Johnston, D and Miles-Shenton, D (2009) Airtightness of UK dwellings. In: Dainty, A R J (ed.) Proceedings of 25th Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2009, Nottingham, UK.
Abstract
This paper presents the results and key messages that have been obtained from Phase 1 of a participatory action research project that was undertaken with 5 developers to investigate the practical design and construction issues that arise in making improvements to the airtightness of speculatively built mainstream housing. Two construction types were represented in the project, masonry cavity and light steel frame. Phase 1 of the project sought to assess in detail the design, construction and air permeability of 25 dwellings that were constructed to conform to the requirements of Approved Document Part L1 2002. While the total number of dwellings reported here is small, the results suggest that there is not a consistent approach to the way in which developers present information on air leakage to those on site, a mixture of approaches are utilised on site to achieve the same specification and there appears to be a lack of foresight in the detailed design stage, resulting in specifications that are practically very difficult to achieve. Despite this, the air permeability results suggest that dwellings constructed with a wet/mechanically plastered internal finish, can default to a reasonable standard of airtightness by UK standards, without much additional attention being given to airtightness.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | airtightness; air leakage; housing; pressurisation testing |
| Index terms: | action research, default, housing, specification, design and construction, design stage, testing, permeability, steel frame |
| Subjects: | construction type, professional practice, material properties and characteristics, dispute resolution, data collection methods, contractual condition, structural engineering, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Construction Materials, Design Practice, Engineering Principles, Construction Technology, Legal Issues, Procurement, Contract Administration |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here