Projects per year
Abstract
There are many challenges when building in the Arctic. These challenges include harsh weather conditions, limited infrastructure, financial circumstances, and lack of local resources, e.g., building materials, skilled labour, factories, and machinery. In this study, Greenland was selected as a case study for the Arctic region. Due to the current building traditions being implemented by the Greenlandic Technical Organisation in 1950 and forward, the modern Greenlandic construction industry is relatively new. As of 2023, it consists mainly of refined single-family half-timber houses and multistorey concrete and half-timber constructions. The newest tendency is crosslaminated timber (CLT) constructions. The Greenlandic building stock is of varying quality, and around 11 % of the government-owned residents are uninhabitable due to either mould or wear and tear. The consequences of poor buildings are many, including unhealthy indoor climate, short service life, large heat loss, and environmental issues. Consequently, this thesis aims to identify how to achieve a better and more robust building stock in Greenland. To this end, two hypotheses were formulated, each with three research questions. The hypotheses are:
- Mould problems in Greenlandic wall constructions are caused by faulty design
- Optimal wall construction designs depend on the location in Greenland
Two field studies were conducted, collecting experimental data from constructions in Nuuk and Sisimiut. Three construction types were tested and monitored for temperature and relative humidity. The investigated construction types were half-timber, CLT, and concrete. In the first study, data from a meticulously constructed test facility with a controlled indoor climate was analysed. In the second field study, data from multiple residential houses was evaluated. Thus, the two data sets account differently for buildability and user behaviour. The performances of the constructions were evaluated by comparing the measured data to hygrothermal simulations of fitted models conducted in the simulation programme Delphin. Furthermore, the risk of mould growth was quantified with the Viitanen model and used to evaluate the buildings’ suitability. The constructions in the test facility were tested for multiple Greenlandic locations with reanalysis weather data.
A theoretical study was conducted based on a developed tool, calculating the optimal insulation thickness for minimising greenhouse gas emissions. The tool was compared to two other methods, evaluating future Arctic and subarctic climate scenarios.
Despite critical mould conditions in air cavities, none of the constructions were concluded to have faulty designs and, therefore, were not considered unsuitable for the Arctic climate based on mould growth risk. Most essentially, the buildability and the labour quality ensuring wind, air, and vapour-tight constructions were found to be key for the suitability, though the presence of wind and vapour barriers is not crucial. Such barriers might, however, reduce the consequences of building errors if implemented correctly. The suitability of a construction at a specific location was found to be closer related to town size and available facilities and resources than to the weather conditions. This is despite the fact that the weather conditions across Greenland were significantly different.
- Mould problems in Greenlandic wall constructions are caused by faulty design
- Optimal wall construction designs depend on the location in Greenland
Two field studies were conducted, collecting experimental data from constructions in Nuuk and Sisimiut. Three construction types were tested and monitored for temperature and relative humidity. The investigated construction types were half-timber, CLT, and concrete. In the first study, data from a meticulously constructed test facility with a controlled indoor climate was analysed. In the second field study, data from multiple residential houses was evaluated. Thus, the two data sets account differently for buildability and user behaviour. The performances of the constructions were evaluated by comparing the measured data to hygrothermal simulations of fitted models conducted in the simulation programme Delphin. Furthermore, the risk of mould growth was quantified with the Viitanen model and used to evaluate the buildings’ suitability. The constructions in the test facility were tested for multiple Greenlandic locations with reanalysis weather data.
A theoretical study was conducted based on a developed tool, calculating the optimal insulation thickness for minimising greenhouse gas emissions. The tool was compared to two other methods, evaluating future Arctic and subarctic climate scenarios.
Despite critical mould conditions in air cavities, none of the constructions were concluded to have faulty designs and, therefore, were not considered unsuitable for the Arctic climate based on mould growth risk. Most essentially, the buildability and the labour quality ensuring wind, air, and vapour-tight constructions were found to be key for the suitability, though the presence of wind and vapour barriers is not crucial. Such barriers might, however, reduce the consequences of building errors if implemented correctly. The suitability of a construction at a specific location was found to be closer related to town size and available facilities and resources than to the weather conditions. This is despite the fact that the weather conditions across Greenland were significantly different.
Original language | English |
---|
Place of Publication | Kgs. Lyngby |
---|---|
Publisher | Technical University of Denmark |
Number of pages | 162 |
ISBN (Electronic) | 978-87-7475-755-9 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2023 |
Series | DCAMM Special Report |
---|---|
Number | S333 |
ISSN | 0903-1685 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Hygrothermal Assessment of Wall Constructions in the Arctic'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Projects
- 1 Finished
-
Optimization of building practice in arctic climate
Friis, N. K. (PhD Student), Petersen, S. (Examiner), Schade, J. (Examiner), Møller, E. B. (Main Supervisor) & Lading, T. (Supervisor)
01/02/2020 → 11/01/2024
Project: PhD