Energy & Buildings 178 (2018) 1–10

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy & Buildings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enbuild

Prediction method of the long-term thermal performance of Vacuum

Insulation Panels installed in building thermal insulation applications
A. Batard a,b,∗, T. Duforestel a, L. Flandin b, B. Yrieix c
a
EDF R&D - ENERBAT, EDF Lab Les Renardires, Moret-sur-Loing 77818, France
b
LEPMI - LMOPS - Universit de Savoie - Campus Savoie Technolac - Hlios, Le Bourget-du-Lac 73376, France
c
EDF R&D - MMC - EDF Lab Les Renardires, Moret-sur-Loing 77818, France

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Vacuum Insulation Panels (VIPs) are super-insulating products that can be used for different applications.
Received 23 November 2017 When they are used for building thermal insulation, they have to maintain a very high thermal perfor-
Revised 26 July 2018
mance in long-term. The initial thermal conductivity of VIPs is around 4 mW.m−1 .K−1 . This very low
Accepted 5 August 2018
value will increase in time, depending on the nanoporous property of the core material and on the bar-
Available online 18 August 2018
rier envelope efficiency which prevents the increase of moisture and internal pressure. To estimate the
Keywords: long-term thermal performance of VIPs, modelling is required. Simulations have shown the very great im-
Vacuum insulation panels portance of the core material characteristics, and the external temperature and humidity conditions. That
Core material behaviour is why it is necessary to study the VIPs behaviour with realistic solicitations in service life for each VIP
Building insulation configuration. This paper proposes a methodology for determining the long-term thermal performance
Modelling of VIPs when they are installed in envelope components for various building thermal insulation appli-
Real solicitations
cations. All the methodology including the climate conditions, the building modelling and the insulation
systems, is described. Severity criteria and performance indicators are proposed in order to estimate the
thermal efficiency of VIPs in various applications and climates.
© 2018 Published by Elsevier B.V.

1. Introduction understanding the influence of the core material characteristics on

Vacuum Insulation Panels (VIPs) have been used for thermal
building insulation applications for around 15 years [1], but have
still not become widespread in the marketplace. Different types
of VIPs exist. They can have different envelopes and core mate-
rials [2–6]. One type of VIPs doesn’t have the same thermal be-
haviour when it is subjected to different solicitations. Different
types of VIPs don’t have the same thermal behaviour when they
are subjected to the same solicitations [7,8].
For commercial and technical reasons, it is necessary to es-
timate the long-term performance of VIPs. Short-term tests are
commonly carried out and used to evaluate the VIPS conductiv-
ity evolution. But some authors have shown that a simple evalua-
tion through a linear extension of VIP short-term evolution doesn’t
represent correctly its real long-term behaviour [7,8]. It appears
that more detailed modelling approaches are required to study
the long-term thermal behaviour of VIPs and their ageing over 50
years. Simulations in constant conditions have been carried out for
∗
Corresponding author at: EDF, 4, rue du Canada, Fontainebleau 77300, France.
E-mail addresses: antoine.batard@edf.fr (A. Batard), thierry.duforestel@edf.fr
(T. Duforestel), lionel.flandin@univ-savoie.fr (L. Flandin), bernard.yrieix@edf.fr (B.
Yrieix).
the panels’ thermal conductivity evolution [6–14]. These simula-
tions have shown the very great importance of external tempera-
ture and humidity conditions. That is why it appears necessary to
study the VIPs behaviour with the real solicitations that are met
during their service life.
The first part of this paper describes the overall methodology
and the modelling tools that have been used for the determination
of temperatures and humidities at the panels’ surface when they
are installed in systems for various building thermal insulation ap-
plications. From different climate conditions and a typical individ-
ual house configuration, simulations have been carried out to cal-
culate the solicitations at the walls’ surface and then at the panels’
surface. The studied dynamic model of VIP is presented. The model
has to take into account the hygro-thermal behaviour of the panel
and the ageing process over 50 years depending on the external
solicitations. In a second part, the climate conditions, building, ap-
plications and insulation systems that have been chosen for the
evaluations presented in this paper, are described. The third part is
devoted to the presentation of some simulation results. From these
results, an evaluation process of the VIPs performance is proposed
in the fourth part, depending on a severity criterion and adapted
performance indicators.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.08.006
0378-7788/© 2018 Published by Elsevier B.V.
2 A. Batard et al. / Energy & Buildings 178 (2018) 1–10

ferent insulation applications. Each application can integrate VIPs

Nomenclature with different systems. A system is composed of several material
layers all considered as homogeneous. Thermal conductivity varia-
Greek letters tions of VIPs are neglected. VIP is modelled as an equivalent ho-
λ0g gaseous thermal conductivity at atmospheric pres- mogeneous material with an equivalent thermal conductivity of
sure W.m−1 .K−1 6 mW.m−1 .K−1 . Simulation results give the temperature evolutions
λ0cs initial solid thermal conductivity W.m−1 .K−1 at the surfaces of each walls. The surface humidities are calculated
λVIP global VIP’s thermal conductivity W.m−1 .K−1 from the external humidity to which is added the interior produc-
λ mean thermal conductivity W.m−1 .K−1 tion (Eq. (1)) as preconized by CSTB [16,17].
φ relative humidity %
pv,int (Tint ) = pv,ext (Text ) +  pv,int (Tint ) (1)
i mass flow of gas i kg.s−1
i apparent permeance to the gas i kg.m−2 .s−1 .Pa−1 with pv, int and pv, ext the internal and external water vapour partial
 memb linear thermal bridge coefficient W.m−1 .K−1 pressures, pv, int the interior production of humidity, and Tint and
ρ density or mass concentration kg.m−3 Text the internal and external temperatures.
τw mass content of water % In a second step, each insulation system, associated to its local
ε porosity – temperature and humidity solicitations, is simulated with the de-
tailed heat and mass transfer SYRTHES® [18] software developed
Other symbols
by EDF R&D. The coupling heat and mass transfers is taken into
∅ pore mean size m
account. All material layers are still considered as homogeneous.
Physical constants Thermal, water vapour and dry air diffusion properties are set at
σ Stefan–Boltzmann’s constant 5.67 × 10−8 W.m−2 . constant values for each material. Very low water vapour and dry
K−4 air diffusion coefficients are imposed for VIP. Previously calculated
C constant depending on gas for gaseous thermal con- temperatures and humidities are imposed at the systems’ surfaces.
duction J.K−1 .m−2 Simulation results give to the temperatures and humidities at the
R ideal gas constant 8.314459848 J.K−1 .mol−1 VIP’s surface over 1 year. In the last step, these solicitations are im-
posed at the surfaces of the dynamic model of VIP. These solicita-
Roman letters tions are looped fifty times in order to make 50 years simulations.
A panel’s area m2
B influence of water content increase on the thermal
2.2. Modelling tools
conductivity W.m−1 .K−1 .%−1
Cp specific heat capacity J.kg−1 .K−1
The first step has been realised thanks to the Dymola® plat-
d panel’s thickness m
form. This software has been developed to simulate the dynamic
E extinction coefficient m−1
behaviour of systems in various engineering fields, including ther-
n refractive index –
mal and hygro-thermal domains. BuildSysPro, which is the EDF’s
P panel’s perimeter m
Modelica library for buildings, has been used. The wall models are
pt internal total pressure Pa
developed in 1D with the Modelica modelling language. They often
pv partial pressure of water vapour Pa
consist in an assembly of several sub-components. All components
Q activation energy of permeance J.mol−1
are connected between them by ports and relied to external con-
SI severity index –
ditions. For the first step, heat ports are used and carries one po-
T temperature K
tential variable: the temperature; and one flux associated: the heat
t time s
flow.
For the second step, SYRTHES® [18] software has been used.
This is an open-source finite element software developed by
2. Methodology and modelling tools EDF R&D which can solve coupled heat and mass transfers’ prob-
lems in porous media. For the third step, Dymola® platform
2.1. Methodology description has been used again, but with hygro-thermal ports. A dynamic
model developed by EDF has been used. It is thoroughly described
The final purpose is to simulate VIPs taking into account their by its authors [7,8]. These ports are similar to heat ports, but
real solicitations for different insulation applications and differ- they have two additional potential variables: water vapour par-
ent climates, in order to predict their thermal performance over tial pressure and total gas pressure; and two additional flux as-
50 years. This needs the determining of the real solicitations at sociated: water vapour mass flow and total mass flow. The enve-
the panels’ surfaces. External conditions in many climates are well lope ageing process isn’t considered, but the permeances thermo-
known. Temperature sun radiation, sky temperature, wind speed activation is. The model takes into account the panel dynamic be-
and humidities are measured each hour over the entire year, and haviour and the silica ageing process by moving its water vapour
aggregated data for specific design purposes are commonly avail-
able. Ambient temperatures and humidities inside buildings are
sorption isotherm. The panel thermal conductivity
 λPIV can be
16 σ n2 T 3
split into several contributions: radiation 3 E (T ) , solid con-
generally less well known but can be calculated with more or less  
detailed with hygro-thermal software. These models generally take   λ0 ( T )
duction λ0cs (T ) + Bτw (φ ) and gaseous conduction ε g CT , and
into account the external climate, the building characteristics, the 1+ ∅ p
walls’ materials, the occupancy scenario, the air ventilation, etc.  Pd  t

the thermal bridge of the envelope A memb , as mentioned in

For determining temperatures and humidities at the panels’ sur- Eq. (2). Variables and constants are presented in nomenclature.
face, a three steps methodology is proposed.
In a first step, the hygro-thermal solicitations at the walls’ sur- 16 σ n2 T 3
λPIV (T , φ , pt ) = + λ0cs (T ) + Bτw (φ )
face are determined over 1 year. The temperatures are calculated 3 E (T )
from simulations of buildings with the Dymola® software [7,8,15]. λ0g (T ) Pd
The simulated building has several walls integrating VIPs in dif- +ε +  (2)
1+ CT
∅ pt
A memb
 A. Batard et al. / Energy & Buildings 178 (2018) 1–10 3

Fig. 2. Standard individual house plan (in m).

Table 1
Material thermal properties (SI units).

Material λ ρ Cp

Bitumen felt 0.230 1050 920

Cladding 1.150 1950 920
Concrete 1.750 2450 920
Expanded Polystyrene 0.450 35 1450
Fiberboard 0.044 250 20 0 0
Plastering Mortar 1.150 1950 920
Plasterboard 0.250 900 10 0 0
Vapour barrier 0.415 950 20 0 0
Vermaculite 0.200 325 1200
VIP 0.006 190 800
Fig. 1. Climatic zones in France. Sand/Gravel 2.0 0 0 20 0 0 1050
Slab 1.750 2450 920

Simulations have been carried out with typical VIPs panel of

0.5 × 0.5 × 0.02 m3 . The VIP’s barrier complex is typically a tri-
metallize V08621B film from Hanita® . Water vapour and dry air
permeances are fixed to constant values measured at 23 °C, on
aged panels stored during 10 years at 23 °C and 80% RH at
EMPA [19]. The global permeances including surface term (gas
flow through the current portion of the barrier) and a linear
term (gas flow through the perimetric welding of the barrier)
are equal to 7.5 × 10−18 and 5.2 × 10−18 kg.m−2 .s−1 .Pa−1 for wa-
ter vapour and dry air respectively. Their activation energies are
fixed to 26 kJ.mol−1 for water vapour [20], and 30 kJ.mol−1 for
dry air [2,21,22]. Three core materials have been studied: C1, C2
and C3. They are respectively made with silica S1, S2 and S3. Their
characteristics and implementation in the numerical model are de-
scribed by Batard et al. [7,8].
3.2. Building
A one storey standard individual house has been chosen for this
study. It is briefly presented on Fig. 2.
It has three external walls and one wall with a side facing an
unheated garage. The house is covered with a flat roof. For each
climate condition, the building can be oriented in order to make
its main façade facing the four cardinal directions: North, West,
South and East. The solar absorption coefficient of exterior walls
has to be taken into account. The worst situation has been studied
by fixing the solar absorption coefficient equals to 0.90. The Th-BCE
2012 method developed by CSTB [16] is used to simulate the build-
ing. The occupancy scenario, the setpoint temperatures for summer
(28 °C) and winter (19 °C), the internal heat gains depending on
the occupancy and equipment have been defined according to the
Th-BCE 2012 method [16].

3. Description of cases study

3.1. Climate conditions
It has been chosen to study only French climates. France is de-
composed into three main climatic zones: H1, H2 and H3, them-
selves split into several zones [23] (cf. Fig. 1).
The coldest zone is H1 and lies in the North East. Zone H2 is
located in the West part of the France where rather moderated
winter temperatures are met thanks to the Atlantic Ocean influ-
ence. The hottest zone is H3 and enjoys a Mediterranean climate.
In this paper, these three zones has been studied. The correspond-
ing cities are Nancy, Rennes and Nice respectively. For each city,
air temperature, sky temperature, relative humidity, total pressure,
sun radiation, wind speed and direction are known for each hour
over the entire year.
3.3. Insulation applications and systems
Three relevant insulation applications have been studied: wall
insulation, floor insulation and flat roof insulation. For each appli-
cation only one system has been applied, except for wall insula-
tion where Internal Wall Insulation (IWI) and External Wall Insu-
lation (EWI) solutions have been studied. Flat roof is externally in-
sulated and should lead to more severe hygro-thermal solicitations
of VIP [6,24,25]. The sectional drawings of all studied systems are
represented on Fig. 3 and Table 1.
3.4. Simulated cases
Thermal simulations have been carried out for the 3 climates
conditions with two different houses: one with IWI and the other
4 A. Batard et al. / Energy & Buildings 178 (2018) 1–10
Fig. 3. Sectional drawings of the four studied insulation systems (in mm).
Table 2
Simulations of the 4 insulation systems in each climate condition to calculate the
solicitations at the walls’ surface.
with EWI. All the cases are summarized in Table 2. The results pre-
sented in this part are focused on two cases: IWI for the main
façade oriented facing the North in Nancy, and flat roof in Nice.
They are supposed to be the most favourable and unfavourable
cases.
Fig. 4. Calculation of the temperature changes over 1 year for air (inside and out-
side) and wall surface (inside and outside), case of a North-oriented IWI in Nancy.
Fig. 5. Calculation of the temperature changes over 1 year for air (inside and out-
side) and wall surface (inside and outside), case of a flat roof in Nice.
4. Simulations results
4.1. Temperature and humidity conditions at the walls’ surfaces
The Fig. 4 shows the hourly internal and external air tempera-
tures evolution, and the temperatures evolution at the walls’ inter-
nal and external surface, for the North-oriented IWI in Nancy.
The Fig. 5 shows the same temperature evolutions but for the
flat roof in Nice.
It can be observed that the temperature at the internal walls’
surface (orange) is very similar to the internal air temperature
(black). In contrast, the temperature at the walls’ external surface
(light blue) strongly differs to the external air temperature (green).
For North-oriented IWI, this difference is significant only in spring
and summer while it is very significant for all the year for the flat
roof in Nice. For this configuration, the temperature at the walls’
external surface exceeds 60 °C during spring and summer days.
The temperature peaks can reach very high values up to 80 °C
in summer whereas the external air temperature doesn’t exceed
35 °C. The impact of radiation exchanges strongly depends on the
absorption coefficients, on the climate, on the orientation, on the
insulation application and on the systems. In contrast, the tem-
 A. Batard et al. / Energy & Buildings 178 (2018) 1–10 5

Fig. 8. Relative humidities evolution over 1 year, at the VIPs’ internal and external
surfaces, for IWI in the North in Nancy.

Fig. 6. Temperatures evolution over 1 year, at the walls’ internal and external sur-
faces and at the VIPs’ internal and external surfaces, for IWI in the North in Nancy.

Fig. 9. Relative humidities evolution over 1 year, at the VIPs’ internal and external
surfaces, for flat roof in Nice.

Fig. 7. Temperatures evolution over 1 year, at the walls’ internal and external sur-
faces and at the VIPs’ internal and external surfaces, for flat roof in Nice.

peratures at the internal walls’ surface can be reasonably approxi-

mated by the internal air temperature.

4.2. Temperature and humidity conditions at the VIPs’ surfaces Fig. 10. Water vapour partial pressure evolution over 1 year, at the VIPs’ internal
and external surfaces, for IWI in the North in Nancy.

Figs. 6 and 7 show the temperature evolutions at the wall’s and

the VIPs’ surfaces. It can be observed that the temperatures at the
internal walls’ surface (orange) are close to the temperatures at the
internal VIPs’ surface (red). For IWI, the values can even be consid-
ered as equal. For flat roof, in summer and the temperature at the
internal VIPs’ surface is about 5 °C higher than the temperature at
the internal walls’ surface. The temperature at the VIPs’ external
surface (blue) can be rather high, but is always smaller than the
temperature at the walls’ external surface (light blue).
Figs. 8 and 9 show the relative humidity at the panel’s surfaces.
The variations of relative humidity at the VIPs’ external surface are
always higher than those at the VIPs’ internal surface. Relative hu-
midity isn’t the most pertinent variable to be studied because it
depends on the temperature.
Figs. 10 and 11 show the water vapour partial pressure at the
Fig. 11. Water vapour partial pressure evolution over 1 year, at the VIPs’ internal
VIPs’ surfaces. Water vapour partial pressures at the VIPs’ internal and external surfaces, for flat roof in Nice.
surface are always higher than those at the VIPs’ external surface.
6 A. Batard et al. / Energy & Buildings 178 (2018) 1–10
Fig. 12. Thermal conductivity evolution over 50 years of VIPs installed in North-
oriented IWI in Nancy and Nice, with core material C2.
Fig. 13. Thermal conductivity evolution over 50 years of VIPs installed in flat roof
in Nancy and Nice, with core material C2.
Fig. 14. Thermal conductivity evolution over 50 years of VIPs installed in North-
oriented IWI and flat roof in Nice, with core material C2.
Pressures fluctuate between 500 Pa and 3500 Pa and are always
higher in summer than in winter.
4.3. Thermal conductivity evolution of VIPs with realistic solicitations
Then, solicitations calculated at the VIPs’ surface have been im-
posed to the dynamic VIP model for all VIP configurations de-
scribed in Section 2.2. The simulations can estimate the thermal
conductivity evolution of VIPs for each system, climate condition
and orientation. The simulation results are presented on Figs. 12–
15 for VIPs with core material C2 installed in North-oriented IWI
and flat roof, in Nancy and Nice.
The thermal conductivity evolutions for the VIPs installed in
IWI and those installed in flat roof are not so different. The av-
erage thermal conductivity increases rapidly during the first years.
Then, the increase seems to become linear in time and slower than
during the beginning of the process.
Fig. 15. Thermal conductivity evolution over 50 years of VIPs installed in North-
oriented IWI and flat roof in Nancy, with core material C2.
Fig. 16. Temperatures evolution over 1 year, at the VIPs’ external surface, for North-
oriented IWI and flat roof in Nice.
In all cases, annual variations of the thermal conductivity can
be observed. These variations are more important for flat roof
than for IWI, and more important at the end of the process
than at the beginning. The variations initially range from 0.3 to
0.5 mW.m−1 .K−1 . But after 50 years, the seasonal variation of the
thermal conductivity reaches 2 mW.m−1 .K−1 . In order to evaluate
the thermal performance of VIPs, it seems to be more judicious to
study only the values in autumn and winter. Indeed, it is during
these two seasons that building needs to be insulated against the
heat losses. For the same insulation application (cf. Figs. 14 and
15), the VIPs installed in Nice always have higher thermal conduc-
tivities.
In Nice (cf. Fig. 14), it can be observed the thermal conductivity
of VIP installed in the flat roof is higher than the thermal conduc-
tivity of VIP installed in IWI. The larger difference can be seen in
summer. In Nancy (cf. Fig. 15), summer conductivities for both ap-
plications tend to similar values, but in winter conductivity for the
flat roof application becomes more and more significantly lower
than the winter conductivity for IWI. This can be explained by the
Rosseland’s effect which induces an increase or a decrease of the
radiative contribution [26,27]. Indeed, temperature in summer at
the external surface of VIPs installed in IWI in Nice are strongly
lower than those of VIPs installed in flat roof in Nice (cf. Fig. 16).
Similarly, the temperature in winter at the external surface of VIPs
installed in flat roof in Nancy are lower than those of VIPs installed
in IWI in Nancy (cf. Fig. 17).
Other simulations have been carried out with the same VIP
model and the same configurations, but with different core ma-
 A. Batard et al. / Energy & Buildings 178 (2018) 1–10
Fig. 17. Temperatures evolution over 1 year, at the VIPs’ external surface, for North-
oriented IWI and flat roof in Nancy.
Fig. 18. Thermal conductivity evolution over 50 years of VIPs installed in North-
oriented IWI in Nancy.
Fig. 19. Thermal conductivity evolution over 50 years of VIPs installed in flat roof
in Nice.
terials. Two other silica are evaluated: silica S1 and S3. Silica S1
is a hydrophobic fumed silica obtained from the treatment of the
hydrophilic fumed silica S2. Silica S3 is a precipitated silica and is
much more hydrophilic. The simulation results are presented on
Figs. 18 and 19 only for VIPs installed in North-oriented IWI in
Nancy and in flat roof in Nice.
The thermal conductivity evolutions are different compared to
those calculated for VIPs with core material C2. For panels with
core material C1, the mean thermal conductivity increases very
rapidly only during the first two years, then it increases slowly.
For panels with core material C3, the mean thermal conductiv-
7
Fig. 20. Diagram “temperature / water vapour partial pressure” of all solicitations
submitted to VIPs over 1 year, for IWI in the North in Nancy and for flat roof in
Nice.
ity increases slowly but during the first 10 or 20 years depend-
ing on the application, and becomes higher than for the other
silica. After 50 years, thermal conductivities are between 5.5 and
8.2 mW.m−1 .K−1 for VIPs with core material C1, between 7.2 and
9.5 mW.m−1 .K−1 for VIPs with core material C2, and between 7.8
and 10 mW.m−1 .K−1 for VIPs with core material C3. These in-
creases estimated for realistic solicitations are much lower than
those estimated for long-term ageing tests with constant and
rather severe conditions [7,8].
Globally, thermal conductivity increase are relatively moderate
whatever the applications, the climate and the core materials. The
variation of the thermal conductivity depends on the application,
but depends much more on the climate. Overall, thermal conduc-
tivity evolution strongly depends on the core material. But, when
one configuration of VIP is chosen, the only factor influencing the
VIP behaviour is the severity of the climatic solicitations applied to
the VIP surfaces.
5. Severity index and performance indicators
All the solicitations of the VIPs surfaces over 1 year can be rep-
resented on a diagram “temperature / vapour pressure” (cf. Fig. 20).
Each point corresponds to one hour where the VIPs surfaces are
submitted to the “temperature / vapour pressure” couple.
It can be observed from the obtained clouds of points that glob-
ally when temperature is high, the vapour pressure is high. The
highest vapour pressures are obtained at the VIPs’ internal surface.
For flat roof in Nice, very high temperatures are observed but they
don’t correspond to extreme humidities. All vapour pressures are
lower than 3500 Pa. This is much less than the vapour pressures
that are commonly used for short-term accelerated tests. The dia-
gram “temperature / vapour pressure” is interesting because it take
into account the coupling effect of the temperature and the humid-
ity, but it doesn’t allow to easily quantify the solicitations.
8 A. Batard et al. / Energy & Buildings 178 (2018) 1–10

Table 3
Severity index values for the floor, IWI and flat roof applications in Nancy and Nice.

Fig. 21. Cumulative percentage of hours where VIPs are submitted to temperatures
below a certain value.

count the impact of the panel constitution. It has been seen in the
previous part, that a same climatic solicitation does not involve the
same thermal conductivity evolution for various VIP configurations.
Especially, the nature of the core material is a major factor to be
considered. In this part, it is just attempted to define a severity
index which would only be dependent on the hygro-thermal so-
licitation of the VIPs as it has been done by Yrieix et al. [6]. First,
a reference solicitation set at 23 °C / 50% RH (pv, 0 = 1404 Pa) is
defined (Eq. (3)).
wv,0 = wv,app,0  pv,0 (3)
The calculated index takes into account the temperature which in-
fluences the barrier permeance and at the same time the external
vapour pressure. The actual vapour flow entering into the panel
can be estimated by the Eq. (4).
Fig. 22. Cumulative percentage of hours where VIPs are submitted to water vapour
partial pressures below a certain value. wv (T , pv ) = wv,app (T ) pv (4)
Thermo-activation of the permeance can be represented by the Ar-
Figs. 21 and 22 show the cumulative percentage of hours over 1 rhenius’s law and calculated as a function of the reference perme-
year, where VIPs are submitted to temperatures and vapour pres- ance at 23 °C (Eq. (5)).
sure below a certain value. This representation can be useful to Q
( T1 − T1 )
determine the number of hours when VIPs are submitted to high
wv (T ) = wv,app,0 e− R 0 (5)
temperatures or humidities, but doesn’t take into account the cou- The activation energy of water vapour apparent permeance is
pling effect of the two solicitations. The continuous curves corre- around 50.5 kJ [20]. The severity index is then calculated as pro-
spond to the flat roof in Nice and the dotted curves to the IWI in posed below by the comparison of the actual vapour flow with the
Nancy. The red curves represent the solicitations at the VIPs’ inter- flow appearing in reference conditions (Eq. (8)).
nal surface, and the blue curves at the VIPs’ external surface. 
1 tb
wv,app (T , pv )
For flat roof in Nice, VIPs are submitted to temperatures higher SI = dt (6)
than 30 °C and to vapour pressure higher than 1800 Pa during
tb − ta ta wv,app,0
about 40% of percent of the year. For IWI in Nancy, VIPs are sub- 
mitted to temperatures higher than 30 °C during less than 10% of 1 tb
wv,app (T ) pv
= dt (7)
percent of the year, and to water vapour partial pressure higher tb − ta ta wv,app,0  pv,0
than 1800 Pa during less than 20% of percent of the year.

As shown in literature [5,8,12,28,29], the ageing process mostly 1 tb Q
− R ( T1 − T1 ) pv,ext − pv,int
depends on the water vapour flow which enter into the panel = e 0 dt (8)
tb − ta ta pv,0 − pv,int,0
than the dry air flow. High temperatures and external vapour pres-
sures would induce higher water vapour permeances. In addition, Then all internal vapour pressures are neglected all over the pro-
Rosseland’s effect tends to increases the radiative conductivity. It cess (pv, int ≈ pv, int, 0 ≈ 0).
is needed to have an approach which takes into account the tem-  tb
Q
− R ( T1 − T1 )
perature which influences the barrier permeance and at the same 1 pv,ext e 0
SI = dt (9)
time the external vapour pressure. That is why a global method- tb − ta ta pv ,0
ology for estimating the severity of a given panel configuration is When the SI is less than 1, the solicitations are considered as mod-
defined in the next part of this paper. erated and less severe than standard conditions. Higher SI values
indicate more severe solicitations. The severity index values for the
5.1. Severity index floor, IWI and flat roof applications in Nancy and Nice are pre-
sented in Table 3.
The aim of the severity index is to determine the severity of For all applications, except for the flat roof in Nice, the severity
solicitations applied to one panel. This index doesn’t take into ac- index is higher at the internal surface than at the external one.
 A. Batard et al. / Energy & Buildings 178 (2018) 1–10 9

Table 4 Table 5
Performance indicators from the mean thermal conductivity of VIPs calculated at Performance indicators from the mean thermal conductivity of VIPs calculated only
different time: 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 years. during the heating period, at different time: 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 years.

This can be explained by the combination of two effects. First,

vapour pressure is higher at the internal surface than at the ex-
ternal one (cf. Section 4.2). Second, the thermo-activation of the
permeance has a lower impact on the flow than the increase of
vapour pressure.
In the same climate, the floor insulation is the application
which shows the lowest severity indices. In opposite, the flat roof
shows the highest indices. For IWI, these indices vary depending
on the wall orientation. They are not presented in this paper, but
the index for the North-oriented IWI is lower than the index for
the East-oriented IWI, which is lower than the index for the South-
oriented IWI, which is lower than the index for West-oriented IWI.
It can be noted that the flat roof application in Nancy is less severe
Fig. 23. Relation between the severity indices and the mean thermal conductivity
than the floor or the IWI applications in Nice.
over 50 years of VIPs with core material C1, C2 and C3, installed in floor, IWI in
North and flat roof applications, in Nancy and Nice.
5.2. Performance indicators

In order to evaluate the thermal performance of VIPs, it is nec-
essary to determine indicators with which we can compare differ-
ent VIPs installed in different applications and climates. Two types
of performance indicators are proposed. The first one is the mean
thermal conductivity for different periods of time: 10, 20, 30, 40
and 50 years (Table 4). The second type of indicators is the same
than the previous one, but calculated only during the heating pe-
riod which here is supposed to correspond to the autumn and win-
ter seasons (Table 5).
Fig. 23 shows the relation between the severity indices and the
mean thermal conductivity over 50 years.
It can be observed that the mean thermal conductivity λ
over 50 years doesn’t depend that much on the applications,
but depends more on the climate and even more on the silica.
From an application to another, average thermal conductivity can
change by 0.4 mW.m−1 .K−1 at most; from a climate to another, by
0.7 mW.m−1 .K−1 ; and from a silica to another, by 1.6 mW.m−1 .K−1 .
In addition, severity index of 1.10 seems to be the threshold be-
yond which the thermal performance is more degraded for all sil-
ica. The mean thermal conductivities λ calculated only over the
heating period lead to the same conclusions. Their values are just
a little bit lower (difference lower than 0.3 mW.m−1 .K−1 ).
Whatever the chosen performance indicator, VIPs with core ma-
terial C1 have the best long-term thermal performance, and VIPs
with core material C3 have the worst one. Nevertheless, in short-
term (during the first 10 years) and for moderated solicitations,
VIPs with core material C3 have a slightly lower mean thermal
conductivity. The influence of the solicitations on the thermal con-
10 A. Batard et al. / Energy & Buildings 178 (2018) 1–10
ductivity evolution is very dependent on the core material. Then
the severity index proposed in this paper can’t be used alone to
predict the long-term VIPs thermal performance.
6. Conclusion and outlooks
The methodology presented in this paper allows the calculation
of the long-term thermal performance of VIPs when they are in-
stalled in various insulation applications and climates. The results
have shown that temperatures and humidities at the both (inter-
nal and external) VIPs’ surfaces can differ considerably according
to applications and climates. A severity index, which takes into ac-
count both temperature and humidity conditions, has been pro-
posed. This index cannot be used alone to predict the long-term
thermal performance of VIPs, but can characterize the actual sever-
ity of a given application.
Two types of performance indicators are proposed to calcu-
late the mean thermal performance of VIPs over different periods
of time. The mean thermal conductivity calculated only over the
heating period is slightly lower but not that different to the con-
ductivity calculated over the entire year. After all, the long-term
performance mainly depends on the VIP core material. VIPs with a
hydrophobic core material have a better long-term thermal perfor-
mance than those with hydrophilic core material. The mean ther-
mal conductivity over 50 years of VIPs installed in building insula-
tion applications is between 4.8 and 7.2 mW.m−1 .K−1 .
Finally, the realistic solicitations calculated at the VIPs’ surfaces
are rather moderated and less severe than the solicitations com-
monly used during short-term accelerated ageing tests. These so-
licitations lead to mean thermal conductivities which depend on
the VIPs configurations, climates and insulation applications, and
the worst values are around 7 mW.m−1 .K−1 . Today, this value is
generally considered as the mean thermal conductivity whatever
the VIPs, whereas VIPs with hydrophobic silica have the best mean
thermal conductivities (between 5 and 5.6 mW.m−1 .K−1 ).
All the results presented in this paper are based on a dynamic
VIP model which take into account the ageing process of the core
material, but not that of the envelope. The permeances have been
considered only dependent on the temperature but they are not
degraded. But as shown by several authors [30], the envelope is
ageing depending on the solicitations. In addition, actual hygro-
thermal software used to model walls generally don’t take into
account the water vapour sorption isotherm variations, and this
tends to limit the vapour pressure variation. The modelling tools
could be modified in order to improve the results.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the collaborators of the
project EMMA-PIV (no. ANR 12-VBDU-0 0 04-01) that includes this
research, and also the National Research Agency (ANR) for his fi-
nancial support. This work is performed within the framework of
the Centre of Excellence of Multifunctional Architectured Materials
“CEMAM” no. ANR-10-LABX-44-01.
References
[1] M. Erb, H. Simmler, S. Brunner, U. Heinemann, H. Schwab, K. Kumaran,
P. Mukhopadhyaya, D. Quénard, H. Sallée, K. Noller, E. Kücükpinar-Niarchos,
C. Stramm, M.T.H. Cauberg, Vacuum Insulation Panels - Study on VIP-compo-
nents and Panels for Service Life - Prediction of VIP in Building Applications
(Subtask A), Technical Report September 2005, HiPTI - High Performance Ther-
mal Insulation - IEA/ECBCS Annex 39, 2005.
[2] H. Schwab, U. Heinemann, A. Beck, H.-P. Ebert, J. Fricke, Permeation of different
gases through foils used as envelopes for vacuum insulation panels, J. Therm.
Envelope Build. Sci. 28 (4) (2005) 293–317, doi:10.1177/1097196305051791.
[3] B. Morel, Vieillissement Thermohydrique de Silices Nanométriques, Université
François-Rabelais de Tours, 2008 Ph.D. thesis.
