[Equest-users] Slab on Grade Floor Heat Loss

Sun Feb 4 10:10:24 PST 2018

Thanks Joe.  I have spent the time to accurately calculate the F-factor of foundation heat flows, but have reverted to using the tables in Appendix A of 90.1.  It does not seem to make any significant difference. 

Hopefully at some point, eQuest would allow us to plug in the F-factor instead of the U-factor for underground and slab on grade floors.  It would also be nice to plug in the C-value instead of U-factor for below grade walls.
Regards, Paul Diglio

      From: Joe Huang via Equest-users <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
 To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org 
 Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 4:56 PM
 Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Slab on Grade Floor Heat Loss

 The use of F2 factors for foundation heat flows has always been flawed.   The simplest explanation for the F2 factor is that it's the effective U-value per perimeter length.   This formulation assumes that there are no heat loses through the foundation away from the perimeter, which is simply not true (think of the case in Minnesota where the constant deep ground temperatures is between 55 and 60 F).  The other problem is  the delta-T used to derive the F2 factor is not clearly defined.  All the studies I've seen (albeit  all these are from 30 years  ago or more) derived  them against the outdoor air temperature, or more exactly, Tin - Tair.   This then opens up the question whether in DOE-2 the slab  should be modeled as an exterior wall or an underground wall?   The third problem  is that by treating the slab as a monolithic surface, it lumps the heat flow characteristics along the perimeter with those of the slab core , which differ in both  magnitude and time  lag.  
  When I last had a project on ground heat flows 17  years ago,  I proposed a simplified method where the foundation was divided into three regions  (perimeter  1' ,  near perimeter 1-4', and core >4' deep),  each with 3 conductances  to the daily average air temperature , average air temperature over the past three weeks,  and the deep ground temperature.  This method was implemented in an enhanced version of DOE-2.1E, and from what I hear, adopted  into California Title-24.   If anyone is interested  to read the report, just send me an e-mail.
  The good news for everyone here is that there is now a RTAR/WS  (ASHRAE terminology for a RFP) being circulated  in TC 4.7 (Energy Calculations)  that aims to develop a better simplified ground model to replace the F2 factors. Stay tuned but be forewarned that it takes ASHRAE at least a year to approve  a project and another half year to pick a contractor, so don't expect any products for another 3 years. Joe
  Moraga CA 94556
yjhuang at whiteboxtechnologies.com
http://weather.whiteboxtechnologies.com for simulation-ready weather data
(o) (925)388-0265
(c) (510)928-2683
"building energy simulations at your fingertips"
 On 2/2/2018 12:26 PM, Paul Diglio via Equest-users wrote:

  Thanks Bill, you are always such a big help.  That is what I thought, but just wanted to run it by the forum.

  Thanks to you too Nathan.
     Paul Diglio

        From: "Bishop, Bill" <bbishop at pathfinder-ea.com>
 To: Nathan Miller <nathanm at rushingco.com>; Paul Diglio <paul.diglio at sbcglobal.net>; "equest-users at onebuilding.org" <equest-users at onebuilding.org> 
 Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 3:13 PM
 Subject: RE: [Equest-users] Slab on Grade Floor Heat Loss

  #yiv8475494426 -- filtered {panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}#yiv8475494426 filtered {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}#yiv8475494426 filtered {panose-1:2 11 6 3 2 1 2 2 2 4;}#yiv8475494426 filtered {font-family:Verdana;panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}#yiv8475494426 filtered {}#yiv8475494426 p.yiv8475494426MsoNormal, #yiv8475494426 li.yiv8475494426MsoNormal, #yiv8475494426 div.yiv8475494426MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;}#yiv8475494426 a:link, #yiv8475494426 span.yiv8475494426MsoHyperlink {color:#0563C1;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8475494426 a:visited, #yiv8475494426 span.yiv8475494426MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:#954F72;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8475494426 p.yiv8475494426msonormal0, #yiv8475494426 li.yiv8475494426msonormal0, #yiv8475494426 div.yiv8475494426msonormal0 {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:11.0pt;}#yiv8475494426 span.yiv8475494426EmailStyle18 {color:windowtext;}#yiv8475494426 span.yiv8475494426EmailStyle19 {color:windowtext;}#yiv8475494426 span.yiv8475494426EmailStyle20 {color:#1F497D;}#yiv8475494426 .yiv8475494426MsoChpDefault {font-size:10.0pt;}#yiv8475494426 filtered {margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}#yiv8475494426 div.yiv8475494426WordSection1 {}#yiv8475494426    Paul, Your reviewer may have thought that if the slab was showing up as an “exterior surface” (such as on the LV-D report) than the model was simulating heat transfer between the zones and the outside air through the slab. But  eQUEST/DOE-2 simulates heat transfer across underground surfaces differently, as described in the UNDERGROUND-WALL and UNDERGROUND-FLOOR section of the DOE-2 help documentation. The main difference is that ground temperature is  used instead of the OA temperature as the outside temperature. The monthly ground temperature is taken from the weather file, or can be entered as SITE-PARAMETERS:GROUND-T.    The eQUEST wizard creates custom constructions for each underground surface based on inputs for Exterior/Cavity Insulation and Perimeter Floor Insulation. Underground floors are given constructions with low U-factor (high R-value) consistent with the lower heat transfer that would be expected.    Regards, ~Bill     William Bishop, PE, BEMP, BEAP, CEM, LEED AP | Pathfinder Engineers & Architects LLP 
|  Senior Energy Engineer  |      |
|      |
|  134 South Fitzhugh Street                 Rochester, NY 14608  |
|  T: (585) 698-1956                        F: (585) 325-6005  |
|  bbishop at pathfinder-ea.com             www.pathfinder-ea.com  |
|  Carbon Fee and Dividend - simple, effective, and market-based.  |

        From: Equest-users [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Nathan Miller via Equest-users
 Sent: Friday, February 02, 2018 2:35 PM
 To: Nathan Miller <nathanm at rushingco.com>; Paul Diglio <paul.diglio at sbcglobal.net>; equest-users at onebuilding.org
 Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Slab on Grade Floor Heat Loss      Fixed my typo in the F-factor heat loss calc (should have read 50 ft of perimeter)… See below.       Nathan Miller, PE, LEED AP BD+C – Mechanical Engineer/Senior Energy Analyst RUSHING | 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 Nathan Miller via Equest-users
 Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 2:33 PM
 To: Paul Diglio <paul.diglio at sbcglobal.net>; equest-users at onebuilding.org
 Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Slab on Grade Floor Heat Loss      In the past I’ve done a conversion of F-factor (perimeter based) slab-on-grade heat loss to U-factor (area) and input that in on a zone-by-zone basis if I really wanted to nail down SOG heat loss.     Example- Space is 20’ x 30’, but the exposed perimeter is only two of the faces (20’ + 30’). Lets say it is uninsulated SOG.     F-factor from 90.1: F = 0.73 Btu/(hr*ft*F)

 Perimeter based heat loss: 0.73 Btu/(hr*ft*F) * 50 ft = 36.5 BTU/(hr *F)    Then we can back-calculate the U-factor to assume for the whole floor to equate to that heat loss: 36.5  BTU/(hr *F) = 600 SF * X BTU/(hr*SF*F) -> U = 0.0608 BTU/(hr*SF*F)    You can create a custom floor construction for each space to provide the U-factor to produce equivalent heat loss that the F-factor calcs are telling you lose. For purely core zones (no exposed perimeter), I guess the F-factor  calcs are telling us were not really losing heat through that slab (doesn’t’ seem right, but it probably is relatively small)       Nathan Miller, PE, LEED AP BD+C – Mechanical Engineer/Senior Energy Analyst RUSHING | 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 Paul Diglio via Equest-users
 Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 2:19 PM
 To: equest-users at onebuilding.org
 Subject: [Equest-users] Slab on Grade Floor Heat Loss        I recently submitted a model to the local utility company for an incentive.  Part of the buildings' first floor is slab on grade.        One of the comments I received back is that this erroneously shows up as an exterior  surface and I should delete all the slab on grade floors in the component tree.  Doesn't seem right to me.        I did a few and it does reduce the overall energy consumption.  In the 3D model, no floors show, just open to the interior of the zone.        So is eQuest assuming that without this floor, there is no heat loss out the bottom of the  zone?  Is this reasonable?        Thank you,       Paul Diglio       

 _______________________________________________
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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20180204/27fa73a1/attachment-0002.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
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