4.7 Article

Thermal bridges of metal fasteners for aerogel-enhanced blankets

期刊

ENERGY AND BUILDINGS
卷 185, 期 -, 页码 307-315

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.12.041

关键词

Silica aerogel; Mechanical fixing; Steel fasteners; Heat transfer; Super-insulating materials; Effective thermal conductivity

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) [2016-04904]
  2. Ontario Ministry of Research Innovation and Science (MRIS)
  3. Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
  4. Higher Education Institutional Excellence Programme of the Ministry of Human Capacities in Hungary within the framework of the Energetics thematic programme of the University of Debrecen

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of silica aerogel-enhanced blankets as a thermal insulation material is one of the most promising solutions to reduce the heat loss through the building envelope. Aerogel-enhanced blankets provide exceptionally high thermal resistance, thanks to a thermal conductivity value as low as 0.014W/mK. However, a challenge in the use of aerogel-enhanced blankets is represented by the way to connect these highly flexible panels to the backing support. This paper describes the effect of mechanical fasteners over the thermal performance of a brick wall covered with an aerogel-enhanced blanket investigated. The effective thermal transmittance of the selected aerogel-enhanced blanket due to the presence of the metal fasteners is evaluated experimentally using a calibrated chamber. The laboratory measurements are also compared with theoretical calculations conducted both for metal and plastic fasteners. Finally, some conclusions about the ways to reduce the thermal bridging effects during the installation of aerogel-enhanced blankets are provided, and the effective thermal conductivity of aerogel blankets considering different materials (plastic or metal anchors) for their fastening are reported. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据