Building and Environment 37 (2002) 665 – 675

www.elsevier.com/locate/buildenv

Thermal performance of building roof elements

Sami A. Al-Sanea
Department of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, King Saud University, P.O. Box 800, Riyadh 11421, Saudi Arabia

Received 1 April 1999; received in revised form 10 May 2001; accepted 31 May 2001

Abstract

The study concerns the evaluation and comparison of the thermal performance of building roof elements subject to periodic changes in
ambient temperature, solar radiation and nonlinear radiation exchange. A numerical model, based on the /nite-volume method and using
the implicit formulation, is developed and applied for six variants of a typical roof structure used in the construction of buildings in Saudi
Arabia. The climatic conditions of the city of Riyadh are employed for representative days for July and January. The study gives the
detailed temperature and heat 1ux variations with time and the relative importance of the various heat-transfer components as well as the
daily averaged roof heat-transfer load, dynamic R-values and the radiative heat-transfer coe2cient. The results show that the inclusion of
a 5-cm thick molded polystyrene layer reduces the roof heat-transfer load to one-third of its value in an identical roof section without
insulation. Using a polyurethane layer instead, reduces the load to less than one-quarter. A slightly better thermal performance is achieved
by locating the insulation layer closer to the inside surface of the roof structure but this exposes the water proo/ng membrane layer to
larger temperature 1uctuations.
c 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Thermal insulation; Building roofs; Heat transmission; R-value; Finite-volume method

1. Introduction
The use of thermal insulation and special types of build-
ing materials has increased signi/cantly in recent years in
both hot and cold climates. This was due to the increasing
demand on the thermal comfort of people inside residential,
commercial and governmental buildings besides the ever
increasing cost of energy. The thermal design of buildings
depends on the indoor conditions required, the outdoor
prevailing climatic conditions, and the choice of building
construction materials and insulation. Accurate methods
of analysis to predict the thermal performance of a whole
building envelope or an element are, therefore, sought.
A whole building thermal analysis is quite involved since
all mechanisms of heat transfer are present and the building
components are composite of many layers of di9erent mate-
rials. The analysis is often time dependent since the outside
ambient temperature, wind speed and solar radiation vary
with time. Also, the heat gains due to occupants, equipment,
lighting, and solar radiation transmission through fenestra-
tion, besides the ventilation and in/ltration of the outside
air will have to be accounted for. Therefore, various meth-
ods with di9erent levels of simpli/cation exist for building
energy calculations such as the transfer function, the degree
day and bin methods [1]. Computer codes are also available
to perform complicated building load analysis. Mathews
et al. [2] compared the thermal load predictions of six such
programs for a number of cases and found signi/cant di9er-
ences in the results of the various methods. Jensen [3] re-
ported procedures for validating complex simulation codes.
Utilizing a prede/ned computer program, based on the ther-
mal response factor method, Eben Saleh [4,5] investigated
the e9ects of using di9erent insulation materials, thicknesses
and arrangements on the thermal performance of buildings.
The studies that deal with the thermal performance of
speci/c building components, and not the building as a
whole, have their own merits. Indeed, computer codes for
building energy simulation can bene/t from improvement
in the modeling of their components. The problem can thus
be reduced, in general, to solving the Fourier heat con-
duction equation through a composite structure subject to
time-dependent boundary conditions. Ozisik [6] described
various analytical methods for solution of one-dimensional
problems with temperature-independent properties; such
methods include the separation of variables, orthogonal
expansion technique, Green’s function, Laplace transform
and integral method. By separating the thermal capacitance
into discrete components, Letherman [7] determined the
temperature response of a slab wall to a sinusoidal heat
1ux input wave. Han [8] described a numeric-analytical
approach using complex algebra of analyzing linear pe-
riodic heating-cooling problems in laminates. Chen and

0360-1323/02/$ - see front matter
c 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 3 6 0 - 1 3 2 3 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 7 7 - 4
666 S.A. Al-Sanea / Building and Environment 37 (2002) 665–675
Nomenclature
Ao amplitude of periodic temperature
◦
variation ( C)
Bi Biot number = hHx=k
c speci/c heat (J=kg K)
Fo Fourier number = Ht=(Hx)2
h heat-transfer coe2cient (W=m2 K)
Is solar radiation 1ux (W=m2 )
k thermal conductivity (W=m K)
L layer thickness (m)
N number of layers
q heat 1ux (W=m2 )
Q daily total heat 1ux (MJ=m2 day)
Re e9ective resistance (m2 K=W )
Rn nominal resistance (m2 K=W )
t time (s)
◦ convo
T temperature ( C or K)
◦ i
Tf; i indoor air temperature ( C)
◦ o
Tf; o outdoor air temperature ( C)
◦ r
Tf; o; mean mean outdoor air temperature ( C)
Tsky sky temperature (K)
v wind speed (m=s)
x coordinate direction (m)
Lin [9] extended the hybrid application of the Laplace
transform technique and the /nite-element method to in-
clude nonlinear radiation boundary conditions in composite
layers.
Al-Turki and Zaki [10] predicted the thermal performance
of building walls in which the general solution was obtained
by superposition of the steady-state solution and harmonic
terms. They studied the e9ect of insulation and energy stor-
ing layers upon the cooling load; the analysis showed that
dispersion of the insulation material within the building ma-
terial was less e9ective than using a continuous equivalent
insulation layer placed on the outdoor facade. Zedan and
Mujahid [11] developed applications of the Fourier series
technique to inverse Laplace transforms to solve the problem
of heat conduction in composite plane walls. The tempera-
ture distribution was obtained in closed form in the Laplace
s-domain and was transformed back to the time domain us-
ing a series formula. Using the concept of the sol–air tem-
perature, Threlkeld [12] studied the periodic heat transfer
through walls and roofs based on the periodic solution of
the heat conduction equation. This latter analysis was used
by Kaushika et al. [13] to investigate the solar thermal gain
of a honeycomb roof-cover as a means for passive solar
space heating and energy conservation. The same method
of analysis was used by Bansal et al. [14] to study the ef-
fect of external surface color on the thermal behavior of a
building. They, also, carried out measurements on a scaled
model.
Greek letters
 thermal di9usivity (m2 =s)
Hx internodal distance (m)
Ht time step (s)
' surface emissivity
( solar absorptivity
) density (kg=m3 )
* Stefan–Boltzmann constant (W=m2 K 4 )
+ phase shift angle (rad)
! frequency (rad=s)
Subscripts
c convection
convi inside convection
outside convection
inside surface or nodal point
outside surface
radiation exchange
s solar radiation
st storage
1; 2 layer number or nodal point.
Yarbrough and Anderson [15] compared the solar heat
gains for a 1at concrete roof deck with and without radiation
control coating. Reductions in cooling loads ranging from
60% to 85% were calculated. Ozkan [16] investigated the
performance of 1at roofs, water proo/ng, and insulation
under hot and dry climatic conditions. Insulation materials
were tested and properties were compared under di9erent
aging conditions. Under the climatic conditions of Greece,
Eumorfopoulou and Aravantinos [17] studied the thermal
behavior of planted roofs and compared it with a bare roof. It
was concluded that planted roofs contributed to the thermal
resistance of buildings, but that was not enough to replace
the thermal insulation layer.
The /nite-di9erence method was utilized by Kuehn and
Maldonado [18] to calculate the time-dependent thermal
response of a composite wall. The explicit formulation was
used and the radiation boundary conditions were included.
Using the /nite-di9erence method, Kosny and Christian
[19] modeled various metal stud walls and calculated their
R-values. For the climatic conditions of Riyadh, Al-Sanea
[20] evaluated the thermal performance of di9erent wall
structures used in construction of buildings in Saudi Arabia.
The study was conducted under one-dimensional periodic
conditions using a control-volume /nite-di9erence method.
The e9ect of wall orientation was studied and the R-values
under dynamic conditions were determined.
The objective of the present study is to evaluate and
compare the thermal performance of building roof elements
 S.A. Al-Sanea / Building and Environment 37 (2002) 665–675 667

subject to steady periodic changes in ambient temperature,
solar radiation and nonlinear radiation exchange. An im-
plicit, control volume /nite-di9erence method is developed
and applied for six variants of a typical roof structure used
in the construction of buildings in Saudi Arabia. The dy-
namic R-values of the roofs are determined under the cli-
matic conditions of Riyadh for representative days for July
and January.
2. Mathematical formulation
The geometrical con/guration is depicted in Fig. 1. The
roof section consists of a number of layers with di9erent
thicknesses and physical properties. The outside surface
is exposed to solar radiation (Is ), convection heat transfer
(qc; o ) and radiation exchange with the sky (qr; o ). The inside
surface is subject to combined convection and radiation heat
transfer (qi ) which relates directly to the air-conditioning
load required to maintain the inside design temperature
(Tf ; i ). The mathematical model is formulated using the
following assumptions.
(i) There is no heat generation.
(ii) The layers are in good contact, hence the interface
resistance is negligible.
(iii) The variation of thermal properties is negligible.
(iv) The thickness of the composite roof is small compared
to the other dimensions. Hence, a one-dimensional tem-
perature variation is assumed.
(v) The convection coe2cient is constant and is based on
the direction of heat 1ow and daily average wind speed.
where  is the thermal di9usivity (k=)c) and the subscript
j refers to the layer, i.e. j = 1; 2; : : : ; N , k is the thermal
conductivity, ) is the density and c is the speci/c heat.
The problem is principally concerned with the solution
of Eq. (1), applied to all layers, to obtain the variations
of temperature and heat-transfer rates subject to prescribed
initial and boundary conditions.
The initial temperature is taken as uniform and equal to
the daily mean of the outside ambient temperature, Tf ; o; mean .
Of course, any other value can be used in the model since
the steady periodic solution is independent of the initial tem-
perature distribution. The boundary conditions are given as
follows:
(i) Boundary conditions at the inside surface (x = 0):


@T

−k1

= hi (Tf ; i − Tx=0 ); (2)
@x x=0
where hi is the inside-surface combined heat-transfer coef-
/cient; from the ASHRAE handbook of fundamentals [1]:
hi = 9:26 W=m2 K for upward direction of heat 1ow;
and
hi = 6:13 W=m2 K for downward direction of heat 1ow:
(ii) Boundary conditions at the outside surface (x = L):


@T


−kN = hc; o (Tx=L − Tf ; o ) − (Is − qr; o ; (3)
@x
x=L
where hc; o is the outside-surface convection coe2cient, Tf ; o
is the outside ambient temperature and ( is the solar absorp-
tivity of the outside surface.

Based on the above assumptions, the conduction equation The coe2cient (hc; o ) is a function of wind speed (v).
governing the heat transfer through the composite roof is Empirical values are taken from Ito et al. [21] as
given by
hc; o = 18:63 V 0:605 in W=m2 K (4)
2
@ Tj 1 @Tj
= ; (1) and,
@x2 j @t 
0:25 v if v ¿ 2 m=s;
V=
0:50 v if v ¡ 2 m=s:
The temperature (Tf ; o ) is /tted by a sinusoidal function
over a 24-h period, with t = 0 corresponds to midnight, as
Tf ; o = Tf ; o; mean + Ao sin(!t − +); (5)
where Ao is the amplitude, ! is the frequency, and + is the
phase shift angle; these parameters are given in Section 4.
The solar radiation (Is ) is calculated for horizontal roofs
in Riyadh by using the ASHRAE clear-sky model [1].
The nonlinear radiation exchange (qr; o ) is given by
4 4
qr; o = '*(Tsky − Tx=L ); (6)
where ' is the surface emissivity, * is the Stefan–Boltzmann
constant, and Tsky is the sky temperature and is taken equal
Fig. 1. Schematic showing a typical composite roof structure. to (Tf ; o − 12); see for example, Garg [22].
668 S.A. Al-Sanea / Building and Environment 37 (2002) 665–675

(iii) Interface node (i) between layers (j) and (j + 1):

t+Ht t+Ht
(kj =Hxj )Ti−1 + (kj+1 =Hxj+1 )Ti+1 + BTit
Tit+Ht = ;
kj =Hxj + kj+1 =Hxj+1 + B
(9)
where
B = ()j cj Hxj + )j+1 cj+1 Hxj+1 )=2Ht:
(iv) The boundary node on the outside surface:
Tnt+Ht
t+Ht
2Foo [Tn−1 +Bio Tft+Ht
;o + (HxN =kN )((Ist+Ht +qr; o )]+Tnt
= ;
2Foo (Bio +1)+1
(10)
where
Foo = N Ht=(HxN )2 ; Bio = hc; o HxN =kN ; and
t+tH 4
qr; o = '*[(Tsky ) − (Tnt+Ht )4 ]:
The set of the /nite-volume equations is solved itera-
tively by using the Gauss–Seidel method. The iterative pro-
cess within each time step continues until the di9erences
between the new and old nodal temperatures are within a
Fig. 2. Composite roof of N layers showing node arrangements.
predetermined small tolerance value. The solution is carried
through a number of cycles until a steady periodic state is
fully obtained. It is noted that the nonlinear radiation e9ects
3. Numerical solution procedure are handled within the process of the iterative solution; the
temperature at the outside roof surface, which appears on
The solution of the present nonlinear problem is obtained both the left- and right-hand sides of Eq. (10), is calculated
by the /nite-volume method. The composite roof of N layers using qr; o evaluated from the temperature value at the pre-
is discretized into a number of nodes. Next, the /nite-volume vious iteration.
equations are derived by applying the energy balance. It is
seen from Fig. 2 that there are four types of nodes which are:
4. Roof structures, thermal properties and climatic data
(i) boundary node on the inside surface, node 1,
(ii) interior nodes inside the layers, The details of six roof structures; namely, R1–R6 are
(iii) interface nodes between the layers, and shown schematically in Figs. 3–5. Structures R1 and R2
(iv) boundary node on the outside surface, node n. represent uninsulated roofs with di9erent foam concrete
types (I and II, respectively). Structures R3, R4 and R5
The resulting /nite-volume equations, using the implicit for- represent insulated roofs with di9erent insulation materials
mulation, are summarized as follows: as follows: molded polystyrene, extruded polystyrene and
polyurethane, respectively. Structure R6 di9ers from R3
(i) The boundary node on the inside surface:
only with respect to the location of the insulation layer. The
2Foi (T2t+Ht + Bii Tf ; i ) + T1t thicknesses of the various layers are: paving tiles = 25 mm,
T1t+Ht = ; (7)
2Foi (Bii + 1) + 1
where
Foi = 1 Ht=(Hx1 )2 and Bii = hi Hx1 =k1 :
(ii) Interior node (i) in layer (j):
t+Ht t+Ht
Foj (Ti−1 + Ti+1 ) + Tit
Tit+Ht = ; (8)
2Foj + 1
where Fig. 3. Schematic of roof structures R1 and R2; (1) tiles, (2) mortar bed,
(3) sand /ll, (4) membrane, (5) foam concrete, (6) reinforced concrete,
Foj = j Ht=(Hxj )2 : and (7) cement plaster.
 S.A. Al-Sanea / Building and Environment 37 (2002) 665–675 669

following parameters are calculated and used in the study:

◦ ◦
Tf ; o; mean = 34:7 C; Ao = 7:8 C for July;
◦ ◦
Tf ; o; mean = 12:3 C; Ao = 4:5 C for January; and

Fig. 4. Schematic of roof structures R3, R4 and R5; (1) tiles, (2) mortar
bed, (3) sand /ll, (4) thermal insulation, (5) membrane, (6) foam concrete,
(7) reinforced concrete, and (8) cement plaster.
+ = 0:8333:
The daily average wind speed is 4:1 m=s for July and
2:6 m=s for January. The solar radiation 1ux on horizontal
roofs Is is calculated from the direct and di9use components
based on the ASHRAE clear-sky model [1]. The latitude,
longitude and the standard meridian of the local time zone
pertinent to the city of Riyadh are speci/c input to the model.

5. Results and discussion

5.1. Introduction

The thermal performance of the six roof structures is de-

termined through the time of day; the day represents an av-
erage of all days in a month. The months of July and January
Fig. 5. Schematic of roof structure R6; (1) tiles, (2) mortar bed, are chosen to represent typical summer and winter condi-
(3) sand /ll, (4) membrane, (5) foam concrete, (6) reinforced concrete, ◦
tions. The indoor temperature (Tf ; i ) is controlled at 25 C for
(7) thermal insulation, and (8) cement plaster. ◦
July and 23 C for January. The radiative properties are set to
' = 0:9 and ( = 0:4 as appropriate to light-colored surfaces.
Table 1 Steady periodic results are achieved after about three periods
Thermal properties (cycles) of computation; the initial transient e9ects, which
diminish with time, have no major interest in the present
Material k (W=m K) ) (kg=m3 ) c (J=kg K)
study. All the results are checked for the e9ect of numerical
Paving tile 1.73 2243 920 parameters and shown to be both grid and time-step inde-
Mortar bed 0.72 1858 837 pendent. The accuracy of the numerical model is validated
Sand /ll 0.33 1515 800 by comparisons with exact analytical solutions for a simpli-
Molded polystyrene 0.036 24 1213
Extruded polystyrene 0.029 35 1213
/ed problem. Due to space limitation, this section concen-
Polyurethane 0.022 32 1590 trates on detailed selected results that highlight and compare
Water proo/ng membrane 0.19 1121 1675 the thermal performance of the roofs.
Leveling foam concrete (I) 0.52 1600 837
Leveling foam concrete (II) 0.08 300 837
Reinforced concrete 1.73 2243 920 5.2. Roof structure R1
Cement plaster 0.72 1858 837
This represents a typical uninsulated roof using a foam
concrete layer of type I. Fig. 6 displays the temperature dis-
tributions across the roof thickness at di9erent times with an
mortar bed = 20 mm, sand /ll = 50 mm, water proo/ng interval of 3 h for the representative day in July. The inside
membrane = 4 mm, foam concrete = 75 mm, reinforced surface of the roof corresponds to the left of the /gure and
concrete slab = 150 mm, cement plaster = 15 mm and insu- the di9erent layers are shown by the dotted lines. At 3:00,
lation layer = 50 mm. the /gure shows that the temperature is relatively high
The thermal properties of the materials used are summa- near the middle of the roof and decreases gradually towards
rized in Table 1; see for example, Croy and Dougherty [23]. both the inside and outside surfaces. Three hours later, at
With regard to the climatic data, the ambient tempera- 6:00, the temperature level across the whole thickness un-
ture and wind speed values for Riyadh for the year 1993 dergoes a further decrease as the stored heat continues to
are used; these data were obtained from the Meteorological dissipate from both surfaces of the roof. Then a fast increase
and Environmental Protection Agency [24] for the whole in outside surface temperature takes place due to sunrise
year. The temperatures are averaged for each month on an and continues until about 15:00 during which the tempera-
hourly basis using the daily variations for that month. Then, ture gradient is reversed as heat is being gained. Thereafter,
the averaged representative daily variations are /tted by a the surface temperature drops continuously after sunset and
sinusoidal function as given by Eq. (5). The values of the the whole process is repeated in a steady periodic fashion.
670 S.A. Al-Sanea / Building and Environment 37 (2002) 665–675

Fig. 6. Temperature variations across the roof thickness at di9erent times Fig. 7. Temperature variations with time at di9erent locations for structure
for structure R1 in July. R1 in July; (1) inside room, (2) inside roof surface, (3) inside interface of
membrane, (4) outside interface of membrane, (5) outside roof surface,
and (6) outside ambient.

The variation of temperature is smooth across each layer

with discontinuities in the gradient at interfaces because of
di9erent conductivities on both sides of each interface. Due
to the thermal storage e9ect, it is noted that while the tem-
perature at the outside surface is decreasing, the temperature
deep inside is still increasing. Also, the temperature 1uctu-
ations are reduced signi/cantly with distance from the out-
side surface. The minimum 1uctuations are calculated at the
◦
inside surface; however, these which amount to about 1:5 C
may still be considered large. The inside surface tempera-
◦
tures are higher than the design room value (25 C) by about
◦
3 C. The roof heat-transfer load would be proportional to
such di9erences in temperature and is expected to be large as
will be seen later. The corresponding results for the month
of January give rise to similar remarks but with opposite
direction of heat 1ow.
Fig. 7 shows the temperature variations with time of day at
six distinct locations in the roof. In general, the temperature
variation is approximately sinusoidal since it is driven by Fig. 8. Components and net heat-transfer rate variations with time for
structure R1 in July.
changes in ambient temperature and solar radiation. The
inside roof surface temperature (curve 2) shows a maximum
di9erence with the space (room) temperature at about 24:00
and a minimum di9erence at about 13:00; these correspond required to maintain the controlled room temperature. While
to the maximum and minimum rates of heat gain into the the absorbed solar radiation is either positive or zero, which
space during the day. The di9erence in temperatures between is virtually the dominant source of heat gain, the radiation
curves 3 and 4 is relatively small as a result of the small exchange (rad) is calculated to be negative throughout. Ac-
thermal resistance across the membrane layer. The time lag cordingly, radiation exchange contributes to heat loss only
between the maximum temperatures attained by the outside which is favorable in summer. The outside-surface convec-
and inside surfaces (curves 5 and 2) is calculated to be about tive 1ux (convo ) shows a more complicated behavior since
10 h. there are losses and gains at di9erent times of day. This de-
Fig. 8 depicts the variations with time of day of the various pends on the roof outside-surface temperature relative to the
heat-transfer rate components for roof structure R1 in July. ambient air temperature. The results indicate that the losses
These are: the absorbed solar 1ux (solar abs ), outside-surface by radiation exchange are greater than the losses by con-
convective 1ux (convo ), outside-surface radiation exchange vection. The daily averaged values of these components are
1ux (rad), and the net of these (net). The inside-surface heat given in Table 2 in which quantitative comparison can be
1ux (convi ) is also shown which relates to the cooling load made.
 S.A. Al-Sanea / Building and Environment 37 (2002) 665–675 671

Table 2
Summary of total and daily-averaged thermal values

Code Rn Re Qi Qc; o Qs Qr hQr

number (m2 K=W) (m2 K=W) (MJ=m2 day) (MJ=m2 day) (MJ=m2 day) (MJ=m2 day) (W=m2 K)

R1JUL 0.670 0.529 1.584 −3:031 11.480 −6:866 5.67

R2JUL 1.463 1.156 0.725 −3:677 11.480 −7:079 5.68
R3JUL 2.059 1.626 0.515 −3:831 11.480 −7:135 5.68
R4JUL 2.394 1.891 0.443 −3:886 11.480 −7:153 5.68
R5JUL 2.943 2.323 0.361 −3:948 11.480 −7:173 5.69
R6JUL 2.059 1.626 0.515 −3:841 11.480 −7:125 5.68

R1JAN 0.628 0.735 −1:261 −2:884 7.260 −5:638 4.51

R2JAN 1.421 1.664 −0:557 −2:355 7.260 −5:461 4.50
R3JAN 2.017 2.362 −0:392 −2:230 7.260 −5:423 4.50
R4JAN 2.352 2.755 −0:336 −2:188 7.260 −5:408 4.50
R5JAN 2.900 3.398 −0:273 −2:140 7.260 −5:392 4.49
R6JAN 2.017 2.359 −0:393 −2:233 7.260 −5:417 4.50

Fig. 9. Layer energy-storage variations with time for structure R1 in Fig. 10. Temperature variations across the roof thickness at di9erent times
July; (1) cement plaster, (2) reinforced concrete, (3) foam concrete, (4) for structure R3 in July.
membrane, (5) sand /ll, (6) mortar bed, and (7) tiles.

The sum of the above three components is the net heat
transfer rate at the outside surface (qnet ). Fig. 8 shows a
net heat loss starting in the late afternoon and continues
until sunrise; at other times, there is a net heat gain which
is attributed to solar radiation. The /gure also reveals that
much of the heat gained by the roof is stored inside the
various layers of the structure and then dissipated to the
outside. This has a great advantage in reducing the rate of
heat transmission into the space as indicated by relatively
small inside-surface heat 1ux (convi ).
Further insight into the thermal behavior of the roof sec-
tion can be obtained by studying the daily variation of the
rate of energy storage in each layer as shown in Fig. 9 for
July. The rate of energy storage depends upon both the ther-
mal capacitance and temperature 1uctuation. Considering
the reinforced concrete slab (curve 2), for example, it is
noted that there is a net storage of heat between 11:30 and
22:30 and a net heat dissipation outside this period. The to-
tal amount of heat storage must equal the total amount of
heat dissipation over a complete cycle (one day). Similar
behavior is obtained for other layers but with di9erent rates
and time lag.
5.3. Roof structure R3
This represents a typical insulated roof with a 5-cm layer
of molded polystyrene placed above the water proo/ng
membrane; except for the insulation layer, this structure is
identical to R1. Fig. 10 shows the variations of temperature
across the roof thickness for July and are to be compared
with the results in Fig. 6. It is seen that the presence of the
insulation has a marked e9ect in which sharp changes in the
temperature slopes are calculated across the interfaces with
the insulation layer. Also, the bulk of the temperature drop
through the roof takes place across the insulation leaving
672 S.A. Al-Sanea / Building and Environment 37 (2002) 665–675
Fig. 11. Temperature variations across the roof thickness at di9erent times
for structure R6 in July.
the layers on the inside having a relatively very small tem-
perature drop and also much smaller variations with time.
This has two advantages; /rstly, the transmission load is
reduced in magnitude and, secondly, the amplitude of load
1uctuation is reduced in size. It is noted that the variation of
◦
temperature on the inside surface amounts to less than 0:3 C
◦
during the whole day and is only 1 C higher than the inside
◦
room temperature of 25 C. These characteristics are supe-
rior when compared to those obtained for roof structure R1.
With regard to the large temperature variations across the
outer layers, a strong resemblance is seen with those for R1.
5.4. Roof structure R6
This represents a typical insulated roof with the thermal
insulation placed close to the inside surface; except for the
location of the insulation layer, this structure is identical to
R3. Fig. 11 displays the variations of temperature across the
roof thickness for di9erent times of day. It is seen that the
results are similar to those in Fig. 10 for the three layers that
lie close to the outside surface. Starting from the membrane
layer and moving inwards, the results in Fig. 11 are distin-
guished by higher temperature levels and larger 1uctuations.
The membrane layer is now exposed to a higher tempera-
ture and a greater temperature variation with time which are
unfavorable since they can cause cracks and property dete-
rioration after a certain period of use. The insulation layer
gives rise to a substantial temperature drop across its thick-
ness and acts to reduce the daily temperature 1uctuation sig-
ni/cantly. It is seen that the e9ect on the inside surface is
quite similar to that for R3, i.e. an inside surface temperature
◦ ◦
of about 26 C (1 C higher than the inside room tempera-
ture) and with a very small variation throughout the day.
It may be concluded, therefore, that the two structures, R3
and R6, behave similarly with respect to their e9ect on the
mean cooling load, further details are given in the next sec-
Fig. 12. Inside-surface heat 1ux variations with time for all roof structures
in July.
tion. However, when interest lies beyond the steady-periodic
conditions, the two roof sections are expected to behave dif-
ferently during the transient periods of operation. This point
is left for further research as, indeed, with the di9erent ef-
fects the two arrangements would have on possible moisture
condensation in wet climates.
5.5. Comparisons between all roofs
The inside-surface heat 1ux variations with time for all
six roof structures (R1–R6) are presented in Fig. 12 for July.
The /gure reveals a relatively large heat 1ux 1uctuation for
structure R1 and a much greater mean value as compared
to the results of the other structures. Roof R2 shows a more
moderate 1uctuation and a mean value that is about one
half of that calculated for R1. The thermally insulated struc-
tures (R3–R6) show much smaller 1uctuations and mean
values that are particularly low. The heat 1ux for structure
R1 reaches a minimum value at about 13:00 and a max-
imum value at about midnight. For structures R3–R6, the
heat 1ux reaches its minimum at about 14:30 and its maxi-
mum at about 2:30; this time lag is due to the added e9ect
of insulation. It is interesting to note that the heat 1ux vari-
ations with time for roofs R3 and R6 are close but with a
slight di9erence in favor of R6. The calculations reveal that
the daily average inside-surface heat 1uxes are the same for
roofs R3 and R6; however, the peak load for R6 is about
3% smaller than that for R3.
Fig. 13 presents the energy storage variations with time
of day for the concrete slab for all roofs. The results show
that the concrete slab stores heat at various rates from about
12:00 to 24:00. The maximum storage rate is calculated at
about 17:00 for R1, R2 and R6 and at about 18:00 for R3, R4
and R5. The slab dissipates heat from about 24:00 to 12:00
with a maximum rate of dissipation calculated between 7:00
and 8:00. It is also noted that the energy storage behavior
 S.A. Al-Sanea / Building and Environment 37 (2002) 665–675 673

Fig. 13. Energy storage variations with time of the reinforced concrete
slab for all roof structures in July.

of the concrete slabs in R1 and R6 are very similar despite

the di9erences between the two roofs with regard to the
general performance. This is because the concrete slab in
R6 is located on the outside of the insulation layer and,
hence, behaves similarly to the slab in R1 which has no
insulation. The slab heat storage variations with time for
R3, R4 and R5 are relatively very small due to the smaller
temperature 1uctuations as a result of placing the insulation Fig. 14. Daily total heat-transfer loads per square meter for all roof
structures in July and January.
on the outside of the slab.
The overall thermal performance of the roofs is presented
in Fig. 14 in terms of the daily total heat-transfer load per
square meter of roof structure (Q in MJ=m2 day). For July,
structure R1 shows an extremely high heat-transfer load
(1:584 MJ=m2 day) as compared to the other structures. Tak-
ing this value as a reference load for comparison, structure
R2 gives about 46% of the reference load. This gives the
e9ect of using the light weight leveling foam concrete with
a higher thermal resistance. With regard to the e9ect of us-
ing thermal insulation, structures R3, R4 and R5 give the
following percentages of the reference load: 33%, 28% and
23%, respectively. It is also noted that roof R6 reduces the
heat-transfer load by an equal amount to that achieved by
R3. Similar remarks can be drawn for the heating loads of
the roofs in January.
Figs. 15 and 16 give the corresponding thermal resistances
(R-values) of the various roof structures. A distinction is
made between the nominal resistance (Rn ) and the e9ec-
tive, or dynamic, resistance (Re ). The Rn values, presented
Fig. 15. Total nominal thermal resistances for all roof structures in July
in Fig. 15, are calculated as the sum of the various conduc- and January.
tive and convective resistance components in the structure.
The Re values, presented in Fig. 16, are calculated from
the daily averaged di9erence between the outside ambient by the roof within the framework of the total resistance. By
and inside room temperatures divided by the daily averaged all standards, the R-value for roof structure R1 is consid-
heat-transfer rate at the inside surface. Therefore, the Re val- ered too small, and such a roof would demand a consider-
ues contain implicitly the e9ect of the outside-surface ra- ably large cooling or heating load as was seen in Fig. 14.
diation exchange and the e9ect of the solar 1ux absorbed It is interesting to note that while the July and January Rn
674 S.A. Al-Sanea / Building and Environment 37 (2002) 665–675
Fig. 16. Total e9ective thermal resistances for all roof structures in July
and January.
values of a particular roof are very close (the di9erences are
due to the surface convective resistance), the Re values for
July are noticeably smaller than their counterparts for Jan-
uary. Therefore, the July values give more stringent condi-
tions on the allowed R-values for the roofs. The di9erences,
for any one structure, between Rn and Re on the one hand
and those due to the seasonal variations on the other, make
the Re values of a more general use since they represent the
dynamic nature of the heat-transfer process and also re1ect
the climatic conditions.
5.6. Outside-surface radiative heat-transfer coe7cient
(hr; o )
This is calculated by the model based on the outside-
surface temperature of the roof, which is unknown and is
determined iteratively by the calculations, and Tsky which
is known from the climatic data as a function of time. A
typical variation of hr; o with time of day is shown in Fig.
17 for roof structure R1 in July. This resembles to a good
degree the outside roof surface temperature variation shown
earlier as curve (5) in Fig. 7. The daily averaged value is
calculated to be 5:67 W=m2 K; the daily di9erence between
the minimum and maximum values amounts to about 20%.
Similar trends of variations are calculated for all roofs with
the daily averaged values for July are about 25% higher than
those for January. These results are summarized in Table 2.
6. Conclusions
A numerical model based on an implicit /nite-volume
method was developed for calculating the time-dependent
temperature variation in composite layers under nonlinear
boundary conditions. The model was applied for the simu-
Fig. 17. Outside-surface radiative heat-transfer coe2cient variation with
time for structure R1 in July.
lation and comparison of the thermal characteristics of six
variants of a typical roof structure used in building construc-
tions in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The investigation was
carried out under steady periodic state using the climatic
conditions of Riyadh. The results showed that, as expected,
the dominant source of energy gain by the roof was the ab-
sorbed solar radiation. While this acted adversely in sum-
mer and favorably in winter, the radiation exchange with the
sky and the convection heat transfer acted in exactly the op-
posite manner. In general, the contribution of the radiation
exchange was more than twice that of the heat convection.
The results, when compared with a reference uninsulated
roof section using a heavy weight concrete foam as a leveling
layer, produced the following: 45% of the reference daily av-
erage heat-transfer load when using a light weight concrete
foam; 32%, 27% and 22% of the reference daily average
heat-transfer load when using a 5-cm thick layer of insula-
tion made of molded polystyrene, extruded polystyrene and
polyurethane, respectively. Placing the thermal insulation
layer closer to the inside surface of the roof section showed
a little favorable e9ect on the instantaneous heat-transfer
load; however, this had exposed the water proo/ng mem-
brane layer to larger temperature 1uctuations.
It is recommended that future studies should include, as
well, the economic side of the problem, moisture transport
and condensation in roof sections under certain climatic con-
ditions, interface and voids resistance between the layers,
and the initial thermal transient e9ects.
Appendix Tabulated total and daily averaged thermal
values
Table 2 gives a summary of the important total and daily
averaged thermal values calculated for all roofs in July and
January. The /rst column in the table gives the identi/ca-
 S.A. Al-Sanea / Building and Environment 37 (2002) 665–675
tion code number, the second column gives the roof nominal
thermal resistance (Rn ), while the third column gives the ef-
fective thermal resistance (Re ). Columns four to seven give
the daily total quantities of heat-transfer per square meter
of roof: Qi for the inside-surface heat transfer (+ve relates
to cooling load and −ve relates to heating load), Qc; o for
the outside-surface heat convection (−ve means loss from
roof to outside ambient), Qs for the absorbed solar radiation
(+ve means gain; the absorptivity is 0.4), and Qr for the
radiation exchange between outside-surface and sky (−ve
means loss from roof to sky; the emissivity is 0.9). Finally,
the last column gives the daily mean outside-surface radia-
tive heat-transfer coe2cient. From an overall energy bal-
ance for the roof section over 24 h, Qc; o + Qs + Qr must
equal to Qi under steady periodic conditions. It is interesting
to note that the largest daily total heat-transfer component
at the roof outside surface is the absorbed solar radiation
which acts adversely in July and favorably in January. It is
also noted that the daily contribution of the radiation ex-
change at the outside surface can be more than twice that
of the convection. This is due to the relative magnitudes of
the radiative and convective heat-transfer coe2cients and to
partial cancellation of the convective 1ux when integrated
over the whole day, as can be seen for example in Fig. 8.
References
[1] ASHRAE. Handbook of Fundamentals. Atlanta: American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., 1993.
[2] Mathews EH, Shuttleworth AG, Rousseau PG. Validation and further
development of a novel thermal analysis method. Building and
Environment 1994;29(2):207–15.
[3] Jensen SO. Validation of building energy simulation programs:
a methodology. Energy and Buildings 1995;22:133–44.
[4] Eben Saleh MA. Thermal insulation of buildings in a newly built
environment of a hot dry climate: the Saudi Arabian experience.
International Journal of Ambient Energy 1990;11(3):157–68.
[5] Eben Saleh MA. Impact of thermal insulation location on buildings
in hot dry climates. Solar and Wind Technology 1990;7(4):
393–406.
[6] Ozisik MN. Heat Conduction, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1993.
[7] Letherman KM. A rational criterion for accuracy of modelling of
periodic heat conduction in plane slabs. Building and Environment
1977;12:127–30.
675
[8] Han LS. Periodic heat conduction through composite panels. Journal
of Thermophysics 1987;1(2):184–6.
[9] Chen H-T, Lin J-Y. Application of the hybrid method to transient
heat conduction in one-dimensional composite layers. Computers and
Structures 1991;39(5):451–8.
[10] Al-Turki A, Zaki GM. Cooling load response for building walls
comprising heat storing and thermal insulating layers. Energy
Conversion and Management 1991;32(3):235–47.
[11] Zedan MF, Mujahid AM. An e2cient solution for heat transfer
in composite walls with periodic ambient temperature and solar
radiation. International Journal of Ambient Energy 1993;14(2):
83–98.
[12] Threlkeld JL. Thermal environmental engineering. Englewood Cli9s,
NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1970.
[13] Kaushika ND, Sharma PK, Padma Priya R. Solar thermal analysis
of honeycomb roof cover system for energy conservation in an
air-conditioned building. Energy and Buildings 1992;18:45–9.
[14] Bansal NK, Garg SN, Kothari S. E9ect of exterior surface colour
on the thermal performance of buildings. Building and Environment
1992;27(1):31–7.
[15] Yarbrough DW, Anderson RW. Use of radiation control
coatings to reduce building air-conditioning loads. Energy Sources
1993;15(1):59–66.
[16] Ozkan E. Thermal and mechanical properties of cellular polystyrene
and polyurethane insulation materials aged on a 1at roof in
hot-dry climate. Journal of Testing and Evaluation 1994;22(2):
149–60.
[17] Eumorfopoulou E, Aravantinos D. The contribution of a planted
roof to the thermal protection of buildings in Greece. Energy and
Buildings 1998;27(1):29–36.
[18] Kuehn TH, Maldonado EAB. A /nite di9erence transient heat
conduction program for studying the thermal performance of
composite building envelopes. In: E. Fernandes et al., editors.
Building Energy Management. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 1981.
p. 265 –76.
[19] Kosny J, Christian JE. Thermal evaluation of several con/gurations
of insulation and structural materials for some metal stud walls.
Energy and Buildings 1995;22:157–63.
[20] Al-Sanea SA. Evaluation of heat transfer characteristics of building
wall elements. Journal of King Saud University 2000;12(2):
285–313.
[21] Ito N, Kimura K, Oka J. A /eld experiment study on the convective
heat transfer coe2cient on the exterior surface of a building.
ASHRAE Transactions 1972;78:1.
[22] Garg HP. Treatise on solar energy, Fundamentals of Solar Energy,
Vol. 1. Chichester: Wiley, 1982 [Chapter 3].
[23] Croy DE, Dougherty DA. Handbook of thermal insulation
applications. NJ: Noyes Publications, 1984.
[24] Private communication. Meteorological and Environmental
Protection Agency, Riyadh, 1994.