Next Article in Journal
Comparison of Positive Streamers in Liquid Dielectrics with and without Nanoparticles Simulated with Finite-Element Software
Next Article in Special Issue
Development of Easily Accessible Electricity Consumption Model Using Open Data and GA-SVR
Previous Article in Journal
Power Management of Islanded Self-Excited Induction Generator Reinforced by Energy Storage Systems
Article Menu
Issue 2 (February) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Energies 2018, 11(2), 360; doi:10.3390/en11020360

Determining the U-Value of Façades Using the Thermometric Method: Potentials and Limitations

Department of Graphical Expression and Building Engineering, University of Seville, 41012 Seville, Spain
Department of Civil Engineering, Universidade da Coruña, 15071 A Coruña, Spain
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 26 December 2017 / Revised: 30 January 2018 / Accepted: 1 February 2018 / Published: 3 February 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Building Energy Use: Modeling and Analysis)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [12226 KB, uploaded 3 February 2018]   |  


The thermal transmittance of building envelopes determines to a large extent the energy demand of buildings. Thus, there is a keen interest in having methods which can precisely evaluate thermal transmittance. From a scientific point of view, this study analyses the viability of the application of the thermometric method (THM), one of the most used methods in Spain. For this purpose, the test method has been improved by determining the adequate test conditions, the selection and installation of equipment, data acquisition and post-processing, and the estimation of uncertainty. We analyse eight case studies in a Mediterranean climate (Csa) to determine the potentials and limitations of the method. The results show that the values obtained through THM are valid under winter environmental conditions with relative uncertainties between 6% and 13%, while difficulties to perform the test in optimal conditions, and therefore to obtain valid results in warmer seasons, are detected. In this regard, the case studies which obtained a greater number of observations by performing the filtrate conditions were able to obtain representative results. Furthermore, there are significant differences depending on the kind of equipment and probes used during the experimental campaign. Finally, in warm climate regions a data filtrate can be considered for observations of a temperature difference higher than 5 °C, obtaining valid results for the case studies, although the rise in the thermal gradient can guarantee a greater stability of data. View Full-Text
Keywords: thermal transmittance (U-value); thermometric method (THM); façades; internal convective coefficient; in situ measurement thermal transmittance (U-value); thermometric method (THM); façades; internal convective coefficient; in situ measurement

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Bienvenido-Huertas, D.; Rodríguez-Álvaro, R.; Moyano, J.J.; Rico, F.; Marín, D. Determining the U-Value of Façades Using the Thermometric Method: Potentials and Limitations. Energies 2018, 11, 360.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Energies EISSN 1996-1073 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top