[esp-r] R: Mean Radiant Temperature; esp-r Digest, Vol 22, Issue 15

Francesco Frontini francesco.frontini at polimi.it
Thu May 22 13:16:28 BST 2008


Dear Jon,
Ok, 
but where I can found the fomula used by ESP-r for the MRT calculation?
Best regards
Francesco

-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: esp-r-bounces at lists.strath.ac.uk
[mailto:esp-r-bounces at lists.strath.ac.uk] Per conto di
esp-r-request at lists.strath.ac.uk
Inviato: martedì 20 maggio 2008 13.00
A: esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
Oggetto: esp-r Digest, Vol 22, Issue 15

Send esp-r mailing list submissions to
	esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.strath.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/esp-r
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	esp-r-request at lists.strath.ac.uk

You can reach the person managing the list at
	esp-r-owner at lists.strath.ac.uk

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of esp-r digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1.  Mean Radiant Temperature (francesco.frontini at polimi.it)
   2. Re: Mean Radiant Temperature (Geissler Achim)
   3.  R:   Mean Radiant Temperature (Francesco Frontini)
   4. Re: R:   Mean Radiant Temperature (Geissler Achim)
   5. Re: R:   Mean Radiant Temperature (Jon Hand)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 08:45:52 +0200
From: francesco.frontini at polimi.it
Subject: [esp-r]  Mean Radiant Temperature
To: esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
Message-ID: <20080520084552.y2yaryo9kcs880ks at webmail.polimi.it>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=ISO-8859-1;	DelSp="Yes";
	format="flowed"

Dear All,
I have a question about MRT.

We want to assess the impact on the operative temperature in an office if we
use an internal blind with a low-emissivity coating (0,5 emissivity for
indoor-facing surface) instead of 0.9 emissivity.
We made two different simulation: static (with WIS program) and Dynamic
(ESP-r).

The results from WIS and from ESP-R for the blind surface temperature are
consistent (blind temperature about 5K higher for the low-emissivity blind).
However, the mean radiant temperature at a position close to the blind (0.5
m in ESP-R) is lower for the high-emissivity blind than the low-emissivity
blind with the ESP-R calculation.
Could you please send me the formula that ESP-r uses for the MRT
calculation? Is there any approximation that would not be appropriate for
low-emissivity surfaces?

I model the double glazing fa?ade with the internal blind like a single
construction (no air-ventilation between the glass and the blind). I set the
U-value for each fa?ade construction (it is similar but not identical for
the two different solutions, U=0,985+-0,005, obtained from the WIS
calculation), and the g-value. What changes in the model is the emissivity
of the indoor-facing surface of the blind
(e=0,9 for the first case and e=0,5 for the second one!), whereas the
solar-optical properties remain the same for the two blinds. In the WIS
model, the emissivity of the two blind surfaces is specified separately.
For both blinds, the emissivity of the outdoor-facing surface in the WIS
model is 0.9.


Looking forward to your answer and thanking you for your help.
Any advice and help on this will be much appreciated.

Francesco Frontini






------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 09:22:39 +0200
From: "Geissler Achim" <Achim.Geissler at josef-gartner.ch>
Subject: [esp-r] Re: Mean Radiant Temperature
To: <francesco.frontini at polimi.it>,	<esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk>
Message-ID:
	<5410907208A9F149ADB6E44744892B3C45EBE8 at sgartgum1.gart.intra>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"

Dear Francesco,

> We want to assess the impact on the operative temperature in an office 
> if we use an internal blind with a low-emissivity coating (0,5 
> emissivity for indoor-facing surface) instead of 0.9 emissivity.
> We made two different simulation: static (with WIS program) and 
> Dynamic (ESP-r).

> The results from WIS and from ESP-R for the blind surface temperature 
> are consistent (blind temperature about 5K higher for the 
> low-emissivity blind).
That is good news.

> However, the mean radiant temperature at a position close to the blind 
> (0.5 m in ESP-R) is lower for the high-emissivity blind than the 
> low-emissivity blind with the ESP-R calculation.

As the mean radiant temperature is defined by view factors and surface
temperature, only, all is well, no? The low-e blind has a higher
temperature, thus I would expect the mean radiant temperature close to the
blind to be higher. That is what you seem to have obtained as result?

Best regards,
Achim





------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 10:35:15 +0200
From: "Francesco Frontini" <francesco.frontini at polimi.it>
Subject: [esp-r]  R:   Mean Radiant Temperature
To: "'Geissler Achim'" <Achim.Geissler at josef-gartner.ch>,
	<esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk>
Message-ID:
	
<!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAru7KqoPmvUiwJBhxMD9pLMKAAAAQ
AAAAq+fYsqTr4E+5QjbiDeTAbQEAAAAA at polimi.it>
	
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"

Dear Achim
Yes I have obtained a MRT, close to the blind, higher for the solution with
low-e blind (that has a higer surface temperature). But for my opinion the
MRT has to take into account not only the view factor and the temperature of
the surface but also the emissivity. For that reason I'm also supposing that
with a low emmissivity also the MRT should be low (for exemple if the view
factor is the same: 43,88?x0,9>48.21?x0,5! Where the formula is
(T1(?C)blind)*(emissivity(1))>(T2(?C)blind)*(emissivity(2))!!!). It's not
correct?

Best regards,
Francesco

-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: Geissler Achim [mailto:Achim.Geissler at josef-gartner.ch]
Inviato: marted? 20 maggio 2008 9.23
A: francesco.frontini at polimi.it; esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
Oggetto: RE: [esp-r] Mean Radiant Temperature

Dear Francesco,

> We want to assess the impact on the operative temperature in an office 
> if we use an internal blind with a low-emissivity coating (0,5 
> emissivity for indoor-facing surface) instead of 0.9 emissivity.
> We made two different simulation: static (with WIS program) and 
> Dynamic (ESP-r).

> The results from WIS and from ESP-R for the blind surface temperature 
> are consistent (blind temperature about 5K higher for the 
> low-emissivity blind).
That is good news.

> However, the mean radiant temperature at a position close to the blind
> (0.5 m in ESP-R) is lower for the high-emissivity blind than the 
> low-emissivity blind with the ESP-R calculation.

As the mean radiant temperature is defined by view factors and surface
temperature, only, all is well, no? The low-e blind has a higher
temperature, thus I would expect the mean radiant temperature close to the
blind to be higher. That is what you seem to have obtained as result?

Best regards,
Achim





------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 11:33:33 +0200
From: "Geissler Achim" <Achim.Geissler at josef-gartner.ch>
Subject: [esp-r] Re: R:   Mean Radiant Temperature
To: "Francesco Frontini" <francesco.frontini at polimi.it>,
	<esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk>
Message-ID:
	<5410907208A9F149ADB6E44744892B3C45EC09 at sgartgum1.gart.intra>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"

Dear Francesco,
the definitions I know of for mean radiant temperature do not take
emissivity into account. The interesting question probably is, is the
measure "MRT" useful for environments with large differences in emissivity?
Of course, for radiation heat transfer, the emissivity is important (that is
what I think you want to describe?).
I would assume that the definition of MRT is based on the "normal" case,
that all surfaces of an indoor space have an emissivity of approx. 0.9.
Thus, the description of the radiative surroundings by temperature alone is
sufficient.
For your case, you may need to define a "new" MRT - maybe more a "mean
radiant heat exchange" type of coefficient (or try PPD / PMV calculations,
however, these also use standard mean radiant temperature for their
calculation).
Regards,
Achim


> -----Original Message-----
> From: esp-r-bounces at lists.strath.ac.uk [mailto:esp-r- 
> bounces at lists.strath.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Francesco Frontini
> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 10:35 AM
> To: Geissler Achim; esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
> Subject: [esp-r] R: Mean Radiant Temperature
> 
> Dear Achim
> Yes I have obtained a MRT, close to the blind, higher for the solution 
> with low-e blind (that has a higer surface temperature). But for my 
> opinion the MRT has to take into account not only the view factor and 
> the temperature of the surface but also the emissivity. For that 
> reason I'm also supposing that with a low emmissivity also the MRT 
> should be low (for exemple if the view factor is the same: 
> 43,88?x0,9>48.21?x0,5! Where the formula is 
> (T1(?C)blind)*(emissivity(1))>(T2(?C)blind)*(emissivity(2))!!!). It's 
> not correct?
> 
> Best regards,
> Francesco
> 
> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: Geissler Achim [mailto:Achim.Geissler at josef-gartner.ch]
> Inviato: marted? 20 maggio 2008 9.23
> A: francesco.frontini at polimi.it; esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
> Oggetto: RE: [esp-r] Mean Radiant Temperature
> 
> Dear Francesco,
> 
> > We want to assess the impact on the operative temperature in an 
> > office if we use an internal blind with a low-emissivity coating 
> > (0,5 emissivity for indoor-facing surface) instead of 0.9 emissivity.
> > We made two different simulation: static (with WIS program) and 
> > Dynamic (ESP-r).
> 
> > The results from WIS and from ESP-R for the blind surface 
> > temperature are consistent (blind temperature about 5K higher for 
> > the low-emissivity blind).
> That is good news.
> 
> > However, the mean radiant temperature at a position close to the 
> > blind
> > (0.5 m in ESP-R) is lower for the high-emissivity blind than the 
> > low-emissivity blind with the ESP-R calculation.
> 
> As the mean radiant temperature is defined by view factors and surface 
> temperature, only, all is well, no? The low-e blind has a higher 
> temperature, thus I would expect the mean radiant temperature close to 
> the blind to be higher. That is what you seem to have obtained as result?
> 
> Best regards,
> Achim
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> esp-r mailing list
> esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
> http://lists.strath.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/esp-r



------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 11:36:21 +0100
From: Jon Hand <jon at esru.strath.ac.uk>
Subject: [esp-r] Re: R:   Mean Radiant Temperature
To: "Geissler Achim" <Achim.Geissler at josef-gartner.ch>,	"Francesco
	Frontini" <francesco.frontini at polimi.it>,
<esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk>
Message-ID:
	<B94620A0857DFE4DB194C4A2DBDC088F8B5FD6 at BE-SCAM2.ds.strath.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"


There is a radiant asymmetry report as part of the comfort report and I
think that will be taking account of the emissivity.

There is an esp-r model which deals with a heated ceiling panel and location
specific comfort for a patient in a bed which needs to be added as an
exemplar model. 

-Jon Hand


-----Original Message-----
From: esp-r-bounces at lists.strath.ac.uk on behalf of Geissler Achim
Sent: Tue 5/20/2008 10:33 AM
To: Francesco Frontini; esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
Subject: [esp-r] Re: R:   Mean Radiant Temperature
 
Dear Francesco,
the definitions I know of for mean radiant temperature do not take
emissivity into account. The interesting question probably is, is the
measure "MRT" useful for environments with large differences in emissivity?
Of course, for radiation heat transfer, the emissivity is important (that is
what I think you want to describe?).
I would assume that the definition of MRT is based on the "normal" case,
that all surfaces of an indoor space have an emissivity of approx. 0.9.
Thus, the description of the radiative surroundings by temperature alone is
sufficient.
For your case, you may need to define a "new" MRT - maybe more a "mean
radiant heat exchange" type of coefficient (or try PPD / PMV calculations,
however, these also use standard mean radiant temperature for their
calculation).
Regards,
Achim


> -----Original Message-----
> From: esp-r-bounces at lists.strath.ac.uk [mailto:esp-r- 
> bounces at lists.strath.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Francesco Frontini
> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 10:35 AM
> To: Geissler Achim; esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
> Subject: [esp-r] R: Mean Radiant Temperature
> 
> Dear Achim
> Yes I have obtained a MRT, close to the blind, higher for the solution 
> with low-e blind (that has a higer surface temperature). But for my 
> opinion the MRT has to take into account not only the view factor and 
> the temperature of the surface but also the emissivity. For that 
> reason I'm also supposing that with a low emmissivity also the MRT 
> should be low (for exemple if the view factor is the same: 
> 43,88?x0,9>48.21?x0,5! Where the formula is 
> (T1(?C)blind)*(emissivity(1))>(T2(?C)blind)*(emissivity(2))!!!). It's 
> not correct?
> 
> Best regards,
> Francesco
> 
> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: Geissler Achim [mailto:Achim.Geissler at josef-gartner.ch]
> Inviato: marted? 20 maggio 2008 9.23
> A: francesco.frontini at polimi.it; esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
> Oggetto: RE: [esp-r] Mean Radiant Temperature
> 
> Dear Francesco,
> 
> > We want to assess the impact on the operative temperature in an 
> > office if we use an internal blind with a low-emissivity coating 
> > (0,5 emissivity for indoor-facing surface) instead of 0.9 emissivity.
> > We made two different simulation: static (with WIS program) and 
> > Dynamic (ESP-r).
> 
> > The results from WIS and from ESP-R for the blind surface 
> > temperature are consistent (blind temperature about 5K higher for 
> > the low-emissivity blind).
> That is good news.
> 
> > However, the mean radiant temperature at a position close to the 
> > blind
> > (0.5 m in ESP-R) is lower for the high-emissivity blind than the 
> > low-emissivity blind with the ESP-R calculation.
> 
> As the mean radiant temperature is defined by view factors and surface 
> temperature, only, all is well, no? The low-e blind has a higher 
> temperature, thus I would expect the mean radiant temperature close to 
> the blind to be higher. That is what you seem to have obtained as result?
> 
> Best regards,
> Achim
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> esp-r mailing list
> esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
> http://lists.strath.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/esp-r

_______________________________________________
esp-r mailing list
esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
http://lists.strath.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/esp-r




------------------------------

_______________________________________________
esp-r mailing list
esp-r at lists.strath.ac.uk
http://lists.strath.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/esp-r

End of esp-r Digest, Vol 22, Issue 15
*************************************




More information about the esp-r mailing list