Advertisement

Wood as an Exposed Building Material for Indoor Climate Adaptation

  • Kristine Nore
  • Dimitrios Kraniotis
  • May-Linn Sortland
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Energy book series (SPE)

Abstract

Use of massive wood has increased during the last decade. The concept of massive wood, mainly as cross laminated timber elements (CLT), has become a popular building method for new constructions, both in public and private sector. Massive wood elements take advantage of wood as building material, also as an indoor climate buffer. Moholt 50|50 is a new student-housing project in Trondheim, Norway, which consists of five mass timber towers. Each of them with eight stories built in CLT on top of a concrete storey. Apart from the student homes, the buildings host facilities, such as activity center, kindergarten, commercial areas and a library, also built in CLT. This makes Moholt 50|50 a significant wooden living lab in Trondheim. The building technique follows the development from the first Norwegian CLT student housing built in Ås in 2012, and reproduced later on in similar patterns in other Norwegian cities, as Tromsø, Haugesund, Drammen, Fredrikstad, Halden, Hønefoss, Porsgrunn and Trondheim. Research on comfort and operation cost coupled to indoor surfaces are included in project Moholt 50|50. The towers are built according to Norwegian low energy standards. All surfaces are treated with water solvent varnish, apart from two stories in one of the Moholt timber towers. Four stories are instrumented to document the difference in the behavior of untreated and treated wooden surfaces. Measurements show a different indoor climate of the stories with untreated surfaces. The measurements presented give preliminary results of a measurement period which, when finished, will include one year of inhabited studios from the date of moving in.

Keywords

Wood Moisture Ventilation Control Indoor climate 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors greatly acknowledge the student housing organization in Trondheim (SiT) for always supporting and helping the research in progress and the Norwegian Research council for supporting the contractor through Skattefunn to finance the research activity.

References

  1. 1.
    G. Schickhofer, R. Brandner, H. Bauer, in Introduction to CLT, Product Properties, Strength Classes. Conference: Cross Laminated Timber—a competitive wood product for visionary and fire safe buildings: Joint Conference of COST Actions FP1402 and FP1404, At KTH, Stockholm, Sweden. March 2016Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Survey Report: Survey of International Tall Wood Buildings. Forest Innovation Investment (FII) and Binational Softwood Lumber Council (BSLC). RethinkWood. Canada (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    C. Rode, R. Peuhkuri, L.H. Mortensen, K.K. Hansen, B. Time, A. Gustavsen, T. Ojanen, J. Ahonen, K. Svennberg, L.E. Harderup, J. Arfvidson, Moisture buffering of building materials. 264 Project No.: 04023. Nordic Innovation Centre (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. Rode, K. Grau, Moisture buffering and its consequence in whole building hygrothermal modeling. J. Build. Phy. 31, 333–360 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    C.J. Simonson, M. Salonvaara, T. Ojanen, Improving Indoor Climate and Comfort with Wooden Structures. Technical Research Centre of Finland, VTT Publications 431; Espoo, Finland (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    ASHRAE. Standard 55—Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Karagiozis, H. Künzel, A. Holm, in WUFI-ORNL/IBPA North American Hygrothermal Model. In Proceedings: Conference on Performance of Exterior Envelopes of Whole Buildings VIII, ASHRAE, Atlanta, USA (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Woloszyn, T. Kalamees, M.O. Abadie, M. Steeman, A.S. Kalagasidis, The effect of combining a relative-humidity-sensitive ventilation system with the moisture-buffering capacity of materials on indoor climate and energy efficiency of buildings. Build. Environ. 44, 515–524 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    O.F. Osanyintola, C.J. Simonson, Moisture buffering capacity of hygroscopic building materials: experimental facilities and energy impact. Energy Build. 38, 1270–1282 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    K. Nore, A. Nyrud, D. Kraniotis, K.R. Skulberg, F. Englund, T. Aurlien, Moisture buffering, energy potential and VOC emissions of wood exposed to indoor environments. Science and Technology for the Built Environment (in press)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    N. Mendes, F.C. Winkelmann, R. Lamberts, P.C. Philippi, Moisture effects on 269 conduction lads. Energy Build. 35, 631–644 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    K. Nore, D. Kraniotis, C. Brückner, The principles of sauna physics. Energy Procedia 78, 1907–1912 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. Kraniotis, K. Nore, C. Brückner, A.Q. Nyrud, Thermography measurements and latent heat documentation of Norwegian spruce (Picea abies) exposed to dynamic indoor climate. J. Wood Sci. 62, 203–209 (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Kraniotis, K. Nore, Latent heat phenomena in buildings and potential integration into energy balance. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2017(38), 364–371 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    S. Hameury, Moisture buffering capacity of heavy timber structures directly exposed to an indoor climate. A numerical study. Build. Environ. 40, 1400–1412 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kristine Nore
    • 1
  • Dimitrios Kraniotis
    • 2
  • May-Linn Sortland
    • 1
  1. 1.Norwegian Institute of Wood TechnologyOsloNorway
  2. 2.Oslo Metropolitan UniversityOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations