Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Building Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jobe

Evaluation of a modular construction system in accordance with

the Passivhaus standard for components
Tatiana Yakimchuk a, *, Patricia Linhares b, Víctor Hermo c
a
Department of Architectural, Civil and Aeronautical Buildings and Structures, University College of Technical Architecture, University of A Coruña,
Campus Zapateira, 15008, A Coruña, Spain
b
Department of Architectural, Civil and Aeronautical Buildings and Structures, Higher Technical University College of Architecture, University of A
Coruña, Campus Zapateira, 15008, A Coruña, Spain
c
Research Group Building Construction and Refurbishment (Sicor), Department of Architectural, Civil and Aeronautical Buildings and Structures,
Higher Technical University College of Architecture, University of A Coruña, Campus Zapateira, 15008, A Coruña, Spain

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Passivhaus is an energy performance standard for buildings that has been deeply analyzed in the
Nearly-zero energy building current scientific literature. However, the study of the Passivhaus standard for components and
Building component certification the use of certified components in the construction of new nearly-zero energy buildings have not
Liner tray system been thoroughly discussed. Additionally, hygrothermal performance evaluations of components
Passivhaus criteria in accordance with this standard have not been fully presented to the scientific community. This
Hygrothermal performance
paper addresses this topic and aims to evaluate the hygrothermal performance of a Spanish
modular construction system of extruded aluminum, in accordance with the criteria for Passiv­
haus components, suitable for warm temperate climate. A three-part methodology was imple­
mented, including hygrothermal performance simulations on fourteen connection details
comprising wall, roof, window, and floor solutions. The initial outcomes reveal that only four
connection details fully meet the Passivhaus criteria for components. Therefore, an optimization
of the connection details is proposed to validate the Passivhaus suitability of the construction
system. The connection details are redesigned to reduce thermal energy losses in the junctions
and to eliminate the risk of interstitial condensation. Several simulation processes are then
conducted and the new results are compared against the criteria for components, validating the
Passivhaus suitability. The evaluation presented in this paper provided valuable data that enabled
to later optimize and submit the construction system to the Passivhaus Institut to become the first
lightweight metallic construction system for walls and roofs manufactured in Spain with a Pas­
sivhaus certification for warm temperate climate.

Nomenclature

Passivhaus abbreviations
BC Basement Ceiling
BW Basement Wall
CE Ceiling

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (T. Yakimchuk).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.107234
Received 20 April 2023; Received in revised form 25 June 2023; Accepted 30 June 2023
Available online 4 July 2023
2352-7102/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

EW Exterior Wall
FS Floor Slab
IW Separating Internal Wall
OB Window Bottom (openable)
OH Window Top (openable)
OJ Window Side (openable)
RO Roof
RWB Roof Window Bottom
RWH Roof Window Top
RWJ Roof Window Side
ec exterior corner
ic internal corner
ve verge

Symbols
A area [m2]
b width [mm]
fRsi temperature factor [− ]
L length [m]
Ma limit maximum accumulated moisture content [g/m2]
p pressure [Pa]
q heat flow density [W/m2]
R thermal resistance [m2K/W]
U thermal transmittance [W/m2K]
φ relative humidity [%]
θ temperature [◦ C]
Ψ linear thermal bridge [W/mK]

Subscripts
e external
f frame
g glass
i internal
min minimum
opaque exterior building component
si internal surface
se external surface
w installed window

1. Introduction
Accounting for about 40% of European Union’s (EU) final energy and 36% of CO2 emissions [1], buildings play a significant role in
the European strategy towards meeting its goal of net-zero greenhouse gases emissions by 2050 [2]. In this context, energy and climate
policies are progressively making the EU energy performance of buildings more efficient [3]. The Energy Performance of Buildings
Directive (2010/31/EU) [4] and its 2018 revision [5] comprise important provisions for a long-term improvement of the EU building
stock. In line with recent action plans such as the European Green Deal and the Renovation Wave [6,7], a new recast of the Directive
was proposed in 2021. It establishes that all new buildings should be zero-emission buildings, and that all existing buildings should be
transformed into zero-emission buildings by 2050 [8].
The Directive 2010/31/EU defines a nearly-zero energy building (nZEB) as a building that has a very high energy performance, in
which the nearly zero or very low amount of energy required should be covered to a very significant extent by energy from renewable
sources, including energy from renewable sources produced on-site or nearby. The Member States are responsible to provide a
quantitative definition of "very high energy performance", as well as the meaning of "covered to a very significant extent by energy
from renewable sources", when incorporating this requirement into national law [4].
The nZEB concept is being translated into concrete examples. Almost 1.25 million buildings were built or renovated to nZEB (or
similar) levels from 2012 to 2016, mostly residential. The share of nZEB in the total construction market increased during the period
2012–2016 in Europe (from 14% in 2012 to 20% in 2016, in average) [9]. The adoption of passive energy-saving technologies in new
and renovated buildings has contributed to a consistent overall improvement in their energy performance [10]. Building envelopes, for
instance, have significantly reduced their thermal transmittance by incorporating thermal insulations and more efficient glazing
technologies, and airtight envelopes are being designed as infiltration and airtightness play a crucial role in the energy consumption of

2
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

buildings [11].
Member States are allowed to adapt the regulations to their specific needs with a progressive tightening of minimum requirements
towards a nZEB model [12]. Several Member States have already provided a quantitative definition and chose the Passivhaus standard
as a reference to ensure that the energy demands of buildings in their territory align with those of a nZEB [13]. Passivhaus (PH) is a
widely known German energy performance standard, which requires minimized energy demand for space heating and therefore, thick
insulation, absence of thermal bridges, airtightness, efficient windows, and heat recovery ventilation [14]. A nZEB complies with the
PH standard for buildings if the following requirements are fulfilled [15].
• Peak heating load ≤ 10 W/m2.
• Annual heating demand (useful energy) ≤ 15 kWh/(m2 year).
• Indoor temperature does not exceed 25 ◦ C for more than 10% of the year.
• Maximum leakage of n50 = 0.6 air changes per hour.
• Primary energy renewable demand is limited to 60 kWh/(m2 year).

New buildings, as well as refurbishments of existing buildings, are likely to receive a PH certification. However, the certification is
not only available for buildings, but also for building components and professionals. PH component certification is an available option
to ensure that materials, products, and construction systems meet the insulation, airtightness, ventilation, and comfort requirements of
the standard. These requirements have been extensively analyzed in the current scientific literature [16–19]. However, the study of PH
components has primarily focused on their application in retrofit projects [20,21] and projects in earthquake-affected areas [22]. Their
role in the construction of new nZEB and their hygrothermal and energy performance have not been thoroughly evaluated or discussed
in the scientific community.
On the other hand, the hygrothermal and energy performance of modular systems and components in the construction of new nZEB
has been studied for lightweight steel frame systems [23–25], gypsum board with glass fiber reinforcement walls [26], and wooden
walls [27,28] with overall positive results. The use of modular systems for renovating the building stock has also been analyzed.
Studies have shown it to be a viable option to achieve nZEB levels in refurbishments [14,29]. However, these studies did not address
the comparison of the hygrothermal performance of the construction systems against PH criteria for components.
Since modular construction allows for most of the labor to be done in factory, it presents numerous economic and technological
advantages. These advantages include faster and safer construction processes, better predictions of completion dates, superior quality,
fewer on-site workers, reduced waste, and lower environmental impact [30,31]. Considering the integration between the imple­
mentation of nZEB and the assessment of cost-optimality across climates represents one of the major challenges that Europe is facing
[32], highly efficient modular construction systems could serve as a cost-optimal solution towards decarbonization of the building
stock. Furthermore, the use of an internationally recognized standard such as Passivhaus to certify the hygrothermal performance of
modular construction systems would ensure that the energy demands of buildings built with those components align with those of a
nZEB.

1.1. Research significance and objective

Based on the literature review presented above, it can be concluded that the subject of PH standards for buildings has been largely
discussed. However, it becomes apparent that there are certain aspects in the field of PH standards that have not been deeply analyzed.
The study of the PH standard for components, specifically focusing on the hygrothermal performance of PH components, is not a
subject particularly abundant in the scientific literature. Although there are currently numerous construction systems in the market
with a PH certificate, the design, evaluation, and validation processes that enabled their certification have not been fully presented to
the scientific community. Additionally, modular construction systems that are likely to receive a PH certificate have not been studied
using the PH standard as a reference. Therefore, this paper aims to address the knowledge gap in this field. The main objective of this
research is to evaluate the hygrothermal performance of a modular construction system of extruded aluminum in accordance with the
PH standard for components, suitable for warm temperate climate.
The modular construction system is manufactured in the city of Pontevedra, located in Galicia, a territory in Northwest Spain. The

Fig. 1. Climate zones indicated in the document ‘Criteria and Algorithms for Certified Passive House Components: Opaque construction systems’ [33].

3
 T. Yakimchuk et al.
Table 1
Criteria for certified PH components [33].

Climate zone Hygiene Comfort Efficiency criteria Moisture criteria

criterion criterion

f2K/W
Rsi = 0.25 m ≥ Uw ≤ Uopaque ≤ Purely opaque details f2K/W
Rsi = 0.25 m ≥ Ψ≤ Condensation Ma limit ≤

[− ] [W/m2K] [W/ [− ] [W/ [− ] [g/m2]

m2K] mK]
4

Artic 0.80 0.45 (0.35) 0.09 0.90 0.010 Condensation should be completely evaporated at the end of 12 months 200
Cold 0.75 0.65 (0.52) 0.12 0.88
Cool, temperate 0.70 0.85 (0.70) 0.15 0.86
Warm, 0.65 1.05 (0.90) 0.25 0.82
temperate
Warm 0.55 1.25 (1.10) 0.50 0.74
Hot None 1.25 (1.10) 0.50 0.74
Very hot None 1.05 (0.90) 0.25 0.82

Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

construction system has been constantly improved since its initial development. Consequently, the evaluation includes an optimization
of its hygrothermal performance to ensure that the PH criteria are fully met and that the construction system can be submitted to the
Passivhaus Institut for certification. The novelty of this research lies not only in addressing a topic that has been insufficiently dis­
cussed, but also in the fact that there is currently no lightweight metallic construction system for walls and roofs manufactured in Spain
with a PH certification for warm temperate climate. The following subsections provide a more detailed analysis of both the PH
standard for components and the modular construction system of extruded aluminum.

1.2. The passivhaus standard for components

1.2.1. Criteria for certified passivhaus components
The evaluation of a construction system must be conducted following the latest available version of the document ‘Criteria and
Algorithms for Certified Passive House Components: Opaque construction systems’. This document presents seven climate zones,
illustrated in Fig. 1 and based on studies by the Passivhaus Institut [33]. The document also highlights that certificates are currently
only being issued for artic, cold, cool temperate and warm temperate regions. Additionally, it indicates that criteria for all climate
zones are subject to modifications, except for the cold temperate zone. Five of the seven regions can be found within European ter­
ritory, and certificates are currently being issued for four of them.
The assignment of a climate zone to a component is based on the location of the manufacturer’s headquarters. Pontevedra, the
Spanish city where the construction system is being manufactured, corresponds to the warm climate zone. However, as the Passivhaus
Institut does not currently certify components for that climate zone, the warm temperate climate zone is selected in this research, as it
is the other climate zone present within the Spanish territory. The criteria to be met for each climate zone are outlined in Table 1, with
the criteria for warm temperate climate zone highlighted.
The criteria indicate that the PH suitability is verified using the thermal transmittance (U-values) of the opaque building com­
ponents (walls, floors, and roofs), the linear thermal bridges (Ψ-values) and temperature factor of two-dimensional connection details.
These values are calculated in accordance with ISO 10211. All assemblies are then assessed according to DIN EN ISO 13788 to check
the risk of interstitial condensation. Finally, the results are compared against the criteria listed in Table 1. If the criteria are met, the
construction system can be certified.
The hygiene criterion is related to the prevention of condensation formation at normal outdoor temperatures, indoor temperatures,
and indoor air humidity levels. The temperature factor fRsi is calculated for each two-dimensional connection detail, whether it is a
purely opaque detail or a window-wall junction. This factor defines the coldest point that can occur on the interior surface of a
construction system. The comfort criterion specifies a limit U-value of the installed window, which applies for vertical windows with a
test size of 1.23 × 1.48 m. Regarding the efficiency criteria, there are three requirements to be met. The first one establishes a limit U-
value of the exterior building component. The second criterion refers to the required minimum temperature factor fRsi in purely opaque
details. Finally, the third efficiency criterion indicates the maximum Ψ-value of the linear thermal bridges in each two-dimensional
connection detail. The standard also indicates that in special cases, such as the connection situation of the internal edge to the

Fig. 2. Two-dimensional connection details indicated in the document ‘Criteria and Algorithms for Certified Passive House Components: Opaque construction sys­
tems’ [33].

5
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

exterior wall or the installation thermal bridge of the window frame, the thermal bridge coefficient may exceed the maximum Ψ-value.
Nonetheless, these exceptions will not affect compliance with other criteria listed in Table 1. Moisture criteria are based on the Glaser
Method, included in ISO 13788. This method assesses the likelihood of the occurrence of interstitial condensation during the winter.
The first criterion specifies that all condensation should be completely evaporated at the end of 12 months. In the second humidity
criterion, Ma limit (maximum accumulated moisture content) reflects the maximum amount of condensate to prevent run-off of liquid
water from watertight surfaces.
The PH standard for components requires heat flow and vapor diffusion simulations to be conducted on standard two-dimensional
connection details. Fig. 2 illustrates all the possible connection details that can be subject to evaluation in accordance with the
standard. Two-dimensional details form most of the calculations considered in construction system certification. However, if three-
dimensional or point thermal bridges exist, they must be considered in the U-value calculation.

1.2.2. Certified passivhaus components

The issued certificate is valid for the assigned climate zone and for climates with less stringent requirements. Once the certificate is
issued, the component is included in the Passive House Planning Package (PHPP) database, and it also becomes part of an open
component database consisting of three main categories: opaque building envelope, transparent building envelope, and building
services [34]. Fig. 3 illustrates the structure of the PH component database.
The criteria presented above only apply for the first category, opaque building envelope, which includes several subcategories. The
subcategory ‘Construction systems’, highlighted in Fig. 3, contains solutions for walls, roofs, combined solutions for walls and roofs
(named ‘construction’ in the database and also highlighted in Fig. 3), as well as components for thermal insulation. The modular
construction system of extruded aluminum analyzed in this paper belongs to the ‘construction’ subtype, thanks to its technological
characteristics that allow for the execution of load-bearing walls and roofs.
It is currently possible to find seventy-nine certified components in the ‘construction systems’ subcategory. Among them, fifty-two
correspond to the “construction” type. Out of the seventy-nine certified construction systems, eight are produced in Spain and have
been certified for warm temperate climate. On the one hand, among the Spanish construction systems, there are two lightweight wood-
based construction systems applicable in walls and roofs, three lightweight steel construction systems useable in walls, and three
construction systems based on solid elements. Internationally, on the other hand, there are four certified lightweight metallic con­
struction systems, two manufactured in China, one in Canada, and one in Germany. The German solution is the only one in this group
that does not belong to the ‘construction’ subtype, as it can only be employed as a roof solution. The Chinese and the German solutions
are certified for cool temperate climate, while the Canadian construction system is certified for use in cool regions.

Fig. 3. Structure of the Passivhaus component database [34].

