4.7 Article

Experimental analysis of cavity ventilation behind rainscreen cladding systems: A comparison of four measuring techniques

期刊

BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT
卷 87, 期 -, 页码 177-192

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.01.030

关键词

Cavity ventilation; Field tests; Measuring techniques; Airflow; Brick veneer; Sidings

资金

  1. Postdoctoral Innovation Mandate of the Institute for the Promotion of Innovation through Science and Technology in Flanders (IWT-Vlaanderen) [140695]
  2. Redco nv

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present article elaborates on the comparison of four measuring techniques quantifying the ventilation rate behind typical cladding systems in wall elements. In total eight full-scale test walls have been investigated in a test building located in a maritime temperate climate (Belgium). Two different commonly used cladding systems are studied: (a) brick veneer and (b) fibre cement sidings. The test walls were installed on the Southwest and Northeast facades of the building corresponding to the orientations with most extreme exposure regarding solar radiation, wind directions and wind-driven rain. In total four different measurement techniques to quantify the ventilation rate in these systems have been applied: a) tracer gas techniques, b) indirect method based on pressure measurements, c) direct method based on anemometers and d) method based temperature and relative humidity registration. The results indicate that the ventilation rate behind vented brick veneer is two orders of magnitude lower than behind ventilated cladding systems with sidings. It was found that the most appropriate measuring technique of a wall system is depending on the ventilation rate, and hence on the type of cladding. For brick veneer claddings, the method deriving the air flow rate from the pressure gauges was found to be most suitable. In the wall systems with sidings, on the other hand, the ventilation rates were sufficiently high to be measured accurately with the anemometers. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据