INTERIOR DUCT SYSTEM DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND PERFORMANCE

By removing air distribution and conditioning equipment from unconditioned spaces, homeowners stand to benefit substantially with respect to both energy savings and indoor air quality. Duct leakage introduces: Greater heating and cooling loads from air at extreme temperatures and humidity levels; Outside air and air from unconditioned spaces that may contain air borne contaminants, combustion gases, pollen, mold spores, and/or particles of building materials; and Higher whole-house infiltration/exfiltration rates. Exemplary studies conducted since 1990 have demonstrated the prevalence of duct leakage throughout the United States and measured energy savings of approximately 20% during both heating and cooling seasons from leakage reduction. These all dealt with duct leakage to and/or from unconditioned spaces. In the building science community, leakage within the conditioned space is generally presumed to eliminate the negative consequences of duct leakage with the exception of possibly creating pressure imbalances in the house which relates to higher infiltration and/or exfiltration. The practical challenges of isolating ducts and air handlers from unconditioned spaces require builders to construct an air-tight environment for the ducts. Florida Solar Energy Center researchers worked with four builders in Texas, North Carolina, and Florida who build a furred-down chase located either in a central hallway or at the edges of rooms as an architectural detail. Some comparison homes with duct systems in attics and crawl spaces were included in the test group of more than 20 homes. Test data reveals that all of the duct/AHU systems built inside the conditioned space had lower duct leakage to unconditioned spaces than their conventional counterparts; however, none of the homes was completely free of duct leakage to unconditioned spaces. Common problems included wiring and plumbing penetrations of the chase, failure to treat the chase as an air tight space, and misguided fresh air inlet design. Improvements were implemented by the Texas builder and retested in July. Results showed a 36% reduction in duct leakage, significant enough to warrant the builder adopting the new sealing procedure