MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115526519 · doi:10.1177/1744259120980032

Determining the thermal resistance of a highly insulated wall containing vacuum insulation panels through experimental, calculation and numerical simulation methods

2020· article· en· W3115526519 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Building Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAerogels and thermal insulation
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermal resistanceThermal conductivityThermalMaterials scienceThermal bridgeWork (physics)Isothermal processVacuum insulated panelThermal insulationMechanicsEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionStructural engineeringComposite materialMechanical engineeringComputer scienceThermodynamicsLayer (electronics)EngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the potential for calculation methods to determine the thermal resistance of a wall system containing vacuum insulation panels (VIPs) that has been experimentally characterised using a guarded hot box (GHB) apparatus. The VIPs used in the wall assembly have not been characterised separately to the wall assembly, and therefore exact knowledge of the thermal performance of the VIP including edge effect is not known. The calculations and simulations are completed using methods found in literature as well as manufacturer published values for the VIPs to determine the potential for calculation and simulation methods to predict the thermal resistance of the wall assembly without the exact characterisation of the VIP edge effect. The results demonstrate that disregarding the effect of VIP thermal bridges results in overestimating the thermal resistance of the wall assembly in all calculation and simulation methods, ranging from overestimates of 21% to 58%. Accounting for the VIP thermal bridges using the manufacturer advertised effective thermal conductivity of the VIPs resulted in three methods predicting the thermal resistance of the wall assembly within the uncertainty of the GHB results: the isothermal planes method, modified zone method and the 3D simulation. Of these methods only the 3D simulation can be considered a potential valid method for energy code compliance, as the isothermal planes method requires too drastic an assumption to be valid and the modified zone method requires extrapolating the zone factor beyond values which have been validated. The results of this work demonstrate that 3D simulations do show potential for use in lieu of guarded hot box testing for predicting the thermal resistance of wall assemblies containing both VIPs and steel studs. However, knowledge of the VIP effective thermal conductivity is imperative to achieve reasonable results.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it