% 98.88% 98.68% 98.37% 98.19% 95.89% 97.91% 98.55% 99.44% 99.56% 98.15% 99.79% 100.76% 102.10% 101.97% 106.04% 0.00%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 98.44% 95.42% 98.82% 98.62% 98.32% 98.14% 95.80% 97.86% 98.49% 99.37% 99.50% 97.91% 99.07% 99.97% 101.33% 101.37% 104.99% 0.00%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 86.43% 89.43% 97.87% 97.96% 97.60% 97.41% 94.95% 97.32% 98.17% 98.98% 99.09% 96.98% 93.78% 93.95% 94.31% 96.54% 93.74% 0.00%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 86.71% 89.61% 98.41% 98.24% 97.91% 97.75% 95.45% 97.65% 98.42% 99.23% 99.29% 97.41% 94.90% 94.92% 95.23% 97.03% 94.68% 0.00%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 85.55% 89.02% 98.39% 98.21% 97.87% 97.71% 95.37% 97.61% 98.37% 99.17% 99.26% 97.16% 94.23% 94.29% 94.63% 96.65% 94.08% 0.00%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 84.33% 88.43% 98.36% 98.16% 97.82% 97.66% 95.29% 97.57% 98.32% 99.11% 99.23% 96.92% 93.55% 93.76% 94.03% 96.27% 93.49% 0.00%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 83.45% 87.95% 98.35% 98.14% 97.79% 97.63% 95.22% 97.54% 98.27% 99.05% 99.19% 96.70% 92.94% 93.27% 93.55% 95.95% 92.99% 0.00%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 84.75% 88.79% 97.93% 98.00% 97.67% 97.49% 95.12% 97.45% 98.30% 99.13% 99.18% 97.24% 94.27% 94.14% 94.16% 96.25% 93.06% 0.00%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 85.34% 89.11% 98.41% 98.29% 98.00% 97.88% 95.67% 97.80% 98.56% 99.38% 99.40% 97.62% 95.26% 94.94% 95.11% 96.73% 93.89% 0.00%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 84.18% 88.50% 98.38% 98.24% 97.96% 97.83% 95.59% 97.76% 98.51% 99.32% 99.35% 97.40% 94.60% 94.40% 94.39% 96.36% 93.33% 0.00%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 83.08% 87.93% 98.36% 98.20% 97.91% 97.79% 95.51% 97.72% 98.46% 99.25% 99.32% 97.15% 93.92% 93.84% 93.79% 95.99% 92.78% 0.00%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 82.16% 87.42% 98.33% 98.16% 97.88% 97.75% 95.44% 97.68% 98.41% 99.20% 99.27% 96.94% 93.30% 93.31% 93.35% 95.68% 92.29% 0.00%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 83.10% 88.67% 97.78% 98.08% 97.80% 97.69% 95.65% 97.79% 98.69% 99.55% 99.46% 98.00% 95.59% 94.61% 94.01% 95.77% 91.71% 0.00%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 83.69% 89.03% 98.34% 98.36% 98.12% 98.04% 96.18% 98.14% 98.94% 99.77% 99.63% 98.22% 96.17% 95.04% 94.46% 96.15% 92.32% 0.00%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 82.56% 88.38% 98.31% 98.32% 98.07% 97.99% 96.10% 98.10% 98.88% 99.71% 99.60% 97.97% 95.51% 94.55% 93.96% 95.83% 91.80% 0.00%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 81.41% 87.73% 98.28% 98.27% 98.02% 97.95% 96.02% 98.05% 98.83% 99.65% 99.56% 97.72% 94.81% 93.99% 93.40% 95.50% 91.28% 0.00%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 80.42% 87.15% 98.26% 98.22% 97.98% 97.90% 95.95% 98.02% 98.79% 99.60% 99.52% 97.51% 94.18% 93.50% 92.95% 95.21% 90.80% 0.00%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 83.13% 88.74% 98.32% 98.35% 98.12% 98.04% 96.17% 98.13% 98.92% 99.74% 99.61% 98.16% 95.87% 94.76% 94.13% 95.92% 91.89% 0.00%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 82.08% 88.15% 98.30% 98.31% 98.08% 98.00% 96.09% 98.08% 98.86% 99.68% 99.57% 97.86% 95.19% 94.24% 93.62% 95.61% 91.41% 0.00%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 80.93% 87.50% 98.27% 98.26% 98.03% 97.95% 96.01% 98.04% 98.81% 99.62% 99.53% 97.60% 94.48% 93.69% 93.08% 95.28% 90.88% 0.00%

255

Table 4 - Appx.D - 25 Total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in NY.
NY TOTAL EUI COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY June 19th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.76% 94.44% 99.76% 99.96% 99.66% 99.54% 97.09% 98.18% 98.89% 100.78% 100.26% 96.23% 89.55% 90.70% 92.74% 95.18% 91.36% 100.00%
NY_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.44% 94.30% 100.74% 100.29% 99.22% 98.93% 97.23% 99.32% 101.18% 103.13% 101.91% 99.04% 95.52% 95.35% 95.63% 97.35% 94.75% 100.00%
NY_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.08% 99.50% 101.35% 101.20% 100.47% 100.21% 97.99% 99.73% 101.04% 102.98% 101.90% 99.36% 99.03% 99.53% 100.42% 100.50% 102.33% 100.00%
NY_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.06% 94.69% 99.47% 99.38% 98.36% 98.16% 96.51% 98.68% 100.90% 102.81% 101.33% 99.19% 96.68% 96.13% 96.20% 97.62% 95.15% 100.00%
NY_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 106.29% 103.78% 101.32% 101.37% 100.63% 100.36% 98.38% 99.92% 101.34% 103.35% 102.15% 100.78% 103.07% 103.83% 104.35% 103.20% 106.91% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.69% 100.85% 101.31% 101.24% 100.56% 100.32% 98.17% 99.81% 101.14% 103.08% 101.92% 99.84% 100.60% 101.05% 101.76% 101.36% 103.98% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.05% 100.32% 101.32% 101.22% 100.52% 100.28% 98.11% 99.78% 101.10% 103.04% 101.91% 99.67% 100.08% 100.52% 101.26% 101.06% 103.38% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.44% 99.82% 101.34% 101.21% 100.49% 100.24% 98.04% 99.75% 101.07% 103.01% 101.90% 99.50% 99.53% 99.98% 100.80% 100.73% 102.79% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.71% 95.31% 99.53% 99.22% 98.15% 97.88% 95.91% 98.25% 100.46% 102.36% 101.04% 98.46% 95.53% 95.87% 96.57% 98.14% 96.50% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 96.04% 95.70% 100.45% 100.11% 99.14% 98.86% 96.89% 98.96% 100.83% 102.72% 101.46% 98.95% 96.38% 96.54% 97.13% 98.41% 97.02% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.62% 95.43% 100.59% 100.17% 99.13% 98.82% 96.83% 98.97% 100.83% 102.73% 101.54% 98.81% 95.89% 96.11% 96.77% 98.20% 96.69% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.18% 95.16% 100.72% 100.21% 99.12% 98.78% 96.77% 98.97% 100.82% 102.74% 101.62% 98.69% 95.38% 95.75% 96.40% 98.00% 96.36% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.87% 94.95% 100.84% 100.26% 99.12% 98.75% 96.73% 98.98% 100.81% 102.76% 101.68% 98.57% 94.92% 95.41% 96.12% 97.83% 96.08% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.02% 94.96% 99.71% 99.46% 98.37% 98.06% 96.14% 98.46% 100.62% 102.52% 101.18% 98.70% 95.90% 96.00% 96.48% 97.99% 96.11% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.47% 95.41% 100.53% 100.29% 99.41% 99.16% 97.24% 99.20% 100.98% 102.87% 101.58% 99.14% 96.65% 96.54% 97.05% 98.25% 96.58% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.04% 95.11% 100.64% 100.32% 99.39% 99.13% 97.18% 99.20% 100.97% 102.87% 101.64% 99.02% 96.16% 96.18% 96.63% 98.05% 96.27% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.64% 94.84% 100.76% 100.36% 99.37% 99.09% 97.12% 99.20% 100.96% 102.87% 101.71% 98.88% 95.66% 95.80% 96.26% 97.85% 95.96% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.31% 94.60% 100.86% 100.39% 99.36% 99.06% 97.07% 99.20% 100.94% 102.88% 101.75% 98.76% 95.20% 95.44% 96.00% 97.68% 95.68% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.24% 94.81% 99.45% 99.33% 98.34% 98.14% 96.51% 98.67% 100.91% 102.82% 101.35% 99.26% 96.89% 96.32% 96.40% 97.73% 95.36% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.70% 95.30% 100.36% 100.16% 99.26% 99.04% 97.46% 99.34% 101.26% 103.15% 101.73% 99.57% 97.34% 96.62% 96.67% 97.94% 95.70% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.30% 94.99% 100.50% 100.21% 99.24% 99.00% 97.40% 99.35% 101.26% 103.17% 101.81% 99.45% 96.85% 96.28% 96.37% 97.77% 95.41% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.89% 94.69% 100.64% 100.26% 99.23% 98.96% 97.35% 99.35% 101.25% 103.19% 101.89% 99.31% 96.32% 95.90% 96.03% 97.59% 95.12% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.54% 94.43% 100.76% 100.29% 99.22% 98.93% 97.29% 99.36% 101.25% 103.20% 101.96% 99.21% 95.86% 95.56% 95.76% 97.43% 94.85% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.46% 95.11% 100.36% 100.19% 99.31% 99.09% 97.49% 99.36% 101.25% 103.13% 101.71% 99.53% 97.11% 96.42% 96.47% 97.81% 95.46% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.09% 94.85% 100.50% 100.24% 99.30% 99.06% 97.44% 99.36% 101.24% 103.15% 101.79% 99.36% 96.60% 96.07% 96.16% 97.65% 95.19% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.68% 94.55% 100.63% 100.28% 99.28% 99.02% 97.38% 99.37% 101.24% 103.16% 101.87% 99.22% 96.07% 95.69% 95.83% 97.47% 94.90% 100.00%
256

NY TOTAL EUI COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY June 19th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.76% 94.44% 99.76% 99.96% 99.66% 99.54% 97.09% 98.18% 98.89% 100.78% 100.26% 96.23% 89.55% 90.70% 92.74% 95.18% 91.36% 100.00%
NY_DSF_MS 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.44% 94.30% 100.74% 100.29% 99.22% 98.93% 97.23% 99.32% 101.18% 103.13% 101.91% 99.04% 95.52% 95.35% 95.63% 97.35% 94.75% 100.00%
NY_DSF_CO 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.08% 99.50% 101.35% 101.20% 100.47% 100.21% 97.99% 99.73% 101.04% 102.98% 101.90% 99.36% 99.03% 99.53% 100.42% 100.50% 102.33% 100.00%
NY_DSF_SB 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.06% 94.69% 99.47% 99.38% 98.36% 98.16% 96.51% 98.68% 100.90% 102.81% 101.33% 99.19% 96.68% 96.13% 96.20% 97.62% 95.15% 100.00%
NY_DSF_BW 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 106.29% 103.78% 101.32% 101.37% 100.63% 100.36% 98.38% 99.92% 101.34% 103.35% 102.15% 100.78% 103.07% 103.83% 104.35% 103.20% 106.91% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.69% 100.85% 101.31% 101.24% 100.56% 100.32% 98.17% 99.81% 101.14% 103.08% 101.92% 99.84% 100.60% 101.05% 101.76% 101.36% 103.98% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.05% 100.32% 101.32% 101.22% 100.52% 100.28% 98.11% 99.78% 101.10% 103.04% 101.91% 99.67% 100.08% 100.52% 101.26% 101.06% 103.38% 100.00%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.44% 99.82% 101.34% 101.21% 100.49% 100.24% 98.04% 99.75% 101.07% 103.01% 101.90% 99.50% 99.53% 99.98% 100.80% 100.73% 102.79% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.71% 95.31% 99.53% 99.22% 98.15% 97.88% 95.91% 98.25% 100.46% 102.36% 101.04% 98.46% 95.53% 95.87% 96.57% 98.14% 96.50% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 96.04% 95.70% 100.45% 100.11% 99.14% 98.86% 96.89% 98.96% 100.83% 102.72% 101.46% 98.95% 96.38% 96.54% 97.13% 98.41% 97.02% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.62% 95.43% 100.59% 100.17% 99.13% 98.82% 96.83% 98.97% 100.83% 102.73% 101.54% 98.81% 95.89% 96.11% 96.77% 98.20% 96.69% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.18% 95.16% 100.72% 100.21% 99.12% 98.78% 96.77% 98.97% 100.82% 102.74% 101.62% 98.69% 95.38% 95.75% 96.40% 98.00% 96.36% 100.00%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.87% 94.95% 100.84% 100.26% 99.12% 98.75% 96.73% 98.98% 100.81% 102.76% 101.68% 98.57% 94.92% 95.41% 96.12% 97.83% 96.08% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.02% 94.96% 99.71% 99.46% 98.37% 98.06% 96.14% 98.46% 100.62% 102.52% 101.18% 98.70% 95.90% 96.00% 96.48% 97.99% 96.11% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.47% 95.41% 100.53% 100.29% 99.41% 99.16% 97.24% 99.20% 100.98% 102.87% 101.58% 99.14% 96.65% 96.54% 97.05% 98.25% 96.58% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 95.04% 95.11% 100.64% 100.32% 99.39% 99.13% 97.18% 99.20% 100.97% 102.87% 101.64% 99.02% 96.16% 96.18% 96.63% 98.05% 96.27% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.64% 94.84% 100.76% 100.36% 99.37% 99.09% 97.12% 99.20% 100.96% 102.87% 101.71% 98.88% 95.66% 95.80% 96.26% 97.85% 95.96% 100.00%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.31% 94.60% 100.86% 100.39% 99.36% 99.06% 97.07% 99.20% 100.94% 102.88% 101.75% 98.76% 95.20% 95.44% 96.00% 97.68% 95.68% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.24% 94.81% 99.45% 99.33% 98.34% 98.14% 96.51% 98.67% 100.91% 102.82% 101.35% 99.26% 96.89% 96.32% 96.40% 97.73% 95.36% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.70% 95.30% 100.36% 100.16% 99.26% 99.04% 97.46% 99.34% 101.26% 103.15% 101.73% 99.57% 97.34% 96.62% 96.67% 97.94% 95.70% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.30% 94.99% 100.50% 100.21% 99.24% 99.00% 97.40% 99.35% 101.26% 103.17% 101.81% 99.45% 96.85% 96.28% 96.37% 97.77% 95.41% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.89% 94.69% 100.64% 100.26% 99.23% 98.96% 97.35% 99.35% 101.25% 103.19% 101.89% 99.31% 96.32% 95.90% 96.03% 97.59% 95.12% 100.00%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.54% 94.43% 100.76% 100.29% 99.22% 98.93% 97.29% 99.36% 101.25% 103.20% 101.96% 99.21% 95.86% 95.56% 95.76% 97.43% 94.85% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.46% 95.11% 100.36% 100.19% 99.31% 99.09% 97.49% 99.36% 101.25% 103.13% 101.71% 99.53% 97.11% 96.42% 96.47% 97.81% 95.46% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 94.09% 94.85% 100.50% 100.24% 99.30% 99.06% 97.44% 99.36% 101.24% 103.15% 101.79% 99.36% 96.60% 96.07% 96.16% 97.65% 95.19% 100.00%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 93.68% 94.55% 100.63% 100.28% 99.28% 99.02% 97.38% 99.37% 101.24% 103.16% 101.87% 99.22% 96.07% 95.69% 95.83% 97.47% 94.90% 100.00%

257

NY coldest day results
Table 4 - Appx.D - 26 Gas load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in NY.

NY GAS USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.36% 93.76% 93.60% 93.33% 92.99% 92.60% 92.18% 99.89% 102.19% 101.12% 101.22% 100.98% 101.72% 101.57% 100.64% 100.64% 100.61% 100.52% 101.02% 101.68% 100.99% 100.42% 99.97% 99.26%
NY_DSF_MS 102.60% 108.82% 109.09% 108.49% 106.93% 106.00% 103.99% 103.49% 105.25% 102.02% 102.12% 101.80% 102.72% 102.40% 101.06% 101.08% 101.03% 101.01% 102.50% 105.99% 104.90% 104.19% 103.50% 104.57%
NY_DSF_CO 97.67% 92.85% 94.15% 94.20% 93.53% 92.82% 92.10% 100.59% 103.76% 101.76% 101.83% 101.32% 102.30% 101.48% 100.59% 100.60% 100.55% 100.51% 101.07% 102.27% 101.28% 100.61% 100.22% 99.02%
NY_DSF_SB 102.31% 106.74% 106.37% 105.96% 105.10% 103.75% 101.94% 102.97% 105.00% 102.01% 102.13% 101.81% 102.73% 102.56% 101.13% 101.10% 100.95% 100.95% 102.35% 105.38% 104.50% 103.88% 103.13% 104.27%
NY_DSF_BW 92.97% 78.08% 78.20% 78.47% 79.25% 79.59% 79.98% 97.47% 102.29% 101.52% 101.58% 101.12% 101.98% 100.74% 100.11% 100.13% 100.05% 99.99% 99.42% 97.49% 96.89% 96.48% 96.16% 93.14%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 96.34% 88.56% 89.64% 90.01% 89.82% 89.75% 89.36% 99.74% 103.22% 101.64% 101.69% 101.20% 102.15% 101.22% 100.45% 100.46% 100.42% 100.38% 100.59% 100.92% 100.07% 99.52% 99.16% 97.56%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 97.15% 91.06% 92.19% 92.37% 91.96% 91.75% 91.22% 100.26% 103.49% 101.69% 101.75% 101.25% 102.22% 101.36% 100.53% 100.55% 100.51% 100.46% 100.87% 101.66% 100.72% 100.15% 99.77% 98.44%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 97.83% 93.33% 94.48% 94.50% 93.90% 93.52% 92.87% 100.71% 103.76% 101.75% 101.81% 101.31% 102.28% 101.49% 100.60% 100.62% 100.58% 100.54% 101.11% 102.32% 101.32% 100.72% 100.30% 99.24%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 101.38% 103.11% 102.20% 101.81% 101.34% 100.08% 98.54% 102.30% 104.92% 102.07% 102.25% 101.92% 102.87% 102.78% 101.21% 101.13% 100.91% 100.88% 102.07% 104.35% 103.44% 103.01% 102.24% 102.95%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 101.23% 104.11% 104.30% 103.89% 102.87% 102.12% 100.55% 102.65% 104.91% 101.99% 102.13% 101.81% 102.75% 102.38% 101.03% 101.00% 100.91% 100.88% 102.08% 104.78% 103.72% 103.14% 102.51% 103.00%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 101.44% 104.90% 105.20% 104.73% 103.59% 102.89% 101.27% 102.89% 105.03% 102.01% 102.15% 101.83% 102.76% 102.42% 101.05% 101.03% 100.94% 100.91% 102.17% 105.02% 103.95% 103.31% 102.69% 103.30%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 101.65% 105.72% 106.07% 105.53% 104.27% 103.62% 101.94% 103.08% 105.15% 102.03% 102.17% 101.84% 102.78% 102.46% 101.07% 101.06% 100.98% 100.94% 102.26% 105.28% 104.17% 103.48% 102.86% 103.53%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 101.64% 105.57% 105.88% 105.32% 104.08% 103.32% 101.65% 103.03% 105.17% 102.04% 102.18% 101.85% 102.79% 102.46% 101.07% 101.06% 100.97% 100.94% 102.26% 105.24% 104.15% 103.48% 102.85% 103.51%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 101.41% 104.00% 103.78% 103.55% 102.82% 101.88% 100.34% 102.62% 104.94% 102.02% 102.17% 101.85% 102.78% 102.61% 101.14% 101.09% 100.94% 100.91% 102.13% 104.82% 103.83% 103.29% 102.52% 103.29%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 101.61% 105.47% 105.75% 105.40% 104.26% 103.60% 101.91% 102.92% 104.98% 101.99% 102.11% 101.80% 102.72% 102.33% 101.01% 101.01% 100.94% 100.92% 102.18% 105.11% 104.06% 103.42% 102.77% 103.48%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 101.80% 106.17% 106.51% 106.10% 104.86% 104.22% 102.47% 103.12% 105.09% 102.01% 102.13% 101.82% 102.74% 102.37% 101.03% 101.04% 100.98% 100.95% 102.26% 105.31% 104.26% 103.57% 102.93% 103.67%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 102.00% 106.88% 107.24% 106.78% 105.44% 104.81% 103.02% 103.28% 105.20% 102.03% 102.15% 101.83% 102.75% 102.41% 101.05% 101.07% 101.01% 100.98% 102.34% 105.53% 104.45% 103.73% 103.07% 103.88%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 101.99% 106.86% 107.20% 106.70% 105.35% 104.65% 102.85% 103.27% 105.23% 102.04% 102.16% 101.84% 102.77% 102.42% 101.06% 101.07% 101.00% 100.98% 102.35% 105.53% 104.44% 103.74% 103.08% 103.88%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 102.07% 106.10% 105.82% 105.49% 104.61% 103.38% 101.64% 102.85% 104.92% 101.99% 102.11% 101.78% 102.70% 102.52% 101.12% 101.07% 100.93% 100.93% 102.26% 105.20% 104.32% 103.72% 102.98% 104.02%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 102.17% 107.26% 107.57% 107.14% 105.76% 104.91% 103.02% 103.13% 104.91% 101.95% 102.04% 101.72% 102.64% 102.25% 100.99% 101.00% 100.94% 100.94% 102.30% 105.52% 104.47% 103.83% 103.17% 104.08%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 102.32% 107.90% 108.27% 107.78% 106.30% 105.48% 103.54% 103.29% 105.02% 101.96% 102.06% 101.74% 102.65% 102.29% 101.01% 101.03% 100.97% 100.97% 102.37% 105.70% 104.65% 103.96% 103.30% 104.26%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 102.48% 108.58% 108.96% 108.42% 106.85% 106.05% 104.05% 103.45% 105.13% 101.99% 102.08% 101.76% 102.67% 102.34% 101.03% 101.06% 101.01% 101.00% 102.45% 105.90% 104.82% 104.10% 103.43% 104.44%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 102.49% 108.51% 108.88% 108.30% 106.74% 105.87% 103.88% 103.43% 105.16% 102.00% 102.10% 101.77% 102.68% 102.34% 101.04% 101.06% 101.00% 100.99% 102.45% 105.89% 104.81% 104.10% 103.44% 104.44%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 102.39% 107.93% 108.19% 107.71% 106.29% 105.32% 103.35% 103.23% 104.99% 101.97% 102.07% 101.75% 102.67% 102.29% 101.01% 101.02% 100.97% 100.96% 102.38% 105.68% 104.66% 104.00% 103.32% 104.33%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 102.49% 108.40% 108.69% 108.17% 106.66% 105.76% 103.77% 103.36% 105.09% 101.98% 102.08% 101.76% 102.68% 102.33% 101.03% 101.05% 100.99% 100.99% 102.44% 105.85% 104.79% 104.10% 103.42% 104.46%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 102.64% 109.01% 109.37% 108.79% 107.19% 106.30% 104.27% 103.52% 105.22% 102.00% 102.10% 101.78% 102.70% 102.37% 101.05% 101.08% 101.03% 101.02% 102.51% 106.05% 104.95% 104.23% 103.54% 104.62%
258

NY GAS USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.36% 93.76% 93.60% 93.33% 92.99% 92.60% 92.18% 99.89% 102.19% 101.12% 101.22% 100.98% 101.72% 101.57% 100.64% 100.64% 100.61% 100.52% 101.02% 101.68% 100.99% 100.42% 99.97% 99.26%
NY_DSF_MS 102.60% 108.82% 109.09% 108.49% 106.93% 106.00% 103.99% 103.49% 105.25% 102.02% 102.12% 101.80% 102.72% 102.40% 101.06% 101.08% 101.03% 101.01% 102.50% 105.99% 104.90% 104.19% 103.50% 104.57%
NY_DSF_CO 97.67% 92.85% 94.15% 94.20% 93.53% 92.82% 92.10% 100.59% 103.76% 101.76% 101.83% 101.32% 102.30% 101.48% 100.59% 100.60% 100.55% 100.51% 101.07% 102.27% 101.28% 100.61% 100.22% 99.02%
NY_DSF_SB 102.31% 106.74% 106.37% 105.96% 105.10% 103.75% 101.94% 102.97% 105.00% 102.01% 102.13% 101.81% 102.73% 102.56% 101.13% 101.10% 100.95% 100.95% 102.35% 105.38% 104.50% 103.88% 103.13% 104.27%
NY_DSF_BW 92.97% 78.08% 78.20% 78.47% 79.25% 79.59% 79.98% 97.47% 102.29% 101.52% 101.58% 101.12% 101.98% 100.74% 100.11% 100.13% 100.05% 99.99% 99.42% 97.49% 96.89% 96.48% 96.16% 93.14%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 96.34% 88.56% 89.64% 90.01% 89.82% 89.75% 89.36% 99.74% 103.22% 101.64% 101.69% 101.20% 102.15% 101.22% 100.45% 100.46% 100.42% 100.38% 100.59% 100.92% 100.07% 99.52% 99.16% 97.56%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 97.15% 91.06% 92.19% 92.37% 91.96% 91.75% 91.22% 100.26% 103.49% 101.69% 101.75% 101.25% 102.22% 101.36% 100.53% 100.55% 100.51% 100.46% 100.87% 101.66% 100.72% 100.15% 99.77% 98.44%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 97.83% 93.33% 94.48% 94.50% 93.90% 93.52% 92.87% 100.71% 103.76% 101.75% 101.81% 101.31% 102.28% 101.49% 100.60% 100.62% 100.58% 100.54% 101.11% 102.32% 101.32% 100.72% 100.30% 99.24%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 101.38% 103.11% 102.20% 101.81% 101.34% 100.08% 98.54% 102.30% 104.92% 102.07% 102.25% 101.92% 102.87% 102.78% 101.21% 101.13% 100.91% 100.88% 102.07% 104.35% 103.44% 103.01% 102.24% 102.95%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 101.23% 104.11% 104.30% 103.89% 102.87% 102.12% 100.55% 102.65% 104.91% 101.99% 102.13% 101.81% 102.75% 102.38% 101.03% 101.00% 100.91% 100.88% 102.08% 104.78% 103.72% 103.14% 102.51% 103.00%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 101.44% 104.90% 105.20% 104.73% 103.59% 102.89% 101.27% 102.89% 105.03% 102.01% 102.15% 101.83% 102.76% 102.42% 101.05% 101.03% 100.94% 100.91% 102.17% 105.02% 103.95% 103.31% 102.69% 103.30%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 101.65% 105.72% 106.07% 105.53% 104.27% 103.62% 101.94% 103.08% 105.15% 102.03% 102.17% 101.84% 102.78% 102.46% 101.07% 101.06% 100.98% 100.94% 102.26% 105.28% 104.17% 103.48% 102.86% 103.53%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 101.64% 105.57% 105.88% 105.32% 104.08% 103.32% 101.65% 103.03% 105.17% 102.04% 102.18% 101.85% 102.79% 102.46% 101.07% 101.06% 100.97% 100.94% 102.26% 105.24% 104.15% 103.48% 102.85% 103.51%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 101.41% 104.00% 103.78% 103.55% 102.82% 101.88% 100.34% 102.62% 104.94% 102.02% 102.17% 101.85% 102.78% 102.61% 101.14% 101.09% 100.94% 100.91% 102.13% 104.82% 103.83% 103.29% 102.52% 103.29%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 101.61% 105.47% 105.75% 105.40% 104.26% 103.60% 101.91% 102.92% 104.98% 101.99% 102.11% 101.80% 102.72% 102.33% 101.01% 101.01% 100.94% 100.92% 102.18% 105.11% 104.06% 103.42% 102.77% 103.48%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 101.80% 106.17% 106.51% 106.10% 104.86% 104.22% 102.47% 103.12% 105.09% 102.01% 102.13% 101.82% 102.74% 102.37% 101.03% 101.04% 100.98% 100.95% 102.26% 105.31% 104.26% 103.57% 102.93% 103.67%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 102.00% 106.88% 107.24% 106.78% 105.44% 104.81% 103.02% 103.28% 105.20% 102.03% 102.15% 101.83% 102.75% 102.41% 101.05% 101.07% 101.01% 100.98% 102.34% 105.53% 104.45% 103.73% 103.07% 103.88%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 101.99% 106.86% 107.20% 106.70% 105.35% 104.65% 102.85% 103.27% 105.23% 102.04% 102.16% 101.84% 102.77% 102.42% 101.06% 101.07% 101.00% 100.98% 102.35% 105.53% 104.44% 103.74% 103.08% 103.88%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 102.07% 106.10% 105.82% 105.49% 104.61% 103.38% 101.64% 102.85% 104.92% 101.99% 102.11% 101.78% 102.70% 102.52% 101.12% 101.07% 100.93% 100.93% 102.26% 105.20% 104.32% 103.72% 102.98% 104.02%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 102.17% 107.26% 107.57% 107.14% 105.76% 104.91% 103.02% 103.13% 104.91% 101.95% 102.04% 101.72% 102.64% 102.25% 100.99% 101.00% 100.94% 100.94% 102.30% 105.52% 104.47% 103.83% 103.17% 104.08%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 102.32% 107.90% 108.27% 107.78% 106.30% 105.48% 103.54% 103.29% 105.02% 101.96% 102.06% 101.74% 102.65% 102.29% 101.01% 101.03% 100.97% 100.97% 102.37% 105.70% 104.65% 103.96% 103.30% 104.26%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 102.48% 108.58% 108.96% 108.42% 106.85% 106.05% 104.05% 103.45% 105.13% 101.99% 102.08% 101.76% 102.67% 102.34% 101.03% 101.06% 101.01% 101.00% 102.45% 105.90% 104.82% 104.10% 103.43% 104.44%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 102.49% 108.51% 108.88% 108.30% 106.74% 105.87% 103.88% 103.43% 105.16% 102.00% 102.10% 101.77% 102.68% 102.34% 101.04% 101.06% 101.00% 100.99% 102.45% 105.89% 104.81% 104.10% 103.44% 104.44%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 102.39% 107.93% 108.19% 107.71% 106.29% 105.32% 103.35% 103.23% 104.99% 101.97% 102.07% 101.75% 102.67% 102.29% 101.01% 101.02% 100.97% 100.96% 102.38% 105.68% 104.66% 104.00% 103.32% 104.33%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 102.49% 108.40% 108.69% 108.17% 106.66% 105.76% 103.77% 103.36% 105.09% 101.98% 102.08% 101.76% 102.68% 102.33% 101.03% 101.05% 100.99% 100.99% 102.44% 105.85% 104.79% 104.10% 103.42% 104.46%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 102.64% 109.01% 109.37% 108.79% 107.19% 106.30% 104.27% 103.52% 105.22% 102.00% 102.10% 101.78% 102.70% 102.37% 101.05% 101.08% 101.03% 101.02% 102.51% 106.05% 104.95% 104.23% 103.54% 104.62%

259

Table 4 - Appx.D - 27 Heating load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in
NY

NY HEATING USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.35% 93.76% 93.60% 93.33% 92.99% 92.60% 92.18% 99.89% 102.20% 101.12% 101.22% 100.98% 101.72% 101.58% 100.64% 100.64% 100.61% 100.52% 101.02% 101.69% 101.00% 100.43% 99.97% 99.26%
NY_DSF_MS 102.61% 108.82% 109.09% 108.49% 106.93% 106.00% 103.99% 103.50% 105.27% 102.02% 102.13% 101.80% 102.72% 102.41% 101.07% 101.08% 101.03% 101.01% 102.51% 106.04% 104.93% 104.22% 103.52% 104.58%
NY_DSF_CO 97.67% 92.85% 94.15% 94.20% 93.53% 92.82% 92.10% 100.59% 103.78% 101.76% 101.83% 101.32% 102.30% 101.49% 100.59% 100.60% 100.56% 100.51% 101.07% 102.29% 101.28% 100.61% 100.22% 99.02%
NY_DSF_SB 102.31% 106.74% 106.37% 105.96% 105.10% 103.75% 101.94% 102.97% 105.02% 102.01% 102.14% 101.81% 102.74% 102.58% 101.14% 101.10% 100.95% 100.95% 102.36% 105.43% 104.53% 103.91% 103.14% 104.29%
NY_DSF_BW 92.95% 78.08% 78.20% 78.47% 79.25% 79.59% 79.98% 97.47% 102.30% 101.53% 101.58% 101.12% 101.98% 100.75% 100.11% 100.13% 100.05% 99.99% 99.42% 97.47% 96.87% 96.46% 96.15% 93.11%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 96.33% 88.56% 89.64% 90.01% 89.82% 89.75% 89.36% 99.74% 103.23% 101.64% 101.70% 101.20% 102.15% 101.23% 100.45% 100.46% 100.42% 100.38% 100.59% 100.93% 100.07% 99.52% 99.16% 97.55%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 97.14% 91.06% 92.19% 92.37% 91.96% 91.75% 91.22% 100.26% 103.51% 101.69% 101.75% 101.26% 102.22% 101.37% 100.53% 100.55% 100.51% 100.46% 100.87% 101.67% 100.73% 100.15% 99.77% 98.44%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 97.83% 93.33% 94.48% 94.50% 93.90% 93.52% 92.87% 100.71% 103.77% 101.75% 101.81% 101.31% 102.28% 101.50% 100.60% 100.62% 100.58% 100.54% 101.11% 102.34% 101.33% 100.72% 100.31% 99.24%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 101.39% 103.11% 102.20% 101.81% 101.34% 100.08% 98.54% 102.31% 104.94% 102.07% 102.25% 101.92% 102.88% 102.80% 101.22% 101.13% 100.91% 100.88% 102.08% 104.38% 103.46% 103.03% 102.24% 102.96%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 101.24% 104.11% 104.30% 103.89% 102.87% 102.12% 100.55% 102.65% 104.93% 101.99% 102.13% 101.82% 102.76% 102.40% 101.03% 101.00% 100.91% 100.88% 102.09% 104.82% 103.75% 103.16% 102.52% 103.01%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 101.44% 104.90% 105.20% 104.73% 103.59% 102.89% 101.27% 102.89% 105.05% 102.01% 102.15% 101.83% 102.77% 102.43% 101.05% 101.03% 100.94% 100.91% 102.18% 105.06% 103.98% 103.33% 102.70% 103.31%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 101.65% 105.72% 106.07% 105.53% 104.27% 103.62% 101.94% 103.09% 105.17% 102.04% 102.17% 101.85% 102.79% 102.47% 101.07% 101.06% 100.98% 100.95% 102.27% 105.32% 104.20% 103.51% 102.87% 103.54%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 101.64% 105.57% 105.88% 105.32% 104.08% 103.32% 101.65% 103.04% 105.19% 102.05% 102.18% 101.86% 102.80% 102.48% 101.07% 101.06% 100.97% 100.94% 102.27% 105.29% 104.17% 103.50% 102.86% 103.53%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 101.41% 104.00% 103.78% 103.55% 102.82% 101.88% 100.34% 102.63% 104.96% 102.03% 102.17% 101.86% 102.79% 102.62% 101.14% 101.09% 100.94% 100.91% 102.14% 104.86% 103.85% 103.31% 102.53% 103.30%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 101.62% 105.47% 105.75% 105.40% 104.26% 103.60% 101.91% 102.93% 104.99% 101.99% 102.12% 101.80% 102.73% 102.35% 101.01% 101.02% 100.95% 100.92% 102.19% 105.16% 104.09% 103.44% 102.78% 103.49%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 101.80% 106.17% 106.51% 106.10% 104.86% 104.22% 102.47% 103.12% 105.11% 102.01% 102.13% 101.82% 102.74% 102.39% 101.03% 101.04% 100.98% 100.95% 102.27% 105.35% 104.29% 103.60% 102.94% 103.68%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 102.00% 106.88% 107.24% 106.78% 105.44% 104.81% 103.02% 103.29% 105.22% 102.04% 102.16% 101.84% 102.76% 102.43% 101.06% 101.07% 101.01% 100.98% 102.35% 105.58% 104.47% 103.75% 103.09% 103.90%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 102.00% 106.86% 107.20% 106.70% 105.35% 104.65% 102.85% 103.27% 105.25% 102.04% 102.17% 101.85% 102.77% 102.43% 101.06% 101.07% 101.01% 100.98% 102.36% 105.58% 104.47% 103.76% 103.09% 103.89%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 102.08% 106.10% 105.82% 105.49% 104.61% 103.38% 101.64% 102.85% 104.94% 101.99% 102.11% 101.78% 102.70% 102.54% 101.12% 101.08% 100.93% 100.93% 102.27% 105.24% 104.35% 103.74% 103.00% 104.04%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 102.17% 107.26% 107.57% 107.14% 105.76% 104.91% 103.02% 103.13% 104.93% 101.95% 102.04% 101.72% 102.64% 102.26% 100.99% 101.00% 100.94% 100.94% 102.31% 105.57% 104.50% 103.85% 103.18% 104.09%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 102.32% 107.90% 108.27% 107.78% 106.30% 105.48% 103.54% 103.29% 105.04% 101.97% 102.06% 101.74% 102.66% 102.31% 101.01% 101.03% 100.98% 100.97% 102.38% 105.75% 104.68% 103.98% 103.31% 104.27%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 102.49% 108.58% 108.96% 108.42% 106.85% 106.05% 104.05% 103.45% 105.15% 101.99% 102.09% 101.76% 102.68% 102.35% 101.04% 101.06% 101.01% 101.00% 102.46% 105.96% 104.85% 104.12% 103.45% 104.45%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 102.50% 108.51% 108.88% 108.30% 106.74% 105.87% 103.88% 103.44% 105.18% 102.00% 102.10% 101.77% 102.69% 102.35% 101.04% 101.06% 101.01% 101.00% 102.46% 105.95% 104.84% 104.13% 103.45% 104.45%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 102.40% 107.93% 108.19% 107.71% 106.29% 105.32% 103.35% 103.23% 105.01% 101.97% 102.07% 101.75% 102.67% 102.30% 101.01% 101.03% 100.97% 100.96% 102.39% 105.73% 104.69% 104.03% 103.34% 104.35%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 102.49% 108.40% 108.69% 108.17% 106.66% 105.76% 103.77% 103.37% 105.11% 101.99% 102.09% 101.77% 102.69% 102.34% 101.03% 101.05% 101.00% 100.99% 102.45% 105.90% 104.82% 104.13% 103.43% 104.48%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 102.65% 109.01% 109.37% 108.79% 107.19% 106.30% 104.27% 103.52% 105.24% 102.01% 102.11% 101.79% 102.70% 102.38% 101.06% 101.08% 101.03% 101.02% 102.52% 106.10% 104.99% 104.26% 103.56% 104.63%
260

NY HEATING USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.35% 93.76% 93.60% 93.33% 92.99% 92.60% 92.18% 99.89% 102.20% 101.12% 101.22% 100.98% 101.72% 101.58% 100.64% 100.64% 100.61% 100.52% 101.02% 101.69% 101.00% 100.43% 99.97% 99.26%
NY_DSF_MS 102.61% 108.82% 109.09% 108.49% 106.93% 106.00% 103.99% 103.50% 105.27% 102.02% 102.13% 101.80% 102.72% 102.41% 101.07% 101.08% 101.03% 101.01% 102.51% 106.04% 104.93% 104.22% 103.52% 104.58%
NY_DSF_CO 97.67% 92.85% 94.15% 94.20% 93.53% 92.82% 92.10% 100.59% 103.78% 101.76% 101.83% 101.32% 102.30% 101.49% 100.59% 100.60% 100.56% 100.51% 101.07% 102.29% 101.28% 100.61% 100.22% 99.02%
NY_DSF_SB 102.31% 106.74% 106.37% 105.96% 105.10% 103.75% 101.94% 102.97% 105.02% 102.01% 102.14% 101.81% 102.74% 102.58% 101.14% 101.10% 100.95% 100.95% 102.36% 105.43% 104.53% 103.91% 103.14% 104.29%
NY_DSF_BW 92.95% 78.08% 78.20% 78.47% 79.25% 79.59% 79.98% 97.47% 102.30% 101.53% 101.58% 101.12% 101.98% 100.75% 100.11% 100.13% 100.05% 99.99% 99.42% 97.47% 96.87% 96.46% 96.15% 93.11%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 96.33% 88.56% 89.64% 90.01% 89.82% 89.75% 89.36% 99.74% 103.23% 101.64% 101.70% 101.20% 102.15% 101.23% 100.45% 100.46% 100.42% 100.38% 100.59% 100.93% 100.07% 99.52% 99.16% 97.55%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 97.14% 91.06% 92.19% 92.37% 91.96% 91.75% 91.22% 100.26% 103.51% 101.69% 101.75% 101.26% 102.22% 101.37% 100.53% 100.55% 100.51% 100.46% 100.87% 101.67% 100.73% 100.15% 99.77% 98.44%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 97.83% 93.33% 94.48% 94.50% 93.90% 93.52% 92.87% 100.71% 103.77% 101.75% 101.81% 101.31% 102.28% 101.50% 100.60% 100.62% 100.58% 100.54% 101.11% 102.34% 101.33% 100.72% 100.31% 99.24%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 101.39% 103.11% 102.20% 101.81% 101.34% 100.08% 98.54% 102.31% 104.94% 102.07% 102.25% 101.92% 102.88% 102.80% 101.22% 101.13% 100.91% 100.88% 102.08% 104.38% 103.46% 103.03% 102.24% 102.96%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 101.24% 104.11% 104.30% 103.89% 102.87% 102.12% 100.55% 102.65% 104.93% 101.99% 102.13% 101.82% 102.76% 102.40% 101.03% 101.00% 100.91% 100.88% 102.09% 104.82% 103.75% 103.16% 102.52% 103.01%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 101.44% 104.90% 105.20% 104.73% 103.59% 102.89% 101.27% 102.89% 105.05% 102.01% 102.15% 101.83% 102.77% 102.43% 101.05% 101.03% 100.94% 100.91% 102.18% 105.06% 103.98% 103.33% 102.70% 103.31%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 101.65% 105.72% 106.07% 105.53% 104.27% 103.62% 101.94% 103.09% 105.17% 102.04% 102.17% 101.85% 102.79% 102.47% 101.07% 101.06% 100.98% 100.95% 102.27% 105.32% 104.20% 103.51% 102.87% 103.54%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 101.64% 105.57% 105.88% 105.32% 104.08% 103.32% 101.65% 103.04% 105.19% 102.05% 102.18% 101.86% 102.80% 102.48% 101.07% 101.06% 100.97% 100.94% 102.27% 105.29% 104.17% 103.50% 102.86% 103.53%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 101.41% 104.00% 103.78% 103.55% 102.82% 101.88% 100.34% 102.63% 104.96% 102.03% 102.17% 101.86% 102.79% 102.62% 101.14% 101.09% 100.94% 100.91% 102.14% 104.86% 103.85% 103.31% 102.53% 103.30%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 101.62% 105.47% 105.75% 105.40% 104.26% 103.60% 101.91% 102.93% 104.99% 101.99% 102.12% 101.80% 102.73% 102.35% 101.01% 101.02% 100.95% 100.92% 102.19% 105.16% 104.09% 103.44% 102.78% 103.49%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 101.80% 106.17% 106.51% 106.10% 104.86% 104.22% 102.47% 103.12% 105.11% 102.01% 102.13% 101.82% 102.74% 102.39% 101.03% 101.04% 100.98% 100.95% 102.27% 105.35% 104.29% 103.60% 102.94% 103.68%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 102.00% 106.88% 107.24% 106.78% 105.44% 104.81% 103.02% 103.29% 105.22% 102.04% 102.16% 101.84% 102.76% 102.43% 101.06% 101.07% 101.01% 100.98% 102.35% 105.58% 104.47% 103.75% 103.09% 103.90%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 102.00% 106.86% 107.20% 106.70% 105.35% 104.65% 102.85% 103.27% 105.25% 102.04% 102.17% 101.85% 102.77% 102.43% 101.06% 101.07% 101.01% 100.98% 102.36% 105.58% 104.47% 103.76% 103.09% 103.89%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 102.08% 106.10% 105.82% 105.49% 104.61% 103.38% 101.64% 102.85% 104.94% 101.99% 102.11% 101.78% 102.70% 102.54% 101.12% 101.08% 100.93% 100.93% 102.27% 105.24% 104.35% 103.74% 103.00% 104.04%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 102.17% 107.26% 107.57% 107.14% 105.76% 104.91% 103.02% 103.13% 104.93% 101.95% 102.04% 101.72% 102.64% 102.26% 100.99% 101.00% 100.94% 100.94% 102.31% 105.57% 104.50% 103.85% 103.18% 104.09%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 102.32% 107.90% 108.27% 107.78% 106.30% 105.48% 103.54% 103.29% 105.04% 101.97% 102.06% 101.74% 102.66% 102.31% 101.01% 101.03% 100.98% 100.97% 102.38% 105.75% 104.68% 103.98% 103.31% 104.27%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 102.49% 108.58% 108.96% 108.42% 106.85% 106.05% 104.05% 103.45% 105.15% 101.99% 102.09% 101.76% 102.68% 102.35% 101.04% 101.06% 101.01% 101.00% 102.46% 105.96% 104.85% 104.12% 103.45% 104.45%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 102.50% 108.51% 108.88% 108.30% 106.74% 105.87% 103.88% 103.44% 105.18% 102.00% 102.10% 101.77% 102.69% 102.35% 101.04% 101.06% 101.01% 101.00% 102.46% 105.95% 104.84% 104.13% 103.45% 104.45%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 102.40% 107.93% 108.19% 107.71% 106.29% 105.32% 103.35% 103.23% 105.01% 101.97% 102.07% 101.75% 102.67% 102.30% 101.01% 101.03% 100.97% 100.96% 102.39% 105.73% 104.69% 104.03% 103.34% 104.35%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 102.49% 108.40% 108.69% 108.17% 106.66% 105.76% 103.77% 103.37% 105.11% 101.99% 102.09% 101.77% 102.69% 102.34% 101.03% 101.05% 101.00% 100.99% 102.45% 105.90% 104.82% 104.13% 103.43% 104.48%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 102.65% 109.01% 109.37% 108.79% 107.19% 106.30% 104.27% 103.52% 105.24% 102.01% 102.11% 101.79% 102.70% 102.38% 101.06% 101.08% 101.03% 101.02% 102.52% 106.10% 104.99% 104.26% 103.56% 104.63%

261

Table 4 - Appx.D - 28 Total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in NY

NY TOTAL EUI COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.52% 95.00% 94.82% 94.54% 94.19% 93.83% 93.41% 100.04% 102.42% 101.20% 101.37% 101.34% 101.93% 102.22% 101.13% 100.87% 100.61% 100.50% 100.95% 101.52% 100.90% 100.39% 99.97% 99.35%
NY_DSF_MS 102.35% 107.07% 107.36% 106.94% 105.74% 105.00% 103.36% 103.29% 105.02% 101.97% 102.07% 101.75% 102.64% 102.70% 101.49% 101.25% 101.02% 100.96% 102.35% 105.42% 104.44% 103.82% 103.20% 104.04%
NY_DSF_CO 97.90% 94.27% 95.26% 95.26% 94.64% 94.02% 93.35% 100.69% 103.78% 101.72% 101.85% 101.62% 102.42% 102.21% 101.21% 100.89% 100.58% 100.48% 101.01% 102.05% 101.16% 100.56% 100.20% 99.14%
NY_DSF_SB 102.08% 105.41% 105.16% 104.88% 104.23% 103.13% 101.64% 102.69% 104.78% 101.96% 102.08% 101.76% 102.65% 102.57% 101.41% 101.18% 100.96% 100.91% 102.21% 104.87% 104.08% 103.54% 102.85% 103.78%
NY_DSF_BW 93.66% 82.43% 82.35% 82.39% 82.81% 82.98% 83.14% 97.75% 102.30% 101.48% 101.57% 101.34% 102.06% 101.46% 100.73% 100.42% 100.10% 100.00% 99.46% 97.73% 97.18% 96.79% 96.50% 93.93%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 96.69% 90.83% 91.61% 91.83% 91.57% 91.45% 91.03% 99.89% 103.23% 101.60% 101.72% 101.50% 102.28% 101.96% 101.07% 100.75% 100.45% 100.36% 100.56% 100.83% 100.06% 99.56% 99.23% 97.84%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 97.43% 92.83% 93.67% 93.76% 93.34% 93.12% 92.60% 100.38% 103.51% 101.65% 101.77% 101.56% 102.35% 102.10% 101.15% 100.83% 100.53% 100.44% 100.81% 101.50% 100.66% 100.14% 99.79% 98.62%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 98.04% 94.66% 95.53% 95.50% 94.95% 94.60% 93.99% 100.79% 103.77% 101.70% 101.83% 101.61% 102.41% 102.22% 101.22% 100.91% 100.60% 100.51% 101.04% 102.10% 101.20% 100.65% 100.28% 99.33%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 101.25% 102.49% 101.78% 101.48% 101.11% 100.06% 98.77% 102.06% 104.70% 102.02% 102.19% 101.87% 102.79% 102.76% 101.48% 101.20% 100.91% 100.84% 101.94% 103.93% 103.12% 102.74% 102.04% 102.61%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 101.11% 103.29% 103.48% 103.18% 102.38% 101.77% 100.46% 102.49% 104.69% 101.94% 102.07% 101.76% 102.67% 102.69% 101.45% 101.17% 100.91% 100.83% 101.96% 104.32% 103.38% 102.86% 102.29% 102.65%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 101.30% 103.93% 104.21% 103.87% 102.97% 102.41% 101.07% 102.72% 104.81% 101.96% 102.09% 101.78% 102.68% 102.73% 101.47% 101.20% 100.95% 100.87% 102.04% 104.54% 103.59% 103.02% 102.45% 102.92%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 101.49% 104.58% 104.91% 104.53% 103.54% 103.02% 101.64% 102.90% 104.92% 101.98% 102.11% 101.79% 102.70% 102.77% 101.49% 101.23% 100.98% 100.90% 102.13% 104.78% 103.78% 103.18% 102.61% 103.12%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 101.48% 104.47% 104.76% 104.35% 103.38% 102.77% 101.39% 102.86% 104.94% 101.99% 102.12% 101.80% 102.71% 102.78% 101.50% 101.23% 100.97% 100.89% 102.13% 104.75% 103.76% 103.17% 102.60% 103.11%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 101.27% 103.20% 103.06% 102.90% 102.34% 101.57% 100.29% 102.39% 104.72% 101.97% 102.11% 101.80% 102.70% 102.69% 101.45% 101.19% 100.94% 100.87% 102.00% 104.36% 103.47% 103.00% 102.30% 102.91%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 101.46% 104.38% 104.66% 104.42% 103.53% 103.00% 101.61% 102.77% 104.75% 101.94% 102.06% 101.75% 102.64% 102.72% 101.47% 101.20% 100.95% 100.88% 102.05% 104.63% 103.68% 103.12% 102.53% 103.07%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 101.62% 104.95% 105.27% 104.99% 104.03% 103.52% 102.08% 102.96% 104.86% 101.96% 102.07% 101.77% 102.66% 102.76% 101.49% 101.23% 100.98% 100.90% 102.13% 104.80% 103.86% 103.26% 102.67% 103.25%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 101.80% 105.51% 105.87% 105.54% 104.51% 104.01% 102.54% 103.11% 104.97% 101.98% 102.09% 101.78% 102.67% 102.80% 101.51% 101.26% 101.01% 100.93% 102.20% 105.00% 104.03% 103.40% 102.81% 103.43%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 101.80% 105.50% 105.83% 105.48% 104.44% 103.88% 102.40% 103.10% 105.00% 101.99% 102.11% 101.79% 102.69% 102.80% 101.52% 101.26% 101.00% 100.93% 102.21% 105.01% 104.03% 103.41% 102.81% 103.43%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 101.87% 104.89% 104.72% 104.49% 103.82% 102.82% 101.38% 102.57% 104.71% 101.94% 102.05% 101.73% 102.62% 102.51% 101.38% 101.15% 100.93% 100.88% 102.13% 104.70% 103.92% 103.39% 102.72% 103.56%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 101.96% 105.82% 106.13% 105.84% 104.77% 104.10% 102.54% 102.93% 104.70% 101.90% 101.99% 101.67% 102.56% 102.54% 101.40% 101.16% 100.95% 100.89% 102.16% 105.00% 104.06% 103.49% 102.89% 103.60%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 102.09% 106.33% 106.70% 106.36% 105.22% 104.57% 102.98% 103.09% 104.80% 101.91% 102.01% 101.69% 102.58% 102.58% 101.42% 101.19% 100.98% 100.92% 102.23% 105.16% 104.22% 103.61% 103.01% 103.77%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 102.24% 106.88% 107.26% 106.88% 105.68% 105.04% 103.41% 103.24% 104.91% 101.94% 102.03% 101.71% 102.59% 102.62% 101.45% 101.22% 101.01% 100.95% 102.30% 105.35% 104.37% 103.74% 103.13% 103.92%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 102.25% 106.82% 107.19% 106.79% 105.59% 104.89% 103.27% 103.23% 104.94% 101.95% 102.04% 101.72% 102.61% 102.63% 101.45% 101.22% 101.00% 100.95% 102.31% 105.34% 104.37% 103.74% 103.14% 103.92%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 102.16% 106.35% 106.63% 106.30% 105.21% 104.44% 102.82% 103.03% 104.77% 101.92% 102.01% 101.70% 102.59% 102.60% 101.43% 101.19% 100.97% 100.92% 102.23% 105.14% 104.23% 103.65% 103.03% 103.83%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 102.24% 106.73% 107.04% 106.68% 105.52% 104.80% 103.18% 103.16% 104.87% 101.93% 102.03% 101.71% 102.60% 102.63% 101.45% 101.22% 101.00% 100.94% 102.30% 105.30% 104.35% 103.74% 103.12% 103.94%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 102.38% 107.22% 107.59% 107.19% 105.96% 105.25% 103.60% 103.31% 104.98% 101.95% 102.05% 101.73% 102.62% 102.68% 101.48% 101.25% 101.03% 100.97% 102.36% 105.47% 104.50% 103.86% 103.23% 104.08%
262

NY TOTAL EUI COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
NY_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
NY_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.52% 95.00% 94.82% 94.54% 94.19% 93.83% 93.41% 100.04% 102.42% 101.20% 101.37% 101.34% 101.93% 102.22% 101.13% 100.87% 100.61% 100.50% 100.95% 101.52% 100.90% 100.39% 99.97% 99.35%
NY_DSF_MS 102.35% 107.07% 107.36% 106.94% 105.74% 105.00% 103.36% 103.29% 105.02% 101.97% 102.07% 101.75% 102.64% 102.70% 101.49% 101.25% 101.02% 100.96% 102.35% 105.42% 104.44% 103.82% 103.20% 104.04%
NY_DSF_CO 97.90% 94.27% 95.26% 95.26% 94.64% 94.02% 93.35% 100.69% 103.78% 101.72% 101.85% 101.62% 102.42% 102.21% 101.21% 100.89% 100.58% 100.48% 101.01% 102.05% 101.16% 100.56% 100.20% 99.14%
NY_DSF_SB 102.08% 105.41% 105.16% 104.88% 104.23% 103.13% 101.64% 102.69% 104.78% 101.96% 102.08% 101.76% 102.65% 102.57% 101.41% 101.18% 100.96% 100.91% 102.21% 104.87% 104.08% 103.54% 102.85% 103.78%
NY_DSF_BW 93.66% 82.43% 82.35% 82.39% 82.81% 82.98% 83.14% 97.75% 102.30% 101.48% 101.57% 101.34% 102.06% 101.46% 100.73% 100.42% 100.10% 100.00% 99.46% 97.73% 97.18% 96.79% 96.50% 93.93%
NY_DECS_0h_25v 96.69% 90.83% 91.61% 91.83% 91.57% 91.45% 91.03% 99.89% 103.23% 101.60% 101.72% 101.50% 102.28% 101.96% 101.07% 100.75% 100.45% 100.36% 100.56% 100.83% 100.06% 99.56% 99.23% 97.84%
NY_DECS_0h_50v 97.43% 92.83% 93.67% 93.76% 93.34% 93.12% 92.60% 100.38% 103.51% 101.65% 101.77% 101.56% 102.35% 102.10% 101.15% 100.83% 100.53% 100.44% 100.81% 101.50% 100.66% 100.14% 99.79% 98.62%
NY_DECS_0h_75v 98.04% 94.66% 95.53% 95.50% 94.95% 94.60% 93.99% 100.79% 103.77% 101.70% 101.83% 101.61% 102.41% 102.22% 101.22% 100.91% 100.60% 100.51% 101.04% 102.10% 101.20% 100.65% 100.28% 99.33%
NY_DECS_25h_0v 101.25% 102.49% 101.78% 101.48% 101.11% 100.06% 98.77% 102.06% 104.70% 102.02% 102.19% 101.87% 102.79% 102.76% 101.48% 101.20% 100.91% 100.84% 101.94% 103.93% 103.12% 102.74% 102.04% 102.61%
NY_DECS_25h_25v 101.11% 103.29% 103.48% 103.18% 102.38% 101.77% 100.46% 102.49% 104.69% 101.94% 102.07% 101.76% 102.67% 102.69% 101.45% 101.17% 100.91% 100.83% 101.96% 104.32% 103.38% 102.86% 102.29% 102.65%
NY_DECS_25h_50v 101.30% 103.93% 104.21% 103.87% 102.97% 102.41% 101.07% 102.72% 104.81% 101.96% 102.09% 101.78% 102.68% 102.73% 101.47% 101.20% 100.95% 100.87% 102.04% 104.54% 103.59% 103.02% 102.45% 102.92%
NY_DECS_25h_75v 101.49% 104.58% 104.91% 104.53% 103.54% 103.02% 101.64% 102.90% 104.92% 101.98% 102.11% 101.79% 102.70% 102.77% 101.49% 101.23% 100.98% 100.90% 102.13% 104.78% 103.78% 103.18% 102.61% 103.12%
NY_DECS_25h_100v 101.48% 104.47% 104.76% 104.35% 103.38% 102.77% 101.39% 102.86% 104.94% 101.99% 102.12% 101.80% 102.71% 102.78% 101.50% 101.23% 100.97% 100.89% 102.13% 104.75% 103.76% 103.17% 102.60% 103.11%
NY_DECS_50h_0v 101.27% 103.20% 103.06% 102.90% 102.34% 101.57% 100.29% 102.39% 104.72% 101.97% 102.11% 101.80% 102.70% 102.69% 101.45% 101.19% 100.94% 100.87% 102.00% 104.36% 103.47% 103.00% 102.30% 102.91%
NY_DECS_50h_25v 101.46% 104.38% 104.66% 104.42% 103.53% 103.00% 101.61% 102.77% 104.75% 101.94% 102.06% 101.75% 102.64% 102.72% 101.47% 101.20% 100.95% 100.88% 102.05% 104.63% 103.68% 103.12% 102.53% 103.07%
NY_DECS_50h_50v 101.62% 104.95% 105.27% 104.99% 104.03% 103.52% 102.08% 102.96% 104.86% 101.96% 102.07% 101.77% 102.66% 102.76% 101.49% 101.23% 100.98% 100.90% 102.13% 104.80% 103.86% 103.26% 102.67% 103.25%
NY_DECS_50h_75v 101.80% 105.51% 105.87% 105.54% 104.51% 104.01% 102.54% 103.11% 104.97% 101.98% 102.09% 101.78% 102.67% 102.80% 101.51% 101.26% 101.01% 100.93% 102.20% 105.00% 104.03% 103.40% 102.81% 103.43%
NY_DECS_50h_100v 101.80% 105.50% 105.83% 105.48% 104.44% 103.88% 102.40% 103.10% 105.00% 101.99% 102.11% 101.79% 102.69% 102.80% 101.52% 101.26% 101.00% 100.93% 102.21% 105.01% 104.03% 103.41% 102.81% 103.43%
NY_DECS_75h_0v 101.87% 104.89% 104.72% 104.49% 103.82% 102.82% 101.38% 102.57% 104.71% 101.94% 102.05% 101.73% 102.62% 102.51% 101.38% 101.15% 100.93% 100.88% 102.13% 104.70% 103.92% 103.39% 102.72% 103.56%
NY_DECS_75h_25v 101.96% 105.82% 106.13% 105.84% 104.77% 104.10% 102.54% 102.93% 104.70% 101.90% 101.99% 101.67% 102.56% 102.54% 101.40% 101.16% 100.95% 100.89% 102.16% 105.00% 104.06% 103.49% 102.89% 103.60%
NY_DECS_75h_50v 102.09% 106.33% 106.70% 106.36% 105.22% 104.57% 102.98% 103.09% 104.80% 101.91% 102.01% 101.69% 102.58% 102.58% 101.42% 101.19% 100.98% 100.92% 102.23% 105.16% 104.22% 103.61% 103.01% 103.77%
NY_DECS_75h_75v 102.24% 106.88% 107.26% 106.88% 105.68% 105.04% 103.41% 103.24% 104.91% 101.94% 102.03% 101.71% 102.59% 102.62% 101.45% 101.22% 101.01% 100.95% 102.30% 105.35% 104.37% 103.74% 103.13% 103.92%
NY_DECS_75h_100v 102.25% 106.82% 107.19% 106.79% 105.59% 104.89% 103.27% 103.23% 104.94% 101.95% 102.04% 101.72% 102.61% 102.63% 101.45% 101.22% 101.00% 100.95% 102.31% 105.34% 104.37% 103.74% 103.14% 103.92%
NY_DECS_100h_25v 102.16% 106.35% 106.63% 106.30% 105.21% 104.44% 102.82% 103.03% 104.77% 101.92% 102.01% 101.70% 102.59% 102.60% 101.43% 101.19% 100.97% 100.92% 102.23% 105.14% 104.23% 103.65% 103.03% 103.83%
NY_DECS_100h_50v 102.24% 106.73% 107.04% 106.68% 105.52% 104.80% 103.18% 103.16% 104.87% 101.93% 102.03% 101.71% 102.60% 102.63% 101.45% 101.22% 101.00% 100.94% 102.30% 105.30% 104.35% 103.74% 103.12% 103.94%
NY_DECS_100h_75v 102.38% 107.22% 107.59% 107.19% 105.96% 105.25% 103.60% 103.31% 104.98% 101.95% 102.05% 101.73% 102.62% 102.68% 101.48% 101.25% 101.03% 100.97% 102.36% 105.47% 104.50% 103.86% 103.23% 104.08%

263

Houston
HOU monthly results
Table 4 - Appx.D - 29 Monthly electricity load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in HOU.

HOU ELECTRICITY MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 105.30% 104.52% 102.87% 101.35% 100.04% 98.04% 97.65% 97.37% 95.83% 96.78% 101.34% 103.77% 98.97%
HOU_DSF_MS 104.22% 104.90% 102.46% 103.06% 102.38% 100.34% 99.90% 98.93% 96.90% 96.81% 100.17% 102.12% 100.15%
HOU_DSF_CO 106.11% 106.09% 104.32% 104.39% 102.88% 101.04% 100.65% 99.90% 98.18% 98.10% 102.02% 103.84% 101.25%
HOU_DSF_SB 103.43% 104.31% 101.49% 102.10% 101.92% 100.31% 99.82% 98.58% 96.44% 95.97% 99.35% 101.40% 99.70%
HOU_DSF_BW 105.75% 105.88% 103.92% 104.68% 103.65% 102.24% 101.68% 100.71% 98.86% 98.32% 101.87% 103.50% 101.82%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 106.04% 106.04% 104.19% 104.45% 103.10% 101.45% 101.00% 100.20% 98.41% 98.16% 102.00% 103.78% 101.45%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 106.07% 106.06% 104.23% 104.43% 103.03% 101.31% 100.89% 100.10% 98.33% 98.13% 102.00% 103.80% 101.38%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 106.09% 106.08% 104.28% 104.40% 102.94% 101.17% 100.77% 100.00% 98.24% 98.10% 102.00% 103.82% 101.31%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 103.36% 104.23% 101.30% 101.71% 101.53% 99.91% 99.49% 98.25% 95.98% 95.32% 99.14% 101.27% 99.35%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 104.20% 104.82% 102.16% 102.68% 102.11% 100.32% 99.90% 98.87% 96.70% 96.29% 100.02% 102.03% 100.00%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 104.22% 104.85% 102.23% 102.71% 102.10% 100.23% 99.82% 98.81% 96.64% 96.27% 100.02% 102.05% 99.97%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 104.25% 104.87% 102.31% 102.75% 102.09% 100.13% 99.74% 98.75% 96.58% 96.24% 100.03% 102.07% 99.93%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 104.27% 104.90% 102.37% 102.79% 102.09% 100.05% 99.66% 98.69% 96.53% 96.25% 100.05% 102.09% 99.90%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 103.60% 104.40% 101.53% 101.94% 101.68% 100.00% 99.59% 98.40% 96.13% 95.56% 99.34% 101.48% 99.51%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 104.44% 104.99% 102.40% 102.93% 102.24% 100.40% 99.97% 99.01% 96.90% 96.59% 100.24% 102.25% 100.17%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 104.46% 105.01% 102.46% 102.95% 102.21% 100.29% 99.88% 98.94% 96.84% 96.56% 100.25% 102.27% 100.12%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 104.49% 105.04% 102.53% 102.98% 102.18% 100.19% 99.79% 98.87% 96.78% 96.54% 100.25% 102.29% 100.08%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 104.51% 105.06% 102.59% 103.02% 102.16% 100.10% 99.70% 98.80% 96.73% 96.54% 100.27% 102.31% 100.04%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 103.38% 104.28% 101.45% 102.09% 101.94% 100.36% 99.87% 98.61% 96.50% 95.99% 99.33% 101.36% 99.72%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 104.12% 104.81% 102.24% 103.00% 102.50% 100.74% 100.25% 99.20% 97.19% 96.96% 100.16% 102.05% 100.34%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 104.14% 104.83% 102.31% 103.03% 102.48% 100.64% 100.17% 99.14% 97.13% 96.94% 100.17% 102.07% 100.30%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 104.17% 104.86% 102.39% 103.07% 102.47% 100.54% 100.08% 99.07% 97.07% 96.92% 100.17% 102.09% 100.26%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 104.19% 104.88% 102.46% 103.11% 102.46% 100.45% 100.00% 99.01% 97.02% 96.92% 100.19% 102.11% 100.23%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 104.17% 104.84% 102.28% 103.00% 102.46% 100.68% 100.19% 99.16% 97.14% 96.94% 100.19% 102.10% 100.31%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 104.21% 104.87% 102.35% 103.04% 102.45% 100.58% 100.11% 99.09% 97.08% 96.92% 100.19% 102.11% 100.27%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 104.23% 104.90% 102.43% 103.07% 102.43% 100.47% 100.02% 99.03% 97.02% 96.90% 100.20% 102.13% 100.23%
264

Table 4 - Appx.D - 30 Monthly gas load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in HOU.

Table 4 - Appx.D - 31 Monthly heating load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in HOU.

HOU GAS MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 109.97% 106.32% 108.46% 100.90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.91% 110.95% 108.29% 107.68%
HOU_DSF_MS 109.65% 106.88% 110.83% 100.52% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.72% 108.95% 107.97% 107.79%
HOU_DSF_CO 106.44% 103.23% 104.89% 100.05% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.13% 102.26% 102.92% 104.09%
HOU_DSF_SB 109.39% 106.19% 110.40% 100.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.50% 108.62% 108.01% 107.46%
HOU_DSF_BW 104.18% 101.08% 101.28% 99.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.27% 98.64% 100.33% 101.85%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 105.93% 102.75% 103.85% 99.86% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.87% 101.30% 102.39% 103.58%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 106.14% 102.97% 104.30% 99.93% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.95% 101.64% 102.59% 103.79%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 106.41% 103.20% 104.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.04% 102.05% 102.93% 104.06%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 109.32% 105.75% 109.49% 100.07% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.84% 105.45% 107.01% 106.97%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 109.00% 105.71% 109.08% 100.11% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.85% 105.19% 106.60% 106.75%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 109.19% 105.90% 109.40% 100.15% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.92% 105.49% 106.86% 106.95%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 109.47% 106.41% 109.80% 100.20% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.01% 105.84% 107.07% 107.27%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 109.48% 106.47% 109.93% 100.22% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.05% 105.95% 107.15% 107.32%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 109.60% 106.26% 109.88% 100.19% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 106.35% 107.52% 107.37%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 109.25% 106.30% 109.59% 100.22% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.05% 106.10% 107.12% 107.17%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 109.58% 106.51% 109.93% 100.28% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.15% 106.48% 107.35% 107.42%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 109.77% 106.70% 110.31% 100.33% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.26% 106.86% 107.58% 107.62%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 109.83% 106.77% 110.44% 100.36% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.31% 106.97% 107.64% 107.68%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 109.18% 106.02% 110.08% 100.35% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.42% 108.15% 107.78% 107.26%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 108.72% 105.95% 109.73% 100.37% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.48% 107.59% 107.29% 106.96%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 108.99% 106.51% 110.09% 100.42% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.57% 108.44% 107.54% 107.31%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 109.34% 106.69% 110.41% 100.47% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.67% 108.77% 107.74% 107.55%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 109.38% 106.75% 110.57% 100.50% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.71% 108.88% 107.79% 107.61%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 109.03% 106.49% 110.06% 100.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.55% 108.49% 107.59% 107.33%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 109.27% 106.65% 110.35% 100.45% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.64% 108.81% 107.76% 107.52%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 109.54% 106.83% 110.68% 100.51% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.73% 109.14% 107.97% 107.73%
HOU HEATING MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 110.31% 106.54% 110.15% 130.34% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 130.05% 122.70% 108.81% 108.86%
HOU_DSF_MS 109.97% 107.13% 112.99% 117.66% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 111.28% 118.55% 108.47% 108.99%
HOU_DSF_CO 106.66% 103.34% 105.87% 101.59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 102.11% 104.69% 103.11% 104.72%
HOU_DSF_SB 109.71% 106.41% 112.47% 112.94% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 107.87% 117.87% 108.51% 108.61%
HOU_DSF_BW 104.33% 101.12% 101.54% 78.93% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 88.46% 97.17% 100.35% 102.13%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 106.13% 102.85% 104.62% 95.17% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 97.98% 102.69% 102.54% 104.13%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 106.35% 103.07% 105.16% 97.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 99.23% 103.40% 102.75% 104.38%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 106.63% 103.32% 105.69% 100.07% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.69% 104.24% 103.12% 104.68%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 109.63% 105.95% 111.38% 102.36% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 97.47% 111.29% 107.45% 108.05%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 109.30% 105.92% 110.89% 103.59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 97.67% 110.75% 107.02% 107.78%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 109.51% 106.11% 111.27% 105.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 98.81% 111.38% 107.30% 108.02%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 109.79% 106.64% 111.76% 106.71% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.09% 112.10% 107.51% 108.39%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 109.80% 106.70% 111.91% 107.56% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.77% 112.32% 107.60% 108.45%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 109.93% 106.48% 111.85% 106.45% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 99.95% 113.15% 108.00% 108.50%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 109.57% 106.52% 111.50% 107.54% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.85% 112.64% 107.57% 108.27%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 109.90% 106.74% 111.91% 109.32% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 102.35% 113.43% 107.81% 108.56%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 110.10% 106.94% 112.37% 111.18% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 104.07% 114.21% 108.06% 108.79%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 110.16% 107.01% 112.52% 112.10% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 104.81% 114.44% 108.12% 108.86%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 109.49% 106.24% 112.09% 111.74% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 106.66% 116.89% 108.27% 108.38%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 109.01% 106.16% 111.67% 112.40% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 107.52% 115.73% 107.75% 108.02%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 109.30% 106.74% 112.10% 114.21% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 108.99% 117.50% 108.01% 108.43%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 109.65% 106.93% 112.49% 116.06% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 110.48% 118.18% 108.22% 108.71%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 109.70% 106.99% 112.68% 117.09% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 111.13% 118.39% 108.28% 108.78%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 109.34% 106.72% 112.07% 113.54% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 108.61% 117.59% 108.07% 108.45%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 109.59% 106.89% 112.41% 115.31% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 110.03% 118.26% 108.25% 108.67%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 109.87% 107.07% 112.80% 117.26% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 111.52% 118.95% 108.47% 108.92%

265

Table 4 - Appx.D - 32 Monthly cooling load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in HOU.

Table 4 - Appx.D - 33 Monthly total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS in HOU.

HOU COOLING MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 0.00% 72.88% 87.03% 90.23% 95.14% 94.84% 95.36% 95.15% 92.35% 86.57% 72.24% 65.31% 93.73%
HOU_DSF_MS 0.00% 70.62% 85.61% 90.72% 96.29% 96.37% 96.87% 96.27% 93.65% 87.80% 72.73% 66.12% 95.00%
HOU_DSF_CO 0.00% 71.73% 86.80% 91.77% 96.93% 97.35% 97.78% 97.22% 94.48% 87.84% 75.12% 63.11% 95.85%
HOU_DSF_SB 0.00% 68.93% 84.99% 90.38% 96.40% 96.73% 97.11% 96.32% 93.50% 87.14% 70.80% 63.59% 95.03%
HOU_DSF_BW 0.00% 74.15% 88.21% 93.85% 98.62% 99.20% 99.23% 98.40% 95.70% 89.06% 77.67% 63.96% 97.29%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 0.00% 72.32% 87.28% 92.45% 97.52% 98.01% 98.31% 97.68% 94.90% 88.17% 75.68% 63.34% 96.37%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 0.00% 72.07% 87.10% 92.20% 97.32% 97.79% 98.14% 97.53% 94.76% 88.04% 75.42% 63.20% 96.19%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 0.00% 71.78% 86.92% 91.94% 97.09% 97.56% 97.96% 97.37% 94.60% 87.90% 75.14% 63.05% 96.01%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 0.00% 66.52% 83.53% 89.12% 95.70% 96.16% 96.69% 95.91% 92.87% 85.75% 68.96% 59.49% 94.43%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 0.00% 68.68% 84.67% 90.24% 96.22% 96.55% 97.03% 96.36% 93.50% 86.82% 71.42% 62.27% 94.96%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 0.00% 68.45% 84.52% 90.03% 96.05% 96.34% 96.87% 96.22% 93.36% 86.68% 71.17% 62.12% 94.80%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 0.00% 68.23% 84.37% 89.80% 95.88% 96.13% 96.70% 96.09% 93.22% 86.54% 70.97% 61.98% 94.64%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 0.00% 68.11% 84.25% 89.63% 95.74% 95.94% 96.55% 95.96% 93.10% 86.47% 70.88% 61.95% 94.50%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 0.00% 66.90% 83.69% 89.33% 95.82% 96.23% 96.76% 96.00% 92.99% 85.97% 69.13% 60.09% 94.53%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 0.00% 69.29% 84.98% 90.53% 96.35% 96.63% 97.09% 96.47% 93.66% 87.14% 71.79% 63.16% 95.09%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 0.00% 69.08% 84.80% 90.29% 96.16% 96.41% 96.92% 96.33% 93.52% 87.01% 71.58% 63.04% 94.92%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 0.00% 68.98% 84.65% 90.06% 95.98% 96.19% 96.75% 96.18% 93.38% 86.87% 71.33% 62.91% 94.75%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 0.00% 68.86% 84.54% 89.91% 95.83% 96.01% 96.59% 96.05% 93.27% 86.80% 71.24% 62.89% 94.61%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 0.00% 69.08% 85.09% 90.49% 96.46% 96.81% 97.18% 96.38% 93.59% 87.26% 71.04% 63.93% 95.11%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 0.00% 71.60% 86.35% 91.65% 96.98% 97.18% 97.51% 96.82% 94.23% 88.44% 73.83% 67.18% 95.65%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 0.00% 71.39% 86.21% 91.42% 96.80% 96.95% 97.33% 96.67% 94.09% 88.32% 73.63% 67.10% 95.48%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 0.00% 71.19% 86.07% 91.18% 96.61% 96.73% 97.15% 96.53% 93.95% 88.19% 73.42% 67.03% 95.31%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 0.00% 71.16% 85.95% 91.00% 96.45% 96.53% 96.99% 96.39% 93.83% 88.11% 73.33% 66.90% 95.16%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 0.00% 71.51% 86.34% 91.54% 96.90% 97.08% 97.43% 96.74% 94.13% 88.34% 73.75% 67.35% 95.56%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 0.00% 71.21% 86.08% 91.29% 96.71% 96.86% 97.25% 96.60% 93.99% 88.19% 73.36% 66.75% 95.39%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 0.00% 70.97% 85.94% 91.05% 96.53% 96.63% 97.07% 96.45% 93.85% 88.05% 73.14% 66.68% 95.22%
HOU TOTAL EUI MONTHLY COMPARISON of ALL façade types Vs. SSF 90%
Model Nr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 108.16% 105.56% 104.13% 101.33% 100.04% 98.07% 97.68% 97.40% 95.89% 96.94% 102.10% 105.82% 100.33%
HOU_DSF_MS 107.54% 106.05% 104.34% 102.96% 102.32% 100.34% 99.90% 98.94% 96.95% 96.93% 100.86% 104.77% 101.34%
HOU_DSF_CO 106.31% 104.43% 104.45% 104.23% 102.81% 101.03% 100.64% 99.90% 98.20% 98.16% 102.04% 103.42% 101.69%
HOU_DSF_SB 107.08% 105.40% 103.49% 102.03% 101.87% 100.30% 99.83% 98.60% 96.50% 96.11% 100.08% 104.39% 100.91%
HOU_DSF_BW 104.79% 103.09% 103.33% 104.48% 103.56% 102.21% 101.66% 100.70% 98.88% 98.35% 101.62% 102.07% 101.83%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 105.97% 104.13% 104.11% 104.28% 103.03% 101.42% 100.99% 100.20% 98.44% 98.21% 101.95% 103.15% 101.78%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 106.11% 104.26% 104.25% 104.26% 102.95% 101.29% 100.88% 100.10% 98.36% 98.19% 101.97% 103.25% 101.76%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 106.29% 104.41% 104.38% 104.23% 102.87% 101.15% 100.76% 100.00% 98.27% 98.16% 102.00% 103.42% 101.74%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 107.01% 105.12% 103.14% 101.64% 101.49% 99.91% 99.50% 98.27% 96.04% 95.46% 99.63% 103.87% 100.54%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 107.14% 105.34% 103.71% 102.58% 102.06% 100.32% 99.90% 98.89% 96.75% 96.40% 100.42% 104.10% 101.05%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 107.27% 105.46% 103.84% 102.61% 102.05% 100.22% 99.82% 98.83% 96.69% 96.38% 100.45% 104.23% 101.05%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 107.44% 105.77% 103.99% 102.65% 102.04% 100.13% 99.74% 98.77% 96.63% 96.36% 100.49% 104.33% 101.07%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 107.46% 105.81% 104.07% 102.69% 102.04% 100.05% 99.67% 98.71% 96.58% 96.37% 100.51% 104.38% 101.05%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 107.28% 105.48% 103.40% 101.88% 101.64% 100.00% 99.59% 98.42% 96.19% 95.69% 99.89% 104.21% 100.73%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 107.39% 105.75% 104.01% 102.83% 102.19% 100.39% 99.97% 99.03% 96.94% 96.69% 100.70% 104.46% 101.25%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 107.59% 105.89% 104.14% 102.85% 102.16% 100.29% 99.88% 98.96% 96.88% 96.67% 100.74% 104.57% 101.25%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 107.72% 106.01% 104.28% 102.88% 102.13% 100.19% 99.79% 98.89% 96.82% 96.66% 100.77% 104.68% 101.25%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 107.76% 106.05% 104.36% 102.91% 102.11% 100.10% 99.71% 98.82% 96.78% 96.66% 100.80% 104.72% 101.23%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 106.93% 105.29% 103.39% 102.02% 101.89% 100.35% 99.87% 98.63% 96.55% 96.13% 100.02% 104.27% 100.89%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 106.93% 105.47% 103.92% 102.90% 102.44% 100.73% 100.25% 99.21% 97.23% 97.07% 100.74% 104.42% 101.36%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 107.11% 105.81% 104.06% 102.93% 102.42% 100.63% 100.17% 99.15% 97.17% 97.05% 100.82% 104.54% 101.39%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 107.33% 105.92% 104.19% 102.97% 102.41% 100.53% 100.08% 99.08% 97.11% 97.04% 100.85% 104.64% 101.39%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 107.37% 105.97% 104.28% 103.01% 102.40% 100.44% 100.00% 99.02% 97.07% 97.04% 100.87% 104.68% 101.37%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 107.15% 105.80% 104.03% 102.90% 102.40% 100.67% 100.19% 99.17% 97.18% 97.06% 100.85% 104.58% 101.40%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 107.31% 105.91% 104.15% 102.94% 102.39% 100.57% 100.11% 99.11% 97.12% 97.03% 100.87% 104.67% 101.40%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 107.48% 106.02% 104.28% 102.98% 102.37% 100.47% 100.02% 99.04% 97.06% 97.02% 100.90% 104.78% 101.39%
266

HOU hottest day results
Table 4 - Appx.D - 34 Electricity load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in
HOU.

HOU ELECTRICITY USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY August 2nd
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.19% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.52% 96.33% 100.49% 99.83% 99.88% 100.08% 98.83% 99.59% 99.40% 99.77% 100.05% 98.14% 92.81% 93.54% 93.30% 93.33% 94.72% 100.00%
HOU_DSF_MS 98.50% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.27% 96.60% 102.20% 101.30% 100.80% 100.59% 99.32% 100.38% 100.46% 100.81% 100.89% 99.18% 96.88% 96.92% 96.60% 96.36% 97.00% 102.65%
HOU_DSF_CO 104.06% 100.87% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.88% 103.14% 102.62% 101.74% 101.41% 101.30% 99.91% 100.75% 100.57% 100.79% 100.90% 99.33% 98.62% 99.39% 100.10% 100.88% 100.89% 108.12%
HOU_DSF_SB 98.72% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.87% 96.87% 100.43% 100.44% 100.23% 100.15% 98.94% 99.96% 100.01% 100.28% 100.32% 99.08% 98.00% 97.81% 97.52% 97.22% 97.59% 103.23%
HOU_DSF_BW 103.46% 101.70% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 103.80% 106.84% 102.30% 101.91% 101.61% 101.51% 100.30% 100.89% 100.68% 100.88% 101.00% 100.11% 101.47% 102.00% 103.19% 104.20% 103.90% 110.85%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 104.61% 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 103.11% 104.27% 102.50% 101.72% 101.47% 101.40% 100.09% 100.81% 100.59% 100.78% 100.88% 99.58% 99.81% 100.40% 101.21% 102.20% 101.95% 109.21%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 104.47% 101.07% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 103.02% 103.87% 102.54% 101.75% 101.45% 101.37% 100.03% 100.79% 100.58% 100.79% 100.89% 99.50% 99.42% 100.08% 100.85% 101.82% 101.60% 108.88%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 104.38% 100.97% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.93% 103.47% 102.59% 101.74% 101.43% 101.34% 99.97% 100.77% 100.58% 100.79% 100.90% 99.42% 99.07% 99.74% 100.53% 101.34% 101.27% 108.53%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 101.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.87% 98.08% 100.57% 100.40% 100.09% 99.92% 98.51% 99.69% 99.75% 100.04% 100.10% 98.59% 96.55% 97.08% 97.29% 97.50% 98.35% 104.50%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 101.85% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.05% 98.46% 102.14% 101.02% 100.67% 100.55% 99.17% 100.19% 100.14% 100.40% 100.48% 98.93% 97.13% 97.41% 97.61% 97.90% 98.59% 104.74%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 101.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.12% 98.24% 101.82% 101.12% 100.69% 100.53% 99.11% 100.19% 100.19% 100.48% 100.56% 98.90% 96.74% 97.13% 97.34% 97.48% 98.32% 104.43%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 101.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.20% 98.03% 102.04% 101.24% 100.72% 100.50% 99.05% 100.19% 100.22% 100.56% 100.65% 98.87% 96.35% 96.80% 97.00% 97.12% 98.04% 104.12%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 101.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.27% 97.86% 102.24% 101.34% 100.75% 100.48% 99.00% 100.19% 100.26% 100.62% 100.73% 98.84% 96.01% 96.50% 96.68% 96.80% 97.78% 103.83%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 102.67% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.91% 97.71% 100.77% 100.53% 100.26% 100.13% 98.75% 99.87% 99.89% 100.17% 100.24% 98.77% 97.00% 97.40% 97.51% 97.66% 98.29% 104.32%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 100.10% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.07% 98.03% 101.66% 101.05% 100.78% 100.70% 99.36% 100.33% 100.26% 100.51% 100.57% 99.07% 97.43% 97.67% 97.70% 97.88% 98.36% 104.39%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 101.29% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 97.80% 101.85% 101.14% 100.80% 100.67% 99.30% 100.32% 100.28% 100.57% 100.64% 99.02% 97.06% 97.29% 97.34% 97.51% 98.15% 104.10%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.21% 97.57% 102.03% 101.23% 100.81% 100.65% 99.24% 100.32% 100.31% 100.63% 100.71% 98.98% 96.67% 96.93% 96.99% 97.15% 97.88% 103.80%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 100.93% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.27% 97.38% 102.20% 101.35% 100.83% 100.62% 99.19% 100.31% 100.34% 100.69% 100.78% 98.94% 96.30% 96.67% 96.69% 96.84% 97.62% 103.53%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 98.81% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.87% 97.00% 100.35% 100.42% 100.21% 100.11% 98.91% 99.94% 100.00% 100.28% 100.32% 99.10% 98.10% 97.90% 97.64% 97.36% 97.71% 103.37%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 98.71% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.03% 97.34% 101.57% 100.98% 100.75% 100.69% 99.55% 100.41% 100.38% 100.60% 100.65% 99.36% 98.34% 98.01% 97.72% 97.39% 97.76% 103.43%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 98.68% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.12% 97.10% 101.79% 101.10% 100.77% 100.66% 99.48% 100.41% 100.42% 100.69% 100.75% 99.32% 97.92% 97.66% 97.37% 97.06% 97.54% 103.17%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 98.48% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.20% 96.87% 102.01% 101.21% 100.79% 100.63% 99.42% 100.40% 100.46% 100.77% 100.84% 99.28% 97.48% 97.36% 97.08% 96.76% 97.29% 102.93%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 98.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.27% 96.66% 102.21% 101.31% 100.81% 100.60% 99.36% 100.40% 100.49% 100.84% 100.92% 99.25% 97.11% 97.06% 96.78% 96.46% 97.05% 102.69%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 98.66% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.04% 97.11% 101.55% 100.98% 100.76% 100.71% 99.56% 100.42% 100.38% 100.60% 100.64% 99.33% 98.18% 97.88% 97.58% 97.23% 97.63% 103.25%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 98.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.12% 96.94% 101.78% 101.10% 100.78% 100.69% 99.50% 100.42% 100.42% 100.69% 100.74% 99.29% 97.79% 97.54% 97.25% 96.91% 97.40% 103.02%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 98.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.20% 96.70% 102.00% 101.21% 100.80% 100.65% 99.44% 100.41% 100.45% 100.76% 100.83% 99.25% 97.35% 97.24% 96.94% 96.59% 97.14% 102.76%

267

HOU ELECTRICITY USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY August 2nd
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.19% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.52% 96.33% 100.49% 99.83% 99.88% 100.08% 98.83% 99.59% 99.40% 99.77% 100.05% 98.14% 92.81% 93.54% 93.30% 93.33% 94.72% 100.00%
HOU_DSF_MS 98.50% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.27% 96.60% 102.20% 101.30% 100.80% 100.59% 99.32% 100.38% 100.46% 100.81% 100.89% 99.18% 96.88% 96.92% 96.60% 96.36% 97.00% 102.65%
HOU_DSF_CO 104.06% 100.87% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.88% 103.14% 102.62% 101.74% 101.41% 101.30% 99.91% 100.75% 100.57% 100.79% 100.90% 99.33% 98.62% 99.39% 100.10% 100.88% 100.89% 108.12%
HOU_DSF_SB 98.72% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.87% 96.87% 100.43% 100.44% 100.23% 100.15% 98.94% 99.96% 100.01% 100.28% 100.32% 99.08% 98.00% 97.81% 97.52% 97.22% 97.59% 103.23%
HOU_DSF_BW 103.46% 101.70% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 103.80% 106.84% 102.30% 101.91% 101.61% 101.51% 100.30% 100.89% 100.68% 100.88% 101.00% 100.11% 101.47% 102.00% 103.19% 104.20% 103.90% 110.85%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 104.61% 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 103.11% 104.27% 102.50% 101.72% 101.47% 101.40% 100.09% 100.81% 100.59% 100.78% 100.88% 99.58% 99.81% 100.40% 101.21% 102.20% 101.95% 109.21%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 104.47% 101.07% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 103.02% 103.87% 102.54% 101.75% 101.45% 101.37% 100.03% 100.79% 100.58% 100.79% 100.89% 99.50% 99.42% 100.08% 100.85% 101.82% 101.60% 108.88%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 104.38% 100.97% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.93% 103.47% 102.59% 101.74% 101.43% 101.34% 99.97% 100.77% 100.58% 100.79% 100.90% 99.42% 99.07% 99.74% 100.53% 101.34% 101.27% 108.53%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 101.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.87% 98.08% 100.57% 100.40% 100.09% 99.92% 98.51% 99.69% 99.75% 100.04% 100.10% 98.59% 96.55% 97.08% 97.29% 97.50% 98.35% 104.50%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 101.85% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.05% 98.46% 102.14% 101.02% 100.67% 100.55% 99.17% 100.19% 100.14% 100.40% 100.48% 98.93% 97.13% 97.41% 97.61% 97.90% 98.59% 104.74%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 101.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.12% 98.24% 101.82% 101.12% 100.69% 100.53% 99.11% 100.19% 100.19% 100.48% 100.56% 98.90% 96.74% 97.13% 97.34% 97.48% 98.32% 104.43%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 101.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.20% 98.03% 102.04% 101.24% 100.72% 100.50% 99.05% 100.19% 100.22% 100.56% 100.65% 98.87% 96.35% 96.80% 97.00% 97.12% 98.04% 104.12%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 101.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.27% 97.86% 102.24% 101.34% 100.75% 100.48% 99.00% 100.19% 100.26% 100.62% 100.73% 98.84% 96.01% 96.50% 96.68% 96.80% 97.78% 103.83%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 102.67% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.91% 97.71% 100.77% 100.53% 100.26% 100.13% 98.75% 99.87% 99.89% 100.17% 100.24% 98.77% 97.00% 97.40% 97.51% 97.66% 98.29% 104.32%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 100.10% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.07% 98.03% 101.66% 101.05% 100.78% 100.70% 99.36% 100.33% 100.26% 100.51% 100.57% 99.07% 97.43% 97.67% 97.70% 97.88% 98.36% 104.39%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 101.29% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.14% 97.80% 101.85% 101.14% 100.80% 100.67% 99.30% 100.32% 100.28% 100.57% 100.64% 99.02% 97.06% 97.29% 97.34% 97.51% 98.15% 104.10%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.21% 97.57% 102.03% 101.23% 100.81% 100.65% 99.24% 100.32% 100.31% 100.63% 100.71% 98.98% 96.67% 96.93% 96.99% 97.15% 97.88% 103.80%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 100.93% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.27% 97.38% 102.20% 101.35% 100.83% 100.62% 99.19% 100.31% 100.34% 100.69% 100.78% 98.94% 96.30% 96.67% 96.69% 96.84% 97.62% 103.53%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 98.81% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.87% 97.00% 100.35% 100.42% 100.21% 100.11% 98.91% 99.94% 100.00% 100.28% 100.32% 99.10% 98.10% 97.90% 97.64% 97.36% 97.71% 103.37%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 98.71% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.03% 97.34% 101.57% 100.98% 100.75% 100.69% 99.55% 100.41% 100.38% 100.60% 100.65% 99.36% 98.34% 98.01% 97.72% 97.39% 97.76% 103.43%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 98.68% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.12% 97.10% 101.79% 101.10% 100.77% 100.66% 99.48% 100.41% 100.42% 100.69% 100.75% 99.32% 97.92% 97.66% 97.37% 97.06% 97.54% 103.17%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 98.48% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.20% 96.87% 102.01% 101.21% 100.79% 100.63% 99.42% 100.40% 100.46% 100.77% 100.84% 99.28% 97.48% 97.36% 97.08% 96.76% 97.29% 102.93%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 98.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.27% 96.66% 102.21% 101.31% 100.81% 100.60% 99.36% 100.40% 100.49% 100.84% 100.92% 99.25% 97.11% 97.06% 96.78% 96.46% 97.05% 102.69%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 98.66% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.04% 97.11% 101.55% 100.98% 100.76% 100.71% 99.56% 100.42% 100.38% 100.60% 100.64% 99.33% 98.18% 97.88% 97.58% 97.23% 97.63% 103.25%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 98.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.12% 96.94% 101.78% 101.10% 100.78% 100.69% 99.50% 100.42% 100.42% 100.69% 100.74% 99.29% 97.79% 97.54% 97.25% 96.91% 97.40% 103.02%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 98.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.20% 96.70% 102.00% 101.21% 100.80% 100.65% 99.44% 100.41% 100.45% 100.76% 100.83% 99.25% 97.35% 97.24% 96.94% 96.59% 97.14% 102.76%
268

Table 4 - Appx.D - 35 Cooling load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in
HOU.

HOU COOLING USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY August 2nd
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 96.51% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.22% 99.03% 98.76% 98.69% 98.71% 97.33% 98.63% 98.73% 99.01% 99.14% 97.26% 91.04% 92.12% 91.78% 91.38% 92.87% 100.00%
HOU_DSF_MS 97.11% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 91.40% 99.25% 98.88% 98.66% 98.65% 97.38% 98.82% 99.09% 99.43% 99.53% 98.17% 95.91% 96.24% 95.83% 95.29% 95.95% 103.85%
HOU_DSF_CO 107.82% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 101.00% 99.78% 99.24% 98.96% 98.88% 97.50% 98.87% 99.07% 99.39% 99.54% 98.35% 98.02% 99.26% 100.13% 101.13% 101.20% 111.79%
HOU_DSF_SB 97.54% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.79% 98.43% 98.80% 98.63% 98.60% 97.35% 98.75% 99.02% 99.37% 99.48% 98.42% 97.33% 97.33% 96.96% 96.40% 96.75% 104.69%
HOU_DSF_BW 106.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 106.72% 99.78% 99.71% 99.34% 99.19% 98.01% 99.11% 99.30% 99.63% 99.80% 99.35% 101.49% 102.44% 103.92% 105.43% 105.27% 115.75%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 108.88% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 102.87% 99.92% 99.40% 99.11% 99.01% 97.72% 98.98% 99.16% 99.49% 99.63% 98.72% 99.48% 100.49% 101.48% 102.85% 102.63% 113.38%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 108.62% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 102.22% 99.87% 99.37% 99.06% 98.97% 97.65% 98.94% 99.13% 99.46% 99.60% 98.60% 99.01% 100.10% 101.04% 102.35% 102.16% 112.90%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 108.43% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 101.56% 99.83% 99.30% 99.01% 98.92% 97.58% 98.91% 99.10% 99.42% 99.57% 98.47% 98.57% 99.68% 100.64% 101.73% 101.71% 112.39%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 103.82% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 94.58% 98.62% 98.78% 98.50% 98.40% 96.90% 98.48% 98.75% 99.11% 99.24% 97.86% 95.56% 96.44% 96.68% 96.77% 97.77% 106.53%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 103.57% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 94.68% 99.97% 99.01% 98.69% 98.62% 97.20% 98.68% 98.92% 99.26% 99.39% 98.08% 96.25% 96.84% 97.06% 97.28% 98.09% 106.88%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 103.35% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 94.17% 99.29% 98.96% 98.66% 98.58% 97.13% 98.65% 98.91% 99.25% 99.38% 97.98% 95.76% 96.49% 96.74% 96.74% 97.73% 106.44%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 103.02% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.66% 99.30% 98.94% 98.62% 98.54% 97.06% 98.63% 98.88% 99.24% 99.36% 97.87% 95.28% 96.09% 96.32% 96.28% 97.35% 105.98%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 102.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.24% 99.30% 98.92% 98.59% 98.50% 97.00% 98.60% 98.86% 99.23% 99.35% 97.78% 94.85% 95.73% 95.93% 95.86% 97.01% 105.57%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 105.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.92% 98.71% 98.79% 98.55% 98.48% 97.03% 98.57% 98.83% 99.19% 99.32% 98.02% 96.11% 96.83% 96.94% 96.97% 97.70% 106.28%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 100.18% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.99% 99.27% 98.95% 98.73% 98.68% 97.32% 98.76% 99.00% 99.34% 99.46% 98.22% 96.62% 97.15% 97.18% 97.26% 97.79% 106.38%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 102.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.48% 99.26% 98.92% 98.69% 98.63% 97.24% 98.73% 98.97% 99.33% 99.43% 98.11% 96.16% 96.70% 96.73% 96.77% 97.50% 105.96%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 102.23% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.97% 99.26% 98.89% 98.64% 98.59% 97.17% 98.70% 98.95% 99.31% 99.42% 98.00% 95.67% 96.25% 96.31% 96.31% 97.13% 105.53%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 101.79% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.54% 99.25% 98.91% 98.61% 98.55% 97.11% 98.67% 98.93% 99.29% 99.40% 97.90% 95.21% 95.94% 95.94% 95.91% 96.79% 105.13%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 97.71% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.99% 98.35% 98.80% 98.64% 98.60% 97.35% 98.75% 99.02% 99.37% 99.48% 98.45% 97.44% 97.43% 97.10% 96.58% 96.91% 104.90%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 97.51% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.08% 99.28% 99.00% 98.82% 98.82% 97.67% 98.95% 99.20% 99.50% 99.60% 98.59% 97.72% 97.58% 97.20% 96.63% 96.98% 104.98%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 97.46% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.52% 99.28% 98.97% 98.77% 98.77% 97.59% 98.92% 99.18% 99.50% 99.60% 98.48% 97.19% 97.14% 96.78% 96.19% 96.67% 104.61%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 97.07% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 91.97% 99.27% 98.93% 98.73% 98.72% 97.52% 98.88% 99.15% 99.48% 99.57% 98.36% 96.65% 96.78% 96.42% 95.80% 96.34% 104.25%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 96.87% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 91.49% 99.27% 98.90% 98.68% 98.67% 97.45% 98.86% 99.13% 99.46% 99.56% 98.25% 96.19% 96.41% 96.05% 95.43% 96.02% 103.90%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 97.41% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.73% 99.26% 98.98% 98.81% 98.81% 97.66% 98.94% 99.19% 99.49% 99.59% 98.55% 97.53% 97.42% 97.03% 96.41% 96.80% 104.72%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 97.16% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.27% 99.26% 98.95% 98.77% 98.77% 97.58% 98.91% 99.17% 99.49% 99.58% 98.44% 97.04% 97.00% 96.62% 96.00% 96.48% 104.38%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 96.88% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 91.72% 99.25% 98.92% 98.72% 98.72% 97.51% 98.88% 99.14% 99.47% 99.56% 98.32% 96.50% 96.63% 96.24% 95.58% 96.14% 104.01%

269

HOU COOLING USAGE COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY August 2nd
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 96.51% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.22% 99.03% 98.76% 98.69% 98.71% 97.33% 98.63% 98.73% 99.01% 99.14% 97.26% 91.04% 92.12% 91.78% 91.38% 92.87% 100.00%
HOU_DSF_MS 97.11% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 91.40% 99.25% 98.88% 98.66% 98.65% 97.38% 98.82% 99.09% 99.43% 99.53% 98.17% 95.91% 96.24% 95.83% 95.29% 95.95% 103.85%
HOU_DSF_CO 107.82% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 101.00% 99.78% 99.24% 98.96% 98.88% 97.50% 98.87% 99.07% 99.39% 99.54% 98.35% 98.02% 99.26% 100.13% 101.13% 101.20% 111.79%
HOU_DSF_SB 97.54% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.79% 98.43% 98.80% 98.63% 98.60% 97.35% 98.75% 99.02% 99.37% 99.48% 98.42% 97.33% 97.33% 96.96% 96.40% 96.75% 104.69%
HOU_DSF_BW 106.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 106.72% 99.78% 99.71% 99.34% 99.19% 98.01% 99.11% 99.30% 99.63% 99.80% 99.35% 101.49% 102.44% 103.92% 105.43% 105.27% 115.75%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 108.88% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 102.87% 99.92% 99.40% 99.11% 99.01% 97.72% 98.98% 99.16% 99.49% 99.63% 98.72% 99.48% 100.49% 101.48% 102.85% 102.63% 113.38%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 108.62% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 102.22% 99.87% 99.37% 99.06% 98.97% 97.65% 98.94% 99.13% 99.46% 99.60% 98.60% 99.01% 100.10% 101.04% 102.35% 102.16% 112.90%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 108.43% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 101.56% 99.83% 99.30% 99.01% 98.92% 97.58% 98.91% 99.10% 99.42% 99.57% 98.47% 98.57% 99.68% 100.64% 101.73% 101.71% 112.39%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 103.82% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 94.58% 98.62% 98.78% 98.50% 98.40% 96.90% 98.48% 98.75% 99.11% 99.24% 97.86% 95.56% 96.44% 96.68% 96.77% 97.77% 106.53%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 103.57% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 94.68% 99.97% 99.01% 98.69% 98.62% 97.20% 98.68% 98.92% 99.26% 99.39% 98.08% 96.25% 96.84% 97.06% 97.28% 98.09% 106.88%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 103.35% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 94.17% 99.29% 98.96% 98.66% 98.58% 97.13% 98.65% 98.91% 99.25% 99.38% 97.98% 95.76% 96.49% 96.74% 96.74% 97.73% 106.44%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 103.02% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.66% 99.30% 98.94% 98.62% 98.54% 97.06% 98.63% 98.88% 99.24% 99.36% 97.87% 95.28% 96.09% 96.32% 96.28% 97.35% 105.98%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 102.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.24% 99.30% 98.92% 98.59% 98.50% 97.00% 98.60% 98.86% 99.23% 99.35% 97.78% 94.85% 95.73% 95.93% 95.86% 97.01% 105.57%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 105.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.92% 98.71% 98.79% 98.55% 98.48% 97.03% 98.57% 98.83% 99.19% 99.32% 98.02% 96.11% 96.83% 96.94% 96.97% 97.70% 106.28%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 100.18% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.99% 99.27% 98.95% 98.73% 98.68% 97.32% 98.76% 99.00% 99.34% 99.46% 98.22% 96.62% 97.15% 97.18% 97.26% 97.79% 106.38%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 102.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.48% 99.26% 98.92% 98.69% 98.63% 97.24% 98.73% 98.97% 99.33% 99.43% 98.11% 96.16% 96.70% 96.73% 96.77% 97.50% 105.96%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 102.23% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.97% 99.26% 98.89% 98.64% 98.59% 97.17% 98.70% 98.95% 99.31% 99.42% 98.00% 95.67% 96.25% 96.31% 96.31% 97.13% 105.53%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 101.79% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.54% 99.25% 98.91% 98.61% 98.55% 97.11% 98.67% 98.93% 99.29% 99.40% 97.90% 95.21% 95.94% 95.94% 95.91% 96.79% 105.13%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 97.71% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.99% 98.35% 98.80% 98.64% 98.60% 97.35% 98.75% 99.02% 99.37% 99.48% 98.45% 97.44% 97.43% 97.10% 96.58% 96.91% 104.90%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 97.51% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.08% 99.28% 99.00% 98.82% 98.82% 97.67% 98.95% 99.20% 99.50% 99.60% 98.59% 97.72% 97.58% 97.20% 96.63% 96.98% 104.98%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 97.46% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.52% 99.28% 98.97% 98.77% 98.77% 97.59% 98.92% 99.18% 99.50% 99.60% 98.48% 97.19% 97.14% 96.78% 96.19% 96.67% 104.61%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 97.07% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 91.97% 99.27% 98.93% 98.73% 98.72% 97.52% 98.88% 99.15% 99.48% 99.57% 98.36% 96.65% 96.78% 96.42% 95.80% 96.34% 104.25%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 96.87% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 91.49% 99.27% 98.90% 98.68% 98.67% 97.45% 98.86% 99.13% 99.46% 99.56% 98.25% 96.19% 96.41% 96.05% 95.43% 96.02% 103.90%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 97.41% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.73% 99.26% 98.98% 98.81% 98.81% 97.66% 98.94% 99.19% 99.49% 99.59% 98.55% 97.53% 97.42% 97.03% 96.41% 96.80% 104.72%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 97.16% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 92.27% 99.26% 98.95% 98.77% 98.77% 97.58% 98.91% 99.17% 99.49% 99.58% 98.44% 97.04% 97.00% 96.62% 96.00% 96.48% 104.38%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 96.88% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 91.72% 99.25% 98.92% 98.72% 98.72% 97.51% 98.88% 99.14% 99.47% 99.56% 98.32% 96.50% 96.63% 96.24% 95.58% 96.14% 104.01%
270

Table 4 - Appx.D - 36 Total EUI comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the hottest day in HOU.

HOU TOTAL EUI COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY August 2nd
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.19% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.48% 96.42% 100.48% 99.84% 99.88% 100.08% 98.85% 99.60% 99.40% 99.77% 100.05% 98.15% 92.93% 93.61% 93.38% 93.40% 94.76% 100.00%
HOU_DSF_MS 98.50% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.22% 96.68% 102.17% 101.29% 100.79% 100.59% 99.33% 100.38% 100.46% 100.81% 100.89% 99.18% 96.93% 96.96% 96.64% 96.39% 97.02% 102.63%
HOU_DSF_CO 104.06% 100.87% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.81% 103.06% 102.59% 101.72% 101.40% 101.29% 99.91% 100.74% 100.56% 100.79% 100.90% 99.34% 98.64% 99.40% 100.10% 100.87% 100.89% 108.05%
HOU_DSF_SB 98.72% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.83% 96.95% 100.43% 100.43% 100.23% 100.15% 98.96% 99.96% 100.01% 100.28% 100.32% 99.09% 98.04% 97.83% 97.55% 97.25% 97.61% 103.20%
HOU_DSF_BW 103.46% 101.70% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 103.72% 106.67% 102.28% 101.89% 101.60% 101.50% 100.29% 100.89% 100.68% 100.88% 100.99% 100.11% 101.45% 101.98% 103.16% 104.16% 103.88% 110.76%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 104.61% 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 103.04% 104.16% 102.47% 101.70% 101.46% 101.39% 100.09% 100.80% 100.58% 100.78% 100.87% 99.59% 99.82% 100.40% 101.20% 102.18% 101.94% 109.14%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 104.47% 101.07% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.95% 103.78% 102.51% 101.73% 101.44% 101.36% 100.03% 100.78% 100.58% 100.79% 100.88% 99.51% 99.43% 100.08% 100.84% 101.80% 101.59% 108.81%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 104.38% 100.97% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.87% 103.39% 102.56% 101.72% 101.42% 101.32% 99.97% 100.76% 100.57% 100.79% 100.89% 99.42% 99.08% 99.74% 100.52% 101.32% 101.26% 108.46%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 101.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.83% 98.13% 100.56% 100.40% 100.09% 99.93% 98.54% 99.69% 99.75% 100.04% 100.10% 98.61% 96.60% 97.11% 97.32% 97.53% 98.36% 104.46%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 101.85% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.00% 98.49% 102.12% 101.01% 100.66% 100.54% 99.18% 100.18% 100.14% 100.40% 100.47% 98.94% 97.18% 97.43% 97.63% 97.92% 98.60% 104.70%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 101.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.08% 98.28% 101.80% 101.11% 100.69% 100.52% 99.13% 100.19% 100.18% 100.48% 100.56% 98.91% 96.79% 97.16% 97.37% 97.50% 98.33% 104.40%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 101.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 98.08% 102.02% 101.22% 100.71% 100.50% 99.07% 100.19% 100.22% 100.55% 100.65% 98.88% 96.41% 96.83% 97.03% 97.15% 98.05% 104.09%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 101.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.22% 97.91% 102.21% 101.33% 100.74% 100.48% 99.02% 100.19% 100.25% 100.62% 100.72% 98.85% 96.07% 96.54% 96.72% 96.83% 97.80% 103.80%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 102.67% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.87% 97.77% 100.76% 100.53% 100.25% 100.13% 98.78% 99.87% 99.89% 100.17% 100.23% 98.78% 97.05% 97.43% 97.54% 97.68% 98.31% 104.29%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 100.10% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.03% 98.08% 101.64% 101.03% 100.78% 100.70% 99.37% 100.32% 100.25% 100.51% 100.57% 99.08% 97.47% 97.69% 97.72% 97.90% 98.37% 104.36%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 101.29% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.09% 97.85% 101.82% 101.13% 100.79% 100.67% 99.31% 100.32% 100.28% 100.57% 100.63% 99.03% 97.11% 97.32% 97.37% 97.53% 98.16% 104.07%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.16% 97.63% 102.01% 101.22% 100.81% 100.64% 99.25% 100.31% 100.31% 100.63% 100.71% 98.99% 96.73% 96.96% 97.03% 97.18% 97.89% 103.77%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 100.93% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.22% 97.44% 102.17% 101.34% 100.82% 100.62% 99.20% 100.31% 100.34% 100.68% 100.77% 98.95% 96.36% 96.71% 96.73% 96.87% 97.64% 103.51%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 98.81% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.82% 97.07% 100.34% 100.42% 100.20% 100.11% 98.93% 99.94% 100.00% 100.28% 100.32% 99.11% 98.14% 97.92% 97.66% 97.38% 97.72% 103.34%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 98.71% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.99% 97.41% 101.55% 100.97% 100.74% 100.69% 99.56% 100.40% 100.37% 100.60% 100.65% 99.37% 98.37% 98.03% 97.74% 97.42% 97.78% 103.40%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 98.68% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.07% 97.17% 101.76% 101.08% 100.76% 100.66% 99.49% 100.40% 100.41% 100.69% 100.75% 99.33% 97.95% 97.68% 97.40% 97.09% 97.55% 103.15%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 98.48% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 96.95% 101.99% 101.20% 100.78% 100.63% 99.43% 100.40% 100.45% 100.77% 100.83% 99.29% 97.52% 97.39% 97.12% 96.79% 97.31% 102.90%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 98.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.22% 96.74% 102.18% 101.30% 100.80% 100.60% 99.37% 100.40% 100.49% 100.83% 100.91% 99.25% 97.16% 97.09% 96.82% 96.50% 97.07% 102.67%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 98.66% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.99% 97.18% 101.53% 100.97% 100.75% 100.71% 99.57% 100.41% 100.37% 100.59% 100.64% 99.33% 98.21% 97.91% 97.61% 97.25% 97.64% 103.23%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 98.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.07% 97.01% 101.76% 101.09% 100.78% 100.68% 99.51% 100.42% 100.42% 100.69% 100.74% 99.30% 97.82% 97.57% 97.28% 96.94% 97.41% 102.99%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 98.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 96.78% 101.98% 101.20% 100.79% 100.65% 99.45% 100.41% 100.45% 100.76% 100.82% 99.26% 97.39% 97.27% 96.97% 96.62% 97.16% 102.74%

271

HOU TOTAL EUI COMPARISON FOR HOTTEST DAY August 2nd
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.19% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.48% 96.42% 100.48% 99.84% 99.88% 100.08% 98.85% 99.60% 99.40% 99.77% 100.05% 98.15% 92.93% 93.61% 93.38% 93.40% 94.76% 100.00%
HOU_DSF_MS 98.50% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.22% 96.68% 102.17% 101.29% 100.79% 100.59% 99.33% 100.38% 100.46% 100.81% 100.89% 99.18% 96.93% 96.96% 96.64% 96.39% 97.02% 102.63%
HOU_DSF_CO 104.06% 100.87% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.81% 103.06% 102.59% 101.72% 101.40% 101.29% 99.91% 100.74% 100.56% 100.79% 100.90% 99.34% 98.64% 99.40% 100.10% 100.87% 100.89% 108.05%
HOU_DSF_SB 98.72% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.83% 96.95% 100.43% 100.43% 100.23% 100.15% 98.96% 99.96% 100.01% 100.28% 100.32% 99.09% 98.04% 97.83% 97.55% 97.25% 97.61% 103.20%
HOU_DSF_BW 103.46% 101.70% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 103.72% 106.67% 102.28% 101.89% 101.60% 101.50% 100.29% 100.89% 100.68% 100.88% 100.99% 100.11% 101.45% 101.98% 103.16% 104.16% 103.88% 110.76%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 104.61% 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 103.04% 104.16% 102.47% 101.70% 101.46% 101.39% 100.09% 100.80% 100.58% 100.78% 100.87% 99.59% 99.82% 100.40% 101.20% 102.18% 101.94% 109.14%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 104.47% 101.07% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.95% 103.78% 102.51% 101.73% 101.44% 101.36% 100.03% 100.78% 100.58% 100.79% 100.88% 99.51% 99.43% 100.08% 100.84% 101.80% 101.59% 108.81%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 104.38% 100.97% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.87% 103.39% 102.56% 101.72% 101.42% 101.32% 99.97% 100.76% 100.57% 100.79% 100.89% 99.42% 99.08% 99.74% 100.52% 101.32% 101.26% 108.46%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 101.98% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.83% 98.13% 100.56% 100.40% 100.09% 99.93% 98.54% 99.69% 99.75% 100.04% 100.10% 98.61% 96.60% 97.11% 97.32% 97.53% 98.36% 104.46%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 101.85% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.00% 98.49% 102.12% 101.01% 100.66% 100.54% 99.18% 100.18% 100.14% 100.40% 100.47% 98.94% 97.18% 97.43% 97.63% 97.92% 98.60% 104.70%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 101.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.08% 98.28% 101.80% 101.11% 100.69% 100.52% 99.13% 100.19% 100.18% 100.48% 100.56% 98.91% 96.79% 97.16% 97.37% 97.50% 98.33% 104.40%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 101.57% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 98.08% 102.02% 101.22% 100.71% 100.50% 99.07% 100.19% 100.22% 100.55% 100.65% 98.88% 96.41% 96.83% 97.03% 97.15% 98.05% 104.09%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 101.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.22% 97.91% 102.21% 101.33% 100.74% 100.48% 99.02% 100.19% 100.25% 100.62% 100.72% 98.85% 96.07% 96.54% 96.72% 96.83% 97.80% 103.80%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 102.67% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.87% 97.77% 100.76% 100.53% 100.25% 100.13% 98.78% 99.87% 99.89% 100.17% 100.23% 98.78% 97.05% 97.43% 97.54% 97.68% 98.31% 104.29%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 100.10% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.03% 98.08% 101.64% 101.03% 100.78% 100.70% 99.37% 100.32% 100.25% 100.51% 100.57% 99.08% 97.47% 97.69% 97.72% 97.90% 98.37% 104.36%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 101.29% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.09% 97.85% 101.82% 101.13% 100.79% 100.67% 99.31% 100.32% 100.28% 100.57% 100.63% 99.03% 97.11% 97.32% 97.37% 97.53% 98.16% 104.07%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 101.16% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.16% 97.63% 102.01% 101.22% 100.81% 100.64% 99.25% 100.31% 100.31% 100.63% 100.71% 98.99% 96.73% 96.96% 97.03% 97.18% 97.89% 103.77%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 100.93% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.22% 97.44% 102.17% 101.34% 100.82% 100.62% 99.20% 100.31% 100.34% 100.68% 100.77% 98.95% 96.36% 96.71% 96.73% 96.87% 97.64% 103.51%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 98.81% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.82% 97.07% 100.34% 100.42% 100.20% 100.11% 98.93% 99.94% 100.00% 100.28% 100.32% 99.11% 98.14% 97.92% 97.66% 97.38% 97.72% 103.34%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 98.71% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.99% 97.41% 101.55% 100.97% 100.74% 100.69% 99.56% 100.40% 100.37% 100.60% 100.65% 99.37% 98.37% 98.03% 97.74% 97.42% 97.78% 103.40%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 98.68% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.07% 97.17% 101.76% 101.08% 100.76% 100.66% 99.49% 100.40% 100.41% 100.69% 100.75% 99.33% 97.95% 97.68% 97.40% 97.09% 97.55% 103.15%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 98.48% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 96.95% 101.99% 101.20% 100.78% 100.63% 99.43% 100.40% 100.45% 100.77% 100.83% 99.29% 97.52% 97.39% 97.12% 96.79% 97.31% 102.90%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 98.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.22% 96.74% 102.18% 101.30% 100.80% 100.60% 99.37% 100.40% 100.49% 100.83% 100.91% 99.25% 97.16% 97.09% 96.82% 96.50% 97.07% 102.67%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 98.66% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 101.99% 97.18% 101.53% 100.97% 100.75% 100.71% 99.57% 100.41% 100.37% 100.59% 100.64% 99.33% 98.21% 97.91% 97.61% 97.25% 97.64% 103.23%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 98.53% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.07% 97.01% 101.76% 101.09% 100.78% 100.68% 99.51% 100.42% 100.42% 100.69% 100.74% 99.30% 97.82% 97.57% 97.28% 96.94% 97.41% 102.99%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 98.38% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 102.15% 96.78% 101.98% 101.20% 100.79% 100.65% 99.45% 100.41% 100.45% 100.76% 100.82% 99.26% 97.39% 97.27% 96.97% 96.62% 97.16% 102.74%
272

HOU coldest day results
Table 4 - Appx.D - 37 Gas load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in HOU.

HOU GAS USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 106.08% 117.91% 107.93% 102.51% 99.04% 96.59% 95.46% 101.82% 104.03% 101.78% 103.07% 104.78% 106.20% 116.48% 108.64% 107.91% 105.42% 103.33% 106.90% 117.45% 111.74% 107.73% 105.61% 108.92%
HOU_DSF_MS 111.08% 145.27% 130.54% 120.02% 114.10% 109.72% 107.78% 105.14% 107.54% 102.99% 104.77% 107.02% 108.75% 121.80% 111.10% 109.98% 107.19% 103.93% 107.90% 120.96% 114.63% 110.19% 108.12% 114.19%
HOU_DSF_CO 94.99% 76.31% 75.53% 79.28% 81.53% 81.70% 84.23% 100.16% 105.02% 102.34% 103.75% 105.76% 107.11% 117.46% 108.64% 107.24% 104.10% 101.55% 101.27% 103.99% 100.95% 99.01% 98.16% 94.99%
HOU_DSF_SB 106.47% 129.69% 116.22% 110.82% 107.08% 103.57% 102.11% 102.93% 106.57% 102.82% 104.52% 106.60% 107.41% 116.84% 107.95% 106.48% 104.03% 101.55% 102.73% 109.94% 107.41% 105.14% 104.24% 107.58%
HOU_DSF_BW 89.92% 58.54% 56.38% 61.33% 65.83% 67.54% 71.08% 97.53% 103.55% 102.02% 103.49% 105.41% 106.80% 116.70% 108.19% 106.73% 103.63% 101.01% 100.35% 98.74% 96.93% 95.92% 95.46% 89.74%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 93.61% 71.44% 69.85% 75.25% 77.89% 78.45% 81.47% 99.34% 104.50% 102.21% 103.69% 105.72% 107.09% 117.43% 108.60% 107.18% 104.05% 101.47% 101.08% 102.19% 99.65% 98.05% 97.35% 93.51%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 94.06% 73.76% 72.03% 76.98% 79.56% 79.98% 82.76% 99.64% 104.67% 102.26% 103.72% 105.76% 107.12% 117.50% 108.64% 107.23% 104.09% 101.51% 101.14% 102.64% 100.00% 98.31% 97.59% 93.94%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 94.72% 76.50% 75.43% 79.25% 81.44% 81.62% 84.15% 99.97% 104.89% 102.35% 103.80% 105.82% 107.18% 117.62% 108.72% 107.31% 104.16% 101.58% 101.27% 103.31% 100.54% 98.73% 97.96% 94.66%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 101.69% 113.20% 101.39% 100.82% 98.88% 95.52% 95.32% 102.27% 106.50% 102.89% 104.64% 106.76% 107.82% 118.69% 109.13% 107.71% 105.00% 102.09% 103.31% 109.86% 106.11% 103.10% 101.60% 101.67%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 102.53% 112.06% 104.23% 102.27% 100.41% 97.93% 97.55% 102.63% 106.57% 102.87% 104.62% 106.83% 108.60% 120.17% 109.32% 107.75% 105.01% 102.11% 103.71% 111.06% 106.85% 103.81% 102.38% 103.36%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 103.31% 114.43% 106.62% 103.81% 101.61% 99.07% 98.48% 102.90% 106.73% 102.90% 104.67% 106.92% 108.70% 121.37% 109.79% 108.11% 105.28% 102.31% 104.18% 112.17% 107.67% 104.43% 102.94% 104.37%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 103.75% 115.74% 108.12% 104.58% 102.28% 99.88% 99.13% 103.12% 106.88% 102.93% 104.72% 106.99% 108.80% 121.83% 109.93% 108.24% 105.39% 102.40% 104.36% 112.75% 108.12% 104.78% 103.27% 104.98%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 103.87% 116.24% 108.28% 104.89% 102.51% 99.96% 99.26% 103.22% 106.97% 102.96% 104.75% 107.03% 108.84% 121.87% 109.92% 108.24% 105.38% 102.41% 104.48% 113.08% 108.30% 104.88% 103.34% 105.06%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 103.46% 116.09% 105.62% 103.22% 100.99% 98.48% 97.83% 102.53% 106.45% 102.83% 104.58% 106.85% 108.38% 119.54% 109.51% 107.95% 105.17% 102.23% 103.71% 110.17% 106.97% 104.13% 102.78% 104.40%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 105.87% 123.30% 113.64% 108.59% 105.37% 102.54% 101.51% 103.39% 106.83% 102.87% 104.64% 106.90% 108.65% 121.59% 111.03% 108.84% 105.62% 102.53% 105.13% 114.22% 109.45% 106.03% 104.46% 107.52%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 108.61% 133.62% 121.65% 113.83% 109.23% 105.50% 104.10% 104.37% 107.25% 102.95% 104.74% 107.05% 108.83% 122.06% 111.19% 110.02% 107.13% 103.85% 107.52% 119.18% 112.74% 108.49% 106.54% 111.10%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 109.06% 135.31% 123.19% 114.87% 110.04% 106.22% 104.78% 104.59% 107.39% 102.98% 104.79% 107.12% 108.93% 122.33% 111.34% 110.19% 107.25% 103.94% 107.76% 119.85% 113.24% 108.87% 106.87% 111.69%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 109.15% 135.87% 123.44% 115.02% 110.15% 106.24% 104.77% 104.67% 107.46% 103.00% 104.82% 107.15% 108.97% 122.42% 111.41% 110.26% 107.29% 103.99% 107.85% 120.06% 113.39% 108.95% 106.93% 111.78%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 105.86% 126.66% 114.24% 109.40% 105.99% 102.78% 101.49% 102.76% 106.46% 102.79% 104.47% 106.53% 107.26% 116.51% 107.80% 106.33% 103.91% 101.47% 102.47% 109.01% 106.82% 104.68% 103.80% 106.84%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 107.07% 129.79% 118.88% 112.43% 108.57% 105.44% 103.94% 103.22% 106.67% 102.81% 104.51% 106.63% 108.27% 120.01% 108.86% 106.92% 104.28% 101.72% 103.31% 111.37% 108.50% 106.11% 104.98% 108.95%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 107.70% 131.91% 120.80% 113.71% 109.55% 106.28% 104.71% 103.72% 106.89% 102.86% 104.57% 106.73% 108.39% 120.49% 108.97% 107.03% 104.37% 101.80% 103.83% 113.05% 109.52% 106.81% 105.50% 109.82%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 110.89% 144.04% 129.95% 119.64% 113.82% 109.54% 107.68% 104.98% 107.39% 102.95% 104.69% 106.90% 108.60% 121.40% 110.87% 109.74% 107.00% 103.79% 107.61% 120.35% 114.29% 110.00% 108.02% 114.04%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 110.97% 144.48% 130.13% 119.72% 113.87% 109.57% 107.66% 105.06% 107.47% 102.97% 104.73% 106.94% 108.65% 121.49% 110.93% 109.81% 107.06% 103.83% 107.71% 120.55% 114.41% 110.07% 108.06% 114.10%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 107.85% 133.30% 121.25% 114.07% 109.84% 106.44% 104.76% 103.68% 106.83% 102.85% 104.56% 106.71% 108.37% 120.44% 108.98% 107.03% 104.37% 101.79% 103.93% 113.03% 109.54% 106.85% 105.53% 109.89%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 108.10% 133.92% 122.12% 114.64% 110.28% 106.83% 105.14% 103.85% 106.97% 102.88% 104.60% 106.79% 108.47% 120.71% 109.08% 107.14% 104.46% 101.86% 104.14% 113.54% 109.92% 107.12% 105.77% 110.28%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 111.26% 145.94% 131.19% 120.50% 114.49% 110.06% 108.11% 105.11% 107.47% 102.97% 104.73% 106.96% 108.68% 121.61% 110.99% 109.87% 107.11% 103.87% 107.80% 120.86% 114.69% 110.29% 108.26% 114.47%

