ᐅ Blower Door Test Result (n50 = 1.13)

Silent802 schrieb:
Exactly, not good... I need to be able to do something to improve the value, right?!

First, I would calculate how much energy is actually being "lost" due to the "leakage." Then, project that amount over the planned service life of the house using realistic heating cost increases. That will give you a total sum you could potentially spend on improvement measures. A rough estimate.

Silent802 schrieb:
I was thinking about hiring an engineer from the city to look for more leaks...

Let’s assume a cost-effective building physicist without measuring equipment. They probably won’t charge less than €120 per hour. For my modest energy-saving regulation-compliant home, that equals about three monthly gas installments.

Silent802 schrieb:
Yes, KfW 40 with a ventilation system. Yes, exactly, not good... I should be able to do something to improve the rating, right?!

I don’t understand: the noticeable and visible defects are corrected during the blower door test, or at least identified and then fixed afterward.
In our case, for example, the drywall contractor sealed the holes during the process. A roller shutter box was leaking and was fixed later. The missing window sills definitely also boosted the rating somewhat. Nevertheless, an average good value was achieved.

BauBob7 schrieb:
I don’t want to dive into the standards now, but Google tells me that the maximum value would be 1.0 for new buildings with mechanical ventilation systems!?

Wasn’t it 1.5? Hm...
As far as I know, it’s only pass or fail. In the latter case, a second blower door test is carried out after locating and fixing the leaks.

Do you already have window sills?
Would there be any other consequences regarding KfW 40 or something for you, or are you just annoyed by it?

Our value during construction in 2017 was KfW 55 with ventilation at 0.51, without any special measures. I would say anything under 1.0 is good. Below 0.5 would be considered passive house.

I think the value is poor and would have the errors investigated and, while it’s still possible, fixed... Don’t let them brush you off—this is like passing an exam with a 4.0 grade...

Snowy36 schrieb:
this is like passing an exam with a grade of 4.0...

As long as the quality criterion is simply pass or fail, it doesn’t really matter in practice whether you passed with a grade of 1.0 or 4.0.
As long as the limit value (1.5 is familiar to me here as well, without wanting to insist on this based on current standards) is met, everything is fine. Unless you have made special agreements beyond that, I see no reason or basis to have your construction supervisor make any corrections that are not defects.

ypg schrieb:
I don’t understand: the noticeable and visible defects are supposed to be fixed during the blower door test

Obviously, that didn’t happen, otherwise the value would be different. The blower door test was passed, but the value indicates possible defects.

We passed twice because I conducted two tests.

@TE: First, check whether the chimney was sealed.