ASTM E783 vs ASTM E1105: Field Testing of Facades
Both standards are the field counterparts of lab tests on installed windows, doors, and curtain walls. They check how the installed assembly performs, including the interface with the building.
At a glance
| ASTM E783 | ASTM E1105 | |
|---|---|---|
| Measures | Air leakage (infiltration/exfiltration) | Water penetration |
| Lab equivalent | ASTM E283 | ASTM E331 (static) / E547 (cyclic) |
| Why it matters | Energy loss, comfort, noise, condensation | Durability, mold, damage to interiors and structure |
| Output | A number (L/s·m² or cfm/ft² at a set pressure) | Pass/fail: any leakage beyond the allowed plane is a fail |
| Water spray | None | Yes, about 3.4 L/m²·min (5 gal/h·ft²), same as E331 |
| Pressure | Typically about 75 Pa (1.57 psf) | Specified, usually about 2/3 of the lab test pressure |
How the tests are conducted
E783 (air)
- A temporary sealed chamber is built over the test area, usually on the interior face, from framing and poly sheet, or from a rigid box.
- A calibrated fan and airflow meter connect to the chamber, plus a pressure tap measuring the pressure difference across the specimen.
- Pressure is applied (negative or positive) and the airflow needed to hold the target pressure is recorded. This is the total leakage.
- The specimen's perimeter and joints are then sealed with tape and film, and the test is repeated. This gives the chamber and parasitic leakage.
- Specimen leakage is the total minus the parasitic leakage, divided by the area (or joint length).
E1105 (water)
- A chamber is built, usually on the interior, with the pressure source and manometer connected.
- A spray rack is set up on the exterior face, with nozzles calibrated for uniform coverage at the specified rate.
- Spray starts. Procedure A applies a uniform static pressure for a set duration, typically 15 minutes. Procedure B applies cyclic pressure (for example 5 minutes on, 1 minute off, for several cycles).
- Inspectors watch the interior for water crossing the defined penetration plane. The test may be repeated with the spray moved to isolate leak paths.
On-site challenges
Air test (E783)
- Parasitic leakage is the biggest issue. The chamber seal and adjacent walls can leak more than the specimen, so tiny differences are lost in the subtraction.
- Wind gusts and stack effect make the pressure unstable at low test pressures.
- Sealing the specimen with tape for the tare test is difficult on large or complex units.
- Flows are low, so instrument accuracy and calibration matter a lot.
- The result includes the perimeter sealant and the air barrier transition, which the lab tests never see.
Water test (E1105)
- Exterior access is hard: swing stages, scaffolding, or lifts are needed, and the spray rack must be rigged and kept uniform.
- Wind blows the spray off target. Cold weather and drying surfaces also hurt repeatability.
- The chamber must hold pressure. On sealed buildings, pressure can leak through unrelated paths.
- Distinguishing true leakage from condensation, from water entering through the chamber seal, or from water tracking along the interior is a judgment call.
- Finished interiors are at risk of water damage, so testing is often done early, before finishes are in.
- Failures are hard to trace. Water may appear far from where it entered.
Are the criteria stringent?
Water: yes, very. The criterion is essentially zero penetration at a significant pressure under continuous, heavy spray. That is harsher than most real rain events, and any visible leak counts. Pass/fail is binary, so an installed assembly with sealant joints, anchors, and flashing transitions is far less forgiving than a lab mock-up built by the manufacturer. Many field failures come from perimeter interfaces, not the glazing system itself.
Air: moderately stringent, but sensitive to method. Typical specs use something like 0.06 cfm/ft² at 75 Pa for curtain wall or storefront. Some specs relax the lab figure for the field, but this varies. The lab limit is easy to meet in a mock-up. In the field, perimeter seals and uneven sealing often push results over, and test uncertainty can be large relative to the limit.
Caveat: project specs (or AAMA 503/501.2 where referenced) set the actual pressures and acceptance limits, and they can differ from one another. Always check the specification, not just the ASTM method.
Does it make a difference which you do?
Yes, because they catch different defects. Air testing catches missing or poorly connected seals and gaskets. Water testing catches drainage, flashing, and sealant defects. A unit can pass one and fail the other.
For a thorough field QA program, run both, ideally on early mock-ups and again on installed sections. Also use cheaper diagnostic checks such as the AAMA 501.2 nozzle test for broad coverage.