Objective: To get an idea of what happens in an enclosure when agent is discharged.

2
Water-based suppression systems may contain a fire, but at the expense of the contents
being protected!
Because it causes water damage (e.g. computers, documents)

Therefore, non-water-based suppression systems were introduced.

Halon was one for the first of these fire suppressants. Halon was used for many years and
was quite effective, but it was found to be an ozone depleter and had negative health effects.

Many Halon alternatives have now been developed. These gaseous systems presented a new
problem to the designer however; to extinguish a fire and to keep it suppressed, the gas
needed to be present in the enclosure for many minutes. Enclosures now had to be tight
enough to retain the gas in sufficient concentration and for sufficient time to ensure that re-
ignition did not occur.

Fact: When agent is discharged, the gas expands (and cools)

Page 3
Brief Retrotec background:

Colin Genge, president and CEO of Retrotec Inc. since 1980.

involved in the development of:
clean agent enclosure integrity testing procedures, air leakage measurement equipment, and
analytical software for this application since 1984.

Hes currently responsible for:

updating NFPA standard
coordinating similar procedures for the ISO standard as well.

Trained over thousands of technicians in over 50 countries

Regularly consult with all the major fire suppression equipment manufacturers worldwide
and has spent many years researching how enclosures interact with gaseous clean agent
suppression systems.
In 1984 Retrotec proposed pretesting enclosures to ensure they would pass the discharge
test.

Hard Fire of Columbus, and Suppression Systems of Chicago were the first pioneers to try out
the idea of using Door Fan systems to pressurize enclosures in order to locate leaks using
smoke that causes agent leakage. Air leaks were sealed up which allowed them to
successfully pass over 100 Halon discharge tests.

At this time, there was no thought about discontinuing full discharge tests because
everybody was really excited by them. But in 1985, the Environmental Protection Agency
threatened to ban the use of Halon altogether unless the industry stopped performing
discharge tests.

Retrotec then proposed measuring the enclosure leakage and using an algorithm to predict
Hold time. NFPA asked Retrotec (Colin Genge) to write the air leakage measurement portion
of what is now known as the Enclosure Integrity Procedure in Annex C of NFPA 2001.

A few years later the British started work on their own standard with a few minor changes
which eventually evolved into the ISO 14520 standard.

Page 5
6
Explanation of Peak Pressure:
The basic principle behind Peak Pressure is very simple: if a fixed volume has a large
quantity of gas pumped into it, the pressure inside that volume will increase. When a
clean agent system discharges there is an initial pressure spike in the enclosure that
can be powerful enough to cause significant physical damage this pressure is called
Peak Pressure. The enclosure must have sufficient vent area to dissipate any
excessive pressures upon discharge.

In 2002, Peak Pressure experiments were performed to discover Peak Pressures values and
characteristics due to Halocarbon and Inert agent discharges

7
Tests performed at Fike in Missouri are listed on the table, showing numerous discharges
using different agents.

8
Five major test programs to measure Peak Pressure during clean agent discharges have taken
place since 1997.

How tight the enclosure must be to hold the agent for the Hold time can be best described by
the Leakage-to-Volume Ratio (LVR ) which Ill discuss later.

9
To establish the relationship between Peak Pressure and all the variables affecting it, a series of
experiments was conducted in Fikes test enclosure where the leakage was measured in the positive and
negative directions over a wide range of vent areas

10
Heres another picture of the experimental setup.
Peak Pressure was recorded
Hold time was evaluated
Over 2 million pieces of data was collected over 5 years of research to characterize
Descending Interface formation on a clean agent

11
Most of the major clean agent manufacturers and equipment suppliers were involved.

Objective: to find range of Peak Pressures in an enclosure at different leakage areas, to get
characteristic curve

12
Heres a schematic of the test setup.

84 one-inch holes were drilled in their enclosure to simulate the worst case of what we
would find in the real world. The worst case scenario (i.e. the scenario that will predict the
shortest Hold time) is a 50/50 upper-to-lower holes ratio (later you will learn that this is an F-
value of 0.5)

They were distributed evenly on all four walls and evenly split between the top and bottom
of the enclosure.

1 Fact that you should remember: Bottom holes have a greater effect on lowering Hold time
than top holes, since agent density is greater than air and in a real discharge it will leak out
the bottom.

13
First a negative pressure was recorded, then a positive pressure.

14
The enclosure was made tighter by putting corks in some of the 84 one inch holes we had
drilled.
The previous example was 28 + 28 square inches, this example shows 18 +18 square inches.
Now the pressure increased from 3.7 to 9.3 psf !

15
An increase in enclosure leakage causes a decrease in the Peak Pressure, and vice versa.

16
There are primarily 2 different agent types: Halocarbon and Inert agents
Different agents produced different characteristic curves.

Peak Pressures can have both negative and positive pulses.

Inert agents usually have a positive pulse (virtually no negative pulse), whereas Halocarbon
agents are mostly negative pulses and with some positive pulse.

17
Graph:
Y axis Enclosure leakage, in terms of LVR (cm2/cm3)
X axis Peak Pressure

Increasing LVR decreases Peak Pressure

Discovered that the characteristic curve was not a square root relationship, as previously
thought.

18
Various agents are shown on the same graph.

Inert agent produces more Peak Pressure for a given LVR (leakage to volume ratio, also
known as VVR (Vent to Volume Ratio) because inert agents are discharged for 60 seconds (vs.
10 seconds for Halocarbons) which means more mass/volume discharged into the enclosure

19
Here Novec 1230 (a halocarbon) which produces a larger negative peak than positive peak.
By contrast, inert agents produce only positive Peak Pressures.

20
Here an Inert Agent, Nitrogen produces a large positive peak of 12 psf with no negative peak
at all.

21
On the left, the enclosure has a large positive peak of 20 psf using a regular valve

compare that to the same enclosure on the right

with a regulated valve that reduces the peak to only 5 psf

Both valves deliver the same amount of agent over 60 seconds.

But the regulated valve regulates the flow so that it is more even (i.e. doesnt have a sharp
initial pulse), decreasing the Peak Pressure.

22
CEA formula 1b square root relationship for Peak Pressure
Shape of curve for halocarbons was different than CEA formula 1b

23
From experimental data for inert agents:
Actual characteristic curve for inert agents had up to 200% error from the curve of CEA
formula 1b

Page 24
Recall: When a clean agent system discharges there is an initial pressure spike in the
enclosure that can be powerful enough to cause significant damage. The enclosure must have
sufficient vent area to dissipate any excessive pressures encountered upon discharge.

Page 25
If the enclosure is not tested properly, problems will not be uncovered.

Currently, many designs are doomed to failure before being installed. A quick check of the
design will quickly uncover these problems.

26
Bad enclosure designs will cause doors to be blown off the hinges, walls to be displace,
ceilings to be wrecked and walls split open.

Page 27
Some of these were previously discussed

Page 28
Here are some more factors.
Agent type can vary the Venting required by a factor of 4 or more from one agent to another.

29
Vent Area has the largest effect by far.
That is the one I will focus on

30
Inert agents work just like an ideal gas. When a large volume of gas is added to a fixed
volume (the enclosure), there will be a sharp increase in pressure which will then slowly
decay as gas escapes through leakage. The amount of leakage will dictate how large the
pressure increase is, as well as the rate of decay.

Page 31
Halocarbon agents are much more complicated than inerts. The agent goes through a phase
change from a liquid in the containers to a gas as it goes out through the nozzle. This phase
change causes significant heat absorption (agent cools) in the enclosure, which actually
creates a negative pressure spike. Then, once the agent starts to warm back up again, the gas
will expand and a positive pressure spike will occur. Depending on the agents
thermodynamic properties and the relative humidity, sometimes the negative Peak Pressure
can be far greater than the positive.

Page 32
Of all the factors that contribute to Peak Pressure, the LVR is the most important for several
reasons:
The concentrations for each agent are relatively constant, there is not much room for
variation
The discharge times are also strictly regulated, so variation will be small from one system to
the next.
The humidity of the enclosure can be difficult to control, and has a relatively small impact on
the Peak Pressure (no effect on inert agents)
Leakage from one enclosure to the next can be extremely different, and thus can cause
differences in Peak Pressures by more than an order of magnitude

Page 33
For Halocarbons:
Humidity has a dramatic effect on Peak Pressure

Negative pressure: decrease in humidity (drier air) -> increase in negative pressure spike,
and vice versa (increase air humidity -> negative pressure spike decreases)
Because evaporation of agent becomes less rapid in higher humidity

Page 34
There are 3 key design elements for Peak Pressure: determining enclosure strength,
determining the required LVR, and determining the vent area needed.

Page 35
Each inert agent manufacturer has a Peak Pressure curve, which can be used to determine
enclosure pressure limit (Peak Pressure) if you have the LVR

Page 36
Use Peak Pressure vent guide (FSSA, FIA, CEA 4045)

37
38
Enclosures have a variety of unintentional leaks
and/or intentional openings such as relief dampers (vents) that
Work together to relieve pressures during the discharge
I will be calling the total leakage: the Vent Area

Vents should be installed up high, so that air is vented instead of agent

39
To calculate LVR, you divide the enclosure leakage over the enclosure volume
You can also multiply this number by 1000 to get the amount of leakage per 1000 units of
volume (ft3 or m3).

Whenever an enclosure of any volume has that LVR, it will achieve the same Peak Pressure,
provided all the other variables are the same.
Since we have chosen worst case conditions for our research (50/50 lower/upper leakage
split), then chances are the pressures achieved in the field will be 10 to 50% lower.

40
The designer must have some idea of the wall strength or Enclosure Pressure Limit required
to contain the agent discharge. This table gives some examples and could be used as a guide.
Well constructed walls will typically take 500 Pa, ( about 10.4 PSF) without a problem, so this
could be a good place to start.

41
The leakage area of clean agent enclosures have been measured regularly using Door Fans
for retention Retention/Hold time predictions

and they can also be used to measure the vent area with the same apparatus except at
higher test pressures.

42
Testing reveals vents that opens only partially or too late

This commonly used damper only opened 20% at 250 Pascals

Giving only a tiny fraction of the venting that was expected.

When field tested, vent dampers rarely perform as anticipated.

43
Open vents at the lowest threshold pressure as possible. Opening the vent early (at a lower
pressure) decreases the peak.

The top curve depicts No vent giving the greatest peak at 671 Pascals.
The middle curve shows the Vent opening at 250 Pascals creating a 346 Pascal peak.
The bottom curve shows the Vent opening at 50 Pascals giving a 142 Pascal peak.

Its recommended that vents start opening between 50-75 Pa, and fully opened by 125 Pa.

44
Retention/Hold time

Page 45
With the exception of Nitrogen, all agents are heavier than air so when it is discharged, it
descends and leaks out the bottom of the enclosure.

Agents that are significantly denser than air (such as Novec which is 10x the density of air,
and most of the other Halocarbons). These will be more influenced by gravity than agents
that have densities similar to air (such as Argon and the other Inert gases).

Pressure created due agent discharge is called the column pressure. If floor leaks exist, as
they always do, the column pressure is dropped partially across the floor and partially across
the ceiling depending on the ratio of leaks.

Page 46
Consider the case of a bucket with no hole at the bottom; regardless how large an opening at
the top, fluid will not leak out. The same is true for an enclosure full of agent.

On the other hand, with a hole at the top and a hole at the bottom, water will leak out at a
rate dictated by the ratio of upper and lower leak areas. If the upper leak is reduced enough,
water leakage out the bottom will be reduced. Generally, even if the upper leaks are entirely
sealed, water will still slowly leak out as air bubbles into the bucket. The same is true in the
enclosure full of agent. However, agent leakage is primarily based on the lower leaks.

Page 47
Given an unlimited capacity for replacement of air to enter the bucket, leakage is directly
related to the total area of the lower leaks. Double the size of the holes and the leakage
doubles. Triple the size of the holes and the leakage triples.

Page 48
As the concentration increases, so does the flow out of the bucket (for the same size of hole).
[It is not directly proportional however.]

A very common misconception when the Door Fan test fails is to simply add more agent to
increase the Hold time. This is, in fact, wrong. Adding more agent increases the
concentration and will actually reduce the Hold time!

Page 49
Weve talked about Descending Interface systems, now Ill talk about Mixing or Continual
Mixing type systems

You may have heard of the concept that Hot air rises. Computer and other electronic
equipment may be shut down at the time of discharge, but heat due to hundreds or
thousands of watts of power are still expelled. This heat will cause localized plumes to
form around the equipment, drawing in gases from the floor level, transporting them up the
equipment towers, to be released above the equipment and cycled back to the floor.

Page 50
In-room air conditioning units, circulating fans, HVAC systems, and even equipment cooling-
fans all act to mechanically circulate air around the room. If these fans are intentionally
turned on or left running during discharge and during the Hold time, so that they can
continually circulate the agent and air within the enclosure.

For continual mixing systems, a higher initial agent concentration will increase Hold time
(wheras in a descending interface system, it will lower Hold time).

Page 51
Recall: Prior to 1988, the capability of an enclosure to retain its fire suppressant was assessed
by a discharge test.
Sensors that detected fire suppressant concentration were installed at various points of
interest around the room and then the fire suppressant system was discharged. During the
discharge, these sensors where monitored. A room would pass or fail the test by examining
the agent concentration at the top of the equipment over time. The room passed the test if
sufficient agent concentration was present after the required hold time at the top of the
equipment. In the event that the room failed, the room is sealed some more, and the
discharge test is repeated.

Aside from the cost of repeated discharge tests, Halon, the predominant agent at the time,
was also known to be an ozone depleter. In 1989 the EPA mandated the industry to
eliminate all future Halon discharges for the purpose of enclosure integrity verification.

Page 52
Discharge tests are now replaced by the Door-Fan Test.

NFPA 2001 and ISO 14520 now require an enclosure integrity test as part of the acceptance
procedure for all clean agent systems, including all halocarbon and inert gas agents. This
comprehensive test and calculation procedure predicts how long the agent will stay in the
room if it were ever discharged.

Page 53
A Door Fan measures the size of holes in the enclosure and software is used to calculate the
Hold time.

Page 54
Page 55
The main difference between the NFPA 2001 and ISO 14520 standards is the way each one
models the descending interface. NFPA assumes a sharp interface, meaning that the
interface between agent and air is infinitely thin. Everywhere below the interface the agent
remains at the initial concentration, and everywhere above the interface there is no agent
left at all. This is not exactly a realistic depiction of what would happen in a real discharge,
but the equations are simpler and have been shown to work fairly well. The Hold time is
defined as the time it takes for the agent-air interface below the minimum protected height.

Page 56
Unlike the NFPA sharp interface model, ISO uses what they call a wide interface. The wide
interface model defines the agent-air interface as a continuously growing area from agent
concentration of 0% at the top, and going all the way down to the height at which the initial
concentration still remains. The point of interest in the interface is the height at which the
minimum concentration (often 85% of the initial concentration) remains. This is called He, or
the equivalent sharp interface height. The Hold time is the time it takes for the equivalent
sharp interface height to descend below the minimum protected height.

Page 57
Pictorial explanation of discharge events
Basic idea (NFPA)

Page 58
NFPA - sharp interface
- (predicts longer Hold time)
ISO - wide interface
- conservative (predicts shorter Hold time)

Page 59
Here is the Proposed - thick interface
- IT is a growing interface like ISO, but only until a certain point, then
descends as a thick interface
- a little less conservative than ISO

For the:::
Sharp interface the interface does not expand
Wide interface interface is continually expanding (thickness keeps increasing)
Thick interface interface expands down to a certain point, and this thickness stays the same
as it drops

Thick interface will be in the newer versions of the NFPA and ISO standards

[show video from level 1]

Page 60
There are two types of discharge Behaviour:
-Continuous mixing
-Descending interface (three interfaces Ive previously described)

Page 61
Interface is defined as between 85% to 15 % agent concentration remaining

[Slope of the line on the elevation vs concentration graph is the interface thickness.]

62
Here is a Graph between: Interface height vs Hold time.
The actual data collected are the dots on the graph

Data shows:
NFPA formulas optimistic Hold times (too high)
ISO formulas conservative Hold times (too low)
Proposed formulas most accurate best fit line for Hold time

63
On this graph, % conservative (on the y-axis) is the % error

The Proposed wide-interface formulas are by far the closest to the axis, mostly hovering
steadily around 0%

64
65
We can determine the times that it will take for agent to drop to any level by measuring air
leakage

66
In general, when hole sizes are reduced to half, the time taken to fall to any level, doubles.
Here the Hold time increases from 10 to 20 minutes when the hole sizes are reduced from 2 -
22 sq inch holes to 2 - 11 square inch holes.

67
Here is a 16 foot enclosure where the Minimum protected height is 6 feet.
ISO predicts that the agent will drop to the 6 foot level in 6.2 minutes which fails the 10
minute requirement.
What to do?
Solution: seal the holes.

68
When a suspended ceiling is added to reduce the amount of agent used, the retention at 6
feet drops (from 6.2 minutes in the previous slide) to 1.5 minutes. Therefore adding a
suspended ceiling decrease Hold time because there is less volume of flooded agent (and also
a lower allowable drop)

69
To pass the test, both the options on the left and right can be done.
On the left the leakage is reduced on the top and bottom to 21 inches (from 144 inches in
previous slides) for the upper and lower leaks to achieve a pass of 10.4 minutes
Or
Another option, shown on the right, is to reduce only the lower leak to 15 sq inches, which is
usually easier.
As we will see later, the second option has other advantages with respect to Peak Pressure.

70
Usually sealing up holes becomes the answer to achieving the required Hold times.
It is common to find holes such as this large hole for cable penetration through walls, or wall
to floor leakage as shown on the right appear in enclosures.
When you ask some clients how much leakage is expected, or allowed for in a design, a
common answer is none. The reality is that enclosures are always full of holes that are not
at first visible, until they are measured and located with smoke testers.

71
ISO requires hold times of at least 10 minutes, but you should know that longer Hold times
than 10 minutes should be specified under certain

A Minimum Hold Time Must Be Specified

Longer Hold Times should be considered for:

remote sites that are un-manned.
hazards with continuous ignition and or fuel sources

72
Sometimes it is very difficult to pass a room for a 10 minute Hold time. You should know
situations when it is possible to specify a lower Hold time to pass the test.

Shorter Hold time than 10 minutes can be considered for:

Extremely small enclosures, which may be impossible to be sealed tight enough to pass. This
is because leakage area does not decrease linearily with volume decrease. In other
words, as the room volume becomes smaller and smaller, the leakage requirement
cannot get smaller and smaller to the same degree because surface area doesnt
mathematically decrease with volume linearly.

Past experience shows that enclosures with volumes of 1250 cu. ft can realistically only
achieve Hold times of 6 minutes, 625 cu. ft 4 minutes and 350 cu. ft 3 minutes. In these
situations, it is okay to justify a lower Hold time to AHJs.

73
To pass a test, sometimes forced Air Circulation should be considered
In room air conditioningn units, circulating fans, HVAC systems, and even equipment cooling-
fans all act to mechanically circulate air around the room. If these fans are running during
discharge and during the Hold time, they will act to continually churn the agent and air within
the enclosure.

74
75
a computer calculates the vent area,
the VVR and gives the Pass/Fail assessment

76
These two rooms are the same.
One is tested with one fan that measures the 159 sq inches of leakage which NFPA will
associate with a 2 minute Hold time
The right hand one was tested with two fans (BCLA or Lower Leaks test) so that the lower
leak of only 15 square inches could be measured. NFPA gives this a 10 minute Hold time.

77
Measuring lower leakage can pass your test (if the Total Enclosure Leakage test fails),
because you are ignoring the leakage in the ceiling, which is justified because agent
descends, not rises. A Flex Duct test is one of two methods to measure Lower leakage test
allows for a room to pass, if the Total Enclosure Test fails.

78
Heres a schematic of a Flex Duct Test.
The upper fan neutralizes the upper leaks allowing the lower fan to measure the lower leaks.
If lower leaks are smaller than one half the total, the Hold time will be increased.
I will give more information on this later.

79
Page 80
There is a conflict between needing more leakage area for relieving the Peak Pressure during
the seconds of the discharge, versus needing less leakage area for retaining the agent during
the retention period.

In other words, enclosures must be:

Loose enough to prevent damage during discharge

Tight enough to retain the agent

81
Recall

82
83
The Enclosure Pressure Limit is low all agents used would fail, since all of them will damage
the enclosure

84
Increasing Enclosure Pressure Limit can pass the test (1 agent will work in this case)

85
Dropping minimum protected height can pass the test for Descending interface systems

86
 Minimum
Protected Minimum Maximum
(Equipment) Protected Protected (Agent)
(Equipment) Height
Height
Height
Maximum Protected
(Agent) Height

The next example requires the Minimum Protected Height to be defined.

It is the minimum level the agent is allowed to fall to during the retention period.

Increasing initial concentration WILL NOT increase Hold time for Descending Interface
systems, but will for Continual Mixing systems.

87
e.g. Flooding the ceiling

88
Seal Lower leaks

89
6. Increasing discharge time to maximum agent going into enclosure at lower rate which
decreases Peak Pressure

90
A vent damper that opens for a few seconds during the discharge gives a large vent area for
relieving the Peak Pressure.

Then closes to reduce the leakage area during the retention period

91
There is a very narrow margin between needing a vent and not needing one. Enclosure vent
area should always be measured and a test completed to ensure adequate relief-venting.
The last thing needed, should a fire event occur, would be to make a bad situation worse by
damaging the enclosure.

92
Open vents as early as possible.
The top curve depicts No vent giving the greatest peak at 671 Pascals.
The middle curve shows the Vent opening at 250 Pascals creating a 346 Pascal peak.
The bottom curve shows the Vent opening at 50 Pascals giving a 142 Pascal peak.
Opening the vent early decreases the peak.

93
vent as high as possible

Ideally relief dampers would be located above suspended ceilings so that air is vented and
not agent.

94
The safest installation is one where only gravity holds back the relief damper.

95
The safest installation is one where only gravity holds back the relief damper.

96
The leakage area of clean agent enclosures have been measured regularly using Door Fans
for retention predictions

and we now propose measuring the vent area with the same apparatus except at higher test
pressures.

97
Vent opens partially or too late

This commonly used damper only opened 20% at 250 Pascals

Giving a tiny fraction of the venting that was expected.

When field tested, vent dampers rarely perform as anticipated.

98
Vent flaps are often blocked. They must be inspected on a regular basis.

99
What guarantees that the Electronic dampers will open at all?

If electronic or pneumatic actuators are used, they must be fast enough to open before the
pressure rises much above 50 Pascals. Some pressure spikes occur in less than a second, will
the dampers respond that fast?

Are they tested regularly to see if they still open?

Gravity-induced opening of the dampers should be considered in their design in case the
electronics fail

100
Surprise !
The large negative pulse was not reduced by the damper which was installed to open on a
positive pressure !

101
Beware of lay-in ceiling tiles that will be easily blown out as the agent makes its way to the
relief vent or to leaks above the ceiling.

Calculator defines Min / Max Leakage range. Vent area is shown if the Max is less than the
Min. In this case, the enclosure must be made tighter than the maximum for agent
retention with the Vent supplying the difference between the two.

Avoid velocity pressures

Calculate the ceiling time vent area to ensure this is avoided.

102
This PRV opens fully at 95.5 Pa

Page
103
Dual acting PRV open in both directions

Page
104
Halocarbons require negative and positive pressure venting. The Dual Acting PRV installed
should consider the greatest Peak Pressure direction (i.e. install PRV to open fully for air
intake into the room if the halocarbon has a larger negative Peak Pressure than a positive
Peak Pressure)

Page
105
Page
106
Page
107
Page
108
For Descending interface, More agent = faster draining

Page
109
Extended discharge can work, but it is expensive and should be a last resort

Page
110
Continual mixing is desired if protected equipment height is high and close to the height of
discharge/ceiling

Page
111
Page
112
2011 Building Pressure. All rights
reserved. 113
All certified testers are listed geographically on the Retrotec website. Certification
details and contact details are listed.

Page
114
NFPA 6.6.1 requires that testers be appropriately trained. The testing technician
should be certified to at least Level 2 for conducting a single Door Fan test and at
least Level 3 when conducting a dual Door Fan test. Testers who have completed any
part of Retrotecs training program are listed on our website at www.retrotec.com,
with complete details of their level of certification.

Page
115
Clean agent 2001 complies with NFPA 2001 (2000 and 2004 editions) and ISO
14520 (2006 edition*)

FanTestic Integrity complies with NFPA 2001 (2012 edition), ISO 14520 (2006 edition),
EN 15004 (2008 edition

*Requires companion spreadsheet

Page
116
NFPA C.2.2.1.5 (paraphrased): pressure gauge must be able to measure from 0-50Pa,
accurate within 1Pa, and calibrated yearly.
Needs to show error estimates at 10Pa, 15Pa, 20Pa, and 50Pa (minimum)

ISO E.2.3.2 (paraphrased): pressure gauge must be accurate within 1Pa, and
calibrated according to manufacturers recommendations.

Page
117
NFPA C.2.2.1.4 The accuracy of air flow measurement should be 5% of the measured
flow rate.
NFPA C.2.2.1.6 (paraphrased): Door fan system should be checked for calibration
every 5 years according to manufacturers specifications. Calibration certificate
should display flow errors at a minimum of 3 different leakage areas.

Page
118
NFPA2001 C.2.3.4

Either direction
Convenient pressure,
preferably 10 Pa

ISO14520 E.2.7.5.1

Both directions
10 Pa pressure differential

Error should be less than 15%

Page
119
 Recommended to check gauge regularly
Connect both channels together
Apply a pressure
E.g. apply pressure with your finger on the tube

Both channels should read roughly the same pressure

Within 1% or 1 Pa of each other

We strongly recommend that the gauge be checked on a regular basis, perhaps before each test. Simply connect
both channels together, and apply a pressure (from the fan pressure connection on the fan, for example). In the
pressure mode, both channels should read roughly the same pressure. You could also apply pressure by placing
your finger firmly onto the end of the yellow tube.

Insert a T in the tube and connect it to one reference port. Connect the other reference port as shown.
Increase the fan speed and compare Channel A and Channel B.
Values should be within 1% of each other.
Remove the tubes from the two reference ports and attach to the two input ports. Repeat the test.

1. Set both channels to measure pressure in Pascals.

2. Connect the input port of channel A to the input port of channel B (#1) using a small piece of tubing.
The measured pressure on both channels should be equal (within 1%).
3. Disconnect the input ports, and connect the reference ports (#2) of both channels using the same
piece of tubing. The measured pressure on both channels should be equal.
4. The same procedure can be followed with two gauges (#3). The reading on both gauges should be the
same

2011 Building Pressure. All rights

reserved. 120
This simple checklist allows the witness to confirm that all necessary steps have been
completed correctly.

Page
121