INDUSTRY COMMENT Air pressure testing is ‘hear’ to stay
Andrew Coy, territory product manager at plumbing and drainage manufacturer, Wavin, talks about the benefits of pneumatic testing for plumbing systems and how this is driving increased use of the method
H
ydrostatic testing with water has long been the go-to method of pressure testing for heating and ventilation contractors, but advances in air pressure testing methods have highlighted the
limitations that traditional water-based methods can have on the job. Air pressure testing methods, which have historically been considered dangerous, are now instead being recognised across Europe for their potential to address contemporary
plumbing issues and the range of time and cost- saving benefits they offer.
Countries including Denmark, The Netherlands and Germany are all familiar with this testing process, having seen air surpass water as the method of choice. And with industry innovations resolving the common pitfalls of air testing, the time is now ripe for UK contractors to follow suit and look at adopting air pressure testing in their processes.
Minimising time and cost
Taking an average of 20 minutes per test, water may initially be seen as the quickest or most efficient option for pressure testing. But when considering the often lengthy preparation and maintenance efforts that come when water pressure testing, air comes out on top. As buildings have gotten larger over time, their plumbing and general maintenance needs have in turn changed. When pressure testing an extensive piping system, the logistics of using water can often be impractical. On live construction sites that are not yet linked to a water supply, large volumes of water must be transported to the top of the building before the testing process can begin – an often costly and time-consuming task. And when the test is complete, there is a lengthy drying process for contractors to contend with. When a leak is detected through water testing methods, the water that escapes can cause damage to the construction site and increase the likelihood of corrosion. To reduce this, testing must be completed in small sections, so that water leaks can be quickly dealt with. Without this risk, air pressure–testing can be completed across a much larger building section, reducing the time taken and allowing construction to swiftly progress.
Better methods incoming
A move towards air pressure testing across mainland Europe has highlighted the need for better systems. Traditional air pressure testing methods make finding any leaks tricky and time consuming in comparison to water-based methods that visibly show their locations. With an increased emphasis on the benefits of air testing in the wider construction process, manufacturers are creating innovative solutions designed with air testing in mind. The launch of Wavin’s new press fit system
Tigris K5/M5, is suitable for both water and air testing methods. Featuring an audible leak alert, contractors can quickly detect the location of an unpressed fitting when using air to pressure test. The 80-decibel noise is similar in volume to a passing freight train, making it loud enough to be heard on even the busiest of construction
12 BUILDING SERVICES & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER JULY 2023 Read the latest at:
www.bsee.co.uk
Air pressure testing
methods, which have historically been considered dangerous, are now instead being recognised across Europe for their potential to address contemporary plumbing issues and the range of time and cost- saving benefits they offer.
sites, ensuring that all leaks are easily identified and secured.
Contractors now have a variety of pressure testing methods available to choose from, and there are undoubtedly benefits and drawbacks to each. As buildings and their servicing needs change, so too should the tools and methods used, and it is the innovations provided by manufacturers that are improving these processes. These factors are likely to explain the steady rise in popularity of air pressure testing across Europe. And for contractors in the UK, seeking safer methods that don’t compromise on effectiveness or efficiency, it is air that we predict will become the go-to choice.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42
