HomeMy WebLinkAbout195 E Foothills Pkwy - Special Inspections/Blower Door Test - 01/18/2016January 18, 2016
-Foo*Ns Mot 1I
W Ioclz 1�-�{�e.Y'1M In't'# 3IS0179(0
■ i} i � 13�rr; ecI I �}- —
CONSULTING &
ENGINEERING
29JAN 16 8:37AN
Mr. Jason Glenn / 9S , ��S 'i�IV
The Beck Group
344 East Foothills Parkway, Unit 3E
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
Project Name: Foothills Mall - Block 10
Pie Project Number: C0115206.10 (020)
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Subject: Air Barrier Performance Testing Report
Dear Mr. Glenn:
In accordance with our agreement, Pie Consulting & Engineering (Pie) has conducted
performance testing of the air barrier system for the Foothills Mall Block 10 in Fort Collins,
Colorado. The purpose of this performance evaluation was to provide the Beck Group a building
air tightness performance value of the as -constructed air barrier.
This report provides The City of Fort Collins Certification of Compliance, a 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 14, 2015 by Scott Terry of Pie.
Air Barrier Performance Testing Report Foothills Mall Block 10, Fort Collins, Colorado
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
0.57
Met
C
N/A
685.5
N/A
r2
r2 > 0.98
0.997
Met
CFM75/sq ft
Actual < 0.25 CFM 75/sq ft
0.2456
Met
95% C.I. Upper
N/A
0.2464
N/A
95% C.I. Lower
N/A
0.2447
N/A
E LA75
N/A
6.2
N/A
Depressurization
Metric
Requirement
Actual
Re uirement Met/Not Met
n
0.45 < n < 0.8
0.56
Met
C
N/A
741.8
N/A
r2
r2 > 0.98
0.988
Met
CFM75/sq ft
Actual < 0.25 CFM 75/sq ft
0.2520
Met
95% C.I. Upper
N/A
0.255
N/A
95% C.I. Lower
N/A
0.249
N/A
E LA75
N/A
6.4
N/A
Averaze
Metric
Re uirement
Actual
Re uirement Met/Not Met
CFM75/sq ft
I Actual < 0.25 CFM 75/ sq ft
10.249
1 Met
1
The test boundary area was obtained from the Arclutect of
Record and was checked on -site for reasonableness.
_AST Initial
2
Set up was performed according to section 2 of the test form and
all deviations and their impact noted here.
_AST Initial
3
Test equipment used was in compliance with respect to accuracy
and calibration date.
_AST Initial
4
The test procedure used was in compliance except as noted here.
Temporary sealing of three (3) storefront windows.
_AST Initial
5
The calculations were done in strict accordance with ASTM
E779-10 except as noted in this Protocol.
_AST Initial
6
Provide the value calculated in step 5.15 (or 5.11 or 5.4, if
applicable)
0.249 —CFM75/sq ft
7
Determine pass/fail status based on the average of
pressurization and depressurization.
1 Pass
Pie Consulting & Engineering Page 2 of 8 C0115206.10 (020)
Air Barrier Performance Testing Report Foothills Mall Block 10, Fort Collins, Colorado
i
8
All accuracies, pressure limits, and data correlations and
confidence intervals are within the bounds specified in steps 3,
4, and 5 and all deviations are noted here.
_AST Initial
9
Supporting documentation described in steps 1, 3, 6, and 7 is
attached to this test form, including all digital photographs of
the buildin and test procedure.
AST Initial
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 authorized representative signature:
Testing agency authorized representative printed name:
Allen Scott Terry
Date: January 18, 2016
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 14, 2016, Pie conducted the building performance testing of the Foothills Mall
Block 10 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
Pie Consulting & Engineering Page 3 of 8 CO115206.10 (020)
Air Barrier Performance
Foothills Mall Block 10, Fort Collins, Colorado
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/ftz at 75-
(0.25 CFM/ft2 at 75-Pa)
Description
75-Pa)
Pa)
OR PASS
Pressurization
0.246
0.246
PASS
Depressurization
0.252
0.255
0.8
Average
0.249
0.251
PASS
Figure 1 - Air Tightness Testing Results
C. The building passed the City of Fort Collins air tightness requirement (0.25 CFM/ftzat 75-
Pa). As a result, diagnostic evaluation of the building air leakage was not required and
was not performed.
