[Equest-users] Heat recovery working too well?

[Adam Barker]

HI Glenn,

I had not.  After looking at this for a long time, my suspicion is that I am misinterpreting the reports somehow.  So that is good know.

From: Haynes, Glenn [mailto:Glenn.Haynes at dnvgl.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 2:39 PM
To: Adam Barker
Subject: RE: Heat recovery working too well?

Have you considered that the LS-D loads are calculated with the LOADS space conditions and not the SYSTEM space conditions?  So usually a direct comparison of results is not that meaningful.

From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org]<mailto:[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org]> On Behalf Of Adam Barker
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 1:22 PM
To: 'equest-users'
Subject: [Equest-users] Heat recovery working too well?

Has anyone else come across heat recovery giving very good results in their model that are higher than expected. In a heating dominated climate, we have a PSZ system serving 5 zones, with baseboards used to meet heating loads in the slave zones (they've been hard sized to just get the unmet hours in an acceptable range).

I have broken down an analysis of building heating energy by month, from LS-D and SS-D.  Assuming the SS-D account for all 'building' loads (envelope, infiltration, lights, etc), and SS-D is all that, plus the OA load.  For a 50% effective  ERV (and no additional fan heat), I get the following for winter months:


Monthly Heating Energy Used (MBTU)



Envelope Loads (LS-D) no ERV

Envelope and OA energy (SS-D) no ERV

Envelope and OA energy (SS-D) with ERV

Envelope energy as % of total (LS-D/SS-D) no ERV

Reduction of energy in SS-D due to ERV (at 50% eff)

J

126

222

154

0.5676

0.306

F

112

196

135

0.5714

0.311

M

90

157

101

0.5732

0.357

A

54

82

47

0.6585

0.427


O

37

52

27

0.7115

0.481

N

67

112

70

0.5982

0.375

D

108

187

127

0.5775

0.321



E.g. in January a 50% eff ERV gives a 30% reduction in heating energy, even though the 'building' pre-OA accounts for 55% of the total energy. My gut feeling is that the 55% is not accurate and it is actually lower, but I can't convince myself using the reports.

Fiddling with the heat recovery control schemes doesn't seem to change the heating results by much either, however changing the effectiveness has a big impact to the results. In comparison, improving the wall performance has a relatively small impact.

I should say that this is a preliminary model so no design drawings available, and it a retail space with about 0.18 cfm OA/sqft.


Adam Barker, MBSc, C.E.T., LEED AP BD+C
Energy Project Manager
Provident Energy Management Inc.
T: 416-736-0630 x 1874 | abarker at pemi.com<mailto:abarker at pemi.com>


**************************************************************************************
This e-mail and any attachments thereto may contain confidential information and/or information protected by intellectual property rights for the exclusive attention of the intended addressees named above. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message and its attachments. Unauthorized use, copying or further full or partial distribution of this e-mail or its contents is prohibited.
**************************************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20150528/8d3b08e1/attachment-0005.htm>