Phase Change Materials Integration in Building Envelopes Under Different Climatic Conditions: State of the Art, Opportunities, and Challenges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Building envelope has a pivotal role in adequate thermal comfort of occupants in the indoor environment. Recent research has been focused on innovative techniques to enhance building performance. Among them, the integration of phase change materials (PCMs) in building envelopes has proven to be promising. Phase change materials have the potential to tune the temperature around their melting point. In addition, the latent heat of phase transition provides high storage capacity compared to plain envelope structures. The current paper provides a comprehensive review on PCM inclusion in building walls, roofs, and floors. It highlights the main governing performance parameters, incorporation methods, modeling techniques, and thermal performance assessment of the systems. Detailed analysis of the results is presented. It includes the effect of PCM inclusion on cooling/heating load reduction, indoor thermal comfort conditions, and energy saving. PCM inclusion was found to reduce building loads by up to 30%. They have also shown a potential of maintaining indoor temperature fluctuation within as low as 2°C. The listed papers cover the recent few decades and span through locations with different climate conditions. The majority of reported work was in Europe and Asia as they are leading in their sustainability goals. In adverse climates like North America, scarce research was reported as the large temperature variation is not favorable for PCM integration. The paper is intended to be a guide for researchers working in the field of PCM integration in building applications. It covers the most recent advances, potentials, and challenges of different integration techniques.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".