Revisiting the Role of Architecture for 'Surviving’ Development. 53rd International Conference of the Architectural Science Association 2019, Avlokita Agrawal and Rajat Gupta (eds), pp. 625–634. © 2019 and published by the Architectural Science Association (ANZAScA).

Adaptation of Double Skin Facade for warm climate from a wind harvesting perspective in tall buildings

Soha Matour, Veronica Garcia Hansen, Robin Drogemuller and Sara Omrani Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia

{s.matour, v.garciahansen, robin.drogemuller, s.omrani} @qut.edu.au

Abstract: Different opening configurations for a double skin façade (DSF) integrated in a tall building are investigated in terms of flow characteristics within the cavity of the DSF using CFD simulations. The main issue of naturally ventilated DSF in warm climates is cavity overheating risk which can be alleviated by means of airflow enhancement in the system's cavity. Previous research has demonstrated the effectiveness of lateral openings in DSF. This research goes a step further, by addressing the impact of front openings number on external skin of DSF. Four case studies are assessed; lateral openings only, one, three and five front openings. The results show that applying openings on external skin could double the average air velocity along the cavity compared to the case with lateral openings. In perpendicular wind direction, increasing the front openings number could be effective just in low wind condition while in different wind speeds, one central opening outperforms other cases in terms of cavity airflow uniformity and velocity. Therefore, by optimizing DSF openings for different building heights and wind directions, DSF with front openings can be introduced as an adapted classification for DSF in warm climates which is capable of improving cavity natural ventilation.

Keywords: Double Skin Facade (DSF); Wind-driven airflow; Cavity openings; CFD.

1. Introduction Globally about 40% of energy consumption is related to the building sector. HVAC (Heating, Ventilation and Air-Conditioning) and lighting systems consume about 40% and 15% of that amount respectively (Chan et al., 2009; Sun et al., 2013). The building envelope, as highlighted by (Zelenay et al., 2011), has the potential of reducing energy consumption through the use of daylighting, solar heat gain control strategies, natural ventilation strategies, and integration with HVAC and lighting systems. These considerations can contribute to up to 55% reduction in cooling load (Haase et al., 2009) in subtropical climate. On the other hand, a large glazed façade as a modern commercial building envelope need mechanical cooling and ventilation systems as a consequence of high thermal loads. In this context, designing a responsive façade with external shading devices which allow natural light and airflow to enter the room could be the optimum solution for the façade total heat gain reduction (Da Graça et al., 2016).

The idea of applying Double Skin Façade (DSF) instead of Single Skin Facade (SSF) has been discussed in recent years in order to overcome glass façade challenges in hot climates (Haase, et al., 2009; Radhi et al., 2013). By adding an external glass skin to the normal façade at a specific distance an intermediate space is created between two skins which is called cavity space. This is an ideal space for locating a shading device since it is a protected external shading device and can block and absorb solar radiation before it enters into an indoor space of buildings (Kim et al., 2018). This integration of glazed facade and shading device can potentially reduce transmitted solar radiation while improving both visual (Kim et al., 2015) and thermal comfort (Barbosa et al., 2015) in the warm climate buildings.

However, longwave radiation can be more notable in the DSF buildings than the SSF buildings. It is due to the high temperature of the shading device surface or inner glass pane in DSF buildings (Olena Kalyanova, 2008) which is more problematic in warm climates rather than temperate and cold climate. Generally the internal convective heat transfer depends on the temperature difference (Hazem et al., 2015) and can be affected by flow rate and flow regime in a naturally ventilated cavity (Olena Kalyanova, 2008). It has been

S. Matour, V. Garcia Hansen, R. Drogemuller and S. Omrani

626

proven that increasing the airflow rate in the cavity can result in reduced long-wave radiation and convective heat flux (Hazem, et al., 2015) and finally dissipation of heat from the air gap (Kuznik et al., 2011; Luo et al., 2018). Therefore, DSF building compared to SSF is capable of reducing direct solar radiation taking advantages of external glass skin and shading device in the cavity space (Flores Larsen et al., 2015; Radhi, et al., 2013). However, to improve the overall performance of DSF in warm climate and reduce the risk of cavity overheating, more consideration and careful design is required for cavity ventilation.

With regard to the significance of cavity ventilation in warm climate, it can be claimed that DSF concepts in this climates should not just rely on stack effect as airflow driven force (Poirazis, 2004). For this purpose and to avoid the use of mechanical systems for cavity ventilation, the strategy is the enhancement of wind-driven airflow (Pomponi et al., 2017) as a potential alternative for reducing overheating risk of DSF in tall buildings. However, the concept of conventional DSFs is based on increasing the stack effect for more airflow rate in the cavity (Amaireh, 2017) while controlling the buffer zone for less building heat loss during the cold period in the heating dominant climates. Therefore, cavity ventilation strategy in conventional DSFs is not compatible with what is required for DSF thermal performance improvement in the warm climate.

In order to highlight the research gap in DSF literature, simulation-based studies of DSF thermal performance assessments have been reviewed in Table 1. In these studies DSF types are based on Oesterle ( 2001) classification which are named as Box windows, Corridor, Shaft box, and Multi-story representing conventional type of DSF. The locations of the studied DSFs are in warm climates referring to the Köppen climate classification system (Peel et al., 2007) . Reviewing the DSF literature in warm climate, it can be concluded that although DSF is capable of reducing cooling load of buildings in warm climate, overheating issue still is a challenge influencing DSF performance. It is notable that almost all the research focused on the conventional type of DSF (Figure 1(a)) in which wind is less responsible for cavity ventilation. Therefore, less attention has been payed to the wind driven DSF configurations as a potential solution in warm climates.

Table 1: Research on DSF thermal performance in warm climates

Reference Location and climate

DSF type Ventilation mode

DSF compare to SSF Research findings

(Baharvand et al., 2014)

Malaysia Wet equatorial climate (Af)

Box window facade

Cross-ventilation

DSF increases natural air velocity in the room.

Overheating in the cavity can increase indoor temperature. Opening location and configuration can prevent entering the hot air into the room.

(Wong et al., 2008)

Singapore Wet equatorial climate (Af)

Multi-story facade

Cross-ventilation

----- DSF thermal performance is closely related to cavity ventilation strategy.

(Alberto et al., 2017)

Porto, Portugal Mediterranean climate, warm summer (Csb)

Four DSF types

Five air flow types defined by (Haase, et al., 2009)

DSF lead to more HVAC energy consumption compare to SSF. DSF can decrease about 70% of solar gain compare to SSF.

Multi-story façade and ventilated cavity type showed more airflow rate and less temperature in the cavity. Overheating problems is an issue in DSF buildings.

(Kim, et al., 2018)

Daejeon, South Korea Humid continental climate (Dfa)

Box window facade

Naturally Ventilated cavity

Ventilated DSF outperform SSF with external shading and can result in 43% cooling load reduction.

In cooling dominate climates, a proper ventilation strategy is required not to increase building cooling load.

(Chan, et al., 2009)

Hong Kong Humid subtropical climate (Cfa)

Box window facade

Naturally Ventilated cavity

26% reduction in annual cooling energy consumption compare to SSF and absorptive glazing.

Combination of single clear glass as an inner pane and a double reflective glazing as the outer pane can provide acceptable thermal performance for DSF.

(Sun et al., 2008)

Shanghai, China Humid subtropical

Box window facade

Closed cavity, Cavity and indoor airflow

All DSF airflow types outperformed SSF in terms of cooling and heating loads.

Naturally ventilated cavity outperformed mechanically ventilated mode in terms of cooling load reduction.

627

Adaptation of Double Skin Facade for warm climate from a wind harvesting perspective in tall buildings

climate (Cfa)

path, Mechanical ventilation

(Haase, et al., 2009)

Hong Kong (Cfa)

Box window facade

Naturally Ventilated cavity

26% reduction in annual cooling energy consumption compare to SSF was reported.

DSF thermal performance with 91% window to wall ratio (WWR) is similar to SSF case with 32% WWR.

(Papadaki et al., 2014)

Crete, Greece Mediterranean climate, hot summer (Csa)

Corridor type

Naturally Ventilated cavity

External slat blind and naturally ventilated cavity resulted in 32% cooling load efficiency.

DSF with external shading device and cavity ventilation outperformed SSF façade with external shading device about 12%. Low ventilation rate of cavity causes overheating phenomena.

(Radhi, et al., 2013)

UAE Tropical desert climate (Bwh)

Multi-story Type

Naturally- Ventilated cavity

17% to 20% reduction of cooling load by using addition of glazed skin to SSF.

Addition of external glazing could result in heat transmission and solar gain reduction. Optimization of externa skin openings is useful for avoiding green-house effect in the cavity.

(Zomorodian & Tahsildoost, 2018)

Tehran (Csa)

Four DSF types

Mix mode Box window type and mix mode in the cavity with external louvers could result in 12% more thermal comfort condition.

DSF in warm climate is subject to overheating problems.

In contrast with conventional DSF with limited openings on top and bottom of façade, two other kinds of DSF configuration have been introduced in the literature which work based on wind-driven airflow; 1- DSF with lateral openings and 2- DSF with lateral and front openings (Figure 1(b)). An experimental study on DSF with lateral openings(Flores Larsen, et al., 2015) proved that horizontal ventilation mode (wind-driven airflow) outperforms vertical ventilation (buoyancy-driven airflow) which is a governing flow regime in conventional types of DSF. Another type of wind-induced DSF was assessed in terms of wind energy harvesting potential (Hassanli et al., 2017) and wind-induced responses of tall buildings (Hu et al., 2017). The results of the study conducted by Hassanli et al. (2017) indicates the effectiveness of one front opening for airflow enhancement in the DSF cavity.

According to the significance of cavity ventilation and the lack of research on the wind-induced configuration of DSF in this regard, this study is aimed to evaluate and compare the airflow characteristics along the cavity of DSF with lateral (as base-case) and DSF with additional front openings. For this purpose, CFD simulations were conducted on four cases to investigate the effectiveness of front openings for facilitating cavity natural ventilation in three levels of the building height. Simulation set up, results and implication of this study are presented in following sections of this paper.

Figure 1: DSF classification based on dominant airflow concepts; (a) Buoyancy-driven and (b) wind-driven airflow

Front view

Cavity horizontal section

Outlet

Inlet

Conventional DSF DSF with lateral openings

DSF with lateral and front openings

(a)

(b)

S. Matour, V. Garcia Hansen, R. Drogemuller and S. Omrani

628

3. CFD SIMULATION Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) technique as a microscopic three-dimensional approach can provide detailed description of the airflow by solving the Navier–Stokes equations (Omrani et al., 2017; Tian et al., 2018). CFD has been successfully applied in several studies to predict detailed information of the airflow through the DSF cavity and openings (Hassanli, et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2017). This analysis method was chosen for this study as an approved tool for conceptual and parametric studies in the field of airflow mechanism around and inside of tall buildings (Omrani, et al., 2017).

3.1. Numerical method and Model geometry

A series of simulation have been carried out on a small scale (1/150) CAARC (Commonwealth Advisory Aeronautical Research Council) standard tall building with lateral and front openings. The dimension of the building model and configuration of openings are given in Table 2. Four different configurations for external skin openings were considered. In the first case (M0) cavity can be ventilated just through lateral and top openings while in M1, M3 and M5, one, three and five openings were considered on external skin of DSF respectively (Figure 1).

Table 2: Building dimensions

Scaled building prototype

Height (mm) 1200 180 (m)

Width (mm) 200 30 (m)

Length (mm) 300 45 (m)

cavity (mm) 6.6 1 (m)

openings width (mm) 6.6 1 (m)

The commercial code ANSYS FLUENT 19.0 was used for the CFD analysis. K - SST as turbulence model in Fluent solver, was applied for the steady state solution which showed a good agreement in previous studies against wind tunnel test data (Hassanli, et al., 2017). The SIMPLE scheme was considered for pressure-velocity coupling with second order discretization for pressure and momentum.

3.2. Computational domain and grid resolution

The CFD simulation was employed to replicate the condition in the wind tunnel test which was conducted by (Hassanli, et al., 2017). Therefore, the vertical cross-section of the computational domain considered the same as wind tunnel condition (2 . For inlet and outlet distance, 3H and 11H were considered respectively, where H refers to the building height. A fully structured mesh was constructed and tested for grid independency with three interval of grid refinements. 5, 10 and 30 million cells were constructed and the result of air velocity in the cavity were compared. Less than 1% change was occurred by increasing cell numbers from 10 to 30 million while it was about 4% in case of 5 million cells. Therefore, the whole domain was divided by 10 106 cells for more accuracy and less computational time using ICEM meshing package. The minimum cell size of 7e-4 m and the growth rate of 1.1 was applied to the areas of interest (i.e. walls and openings). This meshing properties resulted in y+ value under 50 on all walls. Figure 2 shows the dimension of domain for CFD simulation in this study.

Figure 2: (a) Mesh resolution and (b) top view of DSF cavity and openings strategies

M0

M1

M3

M5

(a) (b)

629

Adaptation of Double Skin Facade for warm climate from a wind harvesting perspective in tall buildings

3.3. Boundary conditions At the inlet boundary, the wind profile was imposed in ANSYS Fluent solver. The mean wind speed at the inlet section was calculated by the equation which applied and validated against wind tunnel data in the study conducted by (Hassanli, et al., 2017).

(1)

Where:

z0

Where U(z) and z0 refer to wind speed at height z and roughness length respectively. Turbulence intensity and turbulent viscosity ratio were set to 5% and 10 respectively. For all simulations, the outlet boundary condition was set to outflow and top and lateral boundaries to symmetry while ground and building's surfaces were set to no-slip wall. Convergence criteria was set to 10-6 for all equations.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Effects of opening numbers on the cavity airflow

In this section the behavior of airflow in the cavity of each case is evaluated at the middle of the building height. By applying the front openings on the external skin of DSF the trend of air flow distribution along the cavity changed considerably. In general, at this height, M0 with lateral opening could result in the minimum air velocity in the cavity (1.16 m/s) compared to the other cases with front openings. At the same condition, maximum air velocity (6.22 m/s) was observed in the case with more front openings (M5).

However, the high air velocity in the cases with more openings is not consistent across the cavity. In the M3 and M5 cases, just the openings closer to the cavity outlets (lateral sides) are capable of inducing more wind in the cavity (Figure 4&6(b)). Therefore, by increasing the openings number between outlet and central opening, the level of air velocity around central opening tends to decrease (M5).

On the other hand, the case with one front opening (M1) could result in a higher level of air velocity at the middle length of cavity among all cases. After M0 case, M1 can make the most uniform airflow distribution in both sides of opening. Despite the velocity decrease from the opening to the outlet in M1, the difference between minimum and maximum velocity is quite lower that two other cases with three and five openings. This trend represents the uniformity of air velocity along the cavity in the case with only one front opening. As can be seen in Figure 6(b) cavity air velocity in M3 is between M1 and M5. In this case maximum air velocity is close to the maximum in M5 but the minimum is higher than that case with more openings.

Figure 3: Computational domain

Wind direction

11H

3H

H

3m

2m

S. Matour, V. Garcia Hansen, R. Drogemuller and S. Omrani

630

4.2. Effect of wind speed on openings function

In order to understand the behavior of different DSF configurations regarding the incident wind velocity, four cases were compared in three building levels. For this purpose, building height was divided into three parts and middle of each part was considered as; Top, Middle and bottom level (Figure 5). As can be seen in figures 6, airflow behavior in the cavity of DSF is not just affected by openings number, but also, wind velocity is another influential factor that can change the way airflow distributes along the cavity.

In M0 with just lateral openings, there is an approximately constant air velocity along the cavity on all building levels. Due to decrease in the wind velocity in lower building height, average airflow in the cavity is reduced from 1.68 m/s to 1.26 m/s and then 0.58 m/s. This trend is different for M5. In this configuration (M5), by decreasing the wind velocity at lower levels, minimum air flow at the middle of the cavity length tends to increase which implies functionality improvement in lower wind condition. However, on top level of building and with five openings on DSF external skin, the air velocity in the middle of the cavity length is less than all other configurations even M0 with just lateral openings. This poor function of central opening can be due to high resistance of two other openings in the both sides when building is facing higher wind velocity which is alleviated in the lower wind velocity conditions. The same trend with less intensity was observed for M3. In the case of one front opening (M1) both minimum and maximum velocity in the cavity decreased slightly from top to bottom level. Although this configuration could result in higher minimum air velocity among all cases, even in low wind condition (Figure 6).

(M0)

(M3)

(M1)

(M5)

Figure 4: Contour of mean velocity in the cavity of four configurations at the middle height of building.

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Bu

ildin

g h

eigh

t (m

)

Wind speed (m/s)

Top level

Middle level

Bottom level

Figure 5: (a) Induced wind profile and (b) Three evaluated building levels.

631

Adaptation of Double Skin Facade for warm climate from a wind harvesting perspective in tall buildings

Figure 4: (a) Mean velocity along the cavity at the (a) Top, (b) Middle and (c) Bottom of building height

Building

External skin

Location of reference line in the cavity for plotting mean velocity

Openings location in each case

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0

Mea

n v

elo

city

(m

/s)

M0

M1

M3

M5

(a)

(b)

(c)

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5

Mea

n v

elo

city

(m

/s)

M0

M1

M3

M5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

Mea

n v

elo

city

(m

/s)

M0

M1

M3

M5

632 A. Carre, T. Williamson & V. Soebarto

4.3. Effects of DSF front openings on cavity ventilation

In accordance with (Pasquay, 2004) and (Flores Larsen, et al., 2015) average Air Change per Hour (ACH) is an appropriate criteria for evaluation of cavity natural ventilation in DSF with dominant wind-driven airflow. In this regard, an experimental study on DSF with lateral opening in warm climate (Flores Larsen, et al., 2015) was considered as a reference for ACH assessment of the DSF configurations.

However, in the mentioned study, natural ventilation of the cavity in DSF was effective to partially disperse the heat accumulation of the cavity, it was claimed that additional ventilation is required for cavity overheating reduction. ACH of cavity for the monitored building was reported about 120 (h-1). In present study, ACH was calculated for three levels of the prototype building taking in to account the average cavity air velocity for each case. ACH more than 120 (h-1) was considered as efficient cavity natural ventilation. ACH is calculated as follow:

ACH=3600×Vc × (A/V) (2)

Where:

Vc = Average air velocity in the cavity (m/s); A= flow area (m2) and V= volume of cavity (m3).

Figure 7 indicates that by applying front openings on external skin of DSF, ACH can increase considerably. In all cases with front openings, ACH is more than 120 (h-1) even in lower levels of wind velocity. In addition, in these cases (M1, M3 and M5) the ACH is less affected by building height compared to M0 and shows the effectiveness of these configuration for all levels of a tall building.

However, in case of M0 without vertical openings just in top level of building this minimum ACH can be provided. Therefore, using DSF with vertical openings on external skin can be an efficient strategy in warm climates which can increase airflow in the cavity as an effective alternative for improving the DSF thermal performance and building cooling load reduction.

5. Conclusion

A Double Skin Facade (DSF) building with four different openings configuration was investigated in terms of flow characteristics within the cavity of the DSF integrated with a CAARC tall building by using CFD simulations. Wind direction was perpendicular to the façade in all cases. Since cavity overheating is the issue affecting the façade thermal performance and also increasing the airflow rate in the cavity tend to be a promising solution, wind harvesting configuration of DSF were tested and compared in this study. Based on the results, the following conclusions can be made:

Addition of openings on external skin of DSF showed the improvement of air velocity in the cavity which is critical for dispersing the heated air from cavity. In this study, it was found that the DSF with the strategic openings could effectively use the wind and enhance the flow within the cavity. Therefore, this

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

M0-T M1-T M3-T M5-T M0-M M1-M M3-M M5-M M0-B M1-B M3-B M5-B

Ave

rage

Air

Ch

enge

s p

er H

ou

r (1

/h)

Figure 5: ACH for each case in three levels of the prototype building (Top, Middle and Bottom)

633

Error! No text of specified style in document.

strategy could be considered as one of the possible techniques in climate with less concern about heating load of building.

Increasing the number of openings on external skin of DSF cannot make an efficient ventilation for all parts of cavity length. The level of air velocity at the middle of cavity length in configurations with more openings (M3 and M5) was reduced remarkably. This poor function can cause an uneven ventilation of the cavity despite the high velocity in regions close to lateral outlets.

Airflow in the cavity of M1 shows the optimum condition in terms of uniformity and minimum level of velocity which is higher than other configurations.

Increasing the openings number on external skin can have a better performance in lower levels of building with low wind velocity rather than the top levels.

6. Limitations and future work

This study has been focused on investigation of flow characteristic regarding different openings numbers and locations on DSF external skin. In order to asses each configuration potential in terms of cavity overheating reduction, a benchmarking research is planed considering the façade temperature and airflow enhancement effectiveness in the cavity. In addition, this study needs to be validated against the wind tunnel data for more accurate results. Since in this study just perpendicular wind direction and also a fixed opening aspect ratio were assumed, further research needs to be conducted considering more wind incident angles and finding the optimum aspect ratio for openings on external skin of this system.

References Alberto, A., Ramos, N. M. M., & Almeida, R. M. S. F. (2017). Parametric study of double-skin facades performance in mild

climate countries. Journal of Building Engineering, 12, 87-98. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2017.05.013 Amaireh, I. A. E. M. (2017). Numerical investigation into a double skin façade system integrated with shading devices, with

reference to the city of amman, jordan. Retrieved from https://gateway.library.qut.edu.au/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/docview/2001156836?accountid=13380

Baharvand, M., Hamdan, M., Safikhani, T., & Chung, L. (2014). Double skin facade and opening configurations effect on indoor air distribution. Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 9(4), 69-77. Retrieved from

Barbosa, S., Ip, K., & Southall, R. (2015). Thermal comfort in naturally ventilated buildings with double skin façade under tropical climate conditions: The influence of key design parameters. [Article]. Energy & Buildings, 109, 397-406. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.10.029

Chan, A. L. S., Chow, T. T., Fong, K. F., & Lin, Z. (2009). Investigation on energy performance of double skin façade in Hong Kong. Energy and Buildings, 41(11), 1135-1142. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.05.012

Da Graça, C., Guilherme, Guilherme, & Linden, P. (2016). Ten questions about natural ventilation of non-domestic buildings. Building and Environment, 107, 263-273. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.08.007

Flores Larsen, S., Rengifo, L., & Filippín, C. (2015). Double skin glazed façades in sunny Mediterranean climates. Energy and Buildings, 102, 18-31. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.05.019

Haase, M., Marques da Silva, F., & Amato, A. (2009). Simulation of ventilated facades in hot and humid climates. Energy and Buildings, 41(4), 361-373. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2008.11.008

Hassanli, S., Hu, G., Kwok, K. C. S., & Fletcher, D. F. (2017). Utilizing cavity flow within double skin façade for wind energy harvesting in buildings. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 167, 114-127. doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2017.04.019

Hazem, A., Ameghchouche, M., & Bougriou, C. (2015). A numerical analysis of the air ventilation management and assessment of the behavior of double skin facades. Energy and Buildings, 102, 225-236. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.05.057

Hu, G., Hassanli, S., Kwok, K. C. S., & Tse, K. T. (2017). Wind-induced responses of a tall building with a double-skin façade system. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics, 168, 91-100. doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2017.05.008

Kim, D., Cox, S. J., Cho, H., & Yoon, J. (2018). Comparative investigation on building energy performance of double skin façade (DSF) with interior or exterior slat blinds. Journal of Building Engineering, 20, 411-423. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2018.08.012

Kim, G., Lim, H. S., & Kim, J. T. (2015). Sustainable lighting performance of refurbished glazed walls for old residential buildings. [Article]. Energy and Buildings, 91, 163-169. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.12.058

Kim, G. H., Kwon, H. M., & Yang, J. H. (2017). Ventilation rate and thermal environment properties of double skin façade considering wind profile and direction. [Article]. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 16(3), 675-682. doi: 10.3130/jaabe.16.675

Kuznik, F., Catalina, T., Gauzere, L., Woloszyn, M., & Roux, J.-J. (2011). Numerical modelling of combined heat transfers in a double skin façade – Full-scale laboratory experiment validation. Applied Thermal Engineering, 31(14), 3043-3054. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2011.05.038

634 A. Carre, T. Williamson & V. Soebarto

Luo, Y., Zhang, L., Liu, Z., Su, X., Lian, J., & Luo, Y. (2018). Coupled thermal-electrical-optical analysis of a photovoltaic-blind integrated glazing façade. [Article]. Applied Energy, 228, 1870-1886. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.07.052

Oesterle, E. (2001). Double-skin facades : integrated planning : building physics, construction, aerophysics, air-conditioning, economic viability:

Munich : London : Preste. Olena Kalyanova, L. (2008). Double-Skin Facade – Modelling and Experimental Investigations of Thermal Performance PhD

Thesis. Department of Civil Engineering, Aalborg University. Omrani, S., Garcia-Hansen, V., Capra, B., & Drogemuller, R. (2017). Natural ventilation in multi-storey buildings: Design

process and review of evaluation tools. Building and Environment, 116, 182-194. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.02.012 Papadaki, N., Papantoniou, S., & Kolokotsa, D. (2014). A parametric study of the energy performance of double-skin

façades in climatic conditions of Crete, Greece. International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies, 9(4), 296-304. doi: 10.1093/ijlct/cts078

Pasquay, T. (2004). Natural ventilation in high-rise buildings with double facades, saving or waste of energy. [Conference Paper]. Energy and Buildings, 36(4), 381-389. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2004.01.018

Peel, M. C., Finlayson, B. L., & McMahon, T. A. (2007). Updated world map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11(5), 1633-1644. doi: 10.5194/hess-11-1633-2007

Poirazis, H. (2004). Double skin facades for office buildings-Literature review report. Sweden: Lund University, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund.

Pomponi, F., Barbosa, S., & Piroozfar, P. A. E. (2017). On The Intrinsic Flexibility of the Double Skin Façade: A Comparative Thermal Comfort Investigation in Tropical and Temperate Climates. Energy Procedia, 111, 530-539. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.215

Radhi, H., Sharples, S., & Fikiry, F. (2013). Will multi-facade systems reduce cooling energy in fully glazed buildings? A scoping study of UAE buildings. Energy and Buildings, 56, 179-188. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.08.030

Sun, B., Luh, P. B., Jia, Q.-S., Jiang, Z., Wang, F., & Song, C. (2013). Building energy management: Integrated control of active and passive heating, cooling, lighting, shading, and ventilation systems. IEEE Transactions on automation science and engineering, 10(3), 588-602. Retrieved from

Sun, L., Jones, P. J., & Alexander, D. K. (2008). Energy Efficiency of Double-skin Façade in Office Buildings of Shanghai. Paper presented at The First International Conference on Building Energy and Environment.

Tian, W., Han, X., Zuo, W., & Sohn, M. D. (2018). Building energy simulation coupled with CFD for indoor environment: A critical review and recent applications. Energy and Buildings, 165, 184-199. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.01.046

Wong, P. C., Prasad, D., & Behnia, M. (2008). A new type of double-skin façade configuration for the hot and humid climate. Energy and Buildings, 40(10), 1941-1945. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2008.04.014

Zelenay, K., Perepelitza, M., & Lehrer, D. (2011). High-performance facades design strategies and applications in North America and Northern Europe. Retrieved from

Zomorodian, Z. S., & Tahsildoost, M. (2018). Energy and carbon analysis of double skin façades in the hot and dry climate. [Article]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197, 85-96. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.178

There is a section break below, please do not delete it. There is a section break above, please do not delete it.