Metal framing in concrete block wall (how to model correctly for LEED)

4 posts / 0 new
Last post
Good morning experts, I have a question, we have received a comment from a LEED reviewer requesting for the following information: Table 1.4 of the template appears to indicate that all the assembly U-value for the exterior walls in the Proposed model may not account for the thermal breaks due to the steel-framing portion of the construction assembly. Each construction assembly U-value is not a direct inverse of the insulation R-value for that construction assembly. The R-value of the insulation located between the steel framing must be de-rated when determining the assembly U-value for the exterior wall assembly to account for the reduced thermal resistance of the metal framing components. Revise the Proposed model, as needed, so that all components of the exterior wall construction assembly are accounted for when calculating the assembly U-value for assembly type in the actual design. In addition, update Table 1.4 reflecting the changes. Refer to Table A3.3 in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004 for additional guidance regarding how to de-rate the R-value for insulation located between steel framing assemblies. We have the following wall composition in the project: [cid:image008.jpg at 01CFED22.90970100] And we are using the following assembly value: U-0.125 (= R8 Assembly) based on table A3.1A . [cid:image010.jpg at 01CFED22.90970100] [cid:image011.jpg at 01CFED22.90970100] However since this table in my understanding is only accounting for the concrete block, the insulation and the metal framing, I have added the 5/8? gypsum board (layer 1) and the 5/8? hardie board (layer 7) to the modeled assembly as below. [cid:image015.jpg at 01CFED22.90970100] Do you think the reviewer would object in any of this process? Or do you consider it should be done differently? Thank you for your answers, greatly appreciated. Catalina Caballero. AIA. Assoc., LEED GA. Sustainability Coordinator Johnson, Avedano, Lopez, Rodriguez & Walewski Engineering Group, Inc. Engineering for High Performance Buildings. MEPF - BIM - LEED - Cx 2510 NW 97 Ave, Ste 220, Miami, FL 33172. P: 305.594.0660 Ext: 217 ? F: 305.594.0907 www.jalrw.com | ccaballero at jalrw.com [cid:image001.png at 01CFED1F.9B489CB0] [cid:image002.png at 01CFED1F.9B489CB0] [cid:image003.png at 01CFED1F.9B489CB0] [cid:image004.png at 01CFED1F.9B489CB0] This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute, copy, or alter this email. Please consider the environment before printing this email.
ccaballero's picture
Offline
Joined: 2012-07-19
Reputation: 0
Catalina, My interpretation is that the correct ASHRAE 90.1 table for your wall is Table A3.1C. An 8? CB wall, density 115 lb/ft3, with insulated, unreinforced cells (none are grouted) gives U-0.21. The R-7.5 that is highlighted in Table A3.1A below is for continuous insulation (per A3.1.2.2), which you do not have. Per A3.1.1, the U-factors in the tables already include R-0.17 and R-0.68 for exterior and interior wall films. Potentially, you could add R-0.56 for the gyp wall to Ru-4.78 for the Table A3.1C block wall assembly, and get Reff-5.34, for an assembly U-0.187. Your TRACE wall construction shown below needs to be modified by changing R-8 CMU to R-3.672 (subtracting your surface resistances = 4.78-.333-.685) and you would have to justify the air gap value or delete it as well. Regards, Bill William Bishop, PE, BEMP, BEAP, CEM, LEED AP | Pathfinder Engineers & Architects LLP Senior Energy Engineer [cid:image001.jpg at 01CFED44.013A7100] [cid:image002.jpg at 01CFED44.013A7100] 134 South Fitzhugh Street Rochester, NY 14608 T: (585) 698-1956 F: (585) 325-6005 bbishop at pathfinder-ea.com www.pathfinder-ea.com [http://png-5.findicons.com/files/icons/977/rrze/720/globe.png]Carbon Fee and Dividend - simple, effective, and market-based.
Bill Bishop's picture
Offline
Joined: 2012-02-25
Reputation: 7
Catalina, I agree with Bill's response, and would add that you need to make sure you account for the mass of the wall. If you just enter an R-value then Trace does not account for the mass. Look at some other defult block walls in Trace for an example. The mass does not change the ultimate U-value, but it will change the load profile due to thermal lag. Scott Catalina, My interpretation is that the correct ASHRAE 90.1 table for your wall is Table A3.1C. An 8" CB wall, density 115 lb/ft3, with insulated, unreinforced cells (none are grouted) gives U-0.21. The R-7.5 that is highlighted in Table A3.1A below is for continuous insulation (per A3.1.2.2), which you do not have. Per A3.1.1, the U-factors in the tables already include R-0.17 and R-0.68 for exterior and interior wall films. Potentially, you could add R-0.56 for the gyp wall to Ru-4.78 for the Table A3.1C block wall assembly, and get Reff-5.34, for an assembly U-0.187. Your TRACE wall construction shown below needs to be modified by changing R-8 CMU to R-3.672 (subtracting your surface resistances = 4.78-.333-.685) and you would have to justify the air gap value or delete it as well. Regards, Bill William Bishop, PE, BEMP, BEAP, CEM, LEED AP | Pathfinder Engineers & Architects LLP Senior Energy Engineer [cid:image001.jpg at 01CFED44.013A7100] [cid:image002.jpg at 01CFED44.013A7100] 134 South Fitzhugh Street Rochester, NY 14608 T: (585) 698-1956 F: (585) 325-6005 bbishop at pathfinder-ea.com www.pathfinder-ea.com [http://png-5.findicons.com/files/icons/977/rrze/720/globe.png]Carbon Fee and Dividend - simple, effective, and market-based.
sparker's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010-10-13
Reputation: 1
Scott, I understand where you are coming from, thanks for your reply.However, it seems to me that the main concern for the reviewer is not accounting for the thermal bridging by the metal studs (even though the metal studs are not really cutting through the insulation as suggested in the comment ? Refer to Wall section), and Table A3.1C is not keeping in consideration any metal framing. Like you said, I?m tempted to argue that this is not a metal stud that is causing bridging in the insulation, and therefore follow your suggested value. However I would need to add the steel component as well, and the air gap I included as the air space between the concrete block and the gypsum board, but it?s not necessary? Thanks. Catalina Caballero. AIA. Assoc., LEED GA. Sustainability Coordinator Johnson, Avedano, Lopez, Rodriguez & Walewski Engineering Group, Inc. Engineering for High Performance Buildings. MEPF - BIM - LEED - Cx 2510 NW 97 Ave, Ste 220, Miami, FL 33172. P: 305.594.0660 Ext: 217 ? F: 305.594.0907 www.jalrw.com | ccaballero at jalrw.com [cid:image004.png at 01CFEDE3.A900E140] [cid:image005.png at 01CFEDE3.A900E140] [cid:image006.png at 01CFEDE3.A900E140] [cid:image007.png at 01CFEDE3.A900E140] This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute, copy, or alter this email. Please consider the environment before printing this email.
ccaballero's picture
Offline
Joined: 2012-07-19
Reputation: 0