The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About430 N College Ave - Special Inspections/Blower Door Test - 01/14/2014■ 1119 CONSULTING Sc ENGINEERING January 14, 2014 CSURF C/O of Mr. Jeff Jensen Jensen Consulting 37154 Dickerson Run Windsor, Colorado 80550 Project Name: CSU Engines and Energy Conversion Lab (EECL) Jensen Consulting/CSURF Pie Project Number: C0111586.00 (010) Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Subject: Air Barrier Performance Testing Report Dear Mr. Jensen: Per our agreement for professional services, Pie Consulting & Engineering (Pie) has conducted performance testing of the air barrier system for the CSU EECL located in Fort Collins, Colorado. The purpose of this performance evaluation was to provide CSURF a building air tightness performance value of the as -constructed air barrier. This report provides The City of Fort Collins a Certification of Compliance, summary of the air barrier test procedure, and results of our performance testing. The purpose of the performance testing was to quantify the amount of air leakage occurring through the air barrier test envelope. The testing was performed on January 11, 2014 by Mr. Troy Rodvold of Pie. Air Barrier Performance Testing Report CSU EECL Jensen Consulting/CSURF CITY OF FORT COLLINS CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Building Air Leakage Test Results Pressurization Metric Requirement Actual Requirement Met/Not Met n 0.45,< n < 0.8 .6334 Met C N/A 919.1 N/A rz rz> 0.98 .9901 Met CFM75/sq ft Actual < 0.25 CFM 75/sq ft 0.1713 Met 95% C.I. Upper N/A 0.1733 N/A 95% C.I. Lower N/A 0.1693 N/A EgLA75 N/A 10.8 N/A Depressurization Metric Requirement Actual Requirement Met/Not Met n 0.45 < n < 0.8 0.6973 Met C N/A 548.1 N/A r2 rz > 0.98 .9973 Met CFM75/sq ft Actual < 0.25 CFM 75/sq ft 0.1346 Met 95% C.I. Upper N/A 0.1351 N/A 95% C.I. Lower N/A 0.1341 N/A EgLA75 N/A 8.5 N/A Average Metric Requirement Actual Requirement Met/Not Met CFM75/ sq ft Actual < 0.25 CFM 75/sq ft 0.1529 Met Pie Consulting & Engineering Page 2 of 9 Cot 11586.00 (010) Air Barrier Performance Testing Report CSU — Engines and Energy Conversion Lab 1 The test boundary area was obtained from the Architect of Record and was checked on -site for reasonableness.* ��- Initial 2 Set up was performed according to section 2 of the test form and all deviations and their impact noted here. \ 1Z Initial 3 Test equipment used was in compliance with respect to accuracy and calibration date. Initial 4 The test procedure used was in compliance except as noted here. N/A Initial 5 The calculations were done in strict accordance with ASTM E779-10 except as noted in this Protocol. _ Initial 6 Provide the value calculated in step 5.15 (or 5.11 or 5.4 if applicable). .15 CFM75/sq ft 7 Determine pass/fail status based on the average of pressurization and depressurization. Pass 8 All accuracies, pressure limits, data correlations, and confidence intervals are within the bounds specified in steps 3, 4, and 5 and all deviations are noted here. `T� Initial 9 Supporting documentation described in steps 1, 3, 6, and 7 is attached to this test form, including all digital photographs of the "T b building and test procedure.- Initial est oundary area was not provided by the DOR, and was provided by pie's plan take -off calculations. I hereby certify that the results above are in conformance with the City of Fort Collins Air Leakage Test Protocol. Testing agency name: Pie Consulting & Engineering Testing agency authorize representative signature: 1--� Z Testing agency authorized representative printed name: Troy Rodvold Date: January 13, 2014 Pie Consulting & Engineering Page 3 of 9 CO111586.00 Air Barrier Performance Testing Report CSU EECL Jensen Consulting/CSURF BACKGROUND On March 22, 2011, the City of Fort Collins adopted Ordinance No. 031, 2011 amending Chapter 5, Article II, Division 2 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins for the purpose of amending the 2009 International Energy Conservation Code (Ordinance). This ordinance requires (among other measures) that all new buildings, additions, and those undergoing major renovations shall have an air leakage rate that does not exceed 0.25 CFM75/sq ft of the total building envelope area when tested in accordance with the City of Fort Collins Air Leakage Test Protocol for Non- Residential Building Enclosures (Protocol). This Directive references ASTM E 779-03, Standard Test Method for Determining Air Leakage Rate by Fan Pressurization, as well as ASTM E 1827, Standard Test Methods for Determining Airtightness of Buildings Using an Orifice Blower Door. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. _ On January 11, 2014, Pie conducted the building performance testing of the CSU - Engines and Energy Conversion Lab located in Fort Collins, Colorado to determine the current air tightness value for the building. Testing was conducted in general accordance with the City of Fort Collins Building Air Leakage Test Protocol, which references ASTM E 779, using controlled pressurization and depressurization techniques. B. The building was tested with the air barrier test envelope in the "closed" condition, where applicable; as listed in Table 1 of ASTM E 1827-96 (2002) Standard Test Methods for Determining Air Tightness of Buildings Using an Orifice Blower Door. The normalized results of the air tightness testing of the building are listed in Figure 1. Upper Limit Percent above Max Air Leakage Air Leakage Allowable (CFM/ftz at (CFM/ft2 at 757 (0.25 CFM/ft2 at 75-Pa) Description 75-Pa) Pa) - OR PASS Pressurization 0.171 0.173 PASS Depressurization 0.135 0.135 PASS Average 0.153 0.154 PASS Figure 1 - Air Tightness Testing Results C. The building passed the City of Fort Collins air tightness requirement (0.25 CFM/ft2 at 75-Pa). As a result, diagnostic evaluation of the building air leakage was not required and was not performed. Pie Consulting & Engineering Page 4 of 9 Cot11586.00 (010) Air Barrier Performance Testing Report CSU EECL Jensen Consulting/CSURF B. Pie measured and recorded 48 data points during both pressurization and depressurization testing. Linear regression analysis was conducted to accurately determine the overall air tightness value of the building. C. Data points were plotted and a clear, unambiguous correlation between the measured pressure differentials and total system flows was established. 1. Linear regression and data analysis were conducted in accordance with ASTM E779 to determine the air leakage coefficients, CP and Cd, at standard conditions and the pressure exponents, np and na, for pressurization and depressurization testing. The correlation between the log -linearized pressure differential and flow rate was analyzed to determine the validity of the test data. 2. Based on the Protocol, a correlation (Rz) of 0.98 or greater is necessary for the data collected during testing to be considered accurate and reproducible. After the flow coefficient and exponent were calculated, the overall air leakage rate at 75-Pa, Q75, at standard conditions was calculated and divided by the total surface area of the air barrier, which provided the building air -leakage value. D. A 95-percent confidence interval (95% CI) is included in the test. The 95-percent Cl can be interpreted to mean there is a 95-percent chance that the calculated results of the air tightness testing are between the "high" and "low' measured values. A smaller confidence interval indicates less variation in the measurements and therefore more accurate the test data. 1. The Fort Collins Protocol requires the 95% CI not exceed 0.02 for mean values of 0.25 or less, which equates to approximately 8-percent. The data collected on this building resulted in a relatively narrow confidence interval, which confirms a strong relationship between pressure and flow. The subject building data meets the Protocol requirements. E. The pressurization air barrier test results are listed in Figure 2. Reference Attachment A at the end of this report for the raw data, calculations, and precision and baseline. Pressurization Air Leakage Coefficient, C 919.1 Pressurization exponent, np 0.6334 Q at 75-Pa (CFM) 14,157.2 Air Barrier Envelope Area W 82,648 Air Leakage CFM/ft2envelo a at 75-Pa 0.1713 95% Confidence Limits CFM/ftzenvelope at 75-Pa 0.1693 - 0.1733 Upper Limit Air Leakage (CFM/ ftz envelope at 75-Pa 0.1733 Correlation Value, Rz 0.9901 Equivalent Leakage Area, E LA ftz at 75-Pa 10.8 Measured air tightness above the Protocol requirement of 0.25CFM/ftzenvelope % , or PASS PASS Figure 2 -Pressurization Air Tightness Test Results Pie Consulting & Engineering Page 7 of 9 CO111586.00 (010) Air Barrier Performance Testing Report CSU EECL Jensen Consulting/CSURF F. The depressurization test results are listed in Figure 3. Reference Attachment A at the end of this report for the raw data, calculations, and precision and baseline. Depressurization Flow Coefficient, Ca 548.1 Depressurization Pressure Exponent, na 0.6973 Q at 75-Pa (CFM) 11,127.2 Air Barrier Envelope Area ft2 82,648 Air Leakage CFWft2 envelo a at 75-Pa 0.1346 95% Confidence Limits CFM/ft2envelo a @ 75-Pa 0.1341- 0.1351 Upper Limit Air Leakage CFM/ft2 envelo e ® 75-Pa 0.1351 Correlation Value, R2 0.9973 Equivalent Leakage Area, E LA ftz 8.5 Measured air tightness above the Protocol requirement of O.25CFM/ft2envelope % , or PASS PASS Figure 3 - Depressurization Air Tightness Test Results G. The equivalent leakage areas (EgLA) listed in Figures 2 and 3 are 10.8-ft2 and 8.5-ft2, respectively. These values represent the theoretical equivalent "hole" sizes in the air barrier test envelope if all leakage areas were combined into a single opening. Pie Consulting & Engineering Page 8 of 9 C0111586.00 (010) Air Barrier Performance Testing Report CSU EECL Jensen Consulting/CSURF Pie hereby certifies that the results above are in conformance with the City of Fort Collins Building Air Leakage Testing Protocol (2011-12-09). The opinions and results described in this report are based on information available at the time of the testing and preparation of this report. Should additional information or unknown conditions be uncovered or made available, Pie Consulting & Engineering retains the right to revise and supplement this report accordingly. Sincerely, Pie Consulting & Engineering Prepared by, Troy Rodvold Building Science Specialist �oY�Or�W, 42822 / Whew Hemn (` 142014 I:46 PM FSS/ONA�� Reviewed by, Matthew D. Heron, P.E., LEED® AP Department Manager - Building Science Group TSR:MDH:ta Attachments: Attachment A: Air Tightness Performance Testing Raw Data and Analysis Attachment B: Digital Photographs Attachment C: Retrotec Calibration Data k:12011\co11158600\task 010 - air barrier testing\05 reports attachments submittals\2014-01-14-csueecl-abtrpt.docx Pie Consulting & Engineering Page 9 of 9 C0111586.00 (010) ATTACHMENT A - AIR TIGHTNESS PERFORMANCE' TESTING RAW DATA AND ANALYSIS