Click To Edit Master Title StyleEnvelope Technology Research Team Webinar: Energy Savings Impact of Airtightness in U.S. Commercial Buildings

January 29, 20192:00 – 3:00 PM EST

Addressing Airtightness in Commercial Buildings

Welcome, Introductions ORNL Research: Airtightness of Commercial

Building Envelopes Dr. Diana Hun, ORNL Dr. Mahabir Bhandari, ORNL

Case Study Example: Arlington County, VA Commercial Building Enclosure Testing Jessica Abralind, Arlington County Philip Agee, Viridiant

Q&A

3

Which type of organization best describes you or the work you do? Building Owner/Manager Architect/Engineer Manufacturer Energy Service Providers Researcher/Academia

Poll Question 1

If your organization type isn’t listed, please type into your Questions Window the kind of organization you represent.

Building Envelope Tech Team Support

Building Envelope Technology Research Team

Connecting Better Buildings partners with advanced building envelope technology solutions

Melissa Lapsa, M.B.A.

Building Envelope Technical Team Lead

Mahabir Bhandari, Ph.D.

Building Envelope Tech Team Support

Simon Pallin, Ph.D.

Building Envelope Technical Lead

Caroline Hazard, M.S.

Technology verification studiesSpecification documentsCase studies and fact sheetsCalculators and analytic tools

A Unique and Diverse Team

Demonstration of high performance envelope technologies and solutions

Comprised of Better Buildings Partners and representatives from the design community, including A&E firms

BTO Emerging

Tech Other BBA Tech

Teams

Envelope Tech Team

ORNL

BTOCBI/HIT

BB Challenge

Industry Experts

Sister Labs

BB Alliance

GSA/ GPG

Trade Assoc.

Rating Orgs.

Join the Team!

6

• Adams 12• Allegheny County Community College• Arlington Initiative to Rethink Energy (AIRE)• Brevard County School Board• Clark Atlanta University• Cook County Bureau of Asset Mgmt• Emory University• exp US Services, Inc.• Green Dinosaur Inc.• Hersha Hospitality Mgmt• HOK• Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto• Legacy Health• MA Dept of Energy Resources• Walter P Moore

• More• Newmark Grubb Knight Frank• Parkway Schools• PEAC• SABEY Data Centers• Schmidt• SIM2

• Smart Building Strategies LLC• Tennessee Office of Energy Programs• Tishman Speyer • Turner Construction Company• US Army Corps of Engineers• z2zero

Members(includes: Building Owners/Mgrs, Property Managers, A&E, Construction/ Installers)

Join the Team!

7

• Air Barrier Assoc of America• American Institute of Architects• AppleBlossom Energy, Inc.• Argonne Nat’l Lab• Association for Energy Affordability• BA ConsulT• BROAD U.S.A. Inc.• Building Commissioning Assoc• Building Envelope Materials (BEM)• Burns & McDonnel• Cadmus Group• Covestro LLC• Dow• Dunsky Energy Consulting• EIFS Industry Members Association• Guardian Glass

• Humann Building Solutions• ICF• NanoPore• National Fenestration Rating Council• Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance• NRG Insulated Block• Owens Corning• QuadLock• Renovate by Berkowitz• Rmax Operating, LLC• SGH®• Sustainability Consultants LLC• UNIFRAX• USG Corporation• WJE

Friends(Includes: Researchers, Academics, Trade Associations, Energy Service Providers, Manufacturers, Subject

Matter Experts)

Collaboration: the Envelope Tech Team

Build awareness with guidance and information on envelope technology solutions

Conduct envelope technology verification studies

Offer technical assistance for envelope projects

Engage and support Members in efforts to accelerate adoption of building envelope technologies

To join, email Melissa Lapsa: lapsamv@ornl.gov

9

How familiar or experienced are you with air leakage testing in commercial buildings? No or little experience

(e.g., this is all new to me) Some experience

(e.g., I’ve specified it for my buildings, I’m aware of it, but I don’t do it a lot)

Very experienced (e.g., its required for my buildings, its part of the work I do)

Other – Please type your response in to the chat window

Poll Question 2

ORNL is managed by UT-Battelle, LLC for the US Department of Energy

Airtightness of Commercial Building Envelopes:Research update

Diana Hun, PhDSubprogram Manager for Building EnvelopesBuilding Envelope and Urban Systems Research Group

Mahabir Bhandari, PhDR&D StaffBuilding Envelope and Urban Systems Research Group

29 January 2019

11

Commercial Building Windows and Envelope6 Quads of energy (DOE 2014)

Air leakage20%

Windows (conduction)

22%

Foundation10%

Walls25%

Roofs16%

Windows(solar heat gain) 7%

Whole building air leakage rate not mandated in most of the country

12

Whole Building Airtightness Requirements

Specified by Code / Standard / Program Whole Building Test Required

Air leakage rate (cfm/ft2) at 75 Pa

Most cities and states 2012 and newer IECC Optional <0.4

ASHRAE 90.1-2016 Optional <0.4

Seattle, WA 2015 Seattle Energy Code Yes <0.3 (optional)

Washington State 2015 Washington State Energy Code Yes <0.4 (optional)

New York City NYC Energy Code Yes Comply w/ dept. rules

General Services Administration PBS-P100 (GSA 2014) Yes

Tier 1: <0.40Tier 2: <0.15Tier 3: <0.10

US Army Corps of Engineers USACE Air Leakage Test Protocol Yes <0.25

Building owner ASHRAE 189.1-2014 Yes <0.25

PHIUS+ 2015 Yes <0.08

USGBC LEED Yes See ASHRAE 90.1

13

Material and Assembly TestsASTM E283, E1677 or E2357

8ft × 8ft Test Wall

ASTM 21783.3ft × 3.3ft Test Specimen

14

Whole Building Test

15

Stakeholders’ Input

16

Owners of Privately-Owned Buildings

Reluctance to embrace blower door tests• Tenants typically pay for utility bills

• Utility bill not top priority among tenants when choosing rental space

• Owners may not keep buildings >10 years

• Owners may not get higher rent from lower utility bills

17

Construction Industry

Reluctance to embrace blower door tests• Test cost

• Shutdown time to conduct test– Potential solution: night or weekend tests

• Potential delays to find and fix problems– Potential solution: start with optional airtightness rates (Seattle and WA)

18

Blower Door Test Consultants

• Availability varies based on demand

• ~10 hours for single-story, 35,000 ft2 building

• Conduct tests at night or during weekends

• Certification program– None available– In favor if demand picks up– Perhaps one certified team member

19

Blower Door Test Consultants (cont.)Ways to Decrease Cost and Execution Time

• Either pressurization or depressurization test

• Early involvement of blower door/envelope consultant

• Equipment– Wireless pressure gauges– More powerful blower door fans

• Effective HVAC mechanical dampers

20

Blower Door Test Cost

Estimates vary with building complexity, building size and distance to site

Estimate from Hart et al. (2015)

Cost/ft2 = 268 (floor area)-0.69 Floor Area

(ft2)Cost/floor area

($/ft2)Cost ($)

5,000 0.75 3,800

10,000 0.47 4,700

25,000 0.25 6,200

50,000 0.15 7,700

100,000 0.1 9,500

200,000 0.06 11,800

21

Energy Savings Potential : Airtightness

22

National Energy Savings Potential : Methodology

• Savings are based on 7 selected DOE commercial prototype building* models

• Three infiltration rates (at 0.3 in. water or 75Pa)– 1.07 CFM/ft2 (Base) – NIST study– 0.4 CFM/ft2 (optional in most building

codes)– 0.25 CFM/ft2 (mandated by USACE)

• Representative cities in 16 climate zones

• Used COMTAM predicted detailed hourly infiltration rates in E+ to predict energy savings

• Calculated savings using weighted building areas for each building type in a particular climate zone

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%

Restaurant Fast FoodRestaurant Sit Down

Small HotelLarge Office

HospitalOutpatient Healthcare

Large HotelSmall Office

Primary SchoolStrip mall

Medium OfficeMid-Rise Apartment

High-Rise ApartmentSecondary SchoolStandalone Retail

Warehouse

% of total commercial buidlngs floor area

* https://www.energycodes.gov/development/commercial/prototype_models

23

National Energy Savings Potential : Results• Source Energy savings (TBtu)

– 238 TBtu : airtightness reduction from 1.07 CFM/ft2 to 0.4 CFM/ft2

– 284 TBtu : airtightness reduction from 1.07 CFM/ft2 to 0.25 CFM/ft2

0 50 100 150

Medium office

Standalone retail

Secondary school

Hospital

Large hotel

High-rise apartment

Mid-rise apartment

0.25 CFM/ft20.4 CFM/ft2

Source energy savings (TBtu)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 2A 2B 3A 3B 3C 4A 4B 4C 5A 5B 6A 6B 7 8

Ener

gy sa

ving

s (TB

tu)

Climate zone

0.4 CFM/ft2 0.25 CFM/ft2

24

Web based easy to use tool

User Inputs

• Location (52 locations)

• Building type (currently 7: standalone retail, med office, mid-rise and high rise apts, hospital, large hotel, secondary school)

• Floor area

• Envelope airtightness

• Energy rate

• Can switch between IP and SI units

• Descriptions of the input parameters are availablehttps://airleakage-

l l /#/

• Developed by ORNL, ABAA & NIST

• Estimates the potential energy and cost savings+ reduction in moisture transferfrom improvements in airtightness

• DOE prototype buildings

• E+ and CONTAM

25

Calculator output

Commercial Enclosure TestingARLINGTON COUNTY GOVERNMENT | SW & TE&O

JANUARY 2019

Technical DirectorViridiant

PHILIP AGEE

FORMING OUR PERSPECTIVE ON COMMERCIAL ENCLOSURES

▹EarthCraft Light Commercial

▹ASHRAE Level Commercial Audits

▹DOE Advanced Commercial Building Initiative

Green Building PlannerArlington County Government

JESSICA ABRALIND

VIRIDIANT | 2019

ARLINGTON COUNTY GOVERNMENT

VIRIDIANT | 2019

RECENT FACILITY SUSTAINABILITY POLICY UPDATE: more focus on building enclosure, prioritize passive energy saving strategies like insulation, air sealing

POLICY INCLUDES ECLC AS COMPLIANCE PATH because it fits smaller buildings better than LEED and includes a blower door test and air leakage performance standards

INTERDEPARTMENTAL WORKING GROUP including facilities maintenance, facilities design and construction, Parks, Fire, Housing, Inspection Services

WHY? energy and GHG reductions, cost savings, occupant comfort and healthSW TE+O – first time trying ECLC, first blower door test, first pre-construction occupant survey

CHALLENGE: design team was already engaged and ECLC, testing, and envelope improvements were not in the scope of work

COMMERCIAL ENCLOSURE DEFINITIONS

VIRIDIANT | 2019

Enclosure: part of any building that physically separates the exterior environment from the interior environment(s); (BSC, 2006)

Infiltration: the flow of outdoor air into a building through cracks and other unintentional openings and through the normal use of exterior doors for entrance and egress; (ASHRAE, 2009)

Exfiltration: is leakage of indoor air out of a building through through cracks and other unintentional openings; (ASHRAE, 2009)

Air barrier: a plane that one intends to be the sole, or at least the primary , resistor to airflow; (Straube and Burnett, 2005)

EarthCraft Light Commercial:

a regional green building certification program offering third-party recognition for environmentally responsible design and construction practices for small-scale commercial buildings in the Southeast; (Southface, 2018)

WHY COMMERCIAL ENCLOSURES?

VIRIDIANT | 2019

MEASURED ENERGY USE IN ECLC BUILDINGS

COMMERCIAL ENCLOSURES:<50K FT2

Impact heating and cooling loads

Thermal comfort

Indoor air quality

Building durability

SW & TE&O | ASSESSMENT

ASSESSMENT METHODS:

Thermal comfort survey

Enclosure test

Field Observations & thermal imaging

Energy Benchmarking

VIRIDIANT | 2019

CHARACTERIZING SITE AND BUILDING CONTEXT

CLIMATE ZONE 4A | ARLINGTON, VA

Elevation (ft.) 66

Mean Air Temperature (०F) 58.1

Mean Relative Humidity (%) 65.8

Daily Solar Ration (kWh/m2/d) 3.95

Atmospheric Pressure (kPa) 101.7

Mean Wind Speed (mph) 8.5

Earth Temperature (०F) 56

Heating Degree-Days, HDD (64.4 ०F) 4001

Cooling Degree-Days, CDD (64.4 ०F) 1524

CHARACTERISTIC SW & TEOBuilding Use Group B-1Building Conditioned Floor Area (Ft2) 15,234*Occupancy Load 130*

USER-CENTERED ASSESSMENT1

1ASHRAE 55-2010 Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy THERMAL ENVIRONMENT SATISFACTION SURVEY

VIRIDIANT | 2019

THERMAL COMFORT:

2-page survey

Likert scale, multiple choice

Why? Buildings are for people

Users are rich sources of data

ENCLOSURE TEST PLAN

VIRIDIANT | 2019

OVERVIEW:

Communication

Define test boundary

Identify power sources

Identify system locations

3-4 hrs of prep for the test

4 staff x 5 hrs: 20 hrs

ENCLOSURE TEST | RESULTS

PASCAL (PA) CUBIC FEET/MINUTE (CFM)-25 16,560-30 18,521-35 20,333-40 22,072-45 23,522-50 25,012-55 26,651-60 28,420-65 30,005-70 32,133-75 34,102

Envelope Leakage Ratio75: 1.03Coefficient of Determination (R2): 0.996

VIRIDIANT | 2019

ENCLOSURE OPPORTUNITIES

VIRIDIANT | 2019

ENCLOSURE OPPORTUNITIES

VIRIDIANT | 2019

ENCLOSURE PENETRATIONS

13 intentional holes

Sealed for test

Testing dampers

Photo credit: Mike Barcik, Southface Energy Institute

COMMON ENCLOSURE OPPORTUNITIES

LOW-COST AIRSEALNG

VIRIDIANT | 2019

COMMON ENCLOSURE OPPORTUNITIES | CAN LIGHTS

VIRIDIANT | 2019

COMMON ENCLOSURE OPPORTUNITIES | CAN LIGHTS (CONT.)

VIRIDIANT | 2019

COMMON ENCLOSURE OPPORTUNITIES | BYPASSES

Air impermeable material (e.g., foam, caulk, backer rod, sheathing)VIRIDIANT | 2019

Air impermeable material (e.g., foam, caulk, backer rod, sheathing)

COMMON ENCLOSURE OPPORTUNITIES | DRYWALL PENETRATIONS

VIRIDIANT | 2019

ENCLOSURE TESTING PLANNING

TESTING PLAN FOR A COMMERCIAL OFFICE

LESSONS LEARNED:

Someone needs to manage the ventilation system(s)

Commercial door assemblies are a pain (e.g., automatic openers and larger openings)

Record building conditions before testing

Bring extra equipment - (e.g., fans, trash bags, tape)

ENCLOSURE TESTING PLAN (CONT.)

LESSONS LEARNED:

Have a plan: pre-test meeting, equipment, team assignments

Hand-held radios

1 fan per circuit

Inter-zonal hoses

TESTING PLAN FOR A 6 UNIT RETAIL CENTER

COMMERCIAL ENCLOSURE TESTING

PRE-TEST CALIBRATION PROJECTING THE TEST

ENCLOSURE RETROFIT INVESTMENTS

WHAT GETS MEASURED, GETS MANAGED– PETER DRUCKER

RISK CAN BE MANAGED, UNCERTAINTY CANNOT BE MANAGED

VIRIDIANT | 2019

7

RESEARCH: COMMERCIAL ENCLOSURE TESTING2

© 2018 Philip AgeeADVANCED COMMERCIAL BUILDING INITIATIVEVIRIDIANT | 2019

2Sweet, M., Barcik, M., and Roberts, S. (2015). Impact of Envelope Airtightness on Small Commercial Building Performance. ASHRAE Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA. July 2015.

THANK YOU REFERENCES

Straube, J. (2006). Building Science Digests: the building enclosure. Retrieved from https://buildingscience.com/documents/digests/bsd-018-the-building-enclosure_revised

Straube, J. F., & Burnett, E. F. (2005). Building science for building enclosures. Building science press.

Standard, A. S. H. R. A. E. (2009). 90.1.(2009). Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings-ANSI/AHHRAE Standard, 90-1.

Sweet, M., Barcik, M., and Roberts, S. (2015). Impact of Envelope Airtightness on Small Commercial Building Performance. ASHRAE Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA. July 2015.

Technical DirectorViridiant

PHILIP AGEE

ASHRAE 55-2010 Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy THERMAL ENVIRONMENT SATISFACTION SURVEY

VIRIDIANT | 2019

JESSICA ABRALINDGreen Building PlannerArlington County Government

Questions and Answers

Please type your questions into the Chat Window

Check out the Envelope Tech Team Web Resources

Topic Areas Windows Walls Roofs

Resources Case Studies Calculators Design Guides Fact Sheets Toolkits …and more…

50

https://betterbuildingsinitiative.energy.gov/alliance/technology-solution/building-envelope

Join the Envelope Tech Research Team!

Building Owners

Building Managers

Architects and Engineers

Installers/ Builders

Researchers

Subject Matter Experts

Trade Associations Manufacturers

Energy Service Providers

Engage in R&D:• Addressing airtightness requirements• Investigating Building Enclosure Performance Metric

Email: lapsamv@ornl.gov

To join, email Melissa Lapsa: lapsamv@ornl.gov

Thank you!

Moderator Melissa Voss Lapsa, ORNL, lapsamv@ornl.gov