energies

Article
Experimental Study on Energy Efficiency of
Multi-Functional BIPV Glazed Façade Structure
during Heating Season
Suzana Domjan, Lenart Petek, Ciril Arkar and Sašo Medved *
Laboratory for Sustainable Technologies in Buildings, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Ljubljana, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia; suzana.domjan@fs.uni-lj.si (S.D.);
lenart.petek508@gmail.com (L.P.); ciril.arkar@fs.uni-lj.si (C.A.)
* Correspondence: saso.medved@fs.uni-lj.si




Received: 29 April 2020; Accepted: 26 May 2020; Published: 1 June 2020


Abstract: Building integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) is technology that can significantly increase
the share of renewable energy in final energy supply and are one of essential technologies for the
nearly zero-energy buildings (nZEB), new build and refurbished. In the article (a) an experimental
semitransparent BIPV glazed façade structure with 60% of PV cell coverage is shown; (b) energy
efficiency indicators were developed based on identified impact parameters using experimental data;
and (c) multi-parametric models of electricity generation, preheating of air for space ventilation,
and dynamic thermal insulation features that enable prediction of solar energy utilization in different
climate conditions are shown. The modeled efficiency of electricity production of BIPV was in the
range between 8% and 9.5% at daily solar radiation above 1500 Wh/day, while low impact of outdoor
air temperature and ventilation air flow rate on PV cell cooling was noticed. Between 35% and 75% of
daily solar radiation can be utilized by preheating the air for space ventilation, and 4.5% to 7.5% of
daily solar radiation can be utilized in the form of heat gains through opaque envelope walls.

Keywords: nZEB, BIPV; room ventilation; dynamic thermal insulation; multi-parametric model

1. Introduction
Buildings in Europe are responsible for 36% of all greenhouse gas emissions. To fulfil targets
presented in the Paris climate agreement, emissions in the building sector must be decreased by 90% [1].
Building integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) in form of façade structures are solutions that can significantly
contribute to this goal, as well as increase the share of renewable energy in the final energy supply.
As such, BIPV are one of the essential technologies for the nearly zero energy buildings. Regarding to
the structure of building stock and for ensuring the cost effectiveness of BIPV in general, solutions
for refurbishment of buildings are of great interest [2]. Among several design options, BIPV glazed
façade with a natural or forced ventilated air gap has several comparative advantages and are from the
architectural perspective upgraded double ventilated façades [3].
One way to fulfil this goal is in the multi-functionality of BIPV solutions. Relative low efficiency
of solar energy utilization with PV cells can be improved by solar concentrators or tracking devices,
although in case of BIPV applications, it is more convenient to upgrade PV modules to combine
power and heat generators to so called photovoltaic thermal building structures (BIPV/T). The liquid
heat transfer media can be used to supply the heat to the buildings [4,5], although preheating of
ventilation air for building ventilation is a better option because such applications operate as a low
exergy system [6]. In [7] opaque PV modules are cooled by air flowing through the forced ventilated
air gap and authors report that the overall energy efficiency during the winter months was in the

Energies 2020, 13, 2772; doi:10.3390/en13112772 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2020, 13, 2772 2 of 19

range between 48% to 52% on the monthly basis. Analysis of natural ventilated semitransparent
BIPV designed as a double façade structure is shown in [8] showing energy and environmental
advantages of semitransparent BIPV over the opaque PV modules. In [9] authors propose solutions
for forced ventilated close loop BIPV/T based on the analytical modeling and point out the need for
experimental validation.
The second most common cited advantage of ventilated BIPV structures is the increase of the
PV cell efficiency by cooling. Buoyancy driven natural ventilated semitransparent BIPV consisting
of see-through a-Si PV cells was studied by [10]. Authors have shown that daily energy output can
be increased by 1.9% to 3% due to the lower operating PV cell temperature. Ventilated BIPV façade
was studied by [11] and authors claim that the PV modules efficiency can be increased by 2.2% on the
annual basis in case of natural ventilation and up to 4.7% to 5.7% in cases of forced ventilation with
different air flow rates. Similar results, 2.5% increase in annual electricity production by ventilated
façade mounted opaque PV modules, are reported in [12].
Ventilation of buildings significantly contributes to the wellbeing in buildings. Not only
bioeffluents, but pollutants such as formaldehyde and odors, can be efficiently removed from indoor
air [13]. Proper indoor air quality (IAQ) increases the occupant’s productivity as well [14]. Mechanical
ventilation systems with heat recovery could efficiently reduce heat demand, but significantly increase
the electricity demand, especially in commercial buildings. Nevertheless, in [15] it is shown that
in all-glass buildings with BIPV façade structures, electricity demand for ventilation, even in case
of the ventilation systems that fulfill present requirements about energy efficiency, is dominant
compared to heating, cooling, and lighting systems, measured by primary energy needed. Central
mechanical ventilation systems are difficult to adjust to the presence of occupancies and their personal
physiological needs. Furthermore, decentralized ventilation can be energy efficient in most European
climate regions [16]. Dynamic insulation is a part of the building envelope where outdoor air passes
through a porous thermal insulation layer towards the interior and redirects heat loss flux. Research
on this technique is shown in [17]. The authors have shown that dynamic thermal transmittance of a
ventilated structure having static U 0.3 W/m2 K decreases to 0.15 W/m2 K at air flow rate 0.75 1/s per m2
of the building structure area. Similarly, transmission heat losses of the envelope building structure
can be decreased if the air gap, designed inside the building structures, is ventilated by outdoor air,
and then transferred into the buildings as preheated air. In [18] building ventilated opaque BIPV was
studied at a steady state outdoor temperature, solar irradiation, and wind velocity. Indoor heat gains
were investigated using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) techniques and compared to static heat
losses expressed by thermal transmittance U of the building envelope structure.
In the presented article, a multi-functional modular semitransparent BIPV glazed façade structure
was designed, built, in-situ tested, and analyzed during winter-time conditions. M-Si PV cells are built
in the BIPV in form of double side glass laminated PV module with 60% PV cell packing factor, which
make the BIPV is semitransparent. Modular units can be multiplied according to needs of particular
flat/office/building in new, as well as in renovated buildings. Thick temperate glass layers (4 mm each)
of BIPV also result in the specific thermal response of the structure. Several aspects of functionality of
solar energy utilization are addressed and evaluated, such as (a) electricity production, preheating of
air for space ventilation and dynamic thermal insulation performance; (b) overall efficiency of solar
energy utilization is determined in form of approximation multi-parametric model, providing a tool
for evaluation of such BIPV glazed façade structure in different climate conditions; and (c) all models
are developed on the base of diurnal averaging of independent variables, which enables integration in
buildings thermal response models.
 In general term, BIPV are multifunctional devices because they incorporate passive functions
of ordinary façade (or roof) structures, for example, precipitation and sound protection with
active renewable energy utilization. In this way lower production of electricity compared to self-
stand systems, as a consequence of the position of installation defined by the building envelope,
Energiescan
2020,be13,compensated
2772 at least in terms of investment. Nevertheless, in the presented article, the 3 of 19
multifunctional nature of the examined BIPV glazed façade structure is evaluated in terms of
utilization of solar energy thereby increasing energy efficiency of the building, while improving
2. Object
indoor of Research
living comfort. andAResearch
pilot BIPVMethods
glazed façade structure was designed to fit new buildings and
could be used for energy refurbishment as well, possibly eliminating the need for additional
2.1. Semitransparent BIPV Glazed Façade Structure with Forced Ventilated Air Gap
thermal insulation. It consisted of a transparent glass façade with integrated PV cells and forced
Inventilated
general air term,gapBIPVwhich,arebeside electricity production,
multifunctional devicesenabled
because preheating of fresh supply
they incorporate passive air and
functions
it to act as dynamic thermal insulation (Figure 1). In this way, the heat
of ordinary façade (or roof) structures, for example, precipitation and sound protection with active losses of façade envelope
decrease as consequence of the lower (static) thermal transmittance Ust and because part of
renewable energy utilization. In this way lower production of electricity compared to self-stand
transition heat losses preheats the air that flows inside the ventilated air gap. Both effects are
systems, as a consequence of the position of installation defined by the building envelope, can be
evaluated with dynamic thermal transmittance Ueff. To increase the efficiency of solar energy
compensated
utilization,at least in terms
the BIPV was of investment.
designed Nevertheless, in
as a semitransparent the presented
structure with 60% article, the multifunctional
of opaque PV cell
naturearea.
of the examined
Another reason BIPV glazed
for this BIPVfaçade
designstructure
follows fromis evaluated
optimizationin terms of utilization
of multilayer glazingof solar
energyaccording
thereby to increasing
the natural energy efficiency
heating, shading,of the building,
daylight, while improving
and occupancies view towards indoor the living
outdoor comfort.
A pilotenvironment
BIPV glazed façade
[15]. structure
A similar was designed
conclusion is presented to fit newInbuildings
in [8]. and the
this way, both could be usedBIPV
ventilated for energy
on the opaque
refurbishment as well, façade structure
possibly and BIPV
eliminating theglazing
need forcanadditional
be combined with the
thermal same architectural
insulation. It consisted of a
appearance of the building. BIPV were produced by [19] and
transparent glass façade with integrated PV cells and forced ventilated air gap which, consist of two 4 mm hard glass
beside panes
electricity
production, enabled preheating of fresh supply air and it to act as dynamic thermal insulationsize
and encapsulated layer. Monocrystalline silicon cells with reference efficiency 18.5% [19] and (Figure 1).
156 × 156 mm are installed in the BIPV glazed structure.
In this way, the heat losses of façade envelope decrease as consequence of the lower (static) thermal
The BIPV glazed façade structure was installed in front of the opaque south orientated façade
transmittance Ust and because part of transition heat losses preheats the air that flows inside the
wall of laboratory unit in the way, and an 80 mm thick air gap, which was between BIPV glazed
ventilated air gap.
structure andBothfaçade effects
wall,are
wasevaluated
formed. with dynamic
The façade thermal
wall 1a) consisted U
(Figuretransmittance ofeffa. To increase the
thermal
efficiency of solar
insulation energy
layer utilization,
(d 0.035 m, λ 0.035theW/mK),
BIPV was lineddesigned
by an inner as aand
semitransparent
outer layer of solid structure
wood with(d 60%
0.005 m, λ 0.14 W/mK) made of two transversely glued soft wood plates. Such building structures
of opaque PV cell area. Another reason for this BIPV design follows from optimization of multilayer
glazingare according to theasnatural
often installed opaqueheating,
parapet asshading, daylight,
part of glazed and occupancies
building façade structures,viewsince
towards the outdoor
its thermal
transmittance
environment [15]. AUsimilar
st (1.027 conclusion
W/m2K) does is not exceed in
presented the[8].
common
In thisrequired
way, both level
thefor glazed façades
ventilated BIPV on the
opaque(e.g., in Slovenia
façade structure Umax
and equals
BIPV1.3 W/m2K).
glazing canThe surface of the
be combined structure
with the same hasarchitectural
absorptivity of solar
appearance of
irradiation αs 0.65 and emissivity of IR irradiation εIR 0.9, which is close to that of concrete façade
the building. BIPV were produced by [19] and consist of two 4 mm hard glass panes and encapsulated
structures. The section of the experimental BIPV glazed façade structure is 0.435 m wide and 1.167
layer. Monocrystalline silicon cells with reference efficiency 18.5% [19] and size 156 × 156 mm are
m high, with area ABIPV 0,508 m2. All support structures, such as the installing frame and outdoor
installed in the BIPV glazed structure.
and indoor air channels were thermal insulated to keep heat transfer close to the 2D problem.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 1. Experimental semitransparent building integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) glazed façade

structure (shown by the rectangle section). (a) The façade wall with two ventilation openings, each
of them was enclosed by a fan; (b) BIPV glazed structure installed 80 mm in front of the façade wall,
and (c) interior of experimental BIPV façade structure—air channels were thermal insulated during
the experiment.

The BIPV glazed façade structure was installed in front of the opaque south orientated façade wall
of laboratory unit in the way, and an 80 mm thick air gap, which was between BIPV glazed structure
and façade wall, was formed. The façade wall (Figure 1a) consisted of a thermal insulation layer
(d 0.035 m, λ 0.035 W/mK), lined by an inner and outer layer of solid wood (d 0.005 m, λ 0.14 W/mK)
made of two transversely glued soft wood plates. Such building structures are often installed as opaque
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 4 of 19

parapet as part of glazed building façade structures, since its thermal transmittance Ust (1.027 W/m2 K)
does not exceed the common required level for glazed façades (e.g., in Slovenia Umax equals 1.3 W/m2 K).
The surface of the structure has absorptivity of solar irradiation αs 0.65 and emissivity of IR irradiation
εIR 0.9, which is close to that of concrete façade structures. The section of the experimental BIPV glazed
façade structure is 0.435 m wide and 1.167 m high, with area ABIPV 0,508 m2 . All support structures,
such as the installing frame and outdoor and indoor air channels were thermal insulated to keep heat
transfer close to the 2D problem.
The air gap was forced ventilated by two DC fans with power of 2 W at a supply voltage of 12 V.
.
By changing the supply voltage, ventilation air flow rate V a,in was set on a daily basis to the value
between 0 m3 /h and 61.5 m3 /h and kept constant all day long. If reverse flow fans were used instead,
the overheating protection by forced ventilation of the air gap with cooler indoor air instead of warmer
outdoor air, could be applied. The thermal response of the BIPV glazed façade structure in case of
the non-ventilated air gap was tested to examine the static thermal transmittance Ust of the structure,
while other discrete values of ventilation air flow rates were selected based on the indoor air quality
(IAQ). It was assumed that the office with a net volume Vn of 35 m3 and a useful area Au 14 m2 will be
equipped by the pilot BIPV shown in Figure 1. One person (1.2 met, 1 clo) occupied the office between
8:00 and 17:00 and emitted SCO2 800 mg of CO2 per minute [20]. No brake or leaving from the office
was assumed. When the person started to work, the CO2,8:00 concentration was equal to the outdoor
concentration 500 ppm. The first order concentration model was used to determine transient CO2,t
concentrations assuming constant conservative (decay factor k = 0) pollutant source SCO2 [21]:
.
SCO2 + CCO2,8:00 · V a,i  mg 
CCO2,t→∞ = . (1)
V a,i + k.Vn m3
|{z}
decay
|{z}
0
.
V a,i  mg 
− Vn ·t
CCO2,t = CCO2,t→∞ + (CCO2,t=0 − CCO2,t→∞ ) · e . (2)
m3
Taking into account IAQ quality categories as defined in [22], the CO2,17:00 concentration that
appeared in the office at the end of the workday (at 17:00) did not exceed class III (1350 ppm above
.
outdoor concentration) if office was ventilated with constant air flow rate V a,in 19.5 m3 /h, and class
I requirements (550 ppm above outdoor concentration) were achieved if office was ventilated with
.
constant air flow rate V a,in 62 m3 /h.

2.2. Experiment Setup

The pilot BIPV glazed façade structure was installed on the south oriented façade wall of laboratory
building (Figure 1). The indoor environment was heated and cooled with a split air–air heat pump.
An appliance built-in control unit was used to control indoor air temperature and because large
solar gains were caused by other glazed structures, the laboratory building was often chilled at noon.
This resulted in indoor air temperature periodical oscillations, but we want to point out that at least
Class II [22] of thermal comfort was achieved during the experiment. BIPV and the laboratory building
were equipped with sensors shown in Figure 2. Global solar radiation on the vertical surface was
measured with a Kipp & Zonen CMP3 pyranometer (measurement uncertainty ± 5%) [23]. Downward
atmospheric long-wave radiation was measured with a Kipp & Zonen CG1 pyrgeometer (measurement
uncertainty ± 4%). Other meteorological parameters were measured using a Vantage Pro 2 weather
station: ambient air temperature (± 0.5 ◦ C) and wind velocity (± 5%) [24]. The weather station was
installed on the roof of the laboratory test building (Figure 2b). Temperatures of air (indoor and in the
ventilated air gap) and surface temperatures (BIPV and façade wall) were measured with calibrated
K-type thermocouples (± 0.25 ◦ C). Heat flux at the interior surface of the composite façade wall was
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 5 of 19

Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW

measured with an AHLBORN FQ A018 C sensor (± 8%) [25]. Air velocity in the middle of the5 round
of 19

tube was measured with an Almemo thermoanemometer FV A645 TH3 (± 3%). All measured data was
round tube was measured with an Almemo thermoanemometer FV A645 TH3 (± 3%). All
monitored in one-minute intervals, using a data acquisition units Agilent 34970A [26] and AHLBORN
measured data was monitored in one-minute intervals, using a data acquisition units Agilent
Almemo 2290-4, the latter only for the thermoanemometer.
34970A [26] and AHLBORN Almemo 2290-4, the latter only for the thermoanemometer.

Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 19

round tube was measured with an Almemo thermoanemometer FV A645 TH3 (± 3%). All
measured data was monitored in one-minute intervals, using a data acquisition units Agilent
34970A [26] and AHLBORN Almemo 2290-4, the latter only for the thermoanemometer.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 2.
2. Position
Positionof
ofsensors
sensors (a)
(a)and
and meteorological
meteorological station
station Vantage
Vantage Pro 2 (b).

2.3.
2.3.Research
ResearchMethods
Methods
The
Theenergy
energyefficiency
efficiencyof offunctionality
functionality mode,mode, as as well
well as
astotal
totalenergy
energyefficiency
efficiencyofofsolar
solar energy
energy
utilization, were determined on the basis of an in situ experiment. The efficiency
utilization, were determined on the basis of an in situ experiment. The efficiency of PV was of PV was determined
ondetermined
the basis ofon measured (a) (b) of the inner surface of
the basistransmittance of solar irradiation
of measured transmittance andirradiation
of solar temperature and temperature of the
BIPV glazing
inner surface ofT Figure. The in
BIPV2.glazing
PV,si situ experiment
PositionTof sensors
PV,si was
(a)situ
. The in performed
andexperiment
meteorologicalbetween
was station 25 December
Vantage
performed 2019
25thand
Pro 2 (b).
between 15 April
December
2020. Measured data were gathered in 1-minute
2019 and 15th April 2020. Measured data were gathered in meas intervals (∆t ). The solar irradiation
1-minute intervals (Δtmeas). The G and
solar
glob,90
2.3. Research
outdoor
irradiation GMethods
air temperature Te during
glob,90 and outdoor airthe experimentTare
temperature shownthe
e during in experiment
Figure 3. Theare range
shownof meteorological
in Figure 3.
parameters
The range appearing
of during
meteorological the experiments
parameters are
appearing shown in
during Table
the 1.
experiments are shown in Table 1.
The energy efficiency of functionality mode, as well as total energy efficiency of solar energy
Energy efficiency indicators were developed as diurnal values by summarizing and averaging the
utilization, were determined on the basis of an in situ experiment. The efficiency of PV was
measured data. Although most indicators involve diurnal average values, some of them are developed
determined on the basis of measured transmittance of solar irradiation and temperature of the
using shorter time intervals. For example, the efficiency of electricity production indicators involve
inner surface of BIPV glazing TPV,si. The in situ experiment was performed between 25th December
average meteorological data for the day-time period when G > 0 W/m or the efficiency indicators
2
2019 and 15th April 2020. Measured data were gathered glob,90 in 1-minute intervals (Δtmeas). The solar
related to preheating of the ventilation air were developed taking into account the occupancy period in
irradiation Gglob,90 and outdoor air temperature Te during the experiment are shown in Figure 3.
office buildings (8:00 to 17:00).
The range of meteorological parameters appearing during the experiments are shown in Table 1.

Figure 3. Solar irradiation received by BIPV Gglob,90 and outdoor air temperature Te, which occurred
during the experiment.

Table 1. Average and extreme values of meteorological variables during the duration of the
experiment.

Average Max Min

Meteorological
Figure variable
3. Solar irradiation Maxoccurred
received by BIPV Gglob,90 and outdoor air temperature Te , which Min
Exp.
Figure 3. Solar irradiation received by BIPV Period
Gglob,90 Dailyairav.
and outdoor Daily T
temperature av.
e, which occurred
during the experiment.
during the
Outdoor airexperiment.
temperature Te (°C) 5.75 16.3 −2.8 25.6 −8.7
Solar irradiation Gglob,90 (W/m2) 11324h 841 46
Table
Solar 1. Average
radiation and (Wh/m
Hglob,90,day extreme2day)
values of meteorological
2706 variables during the duration
5410 of the
274
experiment.
IR sky radiation HIR,90,day (Wh/m2day) 7858 8791 6924
Average Max Min
Meteorological variable Max Min
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 6 of 19

Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 19

Table 1. Average and extreme values of meteorological variables during the duration of the experiment.
Wind velocity vw (m/s) 0.49 1.84 0.03 5.6 0.0
Energy efficiency indicators were Average
developed as Max
diurnal Min by summarizing and
values
Meteorological Variable Max Min
Exp. Period Daily av. Daily av.
averaging the measured data.◦Although most indicators involve diurnal average values, some of
Outdoor air temperature Te ( C) 5.75 16.3 −2.8 25.6 −8.7
them are developed using shorter time 113
Solar irradiation Gglob,90 (W/m2 )
intervals. For example, the efficiency 841
of electricity
46
24h
production indicators
Solar radiation involve
Hglob,90,day (Wh/maverage
2 day) meteorological
2706 data for the day-time period 5410 when 274Gglob,90 >
2 day)
0 W/m 2 or
IR sky the efficiency
radiation indicators
HIR,90,day (Wh/m related7858
to preheating of the ventilation air8791 were developed
6924
Wind velocity v
taking into account thewoccupancy period in0.49
(m/s) office buildings1.84 (8:00 to 17:00).
0.03 5.6 0.0

In the second evaluation step, statistical methods were used to define the influential
parameters
In the second for each of the step,
evaluation energy efficiency
statistical indicators.
methods were used to define the influential parameters
for each In of the
the final
energyevaluation
efficiencystep, influential parameters were involved as independent variables
indicators.
inInthe
thestatistical evaluation
final evaluation step,ofinfluential
multi-parametric
parametersapproximation
were involved models developed variables
as independent for each of in
theenergy
statisticalefficiency indicators.
evaluation These approximation
of multi-parametric approximationmodels can bedeveloped
models integratedforinto
eachmodels for
of energy
determining
efficiency the energy
indicators. These performance
approximation of models
buildings canonbethe basis of daily
integrated energy for
into models balance and canthe
determining be
usedperformance
energy for climate conditions
of buildings at least
on thein basis
the range of values
of daily energy ofbalance
meteorological
and canparameters
be used forasclimate
listed
in Tableat1.least in the range of values of meteorological parameters as listed in Table 1.
conditions

3. Energy Efficiency
3. Energy Indicators
Efficiency Indicators
Although experimental
Although experimentaldatadata
waswas
gathered in one-minute
gathered in one-minuteintervals, the energy
intervals, efficiency
the energy of solar
efficiency of
energy utilization with the pilot BIPV glazed façade structure, and the indicators
solar energy utilization with the pilot BIPV glazed façade structure, and the indicators of eachof each operation
mode of the BIPV
operation mode façade
of thestructure are presented
BIPV façade structureasaredaily averageasordaily
presented integral values.
average As such,values.
or integral indicators
As
cansuch,
be implemented in a monthly calculation procedure, which is still commonly used
indicators can be implemented in a monthly calculation procedure, which is still commonly in engineering
practice,
used inand can be usedpractice,
engineering for assessment
and canof be
nZEB as for
used wellassessment
[27]. The indicators
of nZEB as arewell
schematically presented
[27]. The indicators
in Figure 4. In addition
are schematically to those
presented solar energy
in Figure utilization
4. In addition indicators
to those for which
solar energy the approximation
utilization indicators for
models were developed, some other are shown to emphasize the advantages
which the approximation models were developed, some other are shown to emphasize of the pilot BIPV glazed
the
façade structure.
advantages of the pilot BIPV glazed façade structure.

Figure 4. Scheme of indicators of the efficiency of solar energy utilization with the pilot semitransparent
Figure 4. Scheme of indicators of the efficiency of solar energy utilization with the pilot
BIPV glazed façade structure; diurnal electricity production EPV ; diurnal heat supplied with preheated
semitransparent BIPV glazed façade structure; diurnal electricity production EPV; diurnal heat
air for space ventilation Qa,in ; and heat gains through the opaque façade wall Qi,sol were the basis
supplied with preheated air for space ventilation Qa,in; and heat gains through the opaque façade
for developing approximation models of energy efficiency, while others, such as static Ust , dynamic
wall Qi,sol were the basis for developing approximation models of energy efficiency, while others,
thermal transmittance Ueff , and preheating efficiency εv , are used to emphases the advantage of the
such as static Ust, dynamic thermal transmittance Ueff, and preheating efficiency εv, are used to
pilot semitransparent BIPV glazed façade structure.
emphases the advantage of the pilot semitransparent BIPV glazed façade structure.

3.1. Electricity Production

Energies 2020, 13, 2772 7 of 19

3.1. Electricity Production

The amount of diurnal produced electricity was determined by analytical model considering the
measured values of influenced parameters in each time step of observation ∆tmeas . Daily amount of
produced electricity is determined by equation:

tss0 !
1X Wh
EPV = APV · nPV · KT · KG · G glob,β ∆tmeas , (3)
60 day
tsr0

where tsr‘ and tss‘ are sunrise and sunset time relative to the BIPV structure, respectively, indicating the
time frame when PV cells produce electricity. KT is the efficiency factor that corresponds to corrected
PV cell efficiency and includes temperature coefficient β, which depends on PV cell technology. Value
−0.46%/K was assumed for m-Si cells [28–30]. APV and nPV are the area of an individual PV cell
(0.156 × 0.156 m) and the number of PV cells in the BIPV [15,19]. Because BIPV has relatively thick glass
layers (4 + EPA + 4 mm, λ 0.76 W/mK), the PV cell temperature TPV was modelled by combining the
heat transfer model and measurements of surface temperature on the outer and inner glass. The surface
glass temperatures were measured behind the 2nd row and 6th row of the PV cell (TBIPV,2 , TBIPV,6 ).
It was found that in the case of ventilated air gap, there was not a significant difference between
both temperatures, and an average value was used as the representative surface glass temperature.
According to the CFD computer simulations, the combined surface heat transfer coefficient hr+c,e
15 W/m2 K and hr+c,i 6 W/m2 K were assumed and PV cell temperature TPV is approximated in the
following way:
  TPV  
 z }| { 
  
KT = ηre f · 1 + β · TPV,si + 0.0064 + 0.0013 · G glob,β  − 25 (−), (4)
   
  




where TPV,si is temperature of the BIPV surface behind the PV cell towards the air gap. The reference
efficiency ηref was taken from producer data [19] and is equal to 0.185. Solar irradiation correction
factor KG considers the decrease of PV cell efficiency at low level of solar irradiation [15]:
 
W 0.029 · ln G glob,90 − 0.0037 W
K g = 1 if G glob,90 ≥ 200 and if G glob,90 < 200 . (5)
m2 ηre f m2

To investigate the impact of ventilation of the air gap on PV cell overheating, diurnal overheating
hours OHH was introduced. OHH is defined as diurnal sum of the difference between modeled PV
cell temperature and PV cell reference temperature 25 ◦ C:

tss0 !
1X Kh
OHH = δ · (TPV − 25) · ∆tmeas δ = 1 if (TPV − 25) > 0 otherwise δ = 0 . (6)
60 day
tsr0

As an example, Figure 5 shows measured data for two selected days—the clear sky and overcast
cloudy day, and diurnal variables involved in energy efficiency modeling—daily solar radiation
received by BIPV Hglob,90 , average daily outdoor air temperature during PV cell operation Te,avg,PV ,
.
average wind velocity during PV cell operation time vW,avg,PV (m/s), and V a,in ventilation air flow rate.
In the case presented in Figure 5a, BIPV was not ventilated, while in the case shown in Figure 5b
.
BIPV was ventilated with air flow rate Va, in. Concerning the surface glass temperature behind the
PV cells (TBIPV,2 and TBIPV,6 ), it can be seen that temperatures differ only in the case of non-ventilated
(closed) air gap (mark c) as consequence of buoyancy driven convection—by solar irradiation during
day-time and by heat flux due heat losses during the night-time. This causes counter flow pattern
during the night-time and higher TBIPV,6 when compared to TBIPV,1 .
 As an example, Figure 5 shows measured data for two selected days—the clear sky and
overcast cloudy day, and diurnal variables involved in energy efficiency modeling—daily solar
radiation received by BIPV Hglob,90, average daily outdoor air temperature during PV cell operation
Te,avg,PV2020,
Energies , average wind velocity during PV cell operation time vW,avg,PV (m/s), and Va,in ventilation air
13, 2772 8 of 19
flow rate.

(a) (b)

Figure 5. Graphs showing instant ηPV and average diurnal PV cell efficiency ηPV,avg , instant
.
electricity power EPV , and diurnal production of electricity EPV (a), PV cell temperatures (glass
surface temperatures behind PV cell towards ventilated air gap) in the 2nd (TBIPV,2 ) and the 6th row
(TBIPV,6 ) in BIPV, overheating hours (OHH) and selected meteorological data—solar irradiation Gglob,90 ,
diurnal solar radiation Hglob,90 , and instant and daily average outdoor air temperature (Te , Te,avg ) (b).

3.2. Preheating of Ventilation Air

The air gap formed by BIPV was force ventilated by outdoor air. Two by two temperature sensors
were installed at the outlet openings, on both sides of fans. It was found that an increase of the air
temperature caused by fans can be neglected. Data on air velocity in the center of the supply pipe,
gathered by a hot-wire anemometer, was used to determine volumetric air flow using a continuity
equation. Because air flow is turbulent even in case of lowest flow rate set, the volume (and mass) air
flow rate was determined by averaging velocity using the Blasius formula and continuity equation.
Daily heat transferred into the building by preheated air was determined by the sum of one-minute
experimental data over the 24-hour period starting each day at 6:00 in the morning:

+6:00 .
!
1 X 1 Wh
Qa,in = · ρa · cp,a · V a,in · (Ta,in − Te ) · ∆tmeas , (7)
60 3600 day
6:00

.
where ρa is air density, cp,a specific heat capacity of air, V a,in is volume air flow rate, Ta,in is supply
air temperature, and Te is outdoor temperature. Preheating efficiency of ventilation air, value that
can be compared to the heat recovery efficiency in case of mechanical ventilation with recovery unit,
is defined by averaging supply air, outdoor air, and indoor air temperatures over the occupied office
hours (8:00–17:00), assuming constant ventilation air flow rate during observation period:
!17:00
Ta,in,avg − Te,avg
εv = · 100(%). (8)
Ti,avg − Te,avg 8:00

Preheating efficiency εv can be above 100% if Ta,in,avg > Ti,avg, and Te,avg < Ti,avg . Figure 6 shows
an example of experimental data for the selected days. The average air inlet temperature during
work-hours Ta,in,avg , the integrated solar radiation Hglob,90 received by the BIPV, and heat transferred
.
by air into the building Qa,in are shown as well. Because average supply air temperature Ta,in,avg in
Figure 6b is above average indoor air temperature Ti,avg while average outdoor temperature Te,avg is
below Ti,avg , the air preheating efficiency is above 100%.
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 9 of 19
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 19

(a) (b)
Figure6.6. Graphs showing
Figure showing outdoor outdoorand andindoor
indoorair
airtemperatures
temperatures and thethe
and temperature of supplied
temperature of supplied
preheatedair
preheated air(T(T
, T
e
e .i , T
, ,
and
i andT T
a,in );
a,in); velocity,
velocity, ventilation
ventilation air air volume
volume flow flow
rate, rate,
and and
heat heat
flux by flux by
preheated
.
 
a ,in , and Qa,in ); average ventilation air temperature during office occupant
(va, QVa,in
air (va , V a,inair
preheated , and ); average ventilation air temperature during office occupant hours Ta,in,avg ;
air preheating efficiency (εv ); as well as solar irradiation Gglob,90 ; and diurnal solar radiation Hglob,90 ;
hours Ta,in,avg; air preheating efficiency (εv); as well as solar irradiation Gglob,90; and diurnal solar
as well as diurnal heat transferred into the ventilated space by preheated air Qa,in ; (a) for 14 January
radiation Hglob,90; as well as diurnal heat transferred into the ventilated space by preheated air Qa,in;
2020 and (b) for 28 February 2020.
(a) for 14th January 2020 and (b) for 28th February 2020.
3.3. Dynamic Thermal Insulation
3.3. Dynamic Thermal Insulation
Because building envelope structure is ventilated and air is supplied to the indoor space, part of
the heatBecause
lossesbuilding envelopeand
can be recovered structure
the BIPV is ventilated
structure and acts air is supplied
as dynamic to the insulation.
thermal indoor space, part
Efficiency
of the heat losses can be recovered and the BIPV structure acts as dynamic
of heat loss recovery is determined by comparing daily actual heat losses to theoretical ones at steady thermal insulation.
Efficiency
state of heattaking
conditions, loss recovery is determined
into account referenceby comparing
thermal daily actual
transmittance of heat losses to theoretical
the composite façade wall,
ones at steady state conditions, taking into account reference
which was upgraded with the BIPV structure—Ust 1.027 W/m K (Figure 1). Transmission heat 2 thermal transmittance of the
losses
composite façade wall, which was upgraded with the BIPV structure—U
of the BIPV structure were evaluated by static thermal transmittance Ust , while effective thermal st 1.027 W/m2K (Figure

1). Transmission
transmittance Ueffheat
was losses of thebased
evaluated BIPVon structure
the transientwere evaluated by staticof
thermal response thermal
the BIPV transmittance
structure. Ust
U st, while effective thermal transmittance Ueff was evaluated based on the transient thermal
was determined by instant indoor Ti and outdoor Te air temperatures and heat flux was measured
response of the BIPV of structure. Ust was . determined by values
instant for
indoor Ti andbetween
outdoor23:00Te airand
on the internal surface the structure qsi using measured the period
temperatures
6:00+ o’clock inandeachheat flux
day, to was measured
minimize the impact onofthe internal surface
accumulated of theAtstructure
solar energy. qsi using
that period, the heat
measured
transfer wasvalues
close tofor
thethe period
steady between
state, because 23:00 and 6:00+ o’clock
the temperature in each
difference (Ti −day, to minimize
Te ) was the
almost constant.
impact
With theof accumulated
Ust solar energy.
value, the impact At thatskin
of the double period,
façade, theasheat transfer
well as the was
forced close to the steady
ventilation of thestate,
air gap,
because
was the temperature
evaluated and compared difference
to that of (Tthe
i − T Ue)stwas
of the almost constant.
reference With
building the Ust value,
envelope the(Figure
structure impact2a).
of the
The doublethermal
dynamic skin façade, as well Uaseff the
transmittance wasforced
defined ventilation of the
in the similar way,airthe gap,
only was evaluated
difference wasandin the
compared to that of the U of the reference building envelope structure
evaluation period, which was in this case all day long (6:00 to 6:00+1 day). The following equations
st (Figure 2a). The dynamic
thermal
were used:transmittance Ueff was defined in the similar way, the only difference was in the
+6:00 .
evaluation period, which was in this 1case 1 X all day longqsi (6:00 to 6:00+1 
W day). The following equations

Ust = · ∆tmeas , (9)
were used: 7 60 (Ti − Te ) m2 K
23:00
1 1 ++ 6:00 q si .  W 
6:00
U st = 1 1  qsi ⋅ Δtmeas   2W  , (9)
Ue f f = 7 60 23:00 (Ti − Te )
X
· ∆tmeas m K  . (10)
24 60
6:00
(Ti − Te ) m2 K

The impact of unsteady parameters 1 1(H+glob,90

6:00
 sie , and vW ), as well
, qT  impact of ventilation air flow
W as
. U eff =
24 60
rate V a,in , are considered by the effective

thermal − Te )
⋅ Δtmeas  2  .
6:00 ( Titransmittance Ueffm. Examples
K
(10)
of evaluation are shown
in Figure 7.
The impact of unsteady parameters (Hglob,90, Te, and vW ), as well as impact of ventilation air
flow rate Va,in , are considered by the effective thermal transmittance Ueff. Examples of evaluation
are shown in Figure 7.
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 10 of 19
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 19

(a) (b)
Figure7.7.An
Figure An example
example of of measured
measured values
values usedused for evaluation
for the the evaluation
of theofenergy
the energy efficiency
efficiency of
of dynamic
dynamic
thermal thermal insulation
insulation of the BIPVofglazed
the BIPV glazed
façade façade (a)
structure. structure. (a) In
In the case of the case
heavy of heavy
cloudy daycloudy
(1 March
day (1
2020), st March 2020), because the air gap was ventilated, Ust was equal to reference thermal
because the air gap was ventilated, Ust was equal to reference thermal transmittance of composite
façade structureof(U
transmittance composite façade2 K)structure
and Ueff (U ref 1.027 W/m2toK)the
andUUsteff; (b)
waseven
veryinclose to theofUclear
st;
ref 1.027 W/m was very close the case
(b)weather
sky even in the
(21 case of clear
February sky weather
2020), the Ust was (21 very
st February
close 2020),
to the the Ust wasvalue,
reference very close
whiletodynamic
the reference
thermal
value, while dynamic
transmittance was much thermal
lower, transmittance was muchdifference
indicating a significant lower, indicating
in diurnal a significant
transmissiondifference
heat loss
Qini,soldiurnal transmission
from the pilot BIPV heat loss
glazed Qi,sol from
façade the pilot BIPV glazed façade structure.
structure.

3.4.
3.4.Overall
OverallEfficiency
EfficiencyofofSolar
SolarEnergy
EnergyUtilization
Utilization
Overall
Overallefficiency
efficiencyofof solar energy
solar energy utilization
utilization by the by pilot
the pilotBIPV BIPV glazedglazed façadefaçade structure includes
structure
energy
includesgains relatedgains
energy to production
related to of electricity,
production preheating of ventilation
of electricity, preheating air, andof decreased
ventilationtransmission
air, and
heat losses due to the dynamic thermal insulation. In fact,
decreased transmission heat losses due to the dynamic thermal insulation. In fact, the latter is not achieved solely by utilization
the latter is not
ofachieved
solar energy
solelybut by also due toof
utilization lower
solarthermal
energy but transmittance
also due tooflower the BIPV thermal structure,
transmittance nevertheless
of theall
indicators are normalized
BIPV structure, to diurnal
nevertheless received solar
all indicators radiation Hto
are normalized diurnal
glob,90 . The overall
received efficiency is defined
solar radiation
by the sum of partial efficiencies in the following way:
Hglob,90. The overall efficiency is defined by the sum of partial efficiencies in the following way:

 EEPVPV++ ( )
  
  
+ −

Q Q a,i + Q  Qloss,re Q − Q
η sol . BIPV
ηsol.BIPV η PV , BIPV++ηηa,BIPV
= η=PV,BIPV +η
a , BIPV +
 
i , sol , BIPV == 
ηi,sol,BIPV
a , i loss , ref f loss , i loss,i
 (−()−, ), (11)
  HH ⋅ A · A
BIPVBIPV
  (11)
 globglob,90
,90

where:
where:  0,6 ·A   0,6 ·A 
BIPV
0,6z⋅A }|BIPV{ 
  0,6
 ⋅ A
       
 z 
}|BIPV { BIPV

EEPV   A
⋅ 
· nPV   APV
⋅ · nPV 

ηPV,BIPV A PV n A n
ηPV , BIPV= =H glob,90 ·PVABIPV ==ηηPVPV⋅ ·  PVABIPV = = KT K⋅ TK·GK⋅G · PV ABIPV  (−(−
 ),

(12)
PV
 PV
),

(12)
H glob,90 ⋅ ABIPV  A
  BIPV  
 
 A
  BIPV  
   
1 17:00
P .
0.34 · 1 17:00 V a,in · (Ta,in − Te ) · ∆tmeas
8:00Va ,in ⋅ (Ta ,in − Te ) ⋅ Δtmeas
= 0.34 ⋅ 60 
Qa,in 60
ηa,BIPV = Qa ,in (−), (13)
(13)
ηa , BIPV
= glob,90 · ABIPV =
H 8:00H
glob,90 · ABIPV ( −) ,
H glob,90 ⋅ ABIPV H glob,90 ⋅ ABIPV
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 11 of 19
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 19
 2  
1,027W/m K  
 z}|{
1,027W/m 2 K  
!
 1 + 6:00 . 
 Ust,re f · Ti,avg − Te,avg · 24 − 1    · ABIPV 
+6:00
 
( ) 60
∆t
P
q ·

  U st , ref ⋅ Ti , avg − Te, avg ⋅ 24 −  60 q ⋅ Δtmeas  ⋅ ABIPV
si meas
6:00 si
 

  6:00

 (14)
ηi , sol , BIPV
= = (−()−.).

ηi,sol,BIPV (14)
glob ,90 ⋅ ABIPV
HHglob,90 · ABIPV
The
Theconstant
constant0.34
0.34replaces
replacesthe
theproduct
productofofair
airdensity
densityand
andspecific
specificheat
heatcapacity.
capacity.Figure
Figure88shows
showsan
example of overall efficiency of solar energy utilization
an example of overall efficiency of solar energy utilization η ηsol,BIPV determined by measured in
sol,BIPV determined by measured data two
data
days during the experiment period.
in two days during the experiment period.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 8. 8. Overall
Overall efficiency
efficiency of solar
of solar energyenergy
utilization ηBIPV ofηthe
utilization of the
BIPV pilot BIPVpilot BIPV
glazed glazed
façade façade(a)
structure
.
th
onstructure
8 January (a) 2020
on 8 and
th January
(b) on2020th
20 and (b) on2020;
February 20 in
th February
the case2020; inventilation
(a) the the case (a)air
the ventilation
flow rate V a,inair
was
m3 /h,
3.5flow andVconsequently,
rate a ,in was 3.5 m 3/h,utilization
the and consequently,
of solar the
energy utilization
for of
preheating solar
of energy
the for preheating
ventilation air of
decreased,
while the temperature
the ventilation of the supply
air decreased, whileair Ta,in
the increased of
temperature above indoor air temperature and efficiency εv
. the supply air Ta,in increased above indoor
was above 100%; the case (b) was the opposite
air temperature and efficiency εv was above 100%; thea,in because V case (b)much
was was higher and utilization
the opposite because of Vasolar
,in
energy was higher, while preheating air efficiency εv was significantly lower.
was much higher and utilization of solar energy was higher, while preheating air efficiency εv was
significantly
4. Results lower.
and Discussion

4.1. Parametric
4. Results andStudy
Discussion
The impact of daily solar radiation, average daily outdoor air temperature, and ventilation air
4.1. Parametric Study
flow rate on the static thermal transmittance Ust was analyzed and shown in Figure 9a. The Ust was
The impact
determined of daily data,
from measured solar gathered
radiation,between
average23:00
dailyandoutdoor
6:00 theair temperature,
next morning. Itand can be ventilation
concluded
air flow rate on the static thermal transmittance U
that the Ust is practically independent of daily solar radiation Hglob,90 (c2), and values in theThe
st was analyzed and shown in Figure 9a. Ust
middle
ofwas determined
the air flow rate fromrangemeasured
are ~ 0.04data, 2
W/mgathered
K lower between
when compared 23:00 andto 6:00 thethe
that of next morning.
reference It can
composite
be concluded
façade wall (c1) that
due the
to theUstincreased
is practically independent
thermal resistances ofof
daily solar and
the BIPV radiation Hglob,90
air gap. No (c2), and values
significant impact
ofinmid-range
the middle of the
daily air flow
average rate air
outdoor range are ~ 0.04 W/m
temperatures 2
Te,av canK lower
be seenwhen compared
either. This result to that of the
corresponds
toreference composite
the fact that composite façade
wallwall (c1) due to the
is light-weight increased
with thermal resistances
limited potential for storing ofthethe BIPVheat.
(solar) and air
This
gap.
also No significant
confirms that theimpact
thermalofresponse
mid-range daily the
through average outdoor
previous day air
does temperatures
not affect theTheat
e,av can be seenof
response
either.
the BIPV This
the nextresult
day,corresponds
leading to the to conclusion
the fact that that composite wall isindicators
energy efficient light-weight can with limited
be determined
bypotential
averaging fordata
storing
overthe the(solar)
proposed heat.time
This also confirms
period that the
(6:00 to 6:00+). The thermal
impactresponse
of the airthrough
flow ratetheVa,i
previous day does not affect the heat response of the BIPV the next day,
can be noticed only when the air gap was not ventilated (Ust is lowered to the range between 0.80 to leading to the conclusion
thatW/m
0.85 2 K) and
energy efficient indicators
at its highest can be
air flow rate,determined
at which Uby averaging data 2 K (c3).
over the proposed time
st increases to 10 W/m Some additional
period
data (6:00
would to 6:00+).
increase theThe impact of this
credibility the air flow rate Va,i can be noticed only when the air gap was
finding.
not ventilated (Ust is lowered to the range between 0.80 to 0.85 W/m2K) and at its highest air flow
rate, at which Ust increases to 10 W/m2K (c3). Some additional data would increase the credibility
of this finding.
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 12 of 19
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 19
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 19

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 9. Static thermal transmittance Ust of the glazed BIPV façade structure with a forced
Figure9.9.Static
Figure Static thermal
thermal transmittance
transmittance Ust U of glazed
ofstthe the glazed
BIPV BIPV
façadefaçade structure
structure with a with
forcedaventilated
forced
ventilated air gap; (a) impact of the daily solar radiation Hglob,90 received by the BIPV façade
ventilated
air air gap;
gap; (a) impact (a) daily
of the impact of radiation
solar the dailyHsolar
glob,90 radiation
received byHglob,90
the BIPVreceived
façadebystructure
the BIPV andfaçade
average
structure and average daily outdoor air Te,avg (equal to the temperature of the ventilation air at the
structure
daily and air
outdoor average
Te,avg daily
(equaloutdoor
to the air Te,avg (equaloftothe
temperature theventilation
temperatureairofat thethe
ventilation air air
inlet of the at the
gap);
inlet of the air gap); (b) impact of the solar radiation and ventilation air flow rate Va,i. .
inlet
(b) of the
impact ofair
thegap);
solar(b) impact and
radiation of the solar radiation
ventilation and
air flow ventilation
rate Va,i . air flow rate Va,i. .

The dynamic thermal transmittance Ueff shows a significantly greater dependence on the
The
Thedynamic
dynamic thermal transmittance Ueff
thermal transmittance shows aasignificantly
eff shows significantlygreater greaterdependence
dependenceonon thethe
influencing parameters (Figure 10). In theory, at low daily solar radiation (Hglob,90 < 300 Wh/day)
influencing
influencingparameters
parameters(Figure(Figure10).10). In theory, at low daily daily solar
solar radiation
radiation(H (Hglob,90
glob,90 < 300
< 300 Wh/day)
Wh/day)
dynamic thermal transmittance approaches static one (c1) regardless of the outdoor air
dynamic
dynamicthermal
thermal transmittance
transmittance approaches
approaches staticstatic
one (c1)oneregardless of the outdoor
(c1) regardless of the air temperature.
outdoor air
temperature. At higher daily solar radiation Ueff decrease linearly (c4), while it increases with the
At higher daily solar radiation
temperature. At higher daily solar U eff radiation Ueff decrease linearly (c4), while it increases with thethe
decrease linearly (c4), while it increases with the decreasing of
decreasing of the outdoor air temperature Te,avg (c2). The dynamic thermal transmittance Ueff2of
outdoor air temperature
decreasing of the outdoor Te,avg
air(c2). The dynamic
temperature Te,avg thermal
(c2). Thetransmittance
dynamic thermal Ueff oftransmittance
BIPV is 0.2 W/m K or
Ueff of
BIPV is 0.2 W/m22K or lower if daily average outdoor◦ temperature is above ~ 9 °C and the solar
lower
BIPVifisdaily average
0.2 W/m K oroutdoor
lower temperature
if daily average is above ~ 9 Ctemperature
outdoor and the solarisradiation
above ~ is 9 above
°C and4000 the Wh/day,
solar
radiation is above 4000 Wh/day, and when the outdoor temperature Te,avg is above ~ 5 °C, the daily
and when the
radiation outdoor
is above 4000temperature
Wh/day, and Te,avg
when is above ~ 5 ◦ C,temperature
the outdoor the daily solar is above H
Te,avgradiation ~ glob,90
5 °C, thewilldaily
be not
solar radiation Hglob,90 will be not less than 2500 Wh/day, if BIPV is not ventilated (c3). The slope
less than
solar 2500 Wh/day,
radiation if BIPV
Hglob,90 will be notis not
less ventilated
than 2500 Wh/day, BIPVofisUnot
(c3). The ifslope eff decrease
ventilated is (c3).
higher Theinslope
case of
of Ueff decrease is higher in case of non-ventilated BIPV (c5) when compared to the slope of Ueff
non-ventilated BIPV (c5) when compared to the
of Ueff decrease is higher in case of non-ventilated BIPV (c5) slope of U decrease in the case
eff when compared to the slope of Uof ventilated BIPV
eff
decrease in the case of ventilated BIPV (c4). The decrease of the Ueff with increased ventilation air
(c4). The decrease
decrease in the case of the Ueff with increased
of ventilated BIPV (c4).ventilation
The decrease air flow Ueff V
of therate a,i isincreased
with more evident at higher
ventilation airair
flow rate Va,i is more evident at higher air flow rates (C6), while it is not seen at daily solar
flow
flowrates
rate (C6),
Va,i iswhile
moreitevident
is not seen at dailyairsolar
at higher flowradiation
rates (C6), belowwhile2000 it Wh/day.
is not seen at dailyUeff
Negative were
solar
radiation below 2000 Wh/day. Negative Ueff were observed at the highest air flow rates. The wind
observed at the highest air flow rates. The wind velocity v at the experiment
radiation below 2000 Wh/day. Negative Ueff were observedwat the highest air flow rates. The wind location was so low
velocity vw at the experiment location was so low (Table 1) during the whole period of experiment
(Table 1) during
velocity vw at the the whole period
experiment of experiment
location was so lowthat it cannot
(Table 1) duringbe treated
the whole as impact
periodparameter.
of experiment
that it cannot be treated as impact parameter.
that it cannot be treated as impact parameter.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure10.10.Dynamic
Figure Dynamic thermal
thermal transmittance
transmittance Ueff ofUthe
eff of thefaçade
BIPV BIPV structure
façade structure withventilated
with a forced a forced air
Figure 10. Dynamic thermal transmittance Ueff of the BIPV façade structure with a forced
ventilated
gap; air of
(a) impact gap;
the(a)
dailyimpact
solar of the daily
radiation H solar received
radiationbyHthe BIPV
glob,90 received
façadeby the BIPV
structure andfaçade
average
ventilated air gap; (a) impact of the dailyglob,90 solar radiation Hglob,90 received by the BIPV façade
structure
daily andair
outdoor average
Te,avg ; daily outdoor
(b) impact air solar
of the Te,avg; radiation
(b) impact of the
and solar radiation
ventilation air flowand
rateventilation
Va,i . air
structure and average daily outdoor air Te,avg; (b) impact of the solar radiation and ventilation air
flow rate Va,i.
flow rate Va,i.
Energies 2019,13,
Energies2020, 12,2772
x FOR PEER REVIEW 1319
13 of of 19

The average daily efficiency of electricity production is shown in Figure 11. One must note
The average daily efficiency of electricity production is shown in Figure 11. One must note that
that values are defined for the BIPV façade structure as whole, while PV cells only cover 60% of
values are defined for the BIPV façade structure as whole, while PV cells only cover 60% of BIPV
BIPV structure. The daily efficiency ηPV,BIPV increases slightly (c2) with daily solar radiation Hglob,90
structure. The daily efficiency ηPV,BIPV increases slightly (c2) with daily solar radiation Hglob,90 above
above 2500 Wh/day, while at such conditions efficiency is almost temperature independent (c1).
2500 Wh/day, while at such conditions efficiency is almost temperature independent (c1). The reason
The reason can be in the design of glazed BIPV, which contains two relatively thick glass panes
can be in the design of glazed BIPV, which contains two relatively thick glass panes (2 × 4 mm).
(2 × 4 mm). By measurement it was determined that absorptivity of the transparent area of BIPV
By measurement it was determined that absorptivity of the transparent area of BIPV is ~ 19.5%. It was
is ~ 19.5%. It was also discovered that an increase of the ventilation air flow rate Va,i causes only
also discovered that an increase of the ventilation air flow rate Va,i causes only minor increase of
minor increase of efficiency because of the PV cells cooling (c3). It can be that at higher air flow
efficiency because of the PV cells cooling (c3). It can be that at higher air flow rate the fully developed
rate the fully developed flow occurs at a larger distance from the inlet opening. Nevertheless, as
flow occurs at a larger distance from the inlet opening. Nevertheless, as mentioned before, the difference
mentioned before, the difference between PV cell temperatures (meaning as measured—the
between PV cell temperatures (meaning as measured—the temperature of the inner glass of the BIPV
temperature of the inner glass of the BIPV behind the PV cell) in the 2nd and 6th rows only differ
behind the PV cell) in the 2nd and 6th rows only differ for < 1–1.5 ◦ C during3 clear sky conditions at air
for < 1–1.5 °C during clear sky conditions at air flow rates above 15 m /h, while temperature
flow rates above 15 m3 /h, while temperature differences up to 5.5◦ C were noticed in similar weather
differences up to 5.5°C were noticed in similar weather conditions in case of buoyancy convection
conditions in case of buoyancy convection in closed air gap. This finding indicates that additional
in closed air gap. This finding indicates that additional research will be useful in the future. In
research will be useful in the future. In this case as well, we found no evidence of impact of the wind
this case as well, we found no evidence of impact of the wind velocity vw on the PV cell efficiency
velocity vw on the PV cell efficiency as well.
as well.

(a) (b)
Figure11.11.Average
Figure Average daily
daily efficiency
efficiency of electricity
of electricity productionproduction by BIPV
by glazed glazed BIPV determined
determined considering
considering
that thatofsurface
surface area PV cellarea of PVBIPV
in glazed cell in glazed
is 60%; (a) BIPV
impact is of
60%; (a) impact
the daily of the daily
solar radiation solarand
Hglob,90
.
average daily outdoor air Te,avg ; (b) impact of the solar radiation and ventilation air flow rate Vand.
radiation H glob,90 and average daily outdoor air T e,avg; (b) impact of the solar radiation a,in
ventilation air flow rate Va ,in .
If supply air is predominantly preheated by heat losses through composite façade wall (c1 in
FigureIf12), the efficiency
supply of solar energy
air is predominantly utilization
preheated ηa,BIPV
by heat for through
losses preheating of the supply
composite façadeair for((c1
wall space
ventilation
in Figure 12),maythe rise over theofvalue
efficiency solarofenergy
one. In practice, ηthis
utilization a,BIPVisfor
thepreheating
case in days of with low daily
the supply solar
air for
radiation H
space ventilation may rise over the value of one. In practice, this is the case in days with low dailyair
glob,90 (threshold is at ~500 Wh/day). Such cases appear at daily average outdoor
temperatures
solar radiation Te,avg below
Hglob,90 8 ◦ C (c2).
(threshold Where
is at ~ 500daily solar Such
Wh/day). casesHappear
radiation glob,90 isat above
dailythat threshold
average value,
outdoor
air ηtemperatures
the a,BIPV is in theTrange 0.50 to
e,avg below 0.75(c2).
8 °C showing
Where a slightly negative
daily solar trendHdue
radiation glob,90to
is the increased
above heat losses
that threshold
value, the ηa,BIPV is in the range 0.50 to 0.75 showing a slightly negative trend due to the increased
of the BIPV glazed façade structure (c3). Consequently, at daily solar radiation above 4000 Wh/day, it
will
heat losses of the BIPV glazed façade structure (c3). Consequently, at daily solar radiation above to
be slightly below the 0.5. This means that the decrease of ventilation heat losses is comparable
the
4000mechanical
Wh/day, ventilation with heat
it will be. slightly recovery.
below Results
the 0.5. This also
means show thata slight increaseofofventilation
the decrease efficiency with
heatthe
ventilation air flow rate
losses is comparable to the V (c4), while no significant impact of the wind
a,in mechanical ventilation with heat recovery. Results also velocity v on the η slightcan
w show aa,BIPV
be found from
increase experimental
of efficiency with the ventilation air flow rate V
results.
a ,in (c4), while no significant impact of
the wind velocity vw on the ηa,BIPV can be found from experimental results.
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 14 of 19
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 19
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 19

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 12. Average
Average daily
daily efficiency of solarradiation
efficiency radiation utilization for for preheating
preheating of the supply air
Figure
Figure 12.12. Average daily efficiencyofofsolar
solar radiation utilization
utilization for preheating ofofthe
thesupply
supply
airair for
for space ventilation; (a) impact of the daily solar radiation H
Hglob,90 and average daily outdoor air
space
for ventilation; (a) impact of theofdaily solarsolar
radiation and average
averagedaily
dailyoutdoor
outdoorairair Te,avg ;
glob,90
space ventilation; (a) impact the daily radiation H. glob,90 and

rate V ,in .
a,in . Vaa,in
Te,avg; (b)ofimpact of the solar radiation and ventilation air flow
(b) Timpact the solar
e,avg; (b) impact radiation
of the and ventilation
solar radiation air flow
and ventilation flowVrate
airrate .

Solar radiation
Solar radiation thatthatpassed passedthrough
through glazedglazed BIPV BIPV façadefaçadestructure
structure waswas absorbed
absorbed on the on theopaque
Solar radiation that passed through glazed BIPV façade structure was absorbed on the
opaque façade
composite composite wall. façade wall. Consequently,
Consequently, heat loss decreased
heat loss decreased or even turned or even turned into gain.
the heat
opaque composite façade wall. Consequently, heat loss decreased or eveninto turned the heat
into the If solar
heat
heat gain.
gainsIf exceed
solar heat gains exceed
steady-state heatsteady-state
loss on the heat
daily
gain. If solar heat gains exceed steady-state heat loss on the daily basis, the
loss on the
basis, thedaily
valuebasis,
of ηthe value of η
value of ηi,sol,BIPV will than
i,sol,BIPV will be greater
i,sol,BIPV will
zero.be greater
The heat than
gains zero. The
areThe defined heat gains
by the are defined by the product of the η and daily solar
areproduct
defined of bythe
theηproduct and thedaily solar
ηi,sol,BIPV radiation Hglob,90 .
i,sol,BIPV
be greater than zero. heat gains i,sol,BIPV of and daily solar
radiation
Figure H . η
Figure 13 shows how η depends on
radiation Hglob,90. Figure 13 shows how ηi,sol,BIPV depends on influence parameters: daily solar, daily
13 shows how
glob,90
i,sol,BIPV depends on influence
i,sol,BIPV parameters: influence
daily parameters:
solar radiation dailyH solar
glob,90
radiation
average Hglob,90, daily average
outdoor outdoor
Te,avg temperature Tvolume e,avg, and ventilation air volume flow rate Va,i.
flow rate Vair
radiation Hglob,90temperature
, daily average , and ventilation
outdoor temperatureair Te,avg, and ventilation a,i .volume
One must flownote,rate that
Va,i. only
One
40%One must
of the
must
note,
total
note, BIPV that only
thatstructure
40% of the
only 40%isoftransparent.
total
the total BIPV
BIPV The structure
ηi,sol,BIPV
structure
is transparent.
slightly risesThe
is transparent.
The
with η i,sol,BIPV slightly rises
ηi,sol,BIPV
dailyslightly
solar radiation
rises if
withis
Hglob,90 daily solar radiation
larger if Hglob,90 is larger thanbe 500 Wh/day, where it will be inand the 0.08
range between
with daily solarthan 500 Wh/day,
radiation if Hglob,90where
is largerit than
will 500inWh/day,
the range wherebetween
it will 0.06
be in the range (c1).
betweenIn case of
0.06 and 0.08 (c1). In case of non-ventilated BIPV, it is significantly higher (c2)—between 0.10 and
0.06 and 0.08 BIPV,
non-ventilated (c1). Initcase of non-ventilated
is significantly higher BIPV, it is significantly
(c2)—between 0.10 andhigher (c2)—between
0.12. The efficiency 0.10riseandvaries
0.12. The efficiency rise varies slightly with the outdoor air temperature Te,avg as well (c3). At lower
0.12. The
slightly withefficiency
the outdoor rise air
varies slightly with
temperature theasoutdoor
Te,avg well (c3). air temperature
At lower solar Te,avg as well (c3).
radiation, the Atηi,sol,BIPV
lower rises
solar radiation, the ηi,sol,BIPV rises up to 0.30. Obviously, at such low solar energy potential,
up solar radiation,
to 0.30. Obviously, the η such rises
ati,sol,BIPV up toenergy
low solar 0.30. Obviously, at such low
potential, increased solar resistance
thermal energy potential, of the BIPV
increased thermal resistance of the BIPV structure contributes more significantly to decreased
increased
structure thermal more
contributes resistance of the BIPV
significantly structure heat
to decreased contributes
losses than moresolar
significantly
radiationto decreased
itself. Ventilation
heat losses than solar radiation itself. Ventilation air flow rate has a negative and quite small
heat losses than solar radiation itself. Ventilation air flow
air flow rate has a negative and quite small impact on the ηi,sol,BIPV , but it must be considered rate has a negative and quite small in a
impact on the ηi,sol,BIPV, but it must be considered in a multi-parametric regression model. A small
impact on
multi-parametric the η i,sol,BIPV, but it must be considered in a multi-parametric regression model. A small
vw that
negative impactregression of wind velocity model.vwAwas smallalsonegative
noticed. impactFurthermore,of wind velocity
it was noticed washeat alsoflux
noticed.
negative
Furthermore, impact of wind velocity v w was also noticed. Furthermore, it was noticed that heat flux
that entersitthe wasbuilding
noticed has that aheat flux thatdelay
small-time entersbecause
the buildingof thehas lowa thermal
small-time delay of
capacity because
the of
that enters the building has a small-time delay because of the low thermal capacity of the
the composite
low thermal capacity of
façade wall (Figure 6b). the composite façade wall (Figure 6b).
composite façade wall (Figure 6b).

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 13. Average daily solar heat gains through composite façade wall behind the glazed BIPV
Figure
Figure 13.13. Average
Average daily
daily solar
solar heat heat gains
gains through
through composite
composite façadewall
façade wallbehind
behindthe
theglazed
glazedBIPVBIPVfaçade
façade structure expressed by efficiency ηi,sol,BIPV; (a) impact of the daily solar radiation Hglob,90 and
façade structure expressed by efficiency η
structure expressed by efficiency ηi,sol,BIPV ; (a) impact of the daily solar radiation Hglob,90 and
; (a) impact of the daily solar radiation H and
 average
i,sol,BIPV glob,90
average daily outdoor air Te,avg; (b) impact of the solar radiation and ventilation air flow rate . V ,in. .
average daily outdoor air Te,avg; (b) impact of the solar radiation and ventilation air flow rate Vaa,in
daily outdoor air T ; (b) impact of the solar radiation and ventilation air flow rate V .
e,avg a,in
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 15 of 19

4.2. Multi-Parametric Model of Overall Efficiency of Solar Energy Utilization

In the previous section it was shown which variables have the greatest impact on the overall
efficiency of solar energy utilization of the BIPV façade structure. To be able to predict energy efficiency
of such structure in different climate conditions based on the diurnal data, multiple linear regression
models were developed for each component of overall efficiency of solar energy utilization—ηPV,BIPV ,
ηa,BIPV , and ηi,sol,BIPV . Statistical regression analysis was made within MS Excel using built-in LINEST
function, which fits the data using the least squares method. The level of significance for the regression
coefficients of each predictor (independent variable) were tested using Student’s t-tests with built-in
T.DIST.2T function. Only terms with p-value < 0.05 were used in the final multiple linear regression
models. Developed models are of the form:
 25◦ C 
z }| { 
    .
ηPV,BIPV = 0.01207 · ln H glob,90 − 0.000414 · TPV,re f − Te,avg  − 0.000147 · V a,i,avg , (15)

 

340.775 .
ηa,BIPV = − 0.0783 · Te,avg + 0.02807 · V a,i,avg , (16)
H glob,90
7.867   . 
ηi,sol,BIPV = + 0.00152 · Ti − Te,avg + 0.0078 · ln V a,i,avg − 0.0072 · vw,avg , (17)
H glob,90
where all independent variables are daily integrals or average values. The accuracy of the developed
multiple linear regression models of solar energy utilization efficiencies was tested with widely used
indices [31,32]: the adjusted coefficient of determination R2 adj , the normalized mean bias error (NMBE)
and the coefficient of variation of the root-mean-square error CV(RMSE) which are defined by the
following equations:
n−1  
R2 adj = 1 − · 1 − R2 , (18)
n − (p + 1)
n
P
(Mi − Pi )
1 i=1
NMBE = · · 100, (19)
M n−p
v
u
u
u n
(Mi − Pi )2
u
tP
2
1 i=1
CV (RMSE) = · · 100. (20)
M n−p
Detailed explanation as well as calibration criteria of ASHRAE and other agencies can be found
in [31]. Figure 14 presents the comparison of individual efficiencies of overall efficiency of solar energy
utilization obtained from measured values and determined with developed multiple linear regression
models (Equations (15)–(17)). The statistical parameters are also shown on the figures.
It can be seen that R2 adj exceeds the recommended value of 0.75 for all three regression models.
Also, NMBE is within ± 5%, which is the calibration criteria in the case of monthly calculation methods.
Only CV(RMSE), which should be below 15%, is slightly higher in the case of ηa,BIPV , which is probably
is the consequence of the narrow range of ventilation air flow rates. Nevertheless, we can conclude that
the developed multi-parametric regression models are adequate and can be used to evaluate the energy
efficiency performance of the analyzed BIPV façade structure within the ranges of meteorological
conditions that appeared during the experiments. It should be noted that the conditions during the
experiment were quite typical for a moderate and continental climate.
 1 2 (20)
CV ( RMSE ) = ⋅ i =1
⋅ 100 .
M n− p

Detailed explanation as well as calibration criteria of ASHRAE and other agencies can be found
in [31]. Figure 14 presents the comparison of individual efficiencies of overall efficiency of solar
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 16 of 19
energy utilization obtained from measured values and determined with developed multiple linear
regression models (Equations (15–17)). The statistical parameters are also shown on the figures.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 14. Correlation of components of overall efficiency of solar energy utilization ηsol,BIPV determined
by experimental results and multi-parametric regression models; statistical indicators are also shown
for (a) ηPV,BIPV , (b) ηa,BIPV , and (c) ηi,sol;BIPV .

5. Conclusions
In this paper research on energy efficiency of the glazed BIPV façade structure with forced
ventilated air gap is presented. Today, BIPV is considered to be one of the most important technologies
by which, especially in the urban environment, the standards for the nearly or even zero energy
buildings can be achieved. The studied BIPV element is designed as a modular unit that can be used
in new, and with even greater advantages, in renovated buildings. The energy efficiency indicators
were defined for each of the solar energy utilization modes—electricity production, energy savings
due to decreased transmission heat losses and due to decreasing ventilation heat losses by preheating
air for space ventilation. Results based on all-winter season experimental results had shown that
up to 10% of daily solar radiation could be utilized for electricity and heat supply while preheating
of the air utilizes up to 75% of daily received solar radiation. In the case of no clear sky conditions
(low daily solar radiation) the efficiency of heat utilization increases further due to the dynamic thermal
insulation effect. This are general figures. For day-to-day analyses in different climate conditions, the
multi-parametric regression models were developed.
In follow-up research the impact of orientation of the BIPV façade structure with forced ventilated
air gap will be studied and multi-parametric models developed, which will consider the thermal
transmittance of the opaque envelope wall as an independent variable. The study of the impact of
the other techniques for decreasing the PV cell temperature, like phase change materials, will also
be interesting.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.M., C.A., and S.D.; methodology, S.M.; validation, S.D., C.A., and
L.P.; writing—original draft preparation, S.D. and C.A.; writing—review and editing, S.M. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Slovenian Research Agency (research core
funding No. P2-0223 (C)).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature
A m2 area
α (-) absorptivity
β (-) temperature coefficient
C mg/m3 , ppm pollutant concentration
cp (J/kgK) specific heat capacity
d m thickness
∆τmeas min measuring interval
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 17 of 19

.
E W electrical power
E Wh/day diurnal production of electricity
ε (-) emissivity
.
G W solar irradiation power
G W/m2 solar irradiation
h W/m2 K surface heat transfer coefficient
H Wh/m2 day diurnal solar radiation
k 1/day pollutant decay factor
η (%) efficiency
KG (-) solar irradiation factor
KT (-) temperature factor
λ W/mK thermal conductivity
M (-) measured value
n (-) number of
OHH (Kh/day) diurnal overheating hours
P (-) Predicted value
.
q (W/m2 ) density of heat flux
.
Q (W) heat power
Q (Wh/day) diurnal delivered heat
ρ (kg/m3 ) density
S mg/min source of pollutant
T ◦C temperature
U W/m2 K thermal transmittance
v m/s velocity
V m3 volume
.
V m3 /h flow rate
7, 24 h/day constants
60 min/h constant
Index
a air
avg; avg,day average, diurnal average
avg, PV diurnal average during PV electricity production
BIPV pilot building integrated PV glazed façade structure
e outdoor, external
eff effective, dynamic
g glass
glob,90 solar on vertical surface
glob,90,day solar on vertical surface diurnal
i indoor, internal
in inlet
IR infrared, long wavelength
IR,90,day infra-red on vertical surface diurnal
loss heat loss
max maximum, maximum at the end of working hours
n net
PV photovoltaic
PV,si on inner glass surface of BIPV structure
r+c combined radiative and convection
ref reference, reference structure
s solar, short wavelength
si internal surface
sol generated by solar energy
st static
v ventilation
w wind
2, 6 second row, sixth row of PV
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 18 of 19

References
1. Sombsthay, A.; Beauvais, A.; Moser, D.; Tecnalia, E.B.; Gaymard, G.; Delmer, G.; Gurdenli, L.; Machado, M.;
Po, R.; Krawietz, S.; et al. Solar Skins: An Opportunity for Green Cities; SolarPower Europe and ETIP PV:
Brussels, Belgium, 2019.
2. Farghaly, Y.; Hassan, F. A Simulated Study of Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV) as an Approach for
Energy Retrofit in Buildings. Energies 2019, 12, 3946. [CrossRef]
3. Ramirez-Balas, C.; Fernandez-Nieto, E.; Narbona-Reina, G.; Sendra, J.J.; Suarez, R. Thermal 3D CFD
Simulation with Active Transparent Façade in Buildings. Energies 2018, 11, 2264. [CrossRef]
4. Yang, X.; Zhou, J.; Yuan, Y. Energy Performance of an Encapsulated Phase Change Material PV/T System.
Energies 2019, 12, 3929. [CrossRef]
5. Good, C.; Andersen, I.; Hestnes, A.G. Solar Energy for net Zero Energy Buildings—A Comparison between
Solar Thermal, PV and Photovoltaic–Thermal (PV/T) Systems. Solar Energy 2015, 122, 986–996. [CrossRef]
6. Agathokleous, R.A.; Kalogirou, S.A. Double Skin Facades (DSF) and Building Integrated Photovoltaics
(BIPV): A Review of Configurations and Heat Transfer Characteristics. Renew. Energy 2016, 89, 743–756.
[CrossRef]
7. Agrawal, B.; Tiware, G.N. Optimizing the Energy and Exergy of Building Integrated Photovoltaic Thermal
(BIPVT) Systems under Cold Climatic Conditions. Appl. Energy 2010, 87, 417–426. [CrossRef]
8. Saadon, S.; Gaillard, L.; Menezo, C.; Giroux-Julien, S. Exergy, Exergoeconomic and Enviroeconomic
Analysis of a Building Integrated Semi-Transparent Photovoltaic/Thermal (BISTPV/T) by Natural Ventilation.
Renew. Energy 2020, 150, 981–989. [CrossRef]
9. Vats, K.; Tiwari, G.N. Performance Evaluation of a Building Integrated Semitransparent Photovoltaic Thermal
System for Roof and Façade. Energy Build. 2012, 45, 211–218. [CrossRef]
10. Peng, J.; Lu, L.; Yang, H.; Ma, T. Comparative Study of the Thermal and Power Performances of a
Semi-Transparent Photovoltaic Façade under Different Ventilation Modes. Appl. Energy 2015, 138, 572–583.
[CrossRef]
11. Shahrestani, M.; Yao, R.; Essah, E.; Shao, L.; Oliveira, A.C.; Hepbasli, A.; Biyik, E.; del Caño, T.; Rico, E.;
Lechón, J.L. Experimental and Numerical Studies to Assess the Energy Performance of Naturally Ventilated
PV Façade Systems. Sol. Energy 2017, 147, 37–51. [CrossRef]
12. Martín-Chivelet, N.; Gutiérrez, J.C.; Alonso-Abella, M.; Chenlo, F.; Cuenca, J. Building Retrofit with
Photovoltaics: Construction and Performance of a BIPV Ventilated Façade. Energies 2018, 11, 1719. [CrossRef]
13. Kosonen, R.; Tan, F. The Effect of Perceived Indoor air Quality on Productivity loss. Energy Build. 2004, 36,
981–986. [CrossRef]
14. Mofidi, F.; Akbari, H. Integrated Optimization of Energy Costs and Occupants’ Productivity in Commercial
Buildings. Energy Build. 2016, 129, 247–260. [CrossRef]
15. Domjan, S.; Arkar, C.; Begelj, Ž.; Medved, S. Evolution of All-Glass Nearly Zero Energy Buildings with
Respect to the Local Climate and Free-Cooling Techniques. Build. Environ. 2019, 160, 106183. [CrossRef]
16. Kim, M.K.; Baldini, L. Energy Analysis of a Decentralized Ventilation System Compared with Centralized
Ventilation Systems in European Climates: Based on Review of Analyses. Energy Build. 2016, 111, 424–433.
[CrossRef]
17. Imbabi, M.S.-E. A Passive–Active Dynamic Insulation System for All Climates. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ.
2012, 1, 247–258. [CrossRef]
18. Lai, C.-M.; Lin, Y.-P. Energy Saving Evaluation of the Ventilated BIPV Walls. Energies 2011, 4, 948–959.
[CrossRef]
19. Union Glass, S.r.i, Union Glass High-Technology Glass. Available online: http://unionglass.it/index.php
(accessed on 15 January 2019).
20. Emmerich, S.J.; Persily, A.K. State-of-the-Art Review of CO2 Demand Controlled Ventilation Technology and
Application; NIST: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2001.
21. Masters, G.M.; Ela, W.P. Introduction to Environmental Engineering and Science, International ed.; Prentice-Hall:
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1991.
22. Energy Performance of Buildings—Ventilation of Buildings—Part 1: Indoor Environmental Input Parameters for
Design and Assessment of Energy Performance of Buildings Addressing Indoor Air Quality, Thermal Environment,
Light and Acustics; EN 16798-1:2019; CEN: Brussels, Belgium, 2019.
Energies 2020, 13, 2772 19 of 19

23. Kipp & Zonen. Available online: www.kippzonen.com (accessed on 16 May 2020).
24. Davis Instruments. Available online: www.davisinstruments.com (accessed on 16 May 2020).
25. Ahlborn Mess—und Regelungstechnik GmbH. Available online: www.ahlborn.com (accessed on
16 May 2020).
26. Agilent Technologies, Inc. Available online: www.agilent.com (accessed on 16 May 2020).
27. The International Organization for Standardization. Energy Performance of Buildings—Energy Needs for Heating
and Cooling, Internal Temperatures and Sensible and Latent Heat Loads—Part 1: Calculation Procedures; CEN:
Brussels, Belgium, 2017.
28. Singh, P.; Ravindra, N.M. Temperature Dependence of Solar Cell Performance—An Analysis. Sol. Energy
Mater. Sol. Cells 2012, 101, 36–45. [CrossRef]
29. Dash, P.K.; Gupta, N.C. Effect of Temperature on Power Output from Different Commercially available
Photovoltaic Modules. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. 2015, 51, 148–151.
30. Kamuyu, W.C.L.; Lim, J.R.; Won, C.S.; Ahn, H.K. Prediction Model of Photovoltaic Module Temperature for
Power Performance of Floating PVs. Energies 2018, 11, 447. [CrossRef]
31. Ruiz, G.R.; Bandera, C.F. Validation of Calibrated Energy Models: Common Errors. Energies 2017, 10, 1587.
[CrossRef]
32. Domjan, S.; Medved, S.; Černe, B.; Arkar, C. Fast Modelling of nZEB Metrics of Office Buildings Built with
Advanced Glass and BIPV Facade Structures. Energies 2019, 12, 3194. [CrossRef]

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).