Hygrothermal Characteristics of Cold Roof Cavities in New Zealand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The New Zealand Building Code contains minimum durability requirements for components. For roof structures the requirement is 50 years if the component is structural or 15 years if it is not. Metal roof claddings are very common in New Zealand, and roof spaces are typically not deliberately ventilated. Recently, a number of roofs are failing to meet their durability requirement, and the lack of deliberate ventilation is a contributory factor in some cases. In this paper, we consider roof failures and analyse them using the hygrothermal simulation software WUFI® 2D (version 4.1). Using the National Research Council of Canada’s Guideline on Design for Durability of Building Envelopes, we evaluate to what extent the guideline can be used for such more complex models. Experimental data from a residential dwelling where excessive roof moisture issues were discovered shortly after occupancy are presented. A novel remedial solution using daytime-only ventilation to the roof cavity was trialled, and the data were used to benchmark a two-dimensional numerical simulation of the roof space using WUFI® 2D. A larger hygrothermal data set for 71 dwellings is presented together with relevant climatic conditions. The study works towards evidence-based building code changes for roof ventilation and is an example of using the guideline document for more complicated building envelope assemblies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".