[Equest-users] LEED-parking garage question/advice needed

Tue Oct 5 07:31:32 PDT 2010

A few extra thoughts,

In line with Jeremy's suggestion regarding a campus model being a useful
approach... Perhaps you can have your cake and eat it too?  

The new (3.64) wizard screens have a new input field for each shell that
allow you to assign custom prefixes suffixes to each shell - if you
utilize this while making separate files (prefix each group of shells
with N#,E#,S#, W#), and make a point to define your geometries from a
holistic CAD reference, I'll bet you can end up with 4 distinct files
that will all import cleanly into each other when all's said and done as
a final step... you'd want to continue the nomenclature when defining
things in detailed mode of course.

I haven't submitted but one garage for LEED, but I'm of the opinion any
unconditioned garage isn't anything more complicated than a collection
of building shades and/or process / external lighting loads to an eQuest
modeler!  To Kristy's cautions, one can easily define multiple exterior
lighting loads (up to 10 I think) - with distinct magnitudes and/or
scheduling... allowing you to model interior/perimeter and
daytime/nighttime controls.  Photocell scheduling functions are
available for perimeter lighting as well.

Pasha, it'll ultimately come down to how you want to move forward, but 4
separate models sounds like it might work for you:  Each would feature
distinct component prefixes and building shades mimicking the entire
garage, but external lighting/process loads representing a quarter of
the garage.  When the time comes that a campus model is desireable for
whatever reason, you can delete the garage-shades in models 2,3 and 4,
and import into #1, then modify your exterior loads to ensure you're
modeling the full garage.

If you desire extra accuracy in the separate models, you may want to
consider creating some building shades to represent the other 3
buildings - but you'd want to delete those later when importing the
files together for a campus  model...

~Nick

NICK CATON, E.I.T.

PROJECT ENGINEER

25501 west valley parkway

olathe ks 66061

direct 913 344.0036

fax 913 345.0617

Check out our new web-site @ www.smithboucher.com 

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Pasha
Korber-Gonzalez
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:05 AM
To: Jeremy Poling
Cc: eQUEST Users List
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] LEED-parking garage question/advice needed

Thanks Jeremy,

I wasn't aware of the 5-year metering requirement for Energy Star...that
does help me 'accept' the advice for the model a bit more.  However, it
still doesn't sit right with me to split a buiding amongst several model
files for the same reason that you mentioned about disproportionate sim
results.

I liked your observations for the finished model--thanks for sharing
your experience on that.  I also like the idea of doing a separate model
for the garage itself with the approach of keeping all the models in
separate files, but I think I will have to reconsider the multi-files
approach versus inputting all 5 structures into one model file.
hmmmm......

pkg

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Jeremy Poling <
jpoling at epsteinglobal.com> wrote:

As a note, the USGBC reviewer's advice is in line with the requirements
of Energy Star for detached buildings on a campus with shared parking:
for separate buildings on a campus, the parking area (surface and/or
garage) must be divided between the buildings when entered into
Portfolio Manager.  If this is a LEED 2009 project and the owner plans
to comply with the 5-year metering requirement via Energy Star, setting
up the model in that manner will make it consistent with the mandatory
minimum M&V requirements.  I'm not sure what led to the decision to
model each building in a separate PD2 file (other than scheduling of the
design work meaning Building 4's model won't be needed for some time
after Building 1's model is done), but it might provide some benefit to
model the campus in one file.  I would think this would be true in 2
specific cases:

-        If there is a single meter covering all campus electrical use
(not uncommon for campuses), allowing the model to calculate a
coincident demand for cost purposes that might be lower than the sum of
the demands for the four separate model

-        Credit for daylighting is being pursued and there is a
potential for one of the buildings to shade another, making the combined
model file more conservative on energy savings from daylighting than the
four individual models

I have done a split PD2 file approach on a model before and while it
made sense when it was setup and the project was small (10K SF total),
responding to comments was more difficult.  For example, if there was
some error in the baseline U-Value then each model file would have to be
corrected individually instead of changing the wall type in a single
model (4 changes instead of 1).  Just some thoughts to consider.

I would partially agree with the reviewer, though - the parking garage
needs to be part of the model and with a split model you would have to
put the parking garage into each of the four models.  I probably would
have taken a slightly different approach, though - If the campus is not
modeled in a single model, the parking garage should be modeled on its
own, with the resulting energy divided between the four models
proportionate to the number of spaces allocated to each building or the
proposed occupancy of each building, since those are the factors that
determine how much of the garage each building would use.

JEREMY R. POLING, PE, LEED AP
Associate Vice President,

Senior Sustainability Analyst
Strategic Services
Site Solutions | Operations | Sustainability

EPSTEIN
Architecture
Interiors
Engineering
Construction

Epstein is a firm believer in sustainability. We ask that you please
consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Walson, Kristy
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:21 AM
To: 'Pasha Korber-Gonzalez'; eQUEST Users List
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] LEED-parking garage question/advice needed

Hi Pasha,

Having modeled a few parking garages in various software at this point,
I also do not agree with the LEED representative's suggestion.  In my
experience, parking garages typically have daylighting controls to turn
off perimeter lights during the day.  This would be tough for a
simulation program to model without creating a separate building for the
parking garage.  I know you said that the parking garage would not be
utilizing any ECM's, but I like to leave my options open in case an
owner comes back and decides that the payback is well worth the money
spent up-front for controls.

If you end up incorporating the lighting as a bulk load on the
electrical meter at each building, just remember that you'll need 2 bulk
loads - one for daytime garage lighting and one for night time exterior
lighting.  If you're sure they won't be adding ECM's at a later date,
then I think the bulk load idea will work.  Just be sure to spend some
time on your lighting schedule because the lighting savings seen between
the baseline and proposed models for a parking garage can be significant
and you don't want to lose any of this benefit.  Good luck!

Kristy Walson, PE, LEED AP

Mechanical Engineer / Sustainable Design

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Pasha
Korber-Gonzalez
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:13 AM
To: eQUEST Users List
Subject: [Equest-users] LEED-parking garage question/advice needed

Hi,

I would like to get a few opinions from some fellow simulators on a
modeling approach for a LEED project.   Please share your opinion/advice
if you are interested.

Project:    Four separate buildings that surround an open-air parking
garage structure (all above grade.)--Location is Miami, FL
Intent:    All Four buildings (as a whole project) are going for LEED
certification.  Each building will be modeled in it's own .pd2 file as
the simulator would prefer to manage the models in this manner versus
using a campus modeling approach in a single .pd2 file.

USGBC recommendations where that the parking garage should be divided
(or split) into four pieces and 1/4 of the parking garage should be
included with the buildings in each of the separate model files.

The ISSUE is this:   My simulation gut instinct is telling me that this
is a really bad way to include the energy use of a parking garage in a
project model....(I was actually shocked that this was the advice from a
LEED representative.)    So I am trying to advise my colleague that it
might be better to not include the actual parking structure (i.e.
separate shell) in each model, but to calculate the lighting use (on a
schedule of operation) for the parking garage lighting and then simply
add in that energy as a kW input on a separate meter and assign a ltg
operating schedule to it.    With this approach it would be easier to
take the advice of the LEED folks and input 1/4 of the installed kW in
each of the separate model files, rather than wasting time with building
in (& managing) another shell in each model file.   (FYI-there are no
other ECM's that will be accounted for in the parking garage.)

What do you think of this approach?   Do you think that it is
significant and important to include the "physical" presence of the
parking garage in each of the model files?   What approach would you
take?

Thanks for your time as always...

Pasha :)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20101005/6e684fa5/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1459 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20101005/6e684fa5/attachment.jpeg>