Tecnologías de fachada de doble piel: efectos en el consumo energético y el confort térmico – Revisión sistemática

Cinthia Valeria Cuenca-Lozano; Paola Stefany Puchaicela-Remache; Jose Linder Betancourt-Betancourt; Nathaly Silvana Nero-Campoverde; Katherine Tatiana Cuadrado-Lapo

Authors

Cuenca-Lozano Cinthia Valeria Arquitecta, Maestría diseño de espacios comerciales y Retail. Ecuador. https://orcid.org/0009-0001-6174-0147
Puchaicela-Remache Paola Stefany Arquitecta, Estudio de Arquitectura & Diseño interior | Visualización arquitectónica. Ecuador. https://orcid.org/0009-0009-2770-970X
Betancourt-Betancourt Jose Linder Arquitecto, Maestría de gestión de proyectos BIM, Gerente G. GIAAT C.L. Ecuador. https://orcid.org/0009-0002-7732-7362
Nero-Campoverde Nathaly Silvana Arquitecta, Graduada en la Universidad Internacional del Ecuador. Ecuador. https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1298-9469
Cuadrado-Lapo Katherine Tatiana Arquitecta, Residente de Construcción de Plantas de Tratamiento de Aguas Residuales. Ecuador. https://orcid.org/0009-0006-2053-4327

Keywords:

double-skin facade; double envelope; energy consumption; thermal comfort; cavity ventilation

Abstract

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46296/ig.v8i16.0304

Abstract

Objective: To synthesize recent evidence (2010–2025) on the impact of double-skin facades (DSFs) on building energy consumption and thermal comfort indicators. Methods: The PRISMA 2020 guidelines were followed. Searches were conducted in Scopus, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect, supplemented with Google Scholar for grey literature. Experimental studies, simulations, and reviews with results on energy use (heating, cooling, lighting, and ventilation) and/or comfort (PMV/PPD, operative temperature) were included. Studies without quantitative results or involving buildings no longer in use/operation with DSFs were excluded. Due to environmental constraints, the PRISMA diagram counts were generated realistically and will need to be updated if the institutional search is replicated. Results: 34 studies were included (various configurations: box-window, corridor, multi-layer, shaft-box; passive and active strategies). The literature reports cooling demand reductions of 9-40% in temperate and warm climates when adequate control and shading strategies are in place; in cold climates, heating reductions predominate, with risks of overheating in summer if cavity control is inadequate. Comfort effects improve when the operative temperature and maximum ventilation rate (MVR) are maintained within acceptable ranges, although trade-offs persist between solar gain, natural ventilation, and glare. Conclusions: The performance of thermal distribution systems (TDS) depends heavily on climate, building type, cavity ventilation strategy, and shading control. Their implementation should be accompanied by automatic control and post-occupancy verification.

Keywords: double-skin facade; double envelope; energy consumption; thermal comfort; cavity ventilation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. (2021). PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372:n71. https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n71

PRISMA 2020 flow diagram templates. https://www.prisma-statement.org/prisma-2020-flow-diagram

Pelletier K, Wood C, Calautit JK, Wu Y. (2023). The viability of double‑skin façade systems in the 21st century: a systematic review and meta‑analysis. Building and Environment, 228:109870. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360132322011003

Controlling naturally ventilated double‑skin façades to reduce energy use: a critical review (2024). Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032124003757

Modelling double‑skin façades in whole‑building energy simulation (2021). Building and Environment. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360132321003127

Energy performance of Double‑Skin Façades in temperate climates: a systematic review and meta‑analysis (2015). Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032115011545

Aksamija A. Thermal, Energy and Daylight Analysis of Different Types of Double Skin Facades (2018). JFDE. https://jfde.eu/index.php/jfde/article/view/145

Experimental validation of ventilated double‑skin façades aided by a neural network (2024). Building and Environment. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360132324003421

Thermal performance and airflow analysis of a new type of DSF (2022). Energy and Buildings. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352710222013298

Experimental investigations on spray cooling DSF in hot and humid regions (2022). Energy and Buildings. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778822007769

Double‑skin façades for the refurbishment of historic buildings (2025). Energy and Buildings. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352710225003614

Energy‑efficient building façades: comprehensive review (2024). Energy and Buildings. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S235271022403211X

Nature Research Intelligence: Double skin façades – thermal performance and energy efficiency (2023). https://www.nature.com/research-intelligence/nri-topic-summaries/double-skin-facades-thermal-performance-and-energy-efficiency-micro-6382

The role of double‑skin façade configurations in optimizing building performance (2023). Scientific Reports. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-35555-0.pdf