[Equest-users] Outside wall to outside wall

Fri Sep 2 07:38:47 PDT 2016

John,

Is this building a brownstone or something? Is it a brick building? Is the brick structural or just a veneer? (Hint: Look for weepholes if you can't look inside a wall, as I doubt you have any original plans). Where's this building located out of curiosity (neighborhood)? I'm not that familiar with 5-story brownstones (brooklyn brownstones are as far as I remember it most commonly 3-4 stories at least).

Is this a purely energy code compliance model (for trade offs) or are you modeling for EPact tax deductions?

If you're using the model to size your equipment is definitely wouldn't consider these side walls as adiabatic. I've seen first hand someone who started having temperature problems as the building next door went unoccupied for an extended period of time before it was knocked down. There are plenty of way to ensure that this extra capacity won't end up hurting your part load performance.

Julien

Envoyé de mon iPhone

> Le 2 sept. 2016 à 15:56, via Equest-users <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org> a écrit :
> 
> Confirming – that language remains in 90.1-2010.  I’ve had similar experiences with old concrete & masonry buildings (zero insulation), where that’s turned out to be a boon for the likes of LEED points.
>  
> Also since it sounds like you’re dancing with compliance, be advised for any prescriptive purposes those concrete walls are most likely a mass wall by 90.1 definitions.
>  
> Sounds like a fun one alright!
>  
> <image001.png>
> Nick Caton, P.E.
>   Senior Energy Engineer
>   Energy and Sustainability Services
>   Schneider Electric
> D  913.564.6361 
> M  785.410.3317 
> E  nicholas.caton at schneider-electric.com
> F  913.564.6380
> 15200 Santa Fe Trail Drive
> Suite 204
> Lenexa, KS 66219
> United States
> <image002.png>
>  
>  
> From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Chris Baker via Equest-users
> Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 7:01 PM
> To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Outside wall to outside wall
>  
> John,
>  
> It would be worth checking in the tables in Appendix G – however, there used to be the following wording at the bottom of the baseline performance column…
>  
> Existing Buildings. For existing building envelopes, the baseline building
> design shall reflect existing conditions prior to any revisions that are part of
> the scope of work being evaluated.
>  
> This one is from ASHRAE 90.1 (2007) and I’m not sure if it is in the 2010 version but it would be worth a look.
>  
> Though modeling 1855 concrete side walls would be a different issue, entirely!  LOL.
>  
> Good luck, sir!
>  
> Chris Baker
> CCI Alliance of Companies
> Fort Wainwright, AK
>  
> From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of John Aulbach via Equest-users
> Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 3:32 PM
> To: Nicholas.Caton at schneider-electric.com; nathanm at rushingco.com
> Cc: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Outside wall to outside wall
>  
> Thanks, Nick. I have an even more interesting scenario. This building was built originally in 1855 (yes, even before me and 19 years after the Battle of the Alamo)). The owners will leave the concrete 1855 side walls (I think I will let them be totally shaded outside walls), gut the rest of the building, and rebuild a 5 story single residence (no, not one of the Trump kids).
>  
> SO..for the City of New York 2011 Energy Code (2014 doesn't take place until October, 2016), we use ASHRAE 90.1-2010. Good old Appendix G (as I interpret it) say that, for either New or Alterations, the Base model is Steel Frame. ALL of it. So I don't apply the 1855 walls (with some added insulation) until the Proposed Run (Thank GOD I don't have to spin the building like LEED).
>  
> Does this base building approach seem correct to you?
>  
> Don't forget. I am originally a Chicago boy.
>  
> John
>  
> 
> On Thursday, September 1, 2016 3:19 PM, "Nicholas.Caton at schneider-electric.com" <Nicholas.Caton at schneider-electric.com> wrote:
>  
> 
> John, looks like this didn’t leave my outbox… sorry!  Give me time to refine my response:
>  
> How I’d react would depend on my motives/goals.
>  
> Ideally, I’d like to find & assert both neighbors are conditioned to similar temperatures and therefore declare no substantive heat transfer:  adiabatic surfaces with thermal mass to effect hourly heat storage/transfer lag.  This is probably accurate enough (in-aggregate) for many cases, short of exposed walls where one building is taller than another.
>  
> Conservatively – Nathan’s suggestion is the ticket however.  If there’s going to be appreciable heat transfer,  you’re now in a position to decide where to draw a line in the sand:  what’s your worst-case?   This may be the more appropriate response if you’re doing simulation to aid/inform equipment sizing or if you know of planned demolition/renovations in the neighboring spaces.  I can say short of FEMA shelters and the like (this is tornado country…), I don’t normally make the destruction of an attached portion of my buildings a part of my design calculations or energy simulations, but you might have some good reasons to pull that possibility into the picture.
>  
> Applying the likes of 90.1 conditioned envelope definitions notably gets a little trickier if you have an enclosed or partially enclosed gap between the buildings.  If you’re heading down a 90.1/LEED based simulation path or something similar for compliance, look hard for shared wall/space construction details on that front to understand what exactly lies beyond your “envelope.”
>  
> Finally, I notice you mentioned an disquieting location: New York City (or NEW YORK CITY?!? as we say in the midwest).  I want to say there was a mailing list discussion on this exact issue in relation to NY’s energy standards some time back either in equest-users or bldg-sim… but on cursory searching I’m having trouble finding it… suggest digging the archives further!
>  
>  
> ~Nick
>  
>  
> <image001.png>
> Nick Caton, P.E.
>   Senior Energy Engineer
>   Energy and Sustainability Services
>   Schneider Electric
> D  913.564.6361 
> M  785.410.3317 
> E  nicholas.caton at schneider-electric.com
> F  913.564.6380
> 15200 Santa Fe Trail Drive
> Suite 204
> Lenexa, KS 66219
> United States
> <image002.png>
>  
>  
> From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of John Aulbach via Equest-users
> Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 4:09 PM
> To: Nathan Miller
> Cc: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Outside wall to outside wall
>  
> Thank you all. I just had to shake the trees to jog my DOE-2.1 memory.
>  
> A fully shaded outdoor wall is probably the best way, so thank you all.
>  
> John
>  
> On Thursday, September 1, 2016 1:17 PM, Nathan Miller <nathanm at rushingco.com> wrote:
>  
> Tough call, but I’d probably be conservative and err on the side of making assumptions that result in MORE energy consumption in my modeling (unless there is some benchmarking you can compare to).
>  
> That means I’d probably assume the walls are exterior and fully shaded. There is a pretty good chance there is at least small dead-air-space between the buildings (even if it is only a few inches), plus you have no control over what is happening on the other side of the wall… maybe the neighboring building is minimally conditioned, or becomes abandoned.
>  
>  
> Nathan Miller, PE, LEED AP BD+C – Mechanical Engineer/Senior Energy Analyst
> RUSHING | D 206-788-4577 | O 206-285-7100 | C 207-650-3942
> www.rushingco.com
>  
> From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of John Aulbach via Equest-users
> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 5:42 PM
> To: via Equest-users <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
> Subject: [Equest-users] Outside wall to outside wall
>  
> Hi Gang:
>  
> Food (and query) for thought.
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20160902/da4a51d0/attachment-0005.htm>