Trans RINA, Vol 156, Part C1, Intl J Marine Design, Jan –Dec 2014
overall or like Venice where heating loads are of comparable magnitude to cooling. But it is clear from a more detailed perspective that lighting, cooling and heating have a distinct relationship with latitude more so than orientation. The variance of which can be observed from the above tables where by the maximum and minimum variance of total energy loads from the mean of all 6 designs in different locations and orientations was observed as being between +14.46% and -14.57% with north and southern facades and +14.22% and - 13.26% with east and western facades or for a north to south, south to north itinerary.
CABIN ZONE – with 1.5m overhang East
Venice
Barcelona Cairo
Venice Barcelona Barcelona
706.5 620.0 816.4
Cairo 7866.0 Venice 36230.0 Cairo 37070.0
36330.0
Glz % 20 20 20
West 709.4
620.7 815.5
Glz % 20 20 20
DAY/LOUNGE ZONE – with no shading 7892.0 30 7700.0 30 30
DINING ZONE – with no shading 30 30 30
36300.0 36270.0 37030.0
7933.0 30 7626.0 30 7821.0
30 30
30 30
Table 7 East to West Route - Variance in global energy consumption (kWh) of sensible thermal loads and lighting.
Venice Venice
Barcelona Cairo
Barcelona Barcelona
CABIN ZONE – With 1.5m Overhang North 699.3 607.8 777.6
Glz% South 20 20 20
681.7 590.7 791.4
Cairo 6818.0 Venice 35170.0 Cairo 34970.0
34740.0
30 30 30
7986.0 7760.0 7616.0
Glz % 20 20 20
DAY/LOUNGE ZONE – with no shading 7403.0 6933.0
DINING ZONE – with no shading 30 30 30
36680.0 36770.0 36930.0
30 30 30
30 30 30
Table 8 North to South Route - Variance in global energy consumption (kWh) of sensible thermal loads and lighting.
In a similar approach, variance from the mean total energy value of the 6 day/lounge zone designs with 30% glazing was observed as being between 7.64% and - 8.10% for northern and southern facades and between 1.63% to -2.31% for east and western facades. Notably a smaller variance is observed in comparison to cabin zones which is partly due to the size of the zone which reduces the impact of the glazed façade in respect to
C-108 other internal gains but also due to the significant
contribution of lighting loads which diffuses the effect of other more dominant loads such as sensible cooling. Unlike the cabin zones however, the absence of shading results in the sensible cooling component having a greater influence over the total energy performance of the zone which increases by 310.6% and 373.9% when comparing the same loads between Venice and Cairo for north and southern facades and similarly an increase of 358.2% and 358.0% for east and western façades. In each case the cooling load is always the dominant load and its contribution to the total energy consumption of the zone increases from circa 63% to 80% when comparing thermal loads in Venice to Cairo. Daylighting as a scheme helps to reduce this by reducing the internal heat gains but it is clear from this analysis that perimeter spaces could significantly benefit from shading devices.
The dining/zone has low level lighting requirements, but is significantly larger than the other zones considered within the study and has internal heat gain sources that are 69.02 % larger per m2 than the day/lounge zone with double its occupancy. Considering this and the relatively small window to floor area ratio the effects of heating and lighting are small in comparison to other zones and has the least amount of variation in performance when considering other locations and orientations; with a maximum and minimum variance of -3.16% to 2.93% from the mean for north and southern facades and 1.45% to -0.86% for eastern and western facades.
In summary heating and lighting loads decreases with greater proximity
to the equator which matches the
relationship between the mean annual lux and global horizontal radiation levels in relation to latitude whereas the cooling load increases in correlation with mean annual dry
bulb temperatures for each location
considered. Variance in performance of the above designs at the mean idealized glazing percentage seems to correlate with thermal loads and room geometry, where by a greater window to floor area ratio and in particular shallow zones, means that that the design is more sensitive to solar gains and diffused light which explains why the greatest variance from the mean is observed in the cabin and day/lounge zones. In addition it is also apparent that eastern and western facades experience the least variance in thermal and lighting loads but is subject to greater total loads due to increased cooling, which is required to overcome the late day sun. From this information we can deduce from all of the zones that a cruise ship travelling across the Mediterranean (longitudinal itinerary) is likely to incur lower annual
sensible and lighting loads, than one
travelling up and down the Mediterranean (latitudinal itinerary) due to advantages sustained from a northerly orientation which is subject to reduced direct solar gains whilst experiencing a negligible impact on the available natural light. In all cases the improvement of the glazing solar heat gain coefficient and or the implementation of shading can help to further reduce the annual loads.
©2014: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188