# Analysis of the Dynamic Thermal Barrier in Building Envelopes

^{1}

^{2}

^{3}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

_{m}= 17 °C delivered to the TB layer represents R

_{DTR}= up to 30 ((m

^{2}·K)/W) for an equivalent dynamic thermal insulation thickness of 1000 mm for a required standard resistance of R

_{STANDARD}= 6.50 ((m

^{2}·K)/W) of the individual fragments analyzed with static thermal insulation of 65 to 210 mm. The energy potential of a thermal barrier (TB) represents an increase of approximately 500% in the thermal resistance and up to 1500% in the thickness of the dynamic thermal insulation. Further research on the dynamic thermal barrier and verification of the results of the parametric study will continue with comprehensive computer simulations and experimental measurements on the test cell.

## 1. Introduction

_{DTR}= 10.487 ((m

^{2}·K)/W), corresponding to an external static thermal insulation of approximately 200 mm, up to between 25 and 30 °C for the large-scale radiant heating function (reinforced concrete thermal insulated building envelope). This contribution focuses on the research area of building wall structures with integrated energy active elements and dynamic thermal resistance, specifically ATP in the TB function. The principle of dynamic thermal resistance (DTR) of the building envelope is the controlled delivery of heat/cool to the ATP heat transfer layer over time, which adjusts the heat/cool transfer through the building structure as required while limiting the heat loss/gain of the building. Dynamic thermal insulation, therefore, can use a heat transfer agent to adjust the desired temperature in the ATP layer over time and, according to the DTR size requirement, thereby eliminating the thickness of static thermal insulation.

## 2. Current Status of Technical Solutions and Overview of Research Work in the Field of Active Thermal Protection

#### 2.1. Inspirational Technical Solution of Our Research

^{®}Isomax/

^{®}Terrasol Technologien. Since about the 1990s, he has constructed several buildings around the world using this technology with thermal barriers, Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4, [5,6,7]. This combined building energy system inspired us to research building structures with integrated energy-active elements.

#### 2.2. Scientific and Professional Work in the Field of ATP

^{2}, while an increase in the heat transfer coefficient between the wall and the interior by 1 W/(m

^{2}·K) raised the performance by 3 to 4 W/m

^{2}.

#### 2.3. Scientific Works in the Field of ATP Computer Simulations

^{2}, respectively. In this work, the suggested model was also validated using numerically generated data.

## 3. Methodology

#### 3.1. Calculation Procedure for Thermal Resistance R and Heat Transfer Coefficient U according to EN 73 0540

^{2}·K)) and the thermal resistance of the building structure R ((m

^{2}·K)/W).

_{i}is the thermal resistance of the j-th layer of the structure ((m

^{2}·K)/W), d

_{j}thickness of the j-th layer of the structure (m), and λ

_{j}coefficient of thermal conductivity of the j-th layer of the structure (W/(m·K)).

_{c}((m

^{2}·K)/W) is calculated using the formula [22,23]:

_{c}= ∑ R

_{i}

_{si}+ R

_{c}+ R

_{se}

^{2}·K)/W), R

_{c}total thermal resistance of the structure ((m

^{2}·K)/W), R

_{j}is the thermal resistance of the j-th layer of the structure ((m

^{2}·K)/W), R

_{si}thermal resistance to heat transfer at the internal surface of the structure ((m

^{2}·K)/W), and R

_{se}thermal resistance to heat transfer at the external surface of the structure ((m

^{2}·K)/W).

^{2}·K)) is calculated using the formula [22,23]:

^{2}·K)/), R thermal resistance of the structure ((m

^{2}·K)/W), R

_{si}thermal resistance to heat transfer at the internal surface of the structure ((m

^{2}·K)/W), and R

_{se}thermal resistance to heat transfer at the external surface of the structure ((m

^{2}·K)/W).

_{j}(°C) is calculated using the formula [22,23]:

_{j}= θ

_{i}− U × (θ

_{i}− θ

_{e}) × (R

_{si}+ ∑R

_{j})

^{2}·K)), R

_{si}thermal resistance to heat transfer at the internal surface of the structure ((m

^{2}·K)/W), ∑R

_{j}sum of thermal resistances of the j-th layers of the structure ((m

^{2}·K)/W), θ

_{e}outdoor design temperature in winter (°C), θ

_{i}internal design temperature (°C), and θ

_{j}is the temperature in the j-th layer of the structure (°C).

_{p}is the specific heat under constant pressure (kJ/(kg·K)), T the temperature (K), t the time (s), and ρ the density of the wall layer material (kJ/m

^{3})).

_{i}(K) from the ambient conditions. This means that the boundary conditions of the S

_{i}(m

^{2}) and S

_{e}(m

^{2}) surfaces are defined by Newton’s law. Consequently, the heat transfer coefficient by radiation and convection, respectively, is defined by the rate of heat exchange by convection and radiation on the interior surface S

_{i}(m

^{2}). That is, the boundary conditions on the S

_{i}(m

^{2}) surface are defined using the formula [24]:

_{i}the convective/radiative heat transfer coefficient on the internal surface (W/(m

^{2}·K)), T

_{i}the internal air temperature (K), T

_{Fi}(t) the internal surface temperature (K), and λ is the thermal conductivity (W/(m·K)).

_{e}(m

^{2}) surface and the external environment. The heat exchange is composed of convection and radiation, and these two components must be considered separately. Radiation is defined by the solar air temperature, and convection is defined by the convective heat transfer coefficient. We would define the solar air temperature T

_{i}(K) as the fictitious temperature of the outdoor air that, in the absence of radiative exchange at the exterior surface of the roof or wall, would provide the same rate of heat transfer through the wall or roof as the actual combined heat transfer mechanism between the sun, the surface of the roof or wall, and the outdoor air and environment. Since the ambient conditions are variable, we can define the boundary conditions on the external surface S

_{e}(m

^{2}) using the formula [24]:

_{e}(t) is the convective heat transfer coefficient on the external surface (W/(m

^{2}·K)), T

_{Fe}(t) is the external surface temperature (K), and T

_{e}(t) is the sol-air temperature (K).

_{a1}(m

^{2}) and S

_{a2}(m

^{2}) are defined using the formula [24]:

_{a1}= 0

_{a2}= 0

^{2}).

#### 3.2. Calculation Procedure for Wall Heating according to EN 1264-(1–5)

^{2}) of the wall surface, the following parameters are required [25,26,27,28,29]:

- ■
- Heating pipe spacing;
- ■
- The thickness s
_{u}and the thermal conductivity λ_{E}of the wall layer in front of the heating tubes towards the interior; - ■
- The thermal resistance of the surface covering R
_{λ,B}of the wall; - ■
- The outer diameter of the heating tubes D = d
_{a}, possibly with coating D = d_{M}, and the thermal conductivity of the heating tubes λ_{R}or coating λ_{M}; - ■
- The contact between the tubes and the heat pipe elements or spreading layer is characterized by the coefficient a
_{K}.

^{2}), B is the system dependent coefficient (W/(m

^{2}·K)), and $\prod _{\mathrm{i}}\left({\mathrm{a}}_{\mathrm{i}}^{{\mathrm{m}}_{\mathrm{i}}}\right)$ is the power product combining the design parameters between each other. The design parameters are calculated as follows [25,26,27,28,29]:

_{H}is the average temperature of the heating medium (°C), θ

_{V}is the supply temperature of the heating medium (°C), θ

_{R}is the return temperature of the heating medium (°C), and θ

_{i}is the nominal indoor temperature of the room (°C).

_{H})

_{n}; exponent n has values according to theoretical results confirmed by experiments: 1.0 < n < 1.01. Within the limits of sufficient precision, a value is used, n = 1, [25,26,27,28,29].

^{2}) is calculated according to the relation [25,26,27,28,29]:

^{2}) and B is the system-dependent coefficient (W/(m

^{2}·K)). The application for this system is as follows [25,26,27,28,29]:

_{B}is the covering coefficient (−); a

_{T}is the tube spacing coefficient (−), Table 1; a

_{T}= f (s

_{u}/λ

_{E}); λ

_{E}is the thermal conductivity of the spreading layer (W/(m·K)); s

_{u}is the thickness of the spreading layer over the tubes (m); and m

_{i}is the exponents to calculate the characteristic curves (m

_{T}, m

_{u}) (−). This holds as follows [25,26,27,28,29]:

_{u}= 100 (0.045 − s

_{u}) suits when s

_{u}≥ 0.010 m

_{u}is the thickness of the spreading layer above the tubes (m).

^{2}) and q

_{0.375}is the specific heat capacity (W/m

^{2}) calculated at pipe spacing L = 0.375 m. The covering factor is calculated as follows [25,26,27,28,29]:

_{u}is the covering factor (-); α = 10.8 W/(m

^{2}·K); λ

_{u,0}= 1 W/(m

^{2}·K); s

_{u,0}= 0.045 m; a

_{k}is the correction coefficient of coupling in compliance, Table 2; a

_{k}= f (T); a

_{WL}is the thermal conductivity coefficient; Table 3, a

_{WL}= f (K

_{WL}, L, D); and Δθ

_{H}is the average temperature of the heating substance (°C), Formula (12) [25,26,27,28,29].

_{WL}= 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, and above are seen STN EN 1264-2, where K

_{WL}is the coefficient of the heat conducting element for type B (-) systems and is expressed as follows [25,26,27,28,29]:

_{u}= f (L)—Table 4, s

_{WL}× λ

_{WL}= product of thickness and thermal conductivity of the heat conducting element, and s

_{u}× λ

_{E}= product of thickness and thermal conductivity of the spreading layer.

#### 3.3. Computer Simulation Procedure—ANSYS

^{−003}m), as seen in Figure 8. Next, it was necessary to determine the boundary conditions, where the first condition was the convection condition for the interior, the second was the convection condition for the exterior, and the last condition was the water temperature in the pipes of 6 °C.

_{i}is the radiant flux density towards the interior (W/m

^{2}), q

_{e}is the radiant flux density towards the exterior (W/m

^{2}), h

_{i}is the heat transfer coefficient from the indoor air to the structure (h

_{i}= 6 W/(m

^{2}·K)), he is the heat transfer coefficient from the structure to the outdoor air (h

_{e}= 25 W/(m

^{2}·K)), θ

_{i}is the temperature of the indoor ambient air (θ

_{i}= 20 °C), θ

_{e}is the temperature of the outdoor ambient air (θ

_{e}=−11 °C), θ(x,y) is the temperature is a function of two variables, λ (x,y) is the coefficient of thermal conductivity is for each of the isotropic materials forming the region (W/(m·K)), and Γ

_{I}, Γ

_{E}is the boundary of the region on the interior/exterior side.

^{3}), θ(x,y) is the temperature is a function of two variables, t is the time (s), x,y are the variables, and λ (x,y) is the coefficient of thermal conductivity is for each of the isotropic materials forming the region (W/(m·K)).

## 4. Results

- The results of a parametric study of four fragments of building envelopes;
- The results of the computer simulation of the temperature progression in the ATP layer for a fragment of the building envelope of a prefabricated timber building.

#### 4.1. Parametric Study of Fragments of Building Envelope Structures

- Fragment 1—construction of the ISOMAX system perimeter wall (thermal insulation–reinforced concrete–thermal insulation);
- Fragment 2—reinforced concrete wall with thermal insulation on the exterior side;
- Fragment 3—a wall made of aerated concrete blocks with thermal insulation on the exterior side;
- Fragment 4—prefabricated timber building wall.

_{m}(°C) were the exterior temperature θ

_{e}= −11 °C and the interior temperature θ

_{i}= +20 °C.

#### 4.1.1. Fragment 1—Construction of the ISOMAX System Perimeter Wall

_{m}= 3.91 °C for the ISOMAX building envelope structure design for the static thermal insulation with a thickness of 75 mm, Figure 11, and θ

_{m}= 9.05 °C for the upgraded design for the static thermal insulation with thickness 200 mm, Figure 12. The dynamic thermal resistance as a function of the thickness of the static/dynamic thermal insulation and the mean temperature of the heat transfer medium in the ATP tubes forming the heat transfer layer in the building structure can be seen from the graph in Figure 13. The figure shows that the standard DTR R

_{DTR}= 6.5 ((m

^{2}·K)/W) is achieved in this design by the mean temperature of the heat transfer medium in the ATP layer θ

_{m}= 7.04 °C, and the DTR increases with increasing temperature. A temperature of θ

_{m}= 16.96 °C represents an R

_{DTR}= 29.86 ((m

^{2}·K)/W) and an equivalent static thermal insulation thickness of 1000 mm. Similarly, Figure 14 shows the dependence of the dynamic heat transfer coefficient U

_{D}(W/(m

^{2}·K)).

#### 4.1.2. Fragment 2—Reinforced Concrete Wall with Thermal Insulation on the Exterior Side

_{m}= 18.7 °C, R

_{DTR}= 6.55 ((m

^{2}·K)/W), Figure 16, and for a thermal insulation thickness of 50 mm is θ

_{m}= 15.28 °C, R

_{DTR}= 1.67 ((m

^{2}·K)/W), Figure 17.

_{m}= 19.72 °C, R

_{DTR}= 30.46 ((m

^{2}·K)/W), an equivalent static thermal insulation thickness of 1000 mm would be required.

_{D}(W/(m

^{2}·K)). Figure 20 shows in red the required heat in kWh delivered by a heat transfer medium with a mean temperature of 18.7 °C to the ATP (function TB) when using a 50 mm thick static thermal insulation to bring the dynamic thermal resistance of the building envelope up to the value of the standard thermal resistance when using a 210 mm thick static thermal insulation. Based on the results of the study [34], we can conclude that with this technical solution of the building envelope, it is possible to obtain savings on the thickness of the static thermal insulation up to 160 mm. According to the results of the study [1], the ATP function for this building envelope solution has a high potential for application as wall heating/cooling in addition to the thermal barrier and heat/cooling storage functions.

#### 4.1.3. Fragment 3—A Wall Made of Aerated Concrete Blocks with Thermal Insulation on the Exterior Side

_{m}= 1.89 °C, R

_{DTR}= 6.48 ((m

^{2}·K)/W), Figure 22. Figure 23 shows the mathematical-physical model for calculating the dynamic thermal resistance for varying thicknesses of static thermal insulation. Figure 24 shows the graphical dependence of the dynamic thermal resistance on the thickness of the static/dynamic thermal insulation and the mean temperature of the heat transfer medium in the ATP tubes that form the heat transfer layer in the building structure. Similarly, Figure 25 shows the dependence of the dynamic heat transfer coefficient U

_{D}(W/(m

^{2}·K)). The dynamic thermal resistance of this building envelope for the illustrated isotherm with an internal temperature in the ATP location layer of θ

_{m}= 10 °C is R

_{DTR}= 11.8 ((m

^{2}·K)/W), the thickness of 300 mm thermal insulation, respectively, for θ

_{m}= 16.11 °C is R

_{DTR}= 30.80 ((m

^{2}·K)/W), the thickness of 1000 mm thermal insulation, Figure 26. Because the load-bearing wall made of porous concrete blocks has a high thermal resistance, the function of the ATP for this building envelope solution is limited only to the functions of thermal barrier and partial heat/cold accumulation.

#### 4.1.4. Fragment 4—Prefabricated Timber Building Wall

_{m}= 6.03 °C, Figure 31, and for a thermal insulation thickness of 100 mm is θ

_{m}= 0.80 °C. If we increase the mean temperature in the ATP heat transfer layer by Δθ = 5.23 °C using a heat transfer agent, the dynamic thermal resistance is R

_{DTR}= 10.487 ((m

^{2}·K)/W). At the same time, we eliminate the thickness of the static thermal insulation by 100 mm.

_{D}(W/(m

^{2}·K)).

_{m}= 6.03 °C to the ATP (function TB) using 100 mm thick static thermal insulation, θ

_{m}= 0.8 °C, so that the dynamic thermal resistance of the building envelope reaches the value of the thermal resistance corresponding to the use of 200 mm thick static thermal insulation.

_{m}= 15.61 °C, the dynamic thermal resistance has a high value of R

_{DTR}= 30.34 ((m

^{2}·K)/W), which corresponds to a static thermal insulation thickness of 1000 mm.

#### 4.2. Computer Simulation of the Progression of the Temperature on a 2D Model of a Fragment of the Perimeter Wall

_{DTR}= 10.487 ((m

^{2}·K)/W) at a dynamic thermal insulation thickness of 100 mm, which is equal to the thermal resistance at a static thermal insulation thickness of 200 mm.

## 5. Discussion

^{2}·K) in November and 0.11 W/(m

^{2}·K) in March for the analyzed wall, while the standard value was 0.282 W/(m

^{2}·K).

_{DTR}((m

^{2}·K)/W) on the thickness of the static/dynamic thermal insulation and the mean temperature of the heat transfer medium in the ATP tubes for all fragments investigated. The relatively low mean temperature of the heat transfer medium θ

_{m}(°C) = 15.61 to 19.72 °C delivered to the tubes of the ATP heat transfer layer gives a dynamic thermal resistance of R

_{DTR}= 29.86 to 33.34 ((m

^{2}·K)/W) with an equivalent dynamic thermal insulation thickness of 1000 mm for the required standard resistances R

_{STANDARD}= 6.50 ((m

^{2}·K)/W) of the individual fragments of the building envelope with static thermal insulation of 65 to 210 mm. Then, the energy potential of using TB is 455 to 513% in thermal resistance and 476 to 1.538% in thickness dynamic thermal insulation. Figure 40 shows the graphical dependencies of the dynamic heat transfer coefficient U (W/(m

^{2}·K)) on the thickness of the static/dynamic thermal insulation and the mean temperature of the heat transfer medium in the ATP tubes for all fragments investigated.

^{®}ISOMAX panel and system, whose design would be optimal in terms of thermal barrier operation and heat/cool accumulation. The patented system’s manufacture of panels was overly complex and frequently displayed flaws in terms of design. We modeled both solar panels mathematically and physically and evaluated their energy potential. We created a unique panel using induction and analog molding. Most of the building components and all panels with integrated energy-active elements were produced directly in the prefabrication factory based on the synthesis of the knowledge derived from the scientific analysis and the transformation of these data. The prefabricated house IDA I was later realized as a prototype. The uniqueness of our ground-breaking building envelope panel system is in the panel design, which has 2.6 times less heat gain/loss than an ISOMAX panel.

_{i}(W/m

^{2}) increases, while the heat loss decreases rapidly. It was found that the thickness of the reinforced concrete core does not affect the heat flux as much as the thermal insulation. Based on the investigation, it can be concluded that the additional heat loss caused by Variant II, semi-accumulation heating (TABS system), and Variant III, accumulation heating, relative to Variant 1, direct heating, is minor, accounting for less than 1% of the total heat flux given. In the case of direct heating, the direct heat flux to the heated room is 89.17%, in the case of variant II (TABS) semi-accumulation heating is 73.36%, and in the case of variant III, it is 58.46%. Of the total heat flux delivered to the panel structure (TABS system), Variant II accounts for up to 14.84% and Variant III up to 29.86%.

- ■
- A comprehensive analysis of the dynamic thermal barrier for the four most applied practices and materially different fragments of the building envelope;
- ■
- The creation of mathematical-physical models for the parametric study of the individual fragments under consideration;
- ■
- The creation of a 2D model for computer simulation of temperature distribution in individual layers of the building structure of a prefabricated timber building, the results of which will be verified on a test cell;
- ■
- The development of a graphical evaluation of the dynamic thermal resistance and dynamic heat transfer coefficient as a function of the temperature of the heat transfer medium in the TB layer for the comparison of the individual fragments;
- ■
- The evaluation of the multifunctional energy potential of individual building envelope fragments (TB functions, heating, cooling, and heat storage).

_{m}= +10 °C to the ATP layer in Fragment 1 represents R

_{DTR}= 8.91 ((m

^{2}·K)/W), equivalent U = 0.11 (W/(m

^{2}·K)), dynamic thermal insulation thickness 225 mm; in Fragment 3, it is R

_{DTR}= 11.883 ((m

^{2}·K)/W), equivalent U = 0.083 (W/(m

^{2}·K)), dynamic thermal insulation thickness 300 mm; and in Fragment 4, it is R

_{DTR}= 14.773 ((m

^{2}·K)/W), equivalent U = 0.0685 (W/(m

^{2}·K)), dynamic thermal insulation thickness 350 mm. The energy-saving potential of using TB is significant in both the heating and summer seasons. It is increased by the use of heat/cooling from RES and waste heat/cooling.

_{m}(°C) and the pipe spacing L (m) in the ATP layer.

^{2}·K)) and 65% (U = 0.14 W/(m

^{2}·K)) lower than the static insulation U-value (0.4 W/(m

^{2}·K)), respectively. In winter, the average dynamic insulation U-value combined with forced and natural ventilation was 25% (U = 0.3 W/(m

^{2}·K)) and 38% (U = 0.25 W/(m

^{2}·K)) lower than the static thermal insulation U-value (0.4 W/(m

^{2}·K)).

^{2}·K) based on the measured heat loss in the case without DI. The heat loss per unit temperature on the surface with applied DI was 3.19 W/K without DI and 1.83 W/K with DI. The application of DI technology reduced heat loss by 42.6%.

^{−2}K

^{−1}in the insulating state to a value of 2.7 W m

^{−2}K

^{−1}in the conductive state. Building energy simulations using EnergyPlus showed that the sum of heating and cooling requirements could be reduced by approximately 30% if the switchable insulation was used as a window application or in front of an opaque solid wall.

_{2}emissions by more than 300,000 tonnes or 6.80% of the total amount of CO

_{2}currently emitted to heat and cool houses.

## 6. Conclusions

- We developed mathematical-physical models for four materially different building envelope types to determine the energy saving and energy storage potential of ATP, as well as to define the dynamic thermal resistance using a parametric study;
- Due to the application of thermal insulation also on the interior side in Fragment 1, the function of the ATP for this building envelope solution is limited to the thermal barrier and heat/cool accumulation functions only;
- Because the load-bearing wall is made of porous concrete blocks, Fragment 3 has a high thermal resistance, and the function of the ATP for this building envelope solution is limited only to the functions of a thermal barrier and partial heat/cold accumulation;
- Based on the analysis of the dynamic thermal resistance, we can conclude that in the case of the building envelope, Fragment 4, ATP is significant only as a function of TB, but at relatively low mean temperatures of the heat carrier θ
_{m}= 15.61 °C, the dynamic thermal resistance has a high-value R_{DTR}= 30.34 ((m^{2}·K)/W), which corresponds to a static thermal insulation thickness of 1000 mm; - An important result of the computer simulation is the uniform and continuous temperature distribution in the ATP heat transfer layer with a temperature θ
_{m}= of about 6 °C, confirming the functionality of the TB with the achievement of a dynamic thermal resistance R_{DTR}= 10.487 ((m^{2}·K)/W) at a dynamic thermal insulation thickness of 100 mm, which is equal to the thermal resistance at a static thermal insulation thickness of 200 mm; - The relatively low mean temperature of the heat transfer medium θ
_{m}= 15.61 to 19.72 °C delivered to the tubes of the ATP heat transfer layer gives a dynamic thermal resistance of R_{DTR}= 29.86 to 33.34 ((m^{2}·K)/W) with an equivalent dynamic thermal insulation thickness of 1000 mm for the required standard resistances R_{STANDARD}= 6.50 ((m^{2}·K)/W) of the individual fragments of the building envelope with static thermal insulation of 65 to 210 mm. Then, the energy potential of using TB is 455 to 513% for the increase in thermal resistance and 476 to 1.538% for the thickness of the dynamic thermal insulation; - A mean temperature of the heat transfer medium θ
_{m}(°C) delivered to the tubes of the ATP heat transfer layer equal to the interior temperature θ_{i}(°C) represents zero heat loss/gain to and from the interior; - The energy-saving potential of using TB is undoubtedly significant in the heating season as well as in the summer season. It is increased by the use of heating/cooling from RES;
- The computer simulation was intended only for a basic analysis of the uniform and continuous temperature distribution in the ATP layer. We will continue the simulations to analyze for different changes in input parameters, the heat fluxes to the interior and exterior, the amount of heat delivered, the effect of operating time, and other physical variables affecting the dynamic thermal resistance of the individual building envelope structures.

## 7. Patents

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Institutional Review Board Statement

## Informed Consent Statement

## Data Availability Statement

## Acknowledgments

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Kalús, D.; Koudelková, D.; Mučková, V.; Sokol, M.; Kurčová, M.; Šťastný, P. Parametric study of the energy potential of a building’s envelope with integrated energy-active elements. Acta Polytech.
**2022**, 62, 595–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kalús, D.; Koudelková, D.; Mučková, V.; Sokol, M.; Kurčová, M.; Janík, P. Practical Experience in the Application of Energy Roofs, Ground Heat Storages, and Active Thermal Protection on Experimental Buildings. Appl. Sci.
**2022**, 12, 9313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kalús, D.; Koudelková, D.; Mučková, V.; Sokol, M.; Kurčová, M. Experience in Researching and Designing an Innovative Way of Operating Combined Building–Energy Systems Using Renewable Energy Sources. Appl. Sci.
**2022**, 12, 10214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kalús, D.; Gašparík, J.; Janík, P.; Kubica, M.; Šťastný, P. Innovative building technology implemented into facades with active thermal protection. Sustainability
**2021**, 13, 4438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Isomax Technology. Available online: http://www.isomax-terrasol.eu/home.html (accessed on 9 February 2023).
- ®ISOMAX-TERRASOL Zero-Energy Building Technologies—Outer Wall Design with Thermal Barier (Climate Barier). Available online: http://www.isomax-terrasol.eu/en/technologie/isomax-technologies/isomax-temperature-barrier.html (accessed on 11 December 2021).
- Sebright, M.T.; Berg, D. Critical Look into® ISOMAX (Zero Energy Use Structures) Construction. In Proceedings of the 1st Residential Building Design & Construction Conference, Bethlehem, PA, USA, 20–21 February 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Koenders, S.J.M.; Loonen, R.C.G.M.; Hensen, J.L.M. Investigating the potential of a closed-loop dynamic insulation system for opaque building elements. Energy Build.
**2018**, 173, 409–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Krzaczek, M.; Florczuk, J.; Tejchman, J.J.A.E. Improved energy management technique in pipe-embedded wall heating/cooling system in residential buildings. Appl. Energy
**2019**, 254, 113711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kisilewicz, T.; Fedorczak-Cisak, M.; Barkanyi, T. Active thermal insulation as an element limiting heat loss through external walls. Energy Build.
**2019**, 205, 109541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Fawaier, M.; Bokor, B. Dynamic insulation systems of building envelopes: A review. Energy Build.
**2022**, 270, 112268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Shen, J.; Wang, Z.; Luo, Y.; Jiang, X.; Zhao, H.; Tian, Z. Performance evaluation of an active pipe-embedded building envelope system to transfer solar heat gain from the south to the north external wall. J. Build. Eng.
**2022**, 59, 105123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yan, B.; Han, X.; Malkawi, A.; Dokka, T.H.; Howard, P.; Knowles, J.; Edwards, K. Comprehensive assessment of operational performance of coupled natural ventilation and thermally active building system via an extensive sensor network. Energy Build.
**2022**, 260, 111921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Junasová, B.; Krajčík, M.; Šikula, O.; Arıcı, M.; Šimko, M. Adapting the construction of radiant heating and cooling systems for building retrofit. Energy Build.
**2022**, 268, 112228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Šimko, M.; Petráš, D.; Krajčík, M.; Szabó, D. Testing of a Radiant Wall Cooling System with Pipes Coupled to Aerated Blocks. Period. Polytech. Mech. Eng.
**2022**, 66, 59–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chen, S.; Yang, Y.; Chang, T. Uncertainty and parameter ranking analysis on summer thermal characteristics of the hydronic thermal barrier for low-energy buildings. In Building Simulation; Tsinghua University Press: Beijing, China, 2023; Volume 16, pp. 27–49. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, Q.; Xu, X.; Wang, J.; Xiao, F. Development of dynamic simplified thermal models of active pipe-embedded building envelopes using genetic algorithm. Int. J. Therm. Sci.
**2014**, 76, 258–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wu, X.; Zhao, J.; Olesen, B.W.; Fang, L.; Wang, F. A new simplified model to calculate surface temperature and heat transfer of radiant floor heating and cooling systems. Energy Build.
**2015**, 105, 285–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Xie, J.; Xu, X.; Li, A.; Zhu, Q. Experimental validation of frequency-domain finite-difference model of active pipe-embedded building envelope in time domain by using Fourier series analysis. Energy Build.
**2015**, 99, 177–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Zhu, Q.; Li, A.; Xie, J.; Li, W.; Xu, X. Experimental validation of a semi-dynamic simplified model of active pipe-embedded building envelope. Int. J. Therm. Sci.
**2016**, 108, 70–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Lydon, G.P.; Caranovic, S.; Hischier, I.; Schlueter, A. Coupled simulation of thermally active building systems to support a digital twin. Energy Build.
**2019**, 202, 109298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - STN EN 73 0540-2+Z1+Z2; Thermal Protection of Buildings. Thermal Performance of Buildings and Components. Part 2: Functional Requirements. Úrad pre Normalizáciu, Metrológiu a Skúšobníctvo Slovenskej Republiky: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2019.
- STN EN 73 0540-3; Thermal Protection of Buildings. Thermal Performance of Buildings and Components. Part 3: Properties of Environments and Building Products. Úrad pre Normalizáciu, Metrológiu a Skúšobníctvo Slovenskej Republiky: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2012.
- Krzaczek, M.; Kowalczuk, Z. Thermal Barrier as a technique of indirect heating and cooling for residential buildings. Energy Build.
**2011**, 43, 823–837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - STN EN 1264-1; Water Based Surface Embedded Heating and Cooling Systems—Part 1: Definitions and Symbols. Úrad pre Normalizáciu, Metrológiu a Skúšobníctvo Slovenskej Republiky: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2021.
- STN EN 1264-2+A1; Water Based Surface Embedded Heating and Cooling Systems. Part 2: Floor Heating: Prove Methods for the Determination of the Thermal Output Using Calculation and Test Methods. Úrad pre Normalizáciu, Metrológiu a Skúšobníctvo Slovenskej Republiky: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2013.
- STN EN 1264-3; Water Based Surface Embedded Heating and Cooling Systems—Part 3: Dimensioning. Úrad pre Normalizáciu, Metrológiu a Skúšobníctvo Slovenskej Republiky: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2021.
- STN EN 1264-4; Water Based Surface Embedded Heating and Cooling Systems—Part 4: Installation. Úrad pre Normalizáciu, Metrológiu a Skúšobníctvo Slovenskej Republiky: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2021.
- STN EN 1264-5; Water Based Surface Embedded Heating and Cooling Systems—Part 5: Determination of the Thermal Output for Wall and Ceiling Heating and for Floor, Wall and Ceiling Cooling. Úrad pre Normalizáciu, Metrológiu a Skúšobníctvo Slovenskej Republiky: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2021.
- Benča, Š. Výpočtové Postupy MKP pri Riešení Lineárnych úloh Mechaniky; Vydavateľstvo STU: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Kalús, D.; Koudelková, D.; Mučková, V.; Sokol, M.; Kurčová, M. Contribution to the Research and Development of Innovative Building Components with Embedded Energy-Active Elements. Coatings
**2022**, 12, 1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kalús, D.; Koudelková, D.; Mučková, V.; Kurčová, M.; Sokol, M. Design, Project, and Realization of a Prototype of an Energy-efficient Prefabricated House IDA I. using Renewable Energy Sources. Period. Polytech. Civ. Eng.
**2023**, 67, 232–248. [Google Scholar] - Kalús, D.; Janík, P.; Koudelková, D.; Mučková, V.; Sokol, M. Contribution to research on ground heat storages as part of building energy systems using RES. Energy Build.
**2022**, 267, 112125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kalús, D.; Mučková, V.; Koudelková, D. Energy, Economic and Environmental Assessment of Thermal Barrier Application in Building Envelope Structures. Coatings
**2021**, 11, 1538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kalús, D.; Janík, P.; Kubica, M. Experimental house EB2020–Research and experimental measurements of an energy roof. Energy Build.
**2021**, 248, 111172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kalús, D.; Straková, Z.; Kubica, M. Parametric Study of Heating and Cooling Capacity of Interior Thermally Active Panels. Period. Polytech. Mech. Eng.
**2021**, 65, 269–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - UTILITY MODEL SK 5749 Y1 (UTILITY MODEL): Method of Operation of a Combined Construction-Energy System of Buildings and Equipment. Date of Entry into Force of the Utility Model: 1.4.2011. In Vestník ÚPV SR č.: 5/2011, 23p. Spôsob Prevádzky Kombinovaného Stavebno-Energetického Systému Budov a Zariadenie: Číslo Prihlášky 5027-2010, Zverejnená 8. 11. 2010 vo Vestníku ÚPV SR č. 11/2010; Úrad Priemyselného Vlastníctva Slovenskej Republiky: Banská Bystrica, Slovakia, 2011; 23p. Available online: https://wbr.indprop.gov.sk/WebRegistre/UzitkovyVzor/Detail/5027-2010 (accessed on 9 February 2023).
- UTILITY MODEL SK 5729 Y1 (UTILITY MODEL): Samonosný Tepelnoizolačný Panel pre Systémy s Aktívnym Riadením Prechodu Tepla. [Self-Supporting Thermal Insulation Panel for Systems with Active Heat Transfer Control]. Date of Entry into Force of the Utility Model: 28.2.2011. In Vestník ÚPV SR No. 4/2011, Banská Bystrica, Slovak Republic, 32 p. Samonosný Tepelnoizolačný Panel pre Systémy s Aktívnym Riadením Prechodu Tepla: Číslo Prihlášky UV 5030-2010, Zverejnená 7. 10. 2010 vo Vestníku ÚPV SR č. 10/2010; Úrad Priemyselného Vlastníctva Slovenskej Republiky: Banská Bystrica, Slovakia, 2011; 32p. Available online: https://wbr.indprop.gov.sk/WebRegistre/UzitkovyVzor/Detail/5030-2010 (accessed on 9 February 2023).
- UTILITY MODEL SK 5725 Y1 (UTILITY MODEL): Tepelnoizolačný Panel pre Systémy s Aktívnym Riadením Prechodu Tepla: Číslo Prihlášky UV 5031-2010, Zverejnená 7.10. 2010 vo Vestníku ÚPV SR č. 10/2010; Úrad Priemyselného Vlastníctva Slovenskej Republiky: Banská Bystrica, Slovakia, 2011; 63p. Available online: https://wbr.indprop.gov.sk/WebRegistre/UzitkovyVzor/Detail/5031-2010 (accessed on 9 February 2023).
- EUROPEAN PATENT EP 2 572 057 B1. Heat Insulating Panel with Active Regulation of Heat Transition. International Application Number: PCT/SK2011/000004, International Publication Number: WO 2011/146025 (24.11.2011 Gazette 2011/47). 15 October 2014. 67p. Available online: https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP11716446&tab=main&lng=en10 (accessed on 9 February 2023).
- Imbabi, M.S.E. A passive–active dynamic insulation system for all climates. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ.
**2012**, 1, 247–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Yaegashi, A.; Hiyama, K.; Kato, S.; Tezuka, J.; Nikawa, S. Thermal performance evaluation of a dynamic insulation technology applied to a timber framework house in a real environment. J. Asian Archit. Build. Eng.
**2015**, 14, 213–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Fantucci, S.; Serra, V.; Perino, M. Dynamic insulation systems: Experimental analysis on a parietodynamic wall. Energy Procedia
**2015**, 78, 549–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Shekar, V.; Krarti, M. Control strategies for dynamic insulation materials applied to commercial buildings. Energy Build.
**2017**, 154, 305–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Gopalan, A.; Antony, A.S.M.; Suresh, R.; Sahoo, S.; Livingston, L.M.; Titus, A.; Sathyamurthy, R. Performance enhancement of building energy through the combination of dynamic insulation panels and phase changing materials. Energy Rep.
**2022**, 8, 945–958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Horak, P.; Formanek, M.; Fečer, T.; Plášek, J. Evaporation of refrigerant R134a, R404A and R407C with low mass flux in smooth vertical tube. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf.
**2021**, 181, 121845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Formánek, M.; Horák, P.; Diblík, J.; Hirš, J. Experimental increase in the efficiency of a cooling circuit using a desuperheater. Period. Polytech. Civ. Eng.
**2016**, 60, 355–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Jurča, J.; Horák, P. Influence of Sustainability on Comprehensive Assessment of Buildings. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2019; Volume 214, p. 012049. [Google Scholar]
- Park, B.; Srubar, W.V.; Krarti, M. Energy performance analysis of variable thermal resistance envelopes in residential buildings. Energy Build.
**2015**, 103, 317–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Menyhart, K.; Krarti, M. Potential energy savings from deployment of dynamic insulation materials for US residential buildings. Build. Environ.
**2017**, 114, 203–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Pflug, T.; Bueno, B.E.; Siroux, M.; Kuhn, T.E. Potential analysis of a new removable insulation system. Energy Build.
**2017**, 154, 391–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Garriga Martínez, S.; Dabbagh, M.; Krarti, M. Evaluation of dynamic insulation systems for residential buildings in Barcelona, Spain. J. Eng. Sustain. Build. Cities
**2020**, 1, 011002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Rupp, S.; Krarti, M. Analysis of multi-step control strategies for dynamic insulation systems. Energy Build.
**2019**, 204, 109459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kishore, R.A.; Bianchi, M.V.A.; Booten, C.; Vidal, J.; Jackson, R. Enhancing building energy performance by effectively using phase change material and dynamic insulation in walls. Appl. Energy
**2021**, 283, 116306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

**Figure 1.**Lost formwork for reinforced concrete building envelope ISOMAX [5].

**Figure 2.**Application of TB on porous concrete block wall [5].

**Figure 3.**Application of TB on the wall of a timber building [5].

**Figure 4.**Application of TB on a brick wall [5].

**Figure 5.**Wall system with pipes in the insulation layer with thermal diffusion devices, type B (STN EN 1264-1). 1—wall structure, 2—insulation layer, 3—piping, 4—thermal diffusion device, 5—fixing supports, 6—thermal diffusion layer, and 7—surface covering.

**Figure 6.**Mathematical-physical model of the simulation fragment. q

_{e}—radiant flux density towards the exterior (W/m

^{2}), q

_{i}—radiant flux density towards the interior (W/m

^{2}), θ

_{e}—outdoor design temperature in winter (°C), θ

_{i}—internal design temperature (°C), d—construction thickness (mm), DN—pipe dimension (mm), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 11.**Construction of the perimeter wall according to the ISOMAX system [5]. θ

_{m}—the temperature in construction (°C), d—construction thickness (mm), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 12.**Our upgraded ISOMAX perimeter wall construction. θ

_{m}—the temperature in construction (°C), d—construction thickness (mm), x—thickness of thermal insulation, z—the temperature between the load-bearing and thermal insulation layer of the structure (°C), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 13.**Dynamic thermal resistance as a function of static/dynamic thermal insulation thickness and mean temperature of the heat transfer medium in ATP pipes—Fragment 1.

**Figure 14.**Dependence of the dynamic heat coefficient U

_{D}(W/(m

^{2}·K)) on the thickness of the thermal insulation and the mean temperature θ

_{m}(°C) in the ATP layer—Fragment 1.

**Figure 15.**Energy saving and energy storage potential of thermal barrier application for both variants of envelope construction. θ

_{m}—the temperature in construction (°C), Δθ—temperature difference (°C), d—construction thickness (mm), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 16.**Reinforced concrete wall 200 mm thick with thermal insulation 210 mm thick on the outside. θ

_{m}—the temperature in construction (°C), d—construction thickness (mm), x—thickness of thermal insulation, z—the temperature between the load-bearing and thermal insulation layer of the structure (°C), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 17.**Reinforced concrete wall 200 mm thick with thermal insulation 50 mm thick on the outside. θ

_{m}—the temperature in construction (°C), d—construction thickness (mm), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 18.**Dynamic thermal resistance as a function of static/dynamic thermal insulation thickness and mean temperature of the heat transfer medium in ATP pipes—fragment 2.

**Figure 19.**Dependence of the dynamic heat coefficient UD (W/(m2·K)) on the thickness of the thermal insulation and the mean temperature θm (°C) in the ATP layer—Fragment 2.

**Figure 20.**Required heat in kWh supplied by a heat transfer medium with a mean temperature of 18.7 °C to the ATP (function TB) using 50 mm thick static thermal insulation to achieve the standard thermal resistance. θ

_{m}—the temperature in construction (°C), Δθ—temperature difference (°C), d—construction thickness (mm), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 21.**View of the ATP formed by a plastic pipe between aerated concrete masonry and polystyrene. (Photo archive: Kalús).

**Figure 22.**Fragment 3—wall with a load-bearing part made of aerated concrete blocks with a thickness of 375 mm and thermal insulation on the outside with a thickness of 100 mm. θ

_{m}—temperature in construction (°C), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 23.**The mathematical-physical model for calculating the dynamic thermal resistance for varying thicknesses of static thermal insulation. θ

_{m}—the temperature in construction (°C), x—thickness of thermal insulation (mm), z—the temperature between the load-bearing and thermal insulation layer of the structure (°C), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 24.**Graphical dependence of the dynamic thermal resistance on the thickness of the static/dynamic thermal insulation and the mean temperature of the heat transfer medium in the ATP pipes—Fragment 3.

**Figure 25.**Dependence of the dynamic heat coefficient UD (W/(m

^{2}·K)) on the thickness of the thermal insulation and the mean temperature θ

_{m}(°C) in the ATP layer—Fragment 3.

**Figure 26.**View of the ATP formed by a plastic pipe between aerated concrete masonry and polystyrene. θ

_{m}—the temperature in construction (°C).

**Figure 27.**Temperature behavior in the construction of a prefabricated timber house. θ

_{m}—temperature in construction (°C), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 30.**Mathematical-physical model of the test cell wall. θ

_{m}—the temperature in construction (°C), d—construction thickness (mm), x—thickness of thermal insulation (mm), z—the temperature between the load-bearing and thermal insulation layer of the structure (°C), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 31.**Mathematical-physical model of a test cell wall with a static insulation thickness of 200 mm. θ

_{m}—the temperature in construction (°C), d—construction thickness (mm), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 32.**Graphical dependence of the dynamic thermal resistance on the thickness of the static/dynamic thermal insulation and the mean temperature of the heat transfer medium in the ATP pipes—Fragment 4.

**Figure 33.**Dependence of the dynamic heat coefficient U

_{D}(W/(m

^{2}·K)) on the thickness of the thermal insulation and the mean temperature θ

_{m}(°C) in the ATP layer—Fragment 4.

**Figure 34.**Required heat in kWh delivered by the heat transfer medium to the ATP (TB function) to increase the DTR corresponding to a thermal insulation thickness of 200 mm for a static thermal insulation thickness of 100 mm. θ

_{m}—the temperature in construction (°C), Δθ—temperature difference (°C), d—construction thickness (mm), e—exterior, and i—interior.

**Figure 37.**Thermal resistance diagram of (

**1**) a typical wall and (

**2**) a wall equipped with a dynamic insulation system [8]. R

_{cond,x}—thermal resistance of AIS ((m

^{2}·K)/W), R

_{surf}—thermal resistance of surface ((m

^{2}·K)/W), T

_{x}—temperature at point x (°C), Q

_{x}—radiant flux density (W/m

^{2}), and AIS—active insulation system.

**Figure 38.**SWOT analysis for the dynamic insulation approach [11]. SWOT strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats analysis.

**Figure 39.**The graphical dependencies of the dynamic thermal resistance R

_{DTR}((m

^{2}·K)/W) on the thickness of the static/dynamic thermal insulation and the mean temperature of the heat transfer medium in the ATP tubes θ

_{m}(°C) for all fragments investigated.

**Figure 40.**Graphical dependencies of the dynamic heat transfer coefficient U (W/(m

^{2}·K)) on the thickness of the static/dynamic thermal insulation and the mean temperature of the heat transfer medium in the ATP tubes θ

_{m}(°C) for all fragments investigated.

**Figure 41.**Mathematical-physical model for the calculation of conventional and dynamic thermal resistance.

s_{u}/λ_{E}(m ^{2}·K)/W | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.10 | 0.15 | 0.18 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

a_{T} | 1.103 | 1.100 | 1.097 | 1.093 | 1.091 | 1.088 | 1.082 | 1.075 | 1.064 | 1.059 |

L (m) | 0.05 | 0.075 | 0.1 | 0.15 | 0.20 | 0.225 | 0.30 | 0.375 | 0.45 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

a_{K} | 1.00 | 0.99 | 0.98 | 0.95 | 0.92 | 0.90 | 0.82 | 0.72 | 0.60 |

D (m) | 0.022 | 0.020 | 0.018 | 0.016 | 0.014 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|

L (m) | a_{WL} | ||||

0.05 | 0.96 | 0.93 | 0.90 | 0.86 | 0.82 |

0.075 | 0.80 | 0.754 | 0.70 | 0.644 | 0.59 |

0.10 | 0.658 | 0.617 | 0.576 | 0.533 | 0.488 |

0.15 | 0.505 | 0.47 | 0.444 | 0.415 | 0.387 |

0.20 | 0.422 | 0.40 | 0.379 | 0.357 | 0.337 |

0.225 | 0.396 | 0.376 | 0.357 | 0.34 | 0.32 |

0.30 | 0.344 | 0.33 | 0.315 | 0.30 | 0.288 |

0.375 | 0.312 | 0.30 | 0.29 | 0.278 | 0.266 |

0.450 | 0.30 | 0.29 | 0.28 | 0.264 | 0.25 |

L (m) | 0.05 | 0.075 | 0.1 | 0.15 | 0.20 | 0.225 | 0.30 | 0.375 | 0.45 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

b_{u} | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.70 | 0.50 | 0.43 | 0.25 | 0.10 | 0.00 |

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |

© 2023 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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Mučková, V.; Kalús, D.; Koudelková, D.; Kurčová, M.; Straková, Z.; Sokol, M.; Ingeli, R.; Šťastný, P.
Analysis of the Dynamic Thermal Barrier in Building Envelopes. *Coatings* **2023**, *13*, 648.
https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings13030648

**AMA Style**

Mučková V, Kalús D, Koudelková D, Kurčová M, Straková Z, Sokol M, Ingeli R, Šťastný P.
Analysis of the Dynamic Thermal Barrier in Building Envelopes. *Coatings*. 2023; 13(3):648.
https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings13030648

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Mučková, Veronika, Daniel Kalús, Daniela Koudelková, Mária Kurčová, Zuzana Straková, Martin Sokol, Rastislav Ingeli, and Patrik Šťastný.
2023. "Analysis of the Dynamic Thermal Barrier in Building Envelopes" *Coatings* 13, no. 3: 648.
https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings13030648