BUILDING DESCRIPTION
A. The subject building is a retail addition attached to the west extents of the Foothills Mall.
The overall footprint of the building is roughly "rectangular' -shaped with a mean roof
height of approximately 30-ft.
1. Exterior wall construction was EIFS over light gauge metal framing and fluid -
applied air barrier over sheathing.
2. Windows were glass and aluminum storefront type, and exterior doors were
either glass and aluminum or hollow frame steel.
3. Roof construction air barrier material was TPO roof membrane on insulated metal
deck.
4. Floor air barrier material was concrete slab on grade.
B. For the purposes of our testing, and in accordance with instructions from the Architect of
Record, the area requiring air leakage testing was the entire building. The air barrier test
envelope consisted of the exterior walls, roof membrane, and concrete slab.
C. At the time of our testing, the air barrier system was installed, and construction work was
nearing substantial completion. Specifically, approximately the fluid applied air barrier
was installed over opaque exterior walls, exterior glazing was almost completed (with 3
glass lites not yet installed), and the roof membrane was installed.
D. According to the Architect of Record (RFI-0072-00, dated January 1, 2016), the total surface
area of the air barrier for this Building is 33,272 feet -squared (W).
Pie Consulting & Engineering Page 4 of 8 C0115206.10 (020)
Air Barrier Performance T
Foothills Mail Block 10, Fort Collins, Colorado
PERFORMANCE TESTING PROCEDURE
A. Air leakage performance testing was performed in general accordance with the Fort
Collins Protocol and ASTM E 779-03.
B. Prior to performance testing, the building was prepared to be in the "closed" condition,
as listed in Table 1 of ASTM E 1827-96 (2002) and the Fort Collins Protocol Section 3.3.2.
Specifically, the following measures were taken to prepare the building:
1. HVAC system was disabled.
2. HVAC main trunk line dampers for both supply and return air were masked or
closed.
3. Air inlets and outlets at the envelope perimeter were sealed or isolated.
4. Exterior doors and windows were closed and locked.
5. Temporary sealing was accomplished on three (3) storefront locations with
plywood and plastic.
6. Where installed, plumbing traps, including shower drains, bathroom sinks, toilets,
unsealed pipes for urinals and floor drains, were either filled with water or
masked with tape.
C. Based on the total surface area of the air barrier for this building and the Protocol
requirements, 100-percent of the estimated flow using 0.30 CFM/sq-ft air barrier test
envelope equals 9,982 CFM.
D. Based on the tightness of the building as observed during initial equipment configuration,
Pie utilized one Retrotec rigid panel fan system to pressurize and depressurize the
building. The Retrotec system generally consisted of the following components:
1. 2 fans installed in a standard doorframe with a rigid fiberglass panel system (Pie
Fan #s 9 & 10).
2. 1 DM-32 digital controller (Pie DM-32 #1).
3. 2 variable speed fan drives (Pie Fan Drive #s 9 & 10).
4. 1 exterior pressure -monitoring station.
5. 3 interior pressure -monitoring stations.
6. Pie's Retrotec DM-32 digital control gauge #1 was last calibrated in June 2014; fan
#9 was last calibrated in accordance with ASTM E 1258 in May 2015, and fan #10
in September 2015. The Protocol requires that digital gauges be calibrated every
two years and fans be calibrated every four years. Reference the calibration
records included in Attachment C for specific calibration dates.
E. Prior to the test, the average wind speed and direction, as well as interior and exterior
temperatures were recorded. Each baseline pressure point represents an average pressure
value taken over a period of 120 seconds. The pre -baseline points were used in our data
analysis to adjust for the effects of pressure differentials caused by natural wind and
thermal forces.
