Generalizable Thermal Performance of Ventilated Block Walls and Energy Implication of Substitution for Wood-Frame Walls in Cold-Climate Buildings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Space heating and cooling of buildings is a major contributor to the ascending trend of global energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A potential solution to reduce the space heating and cooling is to use buildings’ mass for active thermal energy storage (TES). Having air circulation between an active TES and its associated zones can significantly enhance their thermal coupling; however, reported research studies have not focused on this kind of active TES. To that end, this study aimed to evaluate the thermal performance of a ventilated block wall (VBW) in reducing space heating and cooling loads in cold-climate buildings. In this system, air is circulated between a zone and the voided cores of a VBW, where the air exchanges heat with the wall before returning to the zone. To have a generalizable assessment of the system’s performance, typical-day and annual energy analyses were conducted under various boundary conditions and air circulation speeds. The study found that for a typical day with significant temperature fluctuation, a VBW with a 2 m/s air circulation speed throughout the day can lead to 67% more net energy exchange (the sum of thermal energy storage and release) when compared to having no air circulation. The annual analysis compared the energy performance between a VBW and a traditional wood-frame wall in three different cold climates. The results showed that substituting a wood-frame wall with a VBW can reduce space heating and cooling loads by 35.1 kWh/m2 (wall surface area) for a mixed dry–cold climate throughout the year. Having cement plaster as interior finishing can lead to 9% more net energy exchange than having drywall, on average, for all zone air temperature profiles.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".