# Windows...



## Amitabh (Oct 21, 2010)

Hi All,

Pictures to come, but let me describe the situation.

First off, all my windows have a cloudy vapour in between the pane. The first time we noticed it, we tried to wipe it (d'oh). Its inside in the window. From what i have been reading, the cloudy vapour is a bad symptom. That my thermo protection (if that is the right name) is gone.

Is that right? Should i be replacing my windows? if so with what kind of window? Dont really know the window options out there. Can i do the windows myself (at least on the lower level), or should i consider a professional?

Second, its damn cold right now. But, we do live in a cold climate area, Toronto, Ontario. What we have noticed on all our windows is condensation around the bottom of the window and sometimes across the middle section of the window.

Not sure if this is the worst part, but the condensation also freezes and creates ice all the inside-bottom of the window. Given the heat inside the home, it does melt and create a pool of water on the inside window ledge.

Now - you may also say, maybe my humidity is too high, well, lets just say i have a tough time keeping it between 35 and 37. The humidstat in the basement is set to 30 as well.

Thoughts, suggestions,

Cheers and thanx in advance

PTMD


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

Cloud between the panes = seal and dessicant failure. This requires a replacement IGU or remake of the sealed unit. If they are not that old, look for a serial number and try to get them covered under warranty.

Second issue is a failure or under-performance of the window in general. If these are double pane units in that climate, that is part of the problem. The other part of the problem is the fact that the windows will (when a unit has a poor air infiltration rating) be both thermally bridged and leak air at those locations (meeting rail in the middle and across the sill on the bottom). Between the air leakage and the thermal bridging, that will result in sweating/condensation and freezing if cold enough.

There is no magic bullet for this scenario in most cases as some windows are just leaky by design or unserviceable.

Check to see if the weatherstripping is serviceable, if the window is fitting properly, and if you are candidate for interior storm windows.

If you can tighten up the window and you don't want an internal storm window, you are looking at replacement windows.


----------



## Duckweather (Mar 26, 2012)

I have the same problem with my windows, but it isn't a seal failure as 18 windows developed it about the same time. It appears that the glass used to make the double panes was not cleaned before assembly and had an oily film, maybe to make the glass easier to separate. I can actually see the pattern of liquid smeared on the inside surface. They all look foggy and cannot be cleaned, so after 37 years I am replacing the sashes. I did the first one and almost can't believe the difference. It looks like there is NO glass in them.


----------



## Amitabh (Oct 21, 2010)

Windows on Wash said:


> Cloud between the panes = seal and dessicant failure. This requires a replacement IGU or remake of the sealed unit. If they are not that old, look for a serial number and try to get them covered under warranty.
> 
> Second issue is a failure or under-performance of the window in general. If these are double pane units in that climate, that is part of the problem. The other part of the problem is the fact that the windows will (when a unit has a poor air infiltration rating) be both thermally bridged and leak air at those locations (meeting rail in the middle and across the sill on the bottom). Between the air leakage and the thermal bridging, that will result in sweating/condensation and freezing if cold enough.
> 
> ...


Thanx! 

How do i go about finding a serial number? The windows, I assume, were installed in 2004, when the house was built.

When i moved in 2012, i got some QUAD exterior caulking and re-caulk the exterior windows (10 out of 15 windows, could not reach with the ladder that i have with the other 5). I did the interior as well.

replacements... mmm... thats some money... 

what should i look for in replacement windows

PTMD


----------



## SPS-1 (Oct 21, 2008)

2004 ---- they may very well still be under warranty, or at least the original manufacturer may cut you a deal. All they would do is come in and replace the glass unit. Look for engraving or decal on your windows. Or ask your neighbors --- good chance all the windows in your neighborhood are from the same place (and others may have problems too). Had that happen to me in Waterloo a while back. They had a quiet warranty where they said they would cover the glass but not the labor, but I had to call them twice and neither time was I ever charged for anything.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

Duckweather said:


> I have the same problem with my windows, but it isn't a seal failure as 18 windows developed it about the same time. It appears that the glass used to make the double panes was not cleaned before assembly and had an oily film, maybe to make the glass easier to separate. I can actually see the pattern of liquid smeared on the inside surface. They all look foggy and cannot be cleaned, so after 37 years I am replacing the sashes. I did the first one and almost can't believe the difference. It looks like there is NO glass in them.


Still very likely a seal and/or desiccant failure in that case as well. 

Bulk moisture does not have to be the only type of moisture in there.

If the windows had Low-e, it can fail as well but is usually driven by moisture too.


----------



## Amitabh (Oct 21, 2010)

SPS-1 said:


> 2004 ---- they may very well still be under warranty, or at least the original manufacturer may cut you a deal. All they would do is come in and replace the glass unit. Look for engraving or decal on your windows. Or ask your neighbors --- good chance all the windows in your neighborhood are from the same place (and others may have problems too). Had that happen to me in Waterloo a while back. They had a quiet warranty where they said they would cover the glass but not the labor, but I had to call them twice and neither time was I ever charged for anything.


Man - trying to find the brands/serial number is hard... i havent seen anything yet, maybe another window. But i thought all windows would have it and make it easy to find.

Where would it normally be?

i found "FASCO" and "DE-CAN CANADA"


----------



## Tom Struble (Dec 29, 2008)

usually in one of the channels at the top of the window you will find a label ,sometimes it's on the spacer bar in between the panes


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

Or etched right on the glass in the bottom right hand corner.
Snap the sashes out of the track and time them down and look on the sides.
No clue why a company would want hide the info needed.
I see this all the time.


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

FASCO was a company that made window hardware. They have since been bought out.


----------



## Amitabh (Oct 21, 2010)

i think i found it, Decora Windows and Doors was etched into the metal between the panes. Did a quick google search and they scored 1.4 on Homestars. Yikes.

Everyone is complaining about the thermal leakage. Not sure if i want to brother with getting them to fix it. Based on what i read here.

http://homestars.com/companies/203352-decora-window-door-systems


----------



## BRWhelan (Oct 31, 2012)

Glad to hear you found it.

I'm not sure if it's common in other parts of the country, but here in New England I've found that many of the windows in my house vary in size, so don't go getting one size glass-pack expecting them to fit every window. It could make sense to measure and see if any vary in size.


----------



## Duckweather (Mar 26, 2012)

Windows on Wash said:


> Still very likely a seal and/or desiccant failure in that case as well.
> 
> Bulk moisture does not have to be the only type of moisture in there.
> 
> If the windows had Low-e, it can fail as well but is usually driven by moisture too.


An I R heat loss says they are in good condition, You just can't see through them, they are like looking into the fog. They were sold by RIVCO in NH but BROSCO made the parts and new sash packs and windows are within 1/16" They are wood windows, (I like painting) new ones are low E + argonat less than 1/2 the price of new.


----------



## HomeSealed (Jan 3, 2008)

Duckweather said:


> An I R heat loss says they are in good condition, You just can't see through them, they are like looking into the fog. They were sold by RIVCO in NH but BROSCO made the parts and new sash packs and windows are within 1/16" They are wood windows, (I like painting) new ones are low E + argonat less than 1/2 the price of new.


Glad to hear that you have it fixed. 
I do have to reinforce Windows on Washington's point though, that you do indeed have seal/desiccant failure. Whether it is active moisture, fogging, or a reaction of the low-e coating (if they had one) causing the "smeared" look, it will be due to a failure any way you look at it. A unit that has its seal in tact will not have those issues. I understand that the IR probably does not show a tremendous loss, but that is to be expected. The appearance will be a larger factor than decreased performance when a seal fails, although there definitely is _some_ drop in performance.


----------



## HomeSealed (Jan 3, 2008)

Amitabh said:


> i think i found it, Decora Windows and Doors was etched into the metal between the panes. Did a quick google search and they scored 1.4 on Homestars. Yikes.
> 
> Everyone is complaining about the thermal leakage. Not sure if i want to brother with getting them to fix it. Based on what i read here.
> 
> http://homestars.com/companies/203352-decora-window-door-systems


That really depends... Are you experiencing other issues like air leakage? I'm not familiar with that brand, but most "builder grade" windows leave much to be desired in terms of performance, but perhaps the bar is set a little higher across the border? If your current windows are satisfactory and you can get warranty coverage on the glass, I'd just go that route. OTOH, if they leak like a sieve and you would be paying for the new IGU's out of pocket, you may want to look into full replacement at this juncture.


----------



## Duckweather (Mar 26, 2012)

Have any of you ever used an ultrasonic air leak tester? I used to install aluminum greenhouse sun rooms and we would use one. There were 3 or 4 sending units inside that sent out the signal (ultrasonic sound). Then you went all over the outside with a tube like receiver that would beep and light up. It could pick up even a pinhole air leak in a greenhouse. We tried it on some additions and it worked somewhat, but wood frame has more air leaks than you are led to believe, housewrap or not, that gave too many false readings. It did help find some water leaks too though.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

Can't say I have.

Like you say, the thing would be going off the dial with most home.

People like to see the theatrics of the blower door and smoke or IR camera most times. 

That is what seems to grab peoples attention and makes for a better and more impactful display.


----------



## Amitabh (Oct 21, 2010)

the company went under ( i think ) the phone number is disconnected! 

the builder grade windows are terrible. I think my entire neighbour has the same windows, as everyone's window looks the same as ours.

i think i gotta go the replacement route.


----------



## Startingover (Apr 18, 2012)

My 30 y.o. windows are the same. I've even noticed the patio door is getting a haze. No $$ now but I may do the kitchen window over the sink as it's hard to see out and enjoy the birds.

It was probably one of the reasons my house was so cheap.


----------



## Window Geek (Jan 8, 2014)

Amitabh said:


> Hi All,
> 
> Pictures to come, but let me describe the situation.
> 
> ...


You should have a warranty on the seal failure, but given the brand I would bet the warranty is pro-rated out over what the manufacturer considers the "life of the window". 

Vinyl windows are awful in cold weather. The material has a high thermal expansion/contraction rate. When it gets cold vinyl shrinks and cold air blows past the weather seals because they no longer make contact. Air infiltration is what is causing the ice to form on the interior. If they build a typical vinyl window so that it is tight in cold weather, then the material expands in warm weather and the window wont open. 

There are only a couple of companies that make vinyl windows that are thermally stable enough for really warm and really cold climates, and they are expensive.


----------



## Window Geek (Jan 8, 2014)

Duckweather said:


> I have the same problem with my windows, but it isn't a seal failure as 18 windows developed it about the same time. It appears that the glass used to make the double panes was not cleaned before assembly and had an oily film, maybe to make the glass easier to separate. I can actually see the pattern of liquid smeared on the inside surface. They all look foggy and cannot be cleaned, so after 37 years I am replacing the sashes. I did the first one and almost can't believe the difference. It looks like there is NO glass in them.


You still have seal failure. The Low-E coating has oxidized and clouded the windows. The coating will still work and provide a slightly reduced U-value, but it becomes cloudy and dirty looking. It is not uncommon for all of the windows in a house to fail within months of each other. I know a builder who had all of the windows on the front elevation of his new house fail in less than 3 years.


