Appropriate testing, whether it is of materials or products, is at the core of successful projects. Material and product testing have distinct considerations, and both are explored in this article.
|
For many years, designers, contractors, and owners have understood the value of a systematic approach to ensure the mechanical and electrical systems in buildings meet the owner’s needs. This approach is known as the commissioning (Cx) process. As a result of implementing the Cx process into the design and construction of buildings, defect claims and litigation related to these commissioned systems are relatively low. The building enclosure (sometimes referred to as the building envelope), however, has often been excluded in the Cx process. Unlike mechanical and electrical systems, poorly performing building enclosures are the most common causes for construction claims and/or construction defect litigation.1
|
When properly applied, tests can yield valuable insight into the installed performance of systems, aid investigators in determining the cause of a failure, or help to determine if a product is performing to its intended level.
|
Up until the 2008 edition of American Architectural Manufacturers Association/Window and Door Manufacturers Association/Canadian Standards Association (AAMA/WDMA/CSA) 101/I.S.2/A440, North American Fenestration Standard/Specification for Windows, Doors, and Skylights (NAFS), there were five performances classes of windows with differing requirements for test pressures, allowed leakage rates, and other variables. This sidebar discusses the current four types, and their minimum performance grades.
|
Laboratory testing of fenestration products to the North American Fenestration Standard/Specification for Windows, Doors, and Skylights (NAFS) verifies the performance of a specimen of the fenestration product itself.
|
|
|
