Cob: Thermal Mass Works.

[Darel Henman]

Mark Piepkorn wrote:
> The effect of
> the mysterious "thermal mass (wall) function" truly seems magical under the
> right conditions...
There's certainly nothing mysterious about it.  


> -- but in practice varies from climate to climate, 
The principle would not vary from climate to climate, only the need or
the amount to which mass would be needed.  Additionaly PAHS allows for
tuning to fit the area one's in. 

As for applicability I suppose you can say that people on the equator +
or - 23.17 degrees, wouldn't need  thermal mass because you want to be
cool at night as much as possible.  I agree with this.  I don't know how
much the evaporation effect would cool a sealed off earthen building in
hot areas for storage, however. 

> even building to building. This is also true of PAHS.
The desirability would change from area to area but not the physics
behind it.  Also PAHS allows you to tune the house, as I said above. 
This would make it useable in more areas.   


> On the other hand, the effects of insulation are more predictable.
Except when it gets moist, damp, or wet or the wind is blowing.

> Above-ground, the best compromise in unspecified (that is, imprecisely
> defined) conditions for unspecified occupants is going to be
> diurnally-moderating insulated mass.
Why do you call this the best.   It's great for ares that have a high
diurnal differences, but not for areas that don't.  In terms of saving
the user money, not to mention the environment it would make sense to
employ thermal storage for heating and cooling as much as possible.

You don't have to use soil as a mass, water which is even better in a
sense, can and has been used as well.
 
Darel