----------



## HomeSealed (Jan 3, 2008)

Window Geek said:


> Vinyl windows are awful in cold weather. The material has a high thermal expansion/contraction rate. When it gets cold vinyl shrinks and cold air blows past the weather seals because they no longer make contact. Air infiltration is what is causing the ice to form on the interior. If they build a typical vinyl window so that it is tight in cold weather, then the material expands in warm weather and the window wont open.
> 
> There are only a couple of companies that make vinyl windows that are thermally stable enough for really warm and really cold climates, and they are expensive.


This information is outdated, if not entirely inaccurate.
1) While vinyl does indeed have a much higher rate of expansion/contraction than wood or fiberglass, the amount that it moves in your average residential window is negligible. 
2) Every window regardless of material is designed and engineered to take advantage of the strengths of that material, and mitigate its weaknesses. Yes, this is why vinyl windows do have more weatherstripping and different design features than you would typically see from a wood window.
3) Premium vinyl windows generally have lower air infiltration rates than wood or Fg windows. My own experience in the field on energy audits (blower door, thermal imaging, smoke sticks, etc) confirms this, regardless of whether it is summer or winter.
4) Every material definitely has its own pros and cons. The look and feel of vinyl is a shortcoming for some people, but performance is not. If anything, the fact that there are SO MANY vinyl window manufacturers out there-- and many of them make trash-- reflects poorly, and unjustifiably so, on vinyl as a material.


----------



## Window Geek (Jan 8, 2014)

HomeSealed said:


> This information is outdated, if not entirely inaccurate.
> 1) While vinyl does indeed have a much higher rate of expansion/contraction than wood or fiberglass, the amount that it moves in your average residential window is negligible.
> 2) Every window regardless of material is designed and engineered to take advantage of the strengths of that material, and mitigate its weaknesses. Yes, this is why vinyl windows do have more weatherstripping and different design features than you would typically see from a wood window.
> 3) Premium vinyl windows generally have lower air infiltration rates than wood or Fg windows. My own experience in the field on energy audits (blower door, thermal imaging, smoke sticks, etc) confirms this, regardless of whether it is summer or winter.
> 4) Every material definitely has its own pros and cons. The look and feel of vinyl is a shortcoming for some people, but performance is not. If anything, the fact that there are SO MANY vinyl window manufacturers out there-- and many of them make trash-- reflects poorly, and unjustifiably so, on vinyl as a material.


What do you consider premium vinyl? I have worked with everything from Unilux to crap like Silverline. I have been in the test labs and in the field on pilot projects. I have used vinyl in a Passive House project that cost much more any anything made by Marvin, Lowen, or Pella. Vinyl that performs as well as premium clad wood systems cost more than premium clad wood systems for the features and typically don't look nearly as good or have nearly as much design flexibility. The Unilux windows performed amazingly well, but cost a fortune, took forever to get delivered, and had enough metal reinforcement in them to make two more sets of windows. The vinyl material by itself isn't strong enough for large composites and has to be loaded with metal reinforcement. When I first got in the industry vinyl was only used on mobile homes and it is the dominate window material because of price, not quality. 

When it comes air infiltration numbers for products, don't believe them. I can build a FIXED casement and send it to a lab for testing while my engineer is present. I pay the lab to rate my product according to my standards and under the supervision of my engineer. I can then use the test numbers for all my casement windows (operable or fixed). The numbers provided by manufacturers are a joke.


----------



## HomeSealed (Jan 3, 2008)

The ratings that are advertised by reputable manufacturers are not tested to their own made up standards, nor are they incorrectly classifying operators. AAMA sets the test standards, and the size, configuration, etc is published on every report. Products like the Okna Envirostar and Softlite Elements best any mainstream clad wood or fg product in every measurable area, thermally and structurally, and do so for less. They also do so without metal reinforcement. 
On design flexibility and appearance, I agree 100%. I sell and install windows of every material because as I mentioned earlier, they all have different pros and cons. Performance is NOT an area where today's better vinyl windows are lacking, and your comments about cold area blowing in past the seals is ridiculous. There are a lot of poor vinyl windows out there, and probably even more poor installations, but the material is not the problem. If a window's construction or installation is poor enough that air is leaking profusely during the winter, I promise you that it is doing the same thing during the summer.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

There are some pretty hefty accusations being thrown around there.

Manufacturers falsifying AAMA tests, vinyl not performing, expansion and contraction rates, air infiltration causing icing, vinyl windows not opening in the summer if they are relatively airtight in the winter.

Wow....to put it mildly.

At the end of the day, if the best performing window was made of cow manure...that is what I would sell so I am no vinyl apologist. 

That being said, most, if not all, of the information that you have stated as fact on vinyl windows, Window Geek, is incorrect. 

Expansion and contraction is a force in all building materials and this includes wood windows. The relationship in the case of wood is not temperature related but wood windows certainly do expand and contract with moisture and that is seasonal. Anyone have a wood door that shuts better in the winter than in the summer?

The expansion argument about vinyl windows is outdated and does not have merit when we are talking about the well built and engineered materials out there. 

People talk about fiberglass and recommend that substrate due to its lack of expansion and contraction and its rate is only half that of vinyl. These huge curtain wall systems of glass that are aluminum also have expansion and contraction rates that are about half that of vinyl and they are made in much, much larger sections. 

We don't see failures in those systems because of expansion and these windows are massive by comparison to residential systems. 

As a percentage of what is out there, I would submit than 90% of the top performing (air infiltration, thermal performance, and design pressure) windows are probably be made in vinyl today.


----------



## Window Geek (Jan 8, 2014)

HomeSealed said:


> The ratings that are advertised by reputable manufacturers are not tested to their own made up standards, nor are they incorrectly classifying operators. AAMA sets the test standards, and the size, configuration, etc is published on every report. Products like the Okna Envirostar and Softlite Elements best any mainstream clad wood or fg product in every measurable area, thermally and structurally, and do so for less. They also do so without metal reinforcement.
> On design flexibility and appearance, I agree 100%. I sell and install windows of every material because as I mentioned earlier, they all have different pros and cons. Performance is NOT an area where today's better vinyl windows are lacking, and your comments about cold area blowing in past the seals is ridiculous. There are a lot of poor vinyl windows out there, and probably even more poor installations, but the material is not the problem. If a window's construction or installation is poor enough that air is leaking profusely during the winter, I promise you that it is doing the same thing during the summer.


The AAMA tests that are published are a joke. Request Hallmark certificates from the manufacturer or the Florida Product Approval certificates. Both of those are independent test labs. The AAMA is an association of manufacturers. They develop their own standards and there is a lot of wiggle room. They are a self-governing body all tests are paid for my the manufacturer and your engineers are present for the test. AAMA/WDMA/CSA 101/I.S.2/A440 is the test standard for air infiltration and if you have seen the test performed, or even read the test standards you would now that ambient air temperature is specified by the manufacturer who is paying to have the test done. I have been in the lab with products being tested and had the engineers give me a dozen reasons why I should never trust the AAMA standards.


----------



## HomeSealed (Jan 3, 2008)

AAMA is a highly respected, not for profit organization that has had a tremendous impact in moving window technology and quality forward through the years. May I presumptuously guess which engineers were highly critical of the test results? Answer: those that tested out miserably! Please correct me if I'm wrong. Coincidence I'm sure . BTW, the ambient air temp is listed on the structural test data report for review and comparison purposes.
Let me also reiterate that a substantial portion of my business is wood window sales. Again, each material has its pros and cons. Going back to my days as an installer, I'll concede that there is no window replacement project that can replicate the pride and feeling of a beautifully completed project as one using a good wood window. That said, given that my experience is primarily on the renovation/replacement side as opposed to the new construction/carpenter side, let me say this: I regularly replace wood windows of all grades in 10 yrs give or take, and only replace low end products of inorganic materials in said time period. 
Nothing can best the rich look and feel of wood, but for those homeowners that lack the desire or know-how (most HO's these days) to properly maintain a wood window, or that desire superior thermal and structural performance, vinyl, composite, and fiberglass become much more attractive options. 
The fact of the matter is, regardless of the pros and cons of each material choice, you have already lost all credibility with your ludicrous statements earlier in this thread. We can all have our preferences, but lets please provide honest and accurate info to consumers and DIY'ers viewing this thread.


----------



## Window Geek (Jan 8, 2014)

HomeSealed said:


> AAMA is a highly respected, not for profit organization that has had a tremendous impact in moving window technology and quality forward through the years. May I presumptuously guess which engineers were highly critical of the test results? Answer: those that tested out miserably! Please correct me if I'm wrong. Coincidence I'm sure . BTW, the ambient air temp is listed on the structural test data report for review and comparison purposes.
> Let me also reiterate that a substantial portion of my business is wood window sales. Again, each material has its pros and cons. Going back to my days as an installer, I'll concede that there is no window replacement project that can replicate the pride and feeling of a beautifully completed project as one using a good wood window. That said, given that my experience is primarily on the renovation/replacement side as opposed to the new construction/carpenter side, let me say this: I regularly replace wood windows of all grades in 10 yrs give or take, and only replace low end products of inorganic materials in said time period.
> Nothing can best the rich look and feel of wood, but for those homeowners that lack the desire or know-how (most HO's these days) to properly maintain a wood window, or that desire superior thermal and structural performance, vinyl, composite, and fiberglass become much more attractive options.
> The fact of the matter is, regardless of the pros and cons of each material choice, you have already lost all credibility with your ludicrous statements earlier in this thread. We can all have our preferences, but lets please provide honest and accurate info to consumers and DIY'ers viewing this thread.


AAMA is a manufactures association that is self governed. The reason there are so many failing windows (of all materials) is because the standards are basically the bare minimum. As I said in a previous post, we have a local company that imports the sashes from Mexico and assembles the units here. They have an AAMA label on them and are using a composite "never rot" frame. They tried to bid a commercial project with us and failed miserably when we did field testing.

The engineers who were critical of the results were not working for a company who's product performed miserably. We were in the test lab of a major manufacturer who's testing is considerably more stringent than the AAMA standards. They are critical of the AAMA standards, because anyone can meet them with little effort.


----------



## Amitabh (Oct 21, 2010)

As a home owner and person that likes to research, its good to know these things. My plan is to replace windows this summer. What should i budget? What should i look for in an installer? Should i consider Wood vs. Vinyl?

Could I do it myself?

Please pardon my simplicity, i am a simple DIYer, and by no means a professional, just what i think about and what i saw on DIY channel 
1. remove window (with hammer of course, hehe)
2. clean up the debris
3. Red Tape the area?
4. place window in hole
5. use shims to square window
6. screw in window to wood frame
7. use spray in insulation to fill gaps
8. done?


----------



## websnooper (Jan 16, 2012)

Window Geek said:


> The AAMA tests that are published are a joke. Request Hallmark certificates from the manufacturer or the Florida Product Approval certificates. Both of those are independent test labs. The AAMA is an association of manufacturers. They develop their own standards and there is a lot of wiggle room. They are a self-governing body all tests are paid for my the manufacturer and your engineers are present for the test. AAMA/WDMA/CSA 101/I.S.2/A440 is the test standard for air infiltration and if you have seen the test performed, or even read the test standards you would now that ambient air temperature is specified by the manufacturer who is paying to have the test done. I have been in the lab with products being tested and had the engineers give me a dozen reasons why I should never trust the AAMA standards.





Window Geek said:


> AAMA is a manufactures association that is self governed. The reason there are so many failing windows (of all materials) is because the standards are basically the bare minimum. As I said in a previous post, we have a local company that imports the sashes from Mexico and assembles the units here. They have an AAMA label on them and are using a composite "never rot" frame. They tried to bid a commercial project with us and failed miserably when we did field testing.
> 
> The engineers who were critical of the results were not working for a company who's product performed miserably. We were in the test lab of a major manufacturer who's testing is considerably more stringent than the AAMA standards. They are critical of the AAMA standards, because anyone can meet them with little effort.



The BS is getting pretty deep in here. :no:

So...Window Geek...self governed is a problem with AAMA but not with USGBC?

AAMA is accredited by ANSI as are other testing bodies.

It is all starting to sound a bit Cloak and Dagger. You are impugning an entire industry based on your information from what you "hear".

Does AAMA exist as a result of manufacturer participation and therefore financial contribution...Yes. 

Most certifying bodies on products are funded by participants...is all of their data invalid because an engineer you have talked to said so?

Seems to be okay for USGBC to certify buildings and pay for their overhead based on participation fees? 

AAMA designed and created the testing for windows that is now the standard used but all the certifying bodies. To say their tests are worthless is pathetic. Citing one example of an AAMA rated product that didn't qualify for a commercial project is thin to say the least. 

I can think of a whole slew of products that have an AAMA label that are suitable for most commercial products.

You fail to mention if the product in question even had a light commercial (LC) or commercial (C) rating. Did you attempt to use a residential certified product for a commercial application??

The reason there are so many failing windows is because builders use the cheapest labor and materials they can get their hands on. That, overwhelmingly, is the basis behind more of the failures that actual suitable product failures.


----------



## Amitabh (Oct 21, 2010)

my current windows are $%$#^#$


----------



## Tom Struble (Dec 29, 2008)

Amitabh said:


> my current windows are $%$#^#$


i think you can still get those..


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

Tom Struble said:


> i think you can still get those..


:laughing::laughing::laughing:


----------



## Window Geek (Jan 8, 2014)

websnooper said:


> The BS is getting pretty deep in here. :no:
> 
> So...Window Geek...self governed is a problem with AAMA but not with USGBC?


Did I mention USGBC in this thread? NO. USGBC is a non-profit who doesn't rate, test, or endorse products.



websnooper said:


> AAMA is accredited by ANSI as are other testing bodies.


On the commercial side of the business, nobody cares about AAMA. Everyone requires independent lab testing. Any creditable manufacturer should be able to provide Hallmark certificates for their product. 



websnooper said:


> It is all starting to sound a bit Cloak and Dagger. You are impugning an entire industry based on your information from what you "hear".


And you are making things up as you go along. I'm in no way "impugning" and entire industry. I'm saying that anyone can get an AAMA rating. There are a lot of companies out there who's products exceed AAMA standards by a huge margin. 



websnooper said:


> Does AAMA exist as a result of manufacturer participation and therefore financial contribution...Yes.
> 
> Most certifying bodies on products are funded by participants...is all of their data invalid because an engineer you have talked to said so?


What I have said is that AAMA is the bottom of the barrel. It is the minimum standard. 



websnooper said:


> Seems to be okay for USGBC to certify buildings and pay for their overhead based on participation fees?


You can build to the standard and not pay to be certified, which is what our local city and university have been doing. The USGBC is slowing become bloated and a bureaucratic mess. BUT that has absolutely nothing to do with AAMA standards. If the project owner wants to pay for all of the reporting required and to use the few vendors who can provide CoC documentation then more power to them. 



websnooper said:


> AAMA designed and created the testing for windows that is now the standard used but all the certifying bodies. To say their tests are worthless is pathetic. Citing one example of an AAMA rated product that didn't qualify for a commercial project is thin to say the least.


Maybe you can show me a standard lower than AAMA? The AAMA rating means your product has met the MINIMUM requirements. 



websnooper said:


> I can think of a whole slew of products that have an AAMA label that are suitable for most commercial products.


Sure. There are a lot of manufacturers who products exceed the AAMA standards, and since every product on the market carries the AAMA label, obviously many of them are suitable for commercial use. Nobody on the commercial side cares about the AAMA rating when it comes to thermal or air/water performance. There are some AAMA standards for specific aspects of a window that are like AAMA 2603, 2604, 2605 that we look at, but even those are taken with a grain of salt. Its mostly marketing by the industry. 



websnooper said:


> You fail to mention if the product in question even had a light commercial (LC) or commercial (C) rating. Did you attempt to use a residential certified product for a commercial application??


You're not reading very well. I didn't attempt to use anything. The vendor approached us and requested to bid the project claiming that their AAMA rated product met the requirements set forth by the architect. 

The R, LC, C, AW rating have nothing to do with air and water infiltration. Those ratings are life cycle test. IF you want your door to achieve a Commercial rating you have to demonstrate that it can cycle open/close for a given number of cycles. When you are testing casements they actually attach a weight to the sash to add stress to the hinges and cycle the window from open to close. The R certification is again, the bare minimum and I would hate to see a window that could pass it. 



websnooper said:


> The reason there are so many failing windows is because builders use the cheapest labor and materials they can get their hands on. That, overwhelmingly, is the basis behind more of the failures that actual suitable product failures.


And all of those failing windows have an AAMA sticker on them. Who makes a window that doesn't have the AAMA label on it? Name one. 

Are there builders who use the cheapest materials and labor? Sure, but obviously not the majority. The largest manufacturers are in order Anderson, Pella, Jeld-Win, & Marvin. Are those the cheapest? NO. Anderson, Pella, & Jeld-Win all have some cheap vinyl that I would consider junk, but they are still more expensive than most of the market. Obviously there are a lot of people buying premium windows or companies like Marvin & Pella wouldn't still be in business. Nothing they make is "cheap".


