David Glew, Melanie B. Smith, Dominic Miles-Shenton and Christopher Gorse
The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed appraisal of the quality of domestic retrofits.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed appraisal of the quality of domestic retrofits.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper presents the results of technical surveys on 51 retrofits undertaken before, during and after the retrofits.
Findings
Failures are observed to be endemic and characterised into five themes: 72 per cent showed moisture issues pre-retrofit, 68 per cent had moisture risks post-retrofit, 62 per cent did not adopt a whole house approach, 16 per cent showed inadequate quality assurance protocols and 64 per cent showed evidence of insufficient design detailing. Each theme is further subcategorised with a view to identifying implications for future policy.
Research limitations/implications
The findings suggest the 10 per cent Ofgem retrofit failure rates predictions are an underestimate and so there may be a need for additional investigations to understand the trend across the UK.
Practical implications
Recommendations to reduce the failure rates may include making changes to the current inspection regime, widening understanding among installers; providing standard repeatable designs for repeated features; and empowering occupants to trigger inspections.
Social implications
The sample is representative of a substantial proportion of the homes in the UK suggesting that retrofit quality may in many instances be below the required standards.
Originality/value
Risks of moisture issues and underperformance in domestic retrofit are a concern for government industry and households. This research shows that many installation failures are the result of not implementing existing guidelines and a change to the enforcement of standards may be needed to enact a fundamental change in installer practice and process control.
Details
Keywords
Anne Stafford, David Johnston, Dominic Miles-Shenton, David Farmer, Matthew Brooke-Peat and Chris Gorse
The coheating test is the standard method of measuring the heat loss coefficient of a building, but to be useful the test requires careful and thoughtful execution. Testing should…
Abstract
Purpose
The coheating test is the standard method of measuring the heat loss coefficient of a building, but to be useful the test requires careful and thoughtful execution. Testing should take place in the context of additional investigations in order to achieve a good understanding of the building and a qualitative and (if possible) quantitative understanding of the reasons for any performance shortfall. The paper aims to discuss these issues.
Design/methodology/approach
Leeds Metropolitan University has more than 20 years of experience in coheating testing. This experience is drawn upon to discuss practical factors which can affect the outcome, together with supporting tests and investigations which are often necessary in order to fully understand the results.
Findings
If testing is approached using coheating as part of a suite of investigations, a much deeper understanding of the test building results. In some cases it is possible to identify and quantify the contributions of different factors which result in an overall performance shortfall.
Practical implications
Although it is not practicable to use a fully investigative approach for large scale routine quality assurance, it is extremely useful for purposes such as validating other testing procedures, in-depth study of prototypes or detailed investigations where problems are known to exist.
Social implications
Successful building performance testing is a vital tool to achieve energy saving targets.
Originality/value
The approach discussed clarifies some of the technical pitfalls which may be encountered in the execution of coheating tests and points to ways in which the maximum value can be extracted from the test period, leading to a meaningful analysis of the building's overall thermal performance.