Loading...
Commercial blower door test reoprt -- FINAL257 Middle Road Crown Point, NY 12928 518-597-4503 –ƒ”„— •-ʹͷ‹Ž˜‡”‡–ƒ‹Ž ’ƒ ‡• Building Enclosure Air Tightness Test Prepared for: Clarion Inn & Suites Submitted on 7/13/20 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Starbucks-25 Silver Retail Spaces Queensbury, NY TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................. 3 PROJECT INFORMATION ............................................................................................. 2 SYNOPSIS ...................................................................................................................... 3 BACKGROUND .................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. THE TEST ....................................................................................................................... 5 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................... 6 © 2006-2020 Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved. Federal copyright law prohibits unauthorized reproduction by any means and imposes fines up to $25,000 for violation. This material may be copied and distributed only for purposes related to this specific project. All information, including, but not limited to report language and format, shall remain CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY to Air Barrier Solutions, Inc., unless prior written permission is granted. All Plans and Specifications and copies thereof furnished by or purchased are properties of Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. and are not to be used on other work. With the exception of one complete set, all documents are to be returned upon contract completion. NO PORTION OF THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE SHARED WITH ANY PARTY OTHER THAN THE CLIENT FOR WHICH IT IS PREPARED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM AIR BARRIER SOLUTIONS. This includes any direct or indirect reference to the scope, materials or methodologies outlined in this report. Any information or advice which Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. may furnish is gratuitous and shall in no way be deemed a warranty of the results obtained through use of such product or following such instructions for which Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. assumes legal responsibility. ©Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. CONFIDENTIAL & PROPRIETARY Pg. 1 PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT INFORMATION Facilities Information Project: Starbucks 25 Silver Retail Space, City State Facilities: Retail Space #1 (Starbucks/north side) Retail Space #2 (25 Silver/south side) Client Contact Information Client: Clarion Inn – SEE CHECK Client Laura Kohls Contact: Vice President Clarion Inn & Suites Contact 1454 State Route 9 Address: Lake George, NY 12845 Contact 518-321-8673 – Mobile Phone(s): Contact lakohls@aol.com Email: Testing Information Testing Larry Harmon Staff: Test Date: 7-11-2020 Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. Contact Information Inquiries: Catherine Muller Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. 257 Middle Road Crown Point, NY 12928 518-597-4503 – Office 518-570-6517 – Mobile cmuller@AirBarrierSolutions.com ©Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. CONFIDENTIAL & PROPRIETARY Pg. 2 SYNOPSIS Synopsis Air Barrier Solutions, Inc.’s staff arrived at the Starbucks-25 Silver Retail Spaces project on the morning of July 11, 2020, to conduct a building enclosure airtightness test to verify Commercial Energy Code compliance per C402.5. The blower door test was [[2509,1316,4528,1430][12][B,I,][Arial]]Standard Test Method for Determining Air performed in accordance with ASTM E779 [[600,1449,2325,1563][12][B,I,][Arial]]Leakage Rate by Fan Pressurization . It was an air barrier systems enclosure test that excluded HVAC-related openings. This test is an important step in commissioning a building because of the ongoing space conditioning costs associated with air leakage. Air leakage also has major impacts on non-energy factors, some or all of which may be present in any one building. The same gaps responsible for air leakage are also often the culprits behind occupant noise, odor, and comfort complaints; poor indoor air quality; ice dams; premature roof degradation; mold and mildew; and pest infiltration. A tight building envelope costs less to operate because it uses less energy, leading to a decreased carbon footprint as well. Upon arrival, we inspected the building to be tested. It is a single structure comprised of two independent future retail spaces. Air Barrier Solutions Inc.’s staff made the decision to test the two spaces independently first as that is a harder test for the structure to pass. They felt it would do so readily due to the sheetrock air barrier installed and the quality of the building’s construction. Staff was prepared to test the two spaces simultaneously if necessary, using Teclog and a wireless backbone. In Retail Space #1 on the north side of the building (future Starbucks), staff identified the