<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="6.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Iain S. Walker</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Max H. Sherman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark P. Modera</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Siegel, J.A.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Leakage Diagnostics, Sealant Longevity, Sizing and Technology Transfer in Residential Thermal Distribution Systems</style></title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1998</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">This field study concentrated on measurement of duct leakage to outside the conditioned space because this  is most useful in energy calculations, e.g., proposed ASHRAE Standard 152P (ASHRAE 1997).  For room  by room load/comfort requirements, the total duct leakage (including leaks to conditioned space) is more  appropriate, particularly for additional comfort considerations.  The objective of this field study is to help  to identify major sources of uncertainty and to quantify the trade-offs between different test methods.  The  identification of the areas requiring significant improvement will aid in future development of duct leakage  test methods.  For example, during the course of this study a new method for correcting house pressure  tests to account for the presence of duct leakage in measured envelope leakage was developed. Each of the measurement techniques investigated has resulted from a different set of priorities and hence  compromises.  Thus each one of them is measuring a different physical quantity, although they all report  the same parameter -- duct leakage to outside at operating conditions.  Given that real houses do not meet all  of the simplifying assumptions that must be made to achieve similarity, the same numbers from each test  method are not expected.  Potentially these differences can be quite large and one of the benefits of field  measurement is that the differences in the measurements helps put a realistic bound on how different some  of these leakage diagnostics may be. To evaluate current duct leakage diagnostic methods, field tests were performed in 17 houses.  The field  tests were divided into two parts.  The first part was performed in occupied S.F. Bay Area houses.  The  second part was performed in new unoccupied houses (some with unfinished interiors) in Irvine, CA.  In  the Bay Area, nine houses were tested using four diagnostic techniques.</style></abstract><custom1><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2.5</style></custom1><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">LBNL-41118</style></custom2><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Chapter</style></section></record></records></xml>