|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Current Approaches for Mechanical Ventilation of Houses
Construction Technology Update No. 15, May 1998 by J.C. Haysom and J.T. Reardon This Update, the second of two on mechanical ventilation systems for houses, describes current approaches to design and installation. It also examines the distribution problem and looks at some of the shortcomings of current approaches and how they might be overcome. Current ApproachesCurrent approaches to the mechanical ventilation of houses are found in the CSA Standard F326, "Residential Mechanical Ventilation Systems," and in the National Building Code of Canada 1995. CAN/CSA-F326 CAN/CSA-F326 is generally written in performance terms (that is, it states what must be accomplished rather than how to accomplish it) and therefore provides a great deal of flexibility with regard to the system configuration needed for compliance. This standard addresses the pertinent issues as follows: Control Capacity Table 1. Ventilation Capacity
Distribution Sound level Interference with other systems Interference with the building envelope As well as limiting the flow of air, F326 also places a limit of 10 Pa on the positive pressure that can be brought about by the discrepancy between the ventilation system intake and exhaust flows. This requirement is necessary because in a very tight house, even if the flow discrepancy criterion described above is satisfied, there is still the possibility of creating a high positive pressure in the house, which can lead to very high flow at individual leaks, causing local interstitial condensation problems. 1995 National Building Code These prescriptive alternatives address the issues identified in the description of the ideal system as follows: Control Capacity Distribution
Figure 1. Ventilation system configuration for a house with a forced-air heating system The main features of the configuration for a house with forced-air heating are: The principal exhaust fan. The principal exhaust fan is expected to provide a relatively low level of ventilation — 50% of the minimum required capacity of the system (such that it can run continuously without excessive noise and without excessive energy penalty). Its control is placed in a central location, such as a living room, family room or hallway, and it is wired directly to the furnace circulation fan so that whenever the principal exhaust fan is turned on, the circulation fan is also activated. The outdoor air duct. The use of heating ducts to distribute outdoor air. The supplementary fans.
Figure 2. Ventilation system configuration for a house without a forced-air heating system The main features of the configuration for houses without forced-air heating systems are: The principal exhaust fan. The supply fan. The outdoor air duct. The duct heater. The use of ventilation ducts to distribute outdoor air. The supplementary fans. Sound level Interference with other systems The portion of the system that operates infrequently, for short periods of time, (known as the "high rate or episodic" portion) includes the supplemental exhaust fans, which operate when the principal exhaust fan is not able to provide an adequate rate of air change. When operating in this mode, the system is unbalanced, although it does not usually depressurize the house significantly unless other exhaust devices (e.g., a clothes dryer) are used at the same time. However, if there are other large exhaust devices (e.g., a stovetop barbecue) in the house, high levels of depressurization can occur if these devices are operated on their own. For this reason, in houses with spillage-susceptible combustion appliances, any such large exhaust devices (i.e., greater than 75 L/s exhaust capacity) must be provided with make-up air. In the past, the NBC and other codes and standards tended to rely on the passive supply of make-up air through openings provided for this purpose. This is no longer felt to be a reliable approach for a simple, prescriptively described system because it does not have sophisticated depressurization controls (such as those provided in F326). According to the 1995 NBC, make-up air must be provided by a supply fan that is automatically activated whenever the exhaust device requiring make-up air is activated. If spillagesusceptible combustion equipment is not used, make-up air does not have to be provided. Even at the relatively low level of depressurization likely to occur when the ventilation system is operated at its "high rate or episodic" level, an open fireplace operating in its "die-down," or smoldering, stage can spill products of combustion into the house. In the absence of more sophisticated controls to prevent such levels of depressurization (such as those provided in F326), the only available safeguard is the installation of a carbon monoxide detector in any room that has an open solid- fuelburning device. Where this is not a viable option, the prescriptively described alternatives must be abandoned in favour of a system that complies with F326. Interference with the building envelope The Distribution ProblemIn the two configurations described above, the distribution of outdoor air to the rooms or spaces where it is needed is relatively simple in houses with forced-air heating systems but somewhat more problematic in houses with other types of heating systems. In the configuration shown in Figure 2, ducts must be added to a house that would otherwise not need them. For this reason, IRC researchers are investigating alternative methods of ensuring proper distribution of outdoor air in houses without forced-air heating systems. To date, the findings can be summarized as follows:
Heat RecoveryBecause the cold air entering the house must be heated, indoor/outdoor air exchange, whether provided by leakage or by mechanical ventilation, brings with it an energy and a cost penalty. In the past, when this air exchange took place without the whirring of fans, people tended to ignore the energy cost or simply attribute it to the need for the house to "breathe." But once there is a greater awareness of the air exchange taking place (by means of a mechanical ventilation system) and of the possibilities the system offers for exercising some control over the ventilation of the house, there is a tendency to view the energy cost with some alarm and to seek some means of reducing it. One way to do this is simply to turn off the ventilation system, or to use it less; however, this can result in poor indoor air quality, mould on interior building surfaces and interstitial condensation in the building envelope. Another approach is to incorporate a means of recovering heat from outgoing indoor air and transferring it to the incoming outdoor air. The heat recovery ventilator is the most commonly used equipment with this capability. (Figure 3 shows how it can be used to satisfy the requirements of the NBC.) However, ventilation systems with heat recovery capability inevitably cost more than those without. Therefore, this extra cost needs to be weighed against the cost of the energy saved.
Figure 3. Ventilation system configuration with a heat recovery ventilator for a house with a forcedair heating system This weighing of costs has been done in the Model National Energy Code for Houses, which includes regionally sensitive requirements for all parts of Canada. One such requirement deals with whether or not heat recovery must be incorporated into mechanical ventilation systems. In deciding whether or not heat recovery should be required in a particular region, the committee that developed this code employed extensive life-cycle cost analyses based on regional energy and construction costs. The results can be summed up as follows:
The Future of Mechanical Ventilation of HousesIn time, mechanical ventilation systems will likely approach the ideal (see Construction Technology Update No. 14), as demand-controlled ventilation becomes more practical and economical as a result of research and development. At the same time, it is possible that the amount of indoor/outdoor air exchange required will decrease. This could come about through the introduction of limits on pollutant emissions from building materials and furnishings. However, our ability to identify pollutants of concern and to set safe and practical limits on emissions is still very limited. Finally, there is growing evidence that houses being built today are even tighter than those tested in the 1989 survey. In light of this evidence, the continued viability of the prescriptively described solutions in the NBC for houses that incorporate spillage-susceptible combustion appliances will have to be re-examined. References1. ASHRAE 62-1989, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA. 2. Standard CAN/CSA-F326-M91, Residential Mechanical Ventilation Systems. Canadian Standards Association, Etobicoke, ON. 3. National Building Code of Canada, 1995. Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa. 4. 1989 Survey of Airtightness of New, Merchant Builder Houses. Haysom, J.C., Reardon, J.T., and R. Monsour. Indoor Air '90: The Fifth International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate, v. 4, Toronto, 1990. 5. Residential Air System Design. Heating Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Institute of Canada (HRAI), Islington, ON, 1986. 6. Complying with Residential Ventilation Requirements in the 1995 National Building Code. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Ottawa, 1996. 7. Airtightness and Energy Efficiency of New Conventional and R-2000 Housing in Canada, 1997. Canada Centre for Mineral and Energy Technology, Natural Resources Canada, Ottawa. Mr. John Haysom is a senior technical advisor with the Codes and Evaluation Program of the National Research Council's Institute for Research in Construction. Dr. J.T. Reardon is a research officer with the Indoor Environment Program of the National Research Council's Institute for Research in Construction. © 1998 National Research Council of Canada |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||