Best of Series

BARRIERS
AGAINST
AIR LEAKAGE
 Building and Construction

HIGH PERFORMANCE
BUILDING SOLUTIONS
As the global leader and innovator in silicones
for almost seven decades, we intimately know
the challenges pressing our customers in the
construction industry and related fields.
Dow Corning is collaborating with industry
professionals around the world to improve
the energy efficiency of buildings, offer long-lasting
solutions and provide excellent technical support.
This is High Performance.

dowcorning.com/construction

Image: © Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill Architecture/Jeddah Economic Company.

®™
Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) or an affiliated company of
Dow. The Corning portion of the Dow Corning trademark is a trademark of Corning
Incorporated, used under license. © 2017 The Dow Chemical Company. All rights
reserved. AGP15038. dow_42218047915.
 Contents
Part One
4 Understanding the Canadian Air Barrier Standards
An exploration of CAN/ULC-S741 and S742
By Jean-François Côté, PhD, OCQ

Part Two
11 Weatherproofing ICF Walls
Lessons in resiliency from B.C. field testing
By Douglas Bennion

Part Three
18 Improving the Performance of Curtain Walls
By Ben Mitchell, CSI, Chad Ricker, and Jerry Schwabauer

25 Part Four
Energy-efficient Building with EIFS
By Michael DeLaura, LEED AP, and John Edgar

Brought to you in part by

Published by
Kenilworth Media Inc.
15 Wertheim Court, Suite 710 Richmond Hill, Ontario L4B 3H7
Toll-free: 800-409-8688; (866) 572-5633; Fax: (866) 572-5677
www.constructioncanada.net

The information and contents in this publication are believed by the publisher to be true, correct, and accurate, but no independent investigation has
been undertaken. Accordingly, the publisher does not represent or warrant that the information and contents are true, correct, or accurate, and
recommends that each reader seek appropriate professional advice, guidance, and direction before acting or relying on all information contained
herein. Opinions expressed in the articles contained in this publication are not necessarily those of the publisher.

© 2017 Kenilworth Media Inc. All rights reserved.

 Barriers Against
Air Leakage

Part One
Understanding the Canadian Air Barrier Standards
An exploration of CAN/ULC-S741 and S742

BY JEAN-FRANÇOIS CÔTÉ, PHD, OCQ

Jean-François Côté, PhD, OCQ, is the director of standards

and scientific affairs for Soprema. A registered chemist in
Québec, he chairs the CSA A123.23 technical committee
on bituminous roofing materials. Côté is an active member
of groups including ASTM International, Asphalt Roofing
Manufacturers Association (ARMA), Polyisocyanurate
Insulation Manufacturers Association (PIMA), and ULC. He
can be reached via e-mail at jfcote@soprema.ca.

4 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE

 Feature
Understanding the Canadian
Air Barrier Standards
An exploration of CAN/ULC-S741 and S742
D
uring the 1970s, extensive research was carried
out in Canada on air leakage in buildings.
Researchers at the National Research Council
(NRC) demonstrated the importance of managing
air leakage through the building enclosure. In
the following decade, the concept of air barrier
material emerged and was formally introduced in
the 1985 edition of the National Building Code of
Canada (NBC).
It was then known that uncontrolled air leakage
increases the burden on heating or air-conditioning,
and causes problems because air can transport
large amounts of humidity. Building professionals
BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE | Construction Canada E-BOOK
All images courtesy Soprema
adapted their designs to this new reality, but the
appropriate choice and positioning of materials
in assemblies brought new challenges, with the
functions of air barrier and vapour barriers often
misunderstood. Consequently, major failures such
as mould growth in wall assemblies, rotting of
structural materials, or bursting of water-saturated
exterior cladding materials in winter were observed.
Starting in the mid-’90s, NBC prescribed a
maximal air leakage rate for exterior wall assemblies,
but did not indicate how to evaluate materials and
systems to determine compliance. Interestingly,
standards for air barriers appeared first at ASTM
5
 Some say that both of
the Canadian air barrier
standards—CAN/
ULC-S741 and CAN/
ULC-S742—are just the
north-of-the-border
versions of their U.S.
ASTM counterparts, but
nothing could be further
from the truth.
with the development of E2178, Standard Test
Method for Air Permeance of Building Materials,
published in 2001. This standard rapidly became
the reference for the determination of air leakage
of building materials.
In Canada, the first standards related to air
barrier materials and systems appeared several
years later. CAN/ULC-S741, Standard for
Air Barrier Materials−Specification, and S742,
Standard for Air Barrier Assemblies−Specification,
were published in 2008 and 2011, respectively.
Some may say these are just Canadian versions
of ASTM E2178 and E2357, Standard Test
Method for Determining Air Leakage of Air Barrier
Assemblies, because they make reference to their
U.S. counterparts for test conditions. However,
that is all they have in common.
First, ASTM E2178 and E2357 standards are test
methods. They describe in detail the procedure to be
followed to measure air leakage rates of air barrier
materials and assemblies. Being test methods,
these standards do not establish a requirement or
performance level. It is therefore impossible for
a material to meet or exceed the requirements of
these standards.
Testing an air barrier material as per ASTM E2178
or testing an air barrier assembly as per ASTM
6 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE
E2357 provides a numerical result corresponding
to the air leakage rate or permeance of the
material or assembly. This result may then be
used to compare various materials or assemblies,
or to demonstrate compliance with building
code requirements.
What are S741 and S742?
Both Canadian standards CAN/ULC-S741
and S742 are specifications. Not only do they
indicate how to measure air leakage of air barrier
materials and assemblies (by way of references
to the aforementioned ASTM test methods),
but they each also include relevant performance
requirements. S741 and S742 therefore help
designers and specifiers easily recognize the level
of performance provided by air barrier materials
and assemblies tested under S741 and S742.
The S741 standard requires the result obtained
from the air leakage testing be clearly mentioned
when reporting in order to facilitate comparison
between materials. It is not sufficient to simply
indicate “pass” on the data sheet of an air barrier
material tested as per S741. For air barrier
assemblies, a five-level classification (A1 to A5) is
included in S742; it is based on the maximum air
leakage rate measured during the test.
S741–Air barrier material testing Figure 1
Today’s offering of air barrier materials is quite
extensive, including products sold in sheet form
(self-adhered or nailable) or liquids intended to be
sprayed or trowelled. They can be manufactured
from organic fibres or synthetic plastics, and
be pre-assembled or site-constructed. Some
rigid insulation boards can also claim to be air
barrier materials.
CAN/ULC-S741 allows the testing of all
these different materials to determine their
performance against air leakage. This standard
is intended for materials themselves, without
accessories and details, irrespective of their
composition. It establishes the proper test method
for air leakage and air permeance based on ASTM
E2178, and mandates air barrier materials being
tested exhibit air leakage rates no greater than
0.02 L/s•m2 (0.004 cfm/sf). Materials must meet
this requirement in both directions (infiltration
and exfiltration), and the test is performed before
and after a conditioning/aging period during
which the material is exposed to ultraviolet (UV)
radiation, then subjected to heat-conditioning.
In order to meet the requirements of S741, the
air leakage rate of the air barrier material after
conditioning shall not be more than 10 per cent barrier assembly as constructed in the field and The photo above
shows a self-adhesive
or 0.001 L/s•m2 (0.0002 cfm/sf) greater than its according to the manufacturer’s installation air barrier assembly
air leakage before conditioning. This ensures the instructions. This includes the use of primer ready to be tested as
air barrier material will maintain its integrity when applicable, proper sealing of laps, and per CAN/ULC-S742.

for a minimal period after its installation before
being covered by the exterior cladding.
S742–Air barrier assembly testing
CAN/ULC-S742 covers air barrier assemblies
(i.e. the combination of air barrier materials
and their accessories) used in low-rise and high-
rise buildings. Similar to S741, it includes test
conditions to measure the air leakage rate of an
air barrier assembly’s representative specimen,
and defines the performance level that must be
attained. Each tested assembly is then given a
classification (A1 to A5) based on its air leakage
rate at a reference pressure difference, measured
before and after exposure to cyclic wind loading.
Testing as per S742 references the test method
and procedure found in ASTM E2357. The air
barrier assembly being tested is mounted in
two different 2.4 x 2.4-m (8 x 8-ft) frames. The
test specimens shall be representative of the air
perimeter reinforcement if required.
In the first frame, the assembly is installed
without any penetration of the air barrier
materials. Side- and end-laps must be present in
the case of discontinuous air barrier materials
(e.g. sheet-applied or panels). In the second
frame, various penetrations typically found
in an exterior wall are added to the assembly.
These include:
• windows;
• galvanized steel ducts;
• piping;
• junction boxes; and
• brick ties.
All penetrations must be sealed with appropriate
accessory material to maintain continuity of the
plane of airtightness. Figure 1 shows a frame with
all penetrations sealed and ready to be tested.
Figure 2 (page 8) shows two close-up images of
typical penetrations.

BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE | Construction Canada E-BOOK 7

 CAN/ULC-S741 and S742 are specifications—not only do they indicate how
to measure air leakage of air barrier materials and assemblies, but they each
also include performance requirements.

Figure 2

Two junction boxes representing typical penetrations sealed to ensure continuity of the plane of airtightness.

Both frames are then tested individually. For
testing, each frame is placed between two climatic
chambers and a computer-controlled system allows
the operator to generate a pressure difference
(infiltration and exfiltration) across the frame and
the air barrier assembly. The pressure difference
varies from 25 to 300 Pa during the test; the air
leakage rate across the assembly is measured and
reported at a pressure difference of 75 Pa.
This is where S742 and ASTM E2357 part ways.
After being subjected to this first test, each frame
is exposed to a series of pressure differences
(infiltration and exfiltration) simulating cyclic
wind loads. Static pressures starting at 450 Pa
(9.4 lbf/sf) and maintained during one hour,
followed by cyclic pressure loads and gust
loads reaching at least 980 Pa (20.5 lbf/sf),
are applied to each frame. Figure 3 (page 10)
illustrates these pressure loads. Deflection of the air
barrier assembly is measured during this portion of
the test, which provides professionals with guidance
on the selection of materials.
Air leakage rate measurement is then repeated twice
on each frame. The first measurement is performed
under typical laboratory conditions (identical to the
test prior to cyclic loading). The second measurement
is performed under ‘winter’ conditions, where a
temperature difference is induced across the frame. In
this case, the exterior side of the assembly is cooled to
−20 C (−4 F) while the interior is maintained at 20 C
(68 F). For an air barrier assembly to obtain the A1
classification (i.e. the most stringent), the largest air
leakage rate measured in all the aforementioned
conditions shall not exceed 0.05 L/s•m2 (0.01 cfm/sf)
at a pressure difference of 75 Pa (1.6 lbf/sf).
What about roofs?
The ASTM E2178 and E2357 standards were
developed for wall air barrier materials/assemblies.
Actually, wall assemblies most likely represent the vast

8 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE

 Building and Construction

DESIGN WITH
CONFIDENCE
Push the design envelope with the confidence of
proven performance. Our 50+ years of proven silicone
performance brings peace of mind for advanced building
design, enabling architects to create sustainable, cutting-
edge showpieces that deliver form and function.
Backed by industry-leading warranties and Dow Corning’s
extensive technical support and collaborative development
expertise, architects and engineers can take advantage
of silicone’s unmatched capabilities to develop unique
designs without compromising performance.

Find answers to your next-generation

design challenges with solutions from
Dow High Performance Building.

dowcorning.com/50plus
®™
Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) or an affiliated company of Dow. The
Corning portion of the Dow Corning trademark is a trademark of Corning Incorporated,
used under license. © 2017 The Dow Chemical Company. All rights reserved. AGP15038.
dow_40963531562.
 Figure 3
Wind Pressure Loading
(CAN/ULC-S742)
Positive Pressure
60 minutes
Negative Pressure
60 minutes
Wind pressure
sequences
prescribed by Sustained Loads
CAN/ULC-S742
simulating cyclic
wind loads.
majority of E2357 tests performed by laboratories.
However, the key for performing air barrier
systems is the continuity, which includes junctions
between adjacent assemblies (e.g. wall/foundation
and wall roof junctions) and also a good roof air
barrier assembly.
Before S742, designers and specifiers could not
rely on a test method to evaluate the air barrier
performance of roof assemblies. A significant
advantage of S742 is that for roof air barrier
assemblies, if the designated plane of airtightness
is a low-sloped membrane roof assembly and
the roof membrane serves as the air barrier
material, such assembly is deemed to have an
A4 classification (maximum air leakage rate of
0.2 L/s•m2 [0.04 cfm/sf]) without having to
be tested. In order to demonstrate a better
classification than A4, roof air barrier assemblies
for which the CSA A123.21 standard is applicable
will be allowed to be tested using the parameters
and procedure found in CSA A123.21. Therefore,
testing will be performed horizontally (as the
roof is installed normally) instead of attempting
to position these assemblies vertically as required
by ASTM E2357.
10 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE
1000 cycles
(3-second gusts)
Time
1000 cycles
Cyclic Loads Gust
Loads
Conclusion
Canadian standards were enriched with the
publication of CAN/ULC-S741 and S742. Both
provide designers and specifiers with greater
confidence in the expected performance of
air barrier materials and assemblies used in
Canada. Requirements found in these standards
are coherent with those of NBC, which has
integrated a reference to CAN/ULC-S742 in its
2015 edition (Division B, part 9), and with the
requirements of National Energy Code of Canada
for Buildings (NECB).
The 2015 NECB (Division B, subsection 3.2.4)
now requires air barrier assemblies to conform
to CAN/ULC-S742 with a classification of A4
or better. An option to use ASTM E2357 to
meet the air leakage requirement is still present,
although this option is only permitted for
buildings located where the 1-in-50 hourly wind
pressures do not exceed 0.65 kPa (13.5 lbf/sf),
and if assemblies are installed on the warm side
of the thermal insulation. The usefulness of S741
and S742 will most likely increase their presence
in specifications as more professionals discover
their advantages.
Barriers Against
Air Leakage

Part Two
Weatherproofing ICF Walls
Lessons in resiliency from B.C. field testing

BY DOUGLAS BENNION

Douglas Bennion manages the technical department for Quad-

Lock Building Systems, an ICF manufacturer that was one of the
industry stakeholders in the project discussed in this article and was
instrumental in all phases of the research. His work has supported
the ICF industry since 1989, and he has directly contributed to
developing ICF building code and manufacturing standards in
Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Bennion regularly conducts
training and continuing education seminars for builders and design professionals
around the world. He can be contacted at douglas.bennion@quadlock.com.

BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE | Construction Canada E-BOOK 11

Feature
Weatherproofing
ICF Walls
Lessons in resiliency from B.C. field testing
S
uccessful independent field testing and code
compliance analysis in British Columbia has
resulted in the compilation of the first
comprehensive set of residential construction details
for insulating concrete forms (ICFs) in North America.1
From footings to trusses, the ICF details presented in
the provincial Homeowner Protection Office’s (HPO’s)
upcoming release, “Building Envelope Guide for
Houses,” offer a concise and cost-effective path to best
practices and B.C. code compliance. Ongoing efforts
indicate a strong potential for expanded adoption of
these details in jurisdictions across Canada.
Many different methods—and even more varied
opinions—exist on weatherproofing ICF walls. Only
recently has the industry had scientific evidence
upon which to base best practices for installation
of window and door openings in such walls. “ICF
Field Testing Report,” a research report issued by
HPO, provides a range of solutions compliant with
building codes such as the B.C. Building Code, Part 9
12 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE
Photo courtesy Greyback Construction
(which is modelled after the 2015 National Building
Code of Canada [NBC]). These solutions address the
widest-possible range of building types, from single-
family homes to high-rise commercial buildings.2
To convey the report’s findings and make them
easily applicable to individual projects, it is best to
start at the core of the issue—how to permanently
prevent air and water leakage at window and door
openings in ICF walls. The answer begins with the
following two basic code-compliant paths to water
resistance in building shells.
Moisture protection plane
Mainly concerned with wood-framed walls, building
codes typically call for a primary weather barrier
(such as siding or stucco) with a secondary weather
barrier (such as building paper or another synthetic
membrane) behind it. This is because framed walls
must be kept dry to protect against moisture damage
to both framing members and the insulation within.
 Both codes, however, contain exemptions from the

Images courtesy Quad-Lock Building Systems

secondary weather barrier requirement in the case
of above-grade masonry or concrete walls, which
are recognized as watertight planes and shed water
adequately on their own. As a result of the research
summarized later in this article, ICF walls are now
characterized as a complete assembly under the
B.C. residential code, without the benefit of added
building paper or air gap (i.e. rainscreen) behind
exterior cladding. This means ICF walls will not be
subject to the same requirements for added weather
protection as wood-framed walls, but the same
exemptions as other concrete and masonry walls,
which are recognized as able to resist water penetration
on their own, without added layers of protection.

Exterior insulation
The expanded polystyrene (EPS) used in the
manufacture of ICFs will not permit the passage of
water or water vapour, but the horizontal and vertical
joints between ICF units can allow penetration
of water driven either by wind or gravity. This is
an apparent conflict with building codes, which
typically require the exterior building shell to be able
to shed water to the outermost plane of the wall,
where it cannot harm wood framing. Unable to view
concrete behind the ICF outer insulation, building
officials often default to more familiar wood-framed
construction requirements and expect a membrane
between the building sheathing and the exterior
cladding. This has not only proven to be unnecessary,
but is also unpopular among ICF proponents who
object to the added costs.
Testing ICF walls for water intrusion
In 2013, a number of North American ICF
manufacturers teamed up to provide code-compliant,
tested construction details for window and door
penetrations in ICF walls. HPO agreed to partner in
this targeted research project, recognizing the value of
the research to support its goals of energy reduction
and resiliency in B.C. housing stock.
Phases 1 and 2 of the testing began in 2014. Several
2 x 2-m (6 x 6-ft) wall samples were constructed
using 152-mm (6-in.) core ICFs, and each employed
a different buckout method common at the time.
These included various wooden bucks—some
spanning the full width of the ICF wall, others
recessed into the ICF cavity—as well as vinyl block-
outs designed specifically for the ICF industry. The
assemblies were laboratory-tested at the Vancouver
A cross-section view of a box-framed window recessed from the exterior wall
face, with a wood buckout recessed into the insulating concrete form (ICF) cavity.
headquarters of a B.C. window manufacturer, using
its air/water intrusion testing equipment. Simulated
wind-driven rain was pitted against a typical fixed-
pane vinyl window sample in compliance with ASTM
E331, Standard Test Method for Water Penetration
of Exterior Windows, Skylights, Doors, and Curtain
Walls by Uniform Static Air Pressure Difference, in
conditions representing a range of building types.
The results were more instructional than
encouraging. Most examples allowed water and
air penetration past the assembly at relatively
low levels of pressure and water flow. Some
held to mid-range pressures, but all failed at
the high-pressure criteria levels. With those results,
the ICF technical representatives and building
science experts at RDH Building Science set about
designing six additional test samples implementing
modified features or untested techniques for a
second round of tests. These all yielded much-
improved results, with one displaying quite
unexpected and extraordinary performance.
The 2011 North American Fenestration Standard
(NAFS) has 18 levels of pressure criteria, increased
from three under the original CAN/CSA A440,
Specification for Windows, Doors, and Skylights. The
levels tested here fall within the pressures given in
NAFS, but conform generally to the older standard.

BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE | Construction Canada E-BOOK 13


A cross-section Tested levels were:
view of a box- • 150 Pa (3.13 psf);
framed window
recessed from the • 300 Pa (6.26 psf); and
exterior wall face, • 700 Pa (15 psf).
with the window These levels generally correlate to low-rise, mid-
frame sealed to
face-seal exterior
rise, and high-rise building types. Lab testing was
insulation and successful up to 5000 Pa (104 psf), in one module’s
finish system (EIFS) case—seven times the average pressure criteria for
basecoat layer.
high-rise building enclosures under NAFS. Even
more surprising was the fact the most successful ICF
buckout method was also one of the simplest and
least expensive to install.
Field testing
Data extracted from laboratory testing was used to
‘shortlist’ four additional test assemblies for a more
realistic and accurate field test under ASTM E1105,
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. While the most successful
results came from ICF wall samples featuring non-
flanged (i.e. boxed or equal-leg) window frames,
the ICF industry made it clear a flanged window
option, mounted to the exterior face of the wall,
was a necessity. Widespread use of this option made
14 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE
it critical to provide it, rather than attempting to
force a change.
A technical subcommittee was formed to design
a cost-effective buckout option able to both
accommodate a flanged window installation and
demonstrate adequate moisture and air resistance.
Brian Hubbs, the lead engineer for the project at
RDH, provided input.
Hubbs suggested a reglet be cut in the EPS just
above the flanged window opening, allowing the
head-flashing from the window to be sealed directly
to the concrete core. Thus, the core’s watertight
plane could be preserved and extended to the
exterior of the flush-mounted window, and the
opportunity for water to pass around the extended
window buckout minimized. This method proved
to be successful at the first two pressure levels tested,
with minor leaks detected at the highest levels.
Even though it was not fully successful in testing,
this method’s effective performance at tested levels
exceeds requirements for nearly all residential
building types in all regions.
Phase 3 involved field testing. A site in Surrey, B.C.,
was selected and the four assemblies were constructed
onsite according to designs developed, critiqued, and
accepted by technical professionals from the ICF
industry, along with building envelope engineers who
oversaw the entire project. Again, ASTM E1105 was
implemented at varying wind-pressure and water-
flow levels meant to reflect conditions expected on a
range of building types.
Module 1: Recessed (internal) wood buckout
This sample used a recessed wood buckout left
in place after pouring of concrete—a method
commonly used in ICF projects across North
America. The installation was completed with a box-
framed window, which was mounted at the outside
edge of the concrete core via clips fastened to the
wood buck. A reglet was cut into the EPS above the
window, back to the concrete core. Window flashing
mandated by NBC and Part 9 of the B.C. Building
Code was applied to all sides of the window in
‘shingled’ fashion, with the head flashing sealed back
to concrete inside the top reglet. Both the interior
and exterior face of the window were sealed with
foam backer-rod and silicone sealant.
The module was successful in resisting air and
water infiltration up to pressures of 300 Pa (6.26 psf),
which is equivalent to moderate to severe conditions
expected on low- to mid-rise construction.
Module 2: EIFS basecoat
The second wall section also used an internal wood
buck, but an exterior insulation and finish system
(EIFS) basecoat layer was wrapped from the exterior
face of the building back into the window opening,
past the position of the window. This method is
common in commercial and multifamily residential
buildings finished with face-sealed EIFS or stucco
systems. A box-framed window was also positioned
at the exterior face of the concrete core, and again,
the interior and exterior faces of the window were
sealed with foam backer-rod and silicone sealant.
The module was successful in resisting twice the
air and water infiltration of the first sample at 700 Pa
(14.62 psf), equivalent to the most severe conditions
expected on high-rise construction in any building
use category. This module was likely more successful
because of the direct connection of the window
frame to a fully sealed exterior wall coating wrapped
back into the window opening.

Module 3: Hybrid wood buckout with flanged window

The third sample used a flanged window with a wood
substrate flush to the exterior face of the ICF wall. This
method is common in low-rise residential buildings
finished with face-sealed (i.e. stucco) systems or a
variety of cladding options (including lapped siding,
panelized cladding, vinyl, and shingle applications),
and was deemed critical by the ICF stakeholders.
In this module, a flanged window was fastened to
the outer face of a permanent wood buckout at the
exterior face of the EPS. Code-mandated window
flashing was also applied to all sides of the window in
shingled fashion, with the head flashing sealed back
to concrete inside the top reglet. Only the interior
face of the window was sealed with foam backer-rod
and silicone sealant.
The module was successful in resisting air and
water infiltration up to pressures of 300 Pa—the
same as the first sample tested in this phase.
Module 4: Window sealed directly to concrete
rough opening
In the fourth sample, the buck was stripped after the
pour, leaving the concrete core exposed. This method
is common in multi-storey commercial and multi-
family buildings of any height. A box-framed window
was positioned at the exterior face of the concrete core
for this module, and both the interior and exterior
faces of the window were sealed directly to the concrete
core with foam backer-rod and silicone sealant.
A cross-section view of a box-framed window recessed from the exterior wall
face, with a wood buckout extended to the exterior wall face.
Since the concrete core provides full protection, no
exterior window flashing was required.
This assembly was by far the most successful at
resisting water and air infiltration—after having
resisted pressures up to 5000 Pa (104.42 psf) in
laboratory testing, the field-test module was successful
in resisting air and water infiltration up to pressures of
700 Pa (14.62 psf).
This extraordinary performance is equivalent
to wind-speed conditions of more than 804 km/hr
(500 mph). Such conditions do not naturally exist on
this planet,3 but this ICF wall/window assembly has
proven to be fully resistant to them. In this author’s
opinion, it is a game-changer for the ICF industry.
Not only was this fourth module the most effective
at preventing air and water intrusion, but because it
needs no added flashings, it also represents the least-
expensive option for ICF installers.
Conclusion
The successful results presented in HPO’s “ICF Field
Testing Report” have guided the formulation of new
best-practice construction details for ICF buildings

BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE | Construction Canada E-BOOK 15


A cross-section view of a box-framed window recessed from the exterior
wall face, with a wood buckout removed and the window sealed directly
to the concrete core. This module is highly resistant to air and water.
in the upcoming revision of the organization’s
“Building Envelope Guide for Houses,” slated for
release this spring. Other provinces will likely be
modelling their own future ICF guidelines after
the information published in B.C. The author is
not aware of any ICF-specific guidelines developed
outside the provisions of the 2015 NBC, although
these have been adopted by most provinces and
other local jurisdictions in Canada.
As building codes concerning ICFs continue to
emerge, the ICF industry will continue to offer guidance
to the International Code Council (ICC), supported by
the ICF construction details developed as a result of
this research.4 For instance, it has been suggested code
change petitions based on the HPO work be submitted
on both a provincial and national level.
From an ICF industry perspective, this third-party
research fosters a major step forward in providing
proven, cost-effective solutions for code-compliant
design demonstrating high performance across a
broad range of building types and uses, even in the
most extreme conditions. Add to this the structural
and fire capacity of reinforced concrete structures,
and ICFs’ role in resilience becomes clear.
16 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE
A vacuum chamber creates variable levels of negative
pressure at the interior face of an ICF wall assembly.
For testing, spray frame at the exterior face exposes
the ICF wall assembly to 20 rounds of one-minute
simulated wind-driven rain events.
Notes
1
An earlier version of this article appeared in the
September 2016 issue of ICF Builder.
2
The entire HPO report can be found online at
https://www.bchousing.org/publications/ICF_
Field_Testing_Report.pdf.
3
The top commonly recognized wind-speed range
uses the Enhanced Fujita Scale, (EF) which defines
an EF5 tornado as having wind speeds ranging
from 419 to 512 km/hr (261 to 318 mph). For
more on the Fujita Scale, visit en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Enhanced_Fujita_scale.
4
While the I-codes offered by ICC are available
for adoption worldwide, they are the mainstay of
U.S. codes. Canada recognizes the I-codes only in a
general and advisory fashion.
 Building and Construction

HIGH PERFORMANCE IS
BUILDING A
BETTER BARRIER
Dow Corning® DefendAir 200:
The only water-based silicone
air barrier complemented by a
fully compatible system
Discover how Cornish College of the Arts
(pictured at right) protected design integrity
and sealed its building envelope with our
complete, warranted silicone
weatherproofing system.

Read the case study and learn

more about Dow Corning’s air
and water barrier solutions at
Photo courtesy of Ankrom Moisan Architects and photographer Casey Braunger. ©Ankrom
Moisan Architects. ®™Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) or an affiliated
BuildaBetterBarrier.com.
company of Dow. The Corning portion of the Dow Corning trademark is a trademark of
Corning Incorporated, used under license. © 2017 The Dow Chemical Company.
All rights reserved. AGP15038. dow_43184132604.
 Barriers Against
Air Leakage

Part Three
Improving the Performance of Curtain Walls

BY BEN MITCHELL, CSI, CHAD RICKER, AND JERRY SCHWABAUER

Ben Mitchell, CSI, is the extrusion coatings sales and marketing

manager for AkzoNobel, a global paints and coatings company
and producer of specialty chemicals. He has a bachelor’s degree in
comprehensive science from Urbana University in Ohio. Mitchell
started at AkzoNobel in 1990 as a lab chemist formulating
polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) coatings, and moved into
product management. He can be reached at ben.mitchell@akzonobel.com.

Chad Ricker is the market team manager at Technoform Bautec

North America. He has an engineering background, having
obtained a master’s degree in technology with a concentration
in engineering from East Tennessee State University. Ricker has
been a part of Technoform’s team for more than a decade,
beginning as an engineer and progressing to lead consultative
marketing efforts. He can be contacted via e-mail at cricker@technoform.us.

Jerry Schwabauer is Azon’s vice-president of sales and marketing,

a position he has held since 2000. Schwabauer is active in American
Architectural Manufacturers Association (AAMA) and is a
frequent speaker about the topic of optimizing thermal
performance in commercial fenestration in North America and
Asia. He can be contacted at jschwabauer@azonusa.com.

18 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE


Feature
Improving the
Performance of
Curtain Walls
T
here is perhaps no building element that
typifies contemporary architecture more than
the curtain wall. Lightweight and flexible,
these glazed assemblies not only allow more usable
floor space within a building, but also epitomize
upscale, modern construction. Widespread use of
the curtain wall has driven various improvements
in its functionality and sustainability, and recent
improvements have focused mainly on thermal
performance and coating technologies.
The North American Fenestration Standard
(NAFS), a voluntary standard recently adopted into
most Canadian building codes, has streamlined
some aspects of the fenestration industry. However,
the National Building Code of Canada (NBC) and
some provincial codes distinguish between products
covered by NAFS and those that are not—and the
distinctions may not be intuitive.
For example, curtain wall assemblies are not
manufacturer-tested or certified to be NAFS-
compliant. Instead, engineers and architects are
BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE | Construction Canada E-BOOK
Photo courtesy Starline Windows Ltd.
responsible for designing all individual structures
to meet relevant energy efficiency goals. The portion
of NBC applicable to curtain walls is Part 5,
“Environmental Separation.”
Addressing issues such as air leakage and
water penetration, Part 5 sets forth “minimum
performance requirements, as well as laboratory
and in-situ testing procedures,” according to the
National Research Council of Canada (NRC).
Situation-specific testing and field assessments
of curtain walls help ensure maximum energy
performance in Canada’s cold northern climate.
Designers must also provide protection against
condensation, since condensation-related mould
and moisture can create problems, particularly in
sensitive environments such as healthcare facilities.
In 2015, the American Architectural Manufacturers
Association (AAMA) released AAMA CRS-15,
“A Comparison of Condensation Rating Systems
for Fenestration,” which compares three common
condensation rating systems for the United States
19

Figure 1
Images courtesy Azon
This image
shows a mechanical
lock profile.
and Canada, providing information on how the ratings are
calculated to help designers better assess the condensation
resistance of fenestration systems.
Understanding the curtain wall
There are two main categories of curtain walls:
1. Stick-built systems, in which all structural components
are assembled onsite. This system is optimal for building
designs with little repetition among components, where no
notable savings can be achieved by factory production.
2. Unitized curtain walls, in which glazed and aluminum
components are factory-assembled into panels and
shipped to the construction site. This method has several
advantages, as the controlled factory setting improves
material tolerances, allows faster onsite construction, and
works well for tall structures with many repeat components.
The extruded aluminum members comprising the curtain
wall frame can be two separate pieces (one for the building
interior and one for the exterior) joined at pressure points, as
is common in stick-built systems, or a single extruded profile,
which is more common for unitized systems. While many
curtain wall components are factory-assembled, overall NBC
categorizes curtain walls as ‘site-built.’
Contributions to thermal performance
Throughout the 20th century, a series of improvements to
glazed systems have reduced the rate of unwanted heat loss
and gain for building interiors.
Window glazing
Single-pane window glass was commonly used well into
the middle of the century. However, the proliferation of
20 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE
skyscrapers—and the extreme amount of thermal transfer
occurring over their extensively glazed exteriors—prompted
the commercial production of double- and triple-glazed
insulating units in the 1940s and ’50s. Thermal isolator gaskets
were also installed around metal parts such as mullions and
pressure plates to insulate them and protect against air and
moisture penetration.
In the 1980s, insulating glass (i.e. double panes with inert
gas or a vacuum seal between them) enabled further reduction
of heat transfer. Following that, low-emissivity (low-e) and
other coatings for glass were developed. Together, low-e
coatings and insulating glass (IG) units immensely improved
the thermal performance of glazed openings, since the glass
itself represents the largest surface area over which thermal
transfer occurs.
Spacers
The most significant thermal path or ‘bridge’ remaining
in glazed openings following these improvements was the
spacer. In its earliest and simplest configuration, the IG unit
consisted of two panes or ‘lites’ separated by an aluminum or
metal spacer, which was held in place by seals. IG units used
in curtain walls were dual-sealed, with polyisobutyl (PIB)
primary sealants applied directly to the glazing and silicone
used secondarily to provide a structural component. Spacers
were usually U-shaped, with a desiccant placed within the
canal to absorb any moisture between the lites.
This construction provided structural strength. However, it
also provided a conduit of metal allowing heat and cold into
the building, and created a temperature differential between
the centre and the edge of the glass, which led to condensation.
Replacing the traditional aluminum spacer with warm-edge
spacers (i.e. those constructed from materials such as polymers
or low-conductivity stainless steel) was a first step toward
improving framing. Today, warm-edge spacers are typically an
integral part of fenestration systems.
Thermal barriers
Even after the introduction of IG units and warm-edge
spacers, the aluminum profile of the typical curtain wall
assembly allowed significant remaining pathways for thermal
transfer, since alloyed aluminum is highly conductive.
However, aluminum is also prized for its many advantages—
most notably, its durability, recyclability, and strength. It
is a primary building material in sustainable buildings
and those certified under the Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) program. Therefore, the
fenestration industry turned its attention to mitigating
aluminum’s conductivity and, for both stick-built and
unitized curtain walls, developed engineered systems capable
of interrupting the thermal bridge created by the metal cross-
sections of the assemblies.
Thermal bridging and thermal barriers Figure 2
While the R-value has become a very familiar measurement of
thermal insulation, U-value is the key measure when it comes
to glazed fenestration. R-value measures resistance to heat
transfer, while U-value or ‘thermal transmittance’ measures
the rate of heat transfer. Therefore, the two numbers, while
not representing a direct inverse, are opposites in that a high
R-value (representing a high value of insulation) and a low
U-value (representing a low amount of heat and cold being
transferred across a barrier) is ideal. U-values are commonly
used when discussing a system of building components, as 3.00 11.40 19.70 28.10 36.40 44.80 53.10 61.50 69.80 F
opposed to a single material.
Various types of thermal barrier can be used to maximize
these values. COLD WARM

This figure compares the thermal performance of a curtain wall

The ‘pour and debridge’ thermal barrier profile with a thermal isolator to one with a polyurethane thermal
With this method, the aluminum profile is extruded with a barrier. The latter improves thermal efficiency by interrupting the
channel designed to hold an insulating polymer. This channel flow of cold air through the extrusion, and can similarly interrupt
the flow of hot air in desert climates.
is mechanically abraded to ensure adhesion of the polymer,
while a mechanical lock inside the thermal cavity locks the
thermal barrier to the aluminum (Figure 1, page 20). This Figure 3
allows the maximum separation of the aluminum required
for lower U-values, while also providing superior structural
strength for the composite.
Polyurethane polymers are then poured as liquid into the
thermal barrier channel, where they solidify into a structural
component, and the metal floor of the cavity is removed
from the bottom of the channel. After this ‘debridging,’ the
unit has no continuous run of metal from the building’s
interior to its exterior—the polyurethane connects the two
separate sides to form a composite. As polyurethane features
thermal conductivity more than 1300 times lower than that of
aluminum, its thermal benefits can be achieved within a very
small amount of space, although the amount of separation
should be determined based on the energy efficiency
requirements of a given building.
A dual thermal
This complete separation of the aluminum profile means barrier curtain
the structural abilities of the polymers are of critical wall composite.
importance, since curtain walls (especially those used on
tall buildings) must provide shear and tensile strength in Creating a wider cavity in the frame allows for a lower
strong winds, or even in blast or hurricane situations. In the U-value in most fenestration products. This is outlined in
unitized system, thermal barriers must also accommodate Figure 2, which offers a comparison of the U-value 2.44 W/m2K
stresses created by thermal expansion and pressure (0.43 Btu/[hr-sf-F]) achievable with a thermal isolator to that of
differences. Fortunately, polyurethane offers an exceptional a wider cavity. By use of a polyurethane thermal barrier, the
amount of structural strength, particularly shear strength, U-value can be improved to 2.00 W/m2K (0.35 Btu/[hr-sf-F]),
allowing designers to maximize the span of glazing within and can be lowered further to 1.70 W/m2K (0.30 Btu/[hr-sf-F])
the curtain wall framing. with the use of performance glazing.
As well as by introducing a polymer to interrupt the If one debridged cavity performs well, then two will
thermal bridge, energy efficiency can be increased by perform even better in many instances. In dual thermal barrier
manipulating the shape of the aluminum extrusion itself. systems (Figure 3), the U-value can improve by as much as
The latest developments in this area include wide-cavity and 20 per cent depending on cavity size, cavity location, and
dual-cavity construction. fenestration type, and greater condensation resistance can also

BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE | Construction Canada E-BOOK 21

 Figure 4
Image courtesy Tubelite
A high-performance thermal curtain wall.
be achieved. Additionally, the dual cavity allows wider-span
openings for greater glass area and, consequently, increased
daylighting. Dual thermal barrier designs also allow for the use
of triple glazing, for U-values measuring less than 1.14 W/m2K
(0.20 Btu/[hr-sf-F]).
Polyamide thermal barrier strips
An alternative to the polyurethane-based pour and debridge
method, polyamide barriers are pre-extruded, structural
plastic insulating strips, usually featuring multi-directional
glass fibre reinforcing to improve load transfer. For wall systems
utilizing polyamide strips, two separate aluminum extrusions
are created—one interior and one exterior—and channels are
created in the aluminum profiles to hold the barrier strips.
These channels must be knurled or bent to produce ‘teeth,’
which improve the assembly’s shear strength and hold the
polyamide strip. Once the polyamide strip is inserted into the
aluminum’s channel, the entire assembly is rolled or crimped
to create the bond and turn the system into a composite.
These strips allow some of the greatest thermal separation
widths available with the use of less metal, which in turn
generates savings on resources. They also have a similar co-
efficient of expansion and contraction to aluminum, ensuring
the overall stability of the system (Figure 4).
Ongoing developments in curtain wall assemblies include
alternative designs for pressure plates. Polyamide was used
to develop a new pressure-plate system up to 20 per cent
more efficient than earlier designs, with a 10 per cent gain in
condensation resistance (Figure 5, page 24). Pressure plates
with polyamide have excellent thermal values, require no
special handling or fabrication, and are installed similarly to
aluminum pressure plates.
22 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE
Coating technologies
While coatings for aluminum have not changed drastically
in recent years, a few new formulations are offering some
performance benefits. The rising popularity of powder
coatings has also introduced some confusion among
specifiers. The first question typically asked is whether
powder or liquid is ‘best,’ and which is most cost-effective. The
answer is not a simple one, as there are several considerations.
When powder coatings were first introduced into the
architectural market, they were heralded as a superior
product and were expected to quickly replace liquid paint.
These coatings were gaining visibility at a time when LEED
certification was also in the spotlight, and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) were often the only criterion used
to measure a coating’s success. The fact powder is VOC-
free was its biggest selling point. However, liquid paint has
more staying power than many predicted. The adoption
of powder coatings has turned out to be an evolution,
not a revolution.
What is paint?
Cured paint film is comprised of two principal ingredients:
resin and pigment. Regardless of whether a coating is
applied as a liquid or a powder, it is the resin and pigment
quality that determine the weather resistance and durability
properties desirable in an architectural finish. Resin gives the
film its adhesion to the substrate, chemical resistance, gloss,
and other film properties, while pigment durability confers
colour stability.
The difference in coating formulation is for liquid
coatings, solvent is added to allow smooth application, while
powder has no solvent. This factor is what renders powder
coatings VOC-free. Powder coating is typically applied as a
single coat, but at a higher cured film thickness than liquid,
while liquid coatings are at a lower film thickness and often
include a primer.
A common mistake is to specify merely a powder or a
liquid coating. This basic description does not denote a specific
product or quality, because different coatings are composed
of different resin types and different chemistries. Similarly,
specifying a coating by brand name can limit one’s options, as it
restricts choices to whatever is offered by an individual company.
Choosing a coating
To achieve the desired performance level for a given
application, coatings must be specified to meet third-party
industry standards. AAMA, for instance, establishes voluntary
standards for the fenestration industry, which appear in
NAFS. NAFS references:
• AAMA 2603, Voluntary Specification, Performance
Requirements, and Test Procedures for Pigmented Organic
Coatings on Aluminum Extrusions and Panels;
 ADVERTORIAL

All-silicone product
solutions meet thermal
performance needs,
enhance productivity

CASE STUDY: CORNISH COMMONS, CORNISH COLLEGE OF THE ARTS

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON, USA

PROJECT FEATURES The spray-applied product simplified

• 20 stories installation and eliminated the need for
• Unique rainscreen design featuring traditional membrane materials, and its
3/16" thick architectural aluminum high permeability ensured the design’s
cladding on cold-form framing compliance with Seattle Building Code.
• Building design with thermal
performance 40% better than Dow Corning® brand silicone
required by current Seattle Building materials were used exclusively in the
Code building’s unitized rainscreen panels –
Dow Corning® DefendAir 200 as an air
THE CHALLENGES barrier and Dow Corning® 791 Silicone
• Compliance with Seattle Building Weatherproofing Sealant for unit
Code – the design needed an air sealing. The quick cure capability of the
barrier with high permeability to Dow Corning® products helped keep unit
ensure water vapor was not trapped assembly on schedule.
in the wall cavity
• Staying on schedule The unitized rainscreen system was
• Minimizing product incompatibility used from the third floor to the 20th
issues floor – using 30 units per floor – with
approximately 50,000 square feet
protected by the Dow Corning® Silicone
THE SOLUTION Air Barrier System.
The 100% silicone Dow Corning®
Silicone Air Barrier System was
selected to ensure enclosure airtightness
performance, durability and compatibility. Find solutions to your
air barrier challenges at
BuildaBetterBarrier.com.

Photo courtesy of Ankrom Moisan Architects and photographer Casey Braunger. ©Ankrom Moisan Architects. ®™ Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) or an affiliated company of Dow.
The Corning portion of the Dow Corning trademark is a trademark of Corning Incorporated, used under license. © 2017 The Dow Chemical Company. All rights reserved. AGP15038. dow_43184119704.

Building and Construction

 Environmental considerations

Photo courtesy Starline WIndows Ltd.

With the industry’s shift toward powder being driven primarily
by companies’ desire to reduce VOCs, an investment in
pollution-control systems for liquid-applied coatings has
helped even the playing field between the two types. Painted
extrusions must be cured by baking, and it is during this
process the solvents—and VOCs—in liquid paint escape into
the environment. VOC abatement systems capture more than
Coatings meeting the 98 per cent of VOC emissions from the liquid paint line and send
highest standards
them to a regenerative thermal oxidizer (RTO), where the VOCs
should be used on
structures with large are destroyed. An added benefit is the heat from this process is
expanses of structural captured and utilized for curing. This helps to lower the amount
glazing, such as this
of carbon fuels required to cure the surface—a process requiring
Vancouver building.
temperatures of 232 C (450 F).
Figure 5 For paint to be compliant with AAMA 2605, a pre-treatment
is required, as neither liquid nor powder coatings will adhere
Image courtesy Technoform

to untreated aluminum.Thus, the type of pre-treatment used

A curtain wall polyamide pressure plate.
• AAMA 2604, Voluntary Specification, Performance
Requirements, and Test Procedures for High-performance
Organic Coatings on Aluminum Extrusions and Panels; and
• AAMA 2605, Voluntary Specification, Performance
Requirements, and Test Procedures for Superior-performing
Organic Coatings on Aluminum Extrusions and Panels,
which the highest-performance coatings meet.
These are the most commonly referenced coating standards
for painted fenestration products. Each has unique
requirements—for example, to meet AAMA 2603, a coating
is tested for South Florida weathering for only one year,
whether in liquid or powder form. These coatings are
normally an acrylic or polyester system used in residential or
interior applications.
AAMA 2604 performance testing requires a five-year South
Florida exposure. One example of an AAMA 2604 liquid
offering is new-generation silicone-modified polyester, a
workhorse system in the metal building market with proven
performance. Coatings meeting the AAMA 2604 specification
generally have a lower cost, and powders falling under this
category are super-durable polyesters.
For AAMA 2605 performance testing, 10-year South
Florida exposure is required. Longstanding options meeting
this performance level include polyvinylidene fluoride
(PVDF)—also known as polyvinyl difluoride (PVF2)—and
fluoroethylene vinyl ether (FEVE).
also becomes an environmental consideration. Traditionally,
this consists of a chromate (hexavalent) conversion coating,
but since chrome is a heavy metal toxic to people and
the environment, its use is highly regulated, and many
manufacturers have turned to chrome-free pre-treatments.
These meet the performance standard of AAMA 2605, but
have limited field-performance history, so some still do not
have full confidence in such systems.
Another key to the continued popularity of liquid paint is
it allows for mixing at the coater’s site. This makes it suitable
for just-in-time production, and means excess paint can be
remixed into a new colour, thereby avoiding waste. Finally, in
the commercial architectural market, bright mica or metallic
colours are very popular, and liquid paints can use a higher
level of mica/metallic to give brighter colours. A clear coat
containing some of these pigments can be added for additional
sparkle, especially in sunlight.
Conclusion
Formulas and application methods for architectural metal
coatings continue to evolve. Most companies now offer both
liquid and powder options meeting the same AAMA standards.
The key when specifying a coating, therefore, is to not jump
too quickly to an assumption about which application
method or brand is best. Specifiers should evaluate all options,
balancing the costs and benefits of each based on a project’s
individual requirements.
The energy performance and other sustainable attributes
of buildings are also improving. Careful analysis of available
options in envelope systems—from framing members to
coatings—can help optimize outcomes. Making even minor
improvements to efficiency and durability can add up to
major gains, and these gains are multiplied when a system is
deployed throughout a structure, as curtain walls are in today’s
tall buildings.

24 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE

Barriers Against
Air Leakage

Part Four
Energy-efficient Building with EIFS

BY MICHAEL DELAURA, LEED AP, AND JOHN EDGAR

Michael DeLaura, LEED AP, has been with Sto Corp. as an

exterior cladding specialist since 1996. A 28-year veteran of
the EIFS and coatings industry, he is an active member of the
U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), specifically the Middle
Tennessee and Hampton Roads chapters. DeLaura can be
reached at mdelaura@stocorp.com.
John Edgar is president of John R. S. Edgar Consulting Inc., and
past-chair of the Exterior Insulation and Finish System (EIFS)
Council of Canada. He is convener of ISO TC163 SC03 TG09,
preparing three new international standards for EIFS. Edgar has
held positions including technical director at Sto Canada,
member of the National Building Code of Canada (NBC)
Standing Committee on Environmental Separation (part 5), and chair of
Underwriters Laboratories of Canada S716 Task Group for EIFS. He can be reached
via e-mail at john@johnrsedgar.com.

BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE | Construction Canada E-BOOK 25

Feature
ENERGY-EFFICIENT
Building with EIFS
I
n an effort to build more energy-efficient and
sustainable buildings, there has been a shift toward
energy-efficient lightweight cladding options for
the exterior. One such product is exterior insulation
and finish systems (EIFS).
These assemblies provide numerous features
and benefits including an air barrier, continuous
insulation (ci), and a decorative finish. Tracing their
roots back to early 1950s Germany, the product was
originally designed for commercial use, making its
way to the European residential market a decade later
and, subsequently, Canada and the United States.
The traditional system consisted of an adhesive
applied using a notched trowel to form vertical ribbons
of adhesive to attach the expanded polystyrene (EPS)
insulation board to the substrate. The EPS was rasped
or sanded before application of the basecoat, and a
fibreglass mesh was embedded into the wet base coat.
26 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE
All images courtesy Sto
The final layer consisted of the finish, available in a
sand, swirl, or freeform texture in various colours.
EIFS became a popular cladding since features such as
curves, quoins, arches, reveals, and accents were easy
and economical to fabricate and install. It offered a new
look and an energy-efficient way to wrap the outside
of the building providing continuous insulation and
lowering heating and cooling costs.
In the mid-1990s, driven by air barrier code
requirements, a waterproof air barrier element was
added to EIFS, providing airtight construction and
a waterproof redundancy behind the EIFS. Since
that time, Canadian Construction Materials Centre
(CCMC) developed a robust technical guide for EIFS
evaluation to prove the durability of the systems in
Canadian climatic conditions. No other cladding
is evaluated under such extreme testing. The
CCMC guide has since evolved into Underwriters
Laboratories of Canada (ULC) S716, Standard for
Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems, which was
introduced into the model 2015 National Building
Code of Canada (NBC).
EPS insulation can be installed at up to 140 mm
(5 ½ in.) thick to achieve significantly higher R-values
than other claddings, provided proper fire tests have
been done. Placing the insulation outbound of the
sheathing eliminates thermal bridging, which is
the path of low thermal resistance (e.g. afforded by
mechanical anchors, shelf angles, steel studs, and the
like) that allows thermal energy to pass. In some cases,
thermal bridging woes can reduce the effective R-value
of the steel stud cavity insulation by nearly half.
The relatively recent introduction of the National
Energy Code for Canada for Buildings (NECB) heavily
favoured use of continuous insulation (ci) outbound
of the structure in order to meet its performance
requirements, making EIFS an attractive solution.

How EIFS assemblies have evolved with air
and moisture barriers
The recent publication of the report, “Building
Envelope Thermal Bridging Guide—Analysis,
Applications, and Insights,” which was developed by
Morrison Hershfield and published by BC Hydro,
shows the real effect of thermal bridging in a wall
envelope.1 EIFS has shown to be one of the best and
most economical solutions to thermal bridging.
Over the last 15 years, one of the biggest changes
in the EIFS assembly has been the introduction of a
fluid-applied air/moisture barrier installed over the
substrate.2 This offers the option to use one continuous
barrier over the substrate regardless of the cladding.
The fluid-applied air/moisture barrier is seamless, and
provides protection against moisture intrusion, water
leakage, mould, and mildew.
EIFS offers design flexibility in that the structure
can be waterproofed with various claddings. One
advantage of a fluid-applied waterproof air barrier is
the building can be protected from inclement weather
once the windows and doors are installed. Air barriers
also lower heating and cooling cost and increase
occupant comfort. They help maintain constant
temperature by controlling air leaks through the
wall assembly, which can contribute to heating and
cooling loss.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) study, “Investigation of the Impact of
Commercial Building Envelope Airtightness on HVAC
Energy Use,” confirmed air barriers promote energy
To meet the requirements of the National Energy Code for Canada for
Buildings (NECB), continuous insulation (ci) outbound of the structure can
be a successful strategy. This has increased interest in employing exterior
insulation and finish systems (EIFS).
savings from 30 to 40 per cent for heating climates.3 An
air barrier can be vapour-permeable or impermeable,
depending on the climate and location.
As Canada is a mostly heating climate, vapour drive
tends to be from inside to outside. This means the
vapour barrier will go on the warm side—the inside.
If the insulation strategy is to have some insulation
in the wall cavity and some on the exterior, then a
vapour-permeable air barrier may be appropriate.
If all the insulation is outbound, then the sheathing
becomes the warm side and a vapour barrier material
would be appropriate.
EIFS panelization
Contractors started building a more efficient process
with EIFS panels since they are manufactured in an
enclosed shop or warehouse. Benefits include:
• increased quality control (i.e. all components are
installed at ground level without the limitations
of working at elevations; further, humidity,
temperature of materials, and mixing is controlled);
• highly engineered panels and connections;
• no interruption during inclement weather;
• improved productivity;
• little or no scaffolding required; and
• reduced safety risk in comparison to stick-built
construction types.

BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE | Construction Canada E-BOOK 27


Pictured above and on page 26, Sun Peaks Resort is an alpine ski haven located
in Sun Peaks, B.C., northeast of Kamloops. The project benefits from both the
functional and esthetic impact of EIFS.
Whether designed as field-applied or a prefabricated panel, EIFS can be
considered for existing, new, or retrofit projects.
One of the major advantages of panelization is
construction schedule compression since the panels
can be manufactured offsite and installed as soon
as the project site is ready, significantly reducing the
schedule’s timelines. Since the units are manufactured
offsite, the wall panels are built while the floors are
being poured. Once the floors are completed, the
panels are installed using a tower crane onsite.
Panels are either structural or non-structural. In
the former category, the panel assembly consists of
the following components:
28 Construction Canada E-BOOK | BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE
• metal stud frame;
• exterior sheathing;
• air barrier;
• adhesive;
• insulation;
• basecoat;
• mesh; and
• finish.
The panels are delivered to the site on a flatbed trailer
and attached to the substrate with a clip or anchor
placed in the concrete when it is poured. The panel is
welded or bolted to the clip. A double silicone sealant
joint installed between panels maintains air barrier
continuity with a rain-shedding outer protection.
The non-structural panel assembly consists of:
• EPS insulation;
• optional air barrier;
• basecoat;
• mesh; and
• finish.
The EPS insulation has a furring channel embedded
in the foam with a sleeve on each end to allow for a
mechanical attachment to the substrate. The panel
is attached to the substrate with a mechanical and
adhesive attachment. The lightweight panel type is
installed on virtually any type of project with no
need to modify an existing structure for retrofits
and remodels. This panel uses a ship-lap design
as one method for joining the panels. A silicone
sealant joint installed between the panels provides
a watertight exterior cladding assembly. The non-
structural panels are ideally suited for existing
low-rise buildings where disruption of the existing
business must be avoided.
The decision to use panels should begin early
in the stages of design development. The design
professional must determine whether the project is
suited for prefabrication. However, not all areas of
the project need to be panelized—there may be areas
where there is an in-place application depending on
tie-ins and connections.
Specialty finishes
A new development in the EIFS industry was the
introduction of finishes with self-cleaning properties.
Super-hydrophobic properties results in the finish
being rinsed clean with each rainfall. A clean finish
provides high resistance to mould, mildew, and algae,
reducing maintenance costs. This finish is available
in various colours and textures. A smooth coating is
offered to apply over existing EIFS surfaces and other
exterior substrates.
 EIFS offer specialty finishes that can replicate brick,
granite, limestone, metal panels, and precast. These
finishes are easier to install and require fewer specialty
trades than the traditional cladding material. Specialty
finishes offer a cost-effective esthetic option, as well
as increase energy efficiency and moisture protection.
The finishes offer an identical look to the natural
cladding but are more lightweight, allowing the
owner to build a lighter building with an air barrier;
continuous insulation, and a decorative finish.
Since EIFS only requires deflection criteria of
L/240, in comparison with other claddings such as
brick and limestone at L/600, an owner can save on
the structural steel’s cost since the structure is built
to lower deflection criteria.
Deflection criteria is the extent to which a material
can bend or flex during its lifetime. A cladding with
a deflection of L/240 is more flexible than a cladding
with a deflection of L/360, L/480, or L/600. Claddings
with a higher deflection criteria require a heavier
structure to support the less flexible cladding’s weight.
EIFS with a metallic finish—designed to replicate
metal panels—offers an expedient and cost-effective
solution to metal panels since the material can be
installed onsite and adjusted to allow for any changes
in framing. Unlike traditional metal panels, EIFS
with a metallic finish has continuous insulation and
there are no penetrations through the cladding for
attachment to the substrate.
EIFS testing and research
Independent testing of EIFS has been conducted to
demonstrate its long-term performance compared
to other claddings. In 2003, the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) contacted EIFS Industry Members
Association (EIMA) and proposed a thorough
hygrothermal evaluation of EIFS alongside numerous
other commonly used claddings.4
The association worked with the Oak Ridge
National Laboratory (ORNL) to design and construct
a specific facility dedicated to this purpose. Testing
was performed in two phases, from January 2005 to
May 2006 and June 2006 through June 2007.
The ORNL testing demonstrated EIFS with a liquid-
applied water-resistive barrier (WRB) performed
better in that climate than any assembly—15
individual wall sections that included barrier EIFS,
EIFS with drainage, stucco, brick, and siding were
also tested. Further, the EIFS assemblies had superior
drainage capability compared with the other claddings
as evidenced by the lower relative humidity (RH)
values through the various wall components.
BARRIERS AGAINST AIR LEAKAGE | Construction Canada E-BOOK
Independent testing of EIFS has been conducted to demonstrate its long-
term performance in various climates across North America.
The best overall performance was an EIFS with
101.6 mm (4 in.) of ci applied over a liquid-applied
WRB with an empty (no batt insulation) stud cavity.5
Computer modelling was validated against field data
to show actual long-term wall assembly performance
could be calculated for any climate zone.
Conclusion
Over the last 50 years, exterior insulation and
finish systems have demonstrated they are versatile,
lightweight, energy-efficient claddings installed over
various substrates. Independent third-party testing
has shown EIFS outperforms other types of exterior
cladding. Whether field-applied or a prefabricated
panel, such assemblies can be considered for existing,
new, or retrofit projects.
Notes
1
View the study results at https://www.bchydro.com/
powersmart/business/programs/new-construction.
html?WT.mc_id=rd_oldhiperfbuildingprogramWT.
mc_id=rd_construction.
2
For more, see the article by John Edgar, “Selecting
and Achieving the Proper Air Barrier,” which appeared
in the May 2013 issue of Construction Canada. Visit
www.constructioncanada.net.
3
View the study results at https://www.nist.gov/
publications/investigation-impact-commercial-
building-envelope-airtightness-hvac-energy-use-0.
4
Ibid.
5
Ibid.
29
 ADVERTORIAL

100% silicone, liquid-applied air

barrier enables winter construction

CASE STUDY: SCHEELS ALL SPORTS SUPER STORE

OVERLAND PARK, KANSAS, USA

PROJECT FEATURES But most liquid-applied air barriers

• 220,000-square-foot facility cannot be applied at low temperatures,
• Showcases a collection of which was a problem with the originally
entertainment venues and specified air barrier for this project.
special attractions, including a Based on recommendations from the
16,000-gallon aquarium; a wildlife general contractor, air barrier contractor
mountain; and a 65-foot, 16-car and a distributor, the architect reviewed
operating Ferris wheel and revised the specification to include
low-temperature-capable Dow Corning®
THE CHALLENGES DefendAir 200, enabling construction to
• Protection from the cold winters continue into the chilly winter season.
and hot, often humid, summers of
eastern Kansas A total of 65,000 square feet of
• Maintain construction schedule, Dow Corning® DefendAir 200 was
even in cold winter weather applied to the sheathing and concrete
block substrates on the Overland
Park Scheels store, and Dow Corning®
THE SOLUTION DefendAir 200 is now approved for use
Dow Corning® DefendAir 200 – a
on all future Scheels stores.
vapor-permeable, 100% silicone, liquid-
applied air and water barrier that can
be applied at temperatures as low as
20°F (-7°C).

Liquid-applied air barriers are flexible,

breathable, seamless and trouble-free to Find solutions to your
apply, making them an excellent choice air barrier challenges at
for building owners and applicators alike. BuildaBetterBarrier.com.

®™
Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) or an affiliated company of Dow. The Corning portion of the Dow Corning trademark is a trademark of Corning Incorporated, used under license.
© 2017 The Dow Chemical Company. All rights reserved. AGP15038. dow_40611686414.

Building and Construction