Coordinating Envelope Testing Before It Coordinates You

Coordinating Envelope Testing Before It Coordinates You

The building envelope is the one system you can’t easily service after the fact, and that sets it apart from almost everything else in a building. Mechanical systems get tuned, controls get adjusted, filters get changed on a schedule, but the enclosure mostly just stands in the weather doing its job, year after year, with no one paying it much attention until something goes wrong. So getting it right during design and construction matters more than for almost any other system, and envelope testing is a big part of how we confirm a building was actually built the way it was drawn.

Most owners understand that testing matters. However, not many project teams fully understand the nuances involved. Between misunderstood testing procedures, incorrect pass/fail criteria, undetermined testing scope, and, of course, the question of what happens if a test fails, there are important details that often get overlooked.

At this point in my career, I’ve seen firsthand the role the envelope commissioning authority has in the process and learned the right (and wrong) way to execute an envelope testing program. My goal is to I’d like to share some of these lessons with you and hopefully make your next project more successful.

Where It Goes Wrong

A while back, our team was brought on late in a project as the envelope commissioning agent. Since the project was already well into construction, our goal was to simply provide site visits, attend preinstallation meetings and ensure a level of quality control as work progressed. In our envelope kick off meeting, we combed through the specifications and outlined various envelope tests that were required for the project. And what we found was a mess. While there was envelope testing specified, the test applications varied widely. Some tests were in the contractor’s court to arrange, others were in the owner’s. Some tests clearly defined pass/fail criteria and testing conditions, and many did not. Lastly, some of the tests were not even applicable to their relevant sections (ASTM E 1186 written under curtain wall specifications, for example). Other systems had no testing requirements at all, and the owner was very surprised to learn their 40-year warranty roofing system had none. In that case, we were able to step in and recommend the appropriate testing before it became a warranty problem down the road.

While our team was able to review, clarify, and come up with a plan, it threw the whole team for a loop and required quite a bit of contract review, clarifying the owner’s expectations, and educating the design team on what their own specifications actually required.

What I’ve found is that, like most things, a successful envelope testing program relies heavily on proper coordination in the design phase of the project.

Start in the Design Phase

Once the design nears the CD phase and the building architecture and envelope components have been determined, is the time to discuss envelope testing. Without clear elevation drawings to talk through and specifications to review, it can be a difficult conversation to lead. First, it’s good to review project specifications as they stand.

Our team starts with asking ourselves the following six questions:

1. Is there any envelope testing specified?
2. Are the specified tests relevant?
3. Are there clear pass/fail criteria and testing parameters?
4. Whose court is it in to hire the testing agency?
5. How many test mobilizations are required?
6. In the event there is a test failure, who owes the cost of retests (hint: it shouldn’t be the owner!)

Following our review, we issue a matrix clearly identifying the required envelope testing scope. We also do a gap analysis for any systems that should require testing but don’thave a line item on the schedule. The outcome typically looks something like below:

Sort Out Budget and Responsibility

Once specifications are reviewed and the final testing scope is determined, the next important step is determining the testing budget and costs. Who is carrying testing and how much will it cost?

On most projects, the owner or CxA is responsible for carrying envelope testing. Keeping it under a single entity helps avoid multiple parties carrying bits and pieces of the testing and keeps testing focused on a single point of contact. Having the CxA carry testing (either in-house or through subcontractors) also keeps the testing agency as third party, removing any concerns with conflicts of interest.

Write a Clear Testing Plan

As the conversation continues and the testing scope gets finalized, the CxA should have a clear, written testing plan that identifies all requirements.

During review, the reader should be able to answer the following questions:

1. Is it clear what testing is required?
2. Is it applicable to the specifications and the project?
3. Is it clear who owns the testing?
4. Is the number of test mobilizations, and their timing in the project schedule clear?
5. Are the testing parameters and pass/fail criteria clear?
6. Is the team aware of the next steps in the event a test fails?

This envelope testing plan should be transparent and easily understandable to everyone reading it.

Pull It Into One Specification

Typically, envelope testing requirements are scattered across various Division 3, 4, 7 & 8 specifications. This is why we often develop a specific envelope testing specification under Division 1. Even if SES is not conducting the testing, this gives the project reference language for the envelope testing process and clearly identifies testing that is required. It also creates a single reference point across all divisions, which makes for easier understanding during project bidding, scheduling and construction.

The Bottom Line

Envelope testing sounds simple until you are the one holding a specification full of gaps three months into construction. Getting it right takes more than good intentions. It takes a commissioning authority who has seen where these programs fall apart and knows how to build a plan before the first test is ever scheduled, not after a contractor is already asking who is paying for the retest.

It is worth asking a harder question about your own projects, past and present. Did your envelope CxA walk your design team through these six questions before the specifications went out to bid? Was there a clear testing plan everyone could point to, or did the team find out the hard way? If you are not sure, that uncertainty is usually the answer.

A testing program built on guesswork almost always costs more in change orders, disputes, and retesting than it would have cost to get right from the start. The projects that go smoothly are the ones where an experienced envelope commissioning authority is brought in early enough to coordinate the testing scope, budget, and responsibilities before they become a problem. If your next project does not have that yet, that is exactly the expertise SES brings to the table, and it is worth having that conversation before your specifications go out the door.