Next Article in Journal
Predicting Indoor Temperature Distribution Based on Contribution Ratio of Indoor Climate (CRI) and Mobile Sensors
Next Article in Special Issue
Combined Use of Wind-Driven Rain Load and Potential Evaporation to Evaluate Moisture Damage Risk: Case Study on the Parliament Buildings in Ottawa, Canada
Previous Article in Journal
Framing and Evaluating the Best Practices of IFC-Based Automated Rule Checking: A Case Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
An Approach Concerning Climate Change and Timber Building Resilience: Araucanía Region, South Chile
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

In-Situ and Predicted Performance of a Certified Industrial Passive House Building under Future Climate Scenarios

Buildings 2021, 11(10), 457; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11100457
by Alison Conroy 1,*, Phalguni Mukhopadhyaya 2 and Guido Wimmers 3
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Buildings 2021, 11(10), 457; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11100457
Submission received: 30 June 2021 / Revised: 20 September 2021 / Accepted: 24 September 2021 / Published: 4 October 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Climate Resilient Buildings)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The study entitled In-situ and Predicted Performance of a Certified Industrial Passive House Building Under Future Climate Scenarios presents thermal measurements of Canada’s first industrial facility built to the Passive House International standard.

My general comments are as follows:

1. Submission is a good technical report, but it is not written as research paper, since it lacks proper literature review of similar papers previously published in scientific journals covering the subject area.
2. Would you clearly specify each of author's contribution. A Credit author statement should be added
3. Would you explicitly specify the novelty of your work? What progress against the most recent state-of-the-art similar studies was made?
4. Introduction must include motivation and background, literature review of recent scientific paper covering the topic and leading to the submission hypothesis based on the gap analysis of the previously published research (advise eg Performance of a Passive House under subtropical climatic conditions. Energy and buildings, 133, 14-31)
5. Avoid lumping references.

Author Response

Please see attachment 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is clearly structured.but some doubts by reading the very low u-values. The wall assembly with its thermal characteristics  be presneted.the fault of several probes makes it difficult to assume the reliability of the ehole initial dataset.

the paper should widen its content,and possibility of “upscaling” the results: indeed,the final sentence resumes the authors’ work limitation.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop