Window Film and Energy Project Final

ENERGY EFFICIENCY OF

V-KOOL 40 WINDOW

FILM

ABSTRACT At Texas A&M University, a recent push to become

greener has engulfed the campus. The most

important push is to reduce the amount of energy

consumed especially in the older buildings. The

following paper will discuss the use of V-KOOL 40

Window Film and the possible savings associated

with the installation. With the assistance of

University Energy Services along with funding

provided by the Aggie Green Fund, this pilot program

may be beneficial both economically but for the

occupants working in this older buildings

Kameron Johnson Geos 405

ENERGY EFFICIENCY OF

V-KOOL 40 WINDOW

FILM

ABSTRACT At Texas A&M University, a recent push to become

greener has engulfed the campus. The most

important push is to reduce the amount of energy

consumed especially in the older buildings. The

following paper will discuss the use of V-KOOL 40

Window Film and the possible savings associated with

the installation. With the assistance of University

Energy Services along with funding provided by the

Aggie Green Fund, this pilot program may be

beneficial both economically but for the occupants

working in this older buildings

Kameron Johnson Geos 405

Geos 405 Environmental Geoscience Kameron Johnson Dr. Brendan Roark Spring 2015

pg. 1

Introduction

In the Southeast United States, the cost to cool large educational, business, or

residential buildings can be one of the biggest expenses the operators deal with on a day to day

basis. Especially during the summer months, the increase in electricity usage has continually

driven the price higher and higher. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) states in

their most recent energy forecast, Projected U.S. sales of electricity to the commercial sector

increase by 1.7% this year and by 1.4% in 2016. Projected industrial electricity sales rise by 1.3%

in 2015 and by 1.1% in 2016 (1). With these projections continuing to show increase sells and

higher rates, how can we reduce the amount of energy consumed to still provide a comfortable

environment?

For most office buildings in the United States, about 30% of their operating expenses

are used on utilities with an energy cost exceeding $30,000 per year. According to Managing

Energy Cost in Office Buildings, HVAC systems account for 28 percent of electricity and 86

percent of natural gas consumed by office buildings. During closed hours and on weekends,

turn temperature settings down in heating seasons and up in cooling seasons (2). They also

recommending adjusting the temperature by 0.5-1oF during peak working hours. University

Energy Services at Texas A&M have sensors that control the temperature of the chilled water

and the air circulating throughout the rooms. Overall, lighting, cooling, and ventilation are

responsible for more than 60 percent of electricity use by office buildings, and heating

dominates natural gas consumption (2).

Texas A&M University (TAMU) produces its own electricity at the on campus power

plant under the authority of University Energy Services (UES). The plant chills or heats water


pg. 2

then sends it through underground pipes to buildings throughout the campus. In addition UES is

responsible for heating and cooling all the building on campus (see Table 1 for current energy

rates). The Eller Oceanography and Meteorology Building (O&M) receives the pre-treated water

and re-condition the water to the specified temperature. It then uses the chilled water to cool

auxiliary air and condition all fifteen floors of the building. UES installed monitoring equipment

on the O&M HVAC system in order to measure the difference in water/air flow temperature

allowing for any change to be noted.

The O&M’s design encompasses floor to ceiling windows on the twelfth floor and

concrete and windows from the second to eleventh. When the building was built in 1973,

energy conservation wasn’t a priority in either building practices or codes. As a result all the

windows are single pane non-tinted windows have emergency efficiency rate of 1.0 U-factor

rating due to glass being a very poor insulator. U-factor is the inverse of another widely used

measure, R-value. With R-values, a higher number is better (4). The College of Geosciences at

TAMU is interested in finding out the building envelope of floor-ceiling windows in the O&M

and Halbouty Building. The article “Improving Glass Walls Thermal Resistance in Air-

TAMU UES Commodity 2015 Unit Rates

Electricity $ 0.087 / kWH

Chilled Water $ 15.264 / mmBtu

Heating Hot Water $ 14.971 /mmBtu

Steam $ 15.166 /mlbs

Domestic Cold Water $ 1.888 /mgal

Domestic Hot Water $ 12.795 /mgal

Waste Water Treatment $ 3.133 /mgal

Storm Drainage $ 4.432 / msqft/month

Solide Waste & Recycling $ 128.847 / ton

Table 1: Texas A&M Utility and

Energy Services 2015 Rates. (3)

[Cite your source here.]


pg. 3

Conditioned Buildings” the definition of the building envelope is given as the area consisting of

the surfaces that separate the inside from the buildings outside (5).

The project was introduced by Maureen Reap a facilities coordinator for the College of

Geosciences in an attempt to reduce the energy cost for the building. An initial V-Kool

transparent window film was installed on the second floor of the Halbouty building facing the

southwest in order to collect data for the decision to expand the project. The initial results that

were measured using temperature data loggers along with radiation readings convinced Mrs.

Reap to acquire additional funding. With the assistance of the University Energy Services (UEV),

after collecting data over a 10 day period, “the film reduced the at-the-pane temperatures by 6

to 8 degrees” (Maureen pg. 2). The results showed that the films are effective in reflecting both

UV and IR radiation. In fact, Evan Library installed window films about 10 years ago to protect

their books from degradation. With these positive results, a larger database needs to be

collected over a larger sample size.

What we are proposing, is to install V-Kool 40 UV Window Film to 116 windows to see if

the data reveals any potential energy savings. The V-Kool 40 Window Film is completely

transparent and uses gold and silver atoms sprayed on the surface of the film. The atoms act

like a prism reflecting a projected 90% IR and 99% UV radiation. In order to test the efficiency of

the film, radiation data logging will take place before and after the film is installed on the 2nd-

12th Floor of the O&M building. I will continue monitoring and collected radiation and

temperature data throughout this summer. In order to confirm or deny the results calculated

by UES, our determined baseline temperature and air flow movement (in terms of cubic feet


pg. 4

per minute (CFM) data will be used by future Geos 4005 students who will continue collecting a

full year’s worth of data.

The funding for this project is being provided by the Aggie Green Fund with an amount

estimated budget of $30,000. The project was originally proposed by Maureen Reap, Facilities

Coordinator for the College of Geosciences, who has been the driving force in acquiring funding

for this project. The College of Geosciences Energy Steward Amy Chen and UES who are

providing a tremendous amount of data and labor hours to help get this process in motion. The

difference between the two operating efficiencies can be translated into energy and cost

savings. Due to the high energy use of the equipment, even small increases in efficiency will

result in large savings.

Methods

In order to test the efficiency of the V-Kool 40 window film, we installed 2 Hobo Solar

Radiance Sensors on the 2nd floor skywalk in the Halbouty Geoscience building. One sensor is

installed on a window with the V-KOOL 40 installed and the other on a window with no film.

The sensors measure the amount of UV coming through the windows every 10 minutes. The

data is then sent to the Hobo Micro Station Data Logger-H21-002 and downloaded to a laptop

every couple of days. Hoboware Graphing and Analysis Software was used to process and

analyze the data. Measured data was also compared to daily solar radiation readings,

temperature, and cloud cover data from the KCLL weather station at Easterwood Airport to

quantify the environmental factors including incoming radiation on the windows. The data we

collect from the 2nd floor skywalk in Halbouty will be the base values for the UV and


pg. 5

temperature. The purpose of this data is to measure the actual amount of solar radiation being

reflected by the V-KOOL 40 in order to compare to the manufacturers quoted radiation

reduction.

Once the Halbouty portion of the measurements were completed the 2 Hobo

Solar Radiance Sensors were deployed to the multiple rooms on the 2nd and 12th floors in the

O&M. 4 Hobo Pendant Temperature/Light Data Logger were deployed to measure temperature

and light intensity. The rooms of interest in the O&M are; 202JB, 202G, 1210E, 1210F, 1210G,

and 1210L, however we only had time to measure the office of Dr. Thomas: 1204 B&C and Dr.

Dessler: 1210B. Dr. Thomas’s office is located on the southwest side of the building will Dr.

Dessler’s is facing northeast. Both offices have thermostats located inside where the sensors

are located, however, the area controlled by the thermostat consists of several other rooms.

Therefore other UV sensors will be placed on the windows of the adjacent rooms along with

temperature measurements to test the difference between the rooms. We will then compare

this data with the daily high temperature and UV values from the Easterwood Airport weather

station.

After we collect data values for the rooms of interest, we will use the Radiance Equation

“1/R=QA/ΔT” to calculate the total amount of UV reflected by the UV film. The R represents the

value of insulation, QA is the heat transfer per unit of time, and ΔT is the difference in auxiliary

temp to room temperature. The values we calculate using the equation will then be compared

to values UES calculated using V-Kool’s projected radiation reflection perimeters. If results we

calculate are similar to UES, they will provide extra funding to outfit the entire building with the


pg. 6

V-Kool 40 UV Window Film. Allowing for future Geos 405 students to continue this energy

conservation project by collecting UV and temperature data for an entire year.

The next step will be to calculate the average daily temperature and radiation values.

When making their prediction, UES uses the month of July’s monthly averages to determine the

building envelope of the O&M. However, from looking at max UV potential, the month of June

is the key month we should be looking at since the sun will reach its solar maximum angle of

23.43o on June 21. July is generally warmer temperature wise but the solar zenith angle will

have already started decreasing after the summer solstice.

To find the potential energy savings in terms of BTUs, we will have to look at the HVAC

system used to cool the individual rooms in the O&M. Thanks to UES, auxiliary temperature

sensors have already been installed on the 12th floor along with air flow sensors (Cubic Feet per

Minute “CFM”). These two factors will be the keys in calculating the potential reduction in BTUs

and air flow amount to provide a comfortable building environment. As mentioned earlier, the

current energy cost is $3.00 to cool the building with a projected reduction of $0.60 a square

foot per day once the film is installed throughout the building. UES projects the grand potential

energy savings of $58,000 which comes out to $5,000 in yearly savings. Another question we

will be looking at is the effectiveness of individual thermostats located throughout the offices

that to keep a desired temperature for the individual rooms.

The main focus on the project will be the efficiency of the films on air flow and energy

consumption reduction for the O&M building. Before we start any data collecting, we will send

a pre survey out to professors that are allowing us to install the radiation film in their offices.


pg. 7

Basic questions asked pertained to overall room comfort satisfaction, use of blinds, and if a

fan/space heater is used to achieve a desired room temperature. The results of the survey will

be collected before any testing and will be beneficial in determining comfort levels prior to

installation and if we are on the right track with our hypothesis.

Results and Discussion

The pre-experiment survey was sent out to the professors participating in this

experiment asking several questions pertaining to the rooms comfort level. 75% of the received

responses rank room comfort satisfaction at 3 out of 10, however all the responses have been

received by those who don’t have thermostats located in their rooms. Midday and afternoon

seem to be the times the occupants are in their offices including always being in during the

summer months. Once the offices are outfitted with the film, the survey will be sent out to the

occupants again to identify any changes from their original responses.

The Hobo UV Sensors installed in Halbouty Geosciences Building on the filmed and non-

filmed windows on the 2nd floor skywalk started collecting data the last few days of March.

However, data analysis was started on April 1st in order to calculate with a month’s worth of

solar radiation data. The sensors collected the incoming solar radiation from the un-filmed

window sensor and the window outfitted with the V-Kool 40 window film for two 18 days of

data, while we recorded daily UV Index forecasts from Easterwood Airport in College Station.

Upon removing the radiation sensors, 2 Hobo Pendant Temperature/ Light sensors were placed

to begin collecting temperature readings. Table 2 below shows the maximum recorded UV

values for the un-filmed and filmed windows and the percent difference between two.


pg. 8

Table 2: Halbouty Max UV values in terms of Watts per square meter

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

28

-Mar

28

-Mar

28

-Mar

29

-Mar

29

-Mar

29

-Mar

30

-Mar

30

-Mar

30

-Mar

31

-Mar

31

-Mar

1-A

pr

1-A

pr

1-A

pr

2-A

pr

2-A

pr

2-A

pr

3-A

pr

3-A

pr

4-A

pr

4-A

pr

4-A

pr

5-A

pr

5-A

pr

6-A

pr

6-A

pr

6-A

pr

7-A

pr

7-A

pr

7-A

pr

8-A

pr

8-A

pr

9-A

pr

9-A

pr

9-A

pr

10

-Ap

r1

0-A

pr

10

-Ap

r1

1-A

pr

11

-Ap

r1

2-A

pr

12

-Ap

r1

2-A

pr

13

-Ap

r1

3-A

pr

W/M

²

AXIS TITLE

UV Comparison(Nights Removed)

Window with Film Window without Film


pg. 9

Table 3: The 18 days of Radiation Data 2nd Floor Skywalk Halbouty Geoscience Building (Percentage Difference: V-KOOL 40 Filmed Window vs Un-Filmed Window)

April 5 saw the smallest amount of radiation reach the windows with the non-filmed

window receiving 16 W/m2. This can be explained by the weather as it was storming the entire

day blocking almost 95% of the incoming solar radiation. The maximum values we calculated

have several factors that could have affected the amount of light reaching the sensors. The

maximum observed incoming solar radiation, 246 W/m2 occurred on March 29 thanks to clear

skies. The filmed windows allowed only 7 W/m2 on April 5 while the highest values were

observed on March 27-28 at 96 W/m2. Variables such as cloud cover and sky view obstruction

Date Unfilmed Max W/m² V-Kool Max W/m² Difference (Unfilmed vs V-Kool)

27-Mar-15 242 96 60%

28-Mar-15 243 96 61%

29-Mar-15 246 94 62%

30-Mar-15 217 89 59%

31-Mar-15 137 56 59%

1-Apr-15 187 77 59%

2-Apr-15 214 84 61%

3-Apr-15 196 79 59%

4-Apr-15 219 91 59%

5-Apr-15 16 7 56%

6-Apr-15 188 77 59%

7-Apr-15 201 86 57%

8-Apr-15 64 28 56%

9-Apr-15 172 72 58%

10-Apr-15 68 32 53%

11-Apr-15 77 37 52%

12-Apr-15 217 87 60%

13-Apr-15 217 88 59%

14-Apr-15 242 96 60%

Average Max UV 177 72 58%


pg. 10

from nearby buildings. From the maximum values we collected off the data logger, we

compared the values to those recorded from the airport (Table 4).

Table 4: Easterwood Airport Max UV Index Values compared to the Max UV Values collected from the Hobo UV Sensors. It also shows the percentage of radiation reflected by the filmed & non-filmed window.

Cloud

Conditions

Max Radiation

(W/m²) Un-Filmed

%

Reflected V-Kool

%

Reflected

Overcast 200 187 7% 77 62%

Mostly Cloudy 100 214 -114% 84 16%

Partly Cloudy 75 196 -161% 79 -6%

Overcast 225 219 2% 91 60%

Overcast 127.5 16 88% 7 95%

Partly Cloudy 185 188 -2% 77 58%

Partly Cloudy 225 201 11% 86 62%

Overcast 175 64 63% 28 84%

Mostly Cloudy 150 172 -15% 72 52%

Overcast 125 68 46% 32 74%

Overcast 100 77 23% 37 63%

Mostly Cloudy 225 217 4% 87 61%

Clear 225 217 4% 88 61%

Partly Cloudy 250 242 3% 96 62%

Avg Max UV 171 163 -3% 67 57%

The amount of UV reflected or absorbed by the V-Kool window film has average to

reduce over half the amount of radiation passing into the building thru the normal window. The

performance of the V-Kool UV Window Film is positive blocking over half the available UV

throughout the day. The average amount of UV reflected at the window was just over 61

percent, including a 57 percent reduction during the peak radiation period. The average

amount of radiation blocked by the film is consistent with a previous study on UV Films in 2005.

Humayer Chowdhury at el…(2007) used the same V-Kool window film also calculating a 60%

refection rate, outperforming all other manufacturers.


pg. 11

Table 5: Halbouty 2nd Floor Skywalk Radiation Difference (Non-Filmed vs Filmed) 3PM-7PM for March 28-April 14.

The un-filmed window shows how inefficient the building standards were place at the

time of construction. The results are still positive for the overall objective of this research

project since it shows the inability of the current windows are at reducing solar radiation

inflow. It shows a great possibility of being one of the factors contributing to warmer office

temperatures and higher energy consumption. Table 6 shows the temperature measurements

at peak times (2-6PM).

0

50

100

150

200

250

3/2

8/2

01

5

3/2

9/2

01

5

3/3

0/2

01

5

3/3

1/2

01

5

4/1

/20

15

4/2

/20

15

4/3

/20

15

4/4

/20

15

4/5

/20

15

4/6

/20

15

4/7

/20

15

4/8

/20

15

4/9

/20

15

4/1

0/2

01

5

4/1

1/2

01

5

4/1

2/2

01

5

4/1

3/2

01

5

W/m

²

Date

Halbouty 2nd Floor Skywalk(3PM-7PM)

Unfilmed Window

Filmed WIndow


pg. 12

Table 6: Four day temperature comparison between no-filmed vs filmed window during

Peak Radiation Load (2-6PM)

Currently the energy rates are “$3.00 per square feet (sqft/day) to cool the O&M

building with a cost projection of $2.40 (sqft/day) after the film is installed” (UES). The amount

of energy used to condition the O&M environment is 13.6 BTUs w/o the window film installed.

(UES) The UES also projects a $58,000 consumption savings if the entire building was outfitted

with the UV film in turn paying for the project in 5 years. In order to confirm or deny the results

calculated by UES, we will determine a baseline temperature and air flow movement (in terms

of cubic feet per minute (CFM). If the results look promising, future Geos 4005 students will

continue collecting a full year’s worth of data.

0

10

20

30

40

50

De

gre

es

C

Temperature

No Film

Film


pg. 13

With the data we obtained from our experiments, we ran an ANOVA test comparing the

amount of radiation reflected during the 2-6PM peak times. We obtained a P value w answers

the question: If all the populations really have the same mean (the treatments are ineffective),

what is the chance that random sampling would result in means as far apart (or more so) as

observed in this experiment? (6) Our calculated p-value= 1.55*10-7 which is reassuring since

the smaller a p-value number is the more likelihood our original hypothesis will be proven

correct.

Table 7: Solar insulation amount measured at the windows during peak 2-6PM

(Radiation is in W/m2)

The next step in our research is to begin collecting and analyzing data for the 12th Floor

of the O&M. The current location we are measuring the office of Dr. Thomas (1204 B&C) and

Dr. Dessler (1210B). Both offices have thermostats located inside where the sensors are

located, however, the area controlled by the thermostat consists of several other rooms.

Therefore other radiation sensors will be placed on the windows of the adjacent rooms along


pg. 14

with temperature measurements to test the difference between the rooms. During the

summer, we will continue to measure solar radiation, temperature, and light intensity for the

12th floor of the O&M. The goal is to get a baseline data set before the window film is installed

and begin recording data after installation. Once we have the sufficient amount of data, can we

determine the baseline temperature range from which future Geos 405 research teams will use

to calculate a more accurate reduction in energy consumption and overall costs savings.

Conclusion

The amount of solar radiation being able to enter the building through the original and

still installed windows, the V-Kool 40 Window Film is effective in reducing over half the amount

than the window alone. The results from the pre-survey show the current professors believe

their rooms are too hot/too cold and use their blinds to reduce the amount of light directly

entering the room. Our calculations are similar to those that Utility and Energy Services with

the project paying itself off between 4-5 years. Figure 1 below shows the 12th floor rooms and

orientation and figure 2 showing the air flow (CFM) along with thermostat locations.

Policy Implications

This project is full of policy implications that could be highly beneficial not only Texas

A&M but for potential residential use throughout the nation. In Bryan/College Station, new city

ordinances have been past Section 402.15 Single pane windows shall not be allowed in the

building envelope along with Insulation And Fenestration Requirements By Component defined

by deleting the 0.30 solar heat gain coefficient in the Glazed Fenestration SHGC column for

Climate Zone 2 and requiring a solar heat gain of 0.35 (6). If the project is successful in showing


pg. 15

a reduction in energy consumption (BTUs) and air movement (CFMS), other buildings could be

outfitted with the V-KOOL 40 window film providing more savings throughout the older

buildings on the campus of Texas A&M University.


pg. 16

Figures

1) O&M Building 12th Floor Map Layout, Provided by UES:

2) Air Flow Chart 12th Floor of the O&M Building, Provided by UES:


pg. 17

Faculty and Staff who have gone above and beyond in assisting with this project:

1) Texas A&M University Energy Services (UES)

2) Maureen Reap, College of Geosciences Facilities Coordinator: Texas A&M University

3) Amy Chen, O&M Energy Steward: Texas A&M University

4) Dr. Brendan Roark, Department of Geosciences: Texas A&M University

5) Aggie Green Fund


pg. 18

References

1) U.S. Energy Information Administration: Short-Term Energy and Summer Fuels Outlook

(STEO) April 2015.

2) Simpkins, Dulcey. "Managing Energy Cost In Office Buildings." Managing Energy Costs in

Office Buildings (n.d.): n. pag. E Source Customer Direct, 2010. Web. 11 May 2015

3) "Cost and Fees for Utility Services FY2015." Utilities Energy Services. Texas A&M

University, n.d. Web. 12 May 2015

4) Kozlowski, Dave. "Improved Window Technology Can Handle Many Energy Challenges."

Facilitiesnet. Building Operating Management, Oct. 2006. Web. 11 May 2015.

5) Kaluib, A.M. “Improving Glass Walls Thermal Resistance in Air-Conditioned Buildings.”

Tenth International Conference for Enhanced Building Operations, Kuwait. 26 October

2012

6) Hampton, K “Bryan Building Code Policy”, The City of Bryan 24 May 2011

7) V-KOOL. “KOOL & CLEAR.” V-KOOL The Cool and Clear Window Solution. Accessed

(March 1, 2015)

8) Reap, E. Maureen, “Geosciences Window Film”, Facilities Coordinator College of

Geosciences, Texas A&M October 2014

9) Ashrae Standard, “Energy Standards for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential

Buildings”, SI edition.

Window Film and Energy Project Final

Documents

Transcript of Window Film and Energy Project Final