You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
By adjusting traditional insulation layer thickness (and possibly conductivity if needed), as per ISO 10211 & RP-1365 methodologies, TBD does not significantly alter a construction's transient thermal response, à la RP-1145. This is described in a bit more detail in the last paragraph here. The current approach is deemed suitable/acceptable for well-insulated assemblies in cold climates, but decreasingly so in warmer climates and/or with less insulation.
The "equivalent wall" approach (example here) is a practical solution that - in principle - could be harnessed to solve the issue. However, it requires a priori knowledge - through physical testing or 2D (or 3D) numerical approximations - of a construction's transient response while factoring-in known thermal bridges. This may be feasible for minor thermal bridging (i.e. clear-field R-values), but appears somewhat impractical when considering major thermal bridging (i.e. what TBD tracks), given its surface-specific nature (i.e. unique geometry). In a nutshell, it would be interesting to investigate how to generalize the "equivalent wall" approach without a priori testing or 2D/3D simulations results.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
By adjusting traditional insulation layer thickness (and possibly conductivity if needed), as per ISO 10211 & RP-1365 methodologies, TBD does not significantly alter a construction's transient thermal response, à la RP-1145. This is described in a bit more detail in the last paragraph here. The current approach is deemed suitable/acceptable for well-insulated assemblies in cold climates, but decreasingly so in warmer climates and/or with less insulation.
The "equivalent wall" approach (example here) is a practical solution that - in principle - could be harnessed to solve the issue. However, it requires a priori knowledge - through physical testing or 2D (or 3D) numerical approximations - of a construction's transient response while factoring-in known thermal bridges. This may be feasible for minor thermal bridging (i.e. clear-field R-values), but appears somewhat impractical when considering major thermal bridging (i.e. what TBD tracks), given its surface-specific nature (i.e. unique geometry). In a nutshell, it would be interesting to investigate how to generalize the "equivalent wall" approach without a priori testing or 2D/3D simulations results.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: