3.1. Case Study Results—New Plymouth
The roof space of the case study residential dwelling in New Plymouth is shown in
Figure 3. The roofing underlay as well as the timber structure is affected by extensive mould growth.
Figure 4 shows the recorded air temperatures in the dwelling during the 2019/20 southern hemisphere summer period. The temperatures in the roof cavity, the living room and the outside are given. The vertical dashed line on 24/01 marks the installation of the solar-powered fan to the roof cavity. As an extract fan, it operates during daytime only with its efficiency coupled to the solar irradiance.
As expected, the temperatures in the roof space increase significantly above the ambient temperatures during the daytime with solar gains. A number of overcast periods are evident (8/12, 17/12, 13/01) where the roof cavity temperatures are not increasing significantly above the ambient values. Without any air-conditioning, the inside temperature cycles with the outside temperature. During the night-time, the roof space air temperature is largely at ambient. This is true for the periods before and after the fan installation.
Figure 5 shows the water-air mixing ratio expressed as kilograms of water in a kilogram of dry air for the same time period.
Noticeable are the peaks in mixing ratio in the roof cavity during the daytime, correlating also to the days with elevated temperatures. There are several days where the moisture content in the roof space exceeds 0.020 kg/kg. In contrast, the indoor moisture content is largely between 0.007 and 0.012 kg/kg with a much closer correlation to the outside climate. During the night-time, the moisture content in the roof space air generally drops to a level much closer to ambient. A dramatic effect can be seen after installation of the solar-powered extractor fan. The daytime peaks in the roof space air are significantly reduced, and the climate follows closely the ambient moisture content. During the night-time, the moisture content often falls clearly below the ambient.
Figure 6 and
Figure 7 illustrate the impact of the fan in the form of histograms which show daytime and night-time data respectively. The probability of encountering a mixing ratio in steps of 0.001 kg/kg for both the outside and the roof space climates before and after installation of the solar fan is given on the right with the corresponding time series given on the left. Daytime is here defined as the hours between 6:00 and 20:00.
The daytime probability distribution clearly shows the impact of the solar fan in reducing the absolute moisture content in the roof space cavity. The high moisture load during the day with values greater than 0.016 kg/kg has been removed completely by the active ventilation.
Figure 7 shows the corresponding results for the night-time period, again before and after the fan installation. Since the fan is not operational during the night, any additional air exchanges to the roof space are only due to the passive ventilation properties of the idle fan. For both periods before and after installation of the solar driven fan, the absolute moisture content of the roof space falls below that of the outside during most nights. As expected, there is no significant difference other than the outside climate being more humid during the first 12 days of this measurement period, showing in the probability bar graph. The reason for the drop in water vapour in the roof cavity air might be that the moisture is absorbed by the building components—i.e., the timber or the roofing underlay. The increasing temperature during the day may release this moisture again into the vapour phase. This will be further explored in the WUFI
® modelling.
No concluding comments can be made here regarding the source of the excess moisture in the roof space causing the significant mould growth. Given the recent completion of the dwelling, residual construction moisture seems a likely possibility. Occupant behaviour has also been demonstrated to play a role in determining roof moisture levels [
10]. Inadequately ventilated living spaces leading to high indoor moisture levels in combination with an air-leaky ceiling can lead to problems. However,
Figure 5 shows that, at least during this case study period, the indoor moisture levels are comparable to the outside levels and consequently there are no gains to be had from increasing the air exchanges with the outside.
This case study confirms the effectiveness of daytime-only ventilation in removing moisture from a roof space, in this case, with a solar-driven fan. During the night-time, ventilation should be minimised to avoid an influx from outside moisture into the roof cavity, which might condense on surfaces and get absorbed by the building materials. This is of relevance in particular for roof spaces, where the roof cladding can fall to temperatures below the ambient through radiative energy losses into a clear night sky. The drying potential of ventilating the roof space with outside air during the course of a day is further illustrated by
Figure 8. Data are from before the fan installation only.
For each daily hour, the two vapour pressure differences are averaged over all days in the monthly period. The data point call-outs denote the hour of the day in local standard time. The
X-axis is the difference between the roof and the exterior vapour pressure while the
Y-axis corresponds to the difference between the roof and the interior vapour pressure. Quadrant I describes a climatic condition in which the roof vapour pressure is higher than the interior and the exterior vapour pressure. Air exchange with either environment will therefore reduce the roof vapour pressure. The daytime measurements clearly fall within this quadrant—moisture may be driven out of the materials and into the roof space air by higher temperatures. Conditions in quadrant IV are such that air infiltration from the interior of the building should be avoided as it will increase the vapour pressure in the roof cavity while the exterior air still has drying potential. No data points fall within this quadrant for this case study period, confirming the good indoor conditions—no excess moisture seems to be building up during the daytime, probably a result of good indoor ventilation practice during the summer month. Quadrant III shows data points where the interior and the exterior air has a higher vapour pressure than found in the roof cavity. Measurements during the night-time fall within this segment. A possible explanation is that moisture is condensing on cold surfaces and being absorbed by the building materials, such as the roofing underlay or the timber itself. Moisture can be absorbed into the materials or can form hanging droplets on the surface. A moisture flux into and out of the timber during a daily cycle is confirmed by the WUFI
® 2D simulations. Looking at
Figure 6 before installation of the ventilator, the mixing ratio increases by approximately 0.010 kg/kg during daytime. By taking the roof cavity volume and the density of air into account, this translates to approximately 1 litre of water that is released from and absorbed again by the materials.
3.2. WUFI® Modelling
The plot of the measured and modelled temperatures of the cavity air from the WUFI
® 2D simulations are captured in
Figure 9 for a period before the solar fan being installed and after.
As described in more detail in the methodology section, two simulation runs are compared to the measured data—no ventilation and a constant background air exchange of 3 ach, which is boosted to 10 ach by the solar fan when the solar radiation exceeds 50 W/m2. The installation is marked by the dashed bars.
For the night-time, we find a very good agreement between the model and the measured data, which gives confidence in the way that the undercooling effect is handled and the assumed background ventilation rate. For most of the daytime periods, we also see a good agreement between the model and the measurements. This is true for some hotter as well as some cooler time periods, especially for the week between 15/01 to 22/01 where the model agrees very well with the measured temperatures. There are several days, however, when the model overestimates the measured temperatures. A possible explanation could be differences in the actual irradiance between the weather station and the dwelling, which are several kilometres apart. It is also a possibility that the effective heat transfer coefficient of the cladding is varying with wind speed. This has not been explored.
Figure 10 shows the relative humidity for the same set of simulations. The plot clearly illustrates the importance of accounting for ventilation process. Without any air exchanges to the roof space, the simulated relative humidity is significantly higher than the measured values. Conversely, the simulation incorporating ventilation has a much better agreement to the measurements.
While this may be the case, during the week where we see a very good temperature agreement (15/01–22/01) the relative humidity is slightly underestimated by the model, indicating that more moisture is part of the system—either more water is stored in the materials or it is more readily released. This could come down to several factors. It is thought that this is mainly due to the amount of timber in the system or even the solar absorption/emission coefficients for the roof cladding.
If we change metric and look at the absolute moisture content (mixing ratio) of the cavity air from the WUFI
® 2D simulations (
Figure 11), the pronounced spikes of moisture during the hotter days are reproduced. By enabling recording of the moisture flux vectors in the results file, the absorption and re-emission of moisture into and out of the wood was clearly visible using the analysis tool ‘wufi2dmotion’. Again, without any ventilation processes in the model, these peaks would be significantly overestimated.
The results demonstrate that the model can capture the effect as observed in the measurements. However, there are limitations to the models, which are discussed below. Introducing ventilation processes to the model reduces the relative humidity and the mixing ratio values as observed in reality. The additional boosting of the ventilation rate from a background value of 3 ach to 10 ach has resulted in a further decrease in the absolute moisture values, although not as low as was observed in reality. This is likely tied to the amount of storage capacity in the model. However, subtle but significant effects such as the influence of the additional ventilation on the boundary layer air in contact with the roof cladding and underlay are not possible to incorporate. These effects are likely to have an influence on the amount of evaporation of condensed moisture but are likely difficult to measure in a field situation, requiring tightly controlled laboratory measurements to observe. Even with these limitations, the modelling confirms that there is buffering of the moisture in the air into the surrounding materials as the structure cools and releases it again when the temperature rises.
There is, however, still room to improve the models without major modification, which is the focus of the remainder of the section. To improve the quality of the model fit, there are several approaches that could be taken as both the quality of the boundary condition data and some fundamental limitations with the WUFI® kernel are likely having an impact. As stated earlier, a constant background ventilation rate was assumed to apply in this instance, as it gave a reasonable agreement. In reality, there is going to be considerable variation due to wind and stack effects, so the question is whether this variation is significant enough to warrant a more complex ventilation source. From an understanding of the physical processes perspective, this is likely the case. However, from a practitioner’s perspective trying to assess the durability of a construction methodology, the assumed constant rate is likely to be sufficient, provided it captures the majority of the real-world effect.
The roof surface temperature is strongly dependent on both the incident and reflected radiation. Moving away from cloud cover only to a full explicit radiation and counter-radiation balance as an input to the model has had a positive impact on the simulated results. An issue present is that the dwelling is inland from the weather station so it is likely experiencing greater cloud cover and less wind than the well-exposed site of the weather station on the coast. To improve the irradiation data, which is especially critical to roof models, the data would need to be captured on site. However, the equipment needed to gather this data is expensive and not suitable for field deployment. It is possible this will be covered in future work using the data acquisition available at BRANZ, which will also enable the use shorter time steps of the order of 10 min (or even less), which will increase the numerical stability of the model.
Given the current 1-h resolution data, it may be possible to apply a convolution similar to that in [
19] on the results to smooth response to peaks. The model appears to react very quickly to changing boundary conditions and given the very small amount of moisture in the air relative to the storage in the materials comprising the structure, this is understandable. The technique taken Section 4.5 in [
19] has proved successful in understanding the limitations in modelling air infiltration in relatively airtight dwellings. In tandem with the response, there is also a fundamental limitation in how moisture in air is represented in WUFI
®. Due to numerical limitations, the moisture-carrying capacity of air adheres to a fixed moisture storage function. Typically, this is that same as that for air at 20 °C. In the context of situations where the temperature of the ventilated space does not have large swings over the course of a day, this is an acceptable approximation. In the context of a cold roof, the diurnal swings in temperature are such that the ability of air to hold moisture can change by an order of magnitude in a short space of time. To address this, an approach like that taken by McNeil [
20] with WUFI
® 1D could be applied to the 2D model. In this paper, two independent WUFI
® 1D models were coupled to each side of a third independent mathematical model of the air. The independent model allowed for improvements to the moisture storage function, and the radiative heat transfer across the cavity. There is a considerable amount of work needed to perform this style of modification, particularly with the 2D version of WUFI
®, so it was not done for this work. There is, however, an API for WUFI
® 2D that would enable this to be developed, so it remains a possibility for the future. As this work was focused on demonstrating a technique available to any WUFI
® user, it will remain a task for future work to try and capture these effects more accurately.
Overall, the WUFI® 2D analysis suggests reasonable agreement with the hypothesis that the daytime peaks in the measured air moisture content arise due to the release of moisture from the building materials. However, the complexity of these types of building elements, where the conditions are dependent on rarely available data sets, suggests that they remain outside of the scope of the guideline document.
3.3. Housing Survey Data
In order to understand the dynamics of the ventilation potential (using passive vents as opposed to a solar fan) for a larger data set, we look again at the differences of roof vapour pressure with interior and exterior vapour pressures using the Pilot Housing Study (PHS) as described above. For these houses, the current level of roof ventilation is unknown, so we are assessing the scope for additional ventilation beyond what is occurring already. The graph in
Figure 12 shows the differences for each hour averaged over a month for an individual dwelling of the PHS without an obvious moisture problem in the roof space. The results for January are similar to the New Plymouth case study with smaller vapour pressure differences in the first quadrant, however. During the daytime, when the roof cavity temperature is high, the vapour pressure differences are within quadrants I and IV and hence ventilation during this time will reduce the vapour pressure in the roof. During the night, roof infiltration/ventilation should be minimised.
Figure 12 also shows the situation for the southern hemisphere winter month of July. The indoor climate has a higher average moisture content than the roof space at all times, and air movement into the roof cavity should be avoided. Ventilation with the outside is still effective during daytime although the drying potential is much reduced in comparison to the summer period.
Most roof climates in the study are predominantly operating in quadrants I and IV during the day and III during the night (
Figure 13). Only three homes had roof climates that operated for long periods in quadrant II. The data given in
Figure 13 are for a subset from the PHS where roof cavity measurements are available. Not all dwellings have had recordings for all time periods. 71% of these dwellings had long-run metal claddings, 12% metal roofing tiles and 17% concrete tiles. Daily readings for all days of the months of January, March, June and November are averaged over the respective month to yield the ellipse representing the daily cycle as in
Figure 12. Times have been omitted for clarity. Each colour represents one identical dwelling across all graphs.
The seasonal dynamics of the drying potential are illustrated. Some roofs do not deviate much from the average vapour pressure dynamics throughout the year while others see a contraction of dynamics not reaching quadrant I as shown in
Figure 12. As a detailed analysis of occupant behaviour was not part of this study, no conclusions can be drawn on the individual differences. However, it is noteworthy that only one of the dwellings in
Figure 13 had mould growth problems in the roof space recorded in the survey. The vapour pressure difference curve for this dwelling is well within the other houses and not one of the buildings with larger vapour pressure differences. Also, the vapour pressure differences of the New Plymouth case study house are not on the extreme end of the ones in
Figure 13. While this is relevant for removing moisture from storage sources and drying out the roof space, the vapour pressure differences cannot be used to make comments on the occurrence of mould growth itself. The relevant parameter for the latter is relative humidity, which was not part of this study.
While this data set is not a valid statistical representation either across New Zealand or across different roof designs and materials, it nevertheless represents a trend with similar patterns. It illustrates our findings that the drying potential of a roof space is highly dependent on the individual circumstances of the dwelling and the interior and exterior climate. In general, however, infiltration/ventilation of the roof cavity will yield an improvement of the water vapour pressure given the prolonged periods of time in quadrant I. The fact that most houses in New Zealand with a cold roof design do not suffer from moisture-related problems further suggests that the line between having problems and having no moisture-related problems is difficult to establish in a general sense.
The case study data highlighted the importance of daytime ventilation, and this is reinforced by the PHS data. However, passive ventilation openings allow air to enter the roof cavity throughout the entire day. It is therefore important to understand wind speed distribution over the course of a day.
Figure 14 shows the wind speed distribution for New Zealand cities Christchurch and Wellington for the winter months of July and August and the spring month of September. Lighter colours represent a higher count in the respective time/wind speed window.
For Christchurch, (
Figure 14) the distribution shows that during the day the wind speed is often higher than during the night. Ventilation over the course of a day will likely result in a net water vapour pressure reduction in the roof cavity. The results for Wellington show a more uniform wind speed distribution over the course of the whole day. It is therefore more likely that the drying potential of ventilation is reduced in such a situation.
As the wind speed distribution is different between day and night and the daytime ventilation is the preferred ventilation, it is important to understand what the likelihood is that daytime ventilation exceeds night-time ventilation. This is shown in
Figure 15, where the daytime/night-time differential probability is shown for Christchurch and Wellington. The Christchurch data show a clear demarcation between daytime and night-time probability so that the daytime ventilation and drying potential clearly exceeds that of the night-time. The Wellington data show the night-time drying potential probability is somewhat interspersed with the daytime ventilation but the daytime drying potential probability still dominates. This means that there is no increased risk of condensation due to the additional ventilation. Any condensation should not be able to accumulate over long periods of time.