低层住宅中驱动自然渗透的时间分辨交叉围护结构压力的可预测性

Dominic Bledsoe , Will Clagett , Misael Soto , Ellison M. Carter , Paul W. Francisco , Tami C. Bond
{"title":"低层住宅中驱动自然渗透的时间分辨交叉围护结构压力的可预测性","authors":"Dominic Bledsoe ,&nbsp;Will Clagett ,&nbsp;Misael Soto ,&nbsp;Ellison M. Carter ,&nbsp;Paul W. Francisco ,&nbsp;Tami C. Bond","doi":"10.1016/j.indenv.2025.100106","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Natural infiltration in residential buildings has two major drivers: indoor-outdoor temperature differences (stack effect) and wind effect. While residential infiltration models are long established, their validity has not been evaluated with measurements, and they have rarely been deployed to explain time-resolved indoor-outdoor exchange. Pressure differentials (ΔP) across building envelopes are an intermediate step in modeling; if they cannot be well predicted from the driving forces, then neither can infiltration. We report nearly 16,000 h of environmental and ΔP data, in nine homes, at one-minute resolution that reflects the transient nature of air exchange. Under conditions of low wind (less than 0.25 m/s) and heating (outdoor temperature below indoor), stack pressure is predicted exceptionally well. Biases between observed and predicted values average 0.11 Pa or less across all sites. Biases increase by about a factor of two under cooling conditions, but observations under these conditions were of insufficient length to diagnose the causes. Wind influence on pressure, and hence on infiltration, is not well predicted even with practical, site-based measurements. Airport and site wind speeds, and site wind and envelope pressure, are correlated only modestly, even accounting for wind direction. Simple terrain and shielding classifications cannot reproduce intersite variation. Infiltration models overestimate the influence of wind on pressure even when the most extreme shielding and terrain classes are used in scaling airport data. In addition to evaluating infiltration drivers, this study establishes the difference between time-resolved, cross-envelope pressure differentials at separate points in a single zone (Δ−ΔP) as a building diagnostic.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100665,"journal":{"name":"Indoor Environments","volume":"2 3","pages":"Article 100106"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Predictability of time-resolved cross-envelope pressures driving natural infiltration in low-rise residential buildings\",\"authors\":\"Dominic Bledsoe ,&nbsp;Will Clagett ,&nbsp;Misael Soto ,&nbsp;Ellison M. Carter ,&nbsp;Paul W. Francisco ,&nbsp;Tami C. Bond\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.indenv.2025.100106\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Natural infiltration in residential buildings has two major drivers: indoor-outdoor temperature differences (stack effect) and wind effect. While residential infiltration models are long established, their validity has not been evaluated with measurements, and they have rarely been deployed to explain time-resolved indoor-outdoor exchange. Pressure differentials (ΔP) across building envelopes are an intermediate step in modeling; if they cannot be well predicted from the driving forces, then neither can infiltration. We report nearly 16,000 h of environmental and ΔP data, in nine homes, at one-minute resolution that reflects the transient nature of air exchange. Under conditions of low wind (less than 0.25 m/s) and heating (outdoor temperature below indoor), stack pressure is predicted exceptionally well. Biases between observed and predicted values average 0.11 Pa or less across all sites. Biases increase by about a factor of two under cooling conditions, but observations under these conditions were of insufficient length to diagnose the causes. Wind influence on pressure, and hence on infiltration, is not well predicted even with practical, site-based measurements. Airport and site wind speeds, and site wind and envelope pressure, are correlated only modestly, even accounting for wind direction. Simple terrain and shielding classifications cannot reproduce intersite variation. Infiltration models overestimate the influence of wind on pressure even when the most extreme shielding and terrain classes are used in scaling airport data. In addition to evaluating infiltration drivers, this study establishes the difference between time-resolved, cross-envelope pressure differentials at separate points in a single zone (Δ−ΔP) as a building diagnostic.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100665,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indoor Environments\",\"volume\":\"2 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 100106\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indoor Environments\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950362025000359\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indoor Environments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950362025000359","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

住宅建筑自然渗透主要有两大驱动因素:室内外温差(烟囱效应)和风效应。虽然住宅渗透模型建立已久,但其有效性尚未通过测量进行评估,并且很少用于解释时间解析的室内-室外交换。跨建筑围护结构的压差(ΔP)是建模的中间步骤;如果不能很好地预测它们的驱动力,那么渗透也不能。我们报告了9个家庭中近16,000个 h的环境和ΔP数据,以一分钟的分辨率反映了空气交换的短暂性。在低风速(小于0.25 m/s)和采暖(室外温度低于室内)条件下,堆压预测异常准确。所有站点的观测值和预测值之间的偏差平均为0.11 Pa或更小。在冷却条件下,偏差增加了大约两倍,但在这些条件下的观察时间不够长,无法诊断原因。风对气压的影响,进而对入渗的影响,即使使用实际的、基于现场的测量也不能很好地预测。机场和场地风速,场地风和围护结构压力,即使考虑风向,也只是适度相关。简单的地形和屏蔽分类不能再现站点间的变化。入渗模式高估了风对气压的影响,即使在机场数据中使用了最极端的屏蔽和地形等级。除了评估渗透驱动因素外,本研究还建立了单个区域(Δ−ΔP)中不同点的时间分辨跨围护结构压力差之间的差异,作为建筑物诊断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Predictability of time-resolved cross-envelope pressures driving natural infiltration in low-rise residential buildings
Natural infiltration in residential buildings has two major drivers: indoor-outdoor temperature differences (stack effect) and wind effect. While residential infiltration models are long established, their validity has not been evaluated with measurements, and they have rarely been deployed to explain time-resolved indoor-outdoor exchange. Pressure differentials (ΔP) across building envelopes are an intermediate step in modeling; if they cannot be well predicted from the driving forces, then neither can infiltration. We report nearly 16,000 h of environmental and ΔP data, in nine homes, at one-minute resolution that reflects the transient nature of air exchange. Under conditions of low wind (less than 0.25 m/s) and heating (outdoor temperature below indoor), stack pressure is predicted exceptionally well. Biases between observed and predicted values average 0.11 Pa or less across all sites. Biases increase by about a factor of two under cooling conditions, but observations under these conditions were of insufficient length to diagnose the causes. Wind influence on pressure, and hence on infiltration, is not well predicted even with practical, site-based measurements. Airport and site wind speeds, and site wind and envelope pressure, are correlated only modestly, even accounting for wind direction. Simple terrain and shielding classifications cannot reproduce intersite variation. Infiltration models overestimate the influence of wind on pressure even when the most extreme shielding and terrain classes are used in scaling airport data. In addition to evaluating infiltration drivers, this study establishes the difference between time-resolved, cross-envelope pressure differentials at separate points in a single zone (Δ−ΔP) as a building diagnostic.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信