ᐅ New Energy Saving Regulation 2009 Blower Door Tests

Created on: 18 Dec 2009 17:13
B
bernd17
Hello,
we are currently in the process of building a house. At the moment, we are dealing with the new Energy Saving Ordinance 2009 and the necessary blower door tests. Can someone give us advice on what exactly to pay attention to and which reputable providers are available on the market?

Thank you very much for your support.
K
KPS
22 Dec 2009 10:32
There have been no changes in the measurement procedure or limit values in the 2009 Energy Saving Ordinance compared to the previous regulations.

According to DIN V 18599-2 Table 4, buildings are classified into categories I-IV based on their airtightness.

For comparison purposes within the Energy Saving Ordinance calculation, the reference building is based on category I. However, the building to be calculated could potentially be assigned category II if the Qp limit value is mathematically undercut (even without a blower door test).
P
parcus
22 Dec 2009 12:21
Since the EP mentions "necessary," I assumed it referred more to legal aspects.
For example, whether the decision is not yet legally binding and if the builder still has options.
In that case, paragraphs $28(1) or $28(4) would initially apply to me.
If approved according to the 2007 Energy Saving Ordinance, then the 2009 Energy Saving Ordinance might not be fulfilled.

If the 2009 Energy Saving Ordinance applies, then the situation is clear.

Best regards
K
KPS
27 Dec 2009 07:11
parcus schrieb:

Since the EP mentions "necessary," I assumed it referred more to legal aspects.

Legally, there has (unfortunately) never been an obligation to carry out an airtightness test.

However, such a "necessity" has existed since the Energy Saving Ordinance 2002 whenever the possible bonus for it was claimed in the energy performance documentation.

Even if the building has a mechanical ventilation system installed, a differential pressure leak detection is strongly recommended to ensure the overall ventilation quality of the building.

Even if none of the assumptions above apply, I can fully understand the term "necessary blower door tests" from the perspective that the client considers this quality check reasonable and essential. If applicable, this "necessity" may also arise from the terms of the signed construction contract, in which airtightness requirements were explicitly defined... something I would definitely recommend in any case! 🙂
P
parcus
27 Dec 2009 12:03
@KPS
That is probably why the words necessity and obligation have different meanings. 😉