An investigation into the efficacy of the pulse method of airtightness testing in new build and Passivhaus properties

Seddon, Harriet; Zhong, Hua

doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2023.113270

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This method typically works within a range of 10-60 Pa to minimize disturbances from external wind or buoyancy. However, this method has the drawback that the leakage of the opening gap cannot be measured as it is installed in the opening frame without any leakage [16]. Furthermore, the actual flow rate through the fan is influenced by both fan speed and space leakage, which necessitates pre-calibration.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Situ Airtightness Measurement Using Compressed Air Flow Characteristics

Han,

Jeong,

Lee

et al. 2023

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The airtightness of a building has a significant impact on energy savings, structural longevity, and indoor air quality for occupants. Therefore, it is essential to accurately measure the airtightness of buildings, though the widely used fan pressurization method suffers from several shortcomings. For this reason, transient methods have recently emerged to assess airtightness by monitoring pressure changes over time, but studies using transient methods in this field are rare. In this study, we selected three representative buildings to conduct field tests to verify the practical applicability of the improved transient method. To verify the results of the transient method, we conducted a comparison experiment with the blower door test: a widely used measurement method. When measuring the effective leakage area, the average standard deviation of the transient method was 0.903 cm2, which was much smaller than the blower door test result of 1.488 cm2. In addition, the recorded standard errors ranged from 0.197 cm2 to 0.816 cm2 for the transient method and from 0.269 cm2 to 1.801 cm2 for the blower door test. Notably, the transitional method was more reproducible than the blower door test while showing similar accuracy. Given these results, it is expected that the improved transitional method can be used to evaluate airtightness performance in the field.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%