Building and Environment 71 (2014) 24e32

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Building and Environment

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/buildenv

An investigation into the impact of movable solar shades on energy,

indoor thermal and visual comfort improvements
Jian Yao*
Faculty of Architectural, Civil Engineering and Environment, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Buildings are huge energy consumers and are responsible for a large part of greenhouse gas emissions in
Received 13 July 2013 the world. Among building energy efficiency measures, solar shading plays a significant role in reducing
Received in revised form building energy consumption, especially in hot summer and cold winter zone of China. This paper carried
22 August 2013
out a field measurement of shading performance of movable shades installed on the south-facing facade
Accepted 22 September 2013
of a residential building in Ningbo city of China. The field tests show that external movable solar shades
have a good shading performance that can reduce solar transmittance to about 8% and keep indoor
Keywords:
illuminance at about 1000 lux with little fluctuations, indicating a suitable level for indoor environments.
Building energy
Movable solar shade
A building simulation study on energy, indoor thermal and visual performance of movable solar shades
Indoor thermal was further carried out. Several important indexes were adopted to give an in-depth analysis, including
Visual comfort energy performance, room base temperature, transmitted solar radiation, PMV-PPD and its distribution
as well as Discomfort Glare Index (DGI). Results show that movable solar shades used for south-facing
windows not only reduce building energy demand by 30.87%, but also improve indoor thermal com-
fort by 21% in summer as well as reduce dramatically extremely uncomfortable risks by 80.4%, and
meanwhile the visual comfort condition is also improved by 19.9%.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction amount of solar radiation in winter which is wanted by occupants

to reduce heating energy consumption. Although many studies
With the increasing of population and the improvement of suggested that there might an optimal overhang depth which
living standards, the percentage of buildings with air conditioners blocks solar beam radiation from the high summer sun but still
in China have been increased dramatically, leading to a high con- allows the low winter sun to shine in and provide welcome solar
sumption of energy and environmental- and health-related nega- heating due to solar altitude angle difference in these two seasons
tive effects. For example, urban areas in China contribute 84% of [7] (see Fig. 1), overhang is not effective in controlling sky diffuse
total commercial energy consumption and are responsible for radiation which is a significant part contributing to increased
about 85% of energy related CO2 emissions [1]. Saving building cooling energy in summer.
energy is thus very important for reducing fossil fuels consumption On the other hand, movable shading devices can be adjusted to
and mitigating climate change. To address this demand, a lot of changing outdoor conditions and they are more effective in con-
measures can be used such as better design [2], using high efficient trolling sky diffuse radiation, thus they generally have a higher
HVAC equipment [3,4] and improving the performance of the energy performance than fixed ones. For movable solar shading
building envelope [5]. Among them, solar shading is an effective devices, external shading has a better performance at reducing heat
measure in hot summer and cold winter zone since windows are gain than internal window coverings since solar radiation absorbed
generally the lowest performing part of the building in controlling by internal ones will finally increase indoor heat gains. Regardless
energy loss and excessive solar heat gains [6]. of its high performance, external movable solar devices are rarely
Solar shading devices may be fixed or movable. Fixed shading designed or used by building development firms in hot summer
devices are usually used in the building envelope to block solar and cold winter zone due to relatively high initial costs. As a sub-
radiation in the summer. However, they also block a significant stitute, internal roller shades or coverings are widely used by oc-
cupants in order to control solar heat gains. Therefore, movable
solar shading especially for external one receives less research
* Tel.: þ86 574 87315244; fax: þ86 574 87191030. focus than other building envelope elements such as external walls
E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected]. and roof. Only few studies on movable solar shading conducted in

0360-1323/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.09.011
 J. Yao / Building and Environment 71 (2014) 24e32 25

