[Equest-users] WSHP Capacity Greater Than 90.1 Table 6.8.1

[Nicholas Caton]

I’d fall back to 6.4.1.1 under the mandatory provisions for the prescriptive compliance path – that’s the section citing the 6.8 series tables for the purpose of establishing prescriptive compliance.  As I’m reading/interpreting, equipment that is not listed categorically within the 6.8-series tables by extension does not need to achieve any minimum performance rating.  There is however some complementary text there you’ll want to review carefully to see if anything applies to your situation.

One extra thought:  Is it possible you’re dealing with a 60-ton WSHP package, comprised of a combination of smaller heatpumps?  In that scenario it may be easier using the individual heatpump capacity ratings to find something that fits the prescriptive mold, so to speak.

~Nick
[cid:image001.png at 01D44C4F.BA832030]
Nick Caton, P.E., BEMP
  Senior Energy Engineer
  Regional Energy Engineering Manager
  Energy and Sustainability Services
  Schneider Electric

D  913.564.6361
M  785.410.3317
F  913.564.6380
E  nicholas.caton at schneider-electric.com<mailto:nicholas.caton at schneider-electric.com>

15200 Santa Fe Trail Drive
Suite 204
Lenexa, KS 66219
United States

[cid:image002.png at 01D44C4F.BA832030]



From: Equest-users <equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org> On Behalf Of Paul Diglio via Equest-users
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2018 6:57 AM
To: equest-users at onebuilding.org
Subject: [Equest-users] WSHP Capacity Greater Than 90.1 Table 6.8.1


[External email: Use caution with links and attachments]

________________________________


Hi All:

I am looking at a project based on 90.1-2010.  The capacity of the WSHPs are 60 tons.  90.1-2010 Table 6.8.1B does not list the minimum efficiency of WSHP over 135,000 bBtu/Hr.


Any ideas on how to select the minimum efficiency of a similar system for the baseline?



Thank you,

Paul Diglio
87 Fairmont Avenue
New Haven, CT 06513


______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
______________________________________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20180917/d1bb1565/attachment-0002.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 255 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20180917/d1bb1565/attachment-0008.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 8477 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20180917/d1bb1565/attachment-0009.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: oledata.mso
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 7137 bytes
Desc: oledata.mso
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20180917/d1bb1565/attachment-0004.obj>