Not signed in (Sign In to the Green Building Forum)
Categories
- General
- Essential for Newbies
- Building Regulations and Standards
- Commercial build
- Data and monitoring
- Downshifting
- Energy Assessment
- Events and Courses
- Fundamentals
- Green Building Bible
- Green Building magazine
- Green Living
- Heating and cooling
- Housing - New Build
- Housing - Renovation
- Offers and wants
- Politics
- Products
- Renewable Energy
|
Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
Welcome to new Forum Visitors
Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications:: Apply now.
Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications:: Apply now.
-
- CommentAuthorPugliese
- CommentTimeAug 2nd 2012
Just had my initial SAP assessment back and it is fully compliant with L1A.
Should I be concerned that there are apparent errors like 6 x air changes when it should be 0.6 or the fact that it will all come out in the post build SAP, shall I just move on.
It has been mentioned on this forum that as a tool for assessing our heating needs it is not much good, so I am wondering if analysing it all and picking up all the errors is really worth it.
Also is there a list anywhere of target values for CO2 emissions, fabric heat loss and Space heating requirement per m² (kWh/m²/year)? It would be nice to understand how the house compares to the norm. -
- CommentAuthorEd Davies
- CommentTimeAug 2nd 2012
Posted By: PuglieseShould I be concerned that there are apparent errors like 6 x air changes when it should be 0.6
Any possibility that's due to confusion between target 50 Pa (blower-door test) and “in operation” rates? -
- CommentAuthorPugliese
- CommentTimeAug 2nd 2012
Posted By: Ed Davies
Posted By: PuglieseShould I be concerned that there are apparent errors like 6 x air changes when it should be 0.6
Any possibility that's due to confusion between target 50 Pa (blower-door test) and “in operation” rates?
No, just spoken to the assessor and they decided that 0.6 was very hard to achieve and by putting in 6 the house was still fully compliant, so gave us 'wriggle room' on the final SAP - I suppose it is a bit of forward thinking but they could have told me! -
- CommentAuthorTimber
- CommentTimeAug 2nd 2012
I suggest that the 0.6 ach vs 6 used in the SAP are different values. 0.6Ach isn't the same as 0.6 m3/m2/hr @ 50pa (AFAIK m3/m2 is used in SAP rather than ACH).
0.6m3/m2/hr @ 50pa would be quite hard to achieve unless you are super anal about detailing and on-site build quality. A SAP target of 2 or 3 might be better for design purposes, and aim to beat in the final test.
BUT this is all from memory, so someone might correct me on this.
1 to 4 of 4
