[Equest-users] Adding Insulationtoexistingbuilding(UNCLASSIFIED)

Fri Sep 9 15:16:57 PDT 2011

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

I did not mean to sound negative towards CERL, I have their web site
bookmarked.  They are a great asset for information.

I'm assuming we both made energy models.  We likely just used different
inputs (schedules, plug-loads and 1000 other variable)  I'm very open to the
idea my model/assumptions are off.

My goal is to find what is most efficient, not to prove somebody wrong.  I
did talk to the guy for awhile, he gave me so much useful information that we
didn't dwell on the insulation topic too much.

One thing I learned from him was about the ASHRAE Datacom series.  All our
computer rooms are required to be 72 degrees.  I have seen studies showing
that a computer room temperature can be higher without endangering the
equipment, the manufactures even state this.  I think having ASHRAE also
saying it may help convince owners to allow the computer room temperatures to
be set a little higher to save a lot of energy.  

http://www.ashrae.org/publications/page/1900

-----Original Message-----
From: Wolfe, Brian [mailto:bwolfe at hksinc.com] 
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 3:49 PM
To: Eurek, John S NWO; Nick Caton; David Eldridge;
equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: RE: [Equest-users] Adding Insulationtoexistingbuilding(UNCLASSIFIED)

The intent of energy modeling is to understand how to optimize a building's
efficiency and this clearly shows this is not efficient.  Where's the
efficiency in installing enough insulation that it drives up the loads of a
system.  This would negate true optimization and efficiency.  Plus, there's a
waste of material and cost by adding something that is not needed.  I agree
that if you are able to optimize the outside air, that would help, but this
sounds like a misunderstanding of true energy efficiency.  To play off your
scenarios of examples:  2(heating and cooling loads) - 1(heating) =
1(cooling) x 3(increased cooling) = 3(the amount of load caused by super
insulating)  this just isn't efficient. 

I'm on your side that super insulating is not an efficient strategy.
Increased load, excess materials and extra cost, it doesn't make sense.  I'm
interested in their reasoning for this strategy being a beneficial one.
Good luck.

Brian Wolfe, CDT, LEED AP BD+C 
Sustainable Design Coordinator 
HKS  |  Enhancing the Human Experience 
If you are sending large files, please use my Thru dropbox.
vCard 

-----Original Message-----
From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Eurek, John
S NWO
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 2:29 PM
To: Nick Caton; David Eldridge; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Adding Insulation
toexistingbuilding(UNCLASSIFIED)

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

Today I received an e-mail with recommendations from the Construction
Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL) and in the recommendations was an R-50
roof (super insulation).

The recommendations were from the building I ran energy models for and my
results showed that too much insulation increases energy use.  I hit 'reply
all' to the e-mail and told everyone that I disagree with their research and
explained what my models showed.  I received a call from a person from CERL,
he was a little defensive.  We agreed with everything but the super
insulation.

I know this will come up in a future meeting and before I go toe-to-toe with
him and tell the guy he is wrong, I want to make sure I am right.

One of his quotes was "We want the insulation so good that you can heat the
room with a single match."  I repeatedly told him that it isn't the heating,
it is the cooling.  He responded with, "the building shouldn't depend on the
skin to remove heat". I agreed using the skin for cooling isn't the best
method, but it is what happens.

I would agree with him that super insulation would be great IF the system has
the ability to bring in a lot of outside air.  The outside air will be 'free
cooling' minus the fan energy.  The large amount of outside air in essence
allows you to artificially make the R value zero (just like opening the
windows)  (*snicker to myself - it is fan assisted natural ventilation*)

Will the ability to draw in outside air solve the problem of increased
cooling load for a super insulated building?

Also, to those who are still reading - A part of the energy modeler's job is
to understand what is happening then explaining it to others. (Even
architects)
The analogies below all involve this building with massive internal loads.
The architect insisted that you can reduce energy use by optimizing the
orientation.  I ran the model, it only made a 0.05% difference.

-I told him "It is like trying to get better gas mileage by turning down the
radio in your car.  The skin load is tiny compared to the servers, lights and
computer loads."
-Later I told somebody "It is like trying to make a bull-doze aerodynamic,
this building is a work horse.  If it were an empty house I would agree
rotation matters more."
-And "With this much insulation, the orientation doesn't matter as much. If
you on the beach in a speedo it matters. If you are in a parka covered head
to toe, not so much."

John Eurek PE, LEED AP
Mechanical Engineer,
US Army Corps of Engineers
Omaha District CENWO-ED-DA
1616 Capitol Avenue
Omaha, NE 68102
Phone: (402) 995-2134
email: john.s.eurek at usace.army.mil

-----Original Message-----
From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Nick Caton
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 2:52 PM
To: David Eldridge; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Adding Insulation
toexistingbuilding(UNCLASSIFIED)

David,

Remind me never to ask you how a thermos works ^_^.

John,

I wrote most of this yesterday and David beat me to the punch... I'm echoing
much of the same from his response but maybe it'll help as well??

...

Economizers work just as you describe, and are great energy savers when the
OA temps are conducive to comfort... (moving air generally takes less energy
than moving heat + air) 

But sometimes it's 110F+ at your RTU in the dead heat of the summer...
In our local climate and I'm sure many others, the brunt of the cooling
season has OA temps well above what we want to supply to achieve comfort
inside.  Economizer function isn't terribly helpful in this situation.
With too much insulation, you still run into the same fundamental problem of
"too much heat inside," with no options but to reject the heat using your
cooling equipment outside, even if you do have an economizer.

Your assertion holds true, that super-insulation can be a non-issue when you
have an economizer, but only for specific times in the year when the outside
conditions are cooperating.  Where having an economizer (or not) may have a
dampening effect on the relative impact/problem of "super-insulating" on an
annual basis, it could only remove the issue for the brunt of the cooling
season in a specific sort of cool, temperate climate.

Even in such a climate, blasting tons of extra air into the building to "get
around" someone's decision to over-insulate the envelope doesn't seem
ideal... every building should have an envelope construction where "enough is
enough."

There is an easy answer to your office's water query: "it depends."
(haha, I'll be here all night!)  

There unfortunately isn't a blanket rule here because the answer does depends
on efficiency of the pumps (or fans), which itself is dependent on the piping
(or duct) static being overcome (variability of that comes into play for some
systems), and the efficiency of the cooling equipment as well - be it a
chiller plant or rooftop DX refrigeration...
everything balances out and playing with different supply temps/flow rates
will return a unique answer for every project if you take the time to play
with it.

... 

As David concludes, this is indeed why modelers are ultimately such popular
characters =)!

~Nick

NICK CATON, P.E.
SENIOR ENGINEER

Smith & Boucher Engineers
25501 west valley parkway, suite 200
olathe, ks 66061
direct 913.344.0036
fax 913.345.0617
www.smithboucher.com

NICK CATON, P.E.
SENIOR ENGINEER

Smith & Boucher Engineers
25501 west valley parkway, suite 200
olathe, ks 66061
direct 913.344.0036
fax 913.345.0617
www.smithboucher.com 

-----Original Message-----
From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of David
Eldridge
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:50 PM
To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Adding Insulation to
existingbuilding(UNCLASSIFIED)

Nick, my analogy when I talk about coffee thermoses is a metal building with
internal loads and varying insulation levels.

Anyway - back to the original poster, this phenomenon could more often be
true where generally it is cooler outside than inside for much of the year.

To reply to John E.'s subsequent post -- there likely will still be some
hours where it is cooler outside than inside (and the insulation is now a
detriment) even if there is an  economizer.  Even while the air system is
providing cooling (whether compressor-based or economizer) the walls may
still be conducting energy -- they don't stop based on the HVAC system
status.

Certainly the availability of an economizer can mitigate this problem, but
might not make it go away completely.

But that's why we have energy models -- insulation that looks great at both
design days will still have some hours in the middle where it might make
energy use higher -- run a model and find out what the net is.
(Unless the building is on Mercury...then always add as much as
possible.)

David

David S. Eldridge, Jr., P.E., LEED AP BD+C, BEMP, BEAP, HBDP Grumman/Butkus
Associates

-----Original Message-----
From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Nick Caton
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:00 PM
To: Eurek, John S NWO; mikef at facilitymgt.com;
equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Adding Insulation to existing
building(UNCLASSIFIED)

Agreeing with John per usual...

Any building with internal loads will have some break-point where adding more
insulation to the envelope will be detrimental to annual energy consumption.
It's a bigger deal whenever your internals are relatively high.  The behavior
you're describing is fundamentally sound.

A good thermos keeps my coffee hot longer (great in the wintertime), but it's
not the ideal container when my coffee is scalding-hot and I want the
contents to cool down.

I've yet to settle on a favorite analogy myself... this just comes to mind
because I need to make a new pot here at work...

NICK CATON, P.E.
SENIOR ENGINEER

Smith & Boucher Engineers
25501 west valley parkway, suite 200
olathe, ks 66061
direct 913.344.0036
fax 913.345.0617
www.smithboucher.com
_______________________________________________
Equest-users mailing list
http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to
EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
_______________________________________________
Equest-users mailing list
http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to
EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

_______________________________________________
Equest-users mailing list
http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to
EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE