Show simple item record

Visit the Energy Systems Laboratory Homepage.

dc.creatorMcIlvaine, J.
dc.creatorBeal, D.
dc.creatorMoyer, N.
dc.creatorChasar, D.
dc.creatorChandra, S.
dc.date.accessioned2007-04-19T19:02:24Z
dc.date.available2007-04-19T19:02:24Z
dc.date.issued2004
dc.identifier.otherESL-HH-04-05-10
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/4608
dc.description.abstractThis Florida Solar Energy Center (FSEC) study, conducted under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy's Building America Industrialized Housing Partnership (BAIHP), compares mastic sealed duct systems to tape sealed systems by showing measured total duct leakage (CFM25TOTAL and QnTOTAL) and/or measured leakage to the outside (CFM25OUT and QnOUT) in 190 manufactured home floors or home sections. All manufacturers were considering or actively working toward achieving duct leakage below 3% of the conditioned floor area (QnOUT=0.03), consistent with Energy Star Manufactured Homes criteria. Previous field tests suggest that CFM25OUT accounts for about half of CFM25TOTAL. These data show that achieving CFM25TOTAL=6% during production was generally correlated with achieving CFM25OUT=3% in mastic sealed systems, but less reliably with taped systems. Cost for achieving duct tightness goals range from $4 to $8 including duct testing on the assembly lineen
dc.format.extent118245 bytesen
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherEnergy Systems Laboratory (http://esl.tamu.edu)
dc.publisherTexas A&M University (http://www.tamu.edu)
dc.titleAchieving Airtight Ducts in Manufactured Housingen


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record