Moisture Load for a Vinyl-Clad Wall Assembly for Selected Canadian Cities
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Moisture loads arising from the deposition of wind-driven rain (WDR) on building façades can bring about damage to wall assembly components and consequently affect their long-term performance. Hygrothermal simulations are often used by building practitioners to assess the risk to moisture damage within wall assemblies. Input of moisture loads to simulation models of wall assemblies use 1% of the WDR load deposited on the exterior surface of the wall as specified in ASHRAE Standard 160. However, results from several watertightness tests of wall assemblies have shown that the ratio between the WDR and moisture loads was highly dependent on the hourly WDR loads and driving-rain wind pressure (DRWP) acting on the wall surface. To permit correlating the varying WDR conditions with the moisture load for a vinyl-clad wall assembly, the wall was tested to a set of WDR intensities and DRWPs using a unique watertightness test apparatus, the Dynamic Wind and Wall Test Facility. The results from these tests were thereafter used to formulate an empirical relation for the moisture load based on the hourly WDR load and DRWP as variables. The moisture load for this wall type was thereafter characterized on the basis of historical climate data in selected cities across Canada. It is supposed that the information derived from this study would offer both more accurate as well as more reliable information for input to simulation models.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.004 | 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 it