Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Building Engineering

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jobe

Energy efficient 3D printed buildings: Material and techniques selection

worldwide study
Ammar Alkhalidi *, Dina Hatuqay
Energy Engineering Department, German Jordanian University, Amman, 11180, Jordan

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Additive manufacturing is one of the modern techniques that are emerging in the industry of building con­
Architectural design struction. It is characterized by being fast, low cost, and an environmentally friendly building process. This work
3-D printing investigates and develops energy efficient and low-cost residential units that can be implemented around the
Energy-efficient buildings
world through a green and sustainable criterion for choices. Distinct printable wall configurations with different
Building codes and
Climatic zones
materials were designed to reduce the U-values of the painted walls in compliance with climatic zone regulations.
The simulation resulted in a minimum thermal transmittance value of 0.15 W/m2.K. Results show that a balance
between cavities and 3D printed material should be maintained to achieve the desired U-values and structural
performance. To achieve that balance, multiple rows of configurations were introduced in the search of best
results. Finally, to study the effect of climatic conditions on the 3D printed built environment, annual energy
demand was estimated for each climatic zone.

1. Introduction 1.1. Additive manufacturing techniques

In light of recent technological achievements that were invented to
facilitate human life, energy crises and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
raised as global concerns. The world finds itself in search of environment-
friendly solutions that provide less energy, cost, effort and time. Additive
manufacturing also is known as layered or rapid manufacturing is a new
building technique that is considered and adopted by many manufac­
turers. It is a 3D printing process with a low environmental impact that
saves time, cost, and labor. In the process, 3D printed materials are joined
layer over layer under computer control to create 3-Dimensional objects.
The scale of the application varies from printing micro functional parts to
printing large-scale structures and buildings. The concrete printing sys­
tem is mainly composed of a concrete tank, a pumping mechanism, a
printing nozzle, and a motion control system.
In order to create a successful building product, some properties
related to the extrusion process has to be met. The material to be used in
the process must be pumpable. This means that it has to be able to move
through the delivery system easily. It also must be printable and
buildable. Which indicates that the material must be easily deposited
through the nozzle. It also must have the required strength to hold the
required loads, resist deformation and meet the required structural
behavior [1].
There are many ways to perform 3D printing. They all share the main
components and concepts. They can be mainly categorized into two
techniques (binder jetting and material deposition method (MDM). The
basic principle of both these techniques is to build up any complex
structure by adding small layers of material one over another [2,3].
The binder jetting method process deposits a layer of dry powdered
material and then sprayed with the binding liquid. This process cycles
until the product are completely printed. The unbound material is vac­
uumed out of the printing bed and recycled for another printing task.
Voxeljet and Monolite UK Ltd (D-Shape) are using this technique. This
technique is an off-site process because it is highly affected by weather
conditions. It suits relatively small building parts that can be transported
to its site. Sand, powdered stone bound by an inorganic binder,
powdered concrete mix, and many other materials can be used in this
process [1,3,4].
The material deposition method (MDM) process operates at pouring
material layer over layer progressively until the imported computer-
aided model is completed. In order to have the desired quality product
without any deformations, the material mixture must be designed to be
able to support its weight and the weight of overlapped layers [3].
Depending on the printing method, 3D printed buildings can either

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ammar.alkhalidi@gju.edu.jo (A. Alkhalidi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101286
Received 13 July 2019; Received in revised form 13 February 2020; Accepted 15 February 2020
Available online 19 February 2020
2352-7102/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Alkhalidi and D. Hatuqay
be printed on-site or printed, transported and assembled on site. Floors
and roofs, in particular, are usually printed using temporary formwork
and then assembled with walls on-site [5].
1.2. Energy efficiency of 3D printed buildings
The term ‘building energy efficiency’ is a practice that aims to lower
the energy usage levels to the minimum possible while achieving a
comfortable environment. The practice of energy efficiency leads to
saving a significant amount of consumed energy [6].
Nowadays, scientists and researchers are adopting energy efficiency
strategies and other solutions to overcome and mitigate the current GHG
emissions and energy crisis the world is experiencing. Buildings
consume about 30%–40% of the total energy consumption in the world
because it is where most human activities take place. Buildings also
contribute to around 30% of the world’s CO2 emissions [7].
As the world is headed towards green, sustainable, and more energy
efficient solutions, 3D printing offers a green building technique.
Compared to conventional building techniques, it eliminates a great
amount of CO2 emitting and energy-consuming processes. It is also
flexible and opens the door for many architectural designs to be con­
structed at lower costs [7,8].
The design of the building itself and its elements have a major effect
on the amount of energy consumption of the built environment.
Therefore, Special care must be taken in the design phase in order to
create buildings with lower energy demand that comply with the cli­
matic conditions. If designed appropriately, buildings can passively
achieve the thermal comfort to the people inhabiting the built envi­
ronment. The execution flexibility of 3D printing provides designers
with the opportunity to create suitable elements for each project elim­
inating further treatments for energy reduction purposes. Supportive
passive and renewable energy systems can be applied afterward to reach
even lower, or zero-energy buildings [7,9,10].
1.3. Literature review on 3D printed elements materials, structural, and
thermal properties
Additive manufacturing provides design flexibility in construction, it
also can use almost any kind of material. However, some treatments
must be performed in order to prepare a pumpable and printable ma­
terial that provides the desired structural behavior. For example, Hager
et al. suggested the use of Sulfur concrete for building printing. It is
composed of a mixture of Sulfur, coarse and fine aggregates. The mixture
is printed at the temperature of 140 � C, which is the melting point of
Sulfur, and then the concrete reaches its target strength after cooling
down. Sulfur concrete is a promising option for two main advantages; no
prolonged curing time is needed, and it is a way to reduce environmental
pollution by the use of Sulfur content [5].
Craveiro et al. studied the structural and thermal performances of
several printable materials. Plain concrete, concrete mixed with cork,
and concrete mixed with expanded clay was tested. They concluded that
the concrete mixed with cork have better thermal performance than the
other tested mixes [4]. De Witte also studied different types of 3D
printers and printable materials. He mentioned that Chlorine-based
liquid is used as a binder when sand and stone are printed in a binder
jetting process [11].
According to climatic conditions, building elements must be
designed to achieve a certain thermal transmittance value to achieve
user thermal comfort. In most building techniques, this is usually ach­
ieved by introducing air gaps or layers of insulation between the com­
ponents of building elements. The flexibility 3D printing provides,
designers can create a printing layout with air cavities that satisfies both
thermal and structural requirements. Different cavity arrangements
affect the thermal transmittance value of hollow concrete blocks due to
the simultaneous occurring of conduction, convection, and radiation
heat transfer processes. Bouchair’s performed a numerical study on
2
Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286
various designs and cavity types of hollow clay bricks. He resulted that
changing the design of cavity configurations could decrease the thermal
transmittance by 20% [12].
In addition, ratios between printed concrete thickness and air gaps
are an essential aspect of designing printable walls that meet the
required structural behavior. However, such ratios were not found in the
literature by the author. In order to acquire structurally stable geome­
tries without external reinforcement, real images of constructed additive
manufactured projects are studied. Lime et al. and Ghaffar et al.
included a curved printed wall with triangular cavities with a ratio of
1:2.5 concrete to air gap [13,14]. On the other hand, Winsun company
printed triangular cavity walls with a cavity ratio of 1:4 concrete to
maximum air gap height [15].
In the case of air cavity configuration failure to achieve the required
thermal transmittance values, researchers recommended using cavity-
filling materials instead of adding insulation layers. Cavities can be fil­
led with insulation materials with particular thermal properties to
achieve the target U-value. For instance, Dos Santos et al. tested filling
hollow bricks cavities with Dry sand, Polystyrene, and Polyurethane.
The filling resulted in a reduction of the thermal transmittance value of
54.3% for sand filling, and 80.4% of Polystyrene and Polyurethane
filling [16]. Another cavity filling research was done by Parker et al. on
filling hollow bricks cavities. They stated that expanded polylactic acid
(E-PLA) is a low density, sustainable, and environmentally friendly
product. Its properties are similar to expanded polystyrene and can be
used to replace it in many of its applications, including thermal insu­
lation. It can be foamed using CO2, and it can be printed on-site [17].
Additive manufacturing requires some reinforcement in order to
meet the structural requirements and hold the mixture together during
the printing process. De Witte pointed out that additive manufactured
concrete could be reinforced using polypropylene fibers. They are
embedded directly in the printing process as 12/0.18ø mm poly­
propylene fibers [11]. Labonnote et al. also supported their statement.
They tested adding 1.2 kg/m3 of micro-polypropylene fibers to a con­
crete mixture and resulted in a material strength of 110 MPa after fully
cured (28 days). They used a printable concrete mix composed of
cement, fly ash and silica fume with percentages of (70%,20%,10%)
respectively [1]. Another way of achieving the printed elements struc­
tural requirements is presented by Ghaffar et al. [14]. They studied
printable geometries and stated that printing a truss-like geometry in
walls creates a self-reinforced structure. Providing the required strength
and unnecessary further reinforcement [14].
Material depositing nozzle size and shape is an essential aspect of
additive manufacturing structural behavior. Researchers and 3D print­
ing companies use various geometries and dimensions of nozzles. Each
nozzle shape provides different finish texture, structural behavior and
bonding type between layers. For example, Bos et al. adopted a 40ⅹ40
mm rectangular nozzle depositing a layer with a thickness of 10 mm for
3D printing after testing several nozzle sizes. They stated that rectan­
gular nozzles increase the buildability of the printed structure [18].
1.4. Literature review on the 3D printing buildings required time, cost and
building energy forecasting
In terms of cost assessment, Greguric stated that it is very difficult to
determine the exact price of a 3D printed building, as there are many
factors affect the final price of the product. Such as size, complexity,
material, reinforcement and printing method. He compared prices of
executed 3D printed projects starting from $4,000 up to $100,000. He
mentioned that a small house could be built in an approximately 24-h
period. For example, Apis cor. (a Russian company) built a 38 m2
house for $10,150 in one day, where more than 50% of the price was
allocated for the doors, windows and finishing job [19]. Also, Attaran
performed an economic impact study on adopting additive
manufacturing building techniques. He estimated the world’s revenues
with billions of dollars [20].
A. Alkhalidi and D. Hatuqay Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286

Energy consumption before, during and after any construction pro­ problems are also affected by nonlinearity and dynamicity that makes
cess is a primary global concern [21–23]. Allouhi et al. stated that the their analytical solutions practically unreachable. That is the main
building sector has the highest demand for energy. Therefore, per­ reason computer-aided simulations are used to solve such complex
forming an energy consumption reduction strategy reduces its envi­ problems [33].
ronmental impacts [10]. Abu Bakar et al. also suggested that buildings The dimensional governing conservation equations of the case in this
energy demand forecasting is considered an excellent strategy to study are shown in equations (1)–(3) [34].
enhance energy efficiency and control energy use at the design phase of
∂ρ ∂ðρui Þ
buildings. This leads to reducing costs while providing a comfortable þ ¼0 (1)
∂t ∂xi
environment. They also pointed out that computer-aided modeling gives
an indicator of energy consumption and contributes to the energy effi­ Where the momentum conservation equation is defined in equation (2):
ciency of buildings [6]. Several engines perform building energy fore­ �
casting such as the thermal simulation engine (DOE-2). According to ∂ðρui Þ ∂ ρui uj ∂P ∂τij
þ ¼ þ ρgδij (2)
Birdsal et al. it is developed by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. ∂t ∂xj ∂xi ∂xj
They also stated that Autodesk Revit uses this engine [24]. In terms of
And the energy equation is defined in equation (3):
the annual overall energy consumption, Reeves et al. stated that the
� �
Green Building Studio (GBS) was pretty accurate in a comparison per­ ∂ � uu� � uu� ∂uj ∂P ∂qj
ρ cv T þ i i þ ρuj cv T þ i i ¼ ρgu2 P þ uj
formed between IES, Ecotect, GBS and measured values [25]. ∂t 2 2 ∂xj ∂xj ∂xj
However, in preparation for energy demand estimation, a detailed ∂ ui τij
�
configuration design of the building elements has to be created as a þ (3)
∂xj
primary input. Craveiro et al. stated that ANSYS workbench is a finite
element analysis program that is used for simulating the structural and where t is the time in (s); ui is the velocity vector in the i direction in (m/
thermal behavior of 3D printed concrete [4]. Such software can be used s); ρ is the density in (kg/m3); P is the pressure in (Pa); T is the tem­
to design building elements that meet the required thermal behavior. perature in (K); g is the gravitational acceleration in (m/s2); cv is the
Based on the presented literature review, authors could not find specific heat at constant volume (J/(kg.K)); δij is the Kronecker delta;
energy performance and analysis of 3D printed buildings; this research and τij ; qi ; and k are the viscous stress tensor (N/m2), Where the heat
will investigate the energy efficiency for a building unit designed by the
flux q along i direction is in (W/m2), and the thermal conductivity k is in
author particularly for this research. Building elements such as walls and
(W/(m.K)). They are defined in equations (4)–(6) respectively [34]:
roof are going to be designed to meet different climatic zones recom­ � �
mended thermal performance. The researcher’s design decisions will be ∂ui ∂uj 2 ∂uk
τij ¼ μ þ δij (4)
based on the presented literature. ∂xj ∂xi 3 ∂xk

