The objective of this work was to compare the hygrothermal responses and the moisture performance of four wood-frame walls as predicted by four hygrothermal (HAM) simulation tools, namely: DELPHIN, WUFI, hygIRC and COMSOL. The four wall systems differ only in their cladding type; these were fibreboard, vinyl, stucco and brick. Three Canadian cities having different climates were selected for simulations: Ottawa, Ontario; Vancouver, British Columbia and Calgary, Alberta. In each city, simulations were run for 2 years. Temperature and relative humidity of the outer layer of OSB sheathing were compared amongst the four simulation tools. The mould growth index on the outer layer of the OSB sheathing was used to compare the moisture performance predicted by the respective hygrothermal simulation tools. Temperature profiles of the outer layer of the OSB sheathing were all in good agreement for the four HAM tools in the three locations. For relative humidity, the highest discrepancies amongst the four tools were found with stucco cladding where differences as high as 20% could be found from time to time. Mould growth indices predicted by the four HAM tools were similar in some cases but different in other cases. The discrepancies amongst the different HAM tools were likely related to: the material property processing, how the quantity of wind-driven rain absorbed at the cladding surface is computed and some implementation details. Despite these discrepancies, The tools generally yielded consistent results and could be used for comparing the impacts of different designs on the risk of premature deterioration, as well as for evaluating the relative effects of climate change on a given wall assembly design.

这项工作的目的是比较四个湿热（HAM）模拟工具预测的四个木结构墙的湿热响应和湿气性能，这些模拟工具分别是：DELPHIN，WUFI，hygIRC和COMSOL。四种墙面系统仅在包层类型上有所不同。这些是纤维板，乙烯基，灰泥和砖头。选择了三个气候不同的加拿大城市进行模拟：安大略省渥太华；不列颠哥伦比亚省温哥华市和艾伯塔省卡尔加里市。在每个城市中，模拟进行了2年。在四个模拟工具之间比较了OSB护套外层的温度和相对湿度。使用OSB护套外层的霉菌生长指数来比较各个湿热模拟工具预测的水分性能。对于三个位置的四个HAM工具，OSB护套外层的温度曲线都非常吻合。对于相对湿度，使用灰泥覆层发现了四个工具之间的最高差异，有时会发现差异高达20％。四种HAM工具预测的霉菌生长指数在某些情况下相似，而在其他情况下则不同。不同的HAM工具之间的差异可能与以下有关：材料属性处理，如何计算包层表面吸收的风雨量以及一些实现细节。尽管存在这些差异，但这些工具通常会产生一致的结果，可用于比较不同设计对过早损坏风险的影响，