NFRC in the News - Selected Article
Title
Glass Magazine
November 2006
Speak up: Site-Built
Myths
Misperceptions
abound regarding National Fenestration Rating Council's site-built
procedure for nonresidential products, says the association head
By Jim Benney
During
the last several months, Glass Magazine's readers have heard a
lot about the National Fenestration Rating Council's site-built
procedure, some of it right and some of it wrong. In this article,
I will try to bust some of the myths about the program.
The Myths
1. No workable procedure exists for rating commercial
glazing, particularly for products glazed or assembled in the
field.
The NFRC 100 standard has been used for commercial fenestration
products since 1992; in fact, the city of Seattle has required
its use since 1993. The NFRC site-built procedure was developed
and approved in 1999 to address curtain wall, storefront and other
site-glazed and or field-assembled fenestration systems. It has
been referenced in Title 24 of California's Energy Code since
2001. Since then, literally thousands of fenestration products
and systems have been authorized for certification or certified
with label certificates in the Golden State .
2. Although NFRC has added a procedure for site-built fenestration,
the lack of NFRC labels on curtain wall and storefront fenestration
in the field is evidence that the existing procedures are not
working for commercial buildings. Most commercial inspectors have
never seen a single rating label on curtain wall or storefront
windows.
Site-built fenestration systems such as curtain walls and storefronts
do not receive labels; rather, they utilize label certificates
posted at the building site. Since 1999, NFRC has issued label
certificates for thousands of fenestration products. In addition,
NFRC has issued certification authorization reports for hundreds
of thousands of fenestration products installed in low-rise office
buildings and townhouses and high-rise condominiums.
3. When a product is not labeled, the International Energy Conservation
Code assigns a default value to that product for U-factors and
solar heat-gain coefficients from default tables. U-factor default
values for curtain wall and storefront fenestration never meet
the code requirements in heating dominated climate zones, and
never meet the SHGC requirements in cooling dominated climate
zones.
Default values in the codes are meant to be punitive to assure
that manufacturers do not get credit for poor performing and inefficient
framing and glazing systems. Neither high-performance glazing
systems nor thermally broken or thermally improved framing systems
can be qualified by a visual inspection, meaning that code inspectors
cannot evaluate whether the product is energy efficient. Building
code officials need—and desire—labels and label certificates to
drive punitive default values. Further, default values can indeed
meet energy code when utilizing performance-based approaches for
code compliance rather than relying on prescriptive-based methods.
4.
Curtain-wall and storefront fenestration systems incorporate many
combinations of spacers, glass and framing systems. This leads
to a huge number of possible configurations in the final product
assembled in the field by the glazing contractor. The NFRC rating
system cannot deal with this complexity.
The NFRC rating and certification program easily handles complex
fenestration systems. For example, one manufacturer has authorized
for NFRC certification more than 30,000 individual product variations
within one product line, a vinyl-frame, double-hung window.
5. A new standard is needed to more easily rate commercial products
in a realistic, cost-effective and simple manner.
The current NFRC program is already a proven, realistic and cost-effective
system. The simplicity of any program or system depends on the
understanding of the program participant. New participants find
that they are able to negotiate the site-built system with relative
ease once they begin to go through it, and NFRC leaders are committed
to providing education and assistance to participants. NFRC standards
provide a single yardstick for comparing product performance,
and NFRC labels and label certificates provide a common language
for expressing performance.
6. Providing a new, alternative standard, such as the American
Architectural Manufacturers Association's AAMA 507, for rating
fenestration products, will increase enforcement of energy codes.
Having
two sets of standards for determining energy performance will
actually increase complexity and decrease the ability of code
inspectors to determine compliance. Two standards will create
confusion because code inspectors will have to determine what
label to look for and what standard is being referenced. Just
like insulation, with ratings based on R values; air conditioners,
whose ratings are based on seasonal energy efficiency ratio, or
SEER performance; and lighting efficiency; one standard will be
the best way to help code inspectors determine fenestration energy
performance and code compliance.
7. Having a new rating procedure, such as that of the American
Architectural Manufacturers Association, AAMA 507, will be more
cost-effective for the industry and have no cost implications.
The NFRC was actually formed so that the industry would have one
fair, accurate and credible way to determine energy ratings for
fenestration systems. The industry itself was tired of manufacturers
playing games with alternative, competing ratings that gave different
results, and federal officials were looking closely at the industry
to make sure that the interests of consumers were protected. The
term “fair, level playing field” was the battle cry in 1989. In
addition, the industry was tired of having to obtain different
product ratings for different jurisdictions. By thrusting two
alternative rating methods onto the industry, manufacturers will
now be forced to obtain both ratings, since they will not know
what rating may be required by different jurisdictions.
I hope this exercise will help separate rumor and speculation
from truth and fact. Look for additional information about the
site-built procedure at www.nfrc.org
.
|