gross surface area of the boundary to be tested as 7,350 SF. Per the Commercial Energy Code C402.5, the maximum leakage upon testing shall be no more than 0.4 CFM at 75 Pascals per square foot of the surface area around the portion of the building 2 that is being tested (0.2 L/s * M). In this case, it allows a maximal rate of 2940 CFM75 (.03” W.C.) pressure differential. In Retail Space #2 (south), the boundary surface area was measured at 7,200 SF. In this case, using the same criteria, the Code allows a maximal rate of 2,880 CFM75 (.03” W.C.) pressure differential. Upon testing the north retail space, airflow was calculated at 1,828 CFM75, well below the code compliance target of 2,940 CFM75. This equates to an overall leakage rate of 0.24 CFM75 per square foot of surface area against the Commercial Energy Code’s 0.4 CFM75 requirement. The north Retail Space #1 easily passed the test. More details are provided in the “Results” section below. ©Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. CONFIDENTIAL & PROPRIETARY Pg. 3 Upon testing the second, airflow was calculated at 1,613 CFM75 Pascals, well below the code compliance target of 2,880 CFM75. This equates to an overall leakage rate of 0.22 CFM75 per square foot of surface area against the Commercial Energy Code’s 0.4 CFM75 requirement. The second retail space also easily passed the test. More details are provided in the “Results” section below. ©Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. CONFIDENTIAL & PROPRIETARY Pg. 4 BACKGROUND THE TEST The Test Testing was conducted using Energy Conservatory, Inc.’s Model 3 Minneapolis blower door fans with Energy Conservatory DG-700 digital manometers and the Energy Conservatory’s TECLOG 3 recording software. The graphical results presented are outputs from that software. The data was recorded via a proprietary wireless network. Test weather conditions were: wind SSW @ 13 mph to SSW @ 16 mph and gusting for the second unit. Outdoor temperatures ranged from 82-84 degrees Fahrenheit and inside at 80 degrees Fahrenheit. The test was conducted with a single Model 3 blower door fan connected via a wireless network to a laptop running the TECLOG software. Each space was tested separately. If the leakage rates in this configuration were too high, we were prepared to test both units simultaneously to eliminate reading any interunit leakage. Due to care taken during construction, this did not prove necessary. We used the large rear entrance door in each unit to position the blower door test apparatus. The digital manometer was an Energy Conservatory DG-700 Serial # 17679 equipped with a wireless repeater. Channel A on the DG-700 monitored the building envelope pressure. Channel B on the gauge monitored the model 3 fan flow. For Retail Space #1 a series of 7 readings were taken to get a good data set for the software analysis at pressures ranging from -75 pascals to -45 pascals. The correlation coefficient of .99 indicated a good data set had been recorded. For Retail Space #2 a series of 7 readings were also taken, at pressures ranging from - 79 pascals to -50 pascals. The correlation coefficient of .99 indicated a good data set had been recorded despite winds gusting above 20 mph. The -70 and -65 pascal readings were dropped due to strong wind gusts during that capture time. ©Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. CONFIDENTIAL & PROPRIETARY Pg. 5 Results The accompanying graph details the test data accumulation for retail space #1: The accompanying graph details the test data accumulation for Retail Space #2: ©Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. CONFIDENTIAL & PROPRIETARY Pg. 6 The effects of the wind gusts were much more pronounced on the test of the second retail space. The results graph above summarizes the test results for Retail Space #1. Airflow at 75 pascals was calculated at 1,828 CFM @ 75 pascals, well below the code compliance target of 2,940 CFM75. The leakage rate is 0.24 CFM @ 75 pascals per square foot of surface area against the Commercial Energy Code’s 0.4 CFM75 requirement. The correlation coefficient at 0.99 is extremely high, indicating the data gathered was very 2 solid. The R value was equally high, leading to high confidence in the results. ©Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. CONFIDENTIAL & PROPRIETARY Pg. 7 The results graph above summarizes the test results for Retail Space #2. Airflow at 75 pascals was calculated at 1613 CFM @ 75 Pascals, well below the code compliance target of 2880 CFM75. The leakage rate is 0.22 CFM @ 75 pascals per square foot of surface area against the Commercial Energy Code’s 0.4 CFM75 requirement. The correlation coefficient at 0.99 is extremely high, indicating the data gathered was very 2 solid. The R value was equally high, leading to high confidence in the results. Based on this test data, we can state that in accordance with ASTM E779 testing methodologies, the Starbucks-25 Silver Retail Spaces exceed the enclosure tightness requirements of C402.5 under the Commercial Energy Code. ©Air Barrier Solutions, Inc. CONFIDENTIAL & PROPRIETARY Pg. 8