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

Window Geek said:


> On the commercial side of the business, nobody cares about AAMA. Everyone requires independent lab testing. Any creditable manufacturer should be able to provide Hallmark certificates for their product.


Not sure that fact is even in question or up for debate. Regardless, AAMA does have commercial ratings for products that are aimed at establishing wind load and performance grades for product requiring these ratings (LC, CW, AW).

The Hallmark Certification reads just like the AAMA Gold Label rating (i.e. testing, in plant inspection, etc.). 

_The *Window and Door Manufacturers Association* (WDMA) Sponsored *Hallmark Certification Program* is designed to provide code officials, builders, architects, specifiers and consumers with an easily recognizable means of identifying products that have been manufactured in accordance with the appropriate *WDMA* and other referenced performance standards. The *WDMA Hallmark* is considered a mark of excellence among architects, contractors and other specifiers and is accepted industry-wide. *WDMA* Standards are referenced by HUD/FHA in their Minimum Property Standards and by many other government agencies in their construction specifications. Any manufacturer who can demonstrate conformance to the *WDMA* standards is eligible to participate in the *Hallmark Certification Program*. Conformance is determined by in-plant inspection of the manufacturing facilities and by sampling and testing of products. The manufacturer is issued a Certification Conformance License (CCL) which includes the license and product line numbers. The WDMA Hallmark Certification Program is ongoing. Conformance of participating manufacturing plants is determined by periodic in-plant inspections by a third party administrator. The inspections include auditing manufacturer quality control procedures and processes, and a review to check that products are manufactured in accordance with the appropriate WDMA and other referenced performance standards. Periodic testing of representative product samples and components by a third party testing laboratory is also required. When all of the conditions are met, the licensee is authorized to use the *WDMA Hallmark* registered logo on the Certification Label as a means of identifying products that comply with all aspects of the applicable standards. *WDMA* itself does not certify individual product units; certification is on a per product line basis _

*Question:*

If the Hallmark Certification is issued by the WDMA, what and who do they base their testing criteria on. Are the standards issued by ANSI. What are the standards?



Window Geek said:


> And you are making things up as you go along. I'm in no way "impugning" and entire industry. I'm saying that anyone can get an AAMA rating. There are a lot of companies out there who's products exceed AAMA standards by a huge margin.


You did say:


Window Geek said:


> AAMA tests that are published are a joke


 and that engineers gave you


Window Geek said:


> dozen reasons why I should never trust the AAMA standards.


I would say that pretty well undermines and entire industry that tests residential windows in accordance with the AAMA developed standards.

I don't think that anyone is arguing that minimum standards are minimum standards. I have also never seen someone recommend a window that only meets minimum standards on these forums.



Window Geek said:


> What I have said is that AAMA is the bottom of the barrel. It is the minimum standard.


*Question:*

What are the WDMA standards and how are they different? 



Window Geek said:


> Maybe you can show me a standard lower than AAMA? The AAMA rating means your product has met the MINIMUM requirements.


Again...I don't think anyone is arguing that fact. I am just trying to point out that AAMA is a testing body and does a good job of establishing a standard and then demonstrating where the performance of a given unit at or beyond that (or below that for that matter).



Window Geek said:


> Sure. There are a lot of manufacturers who products exceed the AAMA standards, and since every product on the market carries the AAMA label, obviously many of them are suitable for commercial use. Nobody on the commercial side cares about the AAMA rating when it comes to thermal or air/water performance. There are some AAMA standards for specific aspects of a window that are like AAMA 2603, 2604, 2605 that we look at, but even those are taken with a grain of salt. Its mostly marketing by the industry.


As are most certifications. As a quick note, AAMA does not certify thermal data although they may provide it. 

No one is saying the AAMA label is the gospel of windows. You can get an AAMA label and leak a bunch of air (anywhere less than 0.30) but at least by demonstrating an AAMA label, it means that the window has a minimum standard and was submitted for testing. Given the amount of window manufacturers, it is a minimal effort but does demonstrate something. 




Window Geek said:


> The R, LC, C, AW rating have nothing to do with air and water infiltration. Those ratings are life cycle test.


*That is incorrect.* Air infiltration is a separate and independent test but water and structural testings are absolutely related to DP (or PG now). 

 Both water penetration and structural testing, on the other hand, are based on the window DP rating. Water infiltration is tested at 15% of the design pressure and structural is tested at 150% of DP rating.

What this means is that a window with a DP30 is tested for water infiltration at 4.5psf (15% of 30psf) while a window with a DP40 is tested at 6psf (15% of 40).


A window with a DP30 rating should be able to keep out rain when its driven by 42mph winds and a window with a DP40 should be able to keep out rain when driven by 49mph winds...so while water infiltration is DP related - and air infiltration is not - the nature of air and water infiltration is different.




Window Geek said:


> Are there builders who use the cheapest materials and labor? Sure, but obviously not the majority. The largest manufacturers are in order Anderson, Pella, Jeld-Win, & Marvin. Are those the cheapest? NO. Anderson, Pella, & Jeld-Win all have some cheap vinyl that I would consider junk, but they are still more expensive than most of the market. Obviously there are a lot of people buying premium windows or companies like Marvin & Pella wouldn't still be in business. Nothing they make is "cheap".




I read that as him referring to builders of homes...not the builders of the windows. 

By the way...there is no "Win" in Jeld-Wen...that is just aimed at being a funny pun. :laughing:


----------



## Window Geek (Jan 8, 2014)

Windows on Wash said:


> No one is saying the AAMA label is the gospel of windows. You can get an AAMA label and leak a bunch of air (anywhere less than 0.30) but at least by demonstrating an AAMA label, it means that the window has a minimum standard and was submitted for testing. Given the amount of window manufacturers, it is a minimal effort but does demonstrate something.


In all of that copy and pasting this is actually important.

One question you can answer and prove my original statement wrong. Is that .30 for a fixed unit or an operable unit?

As a window company I make a fixed unit specifically for testing and have it tested to receive the AAMA rating. I can then use that rating for all my windows (operable or fixed) in that line. 

What makes the Hallmark certificates different is that they come into the factory at random and pull product off of the assembly line and test it. There is a huge difference in a production window pulled from the line and one that was hand assembled for testing by the engineer.

Show me where the AAMA rating for air infiltration specifies fixed or operable? Show me where is says that the unit tested has to be a production window?

The base AAMA rating is a joke. A couple of guys in a garage can build a unit that can pass the test of .30 cfm per square foot of frame. One major manufacturer tests every standard size casement that it makes and if the number exceeds .05 cfm the unit is considered defective.


----------



## HomeSealed (Jan 3, 2008)

I think that we are getting closer to some common ground here, as an AI of .30 cfm is atrocious. Nobody here was advocating that baseline rating as good, only suggesting that those tested ratings are a viable form of comparing one product to the next. 
On the fixed vs operable comment, again you are off base. The test report shows what type of operator was tested, and honest companies will advertise those numbers as such. Where there can be questionable integrity in this process is in how an individual manufacturer advertises the results. They may advertise the tested rating from their best product as representative of all of their products, they may test an oversized unit to produce an artificially low number, and so on and so forth. If you are trying to paint the testing itself as bogus and easily manipulated, I'd ask why then are manufactures having to engage in these tactics after the fact? Why don't they all simply test their fixed unit at .01 cfm and call it a day?... Because that is just not how it works. Are there shady companies that try to slip something past on occasion? I'm sure that there are, and there are stories of stuff like that over the years, but I believe that is by far the exception rather than the rule. I'd also address the insinuation that the money involved de legitimizes by asking why then are some of the largest companies the ones that test out poorest, while some small regional manufacturers test off the charts?


----------



## Window Geek (Jan 8, 2014)

HomeSealed said:


> I think that we are getting closer to some common ground here, as an AI of .30 cfm is atrocious. Nobody here was advocating that baseline rating as good, only suggesting that those tested ratings are a viable form of comparing one product to the next.
> On the fixed vs operable comment, again you are off base. The test report shows what type of operator was tested, and honest companies will advertise those numbers as such. Where there can be questionable integrity in this process is in how an individual manufacturer advertises the results. They may advertise the tested rating from their best product as representative of all of their products, they may test an oversized unit to produce an artificially low number, and so on and so forth. If you are trying to paint the testing itself as bogus and easily manipulated, I'd ask why then are manufactures having to engage in these tactics after the fact? Why don't they all simply test their fixed unit at .01 cfm and call it a day?... Because that is just not how it works. Are there shady companies that try to slip something past on occasion? I'm sure that there are, and there are stories of stuff like that over the years, but I believe that is by far the exception rather than the rule. I'd also address the insinuation that the money involved de legitimizes by asking why then are some of the largest companies the ones that test out poorest, while some small regional manufacturers test off the charts?


Show me where the AAMA test specifies operable or fixed for the .30 cfm rating? Show where the AAMA test requires the test unit be a production unit? 

Which large company tests out the poorest? Link to the test please? Or documentation of the test results? Which test are we talking about?


----------



## HomeSealed (Jan 3, 2008)

I'm talking about the big wood window manufacturers that for the most part all test out in the .2's on their DH's, while products from small vinyl, fg, and composite manufacturers are getting below .05, some down to .01 on a DH. The type of operator, exact size, etc is specified on every report. I can email you some test reports if you'd like. 
You obviously are pretty well-informed on a lot of things Window-Geek, making crazy blanket statements like the one about vinyl windows leaking air in winter or binding in the summer are not earning any credibility though. I think even moderately informed consumers would raise an eyebrow at that.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

Window Geek said:


> In all of that copy and pasting this is actually important.


I am glad that you found it important. Hopefully you didn't miss the couple of items where I pointed out that you posted some factually incorrect information that you posted. You know folks use these forums for information so we should make sure we are dealing in facts. 



Window Geek said:


> One question you can answer and prove my original statement wrong. Is that .30 for a fixed unit or an operable unit?


I am sure you know the answer to this but it is for a fixed or operable unit. 



Window Geek said:


> As a window company I make a fixed unit specifically for testing and have it tested to receive the AAMA rating. I can then use that rating for all my windows (operable or fixed) in that line.


That may be the case, but I know that I inspect and review the test reports on the operable units prior to speaking about brand X or Y. I suspect HomeSealed does the same but he/she can speak to that. 

Most manufacturers of repute actually include this information in their literature as well. More consumers are getting educated on some of the finer points of windows and looking for that information. 



Window Geek said:


> What makes the Hallmark certificates different is that they come into the factory at random and pull product off of the assembly line and test it. There is a huge difference in a production window pulled from the line and one that was hand assembled for testing by the engineer.


Guess what that sounds like...hmmm...AAMA/Keystone Gold Label certification. What a novel concept.

The AAMA and Keystone certification do not require testing of the unit but the inspection do entail dis-assembly of the windows and verification that its components and tolerances are representative of that testing sample that was previously submitted.

This is not surprising though seeing as Keystone actually created the ideal of the Gold Label program.



Window Geek said:


> Show me where the AAMA rating for air infiltration specifies fixed or operable? Show me where is says that the unit tested has to be a production window?


Indicated and answered above. I consider myself an intelligent man but I cannot speak to the actions of every manufacturer. If the desire exists to short the system, it can be easily accomplished regardless of certifying body...trust me. 

The brands that I deal in (vinyl, wood, fiberglass, etc.) all test each of the operators as well as maintain internal Q&A protocols that exceed and supplement that of the certifying bodies. 



