Comparison of Thermal Energy Saving Potential and Overheating Risk of Four Adaptive Façade Technologies in Office Buildings

Shady Attia, Stéphanie Bertrand, Mathilde Cuchet, Siliang Yang and Amir Tabadkani
Additional contact information
Shady Attia: Sustainable Building Design Lab, Department of Urban and Environmental Engineering, Applied Sciences, Université de Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium
Stéphanie Bertrand: Sustainable Building Design Lab, Department of Urban and Environmental Engineering, Applied Sciences, Université de Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium
Mathilde Cuchet: Sustainable Building Design Lab, Department of Urban and Environmental Engineering, Applied Sciences, Université de Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium
Siliang Yang: School of Built Environment, Engineering and Computing, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds LS2 8AG, UK
Amir Tabadkani: School of Architecture and Built Environment, Geelong Waterfront Campus, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia

Sustainability, 2022, vol. 14, issue 10, 1-29

Abstract: Adaptive façades are gaining greater importance in highly efficient buildings under a warming climate. There is an increasing demand for adaptive façades designed to regulate solar and thermal gains/losses, as well as avoid discomfort and glare issues. Occupants and developers of office buildings ask for a healthy and energy-neutral working environment. Adaptive façades are appropriate dynamic solutions controlled automatically or through occupant interaction. However, relatively few studies compared their energy and overheating risk performance, and there is still a vast knowledge gap on occupant behavior in operation. Therefore, we chose to study four dynamic envelopes representing four different façade families: dynamic shading, electrochromic glazing, double-skin, and active ventilative façades. Three control strategies were chosen to study the dynamic aspect of solar control, operative temperature, and glare control. Simulations were realized with EnergyPlus on the BESTEST case 600 from the ASHRAE standard 140/2020 for the temperate climate of Brussels. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to study the most influential parameters. The study findings indicate that dynamic shading devices and electrochromic glazing have a remarkable influence on the annual thermal energy demand, decreasing the total annual loads that can reach 30%. On the other hand, BIPV double-skin façades and active ventilative façades (cavity façades) could be more appropriate for cold climates. The study ranks the four façade technologies and provides novel insights for façade designers and building owners regarding the annual energy performance and overheating risk.

Keywords: control strategies; energy efficiency; overheating risk; dynamic shading; electrochromic glazing; active ventilative façades; sensitivity analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6106/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6106/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6106-:d:817867

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().