English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Purpose Accurate values for infiltration rate are important to reliably estimate heat losses from buildings. Infiltration rate is rarely measured directly, and instead is usually estimated using algorithms or data from fan pressurisation tests. However, there is growing evidence that the commonly used methods for estimating infiltration rate are inaccurate in UK dwellings. Furthermore, most prior research was conducted during the winter season or relies on single measurements in each dwelling. Infiltration rates also affect the likelihood and severity of summertime overheating. The purpose of this work is to measure infiltration rates in summer, to compare this to different infiltration estimation methods, and to quantify the differences. Design/methodology/approach Fifteen whole house tracer gas tests were undertaken in the same test house during spring and summer to measure the whole building infiltration rate. Eleven infiltration estimation methods were used to predict infiltration rate, and these were compared to the measured values. Most, but not all, infiltration estimation methods relied on data from fan pressurisation (blower door) tests. A further four tracer gas tests were also done with trickle vents open to allow for comment on indoor air quality, but not compared to infiltration estimation methods. Findings The eleven estimation methods predicted infiltration rates between 64 and 208% higher than measured. The ASHRAE Enhanced derived infiltration rate (0.41 ach) was closest to the measured value of 0.25 ach, but still significantly different. The infiltration rate predicted by the “divide-by-20” rule of thumb, which is commonly used in the UK, was second furthest from the measured value at 0.73 ach. Indoor air quality is likely to be unsatisfactory in summer when windows are closed, even if trickle vents are open. Practical implications The findings have implications for those using dynamic thermal modelling to predict summertime overheating who, in the absence of a directly measured value for infiltration rate (i.e. by tracer gas), currently commonly use infiltration estimation methods such as the “divide-by-20” rule. Therefore, infiltration may be overestimated resulting in overheating risk and indoor air quality being incorrectly predicted. Originality/value Direct measurement of air infiltration rate is rare, especially multiple tests in a single home. Past measurements have invariably focused on the winter heating season. This work is original in that the tracer gas technique used to measure infiltration rate many times in a single dwelling during the summer. This work is also original in that it quantifies both the infiltration rate and its variability, and compares these to values produced by eleven infiltration estimation methods.

Evaluating methods for estimating whole house air infiltration rates in summer: implications for overheating and indoor air quality