Moisture Performance Assessment of Wood-frame Exterior Building Envelope Construction in China and Taiwan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada and other parts of North America, traditional wood frame exterior building envelope construction is widely used and its ability to manage the exterior and interior moisture and thermal (i.e. hygrothermal) loads is well known from the field performance observations over the years. However, this type of building envelope construction is not traditionally used in China and Taiwan. At present, the Council of Forest Industries (COFI), an association of British Columbia forest industry partners, is promoting wood frame building envelope constructions and developing the market for the use of Canadian wood products in China and Taiwan. However, this is not possible without knowing the consequences and the ability of the wood frame building envelope assemblies to manage the hygrothermal loads in the climatic conditions of China and Taiwan. This is a long-term performance issue that becomes even harder to resolve when there is no comprehensive field performance data, as in this case. This paper presents result from a research project that investigated the hygrothermal (i.e. thermal and moisture) performance of the Canadian wood frame exterior building envelope construction practices in the city of Shanghai (China) and Taichung (Taiwan). This has been done using a two-dimensional hygrothermal simulation tool. Three exterior wall constructions and two roof constructions were exposed to the exterior climatic conditions of Shanghai and Taichung. The first set of simulations was conducted with a wall construction that has no air leakage. Thereafter, two wall constructions were also simulated with various levels of air leakage through the wall assembly. The outputs from the simulations have been analyzed with the help of a moisture response indicator called RHT index. Simulation results indicate the relative performances and suitability of the different wall and roof assemblies in Shanghai and Taichung. It is hoped that the results presented in this paper will help to develop moisture and thermal (i.e. hygrothermal) design guidelines for the Canadian style wood frame building envelope construction in China and Taiwan.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".