The Spell Definition in ISO-15927 and its Impact on the Rain Deposition on the Building Facade
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wind-driven rain (WDR) is one of the most important causes for water damage in buildings. Therefore, the first crucial step to assess the hygrothermal performance of the building envelope, is the appropriate estimation of the amount of rainwater striking the building's façade. ISO 15927 offers the annual average index –mainly to assess the moisture content of absorbent surfaces, and the spell index – more related to the likelihood of water penetration through joints. To calculate these indices, assumptions are made concerning the length of the period of ‘no rain’, called ‘spell definition’. Obviously, the choice of this spell definition will characterise the WDR-amount. In this paper, WDR measurements of a 3-storey building in Vancouver, Canada are used to investigate how this spell definition affects the rain load. Different filter criteria are used to exclude errors due to measurement equipment. By means of the catch ratio as a dimensionless parameter, the results of the analysis for different spell definitions are compared to hourly and 5-min data. It is concluded that longer spell definitions result in lower catch ratios and an underestimation of the WDR load. Hourly data turns out to be a more conservative approach for WDR-assessment of this case study, but is able to represent the spread on the catch ratio most closely to the original 5min-dataset.
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".