<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=444131416-19052004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Is it
the sense of the group that infiltration can be predicted well enough in
commercial buildings to take credit for energy savings in this area? I
considered this issue a few years ago, and the literature seemed to indicate
that prediction was very poor, and that field work indicated that infiltration
would vary substantially, in the same building under similar outside
temperatures due to small differences such as a few windows or doors opended
differently, and that it was in most cases unclear what the differences were due
to.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=444131416-19052004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=444131416-19052004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Brian
Thornton</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=444131416-19052004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Glumac, bthornton@glumac.com</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Marcus Sheffer
[mailto:sheffer@paonline.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, May 19, 2004 9:00
AM<BR><B>To:</B> BLDG-SIM@gard.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [BLDG-SIM] Infiltration:
Standard versus Proposed Design<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>Right now infiltration
reduction is not an eligible item for energy cost reduction for LEED.
Infiltration rates must be the same in the proposed and budget
buildings.<BR><BR>My understanding is that the Energy & Atmosphere
Technical Advisory Group (EA TAG) of the USGBC is considering this issue with
an eye toward developing a modeling protocol.<BR><BR>I am aware of at least
two projects that have applied for savings in this area which have been put on
hold (the LEED points were denied pending further input from the EA
TAG). <BR><BR><BR>As At 10:33 AM 05/19/2004, you wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite"><FONT
face="Times New Roman, Times" color=#000080>Can infiltration be considered
in comparing standard versus proposed design models using the ECB method and
for LEED credits under "Optimize Energy Performance"? Typically we use
the same criteria in both models, but this is a particular case of a
proposed double-wall building. "10CFR435 Table 402.2.1. - Air Leakage
for Fenestration & Doors Maximum Allowable Infiltration Rate" provides
standard model information for federal buildings. For example, the
infiltration rate is 0.15 cfm/ft2 for fixed aluminum windows. Can this
be used for LEED standard design and can a lower rate be used for double
wall buildings?<BR> <BR>The CFR table does not account for Heating
& Cooling Degree Days as with Table-B Building Envelope Requirements of
STD90. In my opinion, the peak design infiltration rate should be
varied from maximum in winter to minimum in summer (typically zero for
pressurized buildings) using a schedule. The maximum, of say 0.15
cfm/ft2, would apply to a cold climate such as </FONT>Chicago and it should
be scaled down for warmer climates. <FONT color=#333399>Since DOE2
does not allow infiltration rates on the basis of cfm/ft2 of wall or window
area or cfm per lineal foot of window perimeter, we create a typical
perimeter space and convert the window based infiltration rate to cfm/ft2 of
space area or space air changes. </FONT><FONT color=#000080>We then look at
the results in </FONT><FONT color=#333399>"REPORT- LS-C BUILDING PEAK LOAD
COMPONENTS" of the DOE2 output to see if the infiltration load looks
reasonable (relative to the other loads) for the location and type of
building and make adjustments by trial and error. Judgment and
experience is considered more reliable than theoretical mathematical
models. The BEPS and BEPU reports in DOE2 should separate out the
infiltration loads from the heating & cooling loads. Any
comments?<BR></FONT><FONT face="Times New Roman, Times"
color=#333399> <BR>Thanks for the comments and suggestions to using
different utilities in standard versus proposed design. They were very
helpful in making some decisions here. Most of the responses seem to
go directly to the person asking the question.<BR> <BR>Varkie
Thomas<BR>Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP<BR></FONT><FONT
face="Times New Roman, Times"
color=#000080> <BR> <BR> <BR></FONT><BR><PRE>
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed
to the BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe
from this mailing list send a blank message to
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM
</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><X-SIGSEP>
<P></X-SIGSEP><FONT face="Abadi MT Condensed Light" color=#008000
size=4>Marcus B.
Sheffer
energy & environmental consulting<BR>Energy Opportunities,
Inc
717-292-2636<BR>1200 E Camping Area
Road Fax:
717-292-0585 <BR>Wellsville, PA USA
17365-9783
sheffer@sevengroup.com<BR>a 7group
company
<A href="http://www.sevengroup.com/"
eudora="autourl"><U>www.sevengroup.com<BR></A></FONT></U><PRE>
=====================================================You received this e-mail because you are subscribed
to the BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe
from this mailing list send a blank message to
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE>
======================================================
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed
to the BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe
from this mailing list send a blank message to
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM
</PRE></BODY></HTML>