<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16414" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=629021617-18042007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Brandon,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=629021617-18042007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=629021617-18042007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I
think the thing you need to remember is that the integrity of any rating system
is its ability to be fair and equitable to everyone. This means
that some buildings will get credit for design choices and others will
get penalized. We cannot have a system where you only get to
count the benefits and not the penalties. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=629021617-18042007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=629021617-18042007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>There
are a lot of things about the Appendix G methodology that are burdensome but
they maintain the integrity of the rating system. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=629021617-18042007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=629021617-18042007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>The
nice thing about ASHRAE is any member can participate in the process of
improving work like Appendix G. You should propose an alternate method
that would allow a building to be exempt from the <FONT
face="Lucida Console">"significant and relatively meaningless calculation
burden" <FONT face=Arial>you describe.</FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=629021617-18042007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><FONT
face="Lucida Console"><FONT face=Arial></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=629021617-18042007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><FONT
face="Lucida Console"><FONT
face=Arial>Mike </FONT> </FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=629021617-18042007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=629021617-18042007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=629021617-18042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=629021617-18042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=629021617-18042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT
face="Swis721 Blk BT" size=2>Michael Tillou, PE</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN
lang=en-us><FONT face="Swis721 Blk BT" size=1>ETC Group - Energy Engineering for
a Sustainable Future</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT
face="Swis721 Blk BT" size=1>Ph:413-458-9870</FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
BLDG-SIM@gard.com [mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Brandon
Nichols<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, April 17, 2007 7:44 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
BLDG-SIM@gard.com<BR><B>Cc:</B> Shawn Gavras<BR><B>Subject:</B> [BLDG-SIM] App
G 2004 question<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><FONT
face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2>Thanks Bill & Bing for your
replies,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><FONT
face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><FONT
face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2>Previously I
started this topic going again <SPAN class=076150423-17042007>with a
point-by-point description of some implementation problems caused by the
'orientation averaging' and 'fenestration leveling' requirements of LEED
2.2 / 90.1-2004 Appendix G</SPAN><SPAN class=076150423-17042007>; please
refer to that post for further
details. </SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007>Here let </SPAN>me try to be as clear and
concise as possible<SPAN
class=076150423-17042007>:</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007>• There are, perhaps, only 10% of all buildings that
can take advantage of alternate orientations. Most are
site-constrained, or have already been built.
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007>• There are perhaps a
greater fraction than 10% of all buildings that can take advantage of
alternate glass distributions, however glass distribution is also often
constrained by site considerations.</SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT
face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007>• So
to accommodate a minority of cases, LEED 2.2 / 90.1-2004 Appendix G
seems to impose a significant and relatively meaningless calculation
burden on the majority, by requiring the development of a fictitious
baseline that needs to be manually maintained outside of the simulation
software.</SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007>• How can we waive
these requirements in LEED 2.2 for projects that cannot realistically benefit
from them, and substitute a "code minimum" baseline oriented identically and
glazed similarly to the proposed
building? </SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007>On the last point,
even if a site-constrained project could 'theoretically' benefit from
orientation averaging or fenestration leveling, in principle I believe LEED
teams should have the option to forgo that marginal benefit the sake of the
simplicity, clarity, accuracy, and meaningfulness of the comparative
calculations.</SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007>Thanks for your time,
and hard work on
LEED...</SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007><SPAN
class=076150423-17042007><SPAN class=076150423-17042007>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></SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> BLDG-SIM@gard.com
[mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com] <B>On Behalf Of </B>William
Bahnfleth<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, April 17, 2007 2:48 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
BLDG-SIM@gard.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [BLDG-SIM] App G 2004
question<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>One of the perceived shortcomings of Ch. 11 as a method for
computing energy savings for green building rating purposes was that it did
not provide sufficient opportunity to take credit for energy savings through
envelope design and building orientation on the site. The cited portion
of Ch. 11 (Table 11.3, item 5) requires all envelope components of the Budget
Building to be the same as the Proposed Building, eliminating that
opportunity.<BR><BR>The parallel part of Appendix G relaxes this constraint in
a way that should make it possible for the Proposed Building to show a greater
reduction in energy cost. This is done by removing self-shading,
distributing fenestration uniformly instead of optimally, and by averaging the
effects of orientation. If someone has done a robust test of orientation
averaging vs. best and worst case orientations that shows negligible scatter
around the mean, I am sure the ECB Subcommittee would be interested to see
it. <BR><BR>The distribution of glazing was made uniform mainly
<I>because</I> of the intent to average multiple orientations.<BR><BR>Bill
Bahnfleth<BR><BR>At 04:47 PM 4/17/2007, Charles Christenson wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite">As clarification, LEED v2.2
requires the use of the Performance Rating Method from Appendix G, not the
ECB method (which was used in previous versions of LEED). In fact, in
the Reference Guide section of LEED v2.2 titled “Common mistakes made using
the Performance Rating Method”, the first mistake listed is “The Energy Cost
Budget Method (Section 11) is incorrectly used rather than the Performance
Rating Method (Appendix G) to obtain EA Credit 1 credit”.
<BR> <BR>Brandon – when I first read Appendix G, I was puzzled by their
motivation. Why rotate the building if you are already evenly
distributing glass? I am still not sure what the justification from
ASHRAE is on that one. I have not seen anything from USGBC that gives
any exceptions to the rotating requirement.<BR> <BR>Charlie
Christenson, LEED AP<BR>Brummitt Energy Associates, Inc.<BR>2171 India
Street, Suite B<BR>San Diego, CA 92101<BR>tel:
619-531-1126<BR>fax: 619-531-1101<BR>cchristenson@brummitt.com<BR><A
href="http://www.brummitt.com/" eudora="autourl">www.brummitt.com</A>
<BR> <BR>A net-zero carbon company, using <A
href="http://www.b-e-f.org/GreenTags"
eudora="autourl">www.b-e-f.org/GreenTags</A><BR> <BR>Brummitt Energy
Associates, Inc. helps you achieve comfortable, highly energy efficient,
cost-effective projects by integrating the building design with daylighting,
electric lighting, and mechanical systems. Consulting from early
design through construction documentation, we specialize in energy and
daylight modeling, increasing financial incentives, and documentation for
Title 24, LEED™ and CHPS. 20 years experience includes thousands of
buildings, and more than 35 projects pursuing and achieving LEED™ ratings,
from Certified to Platinum.<BR><B>From:</B> BLDG-SIM@gard.com [<A
href="mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com" eudora="autourl">
mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com</A>] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Leader,
Philip<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, April 17, 2007 1:02 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
BLDG-SIM@gard.com<BR><B>Cc:</B> Shawn Gavras<BR><B>Subject:</B> [BLDG-SIM]
App G 2004 question<BR> <BR>The Appendix G is an informative appendix
and is not part of Standard 90.1. It is merely informative and does not
contain requirements necessary for conformance to the
Standard.<BR> <BR>In the Energy Cost Budget Method section in
Table 11.3 under Section 5 Building Envelope, it describes the requirements
for the Proposed Building design and the Budget Building design. The
first paragraph under the Budget Building design states.... The <I>budget
building</I> shall have identical <I>conditioned floor</I> <I>area</I> and
identical exterior dimensions and orientations as the proposed design,
except as noted in (a), (b), and (c) in this clause. <BR> <BR>There's
nothing in the Standard stating you must rotate the building in 90 degree
increments and average the results. We've never been asked to do it to my
knowledge by the USGBC during a LEED review of our
projects.<BR> <BR>Philip S. Leader, PE <BR>Director of Mechanical
Engineering <BR>Albert Kahn Associates, Inc. <BR>7430 Second Ave.
<BR>Detroit, Michigan 48202-2798 <BR>Phone: 313-202-7834 <BR>FAX:
3130202-7334 <BR>Email: philip.leader@akahn.com <BR>Website: <A
href="http://www.albertkahn.com/" eudora="autourl">www.albertkahn.com</A>
<BR> <BR>
<HR>
<DIV align=center></DIV><B>From:</B> BLDG-SIM@gard.com [<A
href="mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com" eudora="autourl">
mailto:BLDG-SIM@gard.com</A>] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Brandon
Nichols<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, April 17, 2007 3:12 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
BLDG-SIM@gard.com<BR><B>Cc:</B> Shawn Gavras<BR><B>Subject:</B> [BLDG-SIM]
App G 2004 question<BR>All,<BR> <BR>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.<BR> <BR>In the case of our specific building (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.<BR> <BR>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:<BR> <BR>• 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. <BR> <BR>• 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. <BR> <BR>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.<BR> <BR>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.<BR> <BR>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?<BR> <BR>Also, does anyone know if these requirements have
been identified for relaxation or revision in the next LEED
update?<BR> <BR> <BR>Regards<BR> <BR>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> <BR> <BR>_________________________________________________<BR>At
08:41 AM 1/24/2006, Bill Bahnfleth wrote:<BR> <BR>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>
<DL><BR>
<DD><PRE> A bit of a throw-back to the old 1989 version
then?</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>-----Original
Message-----</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>From: Kevin Warren
[<A href="mailto:kevin@warren-energy.com">
mailto:kevin@warren-energy.com</A>]</PRE><FONT
face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 5:46
PM</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>To: peter.alspach@arup.com;
bldg-sim@gard.com</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Subject: RE: [bldg-sim] App G 2004
question</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Peter,</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>I believe the intent is to give you a way to get some savings
from</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>orienting your building with an eye toward savings. If you pay
attention</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>to the sun in your design (passive solar and/or daylighting),
you should</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>get some savings relative to the average of the rotated
orientations.</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Similarly, you could get a penalty if you have too much
west-facing</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>glass.</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>I'm not sure how strictly this provision is being enforced. Most
of the</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>modelers I have spoken to ignore it, but that is a very
unscientific</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>sample.</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>These modelers may not be submitting to
USGBC.</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>For a utility incentive program, it often does not make sense to
do this</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>rotation. Those incentive programs typically care about the
savings from</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>incremental changes to the design, particularly those changes
that carry</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>an incremental cost. I'm not sure how one would determine an
incremental</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>cost for your building's orientation, so it is not a factor that
would</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>typically be
eligible.</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Kevin Warren, P.E., CEM, LEED
AP</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Warren Energy Engineering,
LLC</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>(610) 255-3798
ph</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>(610) 255-3406
f</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>-----Original
Message-----</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>From: bldg-sim@gard.com
[<A href="mailto:bldg-sim@gard.com%5DOn">mailto:bldg-sim@gard.com]On</A>
Behalf Of Peter</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Alspach</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 8:04
PM</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>To:
bldg-sim@gard.com</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Subject: [bldg-sim] App G 2004
question</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Anyone out there know the source of why one would be required
to</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>simulate a building in an orientation that it is not in? This
doesn't</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>really make any sense to me - am I missing
something?</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Peter</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>-----Original
Message-----</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>From: bldg-sim@gard.com
[<A href="mailto:bldg-sim@gard.com">mailto:bldg-sim@gard.com</A>] On
Behalf Of Rohini</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Brahme</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 1:13
PM</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>To:
bldg-sim@gard.com</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Subject: [bldg-sim] App G 2004
question</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>I have a question about the Appendix G in 90.1,
2004.</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>In Table G3.1 the baseline building is to be simulated as
follows:</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>" Orientation. The baseline building performance shall be
generated by</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>simulating the building with its actual orientation and again
after</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>rotating the entire building 90, 180, 270 degrees, then
averaging the</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>results. The building shall be modeled so that it does not
shade</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>itself."</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>What does --- the building shall be modeled so that it does not
shade</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>itself ----
mean?</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Does it mean that if there is, for example, an L shaped building
(which</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>self shades), it has to be modeled as square?
rectangle?</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Any thoughts on this
appreciated.</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Thanks</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>- Rohini</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>==================</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>You received this e-mail because you are subscribed to
the</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe from this
mailing list</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>send a blank message to
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM</PRE><FONT
face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>____________________________________________________________</PRE><FONT
face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>Electronic mail messages entering and leaving Arup
business systems are</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>scanned for acceptability of content and
viruses</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>==================</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>You received this e-mail because you are subscribed to
the</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe from this
mailing list</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>send a blank message to
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM</PRE><FONT
face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>You received this e-mail because you are
subscribed</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>to the BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To
unsubscribe</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>from this mailing list send a blank message
to</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>
<DD><PRE>BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM</PRE><FONT
face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR></DD></DL>_________________________________________________<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><A href="http://www.arche.psu.edu/faculty/WBahnfleth/"
eudora="autourl">www.arche.psu.edu/faculty/WBahnfleth/</A><BR><A
href="http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/iec/">http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/iec/</A><BR>_________________________________________________<BR><BR> <BR>Brandon
Nichols, PE<BR>Mechanical<BR><B>HARGIS ENGINEERS<BR></B>600 Stewart
Street<BR>Suite 1000<BR>Seattle, WA 98101<BR><A
href="http://www.hargis.biz/"
eudora="autourl">www.hargis.biz</A><BR> <BR><B>d |</B>
206.436.0400 <B>c | </B>206.228.8707<BR><B>o |</B> 206.448.3376
<B>f |</B> 206.448.4450<BR> <BR> <BR><BR><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>==================</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>You received this e-mail because you are subscribed
</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>to the BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe
</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>from this mailing list send a blank message to
</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM</PRE><FONT
face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR>This email message and any
attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named
above. This message may contain privileged and confidential
information, and may be protected by copyright. If you are not the
intended recipient, any review, dissemination, distribution or copying is
strictly prohibited. If you received this email message in error,
please immediately delete it and notify the sender by replying to this
email, or by telephone. Thank you.<BR><BR><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>==================</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>You received this e-mail because you are subscribed
</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>to the BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe
</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>from this mailing list send a blank message to
</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM</PRE><FONT
face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE> </PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>==================</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>You received this e-mail because you are subscribed
</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>to the BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe
</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>from this mailing list send a blank message to
</PRE><FONT face="Courier New, Courier"></FONT><BR><PRE>BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM</PRE><FONT
face="Courier New, Courier"></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><BR>
<DIV>_________________________________________________</DIV><BR>
<DIV>William P. Bahnfleth, PhD, PE, FASHRAE</DIV>
<DIV>Professor of Architectural Engineering</DIV>
<DIV>Director, Indoor Environment Center</DIV><BR>
<DIV>The Pennsylvania State University </DIV>
<DIV>104 Engineering Unit A</DIV>
<DIV>University Park, PA 16802 USA</DIV><BR>
<DIV>voice: 814.863.2076 / fax: 814.863.4789 </DIV>
<DIV>e-mail: wbahnfleth@psu.edu</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.arche.psu.edu/faculty/WBahnfleth/"
EUDORA="AUTOURL">www.arche.psu.edu/faculty/WBahnfleth/</A></DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/iec/"
EUDORA="AUTOURL">http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/iec/</A></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><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>