[4] B. Morel, Modifications of a pyrogenic silica exposed to moist air, in: 8th In-
ternational Vacuum Insulation Symposium - IVIS, Würzburg, Germany, 2007,
pp. 1–18.
[5] B. Morel, L. Autissier, D. Autissier, D. Lemordant, B. Yrieix, D. Quenard, Py-
rogenic silica ageing under humid atmosphere, Powder Technol. 190 (1–2)
(2009) 225–229, doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2008.04.049.
[6] B. Yrieix, B. Morel, E. Pons, Vip service life assessment: interactions between
barrier laminates and core material, and significance of silica core ageing, En-
ergy Build. 85 (2014) 1–26, doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.07.035.
[7] A. Batard, T. Duforestel, L. Flandin, B. Yrieix, Modelling of long-term hy-
gro-thermal behaviour of vacuum insulation panels, Energy Build. (2018).
[8] A. Batard, Modélisation du comportement thermique à long terme des Pan-
neaux Isolants sous Vide (PIV), Université Savoie Mont Blanc, 2017 Ph.D. thesis.
[9] H. Schwab, U. Heinemann, A. Beck, H.-P. Ebert, J. Fricke, Prediction of ser-
vice life for vacuum insulation panels with fumed silica kernel and foil
cover, J. Therm. Envelope Build. Sci. 28 (4) (2005) 357–374, doi:10.1177/
1097196305051894.
[10] M.J. Tenpierik, H. Cauberg, Simplified analytical models for service life predic-
tion of a vacuum insulation panel, 8th International Vacuum Insulation Sym-
posium - IVIS, Würzburg, Germany, 2007.
[11] S. Brunner, H. Simmler, Service life prediction for vacuum insulation panels
(vip), in: CISBAT 2003 Conference, EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2003.
[12] E. Wegger, B. Jelle, E. Sveipe, S. Grynning, R. Baetens, J.V. Thue, Effect of age-
ing on service life of vacuum insulation panels, Building Enclosure Science &
Technology (BEST 2 – 2010) (2010) 6–7.
[13] H. Simmler, S. Brunner, Vacuum insulation panels for building application: ba-
sic properties, aging mechanisms and service life, Energy Build. 37 (11 Spec.
Iss.) (2005) 1122–1131, doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2005.06.015.
[14] M. Erb, U. Heinemann, H. Schwab, H. Simmler, S. Brunner, K. Ghazi, R. Bundi,
K. Kumaran, P. Mukhopadhyaya, D. Quénard, H. Sallée, K. Noller, E.K.-N. and-
Cornelia Stramm, M. Tenpierik, H. Cauberg, A. Binz, G. Steinke, A. Moosmann,
Vacuum Insulation - Panel Properties and Building Applications - Summary,
Technical Report December 2005, HiPTI - High Performance Thermal Insula-
tion - IEA/ECBCS Annex 39, 2005.
[15] G. Plessis, A. Kaemmerlen, A. Lindsay, Buildsyspro: a modelica library for mod-
elling buildings and energy systems, in: Modelica Conference, 2014.
[16] CSTB, Méthode de Calcul Th-BCE 2012, Technical Report, 2012.
[17] J. Lamoulie, C. Pompeo, G. Garnier, Etude Hygrothermique de l’Influence de
Plusieurs Paramètres dans des Parois à Ossatures Bois, Technical Report, CSTB,
2012.
[18] EDF, I. Rupp, C. Peniguel, Syrthès, version 4.3, 2015.
[19] S. Brunner, B. Yrieix, E. Pons, Evaluation of vips after mild artificial aging dur-
ing 10 years: focus on the core behavior, 12th International Vacuum Insulation
Symposium - IVIS, Nanjing (China), 2015.
[20] E. Pons, B. Yrieix, L. Heymans, F. Dubelley, E. Planes, Permeation of water vapor
through high performance laminates for vips and physical characterization of
sorption and diffusion phenomena, Energy Build. 85 (2015) 604–616, doi:10.
1016/j.enbuild.2014.08.032.
[21] B. Flaconneche, J. Martin, M.H. Klopffer, Permeability, diffusion and solubility
of gases in polyethylene, polyamide 11 and poly (vinylidene fluoride), Oil Gas
Sci. Technol. 56 (3) (2001) 261–278, doi:10.2516/ogst:2001023.
[22] M. Bouquerel, T. Duforestel, D. Baillis, G. Rusaouen, Mass transfer modeling in
gas barrier envelopes for vacuum insulation panels: a review, Energy Build. 55
(2012) 903–920, doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.09.004.
[23] Arrêté du 28 décembre 2012 relatif aux caractéristiques thermiques et aux ex-
igences de performance énergétique des bâtiments nouveaux et des parties
nouvelles de bâtiments autres que ceux concernés par l’article 2 du décret du
26 octobre 2010 relatif aux caractéristiques thermiques et à la performance
énergétique des constructions(2012).
[24] S. Brunner, H. Simmler, In situ performance assessment of vacuum insulation
panels in a flat roof construction, Vacuum 82 (7) (20 08) 70 0–707, doi:10.1016/
j.vacuum.2007.10.016.
[25] S. Brunner, K.G. Wakili, Hints for an additional aging factor regarding the ther-
mal performance of vacuum insulation panels with pyrogenic silica core, Vac-
uum 100 (2014) 4–6, doi:10.1016/j.vacuum.2013.07.033.
[26] C. Bardos, F. Golse, B. Perthame, The rosseland approximation for the radiative
transfer equations, Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 40 (6) (1987) 691–721, doi:10.
10 02/cpa.316040 0603.
[27] C. Dogbe, The radiative transfer equations: diffusion approximation under ac-
cretiveness and compactness assumptions, Comput. Math. Appl. 42 (6) (2001)
783–791, doi:10.1016/S0898-1221(01)00198-5.
[28] E. Wegger, B.P. Jelle, E. Sveipe, S. Grynning, A. Gustavsen, J.V. Thue, Acceler-
ated ageing of vacuum insulation panels (vips), in: Renewable Energy Research
Conference 2010, Trondheim, Norway, 2010.
[29] A. Batard, E. Planes, T. Duforestel, L. Flandin, B. Yrieix, Water vapour perme-
ation through high barrier materials: numerical simulation and comparison to
experiments, J. Mater. Sci. (2018).
[30] G. Garnier, S. Marouani, B. Yrieix, C. Pompeo, M. Chauvois, L. Flandin,
Y. Brechet, Interest and durability of multilayers: from model films to complex
films, Polym. Adv. Technol. 22 (6) (2011) 847–856, doi:10.1002/pat.1587.