<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2963" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007>All,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" size=2><SPAN class=735220118-17042007>This is
an old thread, but one I thought worth revisiting to see if there have been
any developments. Specifically we are preparing a LEED Silver project for
submittal, and while we understand he intent of the Appendix G
'multiple-orientation' and 'fenestration-leveling' requirements, our
evaluation is that they impose extensive calculation requirements for
arguably marginal returns on accuracy.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2>In the case of our specific
building<SPAN class=735220118-17042007> (as I would suspect the case of 90%+ of
all buildings) there's simply no latitude to change the orientation.
Similarly with glass distribution, the lobby and entryway have the flexibility
to be on one side and one side only of the building, and thus distributing the
glass equally amongst all facets for the baseline model seems to add
an unnecessary level of abstraction to the comparative
analyses.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007>Does imposing the requirement for analysts to
spend considerable effort developing fictitious baselines based on building
orientations and glass distributions that have 0% chance of construction seem to
be a reasonable requisite for LEED project certifications? What I
mean by 'considerable effort' is:</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007>• That the all baseline numbers for each of the
four orientations would need to be extracted from the analysis software,
averaged on a spreadsheet, and a similar extraction done for all subsequent
energy efficiency measure (EEM) comparisons. Posting these numbers from
analysis software to spreadsheets would be both time-consuming and introduce
another level of potential error, and thus require additional
error-checking. </SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007><SPAN class=735220118-17042007>• That a new
building would need to be developed, with glass redistributed equally amongst
all facets, for the four-point orientation exercise described
above. Again, while this may sound reasonable from a theoretical
standpoint, practically speaking this requirement serves to decouple
the baseline from glazing-dependent energy efficiency measures. How
meaningful is changing the U-value or shading coefficient of the glass
in an EEM in comparison to a fictitious baseline, when the glass distribution is
crucial to determining whether or not the measure is cost-effective? As
with building orientations, posting these numbers from analysis software to
spreadsheets would be both time-consuming and additionally
error-prone. </SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT
size=2><SPAN class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN class=735220118-17042007>All
to fulfill the requirement of deriving a fictitious baseline for use in the
comparative analyses -- no doubt these requirements were incorporated with good
intention, but practical implementation considerations seem to have not been
considered carefully enough.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007>Further, we find the concept of comparing proposed
energy efficiency measures to a "code minimum" baseline building, oriented
identically and glazed similarly to each of the EEMs, to be
intuitively more meaningful to both the owner and project team
(and thus presumably to the LEED reviewer) than comparison to a fictitious
baseline. This approach allows the baseline to reside in the analysis
software, and EEM comparisons accomplished using the built-in 'parametric run'
features of the analysis software (eQuest and others) to reduce the
time-consuming error-prone tediousness of extracting and posting numbers to
a spreadsheet for comparative evaluation.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN class=735220118-17042007>Has
anyone had success in obtaining LEED project approval when excepting these
'building orientation averaging' and 'glazing-area
leveling' requirements? What is required in terms of the LEED
application to waive these requirements?</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007>Also, does anyone know if these requirements have been
identified for relaxation or revision in the next LEED
update?</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007>Regards</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007>Brandon Nichols, PE<BR>Mechanical<BR>HARGIS
ENGINEERS<BR>600 Stewart St<BR>Suite 1000<BR>Seattle, WA 98101<BR>d |
206.436.0400 c | 206.228.8707<BR>o | 206.448.3376 f | 206.448.4450<BR><A
href="http://www.hargis.biz">www.hargis.biz</A><BR></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=735220118-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT>_________________________________________________<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT>At 0<SPAN class=735220118-17042007>8</SPAN>:4<SPAN
class=735220118-17042007>1</SPAN> <SPAN class=735220118-17042007>AM</SPAN>
1/2<SPAN class=735220118-17042007>4</SPAN>/2006, <SPAN
class=735220118-17042007>Bill Bahnfleth</SPAN> wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>Modeling the building in the specified orientations and averaging gives
an orientation-neutral baseline.<BR><BR>Appendix G has been developed with
substantial input from experts at PNNL and after discussions with USGBC. Glad to
hear that modelers are ignoring whatever they don't understand or find
inconvenient.<BR><BR>Bill Bahnfleth<BR>Member, ECB Subcommittee<BR><BR>At 09:42
PM 1/23/2006, Peter Alspach wrote:<BR></DIV></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1em; MARGIN-LEFT: 0em; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(0,0,255) 0.1em solid"><PRE> A bit of a throw-back to the old 1989 version then?
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Warren [<A href="mailto:kevin@warren-energy.com">mailto:kevin@warren-energy.com</A>]
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 5:46 PM
To: peter.alspach@arup.com; bldg-sim@gard.com
Subject: RE: [bldg-sim] App G 2004 question
Peter,
I believe the intent is to give you a way to get some savings from
orienting your building with an eye toward savings. If you pay attention
to the sun in your design (passive solar and/or daylighting), you should
get some savings relative to the average of the rotated orientations.
Similarly, you could get a penalty if you have too much west-facing
glass.
I'm not sure how strictly this provision is being enforced. Most of the
modelers I have spoken to ignore it, but that is a very unscientific
sample.
These modelers may not be submitting to USGBC.
For a utility incentive program, it often does not make sense to do this
rotation. Those incentive programs typically care about the savings from
incremental changes to the design, particularly those changes that carry
an incremental cost. I'm not sure how one would determine an incremental
cost for your building's orientation, so it is not a factor that would
typically be eligible.
Kevin Warren, P.E., CEM, LEED AP
Warren Energy Engineering, LLC
(610) 255-3798 ph
(610) 255-3406 f
-----Original Message-----
From: bldg-sim@gard.com [<A href="mailto:bldg-sim@gard.com%5DOn">mailto:bldg-sim@gard.com]On</A> Behalf Of Peter
Alspach
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 8:04 PM
To: bldg-sim@gard.com
Subject: [bldg-sim] App G 2004 question
Anyone out there know the source of why one would be required to
simulate a building in an orientation that it is not in? This doesn't
really make any sense to me - am I missing something?
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: bldg-sim@gard.com [<A href="mailto:bldg-sim@gard.com">mailto:bldg-sim@gard.com</A>] On Behalf Of Rohini
Brahme
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 1:13 PM
To: bldg-sim@gard.com
Subject: [bldg-sim] App G 2004 question
I have a question about the Appendix G in 90.1, 2004.
In Table G3.1 the baseline building is to be simulated as follows:
" Orientation. The baseline building performance shall be generated by
simulating the building with its actual orientation and again after
rotating the entire building 90, 180, 270 degrees, then averaging the
results. The building shall be modeled so that it does not shade
itself."
What does --- the building shall be modeled so that it does not shade
itself ---- mean?
Does it mean that if there is, for example, an L shaped building (which
self shades), it has to be modeled as square? rectangle?
Any thoughts on this appreciated.
Thanks
- Rohini
==================
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
____________________________________________________________
Electronic mail messages entering and leaving Arup business systems are
scanned for acceptability of content and viruses
==================
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
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>
<DIV>_________________________________________________<BR><BR>William P.
Bahnfleth, PhD, PE, Fellow ASHRAE<BR><BR>Professor of Architectural
Engineering<BR>Director, Indoor Environment Center<BR><BR>The Pennsylvania State
University<BR>104 Engineering Unit A<BR>University Park, PA 16802
USA<BR><BR>voice: 814.863.2076 / fax: 814.863.4789<BR>e-mail:
wbahnfleth@psu.edu<BR>www.arche.psu.edu/faculty/WBahnfleth/<BR><A
href="http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/iec/">http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/iec/</A><BR>_________________________________________________<BR><BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV align=left>
<DIV align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">
<DIV><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"><SPAN
class=212011020-11052004><FONT color=#000000>Brandon Nichols,
PE</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"><SPAN
class=212011020-11052004><FONT
color=#000000>Mechanical</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"><FONT
color=#000080><STRONG>HARGIS ENGINEERS</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"><FONT
color=#515151>600 Stewart Street</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"><FONT
color=#515151>Suite 1000</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"><FONT
color=#515151>Seattle, WA 98101<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"><FONT
color=#515151>www.hargis.biz<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"><FONT
color=#515151> <o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">d
|</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">
206.436.04<SPAN class=212011020-11052004>0</SPAN>0<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN><B>c | </B>206.<SPAN
class=212011020-11052004>228.8707</SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"><SPAN
class=212011020-11052004></SPAN></SPAN><FONT color=#515151><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">o
|</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: gray; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">
206.448.3376<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN><B>f <SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>|</B>
206.448.4450</SPAN></FONT></P></SPAN></SPAN>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><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>