BAIHP
Research:
C. Field and Laboratory Building Science Research
Cont'd
- Reflective
Roofing Research
Florida Solar Energy Center, Laboratory Facilities
Cocoa, Florida
Research by BAIHP Researchers Danny Parker and
John Sherwin
|
Figure 86 Vented attic
thermal processes. |
Improving
attic thermal performance is fundamental to controlling
residential cooling loads in hot climates. Research
shows that the influence of attics on space cooling
is not only due to the change in ceiling heat flux,
but often due to the conditions within the attic, and
their influence on duct system heat gain and building
air infiltration. (Figure 86)
The importance of ceiling heat flux has long been
recognized, with insulation a proven means of controlling
excessive gains. However when ducts are present in
the attic, the magnitude of heat gain to the thermal
distribution system can be much greater than the ceiling
heat flux. This influence may be exacerbated by the
location of the air handler within the attic space
- a common practice in much of the southern US. Typically
an air handler is poorly insulated and has the greatest
temperature difference at the evaporator of any location
in the cooling system. It also has the greatest negative
pressure just before the fan so that some leakage into
the unit is inevitable.
|
Figure 87 Flexible Roof Facility
in summer of 2003 configuration. |
The Flexible Roof Facility (FRF) is an FSEC test
facility designed to evaluate five roofing systems
at a time against a control roof with black shingles
and vented attic (Figure 87). The testing
evaluates how roofing systems impact summer residential
cooling energy use and peak demand.
6 th Budget Period Experiments
In the summer of 2004, the following roofing systems were
tested (Table 52). Cell numbering is from left to
right.
Table
52 Roofing systems tested at the FSEC Flexible Roofing
Facility, Summer of 2004 |
Cell # |
Description |
1 |
Galvalume®*
unfinished (unpainted) 5-vee metal with vented attic
(3rd year of exposure) |
2 |
Proprietary test cell |
3 |
Proprietary test cell |
4 |
Galvanized unfinished
5-vee metal with vented attic (3rd year of exposure) |
5 |
Black shingles with standard
attic ventilation (Control Test Cell) |
6 |
White standing seam metal
with vented attic (3rd year of exposure after cleaning) |
* Galvalume
is a quality cold-rolled sheet to which is applied
a highly corrosion-resistant hot-dip metallic coating
consisting of 55% aluminum 43.4% zinc, and 1.6% silicon,
nominal percentages by weight. This results in a
sheet that offers the best protective features characteristic
of aluminum and zinc: the barrier protection and
long life of aluminum and the sacrificial or galvanic
protection of zinc at cut or sheared edges. According
to Bethlehem Steel, twenty-four years of actual outdoor
exposure tests in a variety of atmospheric environments
demonstrate that bare Galvalume sheet exhibits superior
corrosion-resistance properties. |
All had R-19 insulation installed on the attic floor. The
measured thermal impacts include ceiling heat flux, unintended
attic air leakage and duct heat gain. Test Cells #2 and #3
had proprietary test configurations that are not further
described in this report.
The
white metal roof results in the coolest attic over the
summer, with an average day peak air temperature of only
95.7°F – 22.2° cooler than the peak
in the control attic with dark shingles.
Figure 88 2004 ResultsEstimated
combined impact of duct heat gain, air
leakage from the attic
to conditioned space and ceiling heat flux on space
cooling
needs on an average summer day in a 2,000 ft2 home.
This
was the third year of comparative testing metal roofing
(galvanized and Galvalume®) under long term conditions.
Galvalume® roofs are reported
to better maintain their higher solar reflectance than galvanized types.
Average daily mid-attic maximum temperatures for the Galvalume® and galvanized
metal roof systems showed significantly better performance for Galvalume® product
(10.9°F and 2.1°F cooler than the control dark shingle respectively).
However, both unfinished metal roofs showed significant degradation in their
performance over the three year period compared to the white metal roof.
We
also estimated the combined impact of ceiling heat flux,
duct heat gain and unintended attic air leakage from the
various roof constructions. The alternative constructions
produced lower estimated cooling energy loads than the
standard vented attic with dark shingles. The Galvalume® roof
clearly provided greater reductions to cooling energy use
than the galvanized roof after three summers of exposure,
although both suffered significant degradation relative to
the first year’s performance. More specifically, the
Galvalume® and Galvanized roof system provided a 32%
and 22% savings in the first year of exposure, but only 12%
and 1% respectively after three years of exposure.
One important fact from our testing is that nighttime attic
temperature and reverse ceiling heat flux have a significant
impact on the total daily heat gain, particularly for the
metal roofs. The rank order below shows the percentage reduction
of roof/attic related heat gain and approximate overall building
cooling energy savings (which reflect the overall contribution
of the roof/attic to total cooling needs):
Table
53 Cooling Load Reduction and Savings |
Rank |
Description |
Roof Cooling Load Reduction |
Overall Cooling Savings |
1 |
White Metal with vented attic (Cell
#6) |
44% |
15% |
2 |
Galvalume® unfinished
metal with vented attic (Cell #1) |
12% |
4% |
3 |
Galvanized unfinished metal roof with
vented attic (Cell #4) |
1% |
0% |
The relative reductions are consistent with the whole-house
testing recently completed for FPL in Ft. Myers (Parker et
al., 2001). This testing showed white metal roofing having
the largest reductions, followed by darker constructions.
After long-term exposure, test results indicate that galvanized
metal roofing is no better than a standard asphalt shingle
roof after three years of exposure. On the other hand, the
Galvalume roof does maintain some advantage although not
nearly so great as the white metal type.
5 th Budget Period Experiments
The roofing systems tested in the summer of 2003 are listed
in Table 54. Cell numbering is from left to right
beginning with the second cell in from the left.
Table
54 Roofing systems tested at the FSEC Flexible Roofing
Facility, Summer of 2003 |
Cell # |
Description |
1 |
Galvalume®*
unfinished 5-vee metal with vented attic (2 nd year
of exposure) |
2 |
Sealed attic with proprietary
configuration |
3 |
High reflectance brown
metal shingle with vented attic |
4 |
Galvanized unfinished
5-vee metal with vented attic (2 nd year of exposure) |
5 |
Black shingles with standard
attic ventilation (Control Test Cell) |
6 |
Standing seam metal with
vented attic (2 nd year of exposure after cleaning) |
* See
note Table 52 |
All had R-19 insulation installed on the attic floor except
in the configuration with the sealed attic (Cell #2) which
had R-19 of open cell foam sprayed onto the bottom of the
roof decking. The measured thermal impacts include ceiling
heat flux, unintended attic air leakage and duct heat gain.
Cell #2 had a proprietary configuration which is not reported
upon in this report.
A
major thrust of the testing for 2003 was comparative testing
of metal roofing under long term exposure. Given the popularity
of unfinished metal roofs, we tested both galvanized and
Galvalume® roofs in their second year
of exposure.. Average daily mid-attic maximum temperatures
for the Galvalume® and galvanized metal roof systems
showed significantly better performance for Galvalume® product
(17.5 oF and 13.1 oF cooler than the control dark shingle
respectively).
Other
than the sealed attic case, the white metal roof results
in the coolest attic over the summer, with an average peak
of only 94.6 oF – 22.1 o cooler than the peak
in the control attic with dark shingles. The highly reflective
brown metal shingle roof (Cell #3) provided the next coolest
peak attic temperature. Its average maximum daily mid-attic
temperature was 101.5 oF (15.2 oF lower than the control
dark shingle cell). While the brown metal shingle roof’s
reflectance was lower than the two metal roofs and white
metal roof we observed evidence that the air space under
the metal shingles provides additional effective thermal
insulation.
Figure 89 Estimated combined
impact of duct heat gain, air leakage
from the attic to conditioned
space and ceiling heat flux on space
cooling needs on an
average summer day in a 2,000 ft 2 home.
We also estimated the combined impact of ceiling heat flux,
duct heat gain and unintended attic air leakage from the
various roof constructions. All of the alternative constructions
produced lower estimated cooling energy loads than the standard
vented attic with dark shingles (Figure 89). The
Galvalume® roof clearly provided greater reductions to
cooling energy use than the galvanized roof after two summers
of exposure.
Nighttime attic temperature and reverse ceiling heat flux
have a significant impact on the total daily heat gain, particularly
for the metal roofs. The rank order in Table 55 shows the
percentage reduction of roof/attic related heat gain and
approximate overall building cooling energy savings (which
reflect the overall contribution of the roof/attic to total cooling needs):
Table
55 Roof cooling load reduction and overall cooling
savings, Summer 2003 |
Rank |
Description |
Roof Cooling
Load Reduction |
Overall
Cooling Savings |
1 |
White metal with vented
attic (Cell #6) |
47% |
15% |
2 |
High reflectance brown
metal shingle with vented attic (Cell #3) |
29% |
10% |
3 |
Galvalume® unfinished
metal with vented attic (Cell #1) |
25% |
8% |
4 |
Galvanized unfinished metal
roof with vented attic (Cell #4) |
16% |
5% |
4 th Budget Period Experiments
In the summer of 2002, six roofing systems were evaluated
as described in Table 56, Figure 90.
Table
56 Roofing systems tested and associated energy savings
at
the FSEC Flexible Roofing
Facility, Summer of 2002
|
Cell # |
Roof Material |
Venti-
lation
|
Roof Cooling Load
Reduction |
Overall Cooling
Savings |
#1 |
Galvalume® unfinished
5-vee metal |
vented |
32% |
11% |
#2 |
double roof with radiant
barrier (ins roof deck) |
sealed |
7% |
2% |
#3 |
high reflectance ivory
metal shingle |
vented |
38% |
12% |
#4 |
galvanized unfinished
5-vee metal |
vented |
22% |
7% |
#5 |
black shingles (control
cell) |
vented |
control |
control |
#6 |
white standing seam metal |
vented |
7% |
2% |
All
roof cells had R-19 insulation installed on the attic floor,
except the double roof configuration (Cell #2) which had
a level of R-19 open cell foam sprayed onto the bottom of
the roof decking. Measured thermal impacts included ceiling
heat flux, unintended attic air leakage, and duct heat gain.
|
Figure 90 Flexible Roof
Facility in summer 2002 configuration. Cells are numbered
from left to right starting with the second cell in
from the left. |
The sealed attic double roof system (Cell #2) provided
the coolest attic space of all systems tested (average maximum
mid-attic temperature was 81.1 oF), and therefore had the
lowest estimated impact due to return air leakage and duct
conduction heat gains. However this cell also had the highest
ceiling heat flux of all strategies tested, and recorded
the most modest space cooling reduction (7%), relative to
the control roof.
Metal
roof testing was given more emphasis in 2002 due to the
popularity of these products. Researchers tested both galvanized
and Galvalume ® roofs. Galvalume is a cold-rolled
sheet with a highly corrosion-resistant hot-dip metallic
coating application of 55% aluminum 43.4% zinc, and 1.6%
silicon. These roofs are reported to better maintain solar
reflectance than galvanized roofing systems. Average daily
mid-attic maximum temperatures for the Galvalume ® and
galvanized metal roof systems were roughly similar (19.6
oF and 17.3 oF cooler than the control roof, respectively).
The estimated total heat gain for these roof cells also was
relatively close.
Figure 91 2002 estimated
combined impact of duct heat gain, air leakage
from the
attic to conditioned space, and ceiling heat flux on space
cooling
needs on an average summer day in a 2,000 ft 2
home.
The highly reflective ivory metal shingle roof (Cell #3) provided the coolest
peak attic temperature of all the cells without roof deck insulation. Its
average maximum daily mid-attic temperature was 93.3 oF (23.4 oF lower than
the control dark shingle cell). While the ivory metal shingle roof’s
reflectance was slightly lower than the two metal roofs and white metal roof,
researchers noted that the air space under the metal shingles provided additional
effective thermal insulation.
Researchers also estimated the combined impact of ceiling
heat flux, duct heat gain, and unintended attic air leakage
from the various roof constructions. All of the alternative
roofing treatments produced lower estimated cooling energy
loads than the standard vented attic with dark shingles. (Figure
91) The Galvalume® roof clearly provided a greater
cooling energy use reduction than the galvanized roof.
This also was true during the 2001 study. Nighttime attic
temperatures and reverse ceiling heat flux have a significant
impact on the total daily heat gain, particularly for metal
roofs.
|
Figure 92 2001 Experimental
roof cell. Cells are numbered from left to right
starting with the cell second in from the left . |
3 rd Budget Period
In
the 2001 testing, Cell #2 with the double roof/sealed attic
showed the lowest attic temperatures and narrowest temperature
range. (Table 57; Figures 93 and 94) Peak attic
temperatures in Cell #2 were 5 oF to 6 oF lower than this
same sealed cell the year before, without the double roof.
This indicates that the double roof did provide a substantial
benefit. Since there is no insulation on the attic floor
though, there still is a significant heat gain across the
ceiling. In fact, the ceiling heat fluctuation actually
is higher than the reference Cell #5. (Figure 93)
|
|
Figure 93 (left)
2001 heat flux measurements across attic |
Figure 94 (right)
2001 mid-attic temperatures. |
The true impact of the double roof construction of Cell
#2 is most likely a combination of the benefits of a cooler
attic space that reduces duct heat gain and minimizes the
effects of air leakage from the attic into the house, and
the drawback of the higher ceiling heat flux.
Cell #3 with its spectrally selective dark brown metal
shingles, produced lower attic temperatures at night, but
higher roof deck temperatures (which were most likely due
to the insulating quality of the shingles which have an
air space underneath them).
Table
57 Roofing systems tested and
attic temperatures at
the FSEC
Flexible Roofing Facility, Summer of 2001
|
Cell # |
Roof Material |
Venti-
lation
|
Avg Attic Temp |
Max Attic Temp |
#1 |
white tile (weathered) |
sealed |
84.6 |
111.2 |
#2 |
double roof with radiant
barrier (ins roof deck) |
sealed |
78.4 |
85.4 |
#3 |
brown IR selective metal
shingle |
vented |
85.0 |
110.8 |
#4 |
terra cotta tile (weathered) |
vented |
89.0 |
124.3 |
#5 |
dark shingles (control) |
vented |
91.0 |
143.4 |
#6 |
white standing seam
metal (weathered) |
sealed |
84.0 |
115.5 |
Roofing
Experiment with Habitat for Humanity in Fort Myers, Florida
In July 2000, FSEC and Florida Power and Light instrumented
six side-by-side Habitat for Humanity homes in Ft. Myers
with identical floor plans, orientation, and ceiling insulation,
but with different roofing systems as described in Table
58. A seventh monitored house contained an unvented
attic with insulation on the underside of the roof deck
rather than on the ceiling.
Table
58 Roofing systems tested at side-by-side
Habitat for Humanity homes
in Ft. Myers Summer of 2000
|
Code |
Description |
Code |
Description |
RGS |
Standard dark shingles
(control) |
RTB |
Terra
cotta "barrel" S-tile
roof |
RWS |
Light colored shingles |
RWB |
White "barrel" S-tile
roof |
RWM |
White metal roof |
RWF |
White flat tile roof |
RSL |
Standard
dark shingles with sealed attic & R-19 roof
deck insulation |
. |
. |
Each unoccupied home was monitored from July 8 through
July 31, 2001 to collect building thermal and air conditioning
power data. Table 59 presents the cooling performance
of the roofing systems clearly showing the energy-saving
benefits of reflective roofing systems in Florida, especially
the tile and metal roofs with solar reflectance between
65% and 75%.
Table
59 Energy use and savings from roofing systems
in
Habitat for Humanity roofing
study, summer of 2000
|
Site |
Total kWh |
Savings kWh |
Saved Percent |
Demand kW |
Savings kW |
Saved Percent |
RGS |
17.03 |
---- |
---- |
1.63 |
---- |
---- |
RWS |
15.29 |
1.74 |
10.2% |
1.44 |
0.19 |
11.80% |
RSL |
14.73 |
2.30 |
13.05% |
1.63 |
0.01 |
0.30% |
RTB |
16.02 |
1.01 |
5.9% |
1.57 |
0.06 |
3.70% |
RWB |
13.32 |
3.71 |
21.8% |
1.07 |
0.56 |
34.20% |
RWF |
13.20 |
3.83 |
22.5% |
1.02 |
0.61 |
37.50% |
RWM |
12.03 |
5.00 |
29.4% |
0.98 |
0.65 |
39.70% |
Significant findings: Reflective roofing materials represent
one of the most significant energy-saving options available
to homeowners and builders. These materials also reduce
cooling demand during utility coincident peak periods,
and are potentially one of the most effective methods for
controlling demand.
- Based on comparative data from August of 2000, the
maximum decking temperatures in the sealed attic home
were 23 E F higher than the control home (177 E versus
154 E ). After the installation of white shingles in
midsummer, the highest deck temperature from the sealed
attic home measured only 7 E higher than the control
in August of 2001 (161 E versus 154 E ).
- An
additional month’s data was
collected with the homes occupied and thermostat set
points kept constant. Average cooling energy use for
the homes rose by 36%, but there was no decrease in
the highly reflective roofing system savings. Additional
heat gained from the occupants and their appliance
use increased the cooling system runtime and introduced
more hot air into the air conditioning duct system.
- In 2001, the average maximum attic air temperature
in the terra cotta barrel tile roof home was 15 E F hotter
than the maximum ambient. After installing a radiant
barrier the average difference in August was +9 E F.
A similar evaluation with the light colored shingles
showed that peak attic air temperatures dropped from
+ 29 E to +20 E F after installing a radiant barrier.
- Household interior temperature settings varied from
one year to the next, making direct energy saving comparisons
impossible. Still, the collected data did show that attic
air temperatures were reduced by the radiant barrier.
On the other hand, measured maximum plywood decking temperatures
rose by 11 E to 13 E F.
- Based
on previously evaluated roof buckling problems on the
decking of the sealed attic home, researchers decided
to install white shingles similar to those on the RWS
roof. It was thought that buckling problems likely
were caused by excessive heat buildup in this roofing
system. White shingles replaced the dark shingles to
see if this would drop the roof decking temperature spikes.
|