2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.01.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Thermal analysis of above-grade wall assembly with low emissivity materials and furred airspace

Abstract: /npsi/ctrl?lang=en http://nparc.cisti-icist.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/npsi/ctrl?lang=fr Access and use of this website and the material on it are subject to the Terms and Conditions set forth at http://nparc.cisti-icist.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/npsi/jsp/nparc_cp.jsp?lang=en NRC Publications Archive Archives des publications du CNRCThis publication could be one of several versions: author's original, accepted manuscript or the publisher's version. / La version de cette publication peut être l'une des suivantes : la version prépubli… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

8
67
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(75 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
8
67
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is surprising that the present prediction of the R-value is consistently higher than the measured R-value (in accordance of ASTM C-518 test method [12] using FOX-314 heat flow meter [13]) by approximately the same percentage for different reflective insulations. In a previous study [6], however, the prediction of the present model for R-value was in good agreement (within 1.2%) with the measured R-value in GHB (in accordance of ASTM C-1363 test method [11]) for a full-scale wall system (8' x 8') having a reflective insulation and furred-airspace assembly. So, the question is "why was the predicted R-value found to be consistently higher than the measured R-value by approximately the same percentage for different reflective insulations using the ASTM C-518 test method with FOX-314 heat flow meter?…”
Section: Comparison Of Reported Test Data [4] and Present Model Predisupporting
confidence: 80%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…It is surprising that the present prediction of the R-value is consistently higher than the measured R-value (in accordance of ASTM C-518 test method [12] using FOX-314 heat flow meter [13]) by approximately the same percentage for different reflective insulations. In a previous study [6], however, the prediction of the present model for R-value was in good agreement (within 1.2%) with the measured R-value in GHB (in accordance of ASTM C-1363 test method [11]) for a full-scale wall system (8' x 8') having a reflective insulation and furred-airspace assembly. So, the question is "why was the predicted R-value found to be consistently higher than the measured R-value by approximately the same percentage for different reflective insulations using the ASTM C-518 test method with FOX-314 heat flow meter?…”
Section: Comparison Of Reported Test Data [4] and Present Model Predisupporting
confidence: 80%
“…After gaining confidence in the present model in predicting the R-value of specimen with horizontal orientation (see the pervious section) and specimen with vertical orientation (e.g. see [6]), it was used to quantify the contribution of reflective insulation to the R-value of specimen with different orientations.…”
Section: Effect Of Inclination Angle and Direction Of Heat Flowmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations