摘要
目前国际上门窗传热系数的计算存在着北美ASHRAE和欧洲ISO 10077-2两种不同的计算方法,而广泛应用的Therm/Window软件和新近颁布实施的中国行业标准JGJ/T151—2008分别隶属于上述两种不同的算法,为了探讨ASHRAE和JGJ/T 151—2008两种不同算法条件下,采用Therm/Window计算整窗传热系数之间的差别,分析计算了铝固定窗、平开窗和推拉窗三种窗型在十种不同尺寸条件下整窗的传热系数。结果显示,对于所有窗型和尺寸来说,采用ASHRAE算法计算的整窗传热系数都比采用JGJ/T 151—2008的要大,且两者之间的差值随整窗尺寸的增大而减小,固定窗为1.88%～0.04%,平开窗为3.71%～0.03%,推拉窗为4.91%～0.27%,大尺寸条件下两者计算结果近似相等,差值可忽略不计。采用理论分析的方法揭示了造成整窗传热系数存在差异的原因,认为不同的玻璃间隔条处理方法造成的窗框边角面积和玻璃边缘面积引起了计算结果的差异。
There are two different methods for thermal transmittance coefficient calculation ASHRAE method in North America and ISO 10077-2 method in Europe. but the Therm/Window, widely used thermal performance simulation software and JGJ/T 151--2008 are subordinate to the two different methods mentioned above. In order to compare the two different heat transfer calculation methods based on Therm/Window, overall thermal transmittance coefficient for three window types were analyzed under ten different total window area conditions, using Therm/Window simulation software. The results show that values of overall thermal transmittance coefficient using ASHRAE method are all larger than that using JGJ 151--2008method, and the overall thermal transmittance coefficient difference between the two methods decreases as the total window area increases, 1.88%-0.04% for aluminum fixed window, 3.71%-0.03% for aluminum casement window and 4.91%-0.27% for aluminum slider window respectively. Thus, the resulting difference in thermal transmittance coefficient values for the two methods is negligible for larger windows. Theoretical analysis result shows that the differences between the two methods turn out to be due to the corner regions of the window frame and glazing which caused by different treatment ways on the spacer.
出处
《门窗》
2010年第1期44-49,共6页
Doors & Windows
