Abstract
The presented research focuses on the comparison of energy performance of a conventional versus a bioclimatic building, both continuously monitored. Attached buildings of offices located in Madrid, with main orientation N-S, have been built considering different constructive criteria. Principal Components Analysis has been used to check the representativeness criteria of the analysed offices. The Box and Whisker method concluded that the bioclimatic building has registered lower inter-quartile ranges for indoor temperatures than the convectional building. Thermal oscillations have been calculated for both buildings during winter and summer campaigns. The behaviour of the bioclimatic building is close to the summer thermal comfort band however during winter period values are slightly above because upper temperature limit has been exceeded. Thermal assessment of monitored offices has been done for representative days of summer and winter periods. The temperature variation of bioclimatic offices is more stable compared to conventional ones. Global primary energy consumption has been reduced from 124.58 kWh/m2 year in conventional building up to 80.84 kWh/m2 year in bioclimatic building.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
