This report is the result of a thesis conducted at the consulting firm Bjerking AB andis the final part of the Bachelor Programme in Construction Engineering at Universityof Uppsala. The work aims to investigate the costs and how the choice of ventilationsystem affects building projects during a long-term period. This report covers costssuch as investment, maintenance and energy but also how they affect residents andbuilders. Building regulations for energy consumption are expected to be tougher;therefore a comparison of two different heat recovery ventilation systems(HRV-system) was made. One system is based on a centrally placed unit that coversthe whole buildings ventilation through vertical shafts. The second system is based onapartment placed unit that only covers the individual apartment’s ventilation. The unitmakes it possible for the individual user to control the ventilation flow.The method used for comparison of the costs was Life Cycle Cost (LCC). It results inthe total cost during a selected calculation period of 20 years, where yearly basedcosts as energy and maintenance is included. Two housing projects in central Uppsalawere chosen as a reference. They were similar in design but with the two differentsystems of ventilation. A questionnaire was handed out to provide experience fromresidents with apartment units. The results were used in the analysis of the systemsand to determine its pros and cons.Information of costs was collected from different companies and resulted intocustomized spreadsheets to determine the cost per apartment. The result shows thatthe difference in investment is not significant between the systems but is big inmaintenance and energy. The biggest difference is maintenance where the apartmentsystems many service points is increasing the cost. Energy consumption for theapartment system leads to higher energy costs than with a central system, even if thecontrol function is used. The explanation is that a central systems fans have lowerpower usage and the heat recovery is more efficient then an apartment system.The conclusion is that a central system has a lower total cost compared to anapartment system during the calculation period. A reason for choosing the apartmentsystem would be if a need to maximize living space is a priority, and the developingphase of the project is well thought thru.Keywords: LCC-analysis, HRV-systems, Central unit, Apartment unit.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:uu-172562 |
| Date | January 2011 |
| Creators | Appelgren, Jörgen, Kjellström, Fredrik |
| Publisher | Uppsala universitet, Institutionen för geovetenskaper, Uppsala universitet, Institutionen för geovetenskaper |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds