nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

BER Technical thread

lottyprop

I am a qualified but as of yet unregistered BER assessor. I work in property management and initially my plan was to assess my own properties. However prior to doing so I want to be sure I am 100% confident in my ability as an assessor.

So far this year our company has had 4 properties assessed by a registered BER assessor. I have assessed each of those properties unofficially and come out with the same result for 2 of the 4. Who was more correct ? Honestly I don't know!

I would like to start a thread BER assessors could share knowledge and ideas. I know I would benefit form it and I am sure other assessors would too. I would like to emphasize that I don't plan on being a site parasite. I have done both new and existing BER courses and have followed them up with a significant amount of practice and research. I will willingly answer any BER related questions that I possibly can ..

If I can get the ball rolling with a question ...

If an external door is 40% glazing it's default u-value must be adjusted as follows :

(glazing u-val x 40) + (door u-val x 60) / 100

My question is where does the glazing come from. An obvious way of getting this u-val would be to use the DEAP software and input the glazing area under the windows section and then use this u-value..

This is what I have been doing for my unofficial assessments ? is this the correct way of doing it?

Also if there is a glass panel to the side of the door, should the entire opening be treated as the door with the glazed side panel a percentage of the door or should the side panel be treated as a separate window?

I realise these make very little difference but I am anxious to get my assessment procedure as accurate as possible before offering my services.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

sydthebeat

3) For doors which are half-glazed (approximately) the U-value of the door is the average of the appropriate window U-value and that of the non-glazed part of the door (e.g. solid wooden door [U-value of 3.0 W/m2K]
half-glazed with double glazing [low-E, hard coat, argon filled, 6 mm gap, U-value of 2.5 W/m2K] has a resultant

U-value of 0.5(3.0+2.5) = 2.75 W/m2K).

Source: SAP 2005

MicktheMan

There is already a technical section for such questions on the ber association website : http://www.berassoc.ie

Slig

and one in Renewable Energies.

lottyprop

Cheers systhebeat,

Do you include any glazed side panels as part of the doors glazing or do you count them as a separate window ?

We were told on our existing dwellings course not to include the electric immersion as a secondary water heating system if there is means to separate water and space heating via the boiler. An assessor who has assessed 2 of our properties has insisted that it should be included regardless for completeness. Can anyone give the official line on this?

If an external wall is dry lined and insulated but an internal wall (width 300mm) causes a break in the dry lining and insulation creating a thermal bridge How should this be treated?

Btw. I enquired about joining the berassoc site some time back and was told it was only for registered assessors and I haven’t registered yet.

MicktheMan

lottyprop wrote: »

Btw. I enquired about joining the berassoc site some time back and was told it was only for registered assessors and I haven’t registered yet.

You were mis-informed. Membership is open to suitably qualified assessors but not yet registered as well as registered assessors afaik.

dahayeser

On the thermal bridge question, you can ignore it. This is why there is a factor for thermal bridging.

If you read the Appendix S Section S4 on the DEAP manual it outlines fairly generous allowances in respect to areas and u-values.

holdfast

Membership is open to suitably qualified assessors

That means any ones that done the course even if they did not meet the min. requirements. They wish to promote BER assessors but hey would be better ensuring that they are own ranks were free from any finger pointing at their creditability. Before they wish to push rules and regulations at SEI

Maybe another thread BER association a joke

dunie001

Ok i've a few questions to ask:

Q. If a house was built in 1978 with 300mm cavity walls but it was pumped with insulation in 1998, do you count the wall as being between 1978-1982 or between 1994-1998?

Q. If a house was built in 1983 with no "room in roof", but it was later converted to a "room in roof" in 1996, is the "room in roof" of 1983 build or of 1996 build reg's???

Q. I've basically the same question in relation to boilers and radiators etc.? How do you tell DEAP that a house built in 1976 has radiators from 2006??

lottyprop

dunie001 wrote: »

Ok i've a few questions to ask:

Q. If a house was built in 1978 with 300mm cavity walls but it was pumped with insulation in 1998, do you count the wall as being between 1978-1982 or between 1994-1998?

You would count the walls as being between 1978-1982 and presuming you have some documented evidence of the insulation that was pumped in you can get a u-value for this and input it as an extra layer of insulation (not sure what the exact field name in DEAP is where you input this value but there is one anyway)

holdfast

a.)Check the walls for drilled holes where the insulation was pumped. Usually a dead giveaway. They should be more visible around windows and doors. People just tend to paint over them.
b.) Compare size of room with overall house size if less than 10% ignore otherwise you will have to make a call on it.
c.) Rads from 1970 make no difference, use the “Harp index” for the boiler and search model type, if not there you have to make the judgement call on the boiler otherwise. that why the pay us to the big bucks

dahayeser

lottyprop wrote: »

Cheers systhebeat,
Do you include any glazed side panels as part of the doors glazing or do you count them as a separate window ?

If the side panel is not on the actual door would have included this as a seperate window but you've got me thinking now .. it is part of the over all door opening (and frame Isuppose) so prehaps it would be more correct to factor treated as a door with an adjusted u-value if the glazing is over 30% ..

Can anyone else advise on this?

Slig

dahayeser wrote: »

If the side panel is not on the actual door would have included this as a seperate window but you've got me thinking now .. it is part of the over all door opening (and frame Isuppose) so prehaps it would be more correct to factor treated as a door with an adjusted u-value if the glazing is over 30% ..

Can anyone else advise on this?

Its one of many incostincies that come up betwen assessors. I would personally take it as a window because thats what it is, its glazing in a frame. A door is a door

dunie001

Thanks for the answers fellas...

Unfortunately no paperwork exists for the pumped insulation, but there are clear signs in parts of the exterior blockwork of pumping holes as well as two areas in the attic where you can actually see and touch the insulation in the cavity (used to be duct for kitchen extract).

I took pictures of the patched holes in the exterior wall and of the insulation in the cavity in the attic.

I presume this will suffice as evidence for SEI as there is no other way of proving the work.

The walls were pumped 12yrs ago, so the invoice and details of installer have been lost over time...obviously no word back then about BERs and the like.

sinnerboy

dunie001 wrote: »

I presume this will suffice as evidence for SEI as there is no other way of proving the work. .

Let's know in due course please dunie001 . Very few existing BER's as yet and it would be good to compile an overview of what SEI will accept as evidence in practice of improvement works done . SEI guidance notes are a little vague " look for invoices " etc

dunie001

DEAP says the following about doors:

Category___Description__Glazing Area___Solar Gain___U-Value

1.______Solid Door______<30%________NO______Default
2.______Glazed Door____30-60%______NO_______Adjust
3.______French Door_____>60%______YES_______Window

sydthebeat

dunie001 wrote: »

Thanks for the answers fellas...

Unfortunately no paperwork exists for the pumped insulation, but there are clear signs in parts of the exterior blockwork of pumping holes as well as two areas in the attic where you can actually see and touch the insulation in the cavity (used to be duct for kitchen extract).

I took pictures of the patched holes in the exterior wall and of the insulation in the cavity in the attic.

I presume this will suffice as evidence for SEI as there is no other way of proving the work.

The walls were pumped 12yrs ago, so the invoice and details of installer have been lost over time...obviously no word back then about BERs and the like.

is it possible to photograph this??

dunie001

I took photos of the holes on the stone facade section of the house...it's clear that there were drill holes there in the past.

Of course the holes on the main walls cannot be seen because they have been painted over so many times by now, that there is no sign of them at all.

Another Question:

Q. It says in the DEAP Survey Guide to draw sketches of elevations and plans etc. I can understand drawing sketches of the plans and taking measurements of the windows and doors,
but surely it's a bit excessive to have to measure the location and height of every window and door as they are not needed for the calculations. Surely photos of each side of the house would suffice??? What do you guys think???

I mean it's not as if we're doing a full scale drawing of the bloomin house!!! We're doing a BER!

sydthebeat

i dont find it necessary to draw elevations....

window widths and heights, and floor to ceiling heights, and external photographs can suffice.

regarding pumped insulation... in renovations its possible pumping can be done internally... and the plastered over.. this had me confused on a recent assessment when the client had a cert for pumping but there was no evidence of drill externally....

lottyprop

On the DEAP survey form there is space to document the dimensions of each room in the house. None of the assessors who have worked on the properties we are managing have taken these measurements. The only room measurement take was the living room.

Another question..
Ihave a house with two gas fires - these are coal effect fires, sitting in the fire grate, no glas front or anything with a regular chimney over them.

I am not sure what is the most relevent field in table 4a of the DEAP manual for this. I would be guessing it is -

Decorative Fuel Effect gas fire, open to chimney
20% efficient

Can any one confirm this?

Also this is a secondry form of heating, which according to DEAP accounts for 10% of the total space heating demand. Does it matter that there is more than one of these inefficient gas fires?

sydthebeat

lottyprop wrote: »

On the DEAP survey form there is space to document the dimensions of each room in the house. None of the assessors who have worked on the properties we are managing have taken these measurements. The only room measurement take was the living room.

Another question..
Ihave a house with two gas fires - these are coal effect fires, sitting in the fire grate, no glas front or anything with a regular chimney over them.

I am not sure what is the most relevent field in table 4a of the DEAP manual for this. I would be guessing it is -

Decorative Fuel Effect gas fire, open to chimney
20% efficient

Can any one confirm this?

Also this is a secondry form of heating, which according to DEAP accounts for 10% of the total space heating demand. Does it matter that there is more than one of these inefficient gas fires?

firstly, there is no need to take each room measurement if they sketch up a plan and measure from there...

each room measurement is only need if the measurements are not inputed on the sketch plan.

the living room area is the only room area needed to be measured.

and i can confirm that an open fronted gas fire place is 20% effiecient according to DEAP

dahayeser

lottyprop wrote: »

Decorative Fuel Effect gas fire, open to chimney
20% efficient

Can any one confirm this?

Also this is a secondry form of heating, which according to DEAP accounts for 10% of the total space heating demand. Does it matter that there is more than one of these inefficient gas fires?

Yes I can also confirm I have input this as 20%, same principle as the open fire - majority of the heat goes up the chimney.

It doesn't matter in DEAP if there is more than one of these gas fires in the house it is still considered a secondary heating sys and according to DEAP contributes just 10% of the overall space heating. That is assuming your primary heating system is one of gas, oil, solid fuel, heat pump or group heating systems.

lottyprop wrote: »

We were told on our existing dwellings course not to include the electric immersion as a secondary water heating system if there is means to separate water and space heating via the boiler. An assessor who has assessed 2 of our properties has insisted that it should be included regardless for completeness. Can anyone give the official line on this?

On checking my notes last night, I found I had a note scribbled in to ignore electric immersion. Nothing in the actual course text, it just looked more like something the instructor called out. I have been including the immersion myself as a secondary water heating system.

sydthebeat

dahayeser wrote: »

On checking my notes last night, I found I had a note scribbled in to ignore electric immersion. Nothing in the actual course text, it just looked more like something the instructor called out. I have been including the immersion myself as a secondary water heating system.

an immersion is ONLY to be inputed if there is no means to seperate space and DHW in summer... ie a zoning system....

all bar one of the pre 2005 dwellings i have done have had to had this included....

lottyprop

Something worth watching out too is - a lot of the old systems have a leaver that can be used close the supply to the heating system and just heat DHW. I have seen this in a number of old properties.

This could easily be missed as I'd say most assessors would just be watching out for a modern zoning system.

topcatcbr

My understanding of this is a system which cannot provide hot water only has an emersion as secondry hw heating. That means primary heating by means of an open fire or stove with backboiler will have an emmersion shown. all other systems will not. The point made to me when i asked this was with all other systems the rads can be turned off by the valves which would mean the boiler was then capable of providing hot water only wthout providing backround heat in the summer. backboilers are not capable of this.

There does not need to be any zoning or sofisticated boiler controls or even an isolating valve.

sydthebeat

from DEAP

4.6 Hot Water Backup

In most cases the system specified for water heating should be that intended to heat the bulk of the hot water during the course of the year. For example, supplementary electric water heating should be disregarded if provided only for backup where the principal water heating system is from a central heating boiler, as should other devices intended for or capable of heating only limited amounts of hot water.
Supplementary electric water heating is to be included in the following cases:

a)
Where the main water heating system is incapable of providing hot water without space heating, then
the “supplementary electric water heating in summer” option is set to “yes”. In this case, the secondary
water heating fuel type is set to “electricity”.

b)
Where there is a heat pump with an immersion, then “supplementary electric water heating in summer”
is set to “no” and the secondary water heating fuel type is set to “none”. In this case, the efficiency of the
main water heater is determined using equation G1 in Appendix G.
Section 10.3.3 provides further detail on electric water heating supplementing solid fuel boilers.

thanks top..... makes sense...

lottyprop

Cheers guys,

Just wondering what your opinions are on blocked up chimneys. I have a house where there are 2 first floor chimneys, both of which are blocked up or at least covered up..

If a chimney is permanently blocked up you ignore it .... but what constitutes permanently blocked?

In this case I need not have even located either of these chimneys. There was a large piece of furniture screwed to the wall on front of them. I removed this and found 1/2 sheet of plywood screwed in to the wall covering the opening. The owner then told us that there was no insulation behind the timber and the timber was the only thing blocking the chimney?

The reason I did some digging is I spotted additional chimney pots! Testing is meant to be non destructive though so I suppose as I couldn't see the opening it should be ignored ..

sydthebeat

lottyprop wrote: »

Cheers guys,

Just wondering what your opinions are on blocked up chimneys. I have a house where there are 2 first floor chimneys, both of which are blocked up or at least covered up..

If a chimney is permanently blocked up you ignore it .... but what constitutes permanently blocked?

In this case I need not have even located either of these chimneys. There was a large piece of furniture screwed to the wall on front of them. I removed this and found 1/2 sheet of plywood screwed in to the wall covering the opening. The owner then told us that there was no insulation behind the timber and the timber was the only thing blocking the chimney?

The reason I did some digging is I spotted additional chimney pots! Testing is meant to be non destructive though so I suppose as I couldn't see the opening it should be ignored ..

if you cant conrim something visually... default to the worst value....

lottyprop

I would have thought when the fireplace is not even visible you would assume it has been permanently blocked. The opening is totally blocked but not sealed, to default it to a full chimney would seem to be very harsh. If I hadnt unscrewed the furniture (which technically I think assessors aren't supposed to do) I couldn't even have been sure there was a fireplace there at all ..

sydthebeat

by that logic how are you supposed to confirm that the flue is open... light a fire??

you have visually confirmed that the fireplace is boarded over..... do you consider that proof of 'permanent blockage'...??? I wouldnt...

if not, you have to default to 'open chimney'...

topcatcbr

I have come across this before a few times. Where the fire place and hearth has been removed and the fire place covered and plastered i would not count it as a chimney. (they should have a vent where the chimney ope was)

If it is just covered over and it would not require any considerable work to reinstate the chimney i include it. (Eg a sheet of ply jamed or screwed in position).