Environmental assessment of constructive alternatives of a container building
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Publication Date: | 2020 |
Other Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | por |
Source: | PARC (Campinas) |
Download full: | https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/parc/article/view/8654887 |
Summary: | Containers have been widely used as buildings lately; therefore, they need to meet thermal performance requirements by using, depending on the climate, insulation materials, and additional layers for the enclosure. This study compares the environmental performance of a container building for commercial use with different constructive strategies for the envelope. The methodology was based: (a) definition of the envelope constructive alternatives for the container building; (b) thermal and energy performance simulations with the aid of DesignBuilder software for four cities in different Brazilian bioclimatic zones (ZB): São Paulo (ZB2), Brasilia (ZB4), Teresina (ZB7) and Rio de Janeiro (ZB8); (c) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), from cradle to grave, considering the following categories of damage: (1) Climate Change, (2) Human Health, (3) Ecosystem Quality and (4) Depletion of Resources. The envelope constructive alternative of drywall and thermal insulation was more advantageous than the others. The thermal absorptance influenced the results, especially for ZB7 and ZB8. The city of Teresina showed the highest operational energy consumption and, consequently, the highest environmental impact. Moreover, environmental guidelines were presented for this type of building. |
id |
UNICAMP-20_e32e93638f686daea8acf9a5d64334bf |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8654887 |
network_acronym_str |
UNICAMP-20 |
network_name_str |
PARC (Campinas) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Environmental assessment of constructive alternatives of a container building Avaliação ambiental de alternativas construtivas de um edifício contêiner Container buildingsLife Cycle AssessmentBioclimatic zonesEdifícios de contêinersAvaliação do Ciclo de VidaZonas BioclimáticasContainers have been widely used as buildings lately; therefore, they need to meet thermal performance requirements by using, depending on the climate, insulation materials, and additional layers for the enclosure. This study compares the environmental performance of a container building for commercial use with different constructive strategies for the envelope. The methodology was based: (a) definition of the envelope constructive alternatives for the container building; (b) thermal and energy performance simulations with the aid of DesignBuilder software for four cities in different Brazilian bioclimatic zones (ZB): São Paulo (ZB2), Brasilia (ZB4), Teresina (ZB7) and Rio de Janeiro (ZB8); (c) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), from cradle to grave, considering the following categories of damage: (1) Climate Change, (2) Human Health, (3) Ecosystem Quality and (4) Depletion of Resources. The envelope constructive alternative of drywall and thermal insulation was more advantageous than the others. The thermal absorptance influenced the results, especially for ZB7 and ZB8. The city of Teresina showed the highest operational energy consumption and, consequently, the highest environmental impact. Moreover, environmental guidelines were presented for this type of building.Contêineres vêm sendo utilizados como edifícios nos últimos anos. Para isto, devem atender requisitos de desempenho térmico obtidos, a depender do clima, com o uso de materiais isolantes e fechamentos adicionais. Assim, o objetivo desse estudo é comparar o desempenho ambiental de um edifício contêiner de uso comercial com diferentes estratégias construtivas da envoltória. A metodologia baseou-se em: (a) definição de alternativas construtivas da envoltória do edifício contêiner; (b) simulações termoenergéticas com auxílio do software DesignBuilder para quatro cidades de diferentes zonas bioclimáticas (ZB) brasileiras: São Paulo (ZB3), Brasília (ZB4), Teresina (ZB7) e Rio de Janeiro (ZB8); (c) Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida (ACV), com escopo do berço ao túmulo, considerando as seguintes categorias de dano: (1) Mudanças Climáticas, (2) Saúde Humana, (3) Qualidade do Ecossistema e (4) Depleção de Recursos. A alternativa construtiva da envoltória composta por drywall e isolante térmico foi a mais vantajosa dentre as avaliadas. A absortância solar das fachadas influenciou significativamente nos resultados, principalmente para as ZB7 e ZB8. A cidade de Teresina foi a que apresentou maior consumo de energia operacional e, consequentemente, maiores impactos ambientais. Ao final, apresentam-se algumas diretrizes ambientais para esta tipologia de projeto.Universidade Estadual de Campinas2020-06-29info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionTextoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/otherapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/parc/article/view/865488710.20396/parc.v11i0.8654887PARC Pesquisa em Arquitetura e Construção; Vol. 11 (2020): Continuous publication; e020008PARC Pesquisa em Arquitetura e Construção; Vol. 11 (2020): Publicação contínua; e020008PARC Pesquisa em Arquitetura e Construção; v. 11 (2020): Publicação contínua; e0200081980-6809reponame:PARC (Campinas)instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)instacron:UNICAMPporhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/parc/article/view/8654887/22597Brazil; ContemporanyBrasil; ContemporâneoCopyright (c) 2020 PARC Pesquisa em Arquitetura e Construçãoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCaldas, Lucas RosseAbreu-Harbich, Loyde Vieira deHora, Karla Emmanuela Ribeiro2020-07-01T14:00:10Zoai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8654887Revistahttp://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/parcPUBhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/parc/oai||parc@fec.unicamp.br1980-68091980-6809opendoar:2020-07-01T14:00:10PARC (Campinas) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Environmental assessment of constructive alternatives of a container building Avaliação ambiental de alternativas construtivas de um edifício contêiner |
title |
Environmental assessment of constructive alternatives of a container building |
spellingShingle |
Environmental assessment of constructive alternatives of a container building Caldas, Lucas Rosse Container buildings Life Cycle Assessment Bioclimatic zones Edifícios de contêiners Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida Zonas Bioclimáticas |
title_short |
Environmental assessment of constructive alternatives of a container building |
title_full |
Environmental assessment of constructive alternatives of a container building |
title_fullStr |
Environmental assessment of constructive alternatives of a container building |
title_full_unstemmed |
Environmental assessment of constructive alternatives of a container building |
title_sort |
Environmental assessment of constructive alternatives of a container building |
author |
Caldas, Lucas Rosse |
author_facet |
Caldas, Lucas Rosse Abreu-Harbich, Loyde Vieira de Hora, Karla Emmanuela Ribeiro |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Abreu-Harbich, Loyde Vieira de Hora, Karla Emmanuela Ribeiro |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Caldas, Lucas Rosse Abreu-Harbich, Loyde Vieira de Hora, Karla Emmanuela Ribeiro |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Container buildings Life Cycle Assessment Bioclimatic zones Edifícios de contêiners Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida Zonas Bioclimáticas |
topic |
Container buildings Life Cycle Assessment Bioclimatic zones Edifícios de contêiners Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida Zonas Bioclimáticas |
description |
Containers have been widely used as buildings lately; therefore, they need to meet thermal performance requirements by using, depending on the climate, insulation materials, and additional layers for the enclosure. This study compares the environmental performance of a container building for commercial use with different constructive strategies for the envelope. The methodology was based: (a) definition of the envelope constructive alternatives for the container building; (b) thermal and energy performance simulations with the aid of DesignBuilder software for four cities in different Brazilian bioclimatic zones (ZB): São Paulo (ZB2), Brasilia (ZB4), Teresina (ZB7) and Rio de Janeiro (ZB8); (c) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), from cradle to grave, considering the following categories of damage: (1) Climate Change, (2) Human Health, (3) Ecosystem Quality and (4) Depletion of Resources. The envelope constructive alternative of drywall and thermal insulation was more advantageous than the others. The thermal absorptance influenced the results, especially for ZB7 and ZB8. The city of Teresina showed the highest operational energy consumption and, consequently, the highest environmental impact. Moreover, environmental guidelines were presented for this type of building. |
publishDate |
2020 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2020-06-29 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Texto info:eu-repo/semantics/other |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/parc/article/view/8654887 10.20396/parc.v11i0.8654887 |
url |
https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/parc/article/view/8654887 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.20396/parc.v11i0.8654887 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/parc/article/view/8654887/22597 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2020 PARC Pesquisa em Arquitetura e Construção info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2020 PARC Pesquisa em Arquitetura e Construção |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazil; Contemporany Brasil; Contemporâneo |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual de Campinas |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual de Campinas |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
PARC Pesquisa em Arquitetura e Construção; Vol. 11 (2020): Continuous publication; e020008 PARC Pesquisa em Arquitetura e Construção; Vol. 11 (2020): Publicação contínua; e020008 PARC Pesquisa em Arquitetura e Construção; v. 11 (2020): Publicação contínua; e020008 1980-6809 reponame:PARC (Campinas) instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) instacron:UNICAMP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) |
instacron_str |
UNICAMP |
institution |
UNICAMP |
reponame_str |
PARC (Campinas) |
collection |
PARC (Campinas) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
PARC (Campinas) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||parc@fec.unicamp.br |
_version_ |
1809283615028150272 |