[Equest-users] Unmet Load Hours Calc

[James Hansen]

Either the reviewer is wrong (and they need to be educated so that LEED project Owners don’t have to keep writing $500 appeal checks) or that help file is wrong.  Or they are both right J

 

There is an “Important Note” in that help file that says “Any hours outside throttling range that occur during night cycle control hours are included in the total hours outside throttling range implied in the percentage above.”

 

That’s an interesting statement.  If you set your single system to have a night cycle control strategy of “cycle on first” (where the system only kicks on if the control zone is outside of the throttling range), the help file is saying that ANY after-hours temperatures outside of the throttling ranges will be included in the BEPU % calculation if a night cycle control strategy is in place.  With “cycle on first”, there could be MANY hours where certain zones are outside of the throttling ranges, yet the system fan is OFF.  If those hours are being added to the numerator, then it is implied that they are also being added to the denominator (even though the system fan is OFF).

 

So to me, I read this to say that if you have ANY night cycle control strategy, the denominator automatically goes to 8760.

 

I could be wrong, but that’s why I’ve always multiplied the BEPU % by 8760. 

 

GHT Limited
James Hansen, PE, LEED AP

Senior Associate

1010 N. Glebe Rd, Suite 200

Arlington, VA  22201-4749

703-338-5754 (Cell)

703-243-1200 (Office)

703-276-1376 (Fax)

www.ghtltd.com <http://www.ghtltd.com/> 

 

 

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Dubrovich
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 9:59 PM
To: Dakota Kelley; Brett M. West; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Unmet Load Hours Calc

 

I recently received a similar response from a reviewer (same person?).  Unfortunately my initial response was not enough so now the team must appeal the denial.  See below.  Per the attached screenshot from the eQuest detailed reports help file, my understanding of the hours outside of the throttling range is the same as Dakota’s: BEPS % Hours Outside * SS-E hours fans on = Total # of Hours Outside Throttling Range.  Correct?  If it is, then I guess I just need a better way to explain it to the reviewer…  

                                                                                                                                         

Initial comment:

1. Section 1.3 of the Template provides the total unmet load hours for the Proposed (74 hours) and Baseline models (65 hours); however, the BEPS report for the Baseline and Proposed model indicates that the total number of unmet load hours is 70 (0.8% * 8,760 hours) and 140 (1.6% * 8,760 hours), respectively. The total unmet load hours for each model is determined by multiplying the number of hours in a year (8,760) by the ‘Percent of hours any system zone outside of the throttling range’ in the BEPS report or the BEPU report. With the revision, the total unmet load hours for the Proposed model exceeds the total unmet load hours for the Baseline model by more than 50; however, Section G3.1.2.2 requires that the Proposed model does not exceed the total unmet load hours for the Baseline model by more than 50. Please revise the baseline model per the prescriptions of Section G3.1.2.2 so the total unmet load hours for the proposed model does not exceed the total unmet load hours for the baseline model by more than 50. Please note that the total unmet load hours for the Proposed and Baseline models cannot exceed 300 as required by Section G3.1.2.2.

 

My initial response:

Per eQuest help documentation, the “percent hours any system zone outside of the throttling range” should be multiplied by the hours the fans are operating in order to calculate total underheated/undercooled hours. Per the SS-L [same as SS-E since this building only has one system] report, the fans are operating on average 

7388 hours per year in the Baseline and 4706 hours per year in the Proposed. That means the Baseline and Proposed models indicate that the total number of unmet

load hours is 59.1 (0.8% * 7388 hours) and 70.6 (1.5% * 4706 hours), respectively. The different fan runtimes are due to the time the fans must run during unoccupied hours to maintain setback temperatures.

 

Denied!

1. The response narrative to preliminary comment 1 states that the hours outside throttling range apply only to hours in which the interior fans operate however the eQUEST Help states that the “percent of hours any system zone outside of throttling range is the percentage of hours when the temperature in any conditioned zone is outside of the thermostat’s throttling range”. If appealing this credit please revise the Baseline case per the prescriptions of Section G3.1.2.2 so that the difference in the number of unmet load hours is less than 50.

 

 

Matt Dubrovich, PE, CEM, BEMP

 

EMC Engineers, Inc.

Making buildings work.  Better.

(303) 974-1217 - direct

(720) 279-4426 - mobile

(303) 974-1239 - fax

www.emcengineers.com <http://www.emcengineers.com/> 

 

Confidentiality Notice: This message and any materials attached are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error please notify the sender and destroy your copy immediately. 

 

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Dakota Kelley
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 5:34 PM
To: Brett M. West; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Unmet Load Hours Calc

 

Brett,

 

Let me state a few things, and then I’ll offer my interpretation of the comment:

 

?         The numbers in the SS-R report are the same numbers shown in the Air-Side Summary report.  These reports will yield inflated system totals, and therefore simulation totals, for multi-zone systems due to simultaneous counting of separate zones which belong to the same system.  Use them to determine the ratio of unmet heating and cooling hours relative to the two combined, but the sum of hours in these reports is not necessarily the same as multiplying the BEPS percentage by “hours fans on”.

?         Multiplying the BEPS percentage by the “hours fans on” in the SS-E report yields the correct sum of unmet heating and cooling hours, regardless of whether you are modeling multi- or single-zone systems.  Use the ratio obtained above to allocate this total between heating and cooling hours (I have posted previously <http://lists.onebuilding.org/htdig.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org/2010-July/005293.html>  that there may be a more accurate method of allocating heating/cooling hours, but no one has corrected me).

?         The “hours fans on” includes hours the fans are scheduled on and the hours they are scheduled off but cycle on.  Refer to DOE2.2 Volume 4 (build 47), page 138 (SS-C report description), for the “hours fans on” definition.  This definition is echoed on page 142 (SS-E report description).  Therefore, for any system that cycles during off hours, all 8,760 hours have the potential to be counted as an unmet hour.

 

Now for the review comment.  The “hours each zone exists” phrase doesn’t make sense on the first pass.  However, due to the last bullet point above and baseline requirement G3.1.2.4, “hours each zone exists” is practically the same thing as “hours the systems are on”.  All 8,760 hours have the potential to be counted as an unmet hour if the hourly T-stat setting & throttling range are not satisfied.  What if the proposed model doesn’t cycle over night?  I say that’s a bad idea; I would never design a system that way unless an owner wants mold, frozen pipes, etc.  Define a reasonable set back temperature, allow fans to cycle, and they will stay off if cycling is unnecessary.

 

Where the comment is confusing/wrong is: “SS-R reports have been used…does not take into account coincident hours”.  Yes, it does.  It double-counts coincident hours on a multi-zone system, and because it is a system-level report, each system’s zones are counted separately.  It is as “coincident” as it gets.  I’m not sure how the reviewer rejects the SS-R report but then arrives at totals which are apparently greater than what was reported.  I have no .SIM file to review, but the smell of nonsense is strong.

 

 

 

                                

DAKOTA KELLEY 

Project Designer | Energy Analyst

                          

                              Office: 214.744.6199                 

                              Cell: 214.280.3825

                              Fax: 214.744.0770    

 

http://www.teliospc.com <http://www.teliospc.com/>          3535 Travis St. Suite 115

dakotak at teliospc.com            Dallas, TX 75204                                                     

                                

| MEP ENGINEERING · ENERGY MODELING · LEED CONSULTATION · COMMISSIONING |

 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, 

And may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you

are not the intended recipient, please email the sender immediately, and delete this email from all computers.  Any 

distribution or other use is strictly prohibited.  Copyright © 2009 Telios Corporation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: Brett M. West [mailto:bwest at rmf.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 8:01 AM
To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: [Equest-users] Unmet Load Hours Calc

 

I have a question regarding the way unmet load hours are calculated in eQuest. I have received the following comments from the USGBC reviewer after submitting my energy model. 

 

1. The response narrative to preliminary comment 1 states that the SS-R reports have been used to determine the number of unmet load hours for each case however this method does not take into account coincident hours. Additionally, the number of hours any system outside of throttling range is not the number of hours the HVAC system is in operation but rather it is the number of hours each zone exists during the building simulation, or 8,760 hours. Therefore the number of unmet load hours is 333 in the Baseline case and 508 in the Proposed case and the simulation does not meet the requirements of Section G3.1.2.2. If appealing this credit please revise both cases using the prescriptions of Section G3.1.2.2 until the number of unmet load hours is less than 300 for both cases and the number in the Proposed case does not exceed the number in the Baseline case by more than 50.

 

I thought the unmet load hours were calculated only during times when the fans are actually running in the simulation. This is why I always pull my unmet hours from the SS-R report, adding up the unmet hours for both cooling and heating for each individual unit. I can also go into the SS-E report and calculate the number of hours my fans are actually running and then calculate the total number of hours by using the percentage of hours outside the throttling range given in the BEPS report. 

 

If you calculate the hours in the manner the reviewer has outlined then there is no way to show which hours are heating and which are cooling and you have to provide that breakdown in the EAc1 template. 

 

Any input on this topic would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

 

BRETT M. WEST

 

RMF ENGINEERING

T: 843.971.9639 ext. 1499

F: 843.971.9641

bwest at rmf.com <mailto:bwest at rmf.com> 

 


The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be privileged, and is intended only for the use of the addressee.  It is the property of GHT Limited.  Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to ght at ghtltd.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments.  Thank you.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20100722/719e86b7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2143 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20100722/719e86b7/attachment.jpeg>