Pie Consulting & Engineering Page 5 of 8 CO115206.10 (020)
Air Barrier Performance Testing Report Foothills Mall Block 10, Fort Collins, Colorado
F. During the test, the pressure differential and volumetric airflow were measured at 20-
second intervals using digital gauges. Interior pressure -monitoring stations were used to
confirm that the pressure differentials within the test zone were within 10-percent of each
other, in accordance with the Protocol. The interior pressure check was accomplished at a
pressure differential of 50-Pa.
G. Following the test, post -baseline pressures were recorded at each fan station. As with the
pre -baseline pressures, each baseline pressure represented an average pressure value
taken over a period of 120 seconds. Interior and exterior temperatures were measured to
determine average air density and viscosity values.
PERFORMANCE TEST RESULTS
A. The baseline pressures recorded during testing were averaged to arrive at a single baseline
pressure at each fan setup location. This baseline pressure was subtracted from each
recorded pressure reading. These values were then corrected for standard conditions (68-
degrees Fahrenheit at zero elevation).
B. Pie measured and recorded 24 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 outliers (readings outside the general range of data points
typically due to intermittent wind gusts) were removed to establish a clear, unambiguous
correlation between the measured pressure differentials and total system flows.
1. Linear regression and data analysis were conducted in accordance with ASTM
E 779 to determine the air leakage coefficients, Cp and Cd, at standard conditions
and the pressure exponents, np and nd, 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% 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% Cl 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.
Pie Consulting & Engineering Page 6 of 8 C0115206.10 (020)
Air Barrier Performance Testing Report Foothills Mall Block 10, Fort Collins, Colorado
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
685.5
Pressurization exponent, n
0.574
Q at 75-Pa (CFM)
8,171.1
Air Barrier Envelope Area ft2
33,272
Air Leakage (CFM/ft2envelo a at 75-Pa)
0.246
95 % Confidence Limits CFM/ft2 envelope at 75-Pa)
0.245 - 0.246
Upper Limit Air Leakage (CFM/ft2 envelo e at 75-Pa)
0.246
Correlation Value, R2
0.997
Equivalent Leakage Area, E LA (ft2) at 75-Pa
6.2
Measured air tightness above the Protocol requirement of
0.25CFM/ft2 envelo e (%), or PASS
PASS
Figure 2 - Pressurization Air Tightness Test Results
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
741.8
Depressurization Pressure exponent, na
0.561
Q at 75-Pa (CFM)
8,385.8
Air Barrier Envelope Area ft2
33,272
Air Leakage (CFM/ft2 envelo a at 75-Pa)
0.252
95 % Confidence Limits CFM/ft2 envelo e @ 75-Pa)
0.249 - 0.255
Upper Limit Air Leakage CFM/ft2 envelo e @ 75-Pa
0.255
Correlation Value, R2
0.988
Equivalent Leakage Area, E LA ft2
6.4
Measured air tightness above the Protocol requirement of
0.25CFM/ft2envelo e (%), or PASS
PASS
Figure 3 - Depressurization Air Tightness Test Results
G. The equivalent leakage areas (EgLA) listed in Figures 2 and 3 are 6.2-ft2 and 6.4-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 7 of 8 C0115206.10 (020)
Air Barrier Pertormance Testing Report Foothills Mall Block 10,Fort Collins,Colorado �
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 opuuons 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 availaUle, Pie Consulting & Engineering retains the right to
revise and supplement this report accordingly.
Sincerely,
Pie Consulting & Engineering
`� _--�-•
Prepared by,
Scott Terry
Building Science Specialist
�o�pD01lCF,ys
c,o��y,'��ts4�tiT°a,�'�
o � o
o� �o
e
$ �6�� o
o@.
,w'�,
�9��FSS/ONAL����
Reviewed Uy,
Stuart Mitchell,P.E.
Project Manager-Building Science Group
AST:SKM:sg
Attachments: Attachment A: Air Tightness Performance Testing Raw Data and Analysis
Attachment B: Digital Photographs
Attachment C: Retrotec Calibration Data
K:12015\C0115206101Task 020-Block 10\OS Reports Attachments Submittals12016-01-18-020-FHMbIk10-ABTrpt.docx
Pie Consulting&Engineering Page 8 of 8 C0115206.10(020)