273

HOU GAS USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 106.08% 117.91% 107.93% 102.51% 99.04% 96.59% 95.46% 101.82% 104.03% 101.78% 103.07% 104.78% 106.20% 116.48% 108.64% 107.91% 105.42% 103.33% 106.90% 117.45% 111.74% 107.73% 105.61% 108.92%
HOU_DSF_MS 111.08% 145.27% 130.54% 120.02% 114.10% 109.72% 107.78% 105.14% 107.54% 102.99% 104.77% 107.02% 108.75% 121.80% 111.10% 109.98% 107.19% 103.93% 107.90% 120.96% 114.63% 110.19% 108.12% 114.19%
HOU_DSF_CO 94.99% 76.31% 75.53% 79.28% 81.53% 81.70% 84.23% 100.16% 105.02% 102.34% 103.75% 105.76% 107.11% 117.46% 108.64% 107.24% 104.10% 101.55% 101.27% 103.99% 100.95% 99.01% 98.16% 94.99%
HOU_DSF_SB 106.47% 129.69% 116.22% 110.82% 107.08% 103.57% 102.11% 102.93% 106.57% 102.82% 104.52% 106.60% 107.41% 116.84% 107.95% 106.48% 104.03% 101.55% 102.73% 109.94% 107.41% 105.14% 104.24% 107.58%
HOU_DSF_BW 89.92% 58.54% 56.38% 61.33% 65.83% 67.54% 71.08% 97.53% 103.55% 102.02% 103.49% 105.41% 106.80% 116.70% 108.19% 106.73% 103.63% 101.01% 100.35% 98.74% 96.93% 95.92% 95.46% 89.74%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 93.61% 71.44% 69.85% 75.25% 77.89% 78.45% 81.47% 99.34% 104.50% 102.21% 103.69% 105.72% 107.09% 117.43% 108.60% 107.18% 104.05% 101.47% 101.08% 102.19% 99.65% 98.05% 97.35% 93.51%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 94.06% 73.76% 72.03% 76.98% 79.56% 79.98% 82.76% 99.64% 104.67% 102.26% 103.72% 105.76% 107.12% 117.50% 108.64% 107.23% 104.09% 101.51% 101.14% 102.64% 100.00% 98.31% 97.59% 93.94%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 94.72% 76.50% 75.43% 79.25% 81.44% 81.62% 84.15% 99.97% 104.89% 102.35% 103.80% 105.82% 107.18% 117.62% 108.72% 107.31% 104.16% 101.58% 101.27% 103.31% 100.54% 98.73% 97.96% 94.66%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 101.69% 113.20% 101.39% 100.82% 98.88% 95.52% 95.32% 102.27% 106.50% 102.89% 104.64% 106.76% 107.82% 118.69% 109.13% 107.71% 105.00% 102.09% 103.31% 109.86% 106.11% 103.10% 101.60% 101.67%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 102.53% 112.06% 104.23% 102.27% 100.41% 97.93% 97.55% 102.63% 106.57% 102.87% 104.62% 106.83% 108.60% 120.17% 109.32% 107.75% 105.01% 102.11% 103.71% 111.06% 106.85% 103.81% 102.38% 103.36%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 103.31% 114.43% 106.62% 103.81% 101.61% 99.07% 98.48% 102.90% 106.73% 102.90% 104.67% 106.92% 108.70% 121.37% 109.79% 108.11% 105.28% 102.31% 104.18% 112.17% 107.67% 104.43% 102.94% 104.37%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 103.75% 115.74% 108.12% 104.58% 102.28% 99.88% 99.13% 103.12% 106.88% 102.93% 104.72% 106.99% 108.80% 121.83% 109.93% 108.24% 105.39% 102.40% 104.36% 112.75% 108.12% 104.78% 103.27% 104.98%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 103.87% 116.24% 108.28% 104.89% 102.51% 99.96% 99.26% 103.22% 106.97% 102.96% 104.75% 107.03% 108.84% 121.87% 109.92% 108.24% 105.38% 102.41% 104.48% 113.08% 108.30% 104.88% 103.34% 105.06%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 103.46% 116.09% 105.62% 103.22% 100.99% 98.48% 97.83% 102.53% 106.45% 102.83% 104.58% 106.85% 108.38% 119.54% 109.51% 107.95% 105.17% 102.23% 103.71% 110.17% 106.97% 104.13% 102.78% 104.40%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 105.87% 123.30% 113.64% 108.59% 105.37% 102.54% 101.51% 103.39% 106.83% 102.87% 104.64% 106.90% 108.65% 121.59% 111.03% 108.84% 105.62% 102.53% 105.13% 114.22% 109.45% 106.03% 104.46% 107.52%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 108.61% 133.62% 121.65% 113.83% 109.23% 105.50% 104.10% 104.37% 107.25% 102.95% 104.74% 107.05% 108.83% 122.06% 111.19% 110.02% 107.13% 103.85% 107.52% 119.18% 112.74% 108.49% 106.54% 111.10%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 109.06% 135.31% 123.19% 114.87% 110.04% 106.22% 104.78% 104.59% 107.39% 102.98% 104.79% 107.12% 108.93% 122.33% 111.34% 110.19% 107.25% 103.94% 107.76% 119.85% 113.24% 108.87% 106.87% 111.69%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 109.15% 135.87% 123.44% 115.02% 110.15% 106.24% 104.77% 104.67% 107.46% 103.00% 104.82% 107.15% 108.97% 122.42% 111.41% 110.26% 107.29% 103.99% 107.85% 120.06% 113.39% 108.95% 106.93% 111.78%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 105.86% 126.66% 114.24% 109.40% 105.99% 102.78% 101.49% 102.76% 106.46% 102.79% 104.47% 106.53% 107.26% 116.51% 107.80% 106.33% 103.91% 101.47% 102.47% 109.01% 106.82% 104.68% 103.80% 106.84%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 107.07% 129.79% 118.88% 112.43% 108.57% 105.44% 103.94% 103.22% 106.67% 102.81% 104.51% 106.63% 108.27% 120.01% 108.86% 106.92% 104.28% 101.72% 103.31% 111.37% 108.50% 106.11% 104.98% 108.95%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 107.70% 131.91% 120.80% 113.71% 109.55% 106.28% 104.71% 103.72% 106.89% 102.86% 104.57% 106.73% 108.39% 120.49% 108.97% 107.03% 104.37% 101.80% 103.83% 113.05% 109.52% 106.81% 105.50% 109.82%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 110.89% 144.04% 129.95% 119.64% 113.82% 109.54% 107.68% 104.98% 107.39% 102.95% 104.69% 106.90% 108.60% 121.40% 110.87% 109.74% 107.00% 103.79% 107.61% 120.35% 114.29% 110.00% 108.02% 114.04%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 110.97% 144.48% 130.13% 119.72% 113.87% 109.57% 107.66% 105.06% 107.47% 102.97% 104.73% 106.94% 108.65% 121.49% 110.93% 109.81% 107.06% 103.83% 107.71% 120.55% 114.41% 110.07% 108.06% 114.10%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 107.85% 133.30% 121.25% 114.07% 109.84% 106.44% 104.76% 103.68% 106.83% 102.85% 104.56% 106.71% 108.37% 120.44% 108.98% 107.03% 104.37% 101.79% 103.93% 113.03% 109.54% 106.85% 105.53% 109.89%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 108.10% 133.92% 122.12% 114.64% 110.28% 106.83% 105.14% 103.85% 106.97% 102.88% 104.60% 106.79% 108.47% 120.71% 109.08% 107.14% 104.46% 101.86% 104.14% 113.54% 109.92% 107.12% 105.77% 110.28%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 111.26% 145.94% 131.19% 120.50% 114.49% 110.06% 108.11% 105.11% 107.47% 102.97% 104.73% 106.96% 108.68% 121.61% 110.99% 109.87% 107.11% 103.87% 107.80% 120.86% 114.69% 110.29% 108.26% 114.47%
274

Table 4 - Appx.D - 38 Heating load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in
HOU.

HOU HEATING USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 106.12% 117.91% 107.93% 102.51% 99.04% 96.59% 95.46% 101.82% 104.05% 101.79% 103.08% 104.80% 106.22% 116.73% 108.70% 107.95% 105.44% 103.35% 106.96% 117.81% 111.89% 107.82% 105.65% 108.98%
HOU_DSF_MS 111.15% 145.27% 130.54% 120.02% 114.10% 109.72% 107.78% 105.15% 107.59% 103.00% 104.78% 107.04% 108.79% 122.14% 111.18% 110.03% 107.22% 103.94% 107.96% 121.39% 114.82% 110.30% 108.18% 114.29%
HOU_DSF_CO 94.96% 76.31% 75.53% 79.28% 81.53% 81.70% 84.23% 100.16% 105.05% 102.34% 103.76% 105.78% 107.14% 117.73% 108.70% 107.28% 104.12% 101.55% 101.28% 104.07% 100.96% 98.99% 98.15% 94.95%
HOU_DSF_SB 106.51% 129.69% 116.22% 110.82% 107.08% 103.57% 102.11% 102.94% 106.60% 102.83% 104.53% 106.62% 107.44% 117.10% 108.00% 106.51% 104.04% 101.56% 102.75% 110.15% 107.51% 105.19% 104.27% 107.63%
HOU_DSF_BW 89.86% 58.54% 56.38% 61.33% 65.83% 67.54% 71.08% 97.52% 103.57% 102.03% 103.50% 105.43% 106.83% 116.96% 108.25% 106.76% 103.65% 101.02% 100.35% 98.72% 96.89% 95.88% 95.43% 89.67%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 93.57% 71.44% 69.85% 75.25% 77.89% 78.45% 81.47% 99.34% 104.53% 102.21% 103.70% 105.74% 107.12% 117.70% 108.66% 107.22% 104.07% 101.47% 101.09% 102.24% 99.65% 98.02% 97.34% 93.47%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 94.02% 73.76% 72.03% 76.98% 79.56% 79.98% 82.76% 99.64% 104.70% 102.27% 103.73% 105.78% 107.15% 117.77% 108.71% 107.27% 104.11% 101.52% 101.15% 102.69% 100.00% 98.29% 97.58% 93.90%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 94.69% 76.50% 75.43% 79.25% 81.44% 81.62% 84.15% 99.97% 104.92% 102.36% 103.81% 105.84% 107.21% 117.90% 108.78% 107.34% 104.18% 101.58% 101.28% 103.38% 100.54% 98.71% 97.95% 94.62%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 101.70% 113.20% 101.39% 100.82% 98.88% 95.52% 95.32% 102.28% 106.54% 102.89% 104.65% 106.79% 107.85% 118.98% 109.20% 107.74% 105.02% 102.10% 103.34% 110.07% 106.19% 103.13% 101.61% 101.68%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 102.54% 112.06% 104.23% 102.27% 100.41% 97.93% 97.55% 102.63% 106.60% 102.87% 104.64% 106.86% 108.64% 120.48% 109.38% 107.78% 105.04% 102.12% 103.74% 111.29% 106.93% 103.86% 102.40% 103.38%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 103.33% 114.43% 106.62% 103.81% 101.61% 99.07% 98.48% 102.91% 106.77% 102.91% 104.69% 106.94% 108.74% 121.70% 109.86% 108.15% 105.30% 102.32% 104.21% 112.42% 107.77% 104.48% 102.96% 104.40%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 103.78% 115.74% 108.12% 104.58% 102.28% 99.88% 99.13% 103.12% 106.92% 102.94% 104.73% 107.01% 108.84% 122.17% 110.00% 108.28% 105.41% 102.41% 104.40% 113.01% 108.23% 104.84% 103.29% 105.02%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 103.90% 116.24% 108.28% 104.89% 102.51% 99.96% 99.26% 103.23% 107.02% 102.96% 104.77% 107.05% 108.88% 122.21% 109.99% 108.28% 105.40% 102.42% 104.51% 113.35% 108.41% 104.94% 103.36% 105.09%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 103.48% 116.09% 105.62% 103.22% 100.99% 98.48% 97.83% 102.53% 106.49% 102.83% 104.60% 106.87% 108.41% 119.84% 109.58% 107.98% 105.19% 102.24% 103.74% 110.38% 107.06% 104.18% 102.80% 104.43%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 105.91% 123.30% 113.64% 108.59% 105.37% 102.54% 101.51% 103.40% 106.87% 102.88% 104.65% 106.92% 108.68% 121.92% 111.11% 108.88% 105.65% 102.54% 105.17% 114.52% 109.57% 106.09% 104.49% 107.57%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 108.66% 133.62% 121.65% 113.83% 109.23% 105.50% 104.10% 104.38% 107.29% 102.96% 104.75% 107.07% 108.87% 122.41% 111.27% 110.07% 107.16% 103.87% 107.58% 119.58% 112.91% 108.58% 106.58% 111.17%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 109.12% 135.31% 123.19% 114.87% 110.04% 106.22% 104.78% 104.60% 107.44% 102.99% 104.80% 107.14% 108.97% 122.67% 111.42% 110.24% 107.28% 103.96% 107.82% 120.26% 113.41% 108.96% 106.92% 111.77%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 109.21% 135.87% 123.44% 115.02% 110.15% 106.24% 104.77% 104.68% 107.51% 103.01% 104.83% 107.18% 109.01% 122.76% 111.50% 110.31% 107.32% 104.00% 107.91% 120.48% 113.56% 109.05% 106.98% 111.86%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 105.89% 126.66% 114.24% 109.40% 105.99% 102.78% 101.49% 102.76% 106.49% 102.80% 104.49% 106.55% 107.29% 116.76% 107.85% 106.36% 103.93% 101.48% 102.49% 109.19% 106.91% 104.73% 103.83% 106.89%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 107.12% 129.79% 118.88% 112.43% 108.57% 105.44% 103.94% 103.23% 106.71% 102.82% 104.52% 106.66% 108.31% 120.32% 108.93% 106.96% 104.30% 101.73% 103.34% 111.61% 108.61% 106.17% 105.01% 109.01%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 107.74% 131.91% 120.80% 113.71% 109.55% 106.28% 104.71% 103.73% 106.93% 102.87% 104.58% 106.75% 108.43% 120.81% 109.04% 107.06% 104.39% 101.81% 103.86% 113.32% 109.64% 106.88% 105.54% 109.88%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 110.96% 144.04% 129.95% 119.64% 113.82% 109.54% 107.68% 104.99% 107.43% 102.96% 104.71% 106.93% 108.64% 121.73% 110.95% 109.79% 107.04% 103.81% 107.67% 120.77% 114.48% 110.11% 108.07% 114.13%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 111.04% 144.48% 130.13% 119.72% 113.87% 109.57% 107.66% 105.07% 107.51% 102.98% 104.74% 106.97% 108.69% 121.82% 111.01% 109.86% 107.09% 103.85% 107.77% 120.97% 114.59% 110.18% 108.11% 114.19%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 107.90% 133.30% 121.25% 114.07% 109.84% 106.44% 104.76% 103.69% 106.87% 102.86% 104.57% 106.73% 108.41% 120.75% 109.04% 107.07% 104.39% 101.80% 103.96% 113.30% 109.66% 106.92% 105.57% 109.95%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 108.15% 133.92% 122.12% 114.64% 110.28% 106.83% 105.14% 103.86% 107.01% 102.89% 104.62% 106.81% 108.51% 121.03% 109.15% 107.17% 104.48% 101.87% 104.17% 113.82% 110.05% 107.20% 105.81% 110.35%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 111.33% 145.94% 131.19% 120.50% 114.49% 110.06% 108.11% 105.12% 107.51% 102.98% 104.74% 106.98% 108.71% 121.94% 111.07% 109.91% 107.14% 103.88% 107.86% 121.29% 114.88% 110.41% 108.32% 114.56%

275

HOU HEATING USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 106.12% 117.91% 107.93% 102.51% 99.04% 96.59% 95.46% 101.82% 104.05% 101.79% 103.08% 104.80% 106.22% 116.73% 108.70% 107.95% 105.44% 103.35% 106.96% 117.81% 111.89% 107.82% 105.65% 108.98%
HOU_DSF_MS 111.15% 145.27% 130.54% 120.02% 114.10% 109.72% 107.78% 105.15% 107.59% 103.00% 104.78% 107.04% 108.79% 122.14% 111.18% 110.03% 107.22% 103.94% 107.96% 121.39% 114.82% 110.30% 108.18% 114.29%
HOU_DSF_CO 94.96% 76.31% 75.53% 79.28% 81.53% 81.70% 84.23% 100.16% 105.05% 102.34% 103.76% 105.78% 107.14% 117.73% 108.70% 107.28% 104.12% 101.55% 101.28% 104.07% 100.96% 98.99% 98.15% 94.95%
HOU_DSF_SB 106.51% 129.69% 116.22% 110.82% 107.08% 103.57% 102.11% 102.94% 106.60% 102.83% 104.53% 106.62% 107.44% 117.10% 108.00% 106.51% 104.04% 101.56% 102.75% 110.15% 107.51% 105.19% 104.27% 107.63%
HOU_DSF_BW 89.86% 58.54% 56.38% 61.33% 65.83% 67.54% 71.08% 97.52% 103.57% 102.03% 103.50% 105.43% 106.83% 116.96% 108.25% 106.76% 103.65% 101.02% 100.35% 98.72% 96.89% 95.88% 95.43% 89.67%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 93.57% 71.44% 69.85% 75.25% 77.89% 78.45% 81.47% 99.34% 104.53% 102.21% 103.70% 105.74% 107.12% 117.70% 108.66% 107.22% 104.07% 101.47% 101.09% 102.24% 99.65% 98.02% 97.34% 93.47%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 94.02% 73.76% 72.03% 76.98% 79.56% 79.98% 82.76% 99.64% 104.70% 102.27% 103.73% 105.78% 107.15% 117.77% 108.71% 107.27% 104.11% 101.52% 101.15% 102.69% 100.00% 98.29% 97.58% 93.90%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 94.69% 76.50% 75.43% 79.25% 81.44% 81.62% 84.15% 99.97% 104.92% 102.36% 103.81% 105.84% 107.21% 117.90% 108.78% 107.34% 104.18% 101.58% 101.28% 103.38% 100.54% 98.71% 97.95% 94.62%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 101.70% 113.20% 101.39% 100.82% 98.88% 95.52% 95.32% 102.28% 106.54% 102.89% 104.65% 106.79% 107.85% 118.98% 109.20% 107.74% 105.02% 102.10% 103.34% 110.07% 106.19% 103.13% 101.61% 101.68%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 102.54% 112.06% 104.23% 102.27% 100.41% 97.93% 97.55% 102.63% 106.60% 102.87% 104.64% 106.86% 108.64% 120.48% 109.38% 107.78% 105.04% 102.12% 103.74% 111.29% 106.93% 103.86% 102.40% 103.38%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 103.33% 114.43% 106.62% 103.81% 101.61% 99.07% 98.48% 102.91% 106.77% 102.91% 104.69% 106.94% 108.74% 121.70% 109.86% 108.15% 105.30% 102.32% 104.21% 112.42% 107.77% 104.48% 102.96% 104.40%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 103.78% 115.74% 108.12% 104.58% 102.28% 99.88% 99.13% 103.12% 106.92% 102.94% 104.73% 107.01% 108.84% 122.17% 110.00% 108.28% 105.41% 102.41% 104.40% 113.01% 108.23% 104.84% 103.29% 105.02%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 103.90% 116.24% 108.28% 104.89% 102.51% 99.96% 99.26% 103.23% 107.02% 102.96% 104.77% 107.05% 108.88% 122.21% 109.99% 108.28% 105.40% 102.42% 104.51% 113.35% 108.41% 104.94% 103.36% 105.09%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 103.48% 116.09% 105.62% 103.22% 100.99% 98.48% 97.83% 102.53% 106.49% 102.83% 104.60% 106.87% 108.41% 119.84% 109.58% 107.98% 105.19% 102.24% 103.74% 110.38% 107.06% 104.18% 102.80% 104.43%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 105.91% 123.30% 113.64% 108.59% 105.37% 102.54% 101.51% 103.40% 106.87% 102.88% 104.65% 106.92% 108.68% 121.92% 111.11% 108.88% 105.65% 102.54% 105.17% 114.52% 109.57% 106.09% 104.49% 107.57%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 108.66% 133.62% 121.65% 113.83% 109.23% 105.50% 104.10% 104.38% 107.29% 102.96% 104.75% 107.07% 108.87% 122.41% 111.27% 110.07% 107.16% 103.87% 107.58% 119.58% 112.91% 108.58% 106.58% 111.17%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 109.12% 135.31% 123.19% 114.87% 110.04% 106.22% 104.78% 104.60% 107.44% 102.99% 104.80% 107.14% 108.97% 122.67% 111.42% 110.24% 107.28% 103.96% 107.82% 120.26% 113.41% 108.96% 106.92% 111.77%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 109.21% 135.87% 123.44% 115.02% 110.15% 106.24% 104.77% 104.68% 107.51% 103.01% 104.83% 107.18% 109.01% 122.76% 111.50% 110.31% 107.32% 104.00% 107.91% 120.48% 113.56% 109.05% 106.98% 111.86%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 105.89% 126.66% 114.24% 109.40% 105.99% 102.78% 101.49% 102.76% 106.49% 102.80% 104.49% 106.55% 107.29% 116.76% 107.85% 106.36% 103.93% 101.48% 102.49% 109.19% 106.91% 104.73% 103.83% 106.89%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 107.12% 129.79% 118.88% 112.43% 108.57% 105.44% 103.94% 103.23% 106.71% 102.82% 104.52% 106.66% 108.31% 120.32% 108.93% 106.96% 104.30% 101.73% 103.34% 111.61% 108.61% 106.17% 105.01% 109.01%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 107.74% 131.91% 120.80% 113.71% 109.55% 106.28% 104.71% 103.73% 106.93% 102.87% 104.58% 106.75% 108.43% 120.81% 109.04% 107.06% 104.39% 101.81% 103.86% 113.32% 109.64% 106.88% 105.54% 109.88%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 110.96% 144.04% 129.95% 119.64% 113.82% 109.54% 107.68% 104.99% 107.43% 102.96% 104.71% 106.93% 108.64% 121.73% 110.95% 109.79% 107.04% 103.81% 107.67% 120.77% 114.48% 110.11% 108.07% 114.13%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 111.04% 144.48% 130.13% 119.72% 113.87% 109.57% 107.66% 105.07% 107.51% 102.98% 104.74% 106.97% 108.69% 121.82% 111.01% 109.86% 107.09% 103.85% 107.77% 120.97% 114.59% 110.18% 108.11% 114.19%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 107.90% 133.30% 121.25% 114.07% 109.84% 106.44% 104.76% 103.69% 106.87% 102.86% 104.57% 106.73% 108.41% 120.75% 109.04% 107.07% 104.39% 101.80% 103.96% 113.30% 109.66% 106.92% 105.57% 109.95%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 108.15% 133.92% 122.12% 114.64% 110.28% 106.83% 105.14% 103.86% 107.01% 102.89% 104.62% 106.81% 108.51% 121.03% 109.15% 107.17% 104.48% 101.87% 104.17% 113.82% 110.05% 107.20% 105.81% 110.35%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 111.33% 145.94% 131.19% 120.50% 114.49% 110.06% 108.11% 105.12% 107.51% 102.98% 104.74% 106.98% 108.71% 121.94% 111.07% 109.91% 107.14% 103.88% 107.86% 121.29% 114.88% 110.41% 108.32% 114.56%
276

Table 4 - Appx.D - 39 Total EUI load comparison of SSF, DSF and DECS for the coldest day in
HOU.

HOU TOTAL EUI USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.52% 95.00% 94.82% 94.54% 94.19% 93.83% 93.41% 100.04% 102.42% 101.20% 101.37% 101.34% 101.93% 102.22% 101.13% 100.87% 100.61% 100.50% 100.95% 101.52% 100.90% 100.39% 99.97% 99.35%
HOU_DSF_MS 102.35% 107.07% 107.36% 106.94% 105.74% 105.00% 103.36% 103.29% 105.02% 101.97% 102.07% 101.75% 102.64% 102.70% 101.49% 101.25% 101.02% 100.96% 102.35% 105.42% 104.44% 103.82% 103.20% 104.04%
HOU_DSF_CO 97.90% 94.27% 95.26% 95.26% 94.64% 94.02% 93.35% 100.69% 103.78% 101.72% 101.85% 101.62% 102.42% 102.21% 101.21% 100.89% 100.58% 100.48% 101.01% 102.05% 101.16% 100.56% 100.20% 99.14%
HOU_DSF_SB 102.08% 105.41% 105.16% 104.88% 104.23% 103.13% 101.64% 102.69% 104.78% 101.96% 102.08% 101.76% 102.65% 102.57% 101.41% 101.18% 100.96% 100.91% 102.21% 104.87% 104.08% 103.54% 102.85% 103.78%
HOU_DSF_BW 93.66% 82.43% 82.35% 82.39% 82.81% 82.98% 83.14% 97.75% 102.30% 101.48% 101.57% 101.34% 102.06% 101.46% 100.73% 100.42% 100.10% 100.00% 99.46% 97.73% 97.18% 96.79% 96.50% 93.93%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 96.69% 90.83% 91.61% 91.83% 91.57% 91.45% 91.03% 99.89% 103.23% 101.60% 101.72% 101.50% 102.28% 101.96% 101.07% 100.75% 100.45% 100.36% 100.56% 100.83% 100.06% 99.56% 99.23% 97.84%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 97.43% 92.83% 93.67% 93.76% 93.34% 93.12% 92.60% 100.38% 103.51% 101.65% 101.77% 101.56% 102.35% 102.10% 101.15% 100.83% 100.53% 100.44% 100.81% 101.50% 100.66% 100.14% 99.79% 98.62%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 98.04% 94.66% 95.53% 95.50% 94.95% 94.60% 93.99% 100.79% 103.77% 101.70% 101.83% 101.61% 102.41% 102.22% 101.22% 100.91% 100.60% 100.51% 101.04% 102.10% 101.20% 100.65% 100.28% 99.33%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 101.25% 102.49% 101.78% 101.48% 101.11% 100.06% 98.77% 102.06% 104.70% 102.02% 102.19% 101.87% 102.79% 102.76% 101.48% 101.20% 100.91% 100.84% 101.94% 103.93% 103.12% 102.74% 102.04% 102.61%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 101.11% 103.29% 103.48% 103.18% 102.38% 101.77% 100.46% 102.49% 104.69% 101.94% 102.07% 101.76% 102.67% 102.69% 101.45% 101.17% 100.91% 100.83% 101.96% 104.32% 103.38% 102.86% 102.29% 102.65%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 101.30% 103.93% 104.21% 103.87% 102.97% 102.41% 101.07% 102.72% 104.81% 101.96% 102.09% 101.78% 102.68% 102.73% 101.47% 101.20% 100.95% 100.87% 102.04% 104.54% 103.59% 103.02% 102.45% 102.92%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 101.49% 104.58% 104.91% 104.53% 103.54% 103.02% 101.64% 102.90% 104.92% 101.98% 102.11% 101.79% 102.70% 102.77% 101.49% 101.23% 100.98% 100.90% 102.13% 104.78% 103.78% 103.18% 102.61% 103.12%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 101.48% 104.47% 104.76% 104.35% 103.38% 102.77% 101.39% 102.86% 104.94% 101.99% 102.12% 101.80% 102.71% 102.78% 101.50% 101.23% 100.97% 100.89% 102.13% 104.75% 103.76% 103.17% 102.60% 103.11%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 101.27% 103.20% 103.06% 102.90% 102.34% 101.57% 100.29% 102.39% 104.72% 101.97% 102.11% 101.80% 102.70% 102.69% 101.45% 101.19% 100.94% 100.87% 102.00% 104.36% 103.47% 103.00% 102.30% 102.91%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 101.46% 104.38% 104.66% 104.42% 103.53% 103.00% 101.61% 102.77% 104.75% 101.94% 102.06% 101.75% 102.64% 102.72% 101.47% 101.20% 100.95% 100.88% 102.05% 104.63% 103.68% 103.12% 102.53% 103.07%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 101.62% 104.95% 105.27% 104.99% 104.03% 103.52% 102.08% 102.96% 104.86% 101.96% 102.07% 101.77% 102.66% 102.76% 101.49% 101.23% 100.98% 100.90% 102.13% 104.80% 103.86% 103.26% 102.67% 103.25%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 101.80% 105.51% 105.87% 105.54% 104.51% 104.01% 102.54% 103.11% 104.97% 101.98% 102.09% 101.78% 102.67% 102.80% 101.51% 101.26% 101.01% 100.93% 102.20% 105.00% 104.03% 103.40% 102.81% 103.43%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 101.80% 105.50% 105.83% 105.48% 104.44% 103.88% 102.40% 103.10% 105.00% 101.99% 102.11% 101.79% 102.69% 102.80% 101.52% 101.26% 101.00% 100.93% 102.21% 105.01% 104.03% 103.41% 102.81% 103.43%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 101.87% 104.89% 104.72% 104.49% 103.82% 102.82% 101.38% 102.57% 104.71% 101.94% 102.05% 101.73% 102.62% 102.51% 101.38% 101.15% 100.93% 100.88% 102.13% 104.70% 103.92% 103.39% 102.72% 103.56%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 101.96% 105.82% 106.13% 105.84% 104.77% 104.10% 102.54% 102.93% 104.70% 101.90% 101.99% 101.67% 102.56% 102.54% 101.40% 101.16% 100.95% 100.89% 102.16% 105.00% 104.06% 103.49% 102.89% 103.60%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 102.09% 106.33% 106.70% 106.36% 105.22% 104.57% 102.98% 103.09% 104.80% 101.91% 102.01% 101.69% 102.58% 102.58% 101.42% 101.19% 100.98% 100.92% 102.23% 105.16% 104.22% 103.61% 103.01% 103.77%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 102.24% 106.88% 107.26% 106.88% 105.68% 105.04% 103.41% 103.24% 104.91% 101.94% 102.03% 101.71% 102.59% 102.62% 101.45% 101.22% 101.01% 100.95% 102.30% 105.35% 104.37% 103.74% 103.13% 103.92%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 102.25% 106.82% 107.19% 106.79% 105.59% 104.89% 103.27% 103.23% 104.94% 101.95% 102.04% 101.72% 102.61% 102.63% 101.45% 101.22% 101.00% 100.95% 102.31% 105.34% 104.37% 103.74% 103.14% 103.92%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 102.16% 106.35% 106.63% 106.30% 105.21% 104.44% 102.82% 103.03% 104.77% 101.92% 102.01% 101.70% 102.59% 102.60% 101.43% 101.19% 100.97% 100.92% 102.23% 105.14% 104.23% 103.65% 103.03% 103.83%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 102.24% 106.73% 107.04% 106.68% 105.52% 104.80% 103.18% 103.16% 104.87% 101.93% 102.03% 101.71% 102.60% 102.63% 101.45% 101.22% 101.00% 100.94% 102.30% 105.30% 104.35% 103.74% 103.12% 103.94%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 102.38% 107.22% 107.59% 107.19% 105.96% 105.25% 103.60% 103.31% 104.98% 101.95% 102.05% 101.73% 102.62% 102.68% 101.48% 101.25% 101.03% 100.97% 102.36% 105.47% 104.50% 103.86% 103.23% 104.08%

277

HOU TOTAL EUI USAGE COMPARISON FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Model Nr 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00
HOU_SSF_90% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
HOU_SSF_t002 (33%) 98.52% 95.00% 94.82% 94.54% 94.19% 93.83% 93.41% 100.04% 102.42% 101.20% 101.37% 101.34% 101.93% 102.22% 101.13% 100.87% 100.61% 100.50% 100.95% 101.52% 100.90% 100.39% 99.97% 99.35%
HOU_DSF_MS 102.35% 107.07% 107.36% 106.94% 105.74% 105.00% 103.36% 103.29% 105.02% 101.97% 102.07% 101.75% 102.64% 102.70% 101.49% 101.25% 101.02% 100.96% 102.35% 105.42% 104.44% 103.82% 103.20% 104.04%
HOU_DSF_CO 97.90% 94.27% 95.26% 95.26% 94.64% 94.02% 93.35% 100.69% 103.78% 101.72% 101.85% 101.62% 102.42% 102.21% 101.21% 100.89% 100.58% 100.48% 101.01% 102.05% 101.16% 100.56% 100.20% 99.14%
HOU_DSF_SB 102.08% 105.41% 105.16% 104.88% 104.23% 103.13% 101.64% 102.69% 104.78% 101.96% 102.08% 101.76% 102.65% 102.57% 101.41% 101.18% 100.96% 100.91% 102.21% 104.87% 104.08% 103.54% 102.85% 103.78%
HOU_DSF_BW 93.66% 82.43% 82.35% 82.39% 82.81% 82.98% 83.14% 97.75% 102.30% 101.48% 101.57% 101.34% 102.06% 101.46% 100.73% 100.42% 100.10% 100.00% 99.46% 97.73% 97.18% 96.79% 96.50% 93.93%
HOU_DECS_0h_25v 96.69% 90.83% 91.61% 91.83% 91.57% 91.45% 91.03% 99.89% 103.23% 101.60% 101.72% 101.50% 102.28% 101.96% 101.07% 100.75% 100.45% 100.36% 100.56% 100.83% 100.06% 99.56% 99.23% 97.84%
HOU_DECS_0h_50v 97.43% 92.83% 93.67% 93.76% 93.34% 93.12% 92.60% 100.38% 103.51% 101.65% 101.77% 101.56% 102.35% 102.10% 101.15% 100.83% 100.53% 100.44% 100.81% 101.50% 100.66% 100.14% 99.79% 98.62%
HOU_DECS_0h_75v 98.04% 94.66% 95.53% 95.50% 94.95% 94.60% 93.99% 100.79% 103.77% 101.70% 101.83% 101.61% 102.41% 102.22% 101.22% 100.91% 100.60% 100.51% 101.04% 102.10% 101.20% 100.65% 100.28% 99.33%
HOU_DECS_25h_0v 101.25% 102.49% 101.78% 101.48% 101.11% 100.06% 98.77% 102.06% 104.70% 102.02% 102.19% 101.87% 102.79% 102.76% 101.48% 101.20% 100.91% 100.84% 101.94% 103.93% 103.12% 102.74% 102.04% 102.61%
HOU_DECS_25h_25v 101.11% 103.29% 103.48% 103.18% 102.38% 101.77% 100.46% 102.49% 104.69% 101.94% 102.07% 101.76% 102.67% 102.69% 101.45% 101.17% 100.91% 100.83% 101.96% 104.32% 103.38% 102.86% 102.29% 102.65%
HOU_DECS_25h_50v 101.30% 103.93% 104.21% 103.87% 102.97% 102.41% 101.07% 102.72% 104.81% 101.96% 102.09% 101.78% 102.68% 102.73% 101.47% 101.20% 100.95% 100.87% 102.04% 104.54% 103.59% 103.02% 102.45% 102.92%
HOU_DECS_25h_75v 101.49% 104.58% 104.91% 104.53% 103.54% 103.02% 101.64% 102.90% 104.92% 101.98% 102.11% 101.79% 102.70% 102.77% 101.49% 101.23% 100.98% 100.90% 102.13% 104.78% 103.78% 103.18% 102.61% 103.12%
HOU_DECS_25h_100v 101.48% 104.47% 104.76% 104.35% 103.38% 102.77% 101.39% 102.86% 104.94% 101.99% 102.12% 101.80% 102.71% 102.78% 101.50% 101.23% 100.97% 100.89% 102.13% 104.75% 103.76% 103.17% 102.60% 103.11%
HOU_DECS_50h_0v 101.27% 103.20% 103.06% 102.90% 102.34% 101.57% 100.29% 102.39% 104.72% 101.97% 102.11% 101.80% 102.70% 102.69% 101.45% 101.19% 100.94% 100.87% 102.00% 104.36% 103.47% 103.00% 102.30% 102.91%
HOU_DECS_50h_25v 101.46% 104.38% 104.66% 104.42% 103.53% 103.00% 101.61% 102.77% 104.75% 101.94% 102.06% 101.75% 102.64% 102.72% 101.47% 101.20% 100.95% 100.88% 102.05% 104.63% 103.68% 103.12% 102.53% 103.07%
HOU_DECS_50h_50v 101.62% 104.95% 105.27% 104.99% 104.03% 103.52% 102.08% 102.96% 104.86% 101.96% 102.07% 101.77% 102.66% 102.76% 101.49% 101.23% 100.98% 100.90% 102.13% 104.80% 103.86% 103.26% 102.67% 103.25%
HOU_DECS_50h_75v 101.80% 105.51% 105.87% 105.54% 104.51% 104.01% 102.54% 103.11% 104.97% 101.98% 102.09% 101.78% 102.67% 102.80% 101.51% 101.26% 101.01% 100.93% 102.20% 105.00% 104.03% 103.40% 102.81% 103.43%
HOU_DECS_50h_100v 101.80% 105.50% 105.83% 105.48% 104.44% 103.88% 102.40% 103.10% 105.00% 101.99% 102.11% 101.79% 102.69% 102.80% 101.52% 101.26% 101.00% 100.93% 102.21% 105.01% 104.03% 103.41% 102.81% 103.43%
HOU_DECS_75h_0v 101.87% 104.89% 104.72% 104.49% 103.82% 102.82% 101.38% 102.57% 104.71% 101.94% 102.05% 101.73% 102.62% 102.51% 101.38% 101.15% 100.93% 100.88% 102.13% 104.70% 103.92% 103.39% 102.72% 103.56%
HOU_DECS_75h_25v 101.96% 105.82% 106.13% 105.84% 104.77% 104.10% 102.54% 102.93% 104.70% 101.90% 101.99% 101.67% 102.56% 102.54% 101.40% 101.16% 100.95% 100.89% 102.16% 105.00% 104.06% 103.49% 102.89% 103.60%
HOU_DECS_75h_50v 102.09% 106.33% 106.70% 106.36% 105.22% 104.57% 102.98% 103.09% 104.80% 101.91% 102.01% 101.69% 102.58% 102.58% 101.42% 101.19% 100.98% 100.92% 102.23% 105.16% 104.22% 103.61% 103.01% 103.77%
HOU_DECS_75h_75v 102.24% 106.88% 107.26% 106.88% 105.68% 105.04% 103.41% 103.24% 104.91% 101.94% 102.03% 101.71% 102.59% 102.62% 101.45% 101.22% 101.01% 100.95% 102.30% 105.35% 104.37% 103.74% 103.13% 103.92%
HOU_DECS_75h_100v 102.25% 106.82% 107.19% 106.79% 105.59% 104.89% 103.27% 103.23% 104.94% 101.95% 102.04% 101.72% 102.61% 102.63% 101.45% 101.22% 101.00% 100.95% 102.31% 105.34% 104.37% 103.74% 103.14% 103.92%
HOU_DECS_100h_25v 102.16% 106.35% 106.63% 106.30% 105.21% 104.44% 102.82% 103.03% 104.77% 101.92% 102.01% 101.70% 102.59% 102.60% 101.43% 101.19% 100.97% 100.92% 102.23% 105.14% 104.23% 103.65% 103.03% 103.83%
HOU_DECS_100h_50v 102.24% 106.73% 107.04% 106.68% 105.52% 104.80% 103.18% 103.16% 104.87% 101.93% 102.03% 101.71% 102.60% 102.63% 101.45% 101.22% 101.00% 100.94% 102.30% 105.30% 104.35% 103.74% 103.12% 103.94%
HOU_DECS_100h_75v 102.38% 107.22% 107.59% 107.19% 105.96% 105.25% 103.60% 103.31% 104.98% 101.95% 102.05% 101.73% 102.62% 102.68% 101.48% 101.25% 101.03% 100.97% 102.36% 105.47% 104.50% 103.86% 103.23% 104.08%
278

APPENDIX E - DECS patterns and performance (Chapter 5)
Los Angeles
Los Angeles hottest day
Table 5-Appx.E- 1 DECS pattern and electricity loads Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in LA
(gradient color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient).

LA ELECTRICITY COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR HOTTEST DAY July 31st
Time LA_DECS pattern and performance LA_DSF_MS LA_DSF_CO LA_DSF_SB LA_DSF_BW
1:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
2:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
3:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
4:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
5:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
6:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
7:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 1.950 1.953 1.953 1.950 1.952
8:00 LA_DECS_50h_0v 2.620 2.620 2.620 2.620 2.620
9:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 6.842 6.894 6.904 6.843 6.890
10:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 5.536 5.741 5.853 5.546 5.808
11:00 LA_DSF_SB 8.124 8.405 8.838 8.124 8.899
12:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 10.420 10.781 11.232 10.510 11.303
13:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 5.381 5.603 5.797 5.473 5.871
14:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 5.856 6.129 6.334 5.908 6.332
15:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 5.609 5.831 5.897 5.617 5.842
16:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 5.604 5.855 5.865 5.608 5.795
17:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 6.032 6.254 6.254 6.035 6.192
18:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 3.063 3.101 3.101 3.064 3.090
19:00 LA_DSF_SB 1.973 1.975 1.975 1.973 1.975
20:00 any 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015
21:00 any 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015
22:00 any 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015 2.015
23:00 any 1.658 1.658 1.658 1.658 1.658
0:00 any 1.658 1.658 1.658 1.658 1.658
Btu/sf for 24h 86.171 88.305 89.786 86.433 89.732
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -2.134 -3.615 -0.261 -3.561
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 102.48% 104.19% 100.30% 104.13%

279

Table 5-Appx.E- 2 DECS pattern and cooling loads Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in LA (gradient
color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient).

LA COOLING COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR HOTTEST DAY July 31st
Time LA_DECS pattern and performance LA_DSF_MS LA_DSF_CO LA_DSF_SB LA_DSF_BW
1:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
2:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
3:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
4:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
5:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
8:00 LA_DECS_50h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
9:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
10:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
11:00 LA_DSF_SB 2.641 2.700 2.887 2.641 2.987
12:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 4.970 5.079 5.213 5.031 5.316
13:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 1.854 1.961 2.020 1.934 2.110
14:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.315 0.370 0.404 0.351 0.442
15:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
16:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
17:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
18:00 LA_DECS_25h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
19:00 LA_DSF_SB 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
20:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
21:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
22:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
23:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Btu/sf for 24h 9.780 10.110 10.525 9.956 10.855
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -0.330 -0.745 -0.176 -1.075
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 103.37% 107.61% 101.80% 111.00%
280

Los Angeles coldest day
Table 5-Appx.E- 3 DECS pattern and gas loads Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in LA (gradient
color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient).

LA GAS COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR COLDEST DAY February 2nd
Time LA_DECS pattern and performance LA_DSF_MS LA_DSF_CO LA_DSF_SB LA_DSF_BW
1:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
2:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
3:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
4:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
5:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6:00 any 0.000 0.035 0.007 0.031 0.000
7:00 any 0.000 0.048 0.024 0.053 0.000
8:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.437 0.516 0.491 0.523 0.437
9:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.162 0.223 0.186 0.230 0.162
10:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.127 0.127 0.127 0.127 0.127
11:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.170
12:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.170
13:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.212 0.212 0.212 0.212 0.212
14:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.170
15:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.170
16:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.127 0.127 0.127 0.127 0.127
17:00 LA_DSF_SB 0.127 0.127 0.127 0.127 0.127
18:00 any 0.127 0.127 0.127 0.127 0.127
19:00 any 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.042
20:00 any 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.042
21:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
22:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
23:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Btu/sf for 24h 2.085 2.308 2.193 2.323 2.085
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -0.223 -0.108 -0.238 0.000
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 110.70% 105.19% 111.42% 100.00%

281

Table 5-Appx.E- 4 DECS pattern and heating loads Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in LA (gradient
color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient).

LA HEATING COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR COLDEST DAY February 2nd
Time LA_DECS pattern and performance LA_DSF_MS LA_DSF_CO LA_DSF_SB LA_DSF_BW
1:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
2:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
3:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
4:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
5:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6:00 any 0.000 0.035 0.007 0.031 0.000
7:00 any 0.000 0.048 0.024 0.053 0.000
8:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.395 0.474 0.448 0.480 0.395
9:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.077 0.138 0.101 0.146 0.077
10:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
11:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
12:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
13:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
14:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
15:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
16:00 LA_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
17:00 LA_DSF_SB 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
18:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
19:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
20:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
21:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
22:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
23:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Btu/sf for 24h 0.472 0.695 0.580 0.710 0.472
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -0.223 -0.108 -0.238 0.000
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 147.30% 122.93% 150.46% 100.00%
282

New York
New York monthly
Table 5-Appx.E- 5 DECS pattern and electricity loads Vs. DSFs per month in NY (gradient color
representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient).

Table 5-Appx.E- 6 DECS pattern and gas loads Vs. DSFs per month in NY (gradient color
representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient.

NY ELECTRICITY COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs per month
Time NY_DECS pattern and performance NY_DSF_MS NY_DSF_CO NY_DSF_SB NY_DSF_BW
Jan NY_DSF_BW 2.142 2.122 2.147 2.114 2.142
Feb NY_DSF_BW 2.076 2.047 2.084 2.037 2.076
Mar NY_DSF_BW 2.077 2.059 2.084 2.048 2.077
Apr NY_DSF_BW 2.125 2.099 2.136 2.082 2.125
May NY_DECS_25h_0v 2.187 2.217 2.253 2.190 2.248
Jun NY_DECS_25h_0v 2.688 2.729 2.761 2.697 2.771
Jul NY_DECS_25h_0v 4.008 4.066 4.114 4.030 4.155
Aug NY_DECS_25h_0v 4.100 4.160 4.241 4.126 4.277
Sep NY_DECS_25h_0v 2.154 2.180 2.219 2.160 2.219
Oct NY_DSF_BW 2.045 2.015 2.059 2.004 2.045
Nov NY_DSF_BW 2.095 2.070 2.102 2.059 2.095
Dec NY_DSF_BW 2.221 2.194 2.228 2.181 2.221
Kbtu/sf for 12 months 29.917 29.960 30.427 29.729 30.450
EUI savings in Kbtu/sf in 12 months 0.000 -0.043 -0.510 0.188 -0.533
EUI comparison Vs. DECS % (12 mo) 100.00% 100.14% 101.71% 99.37% 101.78%
NY GAS COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs per month
Time NY_DECS pattern and performance NY_DSF_MS NY_DSF_CO NY_DSF_SB NY_DSF_BW
Jan NY_DSF_BW 19.181 19.766 19.424 19.711 19.181
Feb NY_DSF_BW 20.286 20.903 20.525 20.869 20.286
Mar NY_DSF_BW 9.458 9.918 9.650 9.866 9.458
Apr NY_DSF_BW 2.981 3.162 3.063 3.140 2.981
May NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.116 0.118 0.117 0.118 0.114
Jun NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.097 0.097 0.097 0.097 0.097
Jul NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.104 0.104 0.104 0.104 0.104
Aug NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105
Sep NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.096 0.096 0.096 0.096 0.096
Oct NY_DSF_BW 0.843 0.916 0.878 0.914 0.843
Nov NY_DSF_BW 7.135 7.439 7.275 7.430 7.135
Dec NY_DSF_BW 14.450 14.938 14.663 14.913 14.450
Kbtu/sf for 12 months 74.855 77.562 75.998 77.364 74.853
EUI savings in Kbtu/sf in 12 months 0.000 -2.708 -1.144 -2.509 0.002
EUI comparison Vs. DECS % (12 mo) 100.00% 103.62% 101.53% 103.35% 100.00%

283

Table 5-Appx.E- 7 DECS pattern and heating loads Vs. DSFs per month in NY (gradient color
representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient).

Table 5-Appx.E- 8 DECS pattern and cooling loads Vs. DSFs per month in NY (gradient color
representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient).

NY HEATING COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs per month
Time NY_DECS pattern and performance NY_DSF_MS NY_DSF_CO NY_DSF_SB NY_DSF_BW
Jan NY_DSF_BW 19.081 19.665 19.324 19.611 19.081
Feb NY_DSF_BW 20.191 20.808 20.430 20.774 20.191
Mar NY_DSF_BW 9.357 9.816 9.548 9.764 9.357
Apr NY_DSF_BW 2.877 3.058 2.960 3.037 2.877
May NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.012 0.014 0.012 0.013 0.010
Jun NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Jul NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Aug NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Sep NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Oct NY_DSF_BW 0.739 0.812 0.774 0.810 0.739
Nov NY_DSF_BW 7.042 7.345 7.181 7.337 7.042
Dec NY_DSF_BW 14.350 14.837 14.562 14.813 14.350
Kbtu/sf for 12 months 73.648 76.356 74.792 76.158 73.647
EUI savings in Kbtu/sf in 12 months 0.000 -2.708 -1.144 -2.510 0.002
EUI comparison Vs. DECS % (12 mo) 100.00% 103.68% 101.55% 103.41% 100.00%
NY COOLING COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs per month
Time NY_DECS pattern and performance NY_DSF_MS NY_DSF_CO NY_DSF_SB NY_DSF_BW
Jan NY_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Feb NY_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Mar NY_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Apr NY_DSF_BW 0.002 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.002
May NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.152 0.155 0.157 0.155 0.161
Jun NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.714 0.724 0.733 0.722 0.750
Jul NY_DECS_25h_0v 1.937 1.964 1.985 1.958 2.033
Aug NY_DECS_25h_0v 2.141 2.171 2.200 2.166 2.250
Sep NY_DECS_25h_0v 0.175 0.183 0.185 0.180 0.194
Oct NY_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Nov NY_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Dec NY_DSF_BW 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Kbtu/sf for 12 months 5.122 5.200 5.261 5.182 5.390
EUI savings in Kbtu/sf in 12 months 0.000 -0.078 -0.139 -0.060 -0.268
EUI comparison Vs. DECS % (12 mo) 100.00% 101.52% 102.72% 101.18% 105.24%
284

New York hottest day
Table 5-Appx.E- 9 DECS pattern and electricity loads Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in NY
(gradient color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient).

NY ELECTRICITY COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR HOTTEST DAY June 19th
Time NY_DECS pattern and performance NY_DSF_MS NY_DSF_CO NY_DSF_SB NY_DSF_BW
1:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
2:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
3:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
4:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
5:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
6:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
7:00 NY_DSF_MS 3.021 3.021 3.272 3.042 3.443
8:00 NY_DSF_MS 6.159 6.159 6.507 6.185 6.795
9:00 NY_DSF_SB 29.147 29.524 29.705 29.147 29.696
10:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 34.732 35.111 35.432 34.789 35.494
11:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 43.024 43.494 44.046 43.115 44.119
12:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 47.248 47.760 48.385 47.386 48.454
13:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 24.312 24.654 24.850 24.468 24.951
14:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 41.189 41.641 41.816 41.371 41.899
15:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 38.704 38.982 38.927 38.874 39.044
16:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 32.304 32.550 32.502 32.447 32.619
17:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 36.263 36.578 36.575 36.371 36.667
18:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 13.923 14.006 14.052 14.028 14.256
19:00 NY_DECS_25h_100v 7.233 7.280 7.554 7.370 7.869
20:00 NY_DSF_MS 6.301 6.301 6.583 6.354 6.873
21:00 NY_DSF_MS 5.019 5.019 5.276 5.049 5.488
22:00 NY_DSF_MS 4.320 4.320 4.462 4.332 4.584
23:00 NY_DSF_MS 3.616 3.616 3.908 3.631 4.085
0:00 any 1.658 1.658 1.658 1.658 1.658
Btu/sf for 24h 385.974 389.475 393.313 387.419 395.797
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -3.502 -7.339 -1.445 -9.823
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 100.91% 101.90% 100.37% 102.55%

285

Table 5-Appx.E- 10 DECS pattern and cooling loads Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in NY
(gradient color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient).

NY COOLING COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR HOTTEST DAY June 19th
Time NY_DECS pattern and performance NY_DSF_MS NY_DSF_CO NY_DSF_SB NY_DSF_BW
1:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
2:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
3:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
4:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
5:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7:00 NY_DSF_MS 1.156 1.156 1.407 1.192 1.583
8:00 NY_DSF_MS 3.832 3.832 4.180 3.898 4.479
9:00 NY_DSF_SB 23.597 23.710 23.841 23.597 23.903
10:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 29.269 29.301 29.415 29.269 29.540
11:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 37.743 37.877 38.005 37.819 38.135
12:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 41.995 42.193 42.297 42.116 42.417
13:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 20.922 21.119 21.095 21.071 21.221
14:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 35.776 36.008 35.962 35.947 36.091
15:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 32.747 32.924 32.835 32.912 32.976
16:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 25.934 26.072 26.020 26.076 26.168
17:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 30.153 30.264 30.261 30.258 30.410
18:00 NY_DECS_25h_0v 10.932 10.967 11.013 11.036 11.231
19:00 NY_DECS_25h_100v 5.457 5.504 5.778 5.597 6.094
20:00 NY_DSF_MS 4.287 4.287 4.569 4.339 4.858
21:00 NY_DSF_MS 3.004 3.004 3.262 3.035 3.473
22:00 NY_DSF_MS 2.305 2.305 2.448 2.317 2.570
23:00 NY_DSF_MS 1.958 1.958 2.251 1.974 2.428
0:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Btu/sf for 24h 311.066 312.481 314.640 312.453 317.578
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -1.416 -3.575 -1.387 -6.512
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 100.46% 101.15% 100.45% 102.09%
286

New York coldest day
Table 5-Appx.E- 11 DECS pattern and gas loads Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in NY (gradient
color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient).

NY GAS COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Time NY_DECS pattern and performance NY_DSF_MS NY_DSF_CO NY_DSF_SB NY_DSF_BW
1:00 NY_DSF_BW 14.253 15.729 14.974 15.684 14.253
2:00 NY_DSF_BW 4.099 5.713 4.875 5.604 4.099
3:00 NY_DSF_BW 4.332 6.043 5.215 5.892 4.332
4:00 NY_DSF_BW 4.586 6.341 5.506 6.193 4.586
5:00 NY_DSF_BW 4.985 6.725 5.883 6.610 4.985
6:00 NY_DSF_BW 5.200 6.925 6.064 6.778 5.200
7:00 NY_DSF_BW 5.558 7.226 6.400 7.084 5.558
8:00 NY_DSF_BW 26.785 28.439 27.641 28.294 26.785
9:00 NY_DSF_BW 46.636 47.986 47.306 47.869 46.636
10:00 NY_DSF_BW 199.449 200.422 199.917 200.409 199.449
11:00 NY_DSF_BW 193.600 194.634 194.071 194.650 193.600
12:00 NY_DSF_BW 184.861 186.099 185.216 186.108 184.861
13:00 NY_DSF_BW 175.201 176.474 175.748 176.494 175.201
14:00 NY_DSF_BW 89.505 90.975 90.160 91.125 89.505
15:00 NY_DSF_BW 164.319 165.878 165.095 165.996 164.319
16:00 NY_DSF_BW 162.713 164.261 163.483 164.285 162.713
17:00 NY_DSF_BW 159.559 161.111 160.361 160.995 159.559
18:00 NY_DSF_BW 158.590 160.203 159.406 160.108 158.590
19:00 NY_DSF_BW 53.877 55.549 54.771 55.463 53.877
20:00 NY_DSF_BW 18.793 20.432 19.714 20.314 18.793
21:00 NY_DSF_BW 19.124 20.705 19.990 20.626 19.124
22:00 NY_DSF_BW 20.025 21.626 20.882 21.561 20.025
23:00 NY_DSF_BW 20.355 21.909 21.213 21.829 20.355
0:00 NY_DSF_BW 11.788 13.234 12.533 13.197 11.788
Btu/sf for 24h 1748.192 1784.638 1766.423 1783.169 1748.192
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -36.447 -18.231 -34.977 0.000
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 102.08% 101.04% 102.00% 100.00%

287

Table 5-Appx.E- 12 DECS pattern and heating loads Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in NY
(gradient color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient).

NY TOTAL HEATING COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR COLDEST DAY February 6th
Time NY_DECS pattern and performance NY_DSF_MS NY_DSF_CO NY_DSF_SB NY_DSF_BW
1:00 NY_DSF_BW 14.210 15.687 14.931 15.642 14.210
2:00 NY_DSF_BW 4.099 5.713 4.875 5.604 4.099
3:00 NY_DSF_BW 4.332 6.043 5.215 5.892 4.332
4:00 NY_DSF_BW 4.586 6.341 5.506 6.193 4.586
5:00 NY_DSF_BW 4.985 6.725 5.883 6.610 4.985
6:00 NY_DSF_BW 5.200 6.925 6.064 6.778 5.200
7:00 NY_DSF_BW 5.558 7.226 6.400 7.084 5.558
8:00 NY_DSF_BW 26.742 28.396 27.598 28.252 26.742
9:00 NY_DSF_BW 46.466 47.816 47.136 47.699 46.466
10:00 NY_DSF_BW 199.152 200.125 199.620 200.111 199.152
11:00 NY_DSF_BW 193.261 194.295 193.732 194.311 193.261
12:00 NY_DSF_BW 184.522 185.760 184.876 185.769 184.522
13:00 NY_DSF_BW 174.819 176.092 175.366 176.112 174.819
14:00 NY_DSF_BW 88.996 90.466 89.651 90.616 88.996
15:00 NY_DSF_BW 163.852 165.411 164.628 165.529 163.852
16:00 NY_DSF_BW 162.416 163.964 163.186 163.988 162.416
17:00 NY_DSF_BW 159.262 160.814 160.063 160.698 159.262
18:00 NY_DSF_BW 158.208 159.821 159.024 159.725 158.208
19:00 NY_DSF_BW 53.665 55.336 54.559 55.250 53.665
20:00 NY_DSF_BW 18.623 20.262 19.544 20.144 18.623
21:00 NY_DSF_BW 18.997 20.577 19.863 20.498 18.997
22:00 NY_DSF_BW 19.898 21.498 20.755 21.434 19.898
23:00 NY_DSF_BW 20.270 21.824 21.128 21.744 20.270
0:00 NY_DSF_BW 11.745 13.192 12.490 13.155 11.745
Btu/sf for 24h 1743.862 1780.308 1762.093 1778.839 1743.862
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -36.447 -18.231 -34.977 0.000
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 102.09% 101.05% 102.01% 100.00%
288

Houston
Houston hottest day
Table 5-Appx.E- 13 DECS pattern and electricity loads Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in HOU
(gradient color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient).

HOU ELECTRICITY EUI COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR HOTTEST DAY August 2nd
Time HOU_DECS pattern and performance HOU_DSF_MS HOU_DSF_CO HOU_DSF_SB HOU_DSF_BW
1:00 HOU_DECS_100h_75v 2.659 2.662 2.812 2.668 2.796
2:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.312 1.300 1.323
3:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
4:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
5:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
6:00 any 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300
7:00 HOU_DECS_75h_0v 1.924 1.932 1.943 1.924 1.961
8:00 HOU_DSF_MS 6.596 6.596 7.043 6.614 7.295
9:00 HOU_DECS_75h_0v 25.037 25.499 25.605 25.058 25.525
10:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 30.832 31.107 31.242 30.842 31.294
11:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 37.979 38.249 38.481 38.036 38.558
12:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 44.672 44.971 45.287 44.772 45.380
13:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 26.448 26.666 26.823 26.565 26.929
14:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 53.176 53.543 53.741 53.320 53.818
15:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 56.742 57.148 57.208 56.890 57.274
16:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 59.090 59.545 59.536 59.235 59.589
17:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 58.548 59.013 59.018 58.679 59.074
18:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 20.903 21.027 21.060 21.007 21.225
19:00 HOU_DECS_25h_100v 9.834 9.924 10.102 10.039 10.394
20:00 HOU_DECS_25h_100v 10.795 10.843 11.119 10.942 11.411
21:00 HOU_DSF_MS 10.535 10.535 10.917 10.635 11.254
22:00 HOU_DSF_MS 8.553 8.553 8.954 8.630 9.249
23:00 HOU_DSF_MS 6.202 6.202 6.450 6.239 6.643
0:00 HOU_DSF_MS 5.463 5.463 5.754 5.494 5.899
Btu/sf for 24h 482.489 485.979 489.611 484.092 492.092
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -3.489 -7.121 -1.602 -9.603
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 100.72% 101.48% 100.33% 101.99%

289

Table 5-Appx.E- 14 DECS pattern and cooling loads Vs. DSFs for the hottest day in HOU
(gradient color representation, blue=most efficient, red=least efficient).

HOU COOLING COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR HOTTEST DAY August 2nd
Time HOU_DECS pattern and performance HOU_DSF_MS HOU_DSF_CO HOU_DSF_SB HOU_DSF_BW
1:00 HOU_DECS_100h_75v 1.358 1.362 1.512 1.368 1.496
2:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.000 0.022
3:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
4:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
5:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6:00 any 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7:00 HOU_DECS_75h_0v 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.000 0.031
8:00 HOU_DSF_MS 4.249 4.249 4.696 4.314 4.962
9:00 HOU_DECS_75h_0v 19.454 19.632 19.737 19.471 19.737
10:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 25.226 25.252 25.346 25.231 25.464
11:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 32.287 32.339 32.438 32.330 32.560
12:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 38.905 39.001 39.093 38.985 39.215
13:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 22.782 22.896 22.925 22.888 23.044
14:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 47.442 47.604 47.631 47.570 47.745
15:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 51.070 51.249 51.237 51.209 51.358
16:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 53.404 53.579 53.556 53.545 53.688
17:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 52.761 52.915 52.920 52.888 53.063
18:00 HOU_DECS_25h_0v 17.965 18.023 18.055 18.068 18.239
19:00 HOU_DECS_25h_100v 8.027 8.117 8.295 8.237 8.589
20:00 HOU_DECS_25h_100v 8.781 8.828 9.104 8.927 9.396
21:00 HOU_DSF_MS 8.520 8.520 8.903 8.621 9.240
22:00 HOU_DSF_MS 6.538 6.538 6.940 6.615 7.235
23:00 HOU_DSF_MS 4.544 4.544 4.793 4.582 4.985
0:00 HOU_DSF_MS 3.806 3.806 4.097 3.836 4.242
Btu/sf for 24h 407.120 408.453 411.298 408.684 414.309
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -1.332 -4.178 -1.564 -7.188
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 100.33% 101.03% 100.38% 101.77%
290

Houston coldest day
Table 5-Appx.E- 15 DECS pattern and gas loads Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in HOU (gradient
color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient).

HOU GAS COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR COLDEST DAY February 11th
Time HOU_DECS pattern and performance HOU_DSF_MS HOU_DSF_CO HOU_DSF_SB HOU_DSF_BW
1:00 HOU_DSF_BW 6.290 7.770 6.644 7.447 6.290
2:00 HOU_DSF_BW 0.887 2.202 1.157 1.966 0.887
3:00 HOU_DSF_BW 1.090 2.525 1.461 2.248 1.090
4:00 HOU_DSF_BW 1.560 3.052 2.016 2.818 1.560
5:00 HOU_DSF_BW 2.026 3.512 2.509 3.296 2.026
6:00 HOU_DSF_BW 2.270 3.688 2.746 3.481 2.270
7:00 HOU_DSF_BW 2.641 4.005 3.130 3.794 2.641
8:00 HOU_DSF_BW 17.417 18.776 17.887 18.382 17.417
9:00 HOU_DSF_BW 30.301 31.470 30.732 31.183 30.301
10:00 HOU_DSF_BW 133.108 134.376 133.517 134.146 133.108
11:00 HOU_DSF_BW 120.575 122.063 120.874 121.775 120.575
12:00 HOU_DSF_BW 102.856 104.429 103.204 104.019 102.856
13:00 HOU_DSF_BW 90.966 92.632 91.234 91.488 90.966
14:00 HOU_DSF_BW 39.040 40.746 39.293 39.087 39.040
15:00 HOU_DSF_SB 69.170 71.192 69.615 69.170 69.330
16:00 HOU_DSF_SB 66.316 68.501 66.794 66.316 66.472
17:00 HOU_DSF_SB 69.724 71.846 69.776 69.724 69.460
18:00 HOU_DSF_BW 80.340 82.655 80.762 80.768 80.340
19:00 HOU_DSF_BW 27.973 30.077 28.230 28.636 27.973
20:00 HOU_DSF_BW 8.302 10.170 8.743 9.244 8.302
21:00 HOU_DSF_BW 9.682 11.451 10.084 10.730 9.682
22:00 HOU_DSF_BW 11.278 12.955 11.640 12.361 11.278
23:00 HOU_DSF_BW 12.053 13.651 12.393 13.161 12.053
0:00 HOU_DSF_BW 5.683 7.231 6.015 6.812 5.683
Btu/sf for 24h 911.550 950.974 920.458 932.054 911.601
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -39.425 -8.908 -20.504 -0.051
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 104.32% 100.98% 102.25% 100.01%

291

Table 5-Appx.E- 16 DECS pattern and heating loads Vs. DSFs for the coldest day in HOU
(gradient color representation, green=most efficient, red=least efficient).

HOU HEATING COMPARISON DECS Vs. DSFs FOR COLDEST DAY February 11th
Time HOU_DECS pattern and performance HOU_DSF_MS HOU_DSF_CO HOU_DSF_SB HOU_DSF_BW
1:00 HOU_DSF_BW 6.248 7.728 6.602 7.405 6.248
2:00 HOU_DSF_BW 0.887 2.202 1.157 1.966 0.887
3:00 HOU_DSF_BW 1.090 2.525 1.461 2.248 1.090
4:00 HOU_DSF_BW 1.560 3.052 2.016 2.818 1.560
5:00 HOU_DSF_BW 2.026 3.512 2.509 3.296 2.026
6:00 HOU_DSF_BW 2.270 3.688 2.746 3.481 2.270
7:00 HOU_DSF_BW 2.641 4.005 3.130 3.794 2.641
8:00 HOU_DSF_BW 17.375 18.734 17.845 18.340 17.375
9:00 HOU_DSF_BW 30.131 31.300 30.562 31.013 30.131
10:00 HOU_DSF_BW 132.811 134.079 133.220 133.849 132.811
11:00 HOU_DSF_BW 120.235 121.724 120.535 121.435 120.235
12:00 HOU_DSF_BW 102.516 104.089 102.864 103.680 102.516
13:00 HOU_DSF_BW 90.584 92.250 90.852 91.106 90.584
14:00 HOU_DSF_BW 38.531 40.236 38.784 38.578 38.531
15:00 HOU_DSF_SB 68.703 70.725 69.148 68.703 68.863
16:00 HOU_DSF_SB 66.019 68.204 66.496 66.019 66.175
17:00 HOU_DSF_SB 69.427 71.549 69.478 69.427 69.163
18:00 HOU_DSF_BW 79.958 82.273 80.380 80.386 79.958
19:00 HOU_DSF_BW 27.761 29.865 28.018 28.423 27.761
20:00 HOU_DSF_BW 8.133 10.000 8.574 9.074 8.133
21:00 HOU_DSF_BW 9.555 11.324 9.957 10.603 9.555
22:00 HOU_DSF_BW 11.151 12.827 11.513 12.234 11.151
23:00 HOU_DSF_BW 11.968 13.566 12.308 13.076 11.968
0:00 HOU_DSF_BW 5.640 7.188 5.972 6.770 5.640
Btu/sf for 24h 907.220 946.644 916.128 927.724 907.271
EUI savings in Btu/sf for 24h 0.000 -39.424 -8.908 -20.504 -0.051
Daily EUI comparison Vs. DECS % 100.00% 104.35% 100.98% 102.26% 100.01%

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Double Skin Facades (DSF) have been studied extensively in the past for different aspects such as energy and thermal performance, daylight, acoustics, use as noise barriers, aesthetics etc. A review of the current state and energy performance issues of DSF’s are being addressed and mostly regarding their impact on the building’s performance. Moreover, the experimental proposal provides a solution to enhance their efficiency. In order to achieve this goal a dynamic airflow control system was proposed in the cavity. The effect of this system and its outcomes were examined in energy simulation software. The proposed system offers the flexibility to transform a DSF between the four basic types: multi-story, corridor, shaft box, and window box. The results were compared among the types and a single skin façade system. This transformation allows control of the airflow in the cavity, and increases or decreases the air velocity/air volume. The study was made for a climate in each of the cities of: Los Angeles, New York and Houston. The outcomes identified which facade typology performs better for which climate, time period (day, season, year etc.)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Double skin façade in hot arid climates: computer simulations to find optimized energy and thermal performance of double skin façades

PDF

Energy use intensity estimation method based on building façade features by using regression models

PDF

Kinetic facades as environmental control systems: using kinetic facades to increase energy efficiency and building performance in office buildings

PDF

Unitized double skin façade assemblies: achieving the needs of future envelope systems through construction and performance advances

PDF

Energy saving integrated facade: design and analysis using computer simulation

PDF

Building energy performance estimation approach: facade visual information-driven benchmark performance model

PDF

Aerophysics of double-skin facades: simulation-based determination of pressure coefficients for multi-story double-skin facades

PDF

Adaptive façade controls: A methodology based on occupant visual comfort preferences and cluster analysis

PDF

Facade retrofit: enhancing energy performance in existing buildings

PDF

Double skin façades performance: effects on daylight and visual comfort in office spaces

PDF

Human-environmental interaction: potential use of pupil size for office lighting controls

PDF

Multi-domain assessment of a kinetic facade: determining the control strategy of a kinetic façade using BIM based on energy performance, daylighting, and occupants’ preferences; Multi-domain asse...

PDF

Digital tree simulation for residential building energy savings: shading and evapotranspiration

PDF

Mitigating thermal bridging in ventilated rainscreen envelope construction: Methods to reduce thermal transfer in net-zero envelope optimization

PDF

Energy efficient buildings: a method of probabilistic risk assessment using building energy simulation

PDF

Enhancing thermal comfort: data-driven approach to control air temperature based on facial skin temperature

PDF

Pre-cast concrete envelopes in hot-humid climates: examining envelopes to reduce cooling load and electrical consumption

PDF

Design of double skin (envelope) as a solar chimney: adapting natural ventilation in double envelope for mild or warm climates

PDF

Skin fit and retrofit: challenging the sustainability of curtainwall practice in tall buildings

PDF

Environmental adaptive design: building performance analysis considering change

Asset Metadata

Creator Spastri, Maria (author)

Core Title Energy savings by using dynamic environmental controls in the cavity of double skin facades

School School of Architecture

Degree Master of Building Science

Degree Program Building Science

Publication Date 10/28/2014

Defense Date 05/07/2014

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag building envelope,building performance,cavity,Control,double-skin facade,dynamic control system,dynamic system,energy performance,energy savings,OAI-PMH Harvest,Office Building,simulation

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Noble, Douglas (committee chair), Choi, Joon-Ho (committee member), Kensek, Karen M. (committee member)

Creator Email green.arch.ms@gmail.com,spastri@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-510622

Unique identifier UC11288416

Identifier etd-SpastriMar-3036.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-510622 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-SpastriMar-3036.pdf

Dmrecord 510622

Document Type Thesis

Rights Spastri, Maria

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA