ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
1
Ref no. NameYear Type of Building Climate EvaluationEvaluated MetrcBaselineS/Ex
Improvement
Comment
2
studytypemetricnamevaluevalue%
3
1[41]Sharma, Kaushik2023SofficeCwaDLASE [%]sol. exposure25,021,016,0%
also calculated UDI<100, UDI100-2000, DGP
4
2[42]Catto Lucchino et al.2023Soffice CfbEQ [kWh]cooling143,069,051,7%
also calculated for the other control types
5
3[43]Mangkuto et al.2022SofficeAwDLASE [%]sol. exposure39,821,147,0%
also calculated fot other orientations of the facade
6
4[44]Hassooni, Kamoona2023ShospitalBwhEQ [kWh]thermal loadn.a.n.a.75,0%
only the reduction ratio was given, the ratio for tha angle 45 deg. is given
7
5[45]Shen,Han2022Soffice DwaDLUDI [%]useful daylight50,071,042,0%
also calculated DGP
8
6[46]de Bem et al.2024S/Exoffice CfbDLUDI [%]useful daylight26,082,0215,4%
also other metrics calculated originating from the illuminance
9
7[47]Fikery et al.2024SofficeBWhDL/EUDI [%]useful daylight56,294,868,6%
values given for horizontal and horizontal and vertical shades, many other configurations were studied
10
8[48]Chaturvedi et al.2024S/Exresidential BShDL/EUDI [%]useful daylight11,481,2610,5%
other metric also calculated
11
9[49]Kim et al.2022SofficeCfaDLVLT [%]visible light transmittance25,045,080,0%
also LEED points were calculated
12
10[50]Norouziasas et al.2023S/Exoffice CfbEQ [kWh]cooling16,35,963,7%
best case presented, other metrics also calculated
13
11[51] Choi2023SofficeCfbEEgen [kWh]generated electricityn.a.304 566,0n.a.
no baseline scenario was given, comarable value not available
14
12[52]Choi2022SeducationDwaEEgen [kWh]generated electricity5 663 989,010 143 682,079,1%
two types of PV panels comapred with the different angles
15
13[40]Ożadowicz, Walczyk2023Exoffice CfbDLEvilluminance100 370,01197,298,8%
illuminance inside and outside compared, also energy production calculated, but no baseline value given
16
14[53]Valitabar et al.2022Soffice BskDLUDI [%]useful daylight44-47%
author's declared
17
15[54]Fahmy et al.2023SofficeBWhDLC [unitless]contrast1 000,0780,022,0%
uniformities and illuminance ratios were also calculated
18
16[56]Brzezicki2024S/ExofficeCfbDLUDI [%]useful daylight44,077,476,0%
difference between no shading and kinetic shading system
19
17[59]Biloria et al.2023SofficeCfaDL Eh [lux]illuminancen.an.a.56,9%
average daily difference in the minimum threshold level of illuminance is observed between static and dynamic BIPV shading system
20
18[60]Globa et al.2022Exn.a.n.a.n.a.GWP [kgCO2]global warming potent.119,791,123,9%
no daylight analysis performed
21
19[61]Sadegh et al.2022Soffice BskDLUDI [%]useful daylight21,250,2136,7%
also DA calculated
22
20[62]Golzan et al.2022Soffice BWhDL/EQ [kWh]thermal load195,5115,041,2%
thermal load calculated, other metric calculated as well
23
21[63]Kızılörenli et al.2023SofficeCsaDLUDI [%]useful daylight52,980,451,9%
configuration of other facade angles also preformed
24
22[64]Takhmasib et al.2023Exoffice DWaDLDGP [%]daylight glare prob.34,021,038,2%
experimtenal and simulation study, The DGP analysis revealed that the overall DGP values predicted from the ML models during the experiment ranged from 0.24 to 0.26, which falls below the lower limit of acceptable thresholds, with the maximum value being 0.34 and the minimum value 0.21
25
23[65]Kim, Luong2024Soffice DWaDLUDI [%]useful daylight55,095,072,7%
values retrived for the graph
26
24[66]El-Mowafy et al.2022Soffice BWhDLUDI [%]useful daylight79,099,025,3%
other matrics also calculated
27
Kinetic systems based on the mechanical principle of folding rigid elements.
28
25[67]Böke et al.2022Exoffice BwhDLOF [%]openes factor63,039,038,1%
the values given after Schneider, et al., 2021
29
26[68]Taleb, Moarbes2023Soffice BWhDLQ [kWh]coolingna.n.a.21,3%
reduction rate given by the authorsd
30
27[69]Salah, Kayili2022Soffice BskEQs [kWh]solar heat gain17723,015681,011,5%
JUne, Jult, August, September avarage values
31
28[70]Chuan et al.2023Sn.a.AwDLDF [%]% daylight factor between 1-3.52,248,22051,3%
% daylight factor between 1-3.5
32
29[71]Toodekharman et al.2023ShospitalBShDLASE [%]sol. exposure49,08,083,7%
ASE for facade 1
33
30[72]Wu2022SofficeAw-DfbEQ [kWh]cooling and heatingn.a.n.a.32-56%
folding facade reduction in %
34
31[73]Badeche 2022Soffice CsaEQs [kWh]solar heat gain973,0670,031,1%
solar heat gain calculated for the folding facade
35
32[74]Akimov et al.2023SofficeCsaDLUDI [%]useful daylightna.na.43,0%
performance value given by the author
36
33[75}Kahramanoglu, Alp2023SofficeCfaDLUDI [%]useful daylight61,081,032,8%
values retrived form the graph, other metrics also calculated
37
34[76]Meloni et al.2023Soffice CfbEIe [W/m-2]irradiancen.a.n.a.56,0%
mode V1 allows for an average reduction of reflected solar radiation of 56%
38
35[77] da Silva, Veras2023S/ExofficeAwDL[%]proportion of the shading devices that is activated95,025,073,7%
the proportion of shading devices activated at each hour, according to the device activation threshold angle on a summer solstice day
solstice day.
39
36[78]Wagiri et al.2024S/Exoffice CfaDLIe [W/m-2]irradiancen.a.n.a.76,0%
also solar radiation was calculated
40
Kinetic systems based on the mechanical principle of deformation (including aperture scaling).
41
37[79]Le et al.2022SofficeAw, Cwa, Cfa, Cfb, Bsk, DfbEQ [kWh]cooling, heating and lightingn.a.n.a.36-53%
average ws. Best solution for HoChiMin city
42
38[80]Alkhatib et al.2023Exoffice E/DLQ [kWh]cooling, heating and lighting1623,01062,07-35%
For the same particular conditions, the simulated room with a roller blind required from 1513 kWh to 1062 kWh heating, cooling and lighting energy needs depending on the control algorithm, these were equivalent to 7% and 35% energy avings when compared to a double-glazed window.
43
39[81]Ningsih et al.2023S/ExresidentialAmE/DLIe [W/m-2]irradiance2,41,250,0%
An incrementally opened module (45° rotation) can limit incoming sun radiation decline to 1, 2–0, 4 kWh/m2 or 50% of condition without the facade
44
40[83]Abdollah Rizi2023SofficeBskDLUDI [%]useful daylight28,091,6227,6%
Based on the multiobjective optimisation results, the optimal mode of the proposed façade design demonstrates significant improvements
45
41[84]Alawaysheh et al.2023S/ExexpositionBWhEEh [lux]annual av. illuminancen.a.n.a.31,0%
Performance given by the author in the abstract
46
42[24]Tabadkani et al 2023Soffice CfbDLCS [%]comfort scoren.a.n.a.92.5-95.5%
CS included vertical eye illuminance (EV), task illuminance, (EV), and view to outdoor (VR)
47
43[87]Nguyen et al.2023Soffice n.a.DLsDA [%]spatial daylignt autonomyn.a.n.a.50,0%
as given by the author
48
44[88]Senel et al.2022Soffice BskDLASE [%]sol. exposure33,318,045,9%
Values retrived form graphs, for the hexagonal opening KSS system
49
45[89]Liu et al.2023SlibraryCwaDLDGP [%]daylight glare prob.32,022,031,3%
Daylight glare probability (DGP) for all rooms on the summer solstice, values retrived from the graph
50
46[90]Arauz et al..2023S/Exoffice DfaE/DLIe [W/m-2]irradiance440,0510,015,9%
Values retrived form graphs, for the hexagonal opening KSS system
51
Biomimetic kinetic shading systems. All types of motion and deformation.
52
47[92]Jumabekova et al.2023S/Exn.a.CfbE/DLj [W/m-2]heat flux density4,917,0246,9%
heat flux density as a performance characteristic.
53
48[93]Sadegh et al.2022Sn.a.n.a.DLASE [%]sol. exposuren.a.n.a.20,0%
performace given by the author
54
49[94]Anzaniyan et al.2022S/ExofficeBSkEQ [kWh]cooling95755,089722,06,3%
Values retrived form graphs, for the hexagonal opening KSS system, values for June
55
50[95]Soliman, Bo2023SofficeBWhECH [h]comfort hoursna.na.11,3%
additionally, the average thermal comfort conditions over the year increased by 11.3%
56
51[96]Andrade et al.2024Exn.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.
Material science paper
57
52[97]Charpentier et al.2022Exn.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.
Material science paper
58
53[98]Scavée et al.2022S/Exofficen.aDLDF [%]av. daylight factor1,62,131,3%
Retrived form the figure caption
59
54[102]Sommese et al.2024SofficeCsaDLUDI [%]useful daylight39,683,4110,9%
Also glare is calculated
60
55[103]Hassan et al.2023Soffice BWhDLEh [lux]annual av. illuminance3382,61135,766,4%
Also sDA and ASE calculated
61
56[104]Kim, Kim2023Exn.a.n.a.DLUDI_e [%]exceeded useful daylight22,010,054,5%
Values retrived from the graph no. Fig. 3
62
57[25]Hosseini et al.2022SofficeBWhDLUDI [%]useful daylight16,793,5461,2%
Other dayligh metrics also calculated. "The facade increases the amount of UDI up to 5.61 times regarding the base case while decreasing the amount of EUDI in the room by an average of 91.8%. "
63
58[105]Sankaewthong et al.2022S/ExofficeAWDLEh [lux]illuminance4879,5557,788,6%
Comparing average lux value trends between before and after installation of the kinetic façade
64
Kinetic systems based on SMA and bimetallic.
65
59[108]Naeem2023Ex/SofficeBWhEQ [kWh]cooling52,241,520.12-55.09%
average decrease in the energy consumption for the cooling load inside the space comparing the traditional facade with dynamic facade using smart material is 20.12% in July.
66
60[109]Vazquez2024Ex/SofficeDfaDLCH [%]comfort hours10,070,0600,0%
The difference in performance for a bistable south-oriented screen compared to the no screen case increases to 70% hours with sufficient daylight in March from 10% hours achieved with both baseline cases in the same months.
67
61[110]Gaspari2022SresidentialCfbEQ [kWh]heat flow 7088,0636,091,0%
Values for East facade, south and west calculated
68
69
as declared by the authors, no baseline and final data are given
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100