2. Methodology qi ¼ k
∂T
(5)
∂xi
This work will investigate the energy performance of 3D printed
houses in different climatic zones printed by the techniques mentioned k ¼ ραcp (6)
in the introduction section. The wall configurations are going to be
Where μ is the dynamic viscosity is in (kg/(m s)); α is the thermal
designed using ANSYS workbench. This is to obtain a thermal trans­
diffusivity (m2/s), and cp is the specific heat at constant pressure (J/(kg
mittance that complies with the national regulations of each climatic
zone shown in Table 1. Then the results are going to be plotted in K)).
Autodesk-Revit and Green building studio energy simulation to deter­ The ideal gas law shown in equation (7) is used to compute the
mine the energy demand of the designed structure. density variations [34]:
According to the Koppen-Geiger climate classification, the world is P
ρ¼ (7)
categorized into five main climate zones [26]. Countries that represent RT
these climate zones are specified as shown in Table 1. It also represents
the national legislation of the recommended thermal transmittance for Where ρ is the density in (kg/m3); P is the pressure in (Pa); T is the
each of the selected climate zone representative countries. temperature in (K); and R ¼ 287 J/(kg.K) Is the ideal gas constant.
According to the annual maximum and minimum average tempera­ The recirculating flow for which fluid ascends along the hot wall and
tures of summer and winter of the corresponding climate zones repre­ descends along the cold wall is characterized by the Rayleigh (Ra) and
sentative countries over the years (2015–2019) [32]. A design the Prandtl (Pr) numbers defined in equation (8) and equation (9)
temperature difference (ΔT) of 20 � C, 30 � C, and 40 � C as determined by respectively [34]:
fixing the indoor temperature at 24 � C. ��
Ra ¼ Prg βr ΔTH 3 v2r (8)
Most of the real-world problems cannot be solved analytically. That
is due to the complexity of geometry or environmental conditions. Some vr
Pr ¼ (9)
αr

Table 1 Where v is the kinematic viscosity (m2/s); ΔT is the difference between

Standard thermal transmittance values according to national regulations. the highest (Th ) and the lowest temperatures (Tc ), and H is the cavity
Climatic zone Representative country Thermal transmittance (W/m2.K) height (m). The volumetric expansion coefficient βr is assumed to be
1=Tr . The subscript r denotes a reference state.
Walls Roof Floors windows
Equation (10) defines the average Nusselt number for the mean heat
The Jakarta – Indonesia 0.529 0.557 0.557 4.54 flux as [34]:
equatorial [27]
The arid Amman – Jordan [28] 0.57 0.55 0.80 3.40
� Z h
The London – UK [29] 0.18 0.13 0.13 1.40 Nu ¼ 1 H NuðxÞdx (10)
temperate 0

The snow Ottawa – Canada [30] 0.21 0.162 0.162 2.2

The polar Nuuk – Greenland [31] 0.20 0.15 0.20 1.80 Where NuðxÞ is the local Nusselt number and H is the cavity height.

3
A. Alkhalidi and D. Hatuqay Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286

When a fixed temperature condition is applied to the wall, Fluent 3. Model validation
computes the heat flux to the wall from a fluid cell using equations (11)
and (12) [35]. All simulation models were validated against published literature.
Dos Santos et al. performed thermal analysis on several cavity layouts of
’’
q ¼ qconv þ qrad (11)
hollow concrete bricks to obtain their thermal transmittance value [16].
� Their study was validated by comparing the simulated results to calcu­
q’’ ¼ hfluid Twall Tfluid þ qrad (12)
lated ones using (ISO 6946:1996, 1996) international regulation. In this
study, Dos Santos’s’ work is recreated in order to validate this research.
Where hfluid is the fluid-side local heat transfer coefficient, Twall is the
The results show a maximum error of 0.99% that indicates that Ansys
wall surface temperature, Tf is the local fluid temperature, and qrad is the
simulations are accurate and reliable.
radiative heat flux.
Mesh independency test is also performed on this simulation. Dos
Heat transfer to the wall from a solid cell is computed using Equation
Santos et al. used a cubic-element-grid with a size of 1.5 mm. In this
(13) [35].
study, coarser mesh sizes were tested with sizes of (3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, and
ks 5.0) mm. The maximum errors do not exceed 0.33%, which can be
q¼ ðTw Ts Þ þ qrad (13)
Δn considered negligible.

Where ks is the thermal conductivity of the solid, Ts is the local solid 3.1. Revit and green building studio model validation
temperature, and Δn is the distance between the wall surface and the
solid cell center. When defining heat flux boundary conditions Tw Is In order to evaluate the energy demand in the proposed model in this
evaluated using equation (14) when it is adjacent to a fluid cell. And study, a whole building energy demand of a sample project is re-
using Equation (15) when the adjacent cells are solid [35]. evaluated [37]. The sample project is modeled on design-builder and
q qrad simulated on energy plus. In this study Revit, 2019 is implemented as the
Tw ¼ þ Tf (14)
hf BIM (Building Information Management) tool and GBS (Green Building
Studio) as the energy simulation tool.
ðq qrad ÞΔn Some limitations are to be addressed as they contributed to accu­
Tw ¼ þ Ts (15)
ks mulating the resulted relative error of the simulation process. Mainly,
In addition, the fluid side heat transfer coefficient in laminar flows is Autodesk does not provide a ground source heat pump system in its li­
computed using the discrete form of Fourier’s law shown in Equation brary, so the simulation was run on a close in a performance system.
(16). Where n is the local coordinate normal to the wall [35]. McQuay international [38] stated that a residential heat pump has the
� � same energy consumption demand as the ground source heat pumps.
∂T According to Autodesk [39] “Residential 14 SEER/8.3 HSPF split
q ¼ kf (16)
∂n wall packaged heat pump” was chosen for the simulation instead of the
“Ground source heat pump”. The annual heating energy demand was
When the radiation is activated in the simulation, the radiative heat
measured to be 7,127.39 MJ and simulation results 6,733 MJ with a
flux to the wall from within the domain qrad is evaluated using Equation
relative error of 5.5%.
(17) [35].
�
qrad ¼ εsurface σ T 4int T 4w (17) 4. Design criteria and house design

Where εsurface is the emissivity of the external wall surface defined by the
user, σ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant, Tw is the surface temperature
of the wall, and Tint is the temperature of the radiation source or sink on
the interior of the cavity that is defined by the user.
In order to evaluate the U-value, heat flux is calculated using Ansys
workbench through the designed walls, and then the U-value is evalu­
ated using Equation (18) [36].
ΔT
Rtotal ¼ (18)
q’’
And the thermal transmittance is equal to 1=Rtotal so Equation (19)
can be rewritten as Equation (25).
’’
q
U¼ (19)
ΔT
Where U is the thermal transmittance, q’’ is the surface average-
weighted heat flux, and ΔT is the temperature difference between the
indoor and outdoor temperatures defined by the user.
The radiation model chosen for this calculation is the Discrete Or­
dinates Radiation Model (DORM). The reason for this choice is that the
DORM does not perform ray-tracing as a Discrete Transfer Radiation
Model (DTRM). It solves radiative transfer equations for a finite number
of discrete solid angles instead. After acquiring the desired wall
configuration, a small house is going to be designed to host a single-
family. Then the model is going to be modeled in Revit and then
simulated in Autodesk’s green building studio to determine the annual
energy demand.
The design criteria in this study were based on sustainable devel­
opment and green design principles. A small house was designed for this
particular study to be constructed using the 3D printing technique. It is a
one-story house with an internal area of (95 m2) to house a single-
family. The interior dimensions of the rooms were designed based on
a minimum requirement in order to provide a minimum built space with
the best obtainable capacity. Windows were chosen narrow and tall
(1.50 m � 0.60 m) in order to reduce energy demand while maintaining
good lighting and ventilation features. Fig. 1 presents the ground floor
plan of the housing unit.
4.1. Building simulation boundary conditions
The building was designed to have a minimum number of windows
at the southern façade to reduce the cooling load in summer. Windows
east and west the house should provide sufficient lighting.
The energy simulation was performed using building elements mode,
for a 24/7 operating single-family facility. Based on European standards,
the ventilation rate was set to 0.30 h 1 which provides the fresh air
amount required for a single-family [37,40]. The HVAC system used is
the residential 14 SEER/8.3 HSPF split packaged heat pump provided by
Autodesk Revit library.
4.2. Wall configurations
In order to achieve an energy-efficient additive manufactured built
environment, various configurations of 3D printed walls were consid­
ered in this study. Similar to hollow bricks, walls are printed with

4
A. Alkhalidi and D. Hatuqay Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286

Fig. 1. Ground floor plan of the proposed housing unit.

various cavity configurations and geometries resulting in simultaneous 4.3. Materials

heat transfer processes (conduction, convection, and radiation).
In this study, heat transfer analysis was conducted on a sample 3D Materials in this study were chosen according to the design criteria.
printed wall with a fixed 4 cm square nozzle. The nozzle size choice is Three material mixes were chosen with recyclable contents with excel­
based on the real-life constructed mega-scale structures. The sample lent thermal properties. The first tested mix was the Sulfur concrete mix
wall is 1-m-long and 0.5-m-high as shown in Fig. 2 with different cavity proposed by Bretz et al. [5,41]. The mix yields a compressive strength of
configurations. 40 MPa without the addition of polypropylene fibers. The second mix is
For structural considerations, the proposed configurations were a cork concrete proposed by Craveiro et al. [4]. The mix obtained a
based on the actual executed 3D printed walls. The printed ratios of compressive strength of 10 MPa also without the addition of poly­
1:2.5 and 1:4 mentioned in the literature are commonly used. Therefore, propylene fibers. The addition of the fibers to the mentioned mixes is
10 cm and 15 cm cavities were analyzed. The built ratios are extracted assumed to increase the compressive strength and creates self-reinforced
from real-life images, therefore, an intentional reduction of (1–2 cm) in printable mixes [1]. These mixes are printable using material deposition
maximum cavity height from the actual ratio size was made to methods (MDM). The third mix was selected to be compatible with the
compensate estimated ratio error. The different analyzed configurations binder jetting method. Which is composed of powdered silica sand with
details are shown in Fig. 3. an organic binder neglecting its residue according to Le Neel et al. [42]
with compressive strength of 10 MPa [43]. Binder jet method does not
require self-reinforcement as it is not printed on-site. Fig. 4 illustrates
the percentages of the components of each mix.
Mix 1, 2, and 3 properties are shown in Table 2. The values are ob­
tained using the mixture law [4]. Accordingly, the specific heat is
calculated using Equation (20), the density of the mix according to
Equation (21), and the thermal conductivity using Equation (22).
� � � �
V1 V2
Cp mixture ¼ Cp 1 þ Cp 2 þ … (20)
Vmixture Vmixture
� � � �
V1 V2
ρmixture ¼ ρ1 þ ρ2 þ … (21)
Vmixture Vmixture
� � � �
V1 V2
λmixture ¼ λ1 þ λ2 þ … (22)
Vmixture Vmixture

Where Cp is the specific heat, ρ is the density of the corresponding

� �
V1
material, λ is the materials thermal conductivity, and Vmixture is the
volume fraction of the components. The properties of Air filling the
cavities are shown in Table 3.
Fig. 2. 3D printed partial wall model exterior dimensions.

5
A. Alkhalidi and D. Hatuqay Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286

Fig. 3. Dimensions and thicknesses of tested various cavity configurations.

Fig. 4. Printable mixes components percentages.

According to the standards and regulations of the representative 4.4. Boundary conditions for cavity configurations
countries of the Koppen-Geiger climate classification, two main U-values
are going to be targeted to be achieved in this study. The U-values In this study, Neumann-Dirichlet type boundary conditions are used
summarizing the regulations are 0.2 and 0.5 W/m2.K. These U-values at various cavity configurations. Two parallel surfaces are considered
were going to be simulated at temperature differences of (20, 30, and adiabatic at different temperatures, creating a perpendicular heat flux to
40) as shown in the methodology section. those surfaces possible. Considering (Tcold ¼ 297 K and Thot ¼ 317 K,
327 K, and 337 K) for (ΔT of 20, 30, and 40). The other boundaries are
Table 2 considered as insulated, neglecting the heat flux in any other direction.
Calculated properties of different printable mixes. The boundary conditions are represented in Fig. 5.
mix Printing Density Thermal Specific emissivity
method (kg/m3) conductivity (W/ heat (J/g.
m.K) K)

Mix MDM 1,254.24 0.367 0.803 0.558 Table 3

1 Properties of air.
Mix MDM & 986 0.338 1.127 0.583
Density (kg/ Thermal conductivity Specific heat Viscosity (kg/
2 Binderjet
m3) (W/m.K) (J/g.K) m.s)
Mix Binderjet 1,522 0.2 0.73 0.94
3 Air Ideal gas 0.0242 1.00643 1.7894E-05

6
A. Alkhalidi and D. Hatuqay Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286

5. Simulation parameters

In order to calculate the thermal transmittance of the 3D printed wall

configurations, a 3D heat transfer simulation was performed. In addi­
tion, steady-state and laminar airflow were considered. The Discrete
Ordinate Radiation Model (DORM) was applied in this study to calculate
the radiative heat transfer in the configurations air cavities. The mesh
was generated with cubic elements of 3-mm edge length.

5.1. Micro-level analysis

The 3D printed walls consist of solid parts that enclose air-filled

cavities. Heat transfers through the printed wall from the higher to
lower temperature surfaces as shown in the control volume in Fig. 6.
� �
L
Where Rcond is the conduction resistance kA , Rconv is the convection
� � � �
1 1
resistance hconv A , and Rrad is the radiation resistance hrad A [44]. The

equivalent resistance of all the heat transfer processes in the control

volume can be calculated using equation (23).
Rtotal ¼ Rcond1 þ Rmid þ Rcond4 (23)

Where,
1 1 1 1
¼ Rrad2 þ þ (24)
Rmid Rcond5 þ RRconv2þR Rcond2 RRconv1þR
Rrad1
þ Rcond3
conv2 rad2 conv1 rad1 Fig. 6. Heat transfer processes through the 3D printed wall.
It can also be calculated using Equation (25).
of the density of the heated air layer. Thus, the buoyancy force overcame
ΔT
Rtotal ¼ (25) the gravity force as explained in equation (26) [44]. This results in the
q’’
rise of a warmer air layer against gravity and its replacement by the
cooler (heavier) air layer.
Where the thermal transmittance is equal to 1=Rtotal . Where U is the
thermal transmittance, q’’ is the surface average-weighted heat flux, and fB ¼ ρf gV (26)
ΔT is the temperature difference between the indoor and outdoor tem­
peratures defined by the user [36]. Where, f B is the buoyant force in (N), ρf is the fluid density in (kg=m3 ), g
Ansys simulation for various wall configurations associated with is the gravitational acceleration ð9:81m=s2 Þ, and V is the volume of the
different materials and temperature differences yielded the heat flux displaced fluid (km3 ) [44].
through these walls. Fig. 7 shows temperature and air velocity profiles This continuous motion creates a convection current inside the
result for the simulation of the single row 10 cm cavity height config­ cavities as shown in the velocity profile in Fig. 7. The highest velocity of
uration at a temperature difference of (ΔT ¼ 20 K). the air film is observed at the corners of the triangular cavities. The
The temperature profile shows how the surface with higher tem­ enclosure of two solid surfaces at the corners has a higher effect on the
perature heats the adjacent air film by conduction, causing the reduction

Fig. 5. Model boundary conditions assignment.

7
A. Alkhalidi and D. Hatuqay
Fig. 7. Single row 10 cm cavity height configuration temperature and velocity profiles.
adjacent air film than the other triangle sides. Temperature differences
with an average of five degrees occurred at the corners between the solid
surfaces and the adjacent air film. However, the sides of the triangles
experienced lower temperature difference with an average of three de­
grees between the solid surface and the adjacent air film. This resulted in
lower air velocity compared to the corners. The center of the cavity
experienced quiescent air and uniform temperature and the convection
current flows around it. Convection current at mirrored cavities behaves
almost the same as they experience the same temperature difference
conditions.
Fig. 8 presents the velocity profiles of the single row 10 cm cavity
configuration at temperature differences of ΔT 20 K, 30 K, and 40 K. An
increase of 36.7% of the maximum velocity was observed with the in­
crease of temperature difference from ΔT 20 K to ΔT 40 K. This velocity
increase is a result of the increase in temperature difference between the
solid and fluid mediums in the cavities. Causing higher temperatures of
the air film adjacent to the solid surface of the cavity and creating higher
density difference that induces the buoyancy force. Finally resulting in a
convection current with higher velocities.
8
Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286
5.2. Results and findings
Ansys simulation results yielded the thermal transmittance values for
the different mixes at different printing configurations. Results show
that introducing parallel cavities significantly reduces the thermal
transmittance value compared to increasing the cavity size. The double
row 10 cm cavity height results of 42.4% U-value reduction compared to
the single row 15 cm cavity height. In addition, the triple row 10 cm
cavity height reduced the U-value by 27.8% compared to the double row
15 cm cavity configuration. On the other hand, an insignificant drop
occurred when only enlarging the cavity height. Single row 15 cm
configuration only reduced 3.4% of the U-value, and the double row 15
cm cavity reduced 4.7% of the U-value. These readings are compared to
10 cm cavity height configurations with the same row numbers. Fig. 9
illustrates the reduction percentage of the obtained thermal trans­
mittance values for each configuration in comparison with the single
row 10 cm cavity height configuration.
Fig 10 illustrate the thermal transmittance results for a sample wall
printed using Mix1. Temperature difference variation yielded a
A. Alkhalidi and D. Hatuqay
Fig. 8. Velocity profile of the single row 10 cm cavity configuration at several temperature differences.
maximum increase of 4.5% of the thermal transmittance value at min­
imum wall thickness. It is observed that with the increase of the wall
thickness, the temperature difference effect on the thermal trans­
mittance value becomes insignificant.
The minimum U-value obtained for mix1 (Sulfur concrete) was 0.68
W/m2.K. While mix2 (Cork concrete) obtained a minimum U-Value of
0.65 W/m2.K. Moreover, mix-3 (bound sand) obtained a minimum U-
value of 0.45 W/m2.K. All three mixes minimum U-values are associated
with the triple row of 10 cm cavity height. These values do not satisfy the
national regulation of most of the selected countries that represent the
world’s climatic zones. Thus, thermal transmittance reduction methods
were suggested in order to achieve cold climates U-values of (0.2 W/m2.
K).
In the attempt of reducing the thermal transmittance value, dry sand
was used to fill the cavities. The reason for this choice that it is a low
cost, available and green. The sand filling is recorded to reduce the
thermal transmittance values by 54.3% when used to fill hollow bricks
[16].
Results of filling the cavities showed that the thermal transmittance
values were not affected by the temperature differences variation as the
convection-radiation factors were eliminated. A reduction of 32%
resulted from sand filling the cavities yielding a minimum U-value of
Fig. 9. U-value reduction percentages for different configurations at ΔT 40 K.
9
Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286
0.35 W/m2.K that does not satisfy the 0.2 W/m2.K targeted U-value. In
addition to the thermal mass effect resulting from filling the cavities
with dry sand. It is recognized that thermal mass reduces the energy
consumption in hot climates, but it has a counter effect in cold climates
[45]. Thus, another environmentally friendly material was proposed to
achieve the targeted U-values.
Expanded Polylactic acid (E-PLA) was also proposed to fill the cav­
ities in order to reduce the resulted U-values. It is a lightweight, green
and sustainable material, similar in properties to the expanded poly­
styrene [17]. The expanded Polylactic acid is characterized by a low
density (30 kg/m3), a low thermal conductivity (0.03 W/m.K) and a
specific heat of (1.483 J/g.K) [17,46]. Results show that filling the
cavities with E-PLA reduced the obtained U-values by an average of
69%. Values are presented in the appendix.
Figs. (11)–(13) illustrates U-value results obtained for walls with air,
sand-filled, and E-PLA filled cavities printed using different mixes at (ΔT
40 K).
Comparing the results showed insignificant changes in the thermal
transmittance value beyond the double row 15 cm cavity configuration.
Thus, the triple row 10 cm cavity configuration can be illuminated from
consideration. However, E-PLA filling achieved the minimum thermal
transmittance values including the targeted values presented in Table 1.
A. Alkhalidi and D. Hatuqay Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286

Fig. 10. U-value results obtained for different configurations at different temperature differences printed using mix 1.

Fig. 11. Cavity fillings effect on U-values obtained at ΔT 40 K printed using mix 1.

Fig. 12. Cavity fillings effect on U-values obtained at ΔT 40 K printed using mix 2.

10
A. Alkhalidi and D. Hatuqay Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286

Fig. 13. Cavity fillings effect on U-values obtained at ΔT 40 K printed using mix 3.

Table 4 and filled with E-PLA. It obtained a U-value of 0.15 W/m2.K. Table 4
Best mix, configuration, and printing method for worlds climatic zones. presents the mix, cavity configuration, and printing method that best
Climate zone Best configuration and printing method Targeted U- suits the different climatic zones of the world. U-Values of walls and roof
representative value (W/m2. in Table 4 are based on Table 1. The choosing criteria consider the
country K) simplest implementation process and the minimum number of cavity
Walls Roof Walls Roof rows for material reduction purposes.
Jakarta, Indonesia MDM, E-PLA filled MDM, E-PLA filled 0.52 0.55
Single row10cm, Single row10cm, 5.3. Energy demand calculation results
Mix 2 Mix 2
Amman, Jordan MDM, E-PLA filled MDM, E-PLA filled 0.57 0.55
Single row10cm, Single row10cm, After determining the appropriate wall configuration for each cli­
Mix 1 Mix 1 matic zone, an energy demand calculation was performed for the pro­
London, UK Binder jet, E-PLA Binder jet, E-PLA 0.18 0.13 posed housing unit in Fig. 1. The input data is based on Tables 1 and 4
filled Double row, filled Double row,
for the different building elements in the energy simulation.
15 cm, Mix 3 15 cm, Mix 3
Ottawa, Canada Binder jet, E-PLA Binder jet, E-PLA 0.21 0.16 The annual energy demand was calculated by uploading the energy
filled Double row filled Double row model to Autodesk’s Green Building Studio. Fig. 14 presents the energy
15 cm, Mix 3 15 cm, Mix 3 simulation results for each of the climate zone representative countries.
Nuuk, Greenland Binder jet, E-PLA Binder jet, E-PLA 0.20 0.15 Results indicated that the building’s annual energy demand depends
filled Double row filled Double row
15 cm, Mix 3 15 cm, Mix 3
mainly on the difference between the ambient air and the indoor tem­
peratures. It was noticeable that colder climates required higher annual

The 0.5 W/m2.K target value was achieved at the single row 15 cm Table 5
cavity configuration printed using either mix 1 or 2 both filled with E- 3D printing guideline according to climatic zones results.
PLA. On the other hand, the 0.2 W/m2.K target value was achieved
Climate zone Best Best Walls/ Annual
through the double row 15 cm cavity configuration printed using mix 3 representative configuration printing floor U- energy
country method Value (W/ demand
m2.K) (MJ/year)

Jakarta, Indonesia Single MDM 0.52 3,278

row10cm
E-PLA filled,
Cork concrete
Amman, Jordan Single MDM 0.55 5,836
row10cm
E-PLA filled,
Sulfur concrete
London, UK Double Binderjet 0.15 6,317
row15cm
E-PLA filled,
Bound sand
Ottawa, Canada Double Binderjet 0.15 8,598
row15cm
E-PLA filled,
Bound sand
Nuuk, Greenland Double Binderjet 0.15 8,294
row15cm
E-PLA filled,
Fig. 14. Annual energy demand results of the printed house for different
Bound sand
countries and associated U-values.

11
A. Alkhalidi and D. Hatuqay Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286

energy demand than warmer ones. Muhaisen stated that the thermal
transmittance value reduction of buildings reduces the energy demand
within the same climatic conditions [47]. Therefore, U-value reduction
should not be considered when comparing climatic regions with each
other. The obtained annual energy demand values can be referred to
when performing energy forecasting of these printed houses’ energy
consumption. They can also be referred to when performing an envi­
ronmental impact of such projects. Especially if these units were to be
printed in mass production, for example, a printed refugee camp.
For better data rendering on a global vision of best selection for
method and material based on climatic zone, results obtained in this
study are summarizes in Table 5.
6. Conclusion
In the literature of the additive manufacturing industry, researchers
are focusing on the structural performance of the 3D printed product. In
this study, the authors are more concerned about the thermal comfort of
the inhabitants of the 3D printed buildings. This work presents a
guideline that complies with the national regulations of the world’s
climatic zones to create an energy efficient, comfortable 3D printed built
environment.
The lowest obtained thermal transmittance value in this study was
0.15 W/m2.K resulted from a distinct wall configuration and printing
material. The guideline was used to estimate the annual energy demand
for a family house in each climatic zone in the world. However, further
studies on other different mixes and filling materials can be conducted
for further optimization of the guideline.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Ammar Alkhalidi: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - re­
view & editing, Supervision, Project administration. Dina Hatuqay:
Software, Validation, Investigation, Resources, Writing - original draft,
Visualization.

Appendix

Thermal transmittance results for different configurations with different printable mixes at different temperature differences.

Configuration Mix 1 (Sulfur concrete) Mix 2 (Cork concrete) Mix 3 (Bound Sand)

ΔT 20K
Single Row 10cm 1.79 1.70 1.18
Single Row 15cm 1.73 1.64 1.16
Double Row10cm 0.99 0.93 0.66
Double Row15cm 0.95 0.90 0.65
Triple Row 10 cm 0.68 0.65 0.45
ΔT 30K
Single Row 10cm 1.83 1.74 1.20
Single Row 15cm 1.77 1.68 1.18
Double Row10cm 1.00 0.95 0.67
Double Row15cm 0.96 0.92 0.66
Triple Row 10cm 0.68 0.65 0.46
ΔT 40K
Single Row 10cm 1.86 1.76 1.22
Single Row 15cm 1.80 1.71 1.20
Double Row10cm 1.02 0.97 0.68
Double Row15cm 0.98 0.94 0.67
Triple Row 10cm 0.70 0.66 0.47

Thermal transmittance values of sand filled configurations at different mixes at a temperature difference of ΔT 20 K

Configuration Mix 1 (Sulfur concrete) Mix 2 (Cork Concrete) Mix 3 (Bound Sand)

Single Row10cm 1.29 1.24 0.95

Single Row15cm 1.02 0.98 0.74
Double Row10cm 0.72 0.69 0.50
Double Row15cm 0.55 0.52 0.42
Triple Row 10cm 0.49 0.47 0.35

Thermal transmittance values obtained from E-PLA filled configurations at different mixes at a temperature difference of ΔT 20 K.

Configuration Mix 1 (Sulfur concrete) Mix 2 (Cork Concrete) Mix 3 (Bound Sand)

Single Row10cm 0.55 0.52 0.37

Single Row15cm 0.46 0.44 0.31
Double Row10cm 0.35 0.33 0.23
Double Row15cm 0.23 0.22 0.15
Triple Row 10cm 0.23 0.22 0.15

12
A. Alkhalidi and D. Hatuqay Journal of Building Engineering 30 (2020) 101286

References [25] T. Reeves, S. Olbina, R. Issa, Validation of Building Energy Modeling Tools:
EcotectTM, Green Building StudioTM and Ies<VE>TM, 2012.
[26] M. Kottek, J. Grieser, C. Beck, et al., World map of the K€ oppen-Geiger climate
[1] N. Labonnote, A. Rønnquist, B. Manum, et al., Additive construction: state-of-the-
classification updated, Meteorol. Z. 15 (2006) 259–263.
art, challenges and opportunities, Autom. ConStruct. 72 (2016) 347–366.
[27] Jakarta green building user guide building. Jakarta. www.dppb.jakarta.go.id.
[2] Z. Malaeb, H. Hachem, A. Tourbah, et al., 3D concrete printing: machine and mix
[28] T. Awadallah, H. Adas, Y. Obaidat, et al., Energy Efficient Building Code for
design, Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol. 6 (2015) 14–22.
Jordan, 2015.
[3] Y.W.D. Tay, B. Panda, S.C. Paul, et al., 3D printing trends in building and
[29] S. Kunkel, E. Kontonasiou, A. Arcipowska, et al., Indoor Air Quality, Thermal
construction industry: a review, Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 12 (2017) 261–276.
Comfort and Daylight. Analysis of Residential Buildings Regulations in Eight EU
[4] F. Craveiro, H.M. Bartolo, A. Gale, et al., A design tool for resource-efficient
Member States, 2015. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274695177%
fabrication of 3d-graded structural building components using additive
0AIndoor.
manufacturing, Autom. ConStruct. 9 (2017).
[30] M. Parrott, M. Bousfield, Understanding the National Energy Code of Canada for
[5] I. Hager, A. Golonka, R. Putanowicz, 3D printing of buildings and building
Buildings , 2011 Introduction. canada, 2011. www.cascadiawindows.com.
components as the future of sustainable construction? Procedia Eng. 151 (2016)
[31] B. Hurup-Felby, J. Vendel Jensen, T. Mondrup, Design Manual for Building in
292–299.
Greenland, DTU, 2009. https://issuu.com/brianhurup-felby/docs/designman
[6] N.N. Abu Bakar, M.Y. Hassan, H. Abdullah, et al., Energy efficiency index as an
ual_jan09. (Accessed 6 March 2019).
indicator for measuring building energy performance: a review, Renew. Sustain.
[32] World weather online | world weather | weather forecast. https://www.worl
Energy Rev. 44 (2015) 1–11.
dweatheronline.com/. (Accessed 19 March 2019).
[7] C. Filippín, S.F. Larsen, Energy efficiency in buildings, in: A. Hofman K (Ed.),
[33] H. Lee, Finite Element Simulations with ANSYS Workbench 18. https://books.
Energy Efficiency, Recovery and Storage, Nova science publishers, Inc., 2007,
google.jo/books?hl¼en&lr¼&id¼LdNTDwAAQBAJ&oi¼fnd&pg¼PP2&dq¼ansys
pp. 223–245.
þworkbench&ots¼m6IX1M287c&sig¼9OJazv6j6OGdXAqe6MlgDkugT8c&redir_e
[8] P. Wilkinson, K.R. Smith, S. Beevers, et al., Energy, energy efficiency, and the built
sc¼y#v¼onepage&q&f¼false. (Accessed 27 February 2019).
environment, Lancet 370 (2007) 1175–1187.
[34] H. Barrios-Pina, S. Viazzo, C. Rey, Total energy balance in a natural convection
[9] S. Attia, E. Gratia, A De Herde, et al., Simulation-based decision support tool for
flow, Int. J. Numer. Methods Heat Fluid Flow 15 (2017).
early stages of zero-energy building design, Energy Build. 49 (2012) 2–15.
[35] Ansys Inc, ANSYS FLUENT 12.0 theory guide - 5.2.1 heat transfer theory. http://
[10] A. Allouhi, Y. El Fouih, T. Kousksou, et al., Energy consumption and efficiency in
www.afs.enea.it/project/neptunius/docs/fluent/html/th/node107.htm. (Accessed
buildings: current status and future trends, J. Clean. Prod. 109 (2015) 118–130.
26 February 2019).
[11] D de Witte, Concrete in an AM Process - Freeform Concrete Processing, Delft
[36] T.L. Bergman, A.S. Lavine, F.P. Incropera, et al., Fundamentals of Heat and Mass
University of Technology Faculty, 2015.
Transfer, seventh ed., John Wiley & sons, 2011.
[12] A. Bouchair, Steady state theoretical model of fired clay hollow bricks for enhanced
[37] K. V�aclav, B. Zdenka, C. Robert, Computational analysis of thermal performance of
external wall thermal insulation, Build. Environ. 43 (2008) 1603–1618.
a passive family house built of hollow clay bricks, Energy Build. 76 (2014)
[13] S. Lim, R.A. Buswell, T.T. Le, et al., Developments in construction-scale additive
211–218.
manufacturing processes, Autom. ConStruct. 21 (2012) 262–268.
[38] Geothermal Heat Pump Design Manual, 2002.
[14] S.H. Ghaffar, J. Corker, M. Fan, Additive manufacturing technology and its
[39] Autodesk, About energy analysis for Autodesk® Revit® | Revit products 2016 |
implementation in construction as an eco-innovative solution, Autom. ConStruct.
Autodesk knowledge network. https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/revit
93 (2018) 1–11.
-products/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2016/ENU/Revit-Analyze/fil
[15] winsun. Demonstrating the Viability of 3D Printing at Construction Scale. Shap
es/GUID-A4C490A7-A86C-4027-B829-A77AB3211B60-htm.html. (Accessed 14
Futur Constr; vol 12.
September 2018).
[16] G.H. Dos Santos, M.A. Fogiatto, N. Mendes, Numerical analysis of thermal
[40] ISO, ISO 9972: 2015 Thermal Performance of Buildings – Determination of Air
transmittance of hollow concrete blocks, J. Build. Phys. 41 (2017) 7–24.
Permeability of Buildings – Fan Pressurization Method, 2015, p. 26, 2015.
[17] K. Parker, J.P. Garancher, S. Shah, et al., Expanded polylactic acid - an eco-friendly
[41] E. Bretz, TJ. Properties of Sulfur Concrete, 1979.
alternative to polystyrene foam, J. Cell. Plast. 47 (2011) 233–243.
[42] T.A. Le N�eel, P. Mognol, J.Y. Hasco€et, A review on additive manufacturing of sand
[18] F. Bos, R. Wolfs, Z. Ahmed, et al., Additive manufacturing of concrete in
molds by binder jetting and selective laser sintering, Rapid Prototyp. J. 24 (2018)
construction: potentials and challenges of 3D concrete printing, Virtual Phys.
1325–1336.
Prototyp. 11 (2016) 209–225.
[43] B. Primkulov, J. Chalaturnyk, R. Chalaturnyk, et al., 3D printed sandstone strength:
[19] L. Greguri�c, How Much Does a 3D Printed House Cost in 2019? | All3DP, 2019. http
curing of furfuryl alcohol resin-based sandstones, 3D Print. Addit. Manuf. 4 (2018)
s://all3dp.com/2/3d-printed-house-cost/. (Accessed 17 May 2019).
149–156.
[20] M. Attaran, The rise of 3-D printing: the advantages of additive manufacturing over
[44] Y.A. Cengel, J.M. Cimbala, R.H. Turner, Fundamentals of Thermal-Fluid Sciences,
traditional manufacturing, Bus. Horiz. 60 (2017) 677–688.
fifth ed., McGraw-Hill, 2017. http://www.mhhe.com/engcs/mech/cengel/index.
[21] Aa Alkhalidi, W.H. Hassan, Comparing between best energy efficient techniques
mhtml.
worldwide with existing solution implemented in Al-ahliyya amman university,
[45] A. Reilly, O. Kinnane, The impact of thermal mass on building energy
Int. J. Therm. Environ. Eng. 17 (2018) 1–10.
consumption, Appl. Energy 198 (2017) 108–121.
[22] A. Alkhalidi, H. Jarad, M. Juaidy, Glass properties selection effect on LEED points
[46] J. Lai, Mold flow Material Testing Report MAT2238, 2007. http://www.naturewor
for core and shell high rise residential building in Jordan, Int. J. Therm. Environ.
ksllc.com/technical-resources/~/media/technical_resources/properties_document
Eng. 13 (2016) 29–35.
s/propertiesdocument_7000dmoldflowreport_pdf.pdf.
[23] A. Alkhalidi, L. Qoaider, A. Khashman, et al., Energy and water as indicators for
[47] A. Muhaisen, Effect of wall thermal properties on the energy consumption of
sustainable city site selection and design in Jordan using smart grid, Sustain. Cities
buildings in the gaza strip, Int. Sustain. Build Symp. 2 (2015). http://www.isbs2
Soc. 37 (2018) 125–132.
015.gazi.edu.tr/belgeler/bildiriler/1013-1020.pdf.
[24] B. Birdsal, W.F. Buhl, K. Ellington, et al., Overview of the DOE-2 Building Energy
Analysis Program, Version 2.1D. california, 1985. https://cloudfront.escholarship.
org/dist/prd/content/qt8gm226b0/qt8gm226b0.pdf.

13