Sint Gummaruskerk Lier

Client: Stad and OCMW Lier
Subsidizing government: Agentschap Onroerend Erfgoed
Advisor: Koninklijk Instituut voor Kunstpatrimonium ( KIK) – Cel Preventieve Conservatie
Location: Lier
Timing: 2021
Status: ongoing

© N. Moyaert (1) and Michael Van Craen (2)

Technical advice I  Energy and comfort

Energy audit : building physics, construction and installation studies for sustainable climate management. This audit complies with and follows the guidelines of the Agency for Real Estate Heritage and is based on the European directive EN16883.

Step 1: Analysis
In the first preparatory stage, the existing condition of St. Gummarus Church is comprehensively mapped out. We distinguish data concerning the building envelope, the indoor climate, the state of conservation of immovable heritage elements and cultural goods and the already established heritage valuation.

Step 2: Recommendations
When developing the recommendations we look first of all at the possible passive measures which optimize the hygrothermal inertia and performance of the building and the state of conservation of the movable and immovable heritage elements. 

The aim is to 

  • provide structural solutions to building physics problems,  
  • reduce risks and management measures  
  • and enable a more stable indoor climate. 

In a next phase, active and energy-consuming measures are considered in order to guarantee the predefined preservation conditions and user comfort. Annual and daily fluctuations are smoothed out and supplemented by active techniques to achieve the desired comfort.

Step 3: Impact analysis
In the structural and building physics risk analysis, simulation software is used to calculate the risk of surface condensation/mold formation, internal condensation, etc. This allows the risks to be clearly identified and the feasibility of the detailing to be checked in function of heritage values.

Step 4: Reasoned choice
Based on the elaborated scenarios and the corresponding impact analysis, a clear advice with a motivated choice of measures is elaborated with a ranking in function of the impact. 

  • Which choices are necessary in function of preventive conservation? .
  • And which are additional in function of the desired comfort level or risk management?

Team BB: ir. arch. Robbe Verelst, ing; Martijn Vyncke, arch. Bert Van den Bergh