ARTICLE IN PRESS

Building and Environment 41 (2006) 109–116

www.elsevier.com/locate/buildenv

Conjugate heat transfer analysis of double pane windows

Orhan Aydın
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Karadeniz Technical University, 61080 Trabzon, Turkey
Received 31 May 2004; received in revised form 6 January 2005; accepted 7 January 2005

Abstract

This study numerically analyzes conjugate heat transfer through a double pane window using a finite difference technique. The
aim of the study is to determine the thermal optimum air layer thickness between the two panes for different climates. Four different
cities of Turkey, representing different climate conditions are considered: Ankara, Antalya, Kars and Trabzon. Here, much more
realistic boundary conditions considered for panes than those considered in Aydın (Energy and Buildings 2000; 32:303–8). Aydın
(2000) assumed panes as isothermal surfaces, while, here, a conjugate heat transfer analysis is applied. Two different boundary
conditions are applied for the outer surfaces facing inside and outside: constant temperature and convection. The height of the
window, H is chosen 80 cm and the thickness of each pane is set 4 mm. The effect of air layer thickness varying between 3 and 40 mm
on the average Nusselt number and the heat flux through the inner pane. It was shown that energy losses through the double pane
windows can be considerably reduced by optimizing thickness of the air layer. It is also shown that filling the space between the glass
panes with a gas having a lower thermal conductivity instead of air reduces the insulating value of the window.
r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Low energy buildings; Double pane windows; Conjugate heat transfer; Wall conduction; Optimum air layer thickness; Numerical
simulation

1. Introduction through windows is to install double pane windows.

Due to the increase in energy cost and the concern of
global environment, many countries are taking measures
to improve energy efficiency in the building sector. In
this respect, the numbers of studies concerning low-
energy buildings, which ensure low-energy consumption
and provide excellent residential comfort, have in-
creased in recent years.
Windows, providing natural light, ventilation and
weather protection, are very important components of
residential and commercial buildings. However, it has
been recognized that windows, the thermally weakest
link in the building fabric, are thermal holes. They cause
valuable heat loss and thermal discomfort, due to very
poor insulation characteristic, i.e. high heat conduction
characteristic, of glass. One way to reduce energy losses
Tel.: +90 462 3772974; fax: +90 462 3253205.
E-mail address: oaydin@ktu.edu.tr.
Since the air layer trapped between two panes has very
low heat conduction coefficient, most of the heat or air-
conditioning energy losses through windows can be
prevented.
The fact that, in Turkey [1], large window areas are
preferred increases the importance of double pane
windows. One of the most important aspects of double
pane windows, regarding energy efficiency, is the
thickness of the air layer between the two panes. It has
a significant effect on the energy losses through the
windows. For this quantity, the optimum value that
minimizes energy losses should be defined. Some
parameters such as indoor and outdoor temperatures,
weather conditions, climate, etc., influence the optimum
value of the air layer thickness. Therefore, prediction of
the optimum value for different regions with different
climates in Turkey, which is the aim of this study, will
support the economy and preserve the environment
leading decreased energy consumption.

0360-1323/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.01.011
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
110 O. Aydın / Building and Environment 41 (2006) 109–116
Nomenclature
g gravitational acceleration, m/s2
h convection heat transfer coefficient, W/m2K
H height of the window cavity, m
k heat conduction coefficient of air, W/mK
l the thickness of each pane
L air layer thickness between the two pane, mm
n coordinate in normal direction
Nu Nusselt number
PD percentage decrease in the heat flux, %
Pr Prandtl number
q heat flux, W/mK
R aspect ratio (H/L)
Ra Rayleigh number
t time, s
T temperature, K
u velocity component in x-direction, m/s
U non-dimensional velocity component in x-
direction
v velocity component in y-direction, m/s
V non-dimensional velocity component in y-
direction
x,y coordinates defined in Fig. 1
X,Y non-dimensional coordinates
In an interesting numerical study, which is closely
related to this work, Korpela et al. [2] investigated heat
transfer through a double pane window. The description
of multicellular convection flow was made when
Rayleigh number and cavity aspect ratio were high.
Using the Arakawa explicit finite difference scheme for
the convective terms and the explicit DuFort–Frankel
method for the diffusive terms, they determined the
boundaries between conduction, multicellular, and
transition flow regimes in the window cavity for
Rp20: Later, Lee and Korpela [3] presented more
general numerical results valid for cavity aspect ratio
Rp40 and for various Prandtl numbers. Natural
convection heat transfer in a double-paned window
cavity with high aspect ratios was investigated theore-
tically using the finite difference technique by Novak
and Nowak [4]. They evaluated various fluid flow regime
boundaries for cavity aspect ratios 10pRp90 and
Grashof numbers ranges 1
108 pGrp3
109 : Zhang
et al. [5] investigated the thermal insulation effect of a
screen installed inside a double-glazed window. The
screen was a venetian blind system made out of
horizontal strips that could be rotated. They numerically
determined the effect of the permeable screen on the
temperature field, the flow field, and the overall heat
transfer rate. Medved and Novak [6] investigated heat
transfer through a double pane window with a screen
Greek Letters
a thermal diffusivity, m2/s
b volumetric thermal expansion coefficient, 1/
K
z non-dimensional vorticity
y non-dimensional temperature
t non-dimensional time
F generalized non-dimensional variable
C non-dimensional stream function
Subscripts
C cold wall
cr critical
H hot wall
i, j coordinate indices
opt optimum
ref reference
wall at wall
x in x-direction
y in y-direction
and siphon which formed a semi-open cavity using
PHOENICS, a commercially available CFD package.
Muneer and Han [7] presented an analysis for the
calculation of the convective heat transfer in the double-
glazed window enclosure. The potential for large energy
savings due to the use of heavy inert gases, such as
krypton and xenon, was also shown. Abodahab and
Muneer [8] used measurements and modeling techniques
to study the longitudinal temperature variation of
double-glazed windows. They provided a physical model
which could be used to calculate the temperatures along
the height of double-glazed windows. In another study
of theirs [9], a model to calculate the variation of the
nocturnal temperature provided the external tempera-
ture known was introduced. Further, spreadsheet based
software was developed to assess the frequency of
condensation which might occur on any double-glazed
window. The embodied energy of the four main
materials used in the construction of an inert gas filled,
double-glazed window, of a given size, was quantified by
Weir and Muneer [10]. The four main materials
considered were infinite gas (argon, krypton and xenon),
timber, aluminum and glass. The energy requirements of
the underlying manufacturing processes were also
estimated for the processing of the finished product. A
study was made by Sekhar and Toon [11] on the benefits
derived from smart window, a double glazing unit where
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
O. Aydın / Building and Environment 41 (2006) 109–116
one pane consisted of a high-performance heat reflective
glass and the other coated with low emissivity coating. A
description of its quantitative impact on cooling bad,
energy consumption and energy savings achieved as
compared with other forms of glazing was made. The
life cycle costing and the reduction of atmospheric
pollutants were also analyzed. Gavin and Wilson [12]
presented interim results in an experiment that had
monitored the environmental conditions in the glazing
cavities of a number of different window frames. The
measurements of the relative humidity, temperature and
the presence of liquid moisture in the cavities around the
edge of double-glazing units were reported for a 2-year
monitoring period.
Aydın [1] studied heat transfer through a double-pane
window in order to determine the thermal optimum
air-layer thickness between the two panes for different
climates. It was disclosed that energy losses through
double-pane windows could be considerably reduced by
optimizing the thickness of air layer. Constant tempera-
tures were assumed for each pane surface neglecting
conduction in the panes. This study is an extension of
Ref. [1], which takes conduction in the panes into
account. Two different thermal boundary conditions are
used for the outer surfaces of the panes: constant
temperature and convection flux. In the first case outer
temperatures of the two panes are taken as constant
being equal to winter indoor and outdoor design
temperatures, respectively. In the second case, convec-
tion condition is defined for the outer surfaces of the
panes. Four different cities are chosen to represent
different climates in Turkey. For each city, the optimum
thickness of air layer between two panes is determined
using the finite difference method so as to minimize
energy losses through double-pane windows.
Most of the studies in the existing literature have
neglected the interaction between convection inside and
conduction in the walls. Some of studies investigating
conjugate natural convection in enclosures are given in
Refs. [13–24]. Meyer et al. [13] studied the effects of cell
wall thickness and thermal conductivity on natural
convective heat transfer within inclined enclosures. Kim
and Viskanta [14] studied the effects of wall conductance
on natural convection in differently oriented square
cavities. Heat conduction in the connecting (unheated)
walls was shown to simultaneously stabilize and
destabilize the fluid in the cavity. Kaminski and Prakash
[15] studied the problem of conjugate natural convection
in a square cavity whose one vertical was thick, with a
finite thermal conductivity, while the other three walls
being taken to be zero of thickness. They investigated
three separate models to account for the wall conduc-
tion: (i) the complete conjugate case in which conduc-
tion in the thick vertical wall was assumed to be fully
two-dimensional (ii) one-dimensional model in which
conduction in the wall was assumed to be in the
111
horizontal direction only (iii) A lumped parameter
approach which assumed the solid–fluid interface
temperature to be uniform. Mallinson [16] described a
numerical model for the interaction between natural
convection in a slot and conduction in the side walls that
were parallel to the plane of the slot. Perfectly
conducting walls were shown to reduce the rate of heat
transfer by the fluid but to increase the strength of the
flow. Zimmerman and Acharya [17] made a numerical
study to investigated natural convection in an enclosure
with perfectly conducting horizontal end walls and
finitely conducting baffles. Le Peutrec and Lauriat [18]
analyzed the effects of heat losses at the conducting side
walls for 3-D natural convection in rectangular en-
closures. Heindel et al. [19,20] studied coupled conduc-
tion and natural convection transport within 2- and 3-D,
discretely heated cavities. Sun and Emery [21] examined
conjugate natural convection heat transfer in a 2-D, air-
filed enclosure containing discrete internal heat sources
and an internal baffle. Kimura et al. [22] analytically and
experimentally investigated conjugate natural convec-
tion heat transfer from a vertical plate for which three
different materials including copper, stainless steal and
ceramic were used. Baytas et al. [23] numerical studied
steady-state conjugate natural convection in a square
cavity filled with a porous medium and showed that with
an increase in solid–fluid conductivity ratio, the average
Nusselt numbers over the vertical hot and cold walls
decreased. Liaqat and Baytas [24] studied conjugate
natural convection in a square enclosure containing
volumetric sources.
2. Mathematical formulation and numerical method
Flow and energy transport in double-paned windows
is an important example of natural convection heat
transfer in an enclosure. The flow configuration of
interest is shown in Fig. 1. The window cavity is of
length, L, and height, H, and the Cartesian coordinates
with the corresponding velocity components ðu; vÞ are
indicated therein. As explained earlier, conduction in
the panes is considered in this study (conjugate
analysis). The thickness of each pane, l is set to be
equal to each other. The fluid is assumed to be
incompressible, with constant properties, although
buoyancy effects are considered by invoking the
Boussinesq approximation. The compressibility work
and the viscous dissipation terms are neglected in the
energy equation. Thermal radiation is neglected in
comparison to convection. With foregoing assumptions,
the governing equations for the two-dimensional flow
under consideration are first written in primitive
variables. By the elimination of pressure, the equations
are obtained in terms of the dimensionless stream
function, c; and vorticity, z; which are, respectively,
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
112 O. Aydın / Building and Environment 41 (2006) 109–116

In the above equations Pr ¼ v=a is the Prandtl number

and Ra is the Rayleigh number defined in the following
form:
gbH 3 ðT H  T C Þ
Ra ¼ . (6)
va
Since the window enclosure is very tall, conduction in the
vertical direction is ignored considering one-dimen-
sional wall conduction. At the solid–gas interface, the
temperature and the heat flux must be continuous. This is
treated as
qT qT
kglass ¼ kair . (7)
qx qx
In non-dimensional form, the above equation can be
written as
qy qy
kglass ¼ kair . (8)
qX qX
Using this one-dimensional approach for conduction in
each pane suggests a great advantage since one does not
have to solve any heat conduction equation in the wall;
that is, only the flow equations are to be solved, and the
effect of wall conduction is implied through the boundary
condition expressed in the above equation which is
imposed at X ¼ 0 and X ¼ 1: This provides a consider-
able saving in the computational effort [15].
If the convection flux boundary condition is con-
Fig. 1. Geometry of the double pane window cavity.
sidered for the outer surfaces of the panes, the heat the
flux at the outer surfaces can be written as
expressed as follows: q ¼ h1 ðT H  T outer;1 Þ, (9)
qC qC qV qU q ¼ h2 ðT outer;2  T C Þ, (10)
U¼ ; V ¼ ; z¼  . (1)
qY qX qX qY
where h1 and h2 convection coefficients for the inner and
Hence, the usual vorticity-stream function formulation for
outer spaces to which the window faces and, TH and TC
the problem is expressed in dimensionless form as follows.
are the temperatures of these spaces, respectively.
T outer;1 and T outer;2 are the temperatures of the outer
Stream function equation:
surfaces of the inner and outer pane (see Fig. 1).
q2 c qc The remaining appropriate boundary conditions are
2
þ ¼ z. (2)
qX qY 2 U ¼ 0; V ¼ 0 at X ¼ 0 and 0oY o1, (11)
Vorticity-transport equation:

2  U ¼ 0; V ¼ 0 at X ¼ 1 and 0oY o1, (12)
qz qz qz qz q2 z qy
þU þV ¼ Pr þ þ RaPr .
qt qX qY qX 2 qY 2 qX qy
¼ 0; U ¼ 0; V ¼ 0 at Y ¼ 0 and 0oX oR,
(3) qY
(13)
Energy equation:
qy qy qy q2 y q2 y qy
þU þV ¼ þ . (4) ¼ 0; U ¼ 0; V ¼ 0 at Y ¼ 1 and 0oX oR,
qt qX qY qX 2 qY 2 qY
(14)
These equations have been non-dimensionalized by using
the height H as length scale and defining the variables as where R ¼ H=L is the aspect ratio of the window cavity.
The no-slip conditions at the walls (i.e. there is no
x y T  TC at mass flux across any solid boundary) lead to the
X¼ ; Y ¼ ; y¼ ; t¼ ,
H H TH  TC H2 condition c ¼ constant: Thus, at the boundaries of
u v the window cavity, c is arbitrarily specified as zero. The
U¼ ; V¼ . ð5Þ
a=H a=H value of the vorticity at the boundary is calculated by a
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
O. Aydın / Building and Environment 41 (2006) 109–116 113

three-point forward scheme for the stream function. Table 1

Winter design temperatures for the cities considered in this study
This relation yields
City Design winter temperature
q2 c
zwall ¼  , (15)
qn2 Antalya +3
where zwalll is the value of the vorticity at wall and n is Trabzon 3
Ankara 12
the outward drawn normal of the surface. In numerical Kars 27
calculations, the values of vorticity at corners are taken
as averages of the values of vorticity at two neighboring
nodes.
From the engineering viewpoint, the most important Table 2
concern is the heat transfer through the double pane Governing parameters for the simulation program for each city
windows. This is best represented by Nusselt number, examined
which is a measure of the ratio of the heat transfer by
City DT [1C] kair
103 Pr Ra
109
conduction to the total heat transfer. The average
Nusselt number, Nuy for heated wall is given by Antalya 19 24.75 0.711 1.115
Z 1 Trabzon 25 24.54 0.716 1.548
Ankara 34 24.23 0.713 2.255
Nuy ¼ NuðY Þ dY , (16)
0 Kars 49 23.7 0.715 3.862

where Nu(Y) is local Nusselt number for heated wall and

is given by
 
qy
NuðY Þ ¼  . (17)
qX X ¼0
The flux through the double pane window is defined in
the following for both of the thermal boundary
conditions used for the outer surfaces of the panes:
For the constant temperature case, it is
ðT H  T C Þ
q¼
ð2l glass =kglass Þ þ ð1=hÞ
and for the convection case it is
ðT H  T C Þ
q¼ , (19)
ð2l glass =kglass Þ þ ð1=hÞ þ ð1=h1 Þ þ ð1=h2 Þ
where h is the heat convection coefficient and, it is
obtained from
Nuy k
h¼ . (20)
L range of Nu ¼ 1 is the largest for Antalya while being
Details of the numerical simulation method and the
validity of the computer code developed can be found in
Ref. [1].
3. Results and discussion
This study is aimed at determining optimum air layer
thickness between the two panes of double-paned
windows for some cities with different climates in
Turkey. The cities examined here are Ankara, Antalya,
Kars and Trabzon. For these cities, the corresponding
design winter temperatures are given in Table 1.
The window height is chosen to be 80 cm, which is one
of the generally used values in the window design in
Turkey. The indoor temperature is taken 21 1C as stated
earlier this study is an extension of Ref. [1], where the
two panes were assumed to be kept as isothermal. Here,
a much more realistic approach, conjugate analysis, is
performed considering conduction in the panes. Two
different boundary conditions are applied for the outer
surfaces of the panes facing inside and outside,
respectively: constant temperature and convection flux.
Case 1: Constant temperatures for the outer surfaces
(18) of the panes.
Using the corresponding values of each city, tempera-
ture difference, DT, Prandtl number, Pr, and Rayleigh
number, Ra are obtained and given in Table 2. These
parameters are used as initial data in the computer code
to obtain the flow and energy transport mechanisms
differing from city to city. The variation of the average
Nusselt number through the inner pane, Nu with the
increasing air-layer thickness, L, is given in Fig. 2. As it
can be seen, for smaller values of L, Nu is around 1. The
the smallest for Kars. The fact that Nu equals 1 is an
indication of heat transfer due to the conduction, i.e. the
conduction is the only mechanism of the heat transfer.
For larger air layer thickness beyond 12 mm, Nu
increases with the increasing L. Increasing Nu means
more contribution of convection mechanism in heat
transfer. Since the heat convection mechanism occurs
with the movement of the fluid, increased convection is a
result of intensified circulation of air trapped between
the two panes. In order to have a better view onto the
effect of the air layer thickness, the variation of the heat
flux through the double pane window is shown in Fig. 3.
Up to L ¼ 9 mm; where conduction dominates over
convection, heat flux decreases considerably with the
increasing L. This is physically explained by the Heat
Conduction Law of Fourier, which shows an inversely
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
114 O. Aydın / Building and Environment 41 (2006) 109–116
Fig. 2. Variation of the average Nusselt number at the inner pane, Nu;
with the thickness of the air layer between the two panes, L.
Fig. 3. Variation of the heat flux through the inner pane, q, with the
thickness of the air layer between the two panes, L.
proportional relation between the heat flux and the
thickness. When the heat transport mechanism is
conduction, heat transfer decreases very rapidly with
the increasing air layer thickness. Since the heat
conduction coefficient of air is low, air layer behaves
like an insulation material. For larger values of L, the
convection mechanism of the heat transfer starts to
show its effect on the energy transport. For the range
10–15 mm of L, the trend of the decrease in q with the
increasing L continues, but in a lower slope. For this
range of L, the conduction and convection mechanisms
are in a comparable level. Therefore, the decrease in the
heat transfer with the increasing L due to the conduction
is balanced with the increase in the heat transfer due to
the natural convection in enclosed air layer. Beyond L ¼
15 mm; the effect of the thickness of air layer on the heat
flux differ from city to city. As it can be seen, for
Antalya, the increase in the heat flux continues slightly
up to 21 mm. This is due to comparable effects of the
conduction and convection mechanisms on the heat
transport phenomena. Beyond L ¼ 21 mm; q increases
with increasing L due to the fact that the convection
dominates over the conduction. Therefore, choosing the
distance between the two panes in the range of
18–21 mm is the optimum solution for Antalya. The
corresponding range for Ankara and Trabzon is
15–18 mm, while it is 12–15 mm for Kars. These results
are similar to those of Ref. [1]. Here, lower values than
those of Ref. [1] have been obtained for both Nu and q
due to the consideration of conduction. Conduction in
each pane forms a resistance to heat transfer and,
consequently, reduces heat transfer.
With the use of the optimum value of thickness of the
air layer, the percentage decrease in the heat flux can be
calculated using
ðqL¼opt  qL¼ref Þ
PD% ¼
100, (21)
qL¼ref
where qL¼opt and qL¼old represent the heat fluxes at the
optimum value and the reference value of the thickness
of the air layer, respectively. If the optimum values
found here are used instead of L ¼ 9 mm; which is the
commonly used for window design in Turkey, the
following decreases in the heat transfer, therefore energy
savings, will be obtained: 27% for Antalya, 23% for
Trabzon, 19% for Ankara, 13% for Kars. These above
values obtained through the conjugate analysis are
found to be seemingly lower than those obtained Ref. [1]
in which conduction effects in the panes are neglected
considering the panes as isothermal surfaces.
As expected, using fluids having a lower conductivity
will lead to more reduced heat transfer values than those
for air. This is accomplished due to the following two
effects of a lower conductivity: (1) Conduction resis-
tance in the pane will increase. (2) A lower conductivity
will decrease the inner temperature of the pane. These
reduced inner temperatures will consequently decrease
the natural convection heat transfer coefficient (i.e.
increase the convection resistance) lowering the buoy-
ancy force in the fluid. Here, as an example, a gas having
a thermal conductivity of 15
103 is chosen. For
Antalya, it has been reported that taking the air layer
thickness between the two panes is thermally the
optimum solution. It is shown that for a fluid layer
thickness of 21 mm, if the fluid having a thermal
conductivity of 15
103 was used instead of air, then
a more energy saving of 40% with respect to air would
be obtained.
Case 2: Convection flux condition for the outer
surfaces of the panes.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
O. Aydın / Building and Environment 41 (2006) 109–116
As shown earlier, h2 represents the convective heat
transfer coefficient for the outer space and its effect on
the heat transfer is examined. As well known, climate,
wind condition, etc. of a region have important effect on
the heat transfer from outdoor air to the pane.
Depending on the strength of wind, the forced
convective heat transfer coefficient changes. In this
study, four different values are chosen for the value of
the forced convective heat transfer coefficient of the
wall: 15, 20, 25 and 30 W/m2 K.
Assumptions of convection for the outer surfaces of
the panes lead to less heat transfer values than those of
constant temperatures assumption, Case 1. This is due
to the fact that in the constant temperature assumption
for the outer surfaces, we neglect the convective
resistances of outdoor and indoor air to heat transfer.
Consideration of these resistances will normally lead to
decreased heat transfer values as expected. From the
practical view point, our aim was to thermally optimize
the air layer thickness between the panes of the window.
Both the two condition for the outer surfaces of the
panes result in the same thermal optimum air layer
thickness of any region considered. Therefore, the
results obtained in Case 1 using the constant tempera-
ture assumptions for the outer surfaces of the panes can
be generalized.
As stated earlier, another attempt is made at
determining the effect of the forced convective heat
transfer coefficient value of the outer surface of the
outer pane, h2. For the brevity of the article, only the
results for Trabzon for a 21 mm air layer thickness are
presented in the following: Increasing the forced
convection coefficient, h2 from 15 to 30 W/m2 K did
not influence a lot, just suggesting a 2.6% increase. The
above findings give credit the validity of the results
obtained in Case 1 for any region from less windy to
much windy.
Finally, it should be remembered that here, our aim
was to obtain a thermal optimum air layer thickness. In
some other cases, different considerations such as sound
transmission control could be an aim to be achieved. If
the control of sound transmission was considered, one
would obtain different results since there was a trade-off
between the control of the sound transmission and the
control of the heat flow.
4. Conclusions
In this study, a conjugate heat transfer analysis is
performed for heat transfer through a double pane
window. The focus was on the determination of the
optimum thickness of the air layer trapped between the
panes of the window. This was accomplished through
the theoretical investigation of conjugate conduction
and natural convection heat transfer in double pane
115
windows using a finite difference technique. Two
different thermal boundary conditions are defined for
the outer surfaces of the panes: constant temperature
(Case 1) and convection heat flux (Case 2). Four
different cities characterizing different climates in
Turkey, Ankara, Antalya, Kars and Trabzon, were
examined. Based on the simulation results of Case 1, the
range of the optimum thickness was found to be
18–21 mm for Antalya, 15–18 mm for Trabzon and
Ankara, and 12–15 mm for Kars. It was shown that
considerable savings in the energy losses through the
double-paned windows could be obtained when the
optimum values were used. It was also disclosed in Case
1 that using fluids having lower thermal conductivity
will increase the insulating performance of the double
pane windows suggesting more reduced heat transfer
rates. In Case 2, it was obtained that using convection
flux conditions for the outer surfaces suggest lower
results than those for the constant temperature ap-
proach. This is mainly due to additional indoor and
outdoor resistances to the heat transfer since these
resistances are taken to be zero for the condition of the
constant temperatures for the outer surfaces of the
panes assuming infinite convective heat transfer coeffi-
cients. It was also shown that increasing forced
convective heat transfer coefficient for the outer surface
of the outer pane facing outside did not have a
considerable effect on the heat transfer.
Acknowledgment
Support of this work by the Karadeniz Technical
University Research Fund under Grant No. 2001.112.3.4
is gratefully acknowledged.
References
[1] Aydın O. Determination of optimum air-layer thickness in
double-pane windows. Energy and Buildings 2000;32:303–8.
[2] Korpela SA, Lee Y, Drummond JE. Heat transfer through double
pane window. Journal of Heat Transfer 1982;104:539–44.
[3] Lee Y, Korpela SA. Multicellular convection in a vertical slot.
Journal of Fluid Mechanics 1983;126:91–121.
[4] Novak MH, Nowak ES. Natural convection heat transfer in
slender window cavities. Journal of Heat Transfer 1993;115:
476–9.
[5] Zhang Z, Bejan A, Lage JL. Natural convection in a vertical
enclosure with internal permeable screen. Journal of Heat
Transfer 1991;113:377–83.
[6] Medved S, Novak P. Heat transfer through a double pane
window with an insulation screen open at the top. Energy
Buildings 1998;28:257–68.
[7] Muneer T, Han B. Simplified analysis for free convection in
enclosures application to an industrial problem. Energy Conver-
sion and Management 1996;37:1463–7.
[8] Abodahab N, Muneer T. Free convection analysis of a window
cavity and its longitudinal temperature profile. Energy Conver-
sion and Management 1998;39:257–67.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
116 O. Aydın / Building and Environment 41 (2006) 109–116
[9] Muneer T, Abodahab N. Frequency of condensation occurrence
on double glazing in the United Kingdom. Energy Conversion
and Management 1998;39:717–26.
[10] Weir G, Muneer T. Energy and environmental impact analysis of
double-glazed windows. Energy Conversion and Management
1998;39:243–56.
[11] Sekhar SC, Toon KLC. On the study of energy performance and
life cycle cost of smart window. Energy Buildings 1998;28:
307–16.
[12] Garvin SL, Wilson J. Environmental conditions in window frames
with double-glazing units. Construction Building Materials
1998;12:289–302.
[13] Meyer BA, Mitchell JW, El-Wakil MM. The effect of thermal
wall properties on natural convection in inclined rectangular cells.
Journal of Heat Transfer 1982;104:111–7.
[14] Kim DM, Viskanta R. Study of the effects of wall conductance on
natural convection in differently oriented square cavities. Journal
of Fluid Mechanics 1984;144:153–76.
[15] Kaminski DA, Prakash C. Conjugate natural convection in a
square enclosure: effect of conduction in one of the vertical walls.
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 1986;29:
1979–88.
[16] Mallinson GD. The effects of side-wall conduction on natural
convection in a slot. Journal of Heat Transfer 1987;109:419–26.
[17] Zimmerman E, Acharya S. Free convection heat transfer in a
partially divided vertical enclosure with conducting end walls.
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 1987;30:
319–31.
[18] Le Peutrec Y, Lauriat G. Effects of the heat transfer at the side
walls on natural convection in cavities. Journal of Heat Transfer
1990;112:370–8.
[19] Heindel TJ, Incropera FP, Ramadhyani S. Conjugate natural
convection from an array of discrete heat sources: part 1—two-
and three-dimensional model validation. International Journal of
Heat and Fluid Flow 1995;16:501–10.
[20] Heindel TJ, Ramadhyani S, Incropera FP. Conjugate natural
convection from an array of discrete heat sources: part 2—a
numerical parametric study. International Journal of Heat and
Fluid Flow 1995;16:511–8.
[21] Sun YS, Emery AF. Effects of wall conduction, internal heat and
an internal baffle on natural convection heat transfer in a
rectangular enclosures. International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer 1997;40:915–29.
[22] Kimura S, Okajima A, Kiwata T. Conjugate natural convection
from a vertical heated slab. International Journal of Heat and
Mass Transfer 1998;41:3203–11.
[23] Baytas AC, Liaqat A, Grosan T, Pop I. Conjugate natural
convection in a square porous cavity. Heat and Mass Transfer
2001;37:467–73.
[24] Liaqat A, Baytas AC. Conjugate natural convection in a square
enclosure containing volumetric sources. International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer 2001;44:3273–80.