A STUDY ON THE USE OF DOUBLE SKIN FAÇADE SYSTEMS IN THE

PHILIPPINES BASED ON ITS PROPERTIES, NATURE AND GENERAL USE

April Mae D. Dalangin

I. Introduction
Being in the tropics, Philippine architecture has always been subjected to a variety
of styles accounted for mainly by the prevailing climate. The architecture of Philippine
houses always tend to keep the sun out and get as much shade and cold air. From
bahay kubo there came bahay na bato brought about by the Spanish colonizers,
merchant houses and so on. Glass houses successfully materializing on a site in the
country has not yet come to reality for most people.
In terms of high-rise buildings, prevailing in the country is a ray of buildings that fall
under Globalism style. This style is evoked primarily by high-rise glazed structures
around the business districts in Ortigas and Makati. This style takes on Western
aesthetics by heart so the corporate groups prefer this more to attract investors,
especially foreign ones. These buildings, because of their transparency (since the
façade is always glass), absorb large amount of heat on the interior. As a response,
these buildings use air conditioning units from ground to top floor, which on their side
is costly. On the other hand, another style makes it way to mainstream architecture
network since the era of “greenness” began during the late 20th century to present –
the green architecture. Many architects nowadays design under this style as a
response to pressing
environmental issues such
as climate change. To
others the meaning of
“sustainable architecture”
remain vague for others
view it as architecture with
roof gardens, sod roof and
wall with a fountain or pond
right on the center while
others simply perceive it as
the architecture that uses
more passive systems and
less HVAC systems.

Unionbank in Ortigas
In line to the pursuing
debate on sustainable design standards, building systems are being modified to fit the
needs of the industry. A number of systems had already been realized as early the
beginning of the 20th century while others are yet to be conceptualized. An example of
which is the double-skin wall system also known as double skin façade.
II. Double skin façade overview

A. DEFINITION
The concept of the DSF system is complicated as measures to its use and the
technicalities of its design should be carefully analyzed before actually using it. In
this light, a few technical terms have to be clarified thus, defined:
1. Insulation – “the act of being insulated” whereas the material used is an
insulator, a poor conductor of electricity or of heat. (M-w.com)
Insulation happens on a DSF system due to its exterior wall and cavity.

2. Stack effect – also known as chimney effect, is a method of ventilating a

building that has relatively significant differences in external and
internal temperature. This method is used mostly in countries of the
Pacific. According to chuck-wright.com, the primary use of the stack
effect method is to cool down the interior of a building at nighttime for
the next day.

Illustration of the stack effect

3. Curtain wall system – according to Building Envelope Design Guide

(wbdg.org, 2012), it is a “thin, usually aluminum-framed wall,
containing in-fills of glass, metal panels, or thin stone. The framing is
attached to the building structure and
does not carry the floor or roof loads
of the building”. Compared to DSF, it
is only a single-wall system. Shading
devices are placed on the interior
face or exterior face of the wall
depending on the type. In the image
above, the louvers. It is often
confused with the DSF system so a
clarification is needed to be Curtain wall by Bisem-USA
 presented. Other differences include a relative energy saving
properties between the two.

4. Passive design – designing without or minimal dependence on

mechanical systems such as air conditioning and the like

5. Modeling and simulation – virtually testing of the factors that concerns a

system

B. CONCEPT

Double skin façade (DSF) as have been

described by Compagno in 2002 (as mentioned by
H. Poirazis in his work Double skin facades: a
literature review, 2006) is “an arrangement with a
glass skin in front of the actual building façade.
Solar control devices are placed in the cavity
between these two skins, which protects them from
the influences of the weather and air pollution a
factor of particular importance in high rise buildings
or ones situated in the vicinity of busy roads”. ABB Business Center façade
Poirazis (2006) mentioned another definition by Stockholm, Sweden
Kragh (2000) – DSF is “a system that consists of
an external screen, a ventilated cavity and an internal screen. Solar shading is
positioned in the ventilated cavity”. There were many other definitions of the DSF
system which all boils down to 3 particular elements to describe it:
 an exterior wall
 a cavity
 an interior wall
The exterior wall is usually single-glazed.
A number of fully glazed facades of office
buildings can be seen even in the country but
of curtain walls only and not DSF. Full glazed
facades are apparent in ARAG Tower 2000
in Germany and ABB Business center in
Stockholm, Sweden.
The air space also called as cavity. Its
ventilation may be totally natural, fan
supported (hybrid type), or totally mechanical
(Bestfacade, 2005). It is in the cavity where
the solar shading devices such as blinds are
placed. The width of the cavity varies from as
narrow as 10 cm to 2 m and beyond. It is
important to know that the width of the cavity
affects many aspect of the DSF system like
the issues on overheating, heat transfer ARAG 2000 Tower in Düsseldorf, Germany
coefficient, thermal resistance and thermal in double skin facade
transmittance, floor areas, maintenance
among others. The air is allowed to pass through metal vents or diverted via louvers
in a flow whether towards the top of the building of to the bottom.
The interior wall, on the other hand, is usually built with operable windows or
with additional control devices for the shading mechanisms on the cavity.
Practically it has operable windows in case the mechanical ACU inside would not
work.

External wall Interior wall

Vents left
opened

A typical DSF with passive system

To further clarify the elements of the DSF system, Poirazis (2006) also
mentioned the “satisfactory description” of the DSF system and according to
Source book of the Belgian Building Research Institute [BBRI], (2002), the layers
of the façade should at least be:
 Exterior Glazing: Usually it is a hardened single glazing. This exterior façade
can be fully glazed.
 Interior glazing: Insulating double glazing unit (clear, low E coating, solar
control glazing, etc can be used). Almost always this layer is not
completely glazed.
 The air cavity between the two panes. It can be totally natural, fan supported
or mechanically ventilated. The width of the cavity can vary as a function
of the applied concept between 200 mm to more than 2m. This width
influence the way that the façade is maintained.
 The interior window can be opened by the user. This may allow natural
ventilation of the offices.
 Automatically controlled solar shading is integrated inside the air cavity.
 As a function of the façade concept and of the glazing type, heating radiators
can be installed next to the façade.
As explained by Uuttu (2001), to prevent overheating due to high temperature
or heat gain by the exterior wall, the width of the cavity must be thought of carefully.
Climactic conditions of the site should also be a primary concern in building with
DSF. If the location of the building is within the western part of the globe, it could
be good if the exterior wall has at least medium opening since the cold months are
longer there compared to the tropics so they might want to warm themselves with
sunlight. Also, the size of the openings of the exterior wall should be noted since
the air flow within the systems greatly rely on the two abovementioned
technicalities in design.

C. REASONS FOR USING THE DOUBLE SKIN FAÇADE

Architectural works that use double skin façade system are concentrated in
European countries. Even though various studies have been done to check the
feasibility of the system in more temperate regions, still, chances are the reasons
why they use it in the cold countries would not hold true for the latter. Some reasons
for choosing the DSF system are indoor climate control, energy use regulation, and
others.
1. Indoor climate control
a. Thermal comfort
The nature of the DSF is to control of the temperature experienced inside
the building (in reference to DSF system itself, the area beyond the interior
wall). As compared to a curtain wall system, it is believed that DSF is the
better option for energy saving. Also, a well maintained internal temperature
during summer and winter is what people like most in countries with cold
climate.
b. Visual comfort
Visual comfort is increased
since a second wall (exterior;
which can add an option for
sun shading) is present. This
reduces the glare experienced
by users in a building that uses
a bare (or even just partially
bare) single glazed building
envelope.
The glare source angle

c. Acoustic comfort
The second wall (exterior) lessens the noise experienced by users inside
the building. Lee, Selkowitz, Bazjanac, Inkarojrit and Kohler, (2002) further
notes that DSF system particularly minimizes sound levels in areas near the
airport or in high traffic urban areas. However, internal or room to room
acoustics is another case. (Poirazis, 2006)
d. Ventilation
Another reason is that the cavity may be naturally ventilated if designed
properly noting other aspects such as sizes of openings in the exterior wall
and so on. In addition, nighttime ventilation is considered with safety and
rain protection considerations. (Poirazis, 2006)
 2. Energy use
Primarily, tests have been conducted as to whether the DSF system is an
efficient in terms of energy savings. However, these simulation are mostly
conducted for buildings in European countries like Germany, Sweden, the
Americas, etc. and are hardly conducted for the modelling and simulation test
programs were not able to perfectly simulate the DSF system for once (Poirazis,
2006) concluded that there is “no pure network method can be used for a
complex network such as the DSF”.

D. HISTORY
Earliest record of double skin façade system according to Saelens (2002) as
mentioned by Poirazis in 2006 is the one made by Jean-Baptiste Jobard in 1849.
Jobard (1849) described a “mechanically ventilated multiple skin façade. He
mentions how in winter hot air should be circulated between two walls while in
summer it should be cold air”.

The earliest use of the DSF, on

the other hand, is believed to be at
during 1903 at Steiff Factory in
Giengen, Germany as claimed by
Crespo. The factory is a three-
story structure with the DSF
system as a result of considering
maximization of daylight, the cold
weather and strong winds of the
region. Two other similar
structures are built after the
assessment that the first one was
a successful design but with the Steiff factory, the first of the 3 presently-existing
structures
alternative for steel – timber – as
the former is more expensive than
the latter.

Crespo further details that Otto Wagner used a double skin skylight for the main
hall of his design for the Post Office Savings Bank in Austria in 1903. The building
was built from 1904 to 1912. Moisei Ginzburg and Le Corbusier were noted to work
on different projects, Narkomfin building (1928) and Centrosoyus in Moscow. Later,
Le Corbusier designed two others in Paris. (Poirazis, 2006)
 The advent of the DSF system is during the 90’s as environmental concerns
proliferate in the industry. Then only when “green architecture” as a responsible
design strategy has been popular and widely used. Today, a number of
corporations, smaller industrial buildings, office buildings mainly in Germany,
Finland, Sweden, United Kingdom, Switzerland, Belgium, Czech Republic, USA,
and Australia uses DSF system as Poirazis enumerated in his work. A different
work by BestFacade and Intelligent Energy Europe studied DSF systems in
Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Portugal, Greece, and Sweden. The work
entitled Development of a Double-Skin Façade for Sustainable Renovation of Old
Residential Buildings in 2012, however, was conducted by Gon Kim, Hong Soo
Lim and Jeong Tai Kim. They used simulation data suited and closest to the real
data for Seoul, Korea like weather data, temperature, air change rate, and exact
location. It might be the closest study of DSF for the Philippines to date.

III. Classifications of the Double Skin Façade

DSF, being a complicated system that depends on various factors for its
“successful” performance, is being measured by models and simulations. The results,
in turn, will tell whether such system is feasible for a particular location. With the
scenario described, the way DSF is classified has to be universalized. Unfortunately,
there has not been the “universal and universally-accepted” classification yet. What
prevails is that designers tend to formulate a classification system for DSF based on
façade configuration and manner of operation as the Environmental Engineering firm
of Battle McCarthy in Great Britain did; function (ventilation type) as formulated Kragh
(2002); BBRI’s (2002) classification of active facades, among others.

Truly, the permutations seem non-stopping. It takes time to fully check what
classification type one would choose if he/she wishes to use DSF. However, a certain
classification seems to be used by many. The categorization by geometry is used by
Oesterle et al., (2001), Saelens (2002) and E. Lee et al., (2002) and it says that types
of DSF include:

 Box window type: In this case horizontal and vertical partitioning divide the
façade in smaller and independent boxes

Clipped from Development of a Double-Skin Façade for Sustainable Renovation of

Old Residential Building by Kim, L., Lim, H.S., & Kim, J. (2012).
  Shaft box type: In this case a set of box window elements are placed in the
façade. These elements are connected via vertical shafts situated in the façade.
These shafts ensure an increased stack effect.

 Corridor façade: Horizontal partitioning is realized for acoustical, fire security or

ventilation reasons.

 Multi-storey Double Skin Façade: In this case no horizontal or vertical

partitioning exists between the two skins. The air cavity ventilation is realized
via large openings near the floor and the roof of the building.

As Poirazis (2006) explained, it is important to consider the above-mentioned kind

of system since it is on the geometry of the DSF where the properties of air inside the
cavity greatly depends. Whether it relates to sizes of openings to width of the cavity
itself, the classification above is a good starting point. Let there be no more famous
type since the use of each type greatly depend on the needs of the structure.

On the other hand, Boake (2003) proposes another classification with respect to
ventilation method and DSF’s ability to reduce energy consumption. The
classifications are:
Buffer Extract-air Twin-face
system system

Clipped from Understanding the General Principles of the Double Skin

Façade System by T.M. Boake, 2003

 Buffer system – uses two layers of single-glazing around 250 to 900 mm apart.
They allow fresh air to flow from bottom then exhaust it at the topmost floor.
Example of this system can be found at Occidental Chemical/Hooker
Building in Niagara Falls, New York (the depth of the cavity is 1200 mm with
operable louvers in air space and photocell control and manual override).

 Extract-air system – includes thermopane units (double glazing units) on the

interior of the main façade. Shading devices can be mounted on the cavity.
Recommended distance between glass units is 150 mm to 900 mm to permit
manual cleaning. The “natural ventilation” is therefore supplied by
mechanical systems. It is used in areas where natural ventilation is not
possible such as places with high noise, wind, or fumes.

 Twin-face system – the exterior wall is usually single glazed and the interior
wall is a conventional curtain wall or thermal mass wall system. The
difference of this system between the previous two is that both interior and
 exterior may have openings for more controlled ventilation and sound.
Space between glazing units is recommended to be 500 to 600 mm, at least
to permit cleaning. The Telus building in Vancouver uses this system.

In case a needed design for DSF do not fit in any category stated above, Boake
(2003) suggests another system which is called the hybrid system. She explains that
it “combines various aspects of the above systems and is used to classify building
systems”. It may use non-glazed material as part of the interior or exterior wall or both.

Room section of Telus in Vancouver

Clipping from Understanding the General Principles of the Double Skin Façade System by T.M.
Boake, 2003

IV. Advantages and disadvantages of the double skin façade

According to the assessment of Poirazis (2006), the following are the advantages
of the DSF:

 Lower construction cost (compared to electrochromic, thermochromic

photochromic panes) since these high-tech panes change properties based on
climactic or environmental conditions.
 Acoustic insulation due to an exterior wall
 Thermal insulation during the winter due to exterior wall
 Thermal insulation during the summer from warm air in the cavity that can be
extracted from natural or mechanical ventilation and efficient position of sun
shading devices
 Night time ventilation as DSFs are designed to possibly achieve this with
burglar proof and rain protection
 Energy savings and reduced environmental impacts from 1) reduction of energy
consumption (thus, decrease in operational cost) during the operation life of the
building and 2)
 Better protection of the shading or lighting devices due to exterior wall
 Reduction of the wind pressure effects since the cavity serves as a buffer zone
 Transparency – Architectural design related since “it is the desire of architects
to use bigger portions of glazing units” (Poirazis, 2006)
 Natural ventilation from operable windows in the exterior and interior wall
(optional)
  Thermal comfort – temperatures of the internal wall for the air in the cavity will
always be warmer than the air on the exterior of the exterior wall
 Cavity may be used as fire escape
 Low thermal transmission (U-Value) and low solar heat gain coefficient (g-
value)

It is highly inevitable to consider the disadvantages of the system since as

mentioned several times in this paper, one aspect that planned incorrectly will cause
trouble to the users of the system, from construction to maintenance. Based on
Poirazis’ analysis, the following are to be considered as the system’s disadvantages:

 Higher construction costs compared to conventional façade

 Fire protection of DSFs not yet verified virtually; a number of authors
mentioned the problems that might occur in case of room to room
transmission of smoke in case of fire.
 Reduction of rentable office space
 Additional maintenance and operational costs
 Overheating problem in the interior space due to possible overheating in
the cavity
 Increased air flow speed resulting in pressure differences between storeys
 Increased weight of the structure that also causes the increased cost
 Daylight – “reduction of quality of light due to an exterior wall and the
compensatory effect of glazed facades”
 Acoustic insulation from poorly designed façade

The advantages and disadvantages mentioned by Poirazis could be (if not all)
the reason for the factual existence of detractors and patrons of the system. In
reference to the Philippines, one may see that the only advantages for the country
are acoustic insulation (for condominiums around the metro) and nighttime
ventilation (for office buildings of call centers specifically) only. There can be other
advantages – one can argue but, the possibility of it to be widely accepted in a
tropical country is a thought in air.

V. Summary, recommendations, and conclusion

The double skin façade is a technological advancement in architecture that
recognizes the need for a lower cost (compared to high-tech panels) “energy efficient”
system and aesthetics in achieving controllable variables for the wellness and comfort
of the users, the owner’s savings in terms of operational cost, and the efficiency of the
building in terms of sustainability and environmental impacts. Unfortunately, the
stances of the system as “advantages” do not hold true for the Philippines. As
mentioned in the last part, only a few might be true for the condition of the country.
This does not only realizes the climactic restrictions for DSFs but also the behavioral
and practical considerations of and for the locals.
Arguments for the Philippine condition had been set at the Introduction and it shall
be highlighted so as to support that the probability of large-scale use of DSFs in the
country is volatile.
A. Filipinos tend to hide away from the sun
This holds true not only for the ones who take whitening pills or the newly-
rebonded ladies but, for the general public. As much as possible, people commute
just to not the sunlight touch their skins. Today, office buildings in the Philippines
use blinds or louvers to redirect sun rays elsewhere and there is also the
centralized use of ACUs. The concept of DSFs might be outstanding for the
Caucasians who love to bathe under the sun but, not perfect for Filipinos. Arch.
Del Castillo (2013) even supports that DSFs are “okay for the tropics if properly
used”. This might concern site orientation or other sustainable measures but he
furthers that it depends on the material of the skins (walls) used. In most cases, it
leads one to think of anything but glass. True! Since early DSFs used glazing as
its core material. He adds, “…since even double glass walls block some of the heat
from the sun’s rays, the rays still penetrate and bring in heat – a thing we need to
avoid in the tropics.” He then recommends a case wherein the DSF blocks heat
instead of letting it in, he says that “a good double skin for the tropics is one that
blocks the heat and light from the sun, protecting the inner wall from absorbing
heat, thereby reducing heat gain.” Nonetheless, glass as the material choice would
be out of question which then, challenges aesthetics of design.
B. DSFs are too expensive
Curtain walls used in office buildings today are expensive already and DSFs
are predicted to cost four to five times more than those. Take for example
Occidental Chemical Center in New York which uses DSF with operable louvers in
air space with photocell control and manual override as shading device. The cost
for the project is USD12,500,500 (by bid in January 1980) roughly Php 500 M ++
today for an approximate of 18730.45161290323 m 2. Arch. Gilles (2013) believes
that systems such as the DSF should be more accessible to the common people
especially they function as sustainable systems. She adds that “combining green
strategies with passive cooling techniques and renewable energy systems might
be more accessible to the common people”. Sustainable are the systems that are
beneficial to and used by a large pool of people.

C. DSFs tend to lessen office spaces

The cost of construction in the Philippines is fairly high compared to other
developing countries and lessening the leasable areas might disappoint potential
investors. In the language of residential buildings, it also holds true. As Arch. Mata
(2013) pointed out, “It (DSF) is not [suitable] for tropical climates. Circulation
spaces are more needed than insulation.” It might satisfy LED requirements but,
Arch. Mata claims that “LED is still not well accepted for tropical conditions.”

D. Earthquake measures for DSF

Being on the Pacific Ring of Fire, Philippines experiences earthquakes
frequently than European countries. Based on the sources used in this document,
 there is no result regarding earthquake simulations or the like. Models analyze
almost all aspects of DSF via simulations except earthquake probabilities.
It is not true that there is no systems similar to DSF yet in the Philippines. Take
for example mall entrances. They use double glass panels with around a meter of
air space. It could be predicted that the two systems are functioning similarly except
that the ones in malls do not have operable windows. How about DSFs similarity
with the Spanish volada? It has been a significant part of Spanish architectural
houses in the Philippines. It is even more feasible for the country since the windows
are not made of transparent material like DSF’s glass but of capiz shells in wooden
casing. There is also an air space between an inner and outer wall similar to the
interior wall of the DSF and the vents of the DSF represents the bintanilyas below
and sometimes atop the windows. The UP College of Architecture Building 2
façade is also functioning as DSF. Its designer, Arch. Del Castillo (2013) states
that “the facade of Building 2 is actually like a double skin wall. The outer layer is
composed of horizontal and vertical louvers that block the sun's rays and protects
the inner CHB wall from absorbing the heat.”
Double skin facades are impressive
for cool-climate countries but not the
topical ones. There have been
evidences of similar systems already
utilized in the country but the exact DSF
system used in European countries has
yet to be tried. Several behavioral and
economic reasons have been identified.
It is therefore believed that the double
skin wall system is not suitable for the
Philippines and similarly to other tropical
countries. It is recommended for future
studies that earthquake simulation also
conducted, the actual cost measured,
UP College of Architecture Building 2 and the manufacturers known.
References

Boake, T. M. (2003, November). Tboake.com. Retrieved from A personal website:

http://tboake.com/pdf/double_facade_general.pdf
del Castillo, N. (2013, April 2). Double skin facade. (A. M. Dalangin, Interviewer)
Gilles, S. A. (2013, April 2). Double skin facade. (A. M. Dalangin, Interviewer)
Kim, G., Lim, H., & Kim, J. (2012, May 18). sustainablehealthybuildings.org.
Retrieved from http://www.sustainablehealthybuildings.org/PDF/
Mata, R. L. (2013, April 2). Double skin facade. (A. M. Dalangin, Interviewer)
Poirazis, H. (2006). Double skin facades: A literature review. Lund: Lund University,
Lund Institute of Technology.
Streicher, W., Mach, T., Hengsberger, H., & Heimrath, R. (2005). Best Practice for
Double Skin Façades. N/A: BESTFACADE and Intelligent Energy Europe.

Image Sources
Steiff Factory, Germany : http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-
zaXbSreQ2eA/TtJfcmU7l6I/AAAAAAAAAS8/yF88cgAvMWE/s1600/Steiff+fact
ory+with+ramp+towards+1904.png (Accessed on April 2, 2013).
Arag 2000 Tower: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3383/3602733771_4c68034d99_b.jpg
(Accessed on April 1, 2013).
Unionbank, Manila: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8206/8208134480_b1f73dcf3f_b.jpg
(Accessed on April 1, 2013).
ABB Business Center, Sweden:
http://www.bestfacade.com/imagede/location_sweden_023.jpg (Accessed on
April 1, 2013).
Air space: http://www.alufix.co.nz/images/gallery_image_0111.jpg (Accessed on
April 1, 2013).
UP College of Architecture Bldg. 2:
http://upca.upd.edu.ph/images/arki%20complex/bldg2.JPG (Accessed on
April 2, 2013).
Stack effect illustration:
http://heimlerheatcoolplumb.com/images/photos/stack_effect_grey_scale.jpg
(Accessed on April 2, 2013).
Glare angle: http://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0886335099000383-
gr1.jpg (Accessed on April 2, 2013).
*Other images are clipped from the references above. See image for notes.