A comparison of methods for determining watertightness test parameters of building façades
Resumen: Watertightness tests allow evaluating the performance of building façades using standardised parameters that simulate real weather conditions, i.e., a combination of wind-driven rain and driving rain wind pressure. It has been a challenge for researchers to experimentally test simultaneous wind and rain conditions in a rigorous manner. However, two new methods have minimised this problem, creating a precise relationship between the experimental result and the expected performance of the façade under real conditions and vice-versa. This article reviews both alternative methods and analyses their theoretical foundations and comparative advantages. In addition, the two methods are applied in the same case study, analysing the exposure conditions for a generic façade located in Bilbao (Spain). Ten-minute climatic records gathered over 14 years at the city airport have been used for this analysis. The comparative results show an adequate convergence between both procedures. However, their methodological differences would suggest using each one for different specific applications.
Idioma: Inglés
DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.04.027
Año: 2014
Publicado en: Building and Environment 78 (2014), 145-154
ISSN: 0360-1323

Factor impacto JCR: 3.341 (2014)
Categ. JCR: CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY rank: 3 / 59 = 0.051 (2014) - Q1 - T1
Categ. JCR: ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL rank: 11 / 47 = 0.234 (2014) - Q1 - T1
Categ. JCR: ENGINEERING, CIVIL rank: 3 / 125 = 0.024 (2014) - Q1 - T1

Financiación: info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/MINECO-FEDER/BIA2012-31609
Tipo y forma: Article (PostPrint)
Área (Departamento): Area Ingeniería Construcción (Dpto. Ingeniería Mecánica)
Exportado de SIDERAL (2025-02-03-11:02:17)


Visitas y descargas

Este artículo se encuentra en las siguientes colecciones:
articulos > articulos-por-area > ingenieria_de_la_construccion



 Notice créée le 2025-02-01, modifiée le 2025-02-03


Postprint:
 PDF
Évaluer ce document:

Rate this document:
1
2
3
 
(Pas encore évalué)