6
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

1.3. Modular construction system of extruded aluminum

The construction system evaluated in this paper was developed by two of the authors as part of the research project ‘Optimized
system of eco-efficient Proyectopía houses’, which was funded by the Spanish Institute for Industrial Technology Development. The
research was conducted between 2015 and 2017 in Galicia, Spain, with the aim of developing a system suitable for constructing low-
energy detached houses. The construction process is illustrated in Fig. 4, and a group of prototypes built in the city of Pontevedra is
presented in Fig. 5. These prototypes are currently being used as tourist apartments, and their energy performance has been analyzed
as part of the research project. In terms of using this system in the construction of nZEB, it has been proven that by following the
environmental design guidelines, it is possible to comply with the requirements of the PH standard for new buildings [35].
The construction system consists of a modular structure of omega-shaped extruded aluminum panels (element 1 in Fig. 4), which
allows for the execution of load-bearing walls and roofs, and it fulfills the triple functionality of structure, vented façade, and solar
collector [36].
Lightweight metallic construction offers a wide range of systems that can be categorized into three main groups: stick-framing or
stick-built, panelized or areal, and modular or volumetric. In the second group, wall and roof panels are produced in the factory, and
then assembled on the construction site [37]. Liner tray, steel gauge, or cassette system belongs to this group. This solution consists of
C-shaped steel sections, usually of cold-formed steel and less commonly of aluminum. It has been the subject of studies that report
structural advantages, good seismic performance, higher productivity, and the possibility of vertical arrangement of the liner trays of
aluminum to form load-bearing walls in low-rise buildings [38–41]. The construction system evaluated in this research belongs to the
group of liner tray systems. Since the panels are made of extruded aluminum, their lightness adds to the ease of assembly.

1.3.1. Connection details

The construction system consists of a multilayer panel made of extruded aluminum, insulation, and wood. Two nonstructural walls
or ventilated façades contain most of the glazing surfaces and complete the envelope of a typical low-rise building. This configuration
remains consistent, regardless of factors such as the number of buildings, roof slope, or building orientation. Fig. 6 illustrates the
connection details of the construction system, with fourteen two-dimensional connection details required by the PH standard for

Fig. 4. Construction process applying the modular construction system of extruded aluminum, according to the Spanish patent of the system [36].

7
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

Fig. 5. Tourist apartments built with the modular construction system of extruded aluminum in Galicia, Spain. Photograph taken by the authors in 2022.

components identified and labeled following the abbreviation method specified in the standard.
The nonstructural walls have a 20 mm layer of natural stone (element 11 in Fig. 6) on the outer side, supported by a wooden
structure (12), creating a ventilated air gap. A textile sheet for waterproofing and airtightness (2) separates them from a 15 mm thick
OSB, mineral wool insulation 140 mm thick (13), and an inner wooden board. On the interior side, there is a layer of mineral wool, a
vapor barrier, and a finishing board (5). These façades have their own substructure of 80 × 200 mm aluminum U-profiles (24). They
serve as both stiffeners and joint elements with the load-bearing walls, roof, and floor slab. These joints are sealed to contribute to the
overall waterproofing and airtightness of the entire envelope. Nonstructural walls can also include a solar protection.
Load-bearing walls and roofs consist of multilayer panels approximately 30 cm thick. On the outer side, the aluminum components
are omega-shaped elements 300 mm wide and 90 mm thick (1) that create a ventilated air gap. A textile sheet provides waterproofing
and airtightness (2) and is followed by 15 mm thick OSB (3), two layers of mineral wool (4), a vapor barrier, and an interior finishing
board (5).
For foundations, concrete slabs 30 cm thick over precast recycled polypropylene sections are typically used, forming a ventilated
chamber. A HDPE membrane separates the floor slab from a double layer of thermal insulation within a wooden structure (15). On top
of the thermal insulation, a 22 mm thick OSB is placed, which is separated from the wooden flooring by a vapor barrier and a 5 mm
thick polyethylene foam layer (14). As for the intermediate floor, it consists of timber I-joists with a 22 mm thick OSB on top (16) and a
15 mm thick OSB underneath. Timber I-joists are attached to the load-bearing walls using 80 × 200 mm aluminum U-profiles. The
ceiling includes a 50 mm thick layer of mineral wool attached to the lower OSB, and a finishing board (17). Finally, operable windows
as well as fixed windows can be used in both load-bearing and nonstructural walls. Typically, they have aluminum framing with
thermal bridge break and double low-e coating glazing or triple glazing with argon gas. Additionally, a 15 mm thick cement bonded
particle board is used as inner the sill (22), while a lacquered folded sheet 1.2 mm thick serves as the exterior window sill (23).

2. Material and methods

To address the study objective, a three-part methodology is implemented, following the specifications of the document ‘Criteria and
Algorithms for Certified Passive House Components: Opaque construction systems’. The first part involves defining the two-
dimensional connection details that are subject to evaluation. Parameters such as the boundary conditions and hygrothermal prop­
erties of the materials are also defined. In the second part, the hygrothermal performance of the connection details is simulated, which
requires preparing drawings of the connection details to meet the simulation software requirements. The third part involves validating
the PH suitability of the construction system by comparing the simulation results against the PH criteria for components presented in
subsection 1.2.1. If one or more of the criteria are not met, a reconfiguration of the construction details is proposed, and the second part
is then repeated. This iterative process is conducted until all connection details fully meet the PH criteria, at which point the evaluation
is considered complete. A graphic representation of the methodology is presented in Fig. 7. Parts 1 and 2 are explained in the following
section, while Part 3 is presented in section 4.

2.1. Simulation software

Version 1.10 of the hygrothermal simulation software HT-flux, developed by HT-flux Engineering GmbH in Austria, is used. The
software has undergone validation in accordance with EN-ISO 10077–2 and EN-ISO 10211 [42]. HT-flux also incorporates algorithms
for calculating the risks of interstitial condensation following the Glaser method, as specified in ISO 13788.

3. Calculation
As stated in subsection 1.3.1, fourteen two-dimensional connection details are required to evaluate the PH suitability of the
construction system. When establishing the simulation conditions for these connection details in HT-flux, several parameters are
considered. These include defining cut-off planes for each connection detail, determining external and internal boundary conditions
for heat flow and vapor diffusion simulation, specifying window data, selecting finishing materials for walls, roof, and floor, and
considering the hygrothermal properties of the materials used in the connections.
Firstly, cut-off planes are established to create two-dimensional geometric models of each connection detail in accordance with ISO

8
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

Fig. 6. Nonstructural wall (A), load-bearing wall (B) and ground floor (C) details.

9
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

Fig. 7. Graphic representation of the methodology.

10211 [43]. If the connection detail involves the ground, cut-off planes are defined based on ISO 13370 [44]. Secondly, regarding
internal surface resistances (Rsi), external surface resistances (Rse), temperatures (θ), and relative humidity (φ) values for heat flow
simulation, calculations are performed following the boundary conditions indicated in the PH standard for components for ventilated
walls, ventilated roofs, and floor slabs in contact with the ground. Details of these conditions are provided in Table 2. It should be noted
that the heat flow simulations in this study do not consider the possible effects of the emissivity of the extruded aluminum panels on the
external surface resistance Rse. The temperature factor fRsi is calculated using a Rsi-value of 0,25 m2K/W.
As for the external boundary conditions in the vapor diffusion simulation, ISO 13788 states that the average monthly values ob­
tained from methods described on ISO 15927–1 or those included in the national standards must be used [45]. In this study, the climate
files of the Spanish Technical Building Code are analyzed, and data corresponding to the climate zone E1, which has the most rigorous
climate conditions, is adopted [46]. In the absence of well-defined data on the internal boundary conditions, ISO 13788 suggests that
simplified approximations based on daily mean external air temperature can be used to determine daily mean internal air temperature
and humidity in dwellings and office buildings. Internal boundary conditions are obtained by referring to the graphs provided in ISO
13788, Annex A, using the daily mean external air temperature [45].
Once the simulation conditions are defined, the next step focuses on characterizing the elements and materials used in the
connection details. Window frame and glazing data are compatible with the XP-60 TH series window produced by the Spanish
company Extrugasa, as it is the model commonly used in building construction with this system. Based on the test results carried out in
accordance with ISO 10077–2 in a vertical window with a test size of 1.23 × 1.48 m, the thermal transmittance values are determined
as 1.1 W/m2K for the glazing and 1.94 W/m2K for the entire window [47]. These values do not comply with the U-value of the installed
window required by the PH standard in the comfort criterion. Therefore, it is assumed before starting the simulation process that the
comfort criterion is not met under the current conditions in which the construction system is being applied. However, the window-wall
junctions are still simulated to comprehend the necessity to modify not only the type of window, but also the junctions themselves. In
the simulation, the glazing is replaced by an insulation panel with a thermal conductivity of 0.035 W/mK, following the method

Table 2
Heat flow simulation conditions [33].

Rsi Rse θi θe φi φe

m2K/W m2K/W ◦
C ◦
C % %

Ventilated wall 0.13 0.13 20 − 10 50 80

Ventilated roof 0.12 0.12
Windows 0.13 0.04
Floor slab in contact with the ground 0.17 0.00 – – – –

10
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

presented in ISO 10077–2 [48].

Regarding the finishing material, if there is a ventilated air layer in a connection detail, ISO 6946 points out that the thermal
resistance of the air layer and that of the rest of the layers between the air gap and the external environment should be ignored, and an
external surface resistance corresponding to the air should be included in the calculation of the total thermal resistance [49].
Therefore, it is not necessary to define an external finishing material in the simulation process. For the internal finishing material,
double plasterboard is used on walls, OSB on ceilings, and wooden pavement on the floor. Finally, regarding the hygrothermal
properties of the materials, the PH standard for components indicates that the rated values of the thermal conductivities of the ma­
terials used for the chosen connections must be verified in accordance with DIN EN ISO 10456 [50].
Once the general parameters have been set, the calculation process continues as follows.

Fig. 8. Connection details between walls and floors simulated with HT-flux.

11
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

• Editing of the original CAD drawing is performed to create a two-dimensional geometric model according to ISO 10211 and ISO
13370. The drawing is then converted into a set of closed polylines to ensure the simulation software can correctly recognize each
area of the detail in the assignment of materials. The drawing should also include closed polylines representing the indoor and
outdoor environment of the connection detail.
• The drawing file is converted to the DXF file (Drawing Exchange Format), which is compatible with HT-flux.
• The DXF file is uploaded to the simulation software. In case of a failed uploading process, the model must be corrected, converted,
and reuploaded.
• Materials are assigned to each area of the model. For thin materials like the vapor barrier, the polyline is drawn directly in the
software, and its material and thickness are then assigned.

Fig. 9. Connection details between the nonstructural wall and the window simulated with HT-flux.

12
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

• Boundary conditions indicated in the PH standard for components are assigned to the areas representing the indoor and outdoor
environment. These conditions include internal temperature (θi), internal relative humidity (φi), internal surface resistance (Rsi),
external temperature (θe), external relative humidity (φe), and external surface resistance (Rse).
• An initial simulation is performed to verify the correct assignment of materials and boundary conditions. This step involves
defining a simulation region.
• If there are no failures in the initial simulation, the heat flow simulation is run, and the U-value and Ψ-value are calculated by the
software. This step is repeated to validate the initial result.
• Editing of the boundary conditions is conducted, specifically the value of Rsi.
• A new heat flow simulation is conducted to determine the minimum internal surface temperature θsi,min. The simulation is repeated
to validate the initial result.
• The temperature factor fRsi is calculated using the following equation:
θsi,min − θe
fRsi = (1)
θi − θe

• Boundary conditions in the areas representing the indoor and outdoor environment are assigned for the simulation of vapor
diffusion based on the Glaser Method. This step is performed twelve times, one for each month of the year.
• The vapor diffusion simulation is run for each month of the year to calculate the risk of interstitial condensation. This step is also
repeated to validate the initial result.
The aforementioned calculation process is performed fourteen times, corresponding to each connection detail. The simulated

Fig. 10. Connection details between the load-bearing wall and the window simulated with HT-flux.

13
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

connection details are listed in Figs. 8–11, using PH abbreviations. The heat flow diagrams in these figures present the U and Ψ-values
calculated by the software, while the temperature diagrams illustrate the minimum internal surface temperature θsi,min required for
calculating the temperature factor fRsi. The relative humidity diagrams depict the risk of interstitial condensation for each connection
detail. By following this procedure, it is possible to recognize the hygrothermal performance of the entire construction system. The
following section aims to present and discuss the results, and to verify the PH suitability of the construction system by comparing its
hygrothermal performance against the PH criteria for components.

4. Results and discussion

The simulation outcomes reveal that only four connection details fully meet the criteria of the PH standard for components, suitable
for warm temperate climate. These include the connection between the nonstructural wall and the load-bearing wall (EW1_EW2_ec1),
the connection between the nonstructural wall and the floor slab (FS1_EW1), the connection between the load-bearing wall and the
floor slab (FS1_EW2), and the connection between the load-bearing wall and the roof (EW2_RO1). Both connection details involving
the intermediate floor (EW1_EW1_CE1 and EW2_EW2_CE2) have trouble meeting the third efficiency criterion, while all six connection
details involving the window (EW1_OB1, EW1_OH1, EW1_OJ1, EW2_OB1, EW2_OH1 and EW2_OJ1) encounter issues with both the
hygiene and comfort criteria. As for the connection details involving the roof, the one between the nonstructural wall and the roof fail
to meet the second efficiency criterion, while the ridge (RO1_RO1) presents issues complying with both the second and third efficiency
criteria. In summary, ten connection details require redesigning and optimization of their hygrothermal performance to meet the PH
criteria for components. Table 3 presents an overview of these results, with any unmet criterion highlighted. The analysis of each
criterion individually can be summarized as follows.
• Hygiene criterion: Eight out of fourteen details fulfill this criterion. According to Eq. (1), with an internal temperature of 20 ◦ C, an
external temperature of − 10 ◦ C and a temperature factor fRsi greater than or equal to 0.65, the minimum internal surface tem­
perature must be greater than or equal to 9.5 ◦ C. However, none of the window-wall junctions satisfy this condition. The average θsi,
min detected in these details is 6.2 C, which falls 3.3 C below the required minimum.
◦ ◦

Fig. 11. Connection details between walls and roof simulated with HT-flux.

14
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

Table 3
Hygrothermal performance of the construction system and comparison against the PH standard for components for warm temperate climate.

Connection Hygiene Comfort Efficiency criteria Moisture criteria

criterion criterion

f2K/W
Rsi = 0.25 m ≥ Uw ≤ Uopaque Purely opaque details f2K/
Rsi = 0.25 m Ψ≤ Condensation Ma limit
≤ W ≥ ≤

[− ] [W/m2K] [W/ [− ] [W/ [− ] [g/m2]

m2K] mK]

PH Standard 0.65 1.05 (0.90) 0.25 0.82 0.010 no cond. 12 200

months

1 EW1_EW2-ec1 0.83 – 0.183 0.83 − 0.017 ✓ ✓

2 FS1_EW1 0.87 – 0.180 0.87 − 0.043 ✓ ✓
3 FS1_EW2 0.87 – 0.173 0.87 − 0.045 ✓ ✓
4 EW1_EW1_CE1 0.82 – 0.188 0.82 0.068 ⨯ ⨯
5 EW2_EW2_CE1 0.88 – 0.186 0.88 0.026 ✓ ✓
6 EW1_OB1 0.59 1.94 (1.1)a 0.188 – 0.352b ✓ ✓
7 EW1_OH1 0.56 1.94 (1.1)a 0.188 – 0.254b ✓ ✓
8 EW1_OJ1 0.51 1.94 (1.1)a 0.185 – 0.273b ✓ ✓
9 EW2_OB1 0.56 1.94 (1.1)a 0.186 – 0.347b ✓ ✓
10 EW2_OH1 0.50 1.94 (1.1)a 0.186 – 0.220b ✓ ✓
11 EW2_OJ1 0.50 1.94 (1.1)a 0.189 – 0.226b ✓ ✓
12 EW1_RO1-ve1 0.80 – 0.188 0.80 − 0.004 ✓ ✓
13 EW2_RO1 0.91 – 0.188 0.91 0 ✓ ✓
14 RO1_RO1 0.79 – 0.188 0.79 0.073 ✓ ✓
a
U-value of window according to datasheet of the product. U-value of the installed window was not calculated.
b
The Ψ-value for the installation thermal bridge of the window frame can exceed 0.010W/mK.

• Comfort criterion: As mentioned in section 3, the window-wall junctions do not meet this criterion because the U-value of the
window model used in the calculation process exceeds the maximum U-value of the installed window accepted by the Passivhaus
standard for components.
• Efficiency criteria: The U-value of the exterior building component in all connection details complies with the first efficiency
criterion, with an average of 0.18 W/m2K. There are no significant differences observed between the thermal performance of the
nonstructural wall and the load-bearing wall. Six out of eight purely opaque details meet the second efficiency criterion. With an
internal temperature of 20 ◦ C, an external temperature of − 10 ◦ C, and a temperature factor fRsi greater than or equal to 0.82, the
minimum internal surface temperature must be greater than or equal to 14.6 ◦ C. However, the connection between the
nonstructural wall and the roof (EW1_RO1-ve1), and the ridge (RO1_RO1), have calculated minimum internal surface temperatures
of 14.1 ◦ C and 13.8 ◦ C, respectively. In addition, five out of eight purely opaque details have a Ψ-value below 0.10 W/mK. The third
efficiency criterion is not met in the intermediate floor junctions (EW1_EW1_CE1 and EW2_EW2_CE2) and the ridge (RO1_RO1).
• Moisture criteria: Interstitial condensation is detected in only one of the simulated connection details, specifically the connection
between the nonstructural wall and the intermediate floor (EW1_EW1_CE1). Condensation occurs in five months, from November
to March, and no evaporation of condensation is observed during the rest of the year.

The following subsections aim to analyze the outcomes of the connections details that fail to meet one or more of the PH criteria for
components. Subsequently, an optimization proposal is outlined for all ten connection details that do not meet the PH criteria.

4.1. Window-wall junctions

To analyze the heat flow produced at the window-wall junctions, particular attention is given to the connection between the

Fig. 12. Heat flow diagrams of the connection between the nonstructural wall and the window bottom (EW1_OB1), and the connection between the load-bearing and
the window bottom (EW2_OB1).

15
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

nonstructural wall and the window bottom, and the connection between the load-bearing wall and the window bottom. These two
junctions exhibit the highest linear thermal bridges coefficient (Ψ-values) among all six window-wall junctions.
In the case of the connection with the nonstructural wall (EW1_OB1) depicted in Fig. 12, the presence of the aluminum U-profile
and the metallic substructure of the plastered boards used as internal finishing significantly influence heat transfer. These profiles,
made of materials with high thermal conductivity, contribute to the thermal bridge that allows the heat to escape to the outside.
Similarly, the window frame, also made of aluminum, despite having a thermal bridge break made of polyamide, does not possess
sufficient thermal resistance to meet the requirements of the PH standard. In the connection with the load-bearing wall (EW2_OB1)
illustrated in Fig. 12, the influence of the extruded aluminum panel is ignored in the calculations, as mentioned in section 3. In this
case, the metallic substructure of the plastered boards is not in contact with the window frame, resulting in a slightly different heat flow
pattern compared to the connection with the nonstructural wall. The highest levels of heat transfer are detected at the points of contact
of the window frame with the external OSB and the internal cement bonded particle board. These contact points do not have sufficient
thermal insulation to prevent heat loss to the outside.
Based on the analysis of both connection details, reducing thermal energy losses at the window-wall junctions requires separating
the window frame from the metallic elements, and insulating the window frame from the external and internal finishing boards. The U-
value of the installed window is determined by the following equation:
/
Ag × Ug + Af × Uf + Lg × Ψ g + Lw × Ψ w
Uw = ≤ 1.05 W m2 K (2)
Aw

In this equation, the following factors are involved.

• The glazing area (Ag) and the frame area (Af).
• The thermal transmittance of the glass (Ug) and the thermal transmittance of the frame (Uf).
• The linear thermal transmittance produced in the frame-glass junction (Ψg).
• The length of the frame-glass junction (Lg).
• The linear thermal transmittance produced in the window-wall junction (Ψw).
• The length of the window-wall junction (Lw).
• The window area (Aw).
Thus, optimizing the window-wall junction to reduce the linear thermal transmittance (Ψw) is insufficient. It is necessary to

Fig. 13. Heat flow (A), relative humidity (B) and vapor pressure (C) diagrams of the connection between the nonstructural wall and the intermediate
floor (EW1_EW1_CE1).

16
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

simulate a window with overall very high thermal quality to achieve optimal results.

4.2. Wall-intermediate floor junctions

The analysis of the heat flow in the connection between the nonstructural wall and the intermediate floor, (element A in Fig. 13),
highlights the significant influence of the aluminum U-profiles, which function as stiffeners, on heat transfer. The metallic substructure
of the double plasterboard also contributes to the presence of a thermal bridge, along with the interruption of thermal insulation.
This connection detail is also the only one that exhibits interstitial condensation, primarily concentrated on the inner face of the
aluminum U-profiles, since this material has high vapor resistance. This situation is reflected in element B in Fig. 13, which represents
the relative humidity in January. It is possible to verify that the vapor diffusion occurs from the ground floor, passing through the
intermediate floor, and condenses inside the wall. Element C in Fig. 13 depicts the progressive increase in vapor pressure through the
intermediate floor and the wall, a phenomenon that does not occur in areas with a vapor barrier.
In the connection between the load-bearing wall and the intermediate floor, there is only one aluminum U-profile. For this reason,
the linear thermal bridge, although it does not comply with the Passivhaus standard, is significantly lower than the Ψ-value calculated
in the other junction. Fig. 14 reveals that the proximity between the aluminum U-profile and metallic substructure of the double
plasterboard is the primary factor contributing to heat transfer to the outside.

4.3. Wall-roof junctions

In the connection of the nonstructural wall with the roof, the temperature diagram’s isotherms shown in Fig. 15 indicate a tem­
perature alteration where the finishing board of the roof is connected to the metallic substructure of the double plasterboard. This
problem can be corrected by reducing or eliminating the contact surface. Similarly, relocating the metallic substructure can ensure that
the temperature variation occurs further away from the internal surface. In any case, considering the third efficiency criterion is met
with the current solution, all modifications must ensure that the thermal bridge coefficient is less than or equal to 0.10 W/mK.
On the other hand, the ridge exhibits a linear thermal bridge produced by the glued laminated timber beam and L-profiles serving as
structural reinforcement. Element A in Fig. 16 illustrates this situation. It then become evident that the thermal bridge could be
reduced or eliminated by avoiding this reinforcement. However, the presence of this reinforcement is conditioned by the span to be
covered. During the construction of detached houses, it has been verified that if the span is less than or equal to 5 m, the ridge does not
require this reinforcement, and the omega-shaped extruded aluminum panels on the roof can fulfill the structural function as is. Thus,
it is possible to meet the third efficiency criteria without further modifications. In the temperature diagram of the ridge depicted in
Fig. 16, the isotherms reveal the negative influence of the glued laminated timber beam, as observed in the heat flow simulation.
Therefore, eliminating the thermal bridge by removing the reinforcement could also increase the minimum internal surface tem­
perature in this connection detail.

4.4. Optimization proposals

Based on the previous analysis, five main targets are defined for the optimization proposals.
• Improvement of the hygrothermal performance of the window-wall junctions.
• Reduction of the thermal energy losses of the connections between walls and the intermediate floor.

Fig. 14. Heat flow diagram of the connection between the load-bearing wall and the intermediate floor (EW2_EW2_CE1).

17
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

Fig. 15. Temperature diagram of the connection between the nonstructural wall and the roof (EW1_RO1-ve1).

Fig. 16. Heat flow (A) and temperature (B) diagrams of the ridge (RO1_RO1).

• Modification of the connection between the nonstructural wall and the intermediate floor to prevent the production of interstitial
condensation.
• Increase in the minimum internal surface temperature in the connection between the nonstructural wall and the roof.
• Reduction of the thermal energy losses and increase in the minimum internal surface temperature of the ridge.

Table 4
Hygrothermal characteristics of the A84 Passivahus HI window frame from the Spanish manufacturer Aluminios Cortizo S.A.U, according to PH certificate [51].

Frame values Frame width U-value frame Ψ-glazing edge Temp. factor

bf Uf Ψg f2K/W
Rsi = 0.25m

[mm] [W/m2K] [W/mK] [− ]

Flying Mullion (FM1) 171 0.76 0.025 0.73

Bottom (OB1) 164 0.77 0.025 0.74
Top (OH1) 120 0.76 0.025 0.74
Lateral (OJ1) 120 0.76 0.025 0.74

18
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

Fig. 17. Original connection detail (A) and optimization proposal (B). Heat flow (C), temperature (D), relative humidity (E) and vapor pressure (F) diagrams of the
optimization proposal.

19
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

Regarding the first target, one effective approach to ensure high thermal quality of windows is to use a PH certified window in the
simulation process. The PH component database provides specific components suitable for transparent building envelopes, including
window frames, glazing, and glazing edge bonds. Today there are more than three hundred window frames with a PH certificate
available. In order to optimize the hygrothermal performance of the window-wall junctions, the A84 Passivhaus HI window frame
from the Spanish company Aluminios Cortizo S.A.U. is adopted. This window frame is manufactured in the same region as the con­
struction system [51]. This window frame has been certified for cold temperate climate, so it can be used in climate zones with less
stringent requirements such as the warm temperate climate zone. Table 4 presents the main hygrothermal characteristics of this
window frame.
Regarding the second target, the solutions for the connection details between the walls and the intermediate floor are centered
around increasing thermal insulation in the junction and minimizing contact between components with low insulating capabilities.
Fig. 17 provides a comparison between the original solution (A) and the proposed optimization (B). The modifications can be sum­
marized as follows.
• Reduction of the sections of aluminum U-profiles, particularly the length of the flanges that penetrate the thermal insulation.
• Increased thermal insulation in the area of the intermediate floor closest to the wall.
• Introduction of materials with low thermal conductivity within the cavities formed between the aluminum profiles and the wooden
structure.
• Relocation of the metallic substructure of the internal finishing board to avoid contact between metallic components of the hot face
and the cold face of the wall.
• Reduction of contact between elements with low insulating capability, such as the contact between the internal finishing board of
the wall and the ceiling.
On the other hand, the proposal for the third target implies introducing a vapor barrier on the hot side of the thermal insulation of
the ceiling. This solution affects not only the connection between the nonstructural wall and the intermediate floor, but also the
connection with the load-bearing wall. However, this modification does not compromise the reduction of thermal energy losses.
To address the fourth target, which involves the connection between the nonstructural wall and the roof, the contact surface
between the finishing board of the roof and the metallic substructure of the double plasterboard of the wall is eliminated. Fig. 18
provides a comparison between the original connection detail (A) and the proposed optimization (B). This modification ensures that
the thermal bridge coefficient remains below 0.10 W/mK. Lastly, concerning the fifth target, the glued laminated timber beam and L-
profiles that serve as structural reinforcement for the ridge are eliminated.
Once the optimization proposal is defined, calculations are conducted for the newly improved connection details. Connection
details that already comply with the PH standard for components are not included. The calculations follow the procedure specified in
section 3. Several versions of each connection detail are created and simulated to identify the one that demonstrates the optimal
hygrothermal performance of the construction system. It is an iterative process where the impact of each modification on the
hygrothermal performance of the construction system is assessed until the best possible solution is achieved. In some cases, modifi­
cations may affect other aspects of the construction system, such as its structural performance or cost. Even so, the objective of this
research is to evaluate the impact of the modifications solely in terms of hygrothermal performance. Figs. 17 and 18 illustrate the
outcomes for the connection between the nonstructural wall and the intermediate floor, and the connection between the nonstructural
wall and the roof, respectively.

4.5. Validation
The results of the final simulation process are presented in Table 5, indicating that all connection details fully meet the criteria of
the PH standard for components, suitable for warm temperate climate. The analysis of each criterion individually can be summarized
as follows.
• Hygiene criterion: All connection details meet this criterion. The utilization of a PH window contributes to an increased minimum
internal surface temperature, which is necessary to prevent condensation formation at normal outdoor temperatures, indoor
temperatures, and indoor air humidity levels. The average θsi,min detected in these details is now 14.6 ◦ C, surpassing the required
minimum of 9.5 ◦ C for achieving a fRsi below 0.65.
• Comfort criterion: All window-wall junctions fulfill this criterion. The average thermal transmittance of the six connection details is
below 1.05 W/m2K, which is the maximum U-value of the installed window accepted by the PH standard for components for a
warm temperate climate.
• Efficiency criteria: The first criterion does not require any modification of the building component since the U-values are already
below 0.25 W/m2K. The optimization proposal does not alter these values. As for the second efficiency criterion, all purely opaque
details exhibit a temperature factor higher than 0.82. The connection between the nonstructural wall and the roof, as well as the
ridge, which did not meet this requirement in the original solution, now have a fRsi of 0.87 and 0.93, respectively. In addition, all
connection details achieve a Ψ-value below 0.10 W/mK. In the connection between the nonstructural wall and the intermediate
floor, and the connection between the load-bearing wall and the intermediate floor, the modifications enable a thermal bridge
coefficient of 0.009 and 0.008 W/mK, respectively. The elimination of the structural reinforcement in the ridge ensures that this
detail no longer has any thermal bridge. Nonetheless, it should be noted that this condition is only satisfied if the span to be covered
does not exceed 5 m, as discussed in section 4.3.

20
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

Fig. 18. Original connection detail (A) and optimization proposal (B). Heat flow (C) and temperature (D) diagrams of the optimization proposal.

Table 5
Validation of the PH suitability of the construction system.

Connection Hygiene Comfort Efficiency criteria Moisture criteria

criterion criterion

f2K/W
Rsi = 0.25 m ≥ Uw ≤ Uopaque Purely opaque details f2K/
Rsi = 0.25 m Ψ≤ Condensation Ma limit
≤ W ≥ ≤

[− ] [W/m2K] [W/ [− ] [W/ [− ] [g/m2]

m2K] mK]

PH Standard 0.65 1.05 (0.90) 0.25 0.82 0.010 no cond. 12 200

months

1 EW1_EW2-ec1 0.83 – 0.183 0.83 − 0.017 ✓ ✓

2 FS1_EW1 0.87 – 0.180 0.87 − 0.043 ✓ ✓
3 FS1_EW2 0.87 – 0.173 0.87 − 0.045 ✓ ✓
4 EW1_EW1_CE1 0.91 – 0.188 0.91 0.009 ✓ ✓
5 EW2_EW2_CE1 0.87 – 0.186 0.87 0.008 ✓ ✓
6 EW1_OB1 0.82 0.99 (0.70) 0.188 – 0.07a ✓ ✓
7 EW1_OH1 0.82 0.98 (0.70) 0.188 – 0.07a ✓ ✓
8 EW1_OJ1 0.82 0.90 (0.70) 0.185 – 0.042a ✓ ✓
9 EW2_OB1 0.81 0.86 (0.70) 0.186 – 0.026a ✓ ✓
10 EW2_OH1 0.82 0.87 (0.70) 0.186 – 0.032a ✓ ✓
11 EW2_OJ1 0.81 0.85 (0.70) 0.189 – 0.026a ✓ ✓
12 EW1_RO1-ve1 0.87 – 0.188 0.87 − 0.041 ✓ ✓
13 EW2_RO1 0.91 – 0.188 0.91 0 ✓ ✓
14 RO1_RO1 0.93 – 0.188 0.93 0 ✓ ✓
a
The Ψ-value for the installation thermal bridge of the window frame can exceed 0.010W/mK.

• Moisture criteria: The adoption of a vapor barrier in the ceiling effectively eliminates the problem of condensation in the
connection between the nonstructural wall and the intermediate floor. This change is also simulated in the connection of the load-
bearing wall with the intermediate floor, although in this case there was no condensation formation in the initial simulations.

21
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

5. Conclusions
The objective of this paper was fully achieved since it was possible to evaluate the hygrothermal performance of a modular
construction system of extruded aluminum, in accordance with the PH standard for components for warm temperate climate. This
evaluation followed a three-part methodology, which involved conducting hygrothermal simulations on fourteen connection details.
The initial simulations revealed that only four connection details fully met the criteria of the PH standard for components. Therefore,
an optimization proposal was developed, with the primary aim of reducing thermal energy losses in the junctions. The hygrothermal
simulations were then repeated iteratively until all connection details fully met the PH criteria. Based on the objective of this research,
the following conclusions can be made.
• Structural elements such as stiffeners, substructures, and reinforcements negatively influence the overall thermal performance of
the construction system. By relocating, resizing, or eliminating these elements, significant reductions in thermal energy losses were
achieved in the junctions.
• Purely opaque details exhibited varying hygric performances, with one detail presenting a risk of interstitial condensation, and two
having minimum internal surface temperatures below the requirement. Solving the interstitial condensation problem did not imply
significant redesign of the construction system, as only one additional vapor barrier was necessary.
• The selection of a window with very high thermal quality and the separation of the window frame from elements with high thermal
conductivity greatly reduced thermal energy losses in the window-wall junctions.
The research has made several significant contributions. It addressed the study of the PH standard for components, which has
received limited attention in the scientific literature. It also represents one of the first presentations to the scientific community of the
calculation and validation of the hygrothermal performance of a building component in accordance with the PH standard for com­
ponents, promoting the replication of similar studies in other construction systems likely to receive a PH certificate. Moreover, it
emphasizes the potential role of modular standard components in the construction of new nZEB, as they could represent a cost-optimal
solution towards the decarbonization of the building stock in the European Union. Finally, the evaluation presented in this paper
provided valuable data that enabled the optimization and subsequent submission of the construction system to the Passivhaus Institut
in 2022, who certified its suitability for the construction of nZEB in warm temperate regions and regions with less stringent re­
quirements. It is the first lightweight metallic construction system for walls and roofs manufactured in Spain to receive a PH certi­
fication for warm temperate climate.

CREediT autorship contribution statement

Tatiana Yakimchuk: Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Visualization; Writing – Original Draft & Editing.
Patricia Linhares: Conceptualization, Investigation, Resources, Writing – Review & Editing.
Víctor Hermo: Conceptualization, Supervision, Resources, Writing – Review & Editing.

Formatting of funding sources

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

Acknowledgements
This paper presents findings from a thesis completed by Tatiana Yakimchuk as part of the Master’s Degree in Sustainable Building at
the University of A Coruna. The author would like to thank Fundación Carolina and the University of A Coruna for the full scholarship
to study this Master’s program. The authors would also like to express gratitude to Passivhaus certifier Martín Amado Pousa and Soraya
López García from the Passivhaus Institut for their valuable comments and recommendations in the development of this research.

References
[1] M. Economidou, V. Todeschi, P. Bertoldi, D. D’Agostino, P. Zangheri, L. Castellazzi, Review of 50 years of EU energy efficiency policies for buildings, Energy
Build. 225 (2020), 110322, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110322.
[2] I. Jankovic, A. Mayer, D. Staniaszek, X. Fernandez Alvarez, Ready for Carbon Neutral by 2050? Assessing Ambition Levels in New Building Standards across the
EU, BPIE, Brussels, 2022. https://www.bpie.eu/publication/ready-for-carbon-neutral-by-2050-assessing-ambition-levels-in-new-building-standards-across-the-
eu/.
[3] P. Zangheri, D. D’Agostino, R. Armani, P. Bertoldi, Review of the cost-optimal methodology implementation in member states in compliance with the energy
performance of buildings directive, Buildings 12 (2022) 1482, https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12091482.

22
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

[4] European Union, Directive 2010/31/EU of the European parliament and of the council of 19 may 2010 on the energy performance of buildings. https://eur-lex.
europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32010L0031, 2010.
[5] European Union, Directive (EU) 2018/844 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 amending Directive 2010/31/EU on the energy
performance of buildings and Directive 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency. http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2018/844/oj/eng, 2018.
[6] European Union, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions, The European Green Deal, 2019. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%
3A52019DC0640&qid=1685039317977.
[7] European Union, Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the
committee of the regions. A renovation Wave for Europe - greening our buildings, creating jobs, improving lives. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/
TXT/?qid=1603122220757&uri=CELEX:52020DC0662, 2020.
[8] European Union, Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the energy performance of buildings (recast). https://eur-lex.europa.
eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52021PC0802, 2021. (Accessed 25 May 2023).
[9] D. D’Agostino, S.T. Tzeiranaki, P. Zangheri, P. Bertoldi, Assessing nearly zero energy buildings (NZEBs) development in Europe, Energy Strategy Rev. 36 (2021),
100680, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2021.100680.
[10] X. Cao, X. Dai, J. Liu, Building energy-consumption status worldwide and the state-of-the-art technologies for zero-energy buildings during the past decade,
Energy Build. 128 (2016) 198–213, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.06.089.
[11] S.B. Sadineni, S. Madala, R.F. Boehm, Passive building energy savings: a review of building envelope components, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15 (2011)
3617–3631, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.07.014.
[12] P. Olasolo-Alonso, L.M. López-Ochoa, J. Las-Heras-Casas, L.M. López-González, Energy performance of buildings directive implementation in southern
European countries: a review, Energy Build. 281 (2023), 112751, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2022.112751.
[13] S. Attia, P. Eleftheriou, F. Xeni, R. Morlot, C. Ménézo, V. Kostopoulos, M. Betsi, I. Kalaitzoglou, L. Pagliano, M. Cellura, M. Almeida, M. Ferreira, T. Baracu,
V. Badescu, R. Crutescu, J.M. Hidalgo-Betanzos, Overview and future challenges of nearly zero energy buildings (nZEB) design in Southern Europe, Energy
Build. 155 (2017) 439–458, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.09.043.
[14] P. Pihelo, T. Kalamees, K. Kuusk, nZEB renovation with prefabricated modular panels, Energy Proc. 132 (2017) 1006–1011, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
egypro.2017.09.708.
[15] J. Schnieders, T.D. Eian, M. Filippi, J. Florez, B. Kaufmann, S. Pallantzas, M. Paulsen, E. Reyes, M. Wassouf, S.-C. Yeh, Design and realisation of the Passive
House concept in different climate zones, Energy Effic 13 (2020) 1561–1604, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-019-09819-6.
[16] J. Schnieders, W. Feist, L. Rongen, Passive Houses for different climate zones, Energy Build. 105 (2015) 71–87, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.07.032.
[17] J. Schnieders, A. Hermelink, CEPHEUS results: measurements and occupants’ satisfaction provide evidence for Passive Houses being an option for sustainable
building, Energy Pol. 34 (2006) 151–171, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2004.08.049.
[18] W. Feist, J. Schnieders, V. Dorer, A. Haas, Re-inventing air heating: convenient and comfortable within the frame of the Passive House concept, Energy Build. 37
(2005) 1186–1203, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2005.06.020.
[19] W. Feist, J. Schnieders, Energy efficiency - a key to sustainable housing, Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 176 (2009) 141–153, https://doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2009-
01154-y.
[20] Z. Bastian, J. Schnieders, W. Conner, B. Kaufmann, L. Lepp, Z. Norwood, A. Simmonds, I. Theoboldt, Retrofit with passive house components, Energy Effic 15
(2022) 10, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-021-10008-7.
[21] B. Risholt, B. Time, A.G. Hestnes, Sustainability assessment of nearly zero energy renovation of dwellings based on energy, economy and home quality
indicators, Energy Build. 60 (2013) 217–224, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.12.017.
[22] H. Begić, H. Krstić, Possibilities of using prefabricated modular panels for building NZEB buildings in earthquake-affected areas in Croatia – case study, Int. J.
Sustain. Constr. Eng. Technol. 13 (2022) 137–148, https://doi.org/10.30880/ijscet.2022.13.01.013.
[23] B. Milovanović, M. Bagarić, M. Gaši, N. Vezilić Strmo, Case study in modular lightweight steel frame construction: thermal bridges and energy performance
assessment, Appl. Sci. Switz. 12 (2022), https://doi.org/10.3390/app122010551.
[24] E. Antonini, D. Longo, V. Gianfrate, Towards nZEB: modular pre-assembled steel systems for residential buildings, WIT Trans. Built Environ. 142 (2014)
349–360, https://doi.org/10.2495/ARC140301.
[25] L. Moga, I. Petran, P. Santos, V. Ungureanu, Thermo-energy performance of lightweight steel framed constructions: a case study, Buildings 12 (2022), https://
doi.org/10.3390/buildings12030321.
[26] A. Pinto, R. Mateus, J. Silva, M. Lopes, NZEB modular prefabricated building system, in: H. Rodrigues, F. Gaspar, P. Fernandes, A. Mateus (Eds.), Sustain.
Autom. Smart Constr., Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2021, pp. 169–179, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35533-3_20.
[27] M. Rakotonjanahary, M.F. Silva, F. Scholzen, D. Diederich-Waldmann, Designing of the module envelope of a hybrid modular building to meet the passive house
standards in Luxembourg, IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 588 (2020), 052026, https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/588/5/052026.
[28] P. Pihelo, H. Kikkas, T. Kalamees, Hygrothermal performance of highly insulated timber-frame external wall, Energy Proc. 96 (2016) 685–695, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.egypro.2016.09.128.
[29] J. Torres, R. Garay-Martinez, X. Oregi, J.I. Torrens-Galdiz, A. Uriarte-Arrien, A. Pracucci, O. Casadei, S. Magnani, N. Arroyo, A.M. Cea, Plug and play modular
façade construction system for renovation for residential buildings, Buildings 11 (2021) 419, https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11090419.
[30] W. Ferdous, Y. Bai, T.D. Ngo, A. Manalo, P. Mendis, New advancements, challenges and opportunities of multi-storey modular buildings – a state-of-the-art
review, Eng. Struct. 183 (2019) 883–893, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.01.061.
[31] J. Quale, M.J. Eckelman, K.W. Williams, G. Sloditskie, J.B. Zimmerman, Construction matters: comparing environmental impacts of building modular and
conventional homes in the United States, J. Ind. Ecol. 16 (2012) 243–253, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00424.x.
[32] D. D’Agostino, D. Parker, A framework for the cost-optimal design of nearly zero energy buildings (NZEBs) in representative climates across Europe, Energy 149
(2018) 814–829, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.02.020.
[33] Passivhaus Institut, Criteria and Algorithms for Certified Passive House Components: opaque construction systems. Version 3.1_en, 07.02.2022. https://passiv.
de/downloads/03_certification_criteria_construction_systems_en.pdf, 2022. (Accessed 5 April 2022).
[34] Passivhaus Institut, Component Database, (n.d.), https://database.passivehouse.com/en/components/?lat=40.6818&lon=-3.9611&cz=NaN. (Accessed 26 May
2022).
[35] P. Linhares, V. Hermo, C. Meire, Environmental design guidelines for residential NZEBs with liner tray construction, J. Build. Eng. 42 (2021), 102580, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102580.
[36] V. Hermo, Estructura modular para la construcción de edificaciones, ES2716889 B2. https://consultas2.oepm.es/pdf/ES/0000/000/02/71/68/ES-2716889_B2.
pdf, 2020.
[37] N. Soares, P. Santos, H. Gervásio, J.J. Costa, L. Simões da Silva, Energy efficiency and thermal performance of lightweight steel-framed (LSF) construction: a
review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 78 (2017) 194–209, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.04.066.
[38] J.M. Davies, Light gauge steel cassette wall construction — theory and practice, J. Constr. Steel Res. 62 (2006) 1077–1086, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jcsr.2006.06.028.
[39] J.P. Valcárcel, V. Hermo, J.B. Cheda, A new building system: structural aspects of COTaCERO system, in: Struct. Archit., CRC Press, 2013.
[40] M. Georgescu, V. Ungureanu, A. Gruin, A. Floricel, Building cladding using liner trays: experimental and numerical approach, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng.
603 (2019), 022051, https://doi.org/10.1088/1757–899X/603/2/022051.
[41] M.F. Belal, M.H. Serror, S.A. Mourad, M.M.E.L. Saadawy, Numerical study of seismic behavior of light-gauge cold-formed steel stud walls, J. Constr. Steel Res.
174 (2020), 106307, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2020.106307.
[42] HTflux Engineering GmbH, HTflux, (n.d.). https://www.htflux.com/en/(accessed May 3, 2022).

23
T. Yakimchuk et al. Journal of Building Engineering 76 (2023) 107234

[43] International Organization for Standardization, ISO 10211:2017, Thermal bridges in building construction — heat flows and surface temperatures — detailed
calculations. https://www.iso.org/standard/65710.html, 2017.
[44] International Organization for Standardization, ISO 13370:2017, Thermal performance of buildings — heat transfer via the ground — calculation methods.
https://www.iso.org/standard/65716.html, 2017.
[45] International Organization for Standardization, ISO 13788:2012, Hygrothermal performance of building components and building elements — internal surface
temperature to avoid critical surface humidity and interstitial condensation — calculation methods. https://www.iso.org/standard/51615.html, 2012.
[46] Dirección General de Arquitectura, Vivienda y Suelo, Archivos de datos de todas las zonas climáticas, n.d. https://www.codigotecnico.org/pdf/Documentos/
HE/CTEdatosMET_20140418.zip. (Accessed 10 June 2022).
[47] Extrugasa, XP-60 TH series technical datasheet (n.d.), https://www.extrugasa.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ficha-tecnica-XP-60-TH.pdf. (Accessed 9
June 2022).
[48] International Organization for Standardization, ISO 10077-2:2017., Thermal performance of windows, doors and shutters — calculation of thermal
transmittance — Part 2: numerical method for frames. https://www.iso.org/standard/64995.html, 2017.
[49] International Organization for Standardization, ISO 6946:2017, Building components and building elements — thermal resistance and thermal transmittance —
calculation methods. https://www.iso.org/standard/65708.html, 2017.
[50] International Organization for Standardization, ISO 10456:2007, Building materials and products — hygrothermal properties — tabulated design values and
procedures for determining declared and design thermal values. https://www.iso.org/standard/40966.html, 2007.
[51] Passivhaus Institut, Certificate, Certified passive house component. Window A84 Passivhaus HI, n.d. https://database.passivehouse.com/en/components/
details/window/aluminios-cortizo-sau-a84-passivhaus-hi-1128wi03?lat=40.6818&lon=-3.9611&cz=NaN. (Accessed 22 May 2022).

24