Simulation of Dynamic Thermal Behaviour for Housing in Warm Climate: The Case of Thermal Mass in Lightweight Envelopes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comparison between simulation results and measured performances is usually an open scientific problem, crucial to achieving the goal of NZEB performance. This paper addresses this issue in relation to residential buildings, using as a case study "RhOME for denCity", the housing prototype developed by Roma TRE University and winner of Solar Decathlon Europe 2014. In a Mediterranean climate, the use of the mass combined with natural cross ventilation to control the indoor microclimate can be very effective in reducing HVAC use. Therefore, a "massive layer" was introduced in the inner surface of the envelope to not only contribute to the envelope transmittance value and the shifting phase of the thermal waves, but also as a thermal shock absorber to adjust the internal temperature, in both summer and winter. This experimental envelope was tested over two weeks during the competition in Versailles. Although prototype thermal behaviour was monitored only during the competition, and not over an extended period, initial results provide information on how to size the thermal mass contribution for indoor comfort. In-depth simulation through TRNSYS was run prior to the construction phase. This paper presents the comparison between monitored performance and simulations in order to measure the amount of mass needed to obtain a numerical improvement in indoor comfort performance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".