## 3 Results and Discussion
Thus, of the 24 apartments, 18 received classification C for the envelope performance for summer, and six received classification D. The smaller bedrooms, particularly on the intermediate floor, have the worst refrigeration (artificial cooling) consumption performance. The top floor has a better performance; in this case, regardless of the solar orientation, the spaces with the same internal areas and openings received the same classification. Therefore, 14 HUs have a final classification of C, and 10 have classification D. The classification of the entire multi-family building was C.  
Buildings C and D represent the 377 buildings classified in typology 5, i.e., 57% of the 663 buildings surveyed. In this typology, during the survey phase, variations were noted in the balconies. Thus, the two buildings (C and D) were selected to represent typology 5. The representative Building C, approved in 1996, has 10 floors: A ground floor on stilts and nine floors with standard apartments (two types of floor plans). There are six apartments in each standard arrangement, two facing north, two facing south, one facing east, and one facing west (Table 7). Only the balconies can be considered shading elements, and they serve only the living room. All EUSs meet the minimum lighting requirement (12.5%). However, only the living room of the apartments in columns 3 and 6 meet the minimum ventilation percentage for BZ 8 (10%), as shown in Figures 5 and 6, and Table 4. Only the apartments in columns 1, 2, 4, and 5 have a cross ventilation, and the bathroom has both a ventilation and natural light. According to the condominium manager and the engineer who performs the calculations for the structures, the walls are composed of ceramic blocks, and the slab is composed of concrete, approximately 10 cm in thickness. The roof of the building is composed of fiber cement without a special paint or thermal blanket. The exterior walls are painted with colors that are visually similar to color 10, with an absorbance of 0.5, color 12, with an absorbance of 0.34, and color 16, with an absorbance of 0.78. The walls comply with the RTQ-R thermal transmittance and absorbance requirements; however, the roofing does not (Table 4). The apartments have individualized energy measurements, but the building has only a single, combined measurement for drinking water consumption. Toilets with attached boxes, but without a dual flush, and faucet aerators in the kitchens and bathrooms can be considered water conservation equipment in the HUs. Analyzing the data in Table 7, the thermal performance of the envelope of the naturally ventilated building is better in the apartments facing south. The five columns of apartments obtained the same classifications whether they were on stilts or on the intermediate floors; only one bedroom in the west-facing apartments has a better classification, and only when built on stilts. The balconies contributed to the better thermal performance of the living rooms, especially in the north-facing spaces; however, for the east-facing living room, the score for shading could not be considered. In RTQ-R, depending on the building facade orientation and the latitude of the terrain, certain angles are not recommended for scoring in the prescriptive method (due to variable shading). The worst performance was in the apartments on the top floor and in the bedrooms with two outer walls that receive sunshine most of the day (northeast or northwest). Thus, of the 54 apartments, 41 received classification C for the envelope performance for summer and 13 received classification D.  
Regarding the relative energy consumption for refrigeration (artificial cooling), the intermediate floors presented the worst performance, with the highest number of EUSs with a classification of E. Considering the envelope performance for summer and the final classification of the apartments including the water heating system, only the first-floor, west-facing apartment presented different results.