Differences in the Design of Underfloor Air Cavities

Abstract

Concepts of remedial treatments of historic buildings using ventilated floors, with a few exceptions, are with considerable popularity preferred by the representatives of monument protection. The fact that they require small interventions in the masonry is of great benefit for compliance with the methodology of cultural heritage protection, as is the fact that such interventions do not compromise the structural analysis of buildings. The materials used can be original (as is often remitted by the representatives of the monument protection), but for this purpose (covered parts) it is also possible to use modern materials or modern constructions. Currently, in our country with great popularity, special shaped units began to be used. When these methods should be given particular attention to the amount of air cavities design and deployment of the inlet and outlet openings, which is obviously problematic. In this article two different underfloor ventilation systems are compared using CFD simulation. To verify of accuracy of used simulations was carried out laboratory-experimental model.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.