| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 森林環境暨資源學研究所 === 99 === Owing to easy construction and low cost, the wood frame structure house has been the main product of North America style in Taiwan. However, the hot and humid climate is totally different from that in North America. The wall structure of wood frame house is needed to be improved and modified in order to avoid moisture accumulation or leakage that will cause wood decay, moldy, or attacked by termites. Sometimes even cause the “Sick building syndrome”. So the durability of the wood building, especially in wall has become a popular subject. As many scholars have done related research, which found that changes in external environment from the perspective of the durability will affect the structure.
This research plan using 3 types of walls（A、B and C）. The configurations are east-west direction. Doing the two repeats test.（Every wall can be parted with upper side and lower side. Using symbols like EA-U, EA-D, etc. That “EA-U” means the data of the upper side east A type wall.） By the combination of the hygrothermal and moisture content data to analysis. The analytical result has two parts. The first part is analyzing the temperature and relative humidity data inside the wall. It showed more obvious in discrepancy by doing the statistics of the temperature differential ratio（TDR）. In experiment period, C type had the fewest days which the TDR value above 1. And C type wall had the lowest average value of temperature differential per day between outdoor and inside the wall in these days. These result meant C type wall was more stable for containing heat inside than other two. Also the relative humidity part had been done the same analysis. In relative humidity variation section, it seemed not much relativity between the relative humidity value of outdoor and inside the walls from the correlation result. And the relative humidity differential ratio（RHR）displayed the major factor of RHR value over 1 was the outdoor RH value. Most of all, the number of days that RHR value over 1 were all the same in each group.
The second part of this research was the moisture content （MC） time delay effect in different types wall. The first step used EC wall to establish the analytical procedure. The next step was to compare EC wall and WC wall. But there were no significant difference in time delay effect, though there had the indirect proof to say the moisture transport speed was slower in WC wall. The final step was to compare the time delay effect of 3 type walls on west side. The only structural difference between WA and WC wall was the moisture resistance material. The result displayed that WA had about 30 minute longer than WC whether in “RH inside to OSB-MC” part or “OSB-MC to S-MC” part. The most important thing was that using activated carbon moisture-resistive membrane could has better performance than using rubberized asphalt. WB wall was the worst wall in time delay effect. Since the WB didn’t have 25 mm PS board, which WA and WC did. It showed that thickness could also affect the speed of moisture transportation. The total result showed WA wall performed the best in this research, WC is the second and WB is the worst.
|
|---|