Window Geek said:


> The base AAMA rating is a joke. A couple of guys in a garage can build a unit that can pass the test of .30 cfm per square foot of frame. One major manufacturer tests every standard size casement that it makes and if the number exceeds .05 cfm the unit is considered defective.


Again...I think we are arguing the same point to some extent but I try to do it without the inflammatory commentary and paint with broad brushstrokes.

AAMA is not a joke. The AAMA minimum is...well...the minimum standard. For air infiltration, that is pretty leaky. The fact that the AAMA test entails some structural and water infiltration testing does validate that the window can stand up to minimum wind loading and water infiltration. 

0.05 for a casement is nothing to write home about but I certainly appreciate their attentiveness.


----------



## Amitabh (Oct 21, 2010)

Guys - can we come back to window recommendations. 

Windows - what should i look for... i dont want to be buying "builders-grade" next. I want good windows/warranty/etc.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

Lets reset.

What do you want the windows to be made of: Wood, Vinyl, or Fiberglass. 

You need to have a triple glazed window given your location and some passive solar on the South facing elevation is also recommended. 

Look for a window with a super low air infiltration number as well and opt for tighter operating type windows (Casements, Awnings, Tilt and Turns, etc.) if they fit your style choices.


----------



## Window Geek (Jan 8, 2014)

Amitabh said:


> Guys - can we come back to window recommendations.
> 
> Windows - what should i look for... i dont want to be buying "builders-grade" next. I want good windows/warranty/etc.


I am going to assume that since the windows are builders grade, that the rest of the house is as well. You will hit the point of diminishing returns pretty quick if the rest of the house just as leaky. Don't over spec unless you are going to upgrade the rest of the house as well.

As far as brand goes. Ask the rep or supplier for the addresses of projects that are at least 10 years old that you can drive by or even talk to the owner. A good company will have references and will have been in business long enough to provide quality references. Anyone can make a window that looks good and performs for 3-5 years.

Once you have a brand that you are interested in do some internet research. Has the company been bought or sold in the last 5 years? The window market is extreme fragmented with lots of little companies that get bought or change names.

Double check warranty. Generally avoid companies that offer Lifetime or Limited lifetime warranties. Its generally a marketing gimmick with so many loopholes its worthless. Any decent company will give you a 20 year non-prorated warranty against seal failure. 10 year warranty on materials and workmanship is a minimum. A labor warranty is a plus. If it fails in year 2 are they simply going to send you a part or are they going to send someone out to put it in for you? Somethings are easy to replace, and something you need a professional. I think Canada has different warranty laws than the US so the above might not apply.

I prefer foam filled fiberglass as a frame material in areas that experience extreme temperatures and need low maintenance. Toronto winters would be extreme to me. Fiberglass is the most stable over temperature changes. The more a material expands and contracts with temperature cycles the greater the odds of failure at joints. The more the material moves the more they depend on weather stripping to compensate. All materials move, so you want materials that have similar expansion and contraction rates. Since we are stuck with glass then the best choice is a material that moves at the same rate (or as close a possible) to the insulated glass panel. 

I don't care for the aesthetics of most of they fiberglass windows on the market, but their life cycle performance is very, very good. All the test results sales people will show you are from one day in a lab, not 10 years in an actually house. Anyone can make a window that performs really well for one day in a lab.


----------



## Amitabh (Oct 21, 2010)

Upgrading - yes... already started

replaced AC & Furnace
Aluminum taped duct joints
Added insulation to attic (get to R50-60 after settling)
caulked exterior side of windows (all seals cracked)

Working on garage insulation this summer as well


----------



## Amitabh (Oct 21, 2010)

should windows be replaced in summer or winter

when is labour cheaper?


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

As long as there is no impact on the sealants and foam, the work can be done in the winter as well.

There is a threshold cut off point where it is just too cold.


----------



## rossfingal (Mar 20, 2011)

Amitabh said:


> should windows be replaced in summer or winter
> 
> when is labour cheaper?


Usually, the cost is about the same (material and labor).
Quite often; though - the labor is....
Not what it should be!!!


----------



## Window Geek (Jan 8, 2014)

Amitabh said:


> should windows be replaced in summer or winter
> 
> when is labour cheaper?


I would replace in the Spring when the weather is better. Its just more convenient.

Are you buying from a distributor and having them put it in, or are you buying from a remodeling contractor? If you are buying from a distributor or large company they usually have a lot of incentives that they can come up with if they are pushed. They will go for the close on the first visit, but don't do it. Wait towards the end of the month when they are closing out sales numbers for the month. Sales reps and managers tend to get more aggressive as it gets closer to month end. Those guys have numbers they have to hit every month. Don't be afraid to name your own price after you get a few bids. Find the one you like the most and if he is too high, tell him.

If you are buying from a re-mod contractor then he has an extra layer of cost built in. They probably sell for the same on the street, but typically he won't have a much wiggle room on price.


----------



## Amitabh (Oct 21, 2010)

I got about 18 windows, i cant imagine this being cheap

everyone seems to be offering vinyl windows, and i am keeping an eye out on non-prorated lifetime warranty windows.

Most seem like manufacturers with a sales department. I only have looked at homestars for top rated providers so far

PTMD


----------



## Window Geek (Jan 8, 2014)

My market that would ballpark at $15,500 installed. Pricing big name 2-pane vinyl with SDL. 3 pane with GBG would be cheaper and probably more what you are looking for.

We buy a lot of windows, so I don't know how that compares to retail pricing for you in Toronto. Retail pricing can easily run $1,000 per window installed depending on what you are looking for. I just finished comparing 2 clad wood quotes from 2 national lines that are both right at $100,000.00 each, and that is without the custom main entry or the NANO wall system, but these are new construction projects.


----------