The environmental performance of movable solar shading

including thermal and visual conditions has also been widely re-
ported. Kim et al. [18] evaluated the environmental performance of
the automated venetian blind by through thermal (room temper-
ature) and visual (indoor illuminance) experiments in a real-scale
test room. They found that the overall environmental perfor-
mance of the automated blinds is better than that of manual blinds
which is fully closed if the additional lighting energy consumption
is considered. Koo et al. [19] developed a new control method for
automated venetian blinds to maximize occupant comfort. This
new method can not only protect occupants from direct solar glare
but also maximize daylight penetration into buildings based on
occupants’ preferences on daylight. Its potential benefits may be
higher than the previous method. Chaiwiwatworakul et al. [20]
studied the application of automated blind for daylighting in
tropical region. The automated blind can adjust the angle of slats of
Fig. 1. An optimal overhang depth. the blind by a computer controller based on sunlight or glare
conditions. They concluded that this automated system can main-
tain sufficient interior illuminance with a good visual condition
this area. For example, Tian et al. simulated the building energy throughout the day. Beside room temperature and indoor illumi-
performance of movable solar shades using DOE-2 [8]. Their nance, the influence of movable solar shading on indoor mean
research showed that the energy saving potential was significant, radiant temperature [21], bright and glare sensation [22] have also
ranging from 17.29% to 22.68% for residential buildings in different been discussed.
cities in hot summer and cold winter zone. Using computational Another kind of movable solar shading is deciduous plant that
fluid dynamic (CFD) simulation, Zhang et al. analyzed the influence excludes solar radiation in summer by the plant foliage and let solar
of external movable blinds on indoor thermal conditions in Nanjing radiation to enter indoor in winter when the leaves have fallen. An
city [9]. They reported that venetian blinds and roller blinds experimental investigation was carried out by Papadakis and Tsa-
effectively improved indoor thermal performance in summer. mis [23] to analyze the effect of using trees for solar control of
However, there is a negative impact on natural ventilation for roller buildings by shading. They found that the radiative and thermal
blinds in transition seasons while venetian blinds do not influence loads in the shaded area proved to be considerably lower relative to
natural ventilation. the unshaded one and the evaporative cooling effect leaded to
Due to a higher recognition of the importance of movable solar lower air temperature around the shaded wall. The use of vegeta-
shading in Europe and other countries, a lot of literatures, however, tion as a shading to improve indoor thermal performance in Greek
have reported the performance of movable solar shading. Littlefair region was reported by Eumorfopoulou and Kontoleon [24]. Their
et al. [10] carried out a simulation study of solar shading control on research showed that surface temperatures of plant-covered wall
UK office energy use. They compared the energy performance of sections were considerably lower than those of the bare wall sec-
manually controlled internal blinds, a fixed external overhang, and tions and significantly reduced heat flow losses. For the plant-
internal or external blinds under automatic control and manual covered wall, the mean daytime indoor temperature value fulfills
override. the thermal comfort requirements.
Nielsen et al. [11] compared the energy and daylight perfor- Privacy and view toward outside have also been a research
mance of a Denmark office building between three different solar focus. Kim et al. [25] investigated the balance between daylighting
shading types: (1) without solar shading; (2) fixed horizontal performance, privacy and view. They presented an experimental
Venetian blinds and (3) dynamic solar shading (horizontal Venetian configuration of external shading devices. The results demon-
blinds) with slat angle adjustable according to outdoor conditions. strated that external shading devices was capable of improving
Their simulation study showed that dynamic solar shading has the daylighting and view performance compared with conventional
best performance with respect to total energy demand and can venetian blinds. Other environmental performance improvements
dramatically improve the amount of daylight available compared to result from solar shading such as carbon dioxide emission re-
fixed solar shading. ductions [26] have also been reported by researchers.
Palmero et al. [12] investigated the building energy performance However, these studies focused only on one or two aspects of
and indoor temperature improvements for louver shading devices the energy, indoor thermal and visual performance for moveable
under climatic conditions of Mexico (Mexico), Cairo (Egypt), Lisbon solar shading rather than all these three aspects. Furthermore, the
(Portugal), Madrid (Spain) and London (UK) by using TRNSYS performance of movable solar shading differs largely at different
simulation. They concluded that application of louver shading de- locations under various climate conditions. By now, there is still a
vices may lead to comfortable indoor thermal conditions and sig- lack of studies on movable solar shading taking into account the
nificant energy savings. Hammad et al. [13] explored the influence energy, indoor thermal and visual performance with field mea-
of external dynamic louvers on the energy consumption of an office surements and simulation combined analysis in hot summer and
building located in Abu Dhabi-UAE using the IES-VR software. The cold winter zone of China, and this leads to the current study.
so-called dynamic louvers mean that the louvers’ slat angle can be The south-facing facade of a residential building was considered
automatically adjusted to a given angle at a specific time to keep the in this paper to carry out a comprehensive investigation into the
overall lighting and HVAC energy consumption at the minimum effect of movable solar shading on the energy, indoor thermal and
level. Their findings show that the dynamic louvers system with visual performance by field measurements and simulation analysis.
light dimming strategy achieved energy savings of 28.57%e34.02% To give an in-depth analysis, not only solar transmittance, cooling
depending on window orientation. Besides, Tzempelikos [14,15], and heating energy demand will be compared, but also PMV-PPD
Silva [16], Moeseke [17] etc all reported similar results and these index and Discomfort Glare Index (DGI) will be calculated and
literatures focused mainly on the energy performance. discussed.
26 J. Yao / Building and Environment 71 (2014) 24e32

