GBA Logo horizontal Facebook LinkedIn Email Pinterest Twitter Instagram YouTube Icon Navigation Search Icon Main Search Icon Video Play Icon Plus Icon Minus Icon Picture icon Hamburger Icon Close Icon Sorted

Community and Q&A

Am I using RESFEN wrong?

iLikeDirt | Posted in Energy Efficiency and Durability on

I am attempting to model several options for replacing my house’s windows and I’m getting slightly weird results.

This is the Albuquerque, NM area, which is a predominately a heating climate, but does have a cooling season, and gets lots of sun year-round. My cooling bills are very low since I use evaporative cooling, so I want to focus on reducing heating energy, leading me to want to maximize the free solar energy available in my sunny climate. However, I also want to alleviate the summer discomfort from the west windows overheating.

So I’m modeling putting high-SHGC windows on various facings. But RESFEN is giving me slightly odd results. When I model Pella 350 series triple-pane windows, the heating bills fall and the cooling bills rise the more high-SHGC windows I add, which is as I would expect. But for Marvin double-pane windows, the program is reporting the opposite: going with more high SHGC windows increases the heating bills while reducing the cooling bills!

This is the opposite of what I would imagine, and the opposite of what it reported for the triple pane windows. How can it be that with the double-pane windows, going from low SHGC to high inverts the results seen when doing so with triple pane windows? And how could the low SHGC double-pane Marvins possibly result in lower heating bills compared to the high-SHGC Pellas, which have better U-values and higher SHGC? I’m just confused.

Here are the full results I’m getting:


Current windows (estimated): U-0.83 SHGC-0.65

Pella triple pane high SHGC: U-0.23 SHGC-0.46
Pella triple pane low SHGC: U-0.18 SHGC-0.24

Marvin double high SHGC: U-0.31 SHGC-0.55
Marvin double low SHGC: U-0.3 SHGC-0.22

- Base case: $314 heating, $222 cooling, $536 total

- Pella triples, low SHGC on NEWS: $322 heating, $133 cooling $455 total
- Pella triples, low SHGC on NEW: $316 heating, $136 cooling, $452 total
- Pella triples, low SHGC on NW: $309 heating, $144 cooling, $453 total
- Pella triples, low SHGC on N: $299 heating, $156 cooling, $455 total

- Marvin doubles, low SHGC on NEWS: $246 heating, $200 cooling, $446 total
- Marvin doubles, low SHGC on NEW: $251 heating, $199 cooling, $450 total
- Marvin doubles, low SHGC on NW: $272 heating, $195 cooling, $467 total
- Marvin doubles, low SHGC on N: $306 heating, $187 cooling, $493 total

I’ve also attached screenshots of the two most extreme Marvin cases.

GBA Prime

Join the leading community of building science experts

Become a GBA Prime member and get instant access to the latest developments in green building, research, and reports from the field.

Replies

  1. jackofalltrades777 | | #1

    RESFEN modeling leaves a lot to be desired. That's what you get with a free government program. Many people report similar issues and the software is flawed as you have discovered. I would use a different modeling program or pay to have it properly modeled using a better program.

    In my opinion RESFEN is a joke and completely obsolete. When I ran the calcs it gave me similar ridiculous recommendations.

  2. iLikeDirt | | #2

    I agree. Only runs on Windows, too. Welcome to the 90s! What a joke. I kept hearing it highly recommended, but man, what a letdown.

    Do you have any recommendations for alternatives? Aside from PHPP, I suppose?

Log in or create an account to post an answer.

Community

Recent Questions and Replies

  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |