Air Barrier Adventure: An Impossible Air Tightness Goal Achieved | by Joeris General Contractors

Air Barrier Adventure An Impossible Air Tightness Goal Achieved ANGELA CARDWELL Executive Vice President Joeris General Contractors, Ltd. acardwell@joeris.com (210) 393-8602

Additional Contributors Jorden Eiden | Matt Dunn | Henry Serry

LEARN MORE AT JOERIS.COM

Air Barrier Adventure An Impossible Air Tightness Goal Achieved Angela Cardwell, Executive Vice President, Joeris General Contractors, Ltd. Contributors: Jorden Eiden, Matt Dunn, Henry Serry

Background and Introduction Steve Hennigan, President/CEO of Credit Human, is not your normal seeker of efficiency and sustainability. No. Steve Hennigan wants it ALL, and he wants it to perform at the highest levels you can imagine, not those you just think you can achieve. He wants the impossible.

This mindset set the stage for Joeris’ management of the construction of the new headquarters for Credit Human. The entire project sought to exceed anyone’s idea of what it means to own and operate a truly sustainable facility. From living green walls, to solar installations, to geothermal units – Credit Human’s new office space is one of only a few such buildings in the United States, LEED Platinum qualified and beyond Net Zero to Net Producing. All this a result of Hennigan’s vision.

One part of this vision was Hennigan’s challenge to the team regarding the building’s envelope and its air barrier performance.

This paper analyzes the journey that led to not just meeting Steve’s challenge but exceeding it in grand fashion.

1

The Players While the Credit Human building incorporates many sustainable features and design elements, this paper is focused on the building envelope and air barrier performance. To meet the challenge defined

by Steve Hennigan, several voices needed to be engaged in the conversation. These included the architects, engineers, Joeris as the construction manager, several MEP trade partners, local inspectors, and Steve, himself. To give full credit where it is due, the following firms were integral to the success of the building envelope air barrier challenge.

• • • • • • •

Kirksey Architecture Joeris General Contractors TSI Energy Solutions Professional Service Industries Alpha Insulation and Waterproofing Shadrock and Williams Masonry City of San Antonio

The Challenge Steve Hennigan has very strong convictions about sustainability and has always been quick and passionate in showing the long-term benefits of sustainability initiatives, often through the example of implementation in his own home. Steve learned a lot about the challenges of constructing a tight envelope on his house. The concept of the air barrier and a tight building slowly developed as the design developed. Eventually, mention of the Corps of Engineers’ standard for building tightness was introduced (.25cfm/sf@75pa). While the standard is tough to meet, Steve laid down the gauntlet and challenged the team to exceed it, even offering an incentive to all involved if the more challenging goal he set could be met. Steve’s challenge set the goal at 0.1 cfm/sf @75pa, less than half the Corps’ standard. Once the team got beyond the initial instinct of declaring the goal’s impossibility, everyone worked together to devise a plan to make it happen. Steve’s passion drove the team to want to achieve the impossible. The team declared that they would be successful in turning the impossibility into reality.

2

The Process We had no idea how this project would transform our team, or company–all because of the challenge and vision of Steve Hennigan. Steve Hennigan first met with our project team to introduce the sustainability initiatives post-award. Joeris was awarded the project because of our established relationship with the developer and our ability to support that relationship with a team of people with strong resumes to suit this unique build. With the right people together in the right place at the right time, the team was assembled.

As the project design developed, Steve’s vision started becoming apparent. Steve sat in many of the design meetings and challenged the engineers and architects as to how they were approaching their design. He even sat at the table and ran his own calculations to either validate or challenge those of the engineers. It became obvious very quickly that he was deeply invested in his vision and desired outcomes regarding sustainability.

There were early discussions with Steve concerning the roof system. He used the analogy of why you wear a heavy, insulated hat in the winter so you don’t lose all your body heat through the top of your head. These roof insulation discussions led to wall insulation and air barrier discussions. The Joeris team led discussions dealing with the window systems. It was important to our team, for quality control purposes and speed of installation, that we use a “unitized” or pre-glazed system. All these elementspecific discussions started coming together into a wholistic design of the building envelope.

While the building envelope design was developing, so were the other sustainability initiatives. Early on, the project team was approaching the sustainability initiatives as “alternates” and doing a lot of comparative analysis to more conventional systems. But the further the design developed, the more apparent it became that the sustainability initiatives were going to be funded and become integral to the project.

During this project Henry Serry, Joeris COO, recalled watching a documentary on Walt Disney and it reminded him of the way that Steven Hennigan functions. The documentary showcased how Walt Disney employed the best and the brightest and drove them to near perfection. When Disney’s teams finally got to the point where everyone thought that the project could not get any better, he would ask them for one more thing. Just one more thing to make it even better. That is how Steve Hennigan approached the Credit Human project. If he could fit one more geothermal well, or one more solar

3

panel, if he could squeeze in another ½” of insulation, he firmly believed that it was worth it. The team was constantly challenged to find that one more thing.

Once the team chose to take on the impossible air barrier challenge, Joeris put together a quality control plan and associated budget. Our team determined that we would be successful and built it into the project staffing and budget. Project ownership then supported it.

The project ownership found a way to encourage the entire project team’s ability to meet the building tightness challenge. They presented the idea of contractually setting the goal/requirement at the Corps of Engineers’ standard. Team members involved in the building envelope process were then offered a variable incentive for beating the Corps of Engineers’ standard. As it turned out, collectively we shattered the standard.

For a complete technical description of the process and project photography, please refer to the attached Appendix of files1.

For a list of other articles about the truly amazing Credit Human headquarters facility, please refer to our list of related articles2.

1 2

Air Barrier Appendix (https://joeris.egnyte.com/dl/U2jILIVyTv) Credit Human HQ Facility Article List (https://joeris.egnyte.com/dl/jU0dwNZCK1)

4

At Joeris3, our mission is to Transform People and Places and that includes you and your business. If we can help in any way about any topic, please don’t hesitate to contact us4.

Nuts & Bolts (for sustainability savants!): These are some of the truly technical lessons learned by our team during the construction and testing process: • • • • • • •

• • • • • • •

3 4

Requires full time supervision, depending on project size o Utilized carpenter staff to help fix and keep up with testing and schedule.

Make sure surfaces are clean. Pay attention to details.

Use manufacturer recommended and/or required primers.

Sealant joints cleaned of mortar while brick installation occurs. This will help sealant installation and discrepancy of who cleans and delays.

The concept of layers on layers of compatible materials to ensure no deficiencies, whether it’s from installation or exposure to elements.

Build your own test chambers to keep up with testing.

Curtain wall testing E1105 o Use 2x4 for large windows or 1x4 for smaller windows. o Order Vinyl Clear 10 gauge from Joanne Fabrics.

Concrete will leak air at cracks, joints of any kind and honeycomb.

Have mason anchor jack lines to steel and not screw into wall or hang on brick ties.

Make sure brick ties are sealed at location and angle for the brick (Masons would twist or move brick ties and joints would crack or break and now be compromised for air leakage).

Dow 795 Needs a Primer to be successful. Either Primer P or Primer C. Complete ASTM E779 and ASTM C1060 through TSI. We performed E1105 test with PSI and Raba, part of the curtain wall/window testing and AMMA 501.2.

Using the PosiTest air equipment for brick ties and transitions. https://www.defelsko.com/positest-airleak-tester

Visit Our Website: https://joeris.com Contact Joeris: joerisinfo@joeris.com

5

Additional Resources and Articles Resources

Air Barrier Appendix

Complete technical description of the process including our reports, quality control methods, and products used on the project.

Digital Copy: https://joeris.egnyte.com/dl/U2jILIVyTv

Articles The Broadway Office Development Project Features, Challenges, and a Passion for Sustainability at the Oxbow and Credit Human Headquarters https://joeris.com/the-broadway-office-development-energized/

Credit Human - 1703 Broadway https://1703broadway.com

Credit Human Headquarters at 1703 Broadway https://youtu.be/Y72PHpimsGs

Green to the max Solar panels, reflective windows, deep wells for geothermal energy. Credit Human is pulling out all the stops to make its new San Antonio headquarters a beacon of sustainability.

https://www.expressnews.com/news/local/politics/article/Pearl-area-complex-brings-cutting-edge13810993.php

6

A i r B a r r i e r A d v e n t u re An Impossible Air Tightness Goal Achieved

APPENDIX

8. Building Test Areas by Level 1.

Air Barrier Objective

2. Air Barrier Testing Overview: test area, sealed area, square footages 3. Joeris Air Barrier Quality Management Plan 4. Facts: penetrations and anchor counts 5. Products Used: anchors, air barriers, sealants i.

Glass Inspections and Tests

ii.

Envelope Testing of Brick Ties

6. E1105 Water Penetration Test i.

Water Penetration Test Criteria (E1105 Test)

ii.

Joeris Mock-up E1105 Water Test

iii.

PSI-Intertek Mock-up E1105 Water Test

7. Air Barrier/Air Pressurization i.

Air Barrier/Air Pressurization Test Level 6 Mock-up Diagram

ii.

Air Barrier/Air Pressurization Test Level 6 Mock-up Test Agenda

iii.

Air Leakage Rate by Fan Pressurization E779 Test Criteria

iv.

Mock-up Test and Results

v.

Findings and Lessons Learned

vi.

Air Barrier/ Air Leakage Mock-up Test Agenda

9. Basement to Level 5 Preparations 10. Waterproofing Level 5-12 11. Progress Mapping and Deficiencies per Elevation i. ii.

TSI Visual Air Barrier Inspection #4 Report Sealant Re-work at sill

12. Curtain wall E1105 Test Plan i.

Diagrams of Test Plan

13. Sealant Pull Test 14. Design Issues i.

Solution: Sealant Install

15. Curtain Wall Testing Process i.

Joeris Air Barrier Leakage Testing Quality Management Plan

16. TSI Final Air Test i.

Preparation

ii.

Results

17. Key Take Aways 18. Final Project Photography

Appendix

Table of Contents

Air Barrier Objective Broadway Office Development Meet an air tightness of 0.1 cfm/sf @75pa through a whole building air leakage test, following ASTM E779.

Current standard is .25cfm/sf@75 PA.

1. AIR BARRIER OBJECTIVE

Air Barrier Testing Sealed Off Area o o

o

o

2. AIR BARRIER TESTING OVERVIEW: SEALED OFF AREA

Air Barrier Testing Test Area Objective o o

o

2. AIR BARRIER TESTING OVERVIEW: TEST AREA

Air Barrier Testing Square Footage Total

Coves

(Core)

(Core)

(Core)

Testable SF

(slab Floor to Floor thickness)

Height

Testable CF

Level 12

22729.58

90

1163.908

204.9668

1576.26

20079.412

16

0.42

15.58

312837.239

Level 11

22729.58

90

1163.908

204.9668

1576.26

20079.412

14.67

0.42

14.25

286131.621

Level 10

24373.77

144

1163.908

204.9668

1576.26

21777.602

16.67

0.42

16.25

353886.0325

Level 9

24373.77

144

1163.908

204.9668

1576.26

21777.602

14.67

0.42

14.25

310330.8285

Level 8

24373.77

144

1163.908

204.9668

1576.26

21777.602

14.67

0.42

14.25

310330.8285

Level 7

24373.77

144

1163.908

204.9668

1576.26

21777.602

14.67

0.42

14.25

310330.8285

Level 6

24373.77

144

1163.908

204.9668

1576.26

21777.602

14.67

0.42

14.25

310330.8285

Level 5

24054.2

144

1163.908

204.9668

1576.26

21458.032

18

0.42

17.58

377232.2026

170504.866 SF TOTAL

2. AIR BARRIER TESTING OVERVIEW: SQUARE FOOTAGES

2571410.409 CF TOTAL

Joeris Air Barrier

Quality Management Plan

3. JOERIS AIR BARRIER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN

OBJECTIVES

Air Barrier Quality Management Plan Broadway Office Development March 19, 2018

Ensure that all materials are being installed according to details provided in the plans, submitted by the air barrier manufacturer, and discussed during mock up installations and pre-construction meetings to ensure that we achieve air leakage goals that have been created for the project

SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENT .25 CFM/SF or better

TARGET GOAL

Exceed the .1 CFM/SF goal that ownership has set for the project

STRATEGY

1) Supervision Structure - Joeris a. Superintendent assigned to the envelope of both towers to ensure consistency and continuity of communication and quality assurance.

2) Pre-Construction Efforts – Kirksey & Joeris a. Selected best in class trade partners to install window wall and air barrier systems b. Selected TSI Energy Solutions to assist Joeris and our trade partners in the installation of the systems. TSI will also be conducting the final full building test c. Coordinated detailing with Carlisle Coatings, our air barrier manufacturer d. Assessed and selected materials based on construction sequence and exposure times that will be required. e. Conducted due diligence meeting with Roy Schauffle, immediate past president of the ABAA, to receive training regarding air barrier material compatibility.

3) Purchasing, Pre-Planning, and Sequencing – Joeris a. Utilizing mast climber scaffolds to control access to the air barrier prior to brick cover up. b. Will be conducting Pre-construction meetings with design team, testing personnel, installers, and manufacturers to discuss all critical details and installation requirement c. Identifying Known Challenging Conditions so that all parties can focus on common problem areas during installation i. Roof to wall transition ii. Wall to level 5 slab 1. Need detailing depending on Credit Human T.I. split slab decision iii. Window wall at Air Barrier 1. Flashing at all window openings iv. Chase penetrations v. Envelope penetrations

1|Page

4) Mock Up – Joeris and TSI a. A mock-up area for testing will be constructed in the southwest corner of level 5 of the south building. i. This will include south and west windows, corner conditions, brick ties, air barrier beneath the slab, etc. (Full design forthcoming) ii. This area will be tested, early in the project, using the specified blower door test (ASTM E779) to ensure the tightness of the assemblies and identify any areas that require special attention as we are starting install.

5) Installation Management - Joeris a. Additional Quality Management Personnel and Tools i. During all the Window wall, Air Barrier and Masonry installation on the south building, Joeris will provide dedicated quality management supervision full time, on the scaffold to ensure that work is installed correctly

1. Air barrier work will be inspected daily using checklist created by the Joeris team of senior superintendents and our Corporate Quality Management Director (see attached checklist screen shots).

• All issues noted during these inspections will be recorded and tracked in PlanGrid • Issues will be reviewed with foreman daily to ensure that all issues are being addressed and documented 2. Joeris Quality Management personnel will have a tool box of air barrier, foam, sealant, etc. products that will be used to assist with any areas that require additional protection from air loss.

6) In Progress Inspections and Testing – Joeris & TSI a. Portable pressure testing equipment will be used by Joeris quality management personnel to spot test difficult areas and around wall ties (product information attached). b. Third party visual inspections i. Joeris will employ TSI Energy Solutions (TSI) as a 3rd party consultant to conduct visual inspections as we complete each vertical lift on the exterior of the building (3 lifts per elevation for a total of 12 inspections).

DOCUMENTATION • • • • • •

Blower Door results for Mock Up – TSI (sample report attached) Inspection testing tracking log to document full coverage of testing - Joeris PlanGrid Issues Tracking and Reporting – Joeris (sample report attached) Hand Held Testing Results - Joeris TSI Visual Inspection Reports – TSI (sample report attached) Extensive Photo Documentation will be taken as examples of compliance - Joeris

2|Page

FULL BUILDING TESTING

1) Preparation a. Temporary measures for chases that pass through 5th floor air barrier boundary i. Joeris in the process of coordinating with TSI to determine all temporary requirements and submit a plan outlining this in advance of full building testing.

2) Testing a. Joeris will employ TSI Energy Solutions (TSI) as a 3rd party to conduct blower door test (ASTM E779) per specification section 070523 (see attached) on the south building, at completion of the building, to document compliance with air barrier leakage requirements and goals.

3|Page

Project Facts Penetrations

Total Penetrations = 311 o Level 5: 224 o 30 electrical sleeves o 192 from TI on level 5 o 2 on level 5 terrace o Level 11 balconies: 22 o Level 12 to roof outside core: 19 o Level 12 inside the core area: 17 penetrations o plus 3 in electrical room to roof o Penthouses: 26

4. FACTS: PENETRATION COUNTS

Project Facts

Anchor Counts

9,184 Total Brick Ties o 1,568 Level 5 o 3,584 Level 6-12 north and south elevations on columns o 4,032 Level 6-12 East and West side

8,584 Total Metal Panel Cascadia Clips o 5,280 on north and south elevation o 3,304 on east and west sides

4. FACTS: ANCHOR COUNTS

Products Used Anchors

Cascadia clip Metal Panels

5. PRODUCTS USED: ANCHORS

Products Used Anchors

5. PRODUCTS USED: ANCHORS

Products Used Air Barriers

Carlisle Air and Vapor Barrier Fire Resist Barritech VP Applied by sprayer or roller Up to 180-day UV exposure

Air and Vapor Barrier CCW-705 Strips

5. PRODUCTS USED: AIR BARRIERS

Products Used Sealants Sika 1a Sealant used for termination at flashing

5. PRODUCTS USED: SEALANTS

Sharp Glass Curtain Wall Shop Inspection & Test Armor Guard film was spray applied for protection.

Tested Curtain Wall windows according to the E1105 Test 5.I. PRODUCTS USED: GLASS INSPECTIONS AND TESTS

Sharp Glass

Shop Water Testing Report Sharp Glass was required to test a percentage of curtain wall windows 200 window module test reports were processed

5.I. PRODUCTS USED: GLASS INSPECTIONS AND TESTS

Broadway Office Development Shop Water Testing Report General Notes: Type of Water Test Performed: ASTM E1105 Chamber Test Manufacturer of Aluminum Window System: Kawneer Manufacturer’s Design Test Pressure: 15 PSF Shop Testing Pressure: Shop testing pressure will be 12 PSF. Testing Procedure: Each module shall be tested for a period of 15 minutes. The inches of water gauge on the Wind Maker test kit will read 2.31 to maintain consistent 12 PSF of pressure on the module. If any water intrusion is visible, the test will be halted immediately, and the source of the water infiltration will be investigated, identified, documented, and remediated. Any failed module will be re-tested once the remediation has taken place.

Test Information: Garcia Tested by: ____________________ 12/21/2018 Date: ____________________ Fair Weather: __________________________________________________________________________________ 7 elev 6 Module Number & Elevation: ______________________________ 5ʼX10ʼ Module Size: ____________________ 10:12 am Start Time of Test: ____________________ 10:33 End Time of Test: ____________________

Did the Module Pass or Fail: Pass [ � ]

Fail [ ]

See page 3 for Pictures.

Page 1 of 5

Failed Test Information: Time Water was Visible: ____________________ Write a brief summary of where the water infiltrated & the possible causes.:

Once the module has been inspected write a brief summary on the findings & the planned remediation steps.:

Did the module Pass or Fail the re-test: Pass [ � ]

Fail [ ]

See page 4 & 5 for pictures of deficiencies and re-test if required.

Page 2 of 5

Pictures of First Water Test Front of Module Before Water Test

Back of Module Before Water Test

Front of Module During Water Test

Back of Module During Water Test

Pressure Gauge During Water Test

Page 3 of 5

Bubbles indicate an air leak.

An estimate of the relative size of the leak can be made based on the size and speed with which bubbles form.

Ideal for testing penetrations ( fasteners, masonry ties, etc. ) and continuity of joints and seams in rigid air barrier systems

Envelope Testing of Brick Ties Features

■

■

■ ■ ■

■ ■ ■ ■

■

Automatic mode depressurizes the test chamber at a user-selectable rate and limit Manual mode allows the user to control the rate of depressurization Internal memory stores up to 200 test results with rate, time duration, limit and user-entered Pass/Fail conclusion Portable, lightweight tester can be used in any position Environmentally sealed enclosure—dustproof and waterproof Built-in rechargeable batteries perform up to 200 tests per charge. Continue testing with AC power while batteries recharge. Supplied with universal AC adapter High accuracy pressure sensor Conforms to National Standards including ASTM E1186 Comes with everything needed for testing Includes FREE downloadable PosiSoft ® 3.0 Desktop Software for PC One year warranty

5' (1.5 m) super flexible, high durability hose

Large, easy to read LCD displays pressure during testing

Depressurization Rate Indicator

Mode/Increase Pressure Limit/Decrease Select Rate One-touch save feature stores and reviews test results On/Start Off/Stop Low battery indicator

Memory mode icon indicates test results are in memory

Quickly and easily detect air an nd watter leaks in TESTER COMES buildiiCOMPLETE ng g envvelowith pesshoulder and strap, high impact polycarbonate test chamber, durable 5' (1.5 m) hose with quick rigid aiir ba arrier systems disconnect couplings, built-in rechargeable NiMH batteries with

Quick disconnects for easy assembly

charger (AC power supply), 8 oz. test solution with dauber (qty.

4), for instruction USB cable, Ideal testing pemanual, netratio ons s (available as (fasteners, PosiSoft 3.0 Desktopmasonr Software ry ties, etc.)Certificate and a free download), of Calibration continuity of joints traceable to NIST, onein (1) year warranty and and seams rigid barrier systems. soft-sided air nylon carrying case

Clear, high impact polycarbonate test chamber provides unobstructed view

FOR USE WITH...

and two-ply membranes OptionsSingle Liquid applied memb branes ■

Soft rubber chamber seal

■

■

Sprayed Polyureth ha Foam (SPF) Test Solution: additional 8neoz.

Boardstock (case of 16) bottles available Metal Liners ■ ■ ■ ■

Environmentally sealed metal enclosure

■ ■

Sealed USB port for communicating with a PC

Exterior Insulation an nd Finish Systems (EIFS S) EPDM roofing systemss Waterproofing and more e

Lightweight carrying case

AC Adapter port charges batteries or powers tester Convenient shoulder strap Variable speed centrifugal fan allows for different rates of depressurization

Specifications

Conforms to ASTM E1186

Pressure Differential Range 100–900 Pa Rate of Depressurization 5–30 Pa/sec Test Chamber Size Ø16" (40 cm) Base 5 . I I 1. PaP R O D U C T S U S E D : Resolution ± (10% + 10 Pa) Accuracy Carrying Case Dimensions 38 cm (15") x 48.3 cm Ø (19")

ENVELOPE TESTING OF BRICK TIES

Water Penetration E1105 Test Criteria

6.I. WATER PENETRATION TEST CRITERIA (E1105 TEST)

Designation: E1105 – 00 (Reapproved 2008)

Standard Test Method for

Field Determination of Water Penetration of Installed Exterior Windows, Skylights, Doors, and Curtain Walls, by Uniform or Cyclic Static Air Pressure Difference1 This standard is issued under the fixed designation E1105; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.

1. Scope 1.1 This test method covers the determination of the resistance of installed exterior windows, curtain walls, skylights, and doors to water penetration when water is applied to the outdoor face and exposed edges simultaneously with a static air pressure at the outdoor face higher than the pressure at the indoor face.

1.2 This test method is applicable to any curtain-wall area or to windows, skylights, or doors alone. It is intended primarily for determining the resistance to water penetration through such assemblies for compliance with specified performance criteria, but it may also be used to determine the resistance to penetration through the joints between the assemblies and the adjacent construction. Other procedures may be appropriate to identify sources of leakage.

1.3 This test method addresses water penetration through a manufactured assembly. Water that penetrates the assembly, but does not result in a failure as defined herein, may have adverse effects on the performance of contained materials such as sealants and insulating or laminated glass. This test method does not address these issues.

1.4 The proper use of this test method requires a knowledge of the principles of pressure measurement.

1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The inch-pound equivalents of SI units may be approximate.

1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific hazard statements, see 7.1.

1 This test method is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E06 on Performance of Buildings and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E06.51 on Performance of Windows, Doors, Skylights and Curtain Walls.

Current edition approved April 1, 2008. Published May 2008. Originally approved in 1986. Last previous edition approved in 2000 as E1105 – 00. DOI: 10.1520/E1105-00R08.

2. Referenced Documents 2.1 ASTM Standards:2 E631 Terminology of Building Constructions 3. Terminology 3.1 Definitions—For definitions of general terms relating to building construction used in this test method, see Terminology E631.

3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard: 3.2.1 specimen, n—the entire assembled unit submitted for test as installed in the exterior wall of a building.

3.2.1.1 Discussion—The test specimen consists of the major components of the assembly, including all joints, cracks, or openings between such components and any panning, receptors, extenders, sills, mullions, or other parts or components used for assembling any installation. The joints between assemblies and the openings into which they are mounted (masonry openings, for example) are not part of the test specimen. However, these joints may be tested by this procedure.

3.2.2 test pressure difference, n—the specified difference in static air pressure across the closed and locked or fixed specimen expressed in pascals (lbf/ft2).

3.2.3 water penetration, n—penetration of water beyond a plane parallel to the glazing (the vertical plane) intersecting the innermost projection of the test specimen, not including interior trim and hardware, under the specified conditions of air pressure difference across the specimen. For products with non-planer surfaces (domes, vaults, pyramids, etc.) the plane defining water penetration is the plane defined by the innermost edges of the unit frame.

4. Summary of Test Method 4.1 This test method consists of sealing a chamber to the interior or exterior face of specimen to be tested, supplying air 2 For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on the ASTM website.

Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Aug 19 10:18:30 EDT 2011 1 Downloaded/printed by JOHNGUILLAUME MINOR (COMPLETE+GENERAL+CONTRACTORS) TIM (JOERIS+GENERAL+CONTRACTORS) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.

E1105 – 00 (2008) to a chamber mounted on the exterior or exhausting air from a chamber mounted on the interior, at the rate required to maintain the test pressure difference across the specimen while spraying water onto the outdoor face of the specimen at the required rate and observing any water penetration.

5. Significance and Use 5.1 This test method is a standard procedure for determining the resistance to water penetration under uniform or cyclic static air pressure differences of installed exterior windows, skylights, curtain walls, and doors. The air-pressure differences acting across a building envelope vary greatly. These factors should be considered fully prior to specifying the test pressure difference to be used.

NOTE 1—In applying the results of tests by this test method, note that the performance of a wall or its components, or both, may be a function of proper installation and adjustment. In service, the performance will also depend on the rigidity of supporting construction and on the resistance of components to deterioration by various causes, vibration, thermal expansion and contraction, and so forth. It is difficult to simulate the identical complex wetting conditions that can be encountered in service, with large wind-blown water drops, increasing water drop impact pressures with increasing wind velocity, and lateral or upward moving air and water.

Some designs are more sensitive than others to this upward moving water.

NOTE 2—This test method does not identify unobservable liquid water which may penetrate into the test specimen.

5.2 Laboratory tests are designed to give an indication of the performance of an assembly. Field performance may vary from laboratory performance since the supporting structure for the test specimen, methods of mounting, and sealing in the laboratory can only simulate the actual conditions that will exist in the building. Shipping, handling, installation, acts of subsequent trades, aging, and other environmental conditions all may have an adverse effect upon the performance of the installed product. This field test procedure provides a means for determining the performance of a product once installed in the building.

5.3 The field test may be made at the time the window, skylight, curtain-wall, or door assemblies are initially installed and before the interior of the building is finished. At this time, it is generally easier to check the interior surfaces of the assemblies for water penetration and to identify the points of penetration. The major advantage of testing when assemblies are initially installed is that errors in fabrication or installation can be readily discovered and corrections made before the entire wall with its component assemblies is completed at which time the expense of corrective work may be increased many times.

5.4 The field test may also be made after the building is completed and in service to determine whether or not reported leakage problems are due to the failure of the installed assemblies to resist water penetration at the specified static air pressure difference. Generally it is possible to conduct tests on window, skylight, and door assemblies without too much difficulty, and to identify sources of leakage. A curtain-wall assembly, on the other hand, may not be accessible from the inside without the removal of interior finished walls and ceilings. Even with removal of interior walls and ceilings, it may not be possible to observe curtain-wall surfaces behind

spandrel beams. The feasibility of conducting a meaningful static air pressure difference water penetration test on an in-service building must be carefully evaluated before being specified.

5.5 Weather conditions can affect the static air pressure difference measurements. If wind gusting causes pressure fluctuation to exceed 6 10 % from the specified test pressure, the test should not be conducted.

5.6 Generally it is more convenient to use an interior mounted pressure chamber from which air is exhausted to obtain a lower pressure on the interior surface of the specimen.

A calibrated rack of nozzles is then used to spray water at the proper rate on the exterior surface. Under circumstances where it is desirable to use an exterior-mounted pressure chamber, the spray rack must be located in the pressure chamber and air supplied to maintain a higher pressure on the exterior surface.

Exterior chambers are difficult to attach readily and seal to exterior surfaces.

5.7 Even though the equipment requirements are similar, this procedure is not intended to measure air infiltration because of the difficulty of isolating the component air leakage from the extraneous leakage through weep holes, mullion joints, trim, or other surrounding materials.

6. Apparatus 6.1 The description of apparatus in this section is general in nature, and any arrangement of equipment capable of performing the test procedures within allowable tolerances is permitted.

6.2 Major Components (Fig. 1): 6.2.1 Test Chamber—A test chamber or box made of plywood, plastic, or other suitable material and sealed against the test specimen. Test chambers mounted on the interior must be made so that interior surfaces and joints of the specimen can be easily observed for water penetration during the test. No part of the testing chamber shall come in contact with or restrict any point where water pentration may occur. At least one static air pressure tap shall be provided to measure the chamber air pressure versus the ambient (interior-exterior) air pressure and shall be so located that the reading is unaffected by exterior impinging wind, or by the velocity of air supply to or from the chamber. The air supply opening into or exhaust from the chamber shall be arranged so that air does not impinge directly on the test specimen with any significant velocity. A means of access into the chamber may be provided to facilitate adjustments and observations after the chamber has been installed.

6.2.2 Air System—A controllable blower, compressed air supply exhaust system, or reversible blower designed to supply the required maximum air pressure difference across the specimen. The system must provide essentially constant air flow at a fixed pressure for the required test period.

6.2.3 Pressure Measuring Apparatus—A device to measure the test pressure difference within a tolerance of 62 % or 62.5 Pa (60.01 in. of water column), whichever is greater.

6.2.4 Water-Spray System—The water-spray system shall deliver water uniformly against the exterior surface of the test specimen at a minimum rate of 3.4 L/m2·min (5.0 U.S. gal/ft2·h).

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Aug 19 10:18:30 EDT 2011 2 Downloaded/printed by TIM (JOERIS+GENERAL+CONTRACTORS) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.

JOHNGUILLAUME MINOR (COMPLETE+GENERAL+CONTRACTORS)

E1105 – 00 (2008)

FIG. 1 General Arrangement of Water Penetration Test Apparatus

NOTE 3—The National Weather Service Technical Paper No. 403 records that in the contiguous 48 United States, the greatest rainfall for a 1-h period is less than 12.7 cm (5.0 in.). The rate of 3.4 L/m2·min (5.0 U.S. gal/ft2·h) specified in this test method corresponds to a rainfall of 20.3 cm (8.0 in.)/h unless otherwise specified.

6.2.4.1 The water-spray system shall have nozzles spaced on a uniform grid, located at a uniform distance from the test specimen and shall be adjustable to provide the specified quantity of water in such a manner as to wet all of the test specimen, uniformly and to wet those areas vulnerable to water penetration. If additional nozzles are required to provide uniformity of water spray at the edge of the test specimen, they shall be equally spaced around the entire spray grid.

6.2.4.2 The intake water line to the nozzle grid shall be equipped with a pressure gage and pressure adjusting valve.

For field testing, the water pressure shall be adjusted to the same pressure at which the water spray system was calibrated.

7. Hazards 7.1 Warning—Glass breakage will not normally occur at the small pressure differences applied in this test method.

Excessive pressure differences may occur, however, due to error in operation or gusting wind, therefore, exercise adequate precautions to protect personnel.

7.2 Take whatever additional precautions are necessary to protect persons from water spray, falling objects (which may include tools), the spray system, or even the exterior test chamber.

8. Examination of Test Specimens 8.1 Select and identify the test specimen in accordance with the procedures established in Section 10.

8.2 Conduct a detailed visual examination of the test specimen and the construction adjacent to the test specimen. Record all pertinent observations.

8.3 If the intent is to test an operable window, skylight, or door, the unit should be checked for proper installation by opening, closing, and locking the unit five times prior to testing, with no further attention other than the initial adjustment.

3 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Weather Service, 1325 East West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, http://www.nws.noaa.gov.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Aug 19 10:18:30 EDT 2011 3 Downloaded/printed by TIM (JOERIS+GENERAL+CONTRACTORS) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.

JOHNGUILLAUME MINOR (COMPLETE+GENERAL+CONTRACTORS)

E1105 – 00 (2008) NOTE 4—The purpose of this examination is to record the physical condition of the test specimen and adjacent construction at the time of testing. Examples of pertinent observations to be recorded include; any damage or deterioration observed, missing or broken components, missadjustment or weatherstrip or other components, cleanliness of the test specimen, out-of-square installations, and so forth.

9. Calibration 9.1 The ability of the test apparatus to meet the applicable requirements shall be checked by using a catch box, the open face of which shall be located at the position of the face of the test specimen. The calibration device is illustrated in Fig. 2.

The catch box shall be designed to receive only water impinging on the plane of the test specimen face and to exclude all run-off water from above. The box shall be 610 mm (24 in.) square, divided into four areas each 305 mm (12 in.) square.

Use a cover approximately 760 mm (30 in.) square to prevent water from entering the calibration box before and after the timed observation interval. The water impinging on each area shall be captured separately. A spray that provides at least 1.26L/min (20-gal/h) total for the four areas and not less than 0.25 L/min (4 gal/h) nor more than 0.63 L/min (10 gal/h) in any one square shall be acceptable.

9.1.1 The water-spray system shall be calibrated at both upper corners and at the quarter point of the horizontal center line (of the spray system). If a number of identical, contiguous, modular spray systems are used, only one module need be calibrated. The system shall be calibrated with the catch boxes at a distance within 651 mm (2 in.) of the test specimen location from the nozzle. The reference point for location of the spray system from the specimen shall be measured from the exterior glazing surface of the specimen farthest from the spray system nozzles. Recalibrate at intervals necessary in the judgment of the testing agency but not more than six months.

9.1.2 When the calibration is made, record the water pressure on the intake water line to the nozzle grid. When a field test is made, make sure to adjust the water pressure on the intake line to the pressure recorded when the grid was calibrated.

10. Information Required 10.1 The specifying authority shall supply the following information or provide guidance relative to its specification.

NOTE 5—Although the specifying authority is responsible for establishing test specimen sampling, selection, and identification procedures, such procedures or modifications to said unit should be mutually agreed upon by all parties involved prior to testing.

10.1.1 Test specimen sampling, selection, adjustment, and identification.

10.1.2 Test pressure difference(s) to be applied during the test.

10.1.3 Whether uniform or cyclic air pressure difference tests, or both, shall be used. Duration and number of cycles if cyclic test is used.

10.2 Unless otherwise specified, failure criteria of this test method shall be defined as water penetration in accordance with 3.2.3. Failure also occurs whenever water penetrates through the perimeter frame of the test specimen. Water contained within drained flashing, gutters, and sills is not considered failure.

11. Preparation of Test Apparatus 11.1 Fit the test chamber to the perimeter of the test specimen to cover the entire assembly through which a check for water penetration is to be made. Provide suitable support for the test chamber so that it does not contact or restrict any point where water leakage may occur. Seal all joints between the test specimen perimeter and the test chamber. Seal any openings between the test chamber and any air supply or exhaust ducts, pressure taps, or other measuring devices.

11.2 Establish a means for measuring the air pressure difference across the test specimen which takes into account the difference that may exist between the static pressure in the interior of the building and the static pressure on the exterior.

In the case of an interior mounted test chamber, it may be possible simply to open a window in a room to balance the pressure. A pressure tap to the exterior for a pressure measuring

FIG. 2 Catch Box for Calibrating Water-Spray System Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Aug 19 10:18:30 EDT 2011 4 Downloaded/printed by JOHN MINOR (COMPLETE+GENERAL+CONTRACTORS) TIM GUILLAUME (JOERIS+GENERAL+CONTRACTORS) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.

E1105 – 00 (2008) device on an interior-mounted chamber or a pressure tap to the interior for an exterior-mounted test chamber would properly account for any difference.

12. Procedure 12.1 Procedure A—Test under uniform static air pressure difference as follows: 12.1.1 Adjust the valve on the water-spray system so that the intake water is being delivered at the calibrated pressure, as described in Section 9.

12.1.2 Apply the specified static air pressure difference within 15 s and maintain this pressure, along with the specified rate of water spray, for 15 min.

12.1.3 Observe and note points of water penetration, if any, that occur during the test.

12.1.4 Remove the air pressure difference and stop the water spray. Carefully inspect the test specimen for any additional evidence of water penetration and note any such evidence for the report.

12.2 Procedure B—Test under cyclic static air pressure difference as follows: 12.2.1 Adjust the valve on the water-spray system so that the intake water is being delivered at the calibrated pressure, as described in Section 9.

12.2.2 Apply the specified static air pressure difference across the test specimen promptly and maintain this pressure, along with the specified rate of water spray, for the period of time stipulated by the specification or the specifier. Unless otherwise specified, the duration of the pressure cycle shall be 5 min.

12.2.3 While maintaining the water spray, reduce the air pressure difference to zero for a period of not less than 1 min.

12.2.4 Repeat the preceding two steps for the specified number of cycles. In no case, however, shall the total time of pressure application be less than 15 min.

12.2.5 Observe and note points of water penetration, if any, which occur during the test.

12.2.6 At the conclusion of the required number of cycles, remove the air pressure difference and stop the water spray.

Carefully inspect the test specimen for any additional evidence of water penetration and note any such evidence for the report.

12.3 Measure and record the barometric pressure and temperature of the air near the exposed surface of the test specimen, and of the air near the air intake or exhaust of the air system. Measure and record the speed and direction of the air movement (wind) at or near the exposed surface of the test specimen. Take such measurements immediately prior to or during the test.

13. Report 13.1 Report the following information:

13.1.1 General—Testing agency, requester of test, date and time of test, date of report, identification, and location of building.

13.1.2 Test Specimen Description—Manufacturer, model, operation type, dimensions, materials, etc.; identification and location of the test specimen(s) within the building; physical condition of the test specimen, description of any modifications made to test specimen; age of the test specimen, if known, etc.

13.1.3 Detailed Drawings—If available, detailed drawings of the specimen that provide a description of the physical characteristics, skylight sash or door dimensions and arrangement, framing location, panel arrangement, installation and spacing of anchorage, weatherstripping, locking arrangement, hardware, sealants, glazing details, and any other pertinent construction details. Any modifications made on the specimen to obtain the reported shall be noted.

13.1.4 Sampling Procedures—If applicable, describe or list the procedures established.

13.1.5 Test Parameters—List the specified static air pressure difference used in the test and the rate of water-spray application if different from that specified in Section 6. If cyclic test was used, list the number and duration of pressure difference applications. Describe the location of the test chamber, whether mounted on the interior of the building or the exterior; describe the method used to take into account the difference in the static air pressure. If test was made to check the conformity of the specimen to a particular specification, identify or describe that specification.

13.1.6 Test Conditions—List pertinent atmospheric conditions such as pressures and temperatures and list exterior wind speed and direction as measured and recorded during the test.

13.1.7 Test Results—Record all water penetration as described in Section 12.

13.1.8 Compliance Statement—Include a statement that the tests were conducted in accordance with this test method or a complete description of any deviations from this test method.

13.2 If several identical specimens of a component are tested, the results of all specimens shall be reported, each specimen being properly identified, particularly with respect to distinguishing features or differing adjustments. A separate drawing of each specimen shall not be required if all differences between them are noted on the drawings provided.

14. Precision and Bias 14.1 No statement is made either on the precision or bias of this test method for measuring water penetration since the result merely states whether there is conformance to the criteria specified for success.

15. Keywords 15.1 curtain walls; doors; skylights; water penetration; windows

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Aug 19 10:18:30 EDT 2011 5 Downloaded/printed by TIM (JOERIS+GENERAL+CONTRACTORS) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.

JOHNGUILLAUME MINOR (COMPLETE+GENERAL+CONTRACTORS)

E1105 – 00 (2008) ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned in this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.

This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the responsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.

This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or service@astm.org (e-mail); or through the ASTM website (www.astm.org).

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Fri Aug 19 10:18:30 EDT 2011 6 Downloaded/printed by TIM (JOERIS+GENERAL+CONTRACTORS) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.

JOHNGUILLAUME MINOR (COMPLETE+GENERAL+CONTRACTORS)

Joeris Mock-Up

Diagnostic Water Test

6.II. JOERIS MOCK-UP E1105 WATER TEST

DIAGNOSTIC WATER PENETRATION TEST REPORT

Broadway Office Development 1803 Broadway San Antonio, TX 78215

Report No.: 18018‐QAD001‐R0

Test Protocol: AAMA 501.2, Quality Assurance and Diagnostic Water Leakage Field Check of Installed Storefronts, Curtain Walls, and Sloped Glazing Systems

Test Date: Report Date:

11/26/18 11/28/18

Joeris General Contractors 823 Arion Pkwy, San Antonio, TX 78216 | o. 210.494.1638 | f. 210.494.1639 San Antonio | Austin | Dallas | Fort Worth | Houston

www.joeris.com

Test Report No: 18018‐QAD001‐R0 Report Date: 11/28/18

Abstract:

The intent of this evaluation is to ensure that the design and assembly of each selected specimen meet the prescribed water penetration resistance requirements as defined by the contract documents. The results of this evaluation are provided for the exclusive use of Joeris General Contractors.

Scope: Conduct a quality assurance and diagnostic field test to determine water penetration resistance performance of the selected assembly.

Testing Procedure: A precursory review of the relevant drawings, details, and submittals was performed prior to arriving on site for testing. Visual observations and photographic documentation of initial conditions were recorded. Unless otherwise indicated, sample framing and joints were tested from left to right (when viewed from the exterior), beginning with the lower left‐hand corner of the sill, advancing vertically and concluding at the right corner of sample head.

Test Method(s): AAMA 501.2‐09, Quality Assurance and Diagnostic Water Leakage Field Check of Installed Storefronts, Curtain Walls, and Sloped Glazing Systems Water Penetration: For the purpose of this test, water penetration or “leakage” shall be defined as any uncontrollable water that passes through or between the materials of a system, into a space not intended for moisture exposure, appearing on any normally exposed interior surface, that is not contained or drained back to the exterior, or that can cause damage to adjacent materials or finishes.

Test Summary: Installation / Assembly Specimen Selection: Mockups were provided by the Project Superintendent Location: Pearl Mockup Yard Sample Type: Glazed Aluminum Curtain Wall System (Mockup) Manufacturer: Kawneer

Carlisle Coatings and Waterproofing (Weather Barrier Materials)

Model of Equipment: Kawneer 1600 System, 2 ½” x 6” Dimensions: Sample 1 (East): 9’‐10 ½”H x 7’‐6’ ¼”W

Sample 2 (South): 9’‐10”H x 12’‐8 ½”W Page 2 of 11

www.joeris.com

Test Report No: 18018‐QAD001‐R0 Report Date: 11/28/18

Observations:

Curtain wall system installed without finished cap trim. Full perimeter sealant with backer rod was observed but installation of second layer of sealant and backer rod per approved shop drawings could not be determined. Screws broken off/missing from pressure bars (Photo 4). Weep holes installed per design (Photo 5). End dams installed and sealed per design (Photo 6). Waterproofing coverage appeared sufficient with minimal deficiencies/pinholes however, membrane flashing was bubbling in multiple areas.

Testing Conditions:

Weather: 55.2o F, Sunny and Clear, 2.5 mph Wind.

Significant Modifications / Deviations from Standard Test Method: Test samples are not representative of a “complete system”. Initial testing is intended to test the installed waterproofing around the curtain wall system. Sample can be re‐tested after façade installation if desired.

Specimen Description(s): TEST SPECIMEN DESCRIPTION* # 1.

East Mockup, 1/3 width (scale), North Bldg.

INSTALLATION CONDITIONS / OBSERVATIONS

Incorrect flashing used at rough opening, CCW‐705‐TWF in lieu of CCW‐705 (Photo 8), flashing insufficiently lapped at 2.

South Mockup, ½ width (scale), South Bldg. change in lug elevation/depth (Photo 9), edges of membrane flashing rolling at left jamb framing and lacking sealant (Photo 10). *Note: Viewpoint orientation for all location references is from the exterior of the sample.

Page 3 of 11

www.joeris.com

Test Report No: 18018‐QAD001‐R0 Report Date: 11/28/18

Test Results: TEST SPECIMEN #

TEST TYPE (Pre‐Test, Test, Re‐ Test)

TEST TIME

RESULTS (Pass/Fail)

OBSERVATIONS

45 seconds into testing, leakage was observed 1.

Test 10:05 Fail entering the concrete joint below the right corner of the sill (Photo 7).

Testing was re‐started at the left side of the sill 1.

Test

Pass and continued for the entire perimeter framing of the left pane with no visible leakage.

Similar to Sample 1, leakage was observed entering the concrete joint below the right corner of the sill. Testing continued, and additional leakage was observed penetrating the jamb 2.

Test 12:00 Fail flashing at the right jamb when water was applied at 5’‐2” up on the framing. Exterior flashing was observed to be rolled back/not properly sealed at this point (Photo 10).

Testing was re‐started at the base of the left jamb 2.

Test

Pass framing and continued for the entire perimeter framing of the left pane with no visible leakage. *Note: Viewpoint orientation for all location references is from the interior of the sample.

Analysis: Leakage observed at Sample 1 did not appear to be a failure of the waterproofing or curtain wall systems. The leakage appeared to be the result of water entering the concrete joint between the site‐ cast architectural concrete column, the structural concrete column, and the cast‐in‐place concrete band.

Initial leakage at Sample 2 appeared to be the result of water penetrating the concrete joint below the applied waterproofing. The second leak that occurred at 5’‐2” up on the jamb framing was recreated multiple times and appeared to be the direct result of the incorrect termination of the membrane flashing of the rough opening. Exposed flashing edges/terminations should be sealed with approved sealant.

Page 4 of 11

www.joeris.com

Test Report No: 18018‐QAD001‐R0 Report Date: 11/28/18

Recommendations: Recommendations are provided for the consideration of the Project Team and should NOT be considered directives for implementation. Any remedial action taken should be approved by the project Design Team.

Evaluate waterproofing details of concrete joints beyond those directly adjacent to the curtain wall system and apply waterproofing prior to installation of any architectural components.

Ensure correct waterproofing membrane is installed per approved submittals and monitor installation in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations to prevent poor adhesion and insufficient coverage.

Verify second layer of perimeter sealant and backer rod is installed per approved shop drawings.

Testing Conducted By: NAME

REPRESENTATION

Jordan Eiden Tim Guillaume

Joeris General Contractors Joeris General Contractors

Witnesses: The following individuals witnessed all or part of the evaluation: NAME

REPRESENTATION

Deano Thayer Kevin Lange Gary Krier Anthony Cavallaro Brian Stone

Joeris General Contractors Joeris General Contractors Alpha Insulation Joeris General Contractors Joeris General Contractors

Compliance Statement: Observations and test results were obtained in general accordance with the designated test method(s) unless otherwise indicated herein.

For JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS:

X

X

COMPLETED BY: Tim Guillaume TITLE: QA/QC Director

REVIEWED BY: TITLE:

Tim Guillaume QA/QC Director

Attachments (pages): This report is complete only when all attachments listed below are included.

Appendix A: Photographs The observations, test results, and recommendations contained in this report are provided in support of Joeris’ Quality Assurance Program but do not represent a comprehensive or exhaustive evaluation. This report is for the exclusive use of Joeris General Contractors. Joeris assumes no liability to any party for any loss, expense or damage incurred by the use of this report. The statements in this report are relevant only to the sample(s) tested. The contents of this report by itself do not constitute approval, disapproval, certification, acceptance of performance, or compliance with contractual requirements or general industry standards.

Page 5 of 11

www.joeris.com

APPENDIX A PHOTOGRAPHS

Test Report No: 18018‐QAD001‐R0 Report Date: 11/28/18

Photo 1.

Initial conditions (Sample 1).

Photo 2.

Initial conditions (Sample 2).

Page 6 of 11

www.joeris.com

Test Report No: 18018‐QAD001‐R0 Report Date: 11/28/18

Photo 3.

Flashing wrapping structural column per design (Sample 1).

Photo 4.

Screws broken or missing at pressure bar (Typical).

Page 7 of 11

www.joeris.com

Test Report No: 18018‐QAD001‐R0 Report Date: 11/28/18

Photo 5.

Weep holes installed per design (Typical).

Photo 6.

End dams installed and sealed (Typical).

Page 8 of 11

www.joeris.com

Test Report No: 18018‐QAD001‐R0 Report Date: 11/28/18

Photo 7.

Leakage below waterproofing at concrete joint (Sample 1).

Photo 8.

Incorrect flashing used at sill and jamb (Sample 2).

Page 9 of 11

www.joeris.com

Test Report No: 18018‐QAD001‐R0 Report Date: 11/28/18

Photo 9.

Insufficient lapping of membrane flashing (Sample 2).

Photo 10.

Poor flashing adhesion with no termination sealant (Sample 2).

Page 10 of 11

www.joeris.com

Test Report No: 18018‐QAD001‐R0 Report Date: 11/28/18

Photo 11.

Leakage below waterproofing (Sample 2).

Page 11 of 11

www.joeris.com

Intertek PSI Mock-Up Diagnostic Water Test

6.III. PSI-INTERTEK MOCK-UP E1105 WATER TEST

BROADWAY OFFICE BUILDING (MOCKUP) TEST REPORT SCOPE OF WORK WATER TESTS CONDUCTED AT BROADWAY OFFICE BUILDING – 1803 BROADWAY REPORT NUMBER 0315753-1 TEST DATE(S) 07/10/19 ISSUE DATE 07/13/19 RECORD RETENTION END DATE 7/13/22 PAGES 12 DOCUMENT CONTROL NUMBER ATI 00069 (11/09/17) RT-R-AMER-Test-2776 © 2017 INTERTEK

3 Burwood Ln San Antonio, Texas 78216

TEST REPORT FOR JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS

Telephone: 210-342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

Report No.: 0315753-1 Date: 07/13/19

REPORT ISSUED TO JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS 823 Arion Parkway San Antonio, TX 78216 PROJECT BROADWAY OFFICE BUILDING 1803 Broadway San Antonio, Texas 78215 Attention: Mr. Deano Thayer Phone: 210-232-2250 Email: dthayer@joeris.com SECTION 1 SCOPE Intertek Building Science Solutions (BSS) was contracted by Joeris General Contractors to perform on-site testing at the above referenced project. Window testing was performed using the ASTM E1105-00 (2018), (Procedure A) Standard Test Method for Field Determination of Water Penetration of Installed Exterior Windows, Skylights, Doors, and Curtain Walls, by Uniform or Cyclic Static Air Pressure Difference. Water penetration tests were conducted on 2 specimens on a mock-up of the window installation.

This report does not constitute certification of this product nor an opinion or endorsement by Intertek/PSI. SECTION 2 SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS The specimens tested did not meet the performance requirements listed herein for ASTM E1105-00(2018) (Procedure A)

This report is for the exclusive use of Intertek's Client and is provided pursuant to the agreement between Intertek and its Client.

Intertek's responsibility and liability are limited to the terms and conditions of the agreement. Intertek assumes no liability to any party, other than to the Client in accordance with the agreement, for any loss, expense or damage occasioned by the use of this report.

Only the Client is authorized to permit copying or distribution of this report and then only in its entirety. Any use of the Intertek name or one of its marks for the sale or advertisement of the tested material, product or service must first be approved in writing by Intertek.

The observations and test results in this report are relevant only to the sample(s) tested. This report by itself does not imply that the material, product, or service is or has ever been under an Intertek certification program.

Version: 11/09/17

Page 2 of 13

RT-R-AMER-Test-2776

3 Burwood Ln San Antonio, Texas 78216 Telephone: 210-342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

TEST REPORT FOR JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS Report No.: 0315753-1 Date: 07/13/19 For INTERTEK B&C: COMPLETED BY:

Brian Foster

REVIEWED BY:

Barton Tate

TITLE:

Project Manager

TITLE:

Operations Manager

07/13/19

SIGNATURE: DATE:

07/13/19

SIGNATURE: DATE:

This report is for the exclusive use of Intertek's Client and is provided pursuant to the agreement between Intertek and its Client.

Intertek's responsibility and liability are limited to the terms and conditions of the agreement. Intertek assumes no liability to any party, other than to the Client in accordance with the agreement, for any loss, expense or damage occasioned by the use of this report.

Only the Client is authorized to permit copying or distribution of this report and then only in its entirety. Any use of the Intertek name or one of its marks for the sale or advertisement of the tested material, product or service must first be approved in writing by Intertek.

The observations and test results in this report are relevant only to the sample(s) tested. This report by itself does not imply that the material, product, or service is or has ever been under an Intertek certification program.

Version: 11/09/17

Page 3 of 13

RT-R-AMER-Test-2776

3 Burwood Ln San Antonio, Texas 78216

TEST REPORT FOR JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS

Telephone: 210-342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

Report No.: 0315753-1 Date: 07/13/19 SECTION 3 TEST METHOD

The test specimens were evaluated in accordance with the following methods.

ASTM E1105-00(2015), (Procedure A) Standard Test Method for Field Determination of Water Penetration of Installed Exterior Windows, Skylights, Doors, and Curtain Walls, by Uniform or Cyclic Static Air Pressure Difference SECTION 4 TEST PROCEDURE The perimeter of the chamber was attached and sealed to the perimeter of the window installation. The chamber was equipped with a vacuum pump and a pressure sensing device to maintain the desired air pressure differential across the assembly. The specified air pressure differential was provided by the Client; 12 PSF (2.31 inches of water).

ASTM E1105, Procedure A - Water penetration testing was conducted at the specified air pressure differential while simultaneously spraying water on to the exterior face of the assembly at the required rate of 5 gph/ft2. During testing, the interior face of the test area was inspected for water leakage. Testing continued for 15 minutes.

SECTION 5 LIST OF OFFICIAL OBSERVERS NAME Brian Foster Deano Thayer

COMPANY Intertek B&C Joeris

SECTION 6 EQUIPMENT Equipment calibration records are available for review at 130 Derry Court, York, Pennsylvania 17406.

Version: 11/09/17

Page 4 of 13

RT-R-AMER-Test-2776

3 Burwood Ln San Antonio, Texas 78216

TEST REPORT FOR JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS

Telephone: 210-342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

Report No.: 0315753-1 Date: 07/13/19

SECTION 7 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA Provided by project specifications.

Test Specimen #1: Water Leakage: (Field Water Definition) No water leakage/No uncontrolled water leakage/In accordance with ASTM E1105-00 (Modified).

Test Specimen #2: Water Leakage: (Field Water Definition) No water leakage/No uncontrolled water leakage/In accordance with ASTM E1105-00 (Modified).

SECTION 8 PRE-TEST INSPECTION A visual inspection of the designated test area was performed prior to testing; unless otherwise noted no obvious deficiencies or anomalies were observed. The specimen(s) were plumb, level, and square. Any applicable test specimens were operated, closed, and locked prior to testing.

SECTION 9 TEST SPECIMEN DESCRIPTION AND RESULTS Date: 07/10/19 Ambient Exterior Air Temperature: 95°F Barometric Pressure: 29.64 in Hg General Note #1: All locations referenced are as viewed from the interior unless otherwise noted.

General Note #2: Unless specifically noted within this report, atmospheric conditions at the time of testing did not have an adverse impact on the results of the test. These environmental conditions are recorded for informational use only to confirm that the conditions did not have a negative impact on testing.

General Note #3: The test area(s) were chosen by the client or client representative.

General Note #4: The two test specimens are mock-ups of the exterior wall construction.

Version: 11/09/17

Page 5 of 13

RT-R-AMER-Test-2776

3 Burwood Ln San Antonio, Texas 78216

TEST REPORT FOR JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS

Telephone: 210-342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

Report No.: 0315753-1 Date: 07/13/19

Test Specimen #1: (reference Photo Nos. 1 through 4) Manufacturer: Sharp Glass Description: Storefront Mock-up Overall Size: 152”(W)x96”(H) Location: Larger Mock-up window TITLE OF TEST TEST RESULTS ALLOWED Water Penetration leakage No water leakage @ 12 psf (2.31 IN of H₂O Water penetration testing for Test Specimen #1 was conducted on 7-10-19.

Observation: Water leakage occurred at approximately 5 minutes and 30 seconds into testing below the WRB at the bottom left corner (looking from the inside out). See photos 1 thru 5 Remedial Work: No remedial work was performed at the time of the water penetration test.

Test Specimen #2: (reference Photo Nos. 6 through 10) Manufacturer: Sharp Glass Description: Storefront Mock-up Overall Size: 113”(W)X92”(H) Location: Smaller Mock-up window TITLE OF TEST TEST RESULTS ALLOWED Water Penetration leakage No water leakage @ 12 psf (2.31 IN of H₂O) Water penetration testing for Test Specimen 2 was conducted on 7-10-19 Observation: Water leakage occurred almost immediately at the bottom right corner (looking from the inside out). See photos 6 thru 10 Remedial Work: No remedial work was performed at the time of the water penetration test.

Version: 11/09/17

Page 6 of 13

RT-R-AMER-Test-2776

3 Burwood Ln San Antonio, Texas 78216

TEST REPORT FOR JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS

Telephone: 210-342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

Report No.: 0315753-1 Date: 07/13/19 SECTION 10 PHOTOGRAPHS

Areas tested

Test specimen #1 test area

Test specimen #2 test area

Version: 11/09/17

Page 7 of 13

RT-R-AMER-Test-2776

3 Burwood Ln San Antonio, Texas 78216

TEST REPORT FOR JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS

Telephone: 210-342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

Report No.: 0315753-1 Date: 07/13/19

Photo No. 1: Specimen #1: Overview of the test in progress.

Photo No. 2: Specimen #1; Bottom left corner leaked under the WRB.

Version: 11/09/17

Page 8 of 13

RT-R-AMER-Test-2776

3 Burwood Ln San Antonio, Texas 78216

TEST REPORT FOR JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS

Telephone: 210-342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

Report No.: 0315753-1 Date: 07/13/19

Photo No. 3: Specimen #1; No drain plane, water was ponding at this location. Possible water intrusion at screw hole.

Photo No. 4: Specimen #1; The brick was removed to reveal the WRB, very little water was draining out of the weeps.

Version: 11/09/17

Page 9 of 13

RT-R-AMER-Test-2776

3 Burwood Ln San Antonio, Texas 78216

TEST REPORT FOR JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS

Telephone: 210-342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

Report No.: 0315753-1 Date: 07/13/19

Photo No. 5: Specimen #1; Water was ponding at this location.

Photo No. 6: Specimen #2; Overview

Version: 11/09/17

Page 10 of 13

RT-R-AMER-Test-2776

3 Burwood Ln San Antonio, Texas 78216

TEST REPORT FOR JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS

Telephone: 210-342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

Report No.: 0315753-1 Date: 07/13/19

Photo No. 7: Specimen #2; Water leaked at the bottom right corner. (looking from the inside out).

Photo No. 8: Specimen #2; Water leakage at bottom right corner.

Version: 11/09/17

Page 11 of 13

RT-R-AMER-Test-2776

3 Burwood Ln San Antonio, Texas 78216

TEST REPORT FOR JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS

Telephone: 210-342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

Report No.: 0315753-1 Date: 07/13/19

Photo No. 9: Specimen #2; Possible area of water leakage

Photo No. 10: Specimen #2; We removed the clip to reveal 4 holes in the frame.

Version: 11/09/17

Page 12 of 13

RT-R-AMER-Test-2776

3 Burwood Ln San Antonio, Texas 78216

TEST REPORT FOR JOERIS GENERAL CONTRACTORS

Telephone: 210-342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

Report No.: 0315753-1 Date: 07/13/19

SECTION 11 REVISION LOG REVISION #

DATE

PAGES

REVISION

0

07/13/19

N/A

Original Report Issue

Version: 11/09/17

Page 13 of 13

RT-R-AMER-Test-2776

Air Barrier/Air Pressurization Level 6 Mock-up Test Agenda

7.II. AIR BARRIER/AIR PRESSURIZATION TEST LEVEL 6 MOCK-UP TEST AGENDA

Our Mission is to Transform People and Places

Air Barrier/Air Pressurization Mock-Up Test Agenda Thursday, May 16, 2019 6:56 AM Agenda Purpose:

To demonstrate the effectiveness of our materials, design, installation, and quality control in striving to achieve a .1 CFM/SF air leakage rate on the Broadway Office Development project.

I.

II.

Quality Control Measures a.

Sequence i.

Sheathing —» Brick ties/MWP clips —> Air Barrier —» QC b.

Supervision i.

Deano and Jordan c.

Issues management i.

Deano, Jordan, and Ryan I. Daily Checklists I. Any issues are noted and addressed using PlanGrid I. Deficiencies have decreased substantially from building mockup to building application.

Mock-Up a. Location: South Building/southwest corner of level 6 i.

Per E779— Mock-up is located in a corner of the building, this being the most difficult location to achieve rate that will be required for entire project. b. Corner conditions i.

No tie in between exterior air barrier and interior temp walls. This was a detail that only pertained to the air barrier mock-up and presents itself as a vulnerable location of the mock-up. The building air barrier will be tested as a continuous whole during the final inspection and should yield better results in lieu of this particular mock-up detail.

Per ASTM E779 — Exterior corners of building conditions have an increased amount of exterior pressure, therefore making those locations more susceptible to air leakage. c. SF Calculations i.

Conservative in our calculations including • Exterior walls • Floor and ceiling • Interior walls Total SF calculated —4,837.5 SF d. CFM’s allowed to meet standards i.

Standard: .25 cfm/SF (Allowable CFMs 1,209) ii.

T ¿agt: .1 cfm/SF (Allowable CFMs 484 CFMs) e. Initial pressurization (positive and negative) i.

Test was performed to ASTM 1186 which follows guidelines for pressurizing/depressurizing a chamber then using smoke to identify air leakage sites. ii.

Room was filled with smoke, and pressurization of the room was implemented. During the test the positive pressure was increased to around 212 pascals, then depressurized the room to around 150 pascals to help identify air leaks.

SAFETY

INTEGRITY

LEADERSHIP

EXCELLENCE

Our Mission is to Transform People and Places iii. iv.

III.

IV.

Initial tests resulted in air leakage primarily at the mock-up partition walls.

Initial test results were on the high side for both positive and negative air pressure tests.

Tests were reading around 1577 cfm depressurized around 1499 cfm’s. v.

The following areas were reviewed: i.

Seals around windows, ii. between windows and rough openings, iii. gap where panels lock together, iv. connection between window frames and floor, v. around embeds/angles at bottom of slab above, vi. horizontal seams in sheathing, vii. between framing and concrete columns, viii. connection of window frames and walls above, ix. concrete cold joints (learned that this area yields itself to air leakage under high pascal testing. On the building final inspection this should not be an issue since the air barrier will encapsulate all these conditions). vi.

There was one area where smoke was exfiltrating above the window on the northern end of the west elevation. i. this area was re-sealed and re-tested, with not smoke being identified. ii.

Lesson learned: do a second visual inspection of the sealant. This can be done as we are coming down the building elevation on mast climbers. vii.

Window connections where the pre-glazed window systems are assembled in the field: i.

These locations were a concern, and an area of focus. ii.

These locations tested really well and showed no signs of air leakage. viii.

Infrared testing under negative pressure (Minimal temperature differences) i.

Test did not show any significant temperature changes f. Addressing of mock-up specific issues i.

Conditions noted above. ii.

Partition walls were also re-sealed around the perimeter where air leakage was present. g. Re-testing results i.

Positive pressure: 75 pascals, 519 CFMs equating to 0.1073 Negative pressure: 75 pascals, too Iow to get a reading. Overall performance at pre-test.

1. TSI — will be issuing a report of their findings a. Encouraged by the proactive measures being taken to provide an airtight airbarrier.

Process for Today’s Test a.

ASTM E779 b.

Corps of Engineers sequence and standards i.

Positive and Negative pressure readings 1.

Positive Pressure: 75 pascals, 515 CFMs equating to .1065 CFMs/OF 2.

Negative Pressure: 80 pascals, too low to get a reading. ii.

Readings for each reading. Both need to meet the standard Summary of Results/Current Status a.

TSI i.

Broadway Evaluation 1.

Overall, the results of the test were positive, and are falling in line to achieve the .1 CFM/SF air leakage rate on the Broadway Office Development project. ii.

Where do we go from here?

1.

Action Steps a.

Continue daily checklists of the building envelope b.

Continue to use the air-leakage testing device c.

Continuous visual inspections d.

Review and make sure that permanent and temporary core walls are sealed properly, so when final test is performed, they are not a factor.

SAFETY

INTEGRITY

LEADERSHIP

EXCELLENCE

Air Leakage Rate

by Fan Pressurization E779 Test Criteria

7.III. AIR LEAKAGE RATE BY FAN PRESSURIZATION E779 TEST CRITERIA

Level 6 Mock-Up o

ASTM E779 - Standard Test Method for Determining Air Leakage Rate by Fan Pressurization and Depressurization

o

TSI performed the mock-up blower door test

o

Joeris pre-tested some of the air barrier o

Brick Ties

o

Joints

o

Air Barrier Substrate

o

Smoke tested Joints and terminations

7.IV. LEVEL 6 MOCK-UP: TEST AND RESULTS

Level 6 Mock-Up Mock-Up Room

Mock-Up Test Results

7.IV. LEVEL 6 MOCK-UP: TEST AND RESULTS

Level 6 Mock-Up Findings o

o

Top and bottom of wall were the weakest points, in particular the floor as dust and debris were not cleaned and wiped before acoustical sealant was installed, causing a leak. We used several layers of sealant to stop the leaks.

Screw heads that were not tape and floated or having air barrier applied also leaked.

Lessons Learned o

One layer of sealant at bottom of wall is not enough and substrate needs to be clean.

o

Using the concept of Layers on Layers is ideal

o

Quality of installation is the biggest issue.

Products work if given the time and skill to do it right.

7.V. LEVEL 6 MOCK-UP: FINDINGS & LESSONS LEARNED

Air Barrier/Air Leakage Mock-Up Test Agenda

7.VI. AIR BARRIER/ AIR LEAKAGE MOCK-UP TEST AGENDA

Our Mission is to Transform People and Places

Air Barrier/Air Leakage Mock-Up Test Agenda Thursday, May 16, 2019 6:56 AM Agenda Purpose:

To demonstrate the effectiveness of our materials, design, installation and quality control in striving to achieve a .1 CFM/SF air leakage rate on the Broadway Office Development project.

I. II. III. IV.

V.

VI. VII.

VIII.

IX.

Quality Control Measures Sequence a. Sheathing —> Brick ties/MWP clips —> Air Barrier —> QC Supervision a. Deano and Jordan Issues management a. Deano, Jordan, and Ryan b. Daily Checklists c. Any issues are noted and addressed using Plangrid Mock Up a. Location i. Most difficult location to achieve rate that will be required for entire project per E779 Corner conditions a. No tie in between exterior air barrier and interior temp walls SF Calculations a. Conservative in our calculations i. Exterior walls ii. Floor and ceiling iii. Interior walls b. Total SF calculated – 4,837.5 SF CFM’s allowed to meet standards a. .25 cfm/SF (Allowable CFMs 1,209) Standard b. .1 cfm/SF (Allowable CFMs 484 CFMs) Goal c. Initial pressurization (positive and negative) d. Smoke testing e. Infrared testing under negative pressure (Minimal temperature differences) f. Addressing of mock up specific issues g. Re-testing results i. Positive pressure ii. Negative pressure iii. Overall performance at pre-test 1. TSI Process for Today’s Test a. ASTM E779

SAFETY

INTEGRITY

LEADERSHIP

EXCELLENCE

Our Mission is to Transform People and Places b.

Corps of Engineers sequence and standards i. Positive then Negative pressure ii. Readings for each iii. Both need to meet the standard

X.

Summary of Results/Current Status a. TSI i. Broadway Evaluation ii. Other Projects iii. Where do we go from here?

1. Action Steps

XI.

Plus/Delta a. What went well? b. What can we improve?

SAFETY

INTEGRITY

LEADERSHIP

EXCELLENCE

Building Areas Tested by Level o o o

8. BUILDING AREAS TESTED BY LEVEL

Basement, Levels 3 & 4 Seal CMU Perimeter

Sealing off CMU

Block Fill CMU

Sealing metal at top of CMU

8. BUILDING AREAS TESTED BY LEVEL: BASEMENT, LEVELS 3 & 4

Levels 1 & 2 Sealing Perimeter Core

8. BUILDING AREAS TESTED BY LEVEL: LEVELS 1 & 2

Levels 1 & 2 Sealing Perimeter Core

8. BUILDING AREAS TESTED BY LEVEL: LEVEL 1 & 2

Levels 1 & 2 Sealing Perimeter Core

8. BUILDING AREAS TESTED BY LEVEL: LEVELS 1 & 2

Levels 1 & 2 Sealing Perimeter Core

8. BUILDING AREAS TESTED BY LEVEL: LEVELS 1 & 2

Level 1 Electrical Room

8. BUILDING AREAS TESTED BY LEVEL: LEVEL 1

Basement to Level 5 Preparations o o o o

9. BASEMENT TO LEVEL 5 PREPARATIONS

Level 5 Mira SEAL Air Barrier

Carlisle CCW Mira SEAL

Mira SEAL Applied

Mira SEAL and Matting Installed

9. BASEMENT TO LEVEL 5 PREPARATIONS: LEVEL 5 MIRA SEAL AIR BARRIER

Level 5 Mira SEAL Air Barrier

Level 5 Detail Joints were caulked then Mira SEAL and mesh applied then more Mira SEAL

Mira SEAL Gauge o

Checked often

o

Needed 70 mils minimum applied

9. BASEMENT TO LEVEL 5 PREPARATIONS: LEVEL 5 MIRA SEAL AIR BARRIER

Levels 3 & 11 Water Test Mira SEAL

9. BASEMENT TO LEVEL 5 PREPARATIONS: LEVELS 3 & 11 WATER TEST MIRA SEAL

Level 5 Penetrations Requiring Seal

9. BASEMENT TO LEVEL 5 PREPARATIONS: LEVEL 5 PENETRATIONS

Level 5 Stair C Seal Off

o o 9. BASEMENT TO LEVEL 5 PREPARATIONS: LEVEL 5 STAIR C SEAL OFF

Level 5 Stair C Seal Off

9. BASEMENT TO LEVEL 5 PREPARATIONS: LEVEL 5 STAIR C SEAL OFF

Waterproofing Levels 5 – 12 o o o o

10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12

Brick Ties

Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing 10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: BRICK TIES

Brick Ties Sealing Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing Sealant is applied then coated 2-3 times with Barritech VP

10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: BRICK TIES SEALING

Joeris Tested Brick Ties

Sealed Brick Ties

Brick Ties Testing

Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing 10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: BRICK TIES TESTING

Sealed Cascadia Clips Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing

10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: SEALED CASCADIA CLIPS

Flashing & Fish Mouthing Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing

10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: FLASHING & FISH MOUTHING

Sealed then Coated with Barritech VP to prevent fish mouthing and any voids

Flashing & Fish Mouthing

Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing 10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: FLASHING & FISH MOUTHING

Having 3’’ min. from the corner each way and no wrinkles or fish mouthing

Flashing & Fish Mouthing

Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing 10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: FLASHING & FISH MOUTHING

Testing air would escape at screw penetrations

Brick Ties sealed – we called it ‘pookied up’

Brick Ties Testing & Repairs Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing

10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: BRICK TIES TESTING & REPAIRS

Cascadia Clip Sealant

Elevation with and without insulation

Testing & Repairs Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing

10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: BRICK TIES TESTING & REPAIRS

Hole at the fur down behind the steel

Envelope

Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing

Sealed up with flashing then edges sealed to eliminate peeling or fish mouthing.

10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: ENVELOPE

Mileage is thin on the air barrier

Mileage applied

Mileage

Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing 10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: MILEAGE

Not detailed

Detailed and sealed

Halfen Anchor & Support Steel Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing

10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: HALFEN ANCHOR & SUPPORT STEEL

Isokorb Detail

Isokorb

Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing Isokorb Thermal Break at Level 11 Balcony

10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: ISOKORB

Conventional Scaffold on Balconies

Mast Climber Scaffold

Scaffolding Elevations Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing

10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: SCAFFOLDING ELEVATIONS

Stair A Fire Spray Idea is to have layers on layers to help with the air pressure

Level 12 to Roof Cold Joint Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing

10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: LEVEL 12 TO ROOF COLD JOINT

Fire spray screw and bolt penetration from PV equipment on east side

Stair A Rooftop

Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing 10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: STAIR A ROOFTOP

Fire spray cold joint

Fire Spray

Idea is to eliminate any air from escaping through the cold joint crack

We Sprayed 3’’ each side of the Joint

Level 12 Bottom of Roof Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing

10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: LEVEL 12 BOTTOM OF ROOF

Sealing screws and Z channel

Parapet CCW 705 HT all edges were terminated with Barribond

Parapet

Level 5 – 12 Waterproofing 10. WATERPROOFING LEVEL 5-12: PARAPET

Deficiencies & Progress Mapping Per Elevation

11. PROGRESS MAPPING & DEFICIENCIES PER ELEVATION

TSI Energy Solutions

Visual Air Barrier Inspection

11.I. TSI VISUAL AIR BARRIER INSPECTION #4 REPORT

Inspect It - Test It - Trust It

Broadway Office Development 1803 Broadway San Antonio, TX Visual Air Barrier Inspection #4 July 30, 2019

Report Prepared by:

Phone: 800-481-5748 | 4650 Killarney Drive, Carmel, Indiana 46033 www.TSIenergysolutions.com

Page 1 | 9

Inspect It - Test It - Trust It

BROADWAY OFFICE BUILDING Visual Air Barrier Inspection #4 Joeris General Contractors 1803 Broadway Street San Antonio, TX 78215

Phone: 800-481-5748 | 4650 Killarney Drive, Carmel, Indiana 46033 www.TSIenergysolutions.com

Page 2 | 9

Inspect It - Test It - Trust It

PosiTest (Bubble Test) / Visual Air Barrier Inspection •

• • •

Continued testing on all clips, brick ties, and fish mouths along the west side of the south façade. o Leakage sites from previous inspections had been repaired were retested. o Minor fish mouths with confirmed leaks in the air barrier. o Leaks observed on 3 of the Cascadia clips. § Leakage sites found consistent where screws had been installed and removed leaving the hole in the air barrier system.

Locations around columns where the air barrier is not complete.

Caulking found to be pulling away from the wall, and several areas where holes are visible.

Areas in penthouse that will need special attention to maintain air barrier continuity.

Phone: 800-481-5748 | 4650 Killarney Drive, Carmel, Indiana 46033 www.TSIenergysolutions.com

Page 3 | 9

Inspect It - Test It - Trust It

Leakage at clips directly related to improperly installed screws that have been removed.

Phone: 800-481-5748 | 4650 Killarney Drive, Carmel, Indiana 46033 www.TSIenergysolutions.com

Page 4 | 9

Inspect It - Test It - Trust It

Areas found around columns and structure not fully sealed.

Repairs were made after leakage sites were found.

Phone: 800-481-5748 | 4650 Killarney Drive, Carmel, Indiana 46033 www.TSIenergysolutions.com

Page 5 | 9

Inspect It - Test It - Trust It

Areas of concern in the penthouse. *air barrier not yet installed at time of inspection

Locations to pay attention to while air barrier continues to be installed.

Daylight visible at steel to steel connections.

Verify these locations will have continuous air barrier installed.

Phone: 800-481-5748 | 4650 Killarney Drive, Carmel, Indiana 46033 www.TSIenergysolutions.com

Caulking visible on lower portion at transition but none observed on upper section of wall.

Page 6 | 9

Inspect It - Test It - Trust It

Caulking found not fully adhered to wall surface and noticeable gaps and holes.

Phone: 800-481-5748 | 4650 Killarney Drive, Carmel, Indiana 46033 www.TSIenergysolutions.com

Page 7 | 9

Inspect It - Test It - Trust It

Summary of Findings • • •

Brick ties not fully sealed at the pad and screw head. o Most leakage was observed around the screw head through the washer.

Air barrier product installed “horseshoed” around some penetrations.

Locations where screws had been improperly installed, then removed, leaving an open hole through the air barrier system.

•

Verify transition from concrete to sheathing on each level to confirm air barrier continuity at the corner details.

• •

Some window flashing has begun to separate along the opening.

Individual attention may be necessary at each tie after air barrier has been sprayed to reduce leaks at these know weak points.

All the notes and findings from previous inspection still apply. Testing and repairs should continue as necessary while working around the building.

Phone: 800-481-5748 | 4650 Killarney Drive, Carmel, Indiana 46033 www.TSIenergysolutions.com

Page 8 | 9

Inspect It - Test It - Trust It

LEARN MORE ABOUT OUR SERVICES AT

tsienergysolutions.com OR CALL 800-481-5748

Phone: 800-481-5748 | 4650 Killarney Drive, Carmel, Indiana 46033 www.TSIenergysolutions.com

Page 9 | 9

Sealant Rework at Sills

Deficiencies & Progress Mapping Per Elevation After fire rated sealant was installed, holes or cracks formed.

These were touched up to ensure no air leakage.

Damage to Sealant Welders stuck welding rods through the interior sealant to ground off for IFO work

11.II. SEALANT REWORK AT SILLS

Curtain Wall Testing Plan o o o o

12. CURTAIN WALL E1105 TEST PLAN

Curtain Wall

Diagrams of Test Plan

12.I. CURTAIN WALL E1105 TEST PLAN: DIAGRAMS

12.I. CURTAIN WALL E1105 TEST PLAN: DIAGRAMS

12.I. CURTAIN WALL E1105 TEST PLAN: DIAGRAMS

12.I. CURTAIN WALL E1105 TEST PLAN: DIAGRAMS

12.I. CURTAIN WALL E1105 TEST PLAN: DIAGRAMS

Sealant Pull Test Pull Test Pass Dow Sealant Adhesion Note: In the initial test Primer was not used and it failed the pull test which compromised the success of the curtain wall test

13. SEALANT PULL TEST

Design Issues & Water Leakage South Tower Areas o o

Concern o

14. DESIGN ISSUES: SOUTH TOWER

Design Issues Solution Development South Tower

14. DESIGN ISSUES: SOUTH TOWER SOLUTION DEVELOPMENT

Leakage Solution Sealant Install

Apply Primer P and DOW 795 Sealant at the sill from the inside of every window.

These areas were sealed after insulation was installed at the windowsill.

14.I. SOUTH TOWER LEAKAGE SOLUTION: SEALANT INSTALL

Curtain Wall Testing Process “Texas Two Step” (1) E1105 Test (2) AAMA 501.2 -15 or wand test

Tested curtain wall assembly with a water/rain rack o o o

o o o 15. CURTAIN WALL TESTING PROCESS: TEXAS TWO STEP

Field Coordinating Swing Stages & Mast Climbers Curtain Wall Testing Process

15. CURTAIN WALL TESTING PROCESS: FIELD COORDINATION

South Tower South Elevation South Elevation

South Elevation South Elevation

South Elevation South Elevation

South Elevation

South Elevation

Total

Level 5 Level 5 Level 6 Level 6 Level 6 Level 7 Level 7 Level 8 Level 8 Level 8 Level 9 Level 9 Level 10 Level 10 Level 10 Level 10 Level 10 Level 11

Level 12 Level 12 Level 12 Level 12

Drop 1 E Drop 1 W Broken Glass Broken Glass

Drop 2 E Pass 5-28

Drop 2 W Pass 5-28

Pass 5-8

Pass 5-8

Pre-test Fail

Pre-test Fail Pass 6-17

Pass 5-8

Pass 5-8

Pass 7-14

Broken Glass

Pass 5-8

Pass 5-8

Pass 5-8

Pass 5-8

Fail 5-8 Fail 7-30 Fail 8-5 Fail 5-14 Fail 7-14

Fail 5-8 Pass 7-30

Pre-test Fail Fail 5-29 Pass 6-24 AAMA Fail AAMA Pass Fail 4-23 R15 Fail 5-29 Fail 6-24 Fail Pass 8-12 Fail 6-17 Pass 8-12

Fail 5-14 Pass 7-14

Fail 4-23 R15 Fail 4-23 R 15 Pass 6-24 Fail 6-24

Pass 8-5

Drop 3 E

Drop 3 W Drop 4 E

Drop 4 W

Drop 5 E

Drop 5 W

Drop 6 E Fail 5-4 Pass 6-24

Drop 6 W Drop 7 E Pass 5-4 Failed 7-15 Failed 8-5 Pre-test Fail

Pass 5-18

Pass 5-18

Pre-test Fail Pass 5-29

Pass 5-6

Pass 5-6

AAMA Fail AAMA Pass Pass 4-23 R15

AMAA Fail AAMA Pass Pass 5-6

AMAA Fail Pre-test Fail AAMA Pass Pass 4-23 Pass 5-6

Fail 6-17 Pass 8-12

Pass 5-18

Pass 5-18

Pass 8-12

Pass 6-24

Fail 6-24 Pass 7-30

Pass 4-28

Drop 7 W Pass 7-15 Pre-test Fail Fail 6-10 Pass 7-15 Fail 4-28 Pass 6-10

Pre-test Fail Pass 6-10

Pass R16 4/28 Fail R16 4/28 Fail 6-10 Pass 7-15

Failures Pass % Pass Total Windows Tested Make-up Tests to still perform Retests To perform 3

5

8

4

0

1

4

5

1

1

1

6

7

2

2

1

5

6

2

0

0

4

4

0

0

4

6

10

0

1

6

5

11

6

4

9

8

17

8

4

25

43

68

23

69%

Total Tests Left

12 36

Elevation Progress Tracking Curtain Wall Testing Process

15. CURTAIN WALL TESTING PROCESS: ELEVATION PROGRESS TRACKING

Curtain Wall

Execution of Wand Test

15. CURTAIN WALL TESTING PROCESS: EXECUTION OF WAND TEST

Joeris Air Barrier

Leakage Testing Quality Management Plan

15.I.. JOERIS AIR BARRIER LEAKAGE TESTING QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN

Preparing

TSI Final Air Test Preparation for E779 Test Seal doors and perimeter

16.I. TSI FINAL AIR TEST: PREPARING FOR E770 TEST

Preparing

TSI Final Air Test Preparation for E779 Test Seal doors and perimeter

16.I. TSI FINAL AIR TEST: PREPARING FOR E770 TEST

Results Depressurization Test CFM @ -75 Pa

13315 cfm +/- 1.2 %

CFM @ -75/Sq ft

0.078 +/- 0.001

Confidence Interval (for Depressurization ONLY test)

0.077 to 0.079

Correlation Coefficient (r^2)

0.9980

Depressurization Coefficient

944.2 cfm/Pa^n +/- 8.0 %

Depressurization Exponent (nD)

.613 +/- 0.021

Pressurization Test CFM @ 75 Pa

16768 cfm +/- 1.5 %

CFM @ 75/Sq ft

0.098 +/- 0.002

Confidence Interval (for Pressurization ONLY test)

0.097 to 0.100

Correlation Coefficient (r^2)

0.9967

Pressurization Coefficient Cp

1227.7 cfm/Pa^n +/- 10.1 %

Pressurization Exponent (nP)

.606 +/- 0.026

Average CFM75

15042 cfm +/- 1.0 %

Average CFM75/Sq ft

0.088 +/- 0.002

Target CFM75/Sq ft

0.25

Confidence Interval (for both tests) EqLA75

0.087 to 0.090

Pass/Fail Target Airtightness?

10.2 sq ft +/- 1.6 % Pass

Results

TSI Final Air Test E779 Test Results Air Barrier Goals Achieved!

Deviations From Standard *Depressurization test did not reach an induced building envelope pressure of at least -75 Pa *Pressurization test included an induced building envelope pressure less than +25 Pa *Pressurization test did not reach an induced building envelope pressure of at least +75 Pa Page 2

16.II. TSI FINAL AIR TEST: E770 TEST RESULTS

Key Take Aways

What It Took to Meet Air Barrier Objectives on the Broadway Office Development Project o

o o

o o

o

o o o

o o

o o

o o o

17. KEY TAKE AWAYS

Broadway Office Development Joeris General Contractors

18. FINAL PROJECT PHOTOGRAPHY

Broadway Office Development Joeris General Contractors

18. FINAL PROJECT PHOTOGRAPHY

Broadway Office Development Joeris General Contractors

18. FINAL PROJECT PHOTOGRAPHY

Gary Joeris

CEO, Joeris General Contractors

18. FINAL PROJECT PHOTOGRAPHY

A i r B a r r i e r A d v e n t u re

An Impossible Air Tightness Goal Achieved At Joeris, our mission is to Transform People and Places and that includes you and your business.

If we can help in any way about any topic, please don’t hesitate to contact us.

VISIT JOERIS.COM