Abstract

The building airtightness is essential to achieve a high energy performance. In most countries however, it is not mandatory to measure the airtightness. In the Netherlands it is common practice to just take several samples in a housing project. These samples do not give a good indication for all the buildings in a project. It is therefore important to measure the airtightness of all the buildings. Current methods for airtightness measuring are too expensive and time consuming to make this feasible. A method with a new device, the AirTightnessTester (ATT), is proposed. By using the buildings ventilation system, a reduction in price and time can be achieved. The ATT measures in compliance with RESNET-380-2016. The ATT makes use of the ventilation system of the building. It will be explained when and how the ATT makes use of a ventilation system. We have looked at the different ventilation systems that are commonly used in new housing projects in somewhat more detail to analyse the feasibility of our method in practice. It is concluded that several systems can be used as they are now. Some ventilation systems cannot be turned on and off easily. For these ventilation systems a setting switching method has been developed. The theory behind this method, and some preliminary results using this method will be presented. To validate measurements with the ATT, comparisons have been done to the blower door. Preliminary results were already presented during the 2018 AIVC conference but further validation was still necessary. The measurements with the blower door are multi-point measurements and are all done in compliance with ISO9972. The measurements done with the ATT are all single-point measurements. The comparisons are made with the blower door, because since it is the most used method for airtightness measuring. To get a fair comparison, the uncertainty of both methods is taken into account. Overall the blower door and the ATT give show similar results for the airtigthness. In 23 of the 37 measurements it was found that the measured air leakage with the ATT was slightly higher than the measurement compared to the result with the blower door. When switching between a low and a high flow, it was found that 10 out of 12 measurements with the ATT were higher.

摘要

建筑物的气密性对于实现高能源性能至关重要。然而，在大多数国家，测量气密性不是强制性的。在荷兰，通常的做法是在一个住房项目中抽取几个样本。这些样本并不能很好地表明项目中的所有建筑物。因此，测量所有建筑物的气密性非常重要。目前的气密性测量方法过于昂贵和耗时，无法实现。提出了一种使用新设备 AirTightnessTester (ATT) 的方法。通过使用建筑物通风系统，可以降低价格和时间。ATT 措施符合 RESNET-380-2016。ATT 利用建筑物的通风系统。将解释 ATT 何时以及如何使用通风系统。我们更详细地研究了新住宅项目中常用的不同通风系统，以分析我们的方法在实践中的可行性。得出的结论是，有几个系统可以像现在一样使用。某些通风系统无法轻松开启和关闭。对于这些通风系统，已经开发了一种设置切换方法。将介绍该方法背后的理论以及使用该方法的一些初步结果。为了验证 ATT 的测量结果，已对鼓风机门进行了比较。初步结果已经在 2018 年 AIVC 会议期间提出，但仍需要进一步验证。鼓风机门的测量是多点测量，均符合 ISO9972 标准。使用 ATT 完成的测量都是单点测量。与鼓风机门进行比较，因为它是最常用的气密性测量方法。为了得到公平的比较，两种方法的不确定性都被考虑在内。总体而言，鼓风机门和 ATT 给出的气密性结果相似。在 37 次测量中的 23 次中发现，与使用鼓风机门的结果相比，使用 ATT 测量的漏气量略高于测量值。当在低流量和高流量之间切换时，发现使用 ATT 进行的 12 次测量中有 10 次更高。总体而言，鼓风机门和 ATT 给出的气密性结果相似。在 37 次测量中的 23 次中发现，与使用鼓风机门的结果相比，使用 ATT 测量的漏气量略高于测量值。当在低流量和高流量之间切换时，发现使用 ATT 进行的 12 次测量中有 10 次更高。总体而言，鼓风机门和 ATT 给出的气密性结果相似。在 37 次测量中的 23 次中发现，与使用鼓风机门的结果相比，使用 ATT 测量的漏气量略高于测量值。当在低流量和高流量之间切换时，发现使用 ATT 进行的 12 次测量中有 10 次更高。