I also agree with using schedules. I think the fact that Std 90 went from "no schedule changes" to allowing it for DCV means they do too.<div><br></div><div>I think the best thing you can do to simplify your LEED review is to explain to the reviewer what you are doing and why. As long as they can follow you, it makes sense, and it is reasonably conservative, i.e. err on that side, it should be acceptable to them.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Carol<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Shaun Martin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com">smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><u></u>
<div lang="EN-US" vlink="purple" link="blue">
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font size="2" face="Arial">Hi Nick,</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font size="2" face="Arial"></font></span> </div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font size="2" face="Arial">To keep it simple, I would just derate the schedules, your 10/15%
reduction but on an hourly basis (ie one or more hours are moved
to 0%/setback) and apply the RESET-PRIORITY and MIN-RESET-FLOW
keywords. I think averaging it out beforehand and explaining as part of
your modelling methodology in your report would take less time and be easier to
explain. I would start with a small test model, to make sure you have
the right percentages. </font></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span></span><font face="Arial"><font size="2">S<span>haun</span></font></font></div>
<div><font face="Arial"><font size="2"><span></span></font></font> </div>
<div><font face="Arial"><font size="2"><span>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10pt">Shaun
Martin LEED AP</span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10pt">Principal</span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10pt">Shaun
Martin Consulting</span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10pt">Suite
<u></u><u></u><u></u><u></u><u></u><u></u>200 - 420 West Hastings
Street<u></u><u></u><u></u><u></u></span></i><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u><u></u><u></u><u></u><i><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10pt">Vancouver</span></i><u></u><i><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10pt"><u></u> <u></u><u></u>BC<u></u><u></u>
<u></u><u></u>V6B
1L1<u></u><u></u></span></i><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10pt"><a href="tel:604-789-1095" value="+16047891095" target="_blank">604-789-1095</a></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:blue;font-size:10pt"><a title="blocked::mailto:smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com"><i><span title="blocked::mailto:smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com"><span title="blocked::mailto:smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com"><span title="blocked::mailto:smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com"><font color="#000000">smartin@shaunmartinconsulting.com</font></span></span></span></i></a></span></p>
</div></span>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><i><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10pt">member</span></i></span><i><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10pt"> CAGBC,
ASHRAE</span></i></p></font></font></div></div>
<div><br></div>
<div dir="ltr" lang="en-us" align="left">
<hr>
<font size="2" face="Tahoma"><div class="im"><b>From:</b> <a href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Nick
Caton<br></div><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 20, 2011 8:45 AM<br><b>To:</b> James
Hansen; Eurek, John S NWO; David Eldridge;
<a href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</a><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Bldg-sim] How have you
approached... (UNCLASSIFIED)<br></div></div></font><br></div><div><div></div><div class="h5">
<div></div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks so much for the suggestions!<span><font color="#0000ff" size="2" face="Arial"> </font></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I myself have tread the “extensive, realistic
fractional/thermostat scheduling” path before under similar circumstances.
Upon facing a VERY large project, where the amount of explicit scheduling
required for that approach is compounded by the sheer quantity and variety of
occupied spaces benefiting from this relay setup, I am challenged with
brainstorming any acceptable (by LEED reviewer) means of approximating the same
behavior/savings by simplifying the problem…<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Here are some alternative ideas we’ve come up with so far
– I would very much appreciate others’ thoughts on these, or any further
related LEED/USGBC experiences to share as well:<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u><span>1.<span style="font:7pt 'Times New Roman'">
</span></span><u></u>90.1 already prescribes how we quantify the savings of
occupancy sensors for installed lighting (10 or 15% flat deduction on the
LPD). Rather than define & justify the quantity and timing of
unoccupied hours between varying space types (murky waters at best), one could
instead reduce the loads incident on the affected systems by the same
percentage. This might be accomplished by applying this 10/15% deduction
to the affected spaces’ fractional load schedules (occupancy, equipment &
lighting). One would need to tread carefully to avoid “double-dipping” on
any spaces already claiming a LPD deduction for occupancy sensors.
Baseline model’s schedules would remain unaffected and would be documented
alongside the modified ones to illustrate the difference. <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u><span>2.<span style="font:7pt 'Times New Roman'">
</span></span><u></u>(Simpler to model, but requiring slightly more
documentation): Let’s say a hospital has an annual average of 85%
occupancy for all its patient rooms. Treating every other room normally,
select a representative sampling (considering envelope loads) of 15% of the
patient rooms. Model those selected rooms as “empty” (set people, lights
and equipment loads = 0) but still conditioned to maintain the thermostat
setpoint (against loads incident from the envelope & neighboring spaces).
Apply the 0% minimum turndown behavior to those “empty” rooms only.
Baseline model would receive identical treatments, excepting the 0% turndown
behavior. Documentation would include illustrating which zones were
sampled against the others, and justification for the net annual “occupancy
rate” used for each space type.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I have mixed feelings – obviously any simplification of the
problem has the potential to under/overstate the savings that might be found
with a more exhaustive scheduling approach, but may result in as good or even a
better estimation provided with solid documentation and execution. Does
anyone think the above approaches could work well, or have any suggestions to
refine the strategies? <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks again!<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">~Nick<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><img alt="cid:489575314@22072009-0ABB" src="cid:571570616@20072011-2F6C" width="119" height="37"><b><span style="color:#2d4d5e"><u></u><u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:#2d4d5e"><u></u> <u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:#2d4d5e;font-size:12pt">NICK
CATON, P.E.</span></b><b><span style="color:#2d4d5e;font-size:12pt"><u></u><u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#cc9900;font-size:7.5pt">SENIOR
ENGINEER<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#cc9900;font-size:7.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#2d4d5e;font-size:10pt">Smith &
Boucher Engineers</span><span style="font-family:'Times New Roman','serif';color:#cc9900;font-size:7.5pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#2d4d5e;font-size:10pt">25501 west
valley parkway, suite 200<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#2d4d5e;font-size:10pt">olathe, ks
66061<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#2d4d5e;font-size:10pt">direct
<a href="tel:913.344.0036" value="+19133440036" target="_blank">913.344.0036</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#2d4d5e;font-size:10pt">fax
<a href="tel:913.345.0617" value="+19133450617" target="_blank">913.345.0617</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><a title="blocked::www.smithboucher.com" href="http://www.smithboucher.com" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue;font-size:10pt">www.smithboucher.com</span></a></span><u><span style="color:blue;font-size:10pt"> </span></u><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>-----Original Message-----<br>From: James Hansen
[mailto:<a href="mailto:JHANSEN@ghtltd.com" target="_blank">JHANSEN@ghtltd.com</a>] <br>Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 8:40 AM<br>To:
Eurek, John S NWO; Nick Caton; <a href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>Subject: RE:
[Bldg-sim] How have you approached... (UNCLASSIFIED)<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>I agree with John, I've done this on a model before and
its painful. Assuming there are 10 hours in a work day, I set up 10
different occupancy and lighting schedules, each schedule being essentially
identical except for a different hour of zero occupancy / lighting. I then
applied these 10 schedules to the different office zones on a floor so that
specific areas were vacant from 8am-9am, some vacant from 9am-10am, etc.
And then for my system, I assumed relatively consistent 10% non-occupied
conditions and reduced the OA at the system level accordingly. If your
non-occupied conditions are more drastic (30%), obviously you can set up your
schedules differently.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>However, if your primary air is also cooling (and not some
sort of DOAS chilled water VAV box), then you are going to also have to specify
10 separate thermostat schedules (really 20 with heating and cooling) so that
the rooms do not have unmet load hours. I'm assuming you go into setback
mode when the offices are unoccupied.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>However, this was under v2.0, so that was a long time ago
and reviewers were not as critical in their reviews.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>GHT Limited<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>James Hansen, P.E., LEED AP<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Senior Associate<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>1010 N. Glebe Road, Suite 200<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Arlington, VA 22201-4749<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="tel:703-243-1200" value="+17032431200" target="_blank">703-243-1200</a> (office)<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="tel:703-338-5754" value="+17033385754" target="_blank">703-338-5754</a> (cell)<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="tel:703-276-1376" value="+17032761376" target="_blank">703-276-1376</a> (fax)<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="http://www.ghtltd.com" target="_blank">www.ghtltd.com</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>-----Original Message-----<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>From: <a href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>] On Behalf Of Eurek, John S
NWO<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 9:31 AM<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>To: Nick Caton;
<a href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] How have you approached...
(UNCLASSIFIED)<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>Classification: UNCLASSIFIED<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Caveats: NONE<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>Nick,<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>I would do it with schedules. This would be the long
method.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>I have the same controls and have not got around to model
it. I would also<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>make many schedules. A different schedule for
occupancy, lights, equipment,<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>ect. Also if this applies to a lot of rooms, you'd
likely make multiple<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>schedules, one assuming that the room is empty from 9~10
another room empty<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>from 2~3. (The inverse for meeting rooms, if you
have multiple meeting<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>rooms, not all meetings will happen at the same
time.)<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>"Is Freedom a small price to pay to stop Global
Warming?"<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>John Eurek PE, LEED AP<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Mechanical Engineer,<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>-----Original Message-----<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>From:
<a href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p>[mailto:<a href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>] On Behalf
Of Nick Caton<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 3:59 PM<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>To: <a href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Subject: [Bldg-sim] How have you
approached...<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>I have a precedent question for everyone... this is not a
"how to" procedural<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>question for any particular software, but to simply feel
out what has worked<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>for others in the past:<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>Here's a quick description of the situation at-hand:
a VAV terminal unit<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>with a "normal" minimum damper position (say, 30%) is tied
by relay to the<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>space occupancy sensor, which also controls the
lights. Upon sensing space<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>vacancy, the minimum airflow damper position is reset to
0% (airflow is<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>permitted to stop, provided thermostat temperature set
point is satisfied).<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Upon sensing occupancy, the preset minimum damper position
is restored.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>For LEED/USGBC-reviewed energy models, can anyone relate
success in modeling<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>this or a similar energy-saving behavior in the proposed
model, distinct from<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>the baseline? If so, what approach did you use to
model this behavior and/or<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>quantify the energy savings? <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>I was discussing the possibilities with some colleagues
and have a few ideas<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>for approaches that might all be justifiable, ranging from
simple (and quick)<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>to complex (and time-consuming). <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>There are likely multiple "right" answers here, but I am
hoping to identify<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>some precedent to understand what we can anticipate the
LEED reviewership<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>will accept. <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>Thanks in advance!<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>~Nick<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>cid:489575314@22072009-0ABB<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>NICK CATON, P.E.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>SENIOR ENGINEER<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>Smith & Boucher Engineers<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>25501 west valley parkway, suite 200<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>olathe, ks 66061<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>direct <a href="tel:913.344.0036" value="+19133440036" target="_blank">913.344.0036</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>fax <a href="tel:913.345.0617" value="+19133450617" target="_blank">913.345.0617</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p><a href="http://www.smithboucher.com" target="_blank">www.smithboucher.com</a> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>Classification: UNCLASSIFIED<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Caveats: NONE<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>_______________________________________________<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Bldg-sim mailing list<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p>To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank
message to <a href="mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>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
<a href="mailto:ght@ghtltd.com" target="_blank">ght@ghtltd.com</a>, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including
all attachments. Thank you.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p></div>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Bldg-sim mailing list<br>
<a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org</a><br>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to <a href="mailto:BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG">BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Carol Gardner PE<br>
</div>