MIL-HDBK-1003/19
TABLE II. Representative passive system costs.[*]
System Figure
Number Number
System Type
Cost ($/ft2)
1
14
Double glazed direct gain with
12
THICK = 4 and Am/Ac = 3.
2
15
Double glazed direct gain with
12
THICK = 4 and Am/Ac = 6.
3
16
Double glazed, vented Trombe
15
wall with THICK = 12.
4
17
Double glazed radiant panel with
12
THICK = 4 and Am/Ac = 3.
5
18
Double glazed radiant panel
12
with THICK = 4 and Am/Ac =
6
19
Double glazed thermosiphoning
14
air panel with THICK = 4 and
Am/Ac = 3.
7
20
Double glazed thermosiphoning
14
airpanel with THICK = 4 and
Am/Ac = 6.
8
21
Double glazed attached sunspace
18
with glazing tilted 50 degrees
to the horizontal and THICK
= 12.
9
22
Double glazed semi-enclosed
15
sunspace with vertical glazing
and THICK = 12.
[*]Based on typical costs observed by Los Alamos National Laboratory
during the 1984-1985 period.
nine systems specifically described; similar results can be achieved for
other related systems by employing the contour map that is most
representative of the system of interest. Similar results are achieved
because related systems that operate at higher efficiencies than the six
reference cases tend to be more expensive and therefore, require higher
productivities in order to pay for themselves in about ten years. The
higher productivities can be achieved by keeping the aperture size about
equal to that recommended for the cheaper but less efficient systems
included in table II. A similar argument holds for systems that are less
efficient than the related reference cases.
34
Previous Page
