Numerical Investigation of the Effects of Different Overhang Configurations on the Wind-Driven Rain Wetting of Building Facades
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The distribution of wind-driven rain loads on building facades is of high importance in evaluating the hygrothermal performance and durability of building envelopes. Wind-driven rain is known to be a major source of moisture loads on building facades and is responsible for numerous cases of facade failure. One of the classical solutions for preventing the building envelope from being extensively exposed to such loads is the use of overhangs. In this work, the effects of different overhang lengths on the distribution of wind-driven rain on building facades are investigated by numerical methods. To check validity, the results are compared to existing data reported in the literature. Calculated values of catch ratio at two sample positions on the front facade of a simple cubic building are in good agreement with previously published results. The protective effect of overhangs is shown by calculating catch ratio values for cases where rectangular overhangs were added to the cubic building. Results suggest that the introduction of the overhang can significantly change both the amount and the pattern of the wind-driven rain wetting of the facade. This change may, in certain points, be unfavourable.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".