2. Methodology

2.1. The investigated building

The investigated building in this paper is a six-story residential

building (2100 m2) in Ningbo city in hot summer and cold winter
zone of China, which was retrofitted with external movable solar
shades in 2012. The pictures of the existing residential building
before and after installing movable solar shading are shown in
Fig. 2. This building was constructed in 1997 without any energy
efficiency measures such as double-pane glazing windows and
insulated walls etc. The window-to-wall ratio for the south facade
is 0.36. Fig. 3 shows the picture of the solar shade used in this
building.

2.2. Field measurements

Experiments used for field measurements are shown in Fig. 4,

including a PC-2 solar radiation measuring recorder and a TB-2
solarimeter which were used to test the solar shading perfor-
mance of external movable shading. To measure the daylighting
performance of solar shades, a JTG01 illuminometer was used to
record the indoor illuminance before and after shading. Because
most windows and solar shades (83%) are on south-facing facade,
the measurement was conducted on this facade. The tests were
carried out on September 19, 2012, and this day was sunny and
partly cloudy, representing the common weather condition in
summer in this city. Due to limited measurement equipment, the Fig. 3. A solar shade made by PVC and polyester fibrer.
performance, especially annual performance, will be further
analyzed using building simulation.
writing and watching TV etc.) according to the Chinese Standard for
2.3. Computer simulation setting lighting design of buildings [28]. The simulation settings comply
with the real building and the typical meteorological year data was
A south-facing room (4  4  3 m) of the retrofitted building used in 8760 h simulation. The external wall of the building was a
was modeled in the simulation software Energyplus, a whole- 240 mm-brick wall and the other three internal walls, roof and floor
building energy simulation program developed by the U.S. were considered as adiabatic. The windows for this building are
Department of Energy (DOE) [27], to carry out the building per- 3 mm single-pane clear glazing. The room temperature is set 26  C
formance simulation. This room is a typical living room in China for for cooling and 18  C for heating and the air-conditioners are
relaxing and socializing with a comfortable illuminance level of running throughout the year to meet the indoor temperature
100e300 lux depending on types of activity (including reading, setting. The total power density of miscellaneous loads (including

Fig. 2. The investigated building (a): before retrofit; (b): after shades installation.
 J. Yao / Building and Environment 71 (2014) 24e32 27

Table 1
The setting of building enveloped and air-conditioner etc.

Parameter Value

Dimension Room: 4  4  3 m, Window: 2.4  1.8 m

Building envelope External wall: U-value ¼ 2 W/m2 K,
Orientation: south;
Three internal walls, roof and floor: U-value ¼ 0 W/m2 K;
Window: U-value ¼ 6.4 W/m2 K, Solar shading
coefficient (SC) ¼ 1
Air-conditioner Temperature: 18e26  C, run time: the whole year
Miscellaneous loads 4.3 W/m2
Air change rate 1.5 per hour

without the air-conditioner running, is a key factor to calculate

indoor thermal environment [31]. When simulating room base
temperature, air conditioning was set to be off in the whole year.
Transmitted solar radiation reduction including solar beam radia-
tion and diffuse radiation was compared in summer and in winter.
The subjective indoor thermal performance index PMV-PPD was
also calculated by Energyplus. The cooling, heating and lighting
energy demands were simulated by Energyplus for energy perfor-
mance evaluation. Although many formulas are available for visual
discomfort and glare rating nowadays such as BRS glare equation
(BRS or BGI) [32], Unified Glare Rating (UGR) [33], CIE Glare Index
(CGI) [34], the most cited one is Discomfort Glare Index (DGI) at the
international level since it is relatively suitable for evaluation of
daylight induced discomfort glare experienced from windows [35].
When analyzing DGI, it is assumed that occupant sits (1.2 m high)
toward outside and the distance from the occupant and the win-
dow is 0.5 m.

3. Results and discussion

Fig. 4. Experiments for field measurements: (a) PC-2 solar radiation measuring
recorder; (b) JTG01 illuminometer.
3.1. Field measurement analysis

3.1.1. Solar transmittance

lighting systems and occupants) is 4.3 W/m2 and the air change rate
To reduce the error of tests, field measurements were conducted
is 1.5 per hour. These thermal settings for non-energy efficient
for 22 times from 10:00 to 15:15 with a 15 min interval and the
buildings are in accordance with the design standard in this region
average value of records was considered to be used in further
[29]. The detailed values of these settings are listed in Table 1. The
simulation. Fig. 5 shows the solar transmittance before and after
reasons why the author assume the air-conditioners are running
shading. It can be seen that solar radiation before shading fluctu-
throughout the year are that living standards in this area improved
ated wildly (from about 100 W/m2 to more than 400 W/m2) due to
significantly with more and more frequently used air-conditioning
weather conditions while the transmitted solar radiation dropped
and to give an energy saving potential comparison with other
to lower than 50 W/m2 after shading, and the solar transmittance
measures proposed by the design standards [29].
ratio of the solar shades is shown in Fig. 6 and it’s average value is
about 8%, indicating a high solar shading performance in summer.
2.4. Solar shading strategy
3.1.2. Daylight illuminance
Two kinds of window shading setting were used including bare
Besides solar shading, daylighting performance and glare con-
windows without shading and with solar shading controlled by
trols are others aspects that may influence visual comfort. There-
occupants as shown in Table 2 (this strategy reflects the common
fore, indoor illuminance was tested for 22 times before and after
control by occupants on solar shades in this region to keep indoor
condition comfortable). The solar transmittance value of movable
shades was set according to the filed measurement results. The
Table 2
following simulation analysis compared these two cases with other
Solar shading control strategy.
parameters remained unchanged.
Season Time Shading sate The aim of occupants’ control

2.5. Evaluation index Summer Daytime Shade 2/3 of Block excessive solar gain and keep
window area enough daylight
Nighttime Fully open Enable natural ventilation to decrease
For indoor thermal performance evaluation, many objective and
indoor temperature
subjective factors or indexes can be used. Here typical objective Winter Daytime Fully open Admit solar heat to warm indoor space
factors including room base temperature and transmitted solar Nighttime Fully closed Reduce heat loss
radiation as well as well-known subjective index PMV-PPD [30] Note: the season Summer means days from 6. 1e9.30 and Winter means days from
were adopted to give a comprehensive comparison. Room base 10. 1e5.31; Daytime means the time from 8:00e18:00 while Nighttime indicates
temperature, which represents hourly indoor air temperature 19:00e7:00.
28 J. Yao / Building and Environment 71 (2014) 24e32

450
W/m2)

400
350
300
Solar transmittance

250
200 without shading
150 shading
100
50
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21
test times
Fig. 5. Solar transmittance before and after solar shading. Fig. 7. Indoor illuminance before and after shading.

shading as shown in Fig. 7. It can be seen that indoor illuminance solar transmittance in rooms by solar shades, the temperature
near windows (0.5 m) is more than 10,000 lux, and even more than reduction is obvious, ranging from 1 to 2.5  C in these days.
50,000 lux at some tests. This may induce daylight glare and Fig. 9 also presents the annual indoor air temperature reduction
decrease indoor visual comfort. after using solar shades. The temperature reduction reaches as high
On the other hand, the indoor illuminance kept about 1000 lux as about 5  C in summer. Moreover, its negative values of about
after shading with little fluctuation. Though this value is a little 0.8  C in winter means that room base temperature for the solar
higher than the best illuminance level of 100e300 lux for living, it shading case is higher than that of without solar shading. This is
is less than one tenth of the bare window case and do not exceed mainly due to closed solar shades which reduce heat loss during
the useful daylight illuminance of 2000 lux according to the liter- nighttime in winter. Therefore, solar shades show a high perfor-
ature [36]. Thus, this condition can be considered as a suitable in- mance in improving room base temperature both in summer and in
door visual environment. Therefore, external movable shades can winter.
not only reduce excessive solar radiation in summer and admit
solar gains in winter to warm rooms, but also control indoor illu- 3.2.2. Transmitted solar radiation
minance at a reasonable level that remains sufficient daylight. To illustrate the blocked solar radiation by solar shades in the
whole year, Fig. 10 presents annual transmitted solar radiation
3.2. Simulation analysis reduction (including beam and diffuse radiation) after using solar
shading. It is clear that solar radiation is substantially blocked by
The above field test showed that movable solar shades shades in summer with a maximum value of about 1600 W. On the
contribute to substantial solar radiation reduction and good other hand, there is only a small amount of prevented solar radia-
daylight control with little illuminance fluctuation in typical sum- tion, which is a minor negative impact induced by fully closed solar
mer days in summer. Although the test results are not new findings, shades during early morning (such as 7:00) and late afternoon
it gives architects and designers a deep understanding of the (such as 18:00). By the Fig. 10 alone, it is not easy to determine
benefit of movable solar shading since some of them may be not which part of radiation (beam or diffuse) is significantly reduced.
familiar with this benefit. The following section will further give To give a detailed analysis on transmitted solar radiation, Table 3
annual energy, indoor thermal and visual performance taking into lists annual transmitted beam and diffuse solar radiation. For these
account both summer and winter conditions.

3.2.1. Room base temperature

Fig. 8 gives simulated room base temperature before and after
using solar shading for 10 typical days in summer. Due to reduced

14%
%)

12%
Solar transmittance ratio

10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 1213141516171819202122
test times
Fig. 8. Room base temperature of south-facing rooms during typical days in summer
Fig. 6. Solar transmittance ratio. (dash line: no shading, solid line: shading).
 J. Yao / Building and Environment 71 (2014) 24e32 29

Table 3
Annual transmitted solar radiation.

Type Transmitted solar radiation (kW)

Total Beam Diffuse

Shading 1578.10 421.90 1156.21

Without shading 2102.67 495.45 1607.21
Reduction 524.56 73.56 451.01

illuminance lower than 100 lux during daytime (need artificial

lighting according to the standard [28]) for these two cases are
similar with 850 h for the solar shading case and 726 h for the no
shading case. This means that the increased lighting energy for the
solar shading case is less than 0.9 kWh/m2 according to the lighting
intensity value of 7 W/m2 [28]. Therefore, the lighting energy dif-
ference can be ignored.
According to further simulation, this total energy saving per-
formance (30.87%) is equal to that of reducing the wall insulation
Fig. 9. Annual indoor air temperature reduction of south-facing windows after using level to half of the energy standard required value (1.5 W/m2 K)
solar shading. with a combination of applications of the most energy efficient but
high-cost Low-E windows (SC ¼ 0.18) in this region [29]. This sig-
nificant energy saving potential is higher than Tian’s study
two cases (with and without solar shading), transmitted diffuse
(17.29%e22.68%), which considered the overall energy saving per-
solar radiation is about 3 times as high as beam radiation. As a
formance of movable solar shades on the four facades [8]. This is
result, the reduction in diffuse radiation (451.01 kW) is much
because south-facing rooms have relatively higher window-to-wall
higher than that in beam one (73.56 kW) after using solar shades.
ratio compared with other facades and thus the energy saving
This means 86% of transmitted solar radiation reduction is
potential for movable solar shading on this facade in this paper is
contributed by decreased diffuse radiation penetration, and thus
higher than that for the whole building. The above discussion
movable solar shades could reduce energy demand for cooling
shows that movable solar shading has a relatively high energy
induced not only by transmitted beam solar radiation but also sky
saving potential in this area compared to other measures and its
diffuse radiation penetration through windows. This is why
negative impacts on lighting energy increase is negligible.
movable solar shades should be used prior to overhang for south-
facing windows as described in the Introduction section.
3.2.4. PMV-PPD
Figs. 12 and 13 illustrate the annual PMV index of south-facing
3.2.3. Energy
windows for the two cases and the annual PMV reduction after
In Fig. 11, annual energy performance of the south-facing room
using solar shading (When performing PMV-PPD simulation in
with and without solar shading was compared. A significant energy
Energyplus, the air-conditioner is assumed to be off in the whole
saving performance is achieved after using solar shading with a
year in order to better reflect the indoor thermal performance
cooling energy reduction of 35.96% and a heating reduction of
difference induced by changed shading performance). It can be
24.23%. The total energy demand (cooling and heating) is decreased
seen that the PMV reduction is higher than 0 between June 1 and
by 30.87% compared to the bare window case. Here lighting energy
September 30 with its peak value reaches as high as 1.7, which
is not taken into consideration. Because the hours of daylight
indicates that indoor thermal comfort is significantly improved in
summer. On the other hand, the PMV reduction is about 0.2 which
does not mean a little reduction in comfort in winter but means a

30.00
Annual energy demand (kWh/m )
2

25.00 23.97

20.00 18.36
15.35
15.00 13.91

10.00

5.00

0.00
Heating Cooling
Shading Without shading

Fig. 10. Annual transmitted solar radiation reduction (including beam and diffuse Fig. 11. Annual energy performance of the south-facing room with and without solar
radiation) after using solar shading. shading.
30 J. Yao / Building and Environment 71 (2014) 24e32

Fig. 12. Annual PMV index of south-facing windows for the two cases.
Fig. 14. PPD reduction of south-facing windows after using solar shading.

little improvement. This is because the PMV index in winter is

mostly less than 0 (as shown in Fig. 12) and thus the negative PMV relatively low solar altitude angle, DGI in winter is much higher
reduction means that the PMV index for the solar shading case is than in summer, with the maximum value reaches 44.74 for the
much closer to 0 compared to the no solar shading case. both cases. Why the solar shading case does not reduce DGI in
Fig. 14 further gives the annual PPD reduction. We can see that winter is that it is assumed movable solar shading is retracted
predicted percentage of dissatisfied on indoor thermal comfort is (solar shading is not in use) for maximization of solar heat
obviously reduced at most of time in the year, even in winter. Fig. 15 penetration. Beside the extreme DGI value, the time for DGI value
gives cumulated PMV and PPD distributions. The comfort time of higher than 40 is also very long, even might last for 7 h a day
(1 < PMV < 1) increases by 21% (from 3209 h to 3883 h) after in winter. According to the literature [35], recommended values
using solar shading, and the extremely uncomfortable time of maximum allowable DGI is 22 (higher than 22 means glare
(PMV > 3 or PMV < 3) decrease is more significant with a 80.4% may be induced). Therefore, daylight glare problems are serious
reduction, which is mainly contributed by summer improvements in winter if solar shades are not in use. Although occupants may
on PMV > 3 being declined from 440 h to 84 h. Therefore, movable spend less time in living room during daytime than in offices and
solar shades are an efficient solution to improve indoor thermal thus require less strict visual conditions, it is better to keep roller
comfort in this climate region, not only can reduce uncomfortable shades deployed at a suitable position that have a balance be-
time but also can increases comfortable time. tween energy performance and visual comfort.

3.2.5. DGI
Fig. 16 presents the annual DGI distribution for south-facing
windows with and without solar shading. Because daylight
glare can only be experienced during daytime, the DGI value
during nighttime is 0 (the white area in the figure). Due to

Fig. 15. Annual PMV distribution of south-facing windows: (a) without solar shading;
Fig. 13. Annual PMV reduction of south-facing windows after using solar shading. (b) with solar shading.
 J. Yao / Building and Environment 71 (2014) 24e32 31

24 Acknowledgments
21
a 40

35
This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of
17 30 Ningbo city (2012A610158) and Zhejiang Province (LQ13E080009),
25 and the author would like to thank the K.C.Wong Magna Fund in
Time (h)

13 Ningbo University.
20

9 15
References
10
5
5 [1] Li L, Chen C, Xie S, Huang C, Cheng Z, Wang H, et al. Energy demand and
carbon emissions under different development scenarios for Shanghai, China.
1 0 Energ Policy 2010;38(9):4797e807.
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month [2] Jian Y. Energy optimization of building design for different housing units in
apartment buildings. Appl Energ 2012;94:330e7.
[3] Bojic M, Nikoli c N, Nikoli
c D, Skerli
c J, Mileti
c I. A simulation appraisal of
performance of different HVAC systems in an office building. Energ Buildings
24
b 40 2011;43(6):1207e15.
21 [4] Wu S, Sun J. Multi-stage regression linear parametric models of room tem-
35 perature in office buildings. Build Environ 2012;56:69e77.
[5] Yang L, Lam JC, Tsang CL. Energy performance of building envelopes in
17 30
different climate zones in China. Appl Energ 2008;85(9):800e17.
25 [6] Yu J, Yang C, Tian L. Low-energy envelope design of residential building in hot
Time (h)

13 summer and cold winter zone in China. Energ Buildings 2008;40(8):1536e46.

20 [7] Feuermann D, Novoplansky A. Reversible low solar heat gain windows for
energy savings. Sol Energy 1998;62(3):169e75.
9 15
[8] Tian HF, Sun DM, Zhou HZ. The energy saving performance of movable solar
10 shading for building energy saving by 65%. Wall Mater Innovation Energy
5 Saving Buildings 2009;10:48e50 [in Chinese].
5 [9] Zhang HX, Cheng H, Jin RJ, Li M. Influence of retractable external shading of
buildings on indoor thermal environment in Nanjing. Jiangsu Construction
1 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010;5:56e8 [in Chinese].
Month
[10] Littlefair P, Ortiz J, Bhaumik CD. A simulation of solar shading control on UK
office energy use. Building Res Inf 2010;38(6):638e46.
Fig. 16. Annual DGI distribution for south-facing windows: (a) without solar shading; [11] Nielsen MV, Svendsen S, Jensen LB. Quantifying the potential of automated
(b) with solar shading. dynamic solar shading in office buildings through integrated simulations of
energy and daylight. Sol Energy 2011;85(5):757e68.
[12] Palmero-Marrero AI, Oliveira AC. Effect of louver shading devices on building
On the other hand, the DGI value in summer (mostly lower energy requirements. Appl Energ 2009;87(6):2040e9.
[13] Hammad F, Abu-Hijleh B. The energy savings potential of using dynamic
than 28) is much less than in winter due to high summer sun, and external louvers in an office building. Energ Buildings 2010;42(10):1888e95.
the color for the case without solar shading is much darker than [14] Tzempelikos A, Athienitis AK. The impact of shading design and control on
that with solar shading in summer, indicating that there will be building cooling and lighting demand. Sol Energy 2007;81(3):369e82.
[15] Tzempelikos A, Bessoudo M, Athienitis AK, Zmeureanu R. Indoor thermal
higher DGI values if solar shading is not adopted. For the whole environmental conditions near glazed facades with shading devices-part II:
year, there is 3562 h for DGI >22 for the case without solar thermal comfort simulation and impact of glazing and shading properties.
shading, while it is only 2853 h for movable solar shading which Build Environ 2010;45(11):2517e25.
[16] Da Silva PC, Leal V, Andersen M. Influence of shading control patterns on the
means a 19.9% reduction compared to the no shading case. energy assessment of office spaces. Energ Buildings 2012;50:35e48.
Moreover, the average DGI for the daytime (8:00e18:00) is 26.19 [17] van Moeseke G, BruyHre I, De Herde A. Impact of control rules on the effi-
and 24.18 for without and with solar shading, respectively. ciency of shading devices and free cooling for office buildings. Build Environ
2007;42(2):784e93.
Therefore, movable solar shading contributes significant visual
[18] Kim J, Park Y, Yeo M, Kim K. An experimental study on the environmental
comfort improvements. performance of the automated blind in summer. Build Environ 2009;44(7):
1517e27.
[19] Koo SY, Yeo MS, Kim KW. Automated blind control to maximize the benefits
4. Conclusions of daylight in buildings. Build Environ 2010;45(6):1508e20.
[20] Chaiwiwatworakul P, Chirarattananon S, Rakkwamsuk P. Application of
This paper carried out field measurement and simulation automated blind for daylighting in tropical region. Energ Convers Manage
2009;50(12):2927e43.
studies on the impact of movable solar shades on the energy, indoor [21] Frontini F, Kuhn TE. The influence of various internal blinds on thermal
thermal and visual comfort improvements on a retrofitted resi- comfort: a new method for calculating the mean radiant temperature in office
dential building. The field test results show that external movable spaces. Energ Buildings 2012;54(0):527e33.
[22] Kim K, Kim BS, Park S. Analysis of design approaches to improve the comfort
solar shades can reduce solar transmittance to about 8% compared level of a small glazed-envelope building during summer. Sol Energy
to bare windows and control daylighting to a suitable level for 2007;81(1):39e51.
occupants. The building simulation study indicates that movable [23] Papadakis G, Tsamis P, Kyritsis S. An experimental investigation of the effect
of shading with plants for solar control of buildings. Energ Buildings
solar shade not only improves indoor thermal comfort in summer 2001;33(8):831e6.
but also reduces dramatically extremely uncomfortable risks. It has [24] Eumorfopoulou EA, Kontoleon KJ. Experimental approach to the contribution
a relatively high energy saving potential (30.87%, which is equal to of plant-covered walls to the thermal behaviour of building envelopes. Build
Environ 2009;44(5):1024e38.
reduce the wall insulation level to half of the energy standard [25] Kim JT, Kim G. Advanced external shading device to maximize visual and view
required value with a combination of applications of the most en- performance. Indoor Built Environ 2010;19(1):65e72.
ergy efficient but high-cost Low-E windows) in this area compared [26] Donovan GH, Butry DT. The value of shade: estimating the effect of urban
trees on summertime electricity use. Energ Buildings 2009;41(6):662e8.
to other measures with an increased comfort time by 21% and a
[27] Crawley DB, Lawrie LK, Winkelmann FC, Buhl WF, Huang YJ, Pedersen CO,
decreased extremely uncomfortable time by 80.4% and the visual et al. Others. EnergyPlus: creating a new-generation building energy simu-
comfort condition is improved by 19.9%. Therefore, movable solar lation program. Energ Buildings 2001;33(4):319e31.
shading has a significant performance in terms of energy, indoor [28] Standard for lighting design of buildings. China Architecture and Building
Press; 2004 [in Chinese].
thermal and visual comfort, and can be widely used in hot summer [29] Design standard for energy efficiency of residential buildings in hot summer and
and cold winter zone of China. cold winter zone. China Architecture and Building Press; 2001 [in Chinese].
32 J. Yao / Building and Environment 71 (2014) 24e32

[30] ISO 7730. Ergonomics of the thermal environment e analytical determination [33] CIE. Discomfort glare in interior lighting. Technical note 117. Vienna, Austria:
and interpretation of thermal comfort using calculation of the PMV and PPD Commission Internationale de L’Eclairage; 1995. p. 2e5.
indices and local thermal comfort criteria. International Standards Organisa- [34] Einhorn HD. A new method for the assessment of discomfort glare. Lighting
tion; 2005. p. 60. Res Technol 1969;1(4):235e47.
[31] Jian Y, Jiang Y. Comparison of indoor temperatures between simulation results [35] Piccolo A, Simone F. Effect of switchable glazing on discomfort glare from
and field measurements. Housing Sci 2002;7:3e5 [in Chinese]. windows. Build Environ 2009;44(6):1171e80.
[32] Petherbridge P, Hopkinson RG. Discomfort glare and the lighting of buildings. [36] Nabil A, Mardaljevic J. Useful daylight illuminances: a replacement for
Trans Illuminating Eng Soc 1950;15(39). London (UK). daylight factors. Energ Buildings 2006;38(7):905e13.