Setting Realistic Design Indoor Conditions for Residential Buildings by Vapor Pressure Difference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Indoor relative humidity (RH) is commonly used to characterize the indoor environment for heat-air-moisture (HAM) simulations, chamber studies, analysis of monitoring data, or test hut studies of buildings without recognition that indoor RH and condensation potential depend on concurrent outdoor temperature and RH. This can lead to the use of unrealistic boundary conditions for HAM simulations and test programs, which may result in misleading conclusions. In buildings operating without mechanical dehumidification, the indoor air moisture level (vapor pressure) is directly related to the outdoor vapor pressure, moisture sources in the space, and the level of ventilation. Mathematics suggests that one can expect buildings with similar operation, occupancy, and construction, but affected by different weather conditions, to have a similar difference between indoor and outdoor vapor pressures. This paper provides a foundation for selecting appropriate and realistic boundary conditions for the design of residential buildings that are based on vapor pressure difference with the aim to eliminate any significant bias for a particular climate. The paper will present the following: (1) Discussion of current standards that provide some guidance to selecting appropriate indoor moisture levels based on vapor pressure difference; (2) Moisture balance equations will be used to show the impact of ventilation and moisture generation rates on the vapor pressure difference; (3) Monitoring data for six multi-unit residential buildings in two Canadian climates (Toronto and Vancouver) showing the relationship between the outdoor temperatures and vapor pressure difference; (4) Analysis of seasonal indoor moisture conditions and their impact on HAM modeling based on assumed indoor RH and conditions derived by a constant vapor pressure difference; and (5) Exploration of the concept that vapor pressure difference and indoor RH are limited by moisture removal on windows.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".