[Equest-users] End results analysis

[Pasha Korber-Gonzalez]

Hi Sambhav,

My first guess on this issue is that is has something to do with the
controls that you've specified for the chilled water loop (i.e. load reset,
or OA reset, etc.)  Apparently you are seeing that your fans are the ones
trying to satisfy the "call for cooling."   But the bigger question is what
are the cooling or chiller schedules that you have input for your plant
systems vs. your air-side systems.

My next guess is that with such a dramatic difference in fans, but not in
cooling energy is that in one of the models you probably have a large number
of hours of cooling not met (throttling hours out of range.)  Have you
checked your BEPS/U reports, SS-F, SS-R?   Did you input your own schedules
or did you use the default operation schedules from the program?

As is always the case for simulation questions when you ask "what's going
on?" the basic response is, "IT DEPENDS..."  on so many variables that at
this point you are the only one who knows which variables in your model you
have (or have not) adjusted.

Best way for us to try and offer insight or solutions is to upload your
.pd2, .inp, and maybe even your weather file for us to run and look deeper
into your model file for you.

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 12:49 AM, sambhav tiwari
<tiwari.sambhav at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi All,
>          In on of my projects i was geeting the energy end results
> for two cases
>
>                                  Cooling                     Fan
>                  Pump
>
> 1 Proposed Case        3627607                   26,226,040
>  59,369
>
> 2 Proposed Case2     3627295                    12141210
> 59,369
>
>
> This is a fctory hall of 72000sqft served by 2 air cooled screw chiller of
> 180TR
>
> The difference in two cases is that in first case  Proposed Case1 the
> EPD was 38w/sqft and occupancy was 220 ,and in Proposed case2  EPD
> was changed to 11w/sqft and Occupancy to 100, my doubt is that with
> such a large variation in EPD and Occupancy why there is neligiable
> variation in cooling energy0.008% and zero variation in pump energy as
> shown in above results although this is large variation in fan energy.
>
> I was expecting that the energy in three of them  Cooling Fan and Pump
> should have come down drasticaly it happened with fan but not with
> cooling and pump.
>
> Can anyone suggest some logic to this.
>
> Thanks
> Sambhav Tiwari
> _______________________________________________
> Equest-users mailing list
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to
> EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20100721/716cfb6b/attachment.htm>