鼓风机门测试和等效泄漏区域
Ted Cummings|Posted inEnergy Efficiency and Durability在
In reading Dr. Lstiburek’s book Series “Builders Guide to… ‘name your climate'”, I concluded (though it was never specified quite clearly) that for 1000 CFM at 50 Pa the EqLA was 1 square foot. That would be about 7 CFM50 for each square inch of EqLA.
最近，在一篇文章的光线施工杂志的编辑中，用于在一个非常紧凑的房子里进行鼓风机门测试。结论是，50-65 CFM50等同于大约2½平方米的EQLA。在......每平方英寸的EQLA，约为23 CFM50。
It doesn’t seem that both can be correct – 7 vs. 23. Is there a consensus of what CFM50 equates to a square inch of EqLA?
GBA Detail Library
由气候和房屋部件组织的一千个建筑细节的集合
Search and download construction details
答复
泰德，
I'm waiting to hear back from the technical help hotline at the Energy Conservatory for an answer to your question.
While we're waiting, here's info froman NREL document- 这个信息让我怀疑答案是，“这很复杂。”
The reference in this document to 4 Pascals (instead of 10 Pascals) leads me to suspect that the author is confusing "equivalent leakage area" with "effective leakage area."
“等效泄漏面积（ELA）被定义为校准孔的面积，该孔的区域将在房屋处于4 PA的压力下具有相同的空气流速。因此，ELA是所有的估计在建筑物中泄漏。可以从多点鼓风机门测试的结果计算ELA。这通常是使用带有TECTITE软件的笔记本电脑进行的，以自动控制鼓风机门以进行多点测试。通常，8个中的100个数据点在15到50 pa之间的不同压力用于确定测试家庭的压力和泄漏率之间的关系。ELA基于4 pa压力差的泄漏率，这通过曲线适合于鼓风机门测试确定各种压力的数据。然后，ELA可以与家庭现场的天气状况结合使用，以在特定时间模拟天然ACH，估计长期或年度渗透率。“
泰德，
Here's the answer, to the best of my knowledge, from research I did for an Energy Design Update article many years ago.
Equivalent leak area (EqLA) is the area of a theoretical sharp-edged hole in the building envelope that would leak as much as all of the building’s actual holes at a pressure difference of 10 Pa. EqLA (in square inches) approximately equals cfm50 divided by 10.
Effective leak area (ELA) is the area of a theoretical hole (with rounded edges) in the building envelope that would leak as much as all of the building’s actual holes at a pressure difference of 4 Pa. ELA (in square inches) approximately equals cfm50 divided by 18.
简短的答案是，不可能确定从CFM50的泄漏的实际泄漏区域，因为不同形状的泄漏路径，但相同的区域使不同的空气通过。具有更多数据（CFM4，CFM10，CFM25和CFM50将是与之合作的好的数据集，并且可以获得更准确的估计。但是，很少有理由试图准确估计泄漏区域。我知道要计算ELA的唯一原因是了解你在做空气密封或者与房主沟通时，你正在寻找多少洞或你正在寻找多少洞。对于任何一个，粗略估计都很好。
That helps a lot; and I'm so glad you didn't stop after answer #1.
I suspect there's confusion out there about what someone means when "ELA" is used. Does it mean Equivalent or Effective Leakage Area. Even when the terms (abbreviations) Equivalent (EqLA) or Effective (ELA) are used, one wonders whether the author is using them appropriately; knows the difference; or even that there is a difference.
我想，最后的差异是不大的实际重要性。
谢谢 。
更多关于等效泄漏面积：保罗莫琳的能源保温师刚通过电子邮件向我发出此信息：
"An older blower door manual shows that the formula for Equivalent Leakage Area = 0.2939 x CFM10. Also attached is Appendix D of the old manual that shows some test results and those results graphed on log log graph paper.
"Here are some ways to calculate CFM10:
•最明显的方式是在10个Pascals的PR / FL模式下执行单点测试。然而;在刮风的日子，很难获得准确的CFM10。
•使用0.65的默认流量指数进行单点CFM50测试并将CFM50转换为CFM10。CFM10 = CFM50 x（10/50）^ 0.65。这将更加准确，但是0.65个流量指数是默认号码，可能不是您正在测试的房屋的正确流量指数。
•在PR / FL模式下录制多点鼓风机门测试，并在日志日志图纸上绘制点。通过点绘制一条线来计算CFM10。这是旧的学校方式（在计算机之前BC）。
•使用TECTITE软件进行多点测试，让软件计算实际流量指数和等效泄漏区域。这将为您提供最准确的结果。“
Before anyone gets bent out of shape due to apparent contradictions in the formulas provided, make sure that you note that some of these formulas refer to cfm @ 50 pascals, and others refer to cfm @ 10 pascals.
其实我想知道的是相关的to a new construction home that I will begin soon. My builder (with whom I enjoy a good mutual constructive relationship) typically builds HERS 29-31 houses, without PV, and is always pursuing the next lower number. I visit his projects regularly and tease him about the size of the hole (EqLA) he left in the last home, by wearing a patch depicting the size of the hole. This is by way of encouraging him to push the envelope especially when he gets to my home, where the goal is to achieve 0.1ACH50 (the decimal is correct) though I realize that will be very difficult.
Unfortunately there appears to be a lower limit in the HERS system below which lowering the leakage no longer earns any additional lowering of the HERS score. For my builder, pursuing a lower HERS score means affecting other elements of construction and insulation where the economics of triple paned windows or higher levels of insulation don't seem to make much sense. Without PV, a HERS score of around 28 or 29 seems to be the economic threshold around here, upper CZ-4, in southern Indiana.
My impulse is to say that the PH target of 0.6 ACH50 is an excellent goal, but 1.0 ACH50 is good and achievable with reasonable design and construction practices, and will result in an efficient, comfortable, durable house if I haven’t done something stupid. [“(Stupidity avoidance continues to be an important aspect of building science.)” – R. Baldwin] Clearly air-sealing is a major key to any PGH or better building, but eventually other design aspects are more important to making a pleasant home than chasing the last theoretical square-edged hole in the envelope. And it’s probably reasonable to limit HERS scoring at some point for theoretical leakage rates, especially since holes may not leak much in real life, depending on where they are in the envelope.
但听起来你与你的建筑师有良好的关系，所以我不会说什么。