ToolBase Services
The Home Building Industry's Technical Information Resource

Back to Standard View
Search by Building SystemBrowse by Evaluated TechnologyAbout Field Evaluations

Existing Homes in Chicago: Chicago, IL

Summary
Details
Results
Journal
Resources
Location: Chicago, IL
Climate Zone: Cold
Subdivision: N/A
Builder: Existing Homes in Chicago
Evaluation
Start Date:
October 2006
Completion Date: April 2007

Crew with Sample Home
Technologies Evaluated:

Objectives:
  • To determine the energy savings of installing clear and Low-E storm windows in a cold climate
  • To determine the costs of installing clear and Low-E storm windows, and the approximate simple payback schedule of doing so
  • To determine the improvement, if any, of the air tightness of the home after storm windows have been installed
  • To provide guidance to home energy-efficiency raters wishing to analyze storm window performance with energy simulation software
General Construction Information:

All houses in this study had brick façades with structural concrete block exterior walls and no insulation inside the walls. All had basements that were either directly or indirectly conditioned. Details on each house are below.

House #1

A 1,625-square foot bungalow built in the 1930s with 33 windows and a hot water boiler.

House #2

A 2,250-square foot bungalow built in the 1950s with 12 windows and a gas furnace.

House #3

A 1,125-square foot, two-story bungalow built in 1935 with 11 windows and a gas furnace.

House #4

A 1,150-square foot, two-story bungalow,built in 1925 with 22 windows and a gas furnace.

House #5

A 2,160-square foot, single–story, ranch-style home built in 1965 with, 12 windows and a gas furnace.

House #6

A 2,500 square-foot bungalow built in 1970 with a hot water boiler and 24 winows.

Significant Results:
  • Installing clear glass storm windows reduced the heating load by 13% with a 10-year simple payback.
  • Installing Low-E storm windows lead to a 21% reduction in heating costs and an average payback term of less that five years.
  • The average reduction in air leakage (at 50 Pascals of pressure) was 15 CFM (25.5 M3/hr) per window.
Contributors: