<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"MS Mincho";
panose-1:2 2 6 9 4 2 5 8 3 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Stylus BT";
panose-1:2 14 4 2 2 2 6 2 3 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@MS Mincho";
panose-1:2 2 6 9 4 2 5 8 3 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="2050" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Hi Robert,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I can only speculate towards the circumstances of the DOE ‘tests’ you are referring to, but a contributing factor is likely that statements such as: “XXX CFM/SF reduction of infiltration will result in YYY% energy consumption savings” are inherently case-specific. Any set of numbers may be true for a specific model of a specific size and type of building in a specific climate (the variables go on and on), but as soon as you change any of number of contributing variables you open the door for the impact of infiltration to change. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>This is analogous to the application of the Passivhaus and similar standards to buildings in completely different building types or climates than those the standards are built around. Someone trying to design/build a Passivhaus home in the Arizona is to some extent missing the point, for example, and will hopefully realize the annual 15kWh/m^2 heating/cooling mandate is itself intended for a specific part of the world.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Again, this is as speculative as it must be, but if you’re implying DOE models calculate infiltration loads differently than something else, you’ll need to first provide more specifics regarding what the 3% number is based on, and ensure the contributing variables to infiltration impact are being held constant against the measurements/model producing the 3% figure… I think you’ll find eQuest/DOE2 models are capable of determining and modeling infiltration in a variety of calculation methods (among which you can mandate a specific ACH or CFM/SF of wall – both convertible from </span><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>10m³ /h.m² of wall area)</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>, and can also be scheduled to impose any desired hourly level of infiltration upon a model’s zones if that’s desired.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Best of luck,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><br>~Nick<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><img width=119 height=37 id="Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image001.jpg@01CC5BF0.D6ECBEE0" alt="cid:489575314@22072009-0ABB"></span><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Stylus BT","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E'><o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Stylus BT","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E'><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Stylus BT","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E'>NICK CATON, P.E.</span></b><b><span style='font-family:"Stylus BT","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E'><o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#CC9900'>SENIOR ENGINEER<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#CC9900'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E'>Smith & Boucher Engineers</span><span style='font-size:7.5pt;color:#CC9900'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E'>25501 west valley parkway, suite 200<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E'>olathe, ks 66061<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E'>direct 913.344.0036<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E'>fax 913.345.0617<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><a href="www.smithboucher.com" title="blocked::www.smithboucher.com"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>www.smithboucher.com</span></a></span><u><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:blue'> </span></u><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Bobby Sy<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, August 16, 2011 6:04 AM<br><b>To:</b> Eurek, John S NWO<br><b>Cc:</b> equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] Basic stuff - Infiltration (UNCLASSIFIED)<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Hi all,</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>In the UK when modeling houses, for example, the reduction in infiltration provides a much bigger return on the overall energy saving – albeit with a much simpler model engine. Let me explain.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>British Building Regulations demand a maximum infiltration rate of 10m³ /h.m² of wall area (at 50pa) – equivalent to a little over a hole the size of a 5 peso coin per m². Reducing the infiltration rate to 3m³ gets an instant improvement in overall energy consumption of around 3%. Further, Germany’s Passivhaus criteria has a maximum heating demand of 15kWh/m².yr – ditto cooling demand. To achieve that they regularly build to infiltration not exceeding 1m³. That’s difficult to achieve but the point is I don’t see anywhere near the percentage improvements from similar ‘tests’ with infiltration with the DOE models. Why is that?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Thanks in advance!</span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>-Robert</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:04 AM, Eurek, John S NWO <<a href="mailto:John.S.Eurek@usace.army.mil" target="_blank">John.S.Eurek@usace.army.mil</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Classification: UNCLASSIFIED<br>Caveats: NONE<br><br><br>Another infiltration issue to consider is the infiltration schedule. Most of<br>my designs include building pressurization during occupied hours. I make an<br>infiltration schedule and set the infiltration to 10% during occupied hours.<br><br>The biggest advantage is that all the outside air goes through an energy<br>recovery unit and therefore is tempered.<br><br><br><br>"Is Freedom a small price to pay to stop Global Warming?"<br><br>John Eurek PE, LEED AP<br><br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: <a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>[mailto:<a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>] On Behalf Of Robby Oylear<br>Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 11:55 AM<br>To: Mehta, Gaurav<br>Cc: <a href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Basic stuff - Infiltration<br><br>Gaurav's screenshot didn't come through for me, so to summarize, in order to<br>take wind-speed correction factors into account you need to take the value of<br>INF-FLOW/AREA that the wizard inputs into the detailed file and convert it to<br>an AIR-CHANGE/HR value. eQUEST does not apply wind-speed correction to<br>INF-FLOW/AREA (see below).<br><br>From DOE-2 help file on INF-METHOD:<br><br>AIR-CHANGE<br><br>The infiltration rate is calculated using the air-change method.<br>AIR-CHANGES/HR or INF-FLOW/AREA should be specified if INF-METHOD =<br>AIR-CHANGE. In this case the value AIR-CHANGES/HR will be corrected for wind<br>speed each hour, but the value of INF-FLOW/AREA will not be corrected. If<br>both AIR-CHANGES/HR and INF-FLOW/AREA are specified, the resulting<br>infiltration rates are added.<br><br><br>On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Mehta, Gaurav <<a href="mailto:Gaurav.Mehta@stantec.com" target="_blank">Gaurav.Mehta@stantec.com</a>><br>wrote:<br><br><br> Here is a recent response that I posted on Bldg-Sim.<br><br><br><br> Gaurav Mehta, LEED® AP BD+C<br> Sustainable Building Analyst<br> Stantec<br><br> 1932 First Avenue Suite 307<br> Seattle WA 98101<br> Ph: <a href="tel:%28206%29%20770-7779" target="_blank">(206) 770-7779</a> <tel:%28206%29%20770-7779><br> Fx: <a href="tel:%28206%29%20770-5941" target="_blank">(206) 770-5941</a> <tel:%28206%29%20770-5941><br> <a href="mailto:Gaurav.Mehta@stantec.com" target="_blank">Gaurav.Mehta@stantec.com</a><br><br> <a href="http://stantec.com" target="_blank">stantec.com</a> <<a href="http://www.stantec.com" target="_blank">http://www.stantec.com</a>><br><br><br><br> The content of this email is the confidential property of Stantec and<br>should not be copied, modified, retransmitted, or used for any purpose except<br>with Stantec's written authorization. If you are not the intended recipient,<br>please delete all copies and notify us immediately.<br><br><br><br> ü Please consider the environment before printing this email.<br><br> From: <a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>[mailto:<a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>] On Behalf Of Nick Caton<br> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 9:40 AM<br> To: Robby Oylear; John Bixler<br> Cc: <a href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br><br><br> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Basic stuff - Infiltration<br><br><br><br><br><br> Robby - awesome post, thanks for linking that paper!<br><br><br><br> As an extra heads up/thought: depending on which infiltration method<br>is selected, I do believe eQuest will also calculate hourly infiltration<br>rates working from windspeed in the weather file. Details would be in the<br>help files... I can't recall if this happens with the default method, or if<br>there is a single "default" method (it might vary based on how you define<br>infiltration at the wizard level?)...<br><br><br><br> ~Nick<br><br><br><br> cid:489575314@22072009-0ABB<br><br><br><br> NICK CATON, P.E.<br><br> SENIOR ENGINEER<br><br><br><br> Smith & Boucher Engineers<br><br> 25501 west valley parkway, suite 200<br><br> olathe, ks 66061<br><br> direct <a href="tel:913.344.0036" target="_blank">913.344.0036</a><br><br> fax <a href="tel:913.345.0617" target="_blank">913.345.0617</a><br><br> <a href="http://www.smithboucher.com" target="_blank">www.smithboucher.com</a> <<a href="http://www.smithboucher.com" target="_blank">http://www.smithboucher.com</a>><br><br><br><br> From: Robby Oylear [mailto:<a href="mailto:robbyoylear@gmail.com" target="_blank">robbyoylear@gmail.com</a>]<br> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 11:28 AM<br> To: John Bixler<br> Cc: Nick Caton; <a href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Basic stuff - Infiltration<br><br><br><br> John,<br><br><br><br> The infiltration as a function of exterior gross wall area is only<br>available in the wizard. I don't believe DOE2.2 is capable of having inputs<br>that relate to the sum of a parameter of it's child components. The DOE2.2<br>BDL Functions do not have any references to child components (i.e. a Wall can<br>reference a parameter of its parent Space, but a Space cannot reference a<br>parameter of its child Wall).<br><br><br><br> Regarding Lawrence's initial question about converting a known tested<br>value to a value usable within eQUEST, the PNNL Report 18898, Infiltration<br>Modeling Guidelines for Commercial Building Energy Analysis<br>(<a href="http://www.pnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-18898.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.pnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-18898.p<br>df</a>) contains formula for converting infiltration from a test case to an<br>actual design case. Based on the example presented in the document, a<br>conversion factor of 0.112 can be derived.<br><br><br><br> So a tested air leakage of 0.40 CFM/SF at 0.30 in. w.g. would be<br>modeled at 0.045 CFM/SF. This value is modeled at 100% when building fan<br>system is off and 25% when the building fan system is on.<br><br><br><br> Granted, this may be an oversimplification for eQUEST, as the<br>document was written for EnergyPlus which contains a wind-driven infiltration<br>model, but it seems to be a good starting point at least if you have test<br>information available.<br><br><br><br> Robby Oylear, LEED® AP BD+C<br><br> Mechanical Project Engineer<br><br> Energy Analyst<br><br><br><br> D <a href="tel:206-788-4571" target="_blank">206-788-4571</a> | C <a href="tel:206-354-2721" target="_blank">206-354-2721</a><br><br> <a href="http://www.rushingco.com" target="_blank">www.rushingco.com</a> <<a href="http://www.rushingco.com/" target="_blank">http://www.rushingco.com/</a>><br><br><br><br><br><br> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 8:17 AM, John Bixler <<a href="mailto:JBixler@sebesta.com" target="_blank">JBixler@sebesta.com</a>><br>wrote:<br><br> Thanks for the response Nick.<br><br><br><br> As I recall from a recent foray into this subject in eQuest (in<br>detailed mode), the cfm/sq ft entry is based on floor area.<br><br><br> It would be logical that if cfm/sq ft of exterior wall is an option<br>in wizard mode, it would also be an option in detailed mode - I just haven't<br>dug that far yet.<br><br><br><br> From: Nick Caton [mailto:<a href="mailto:ncaton@smithboucher.com" target="_blank">ncaton@smithboucher.com</a>]<br> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:08 AM<br> To: John Bixler; <a href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br> Subject: RE: [Equest-users] Basic stuff - Infiltration<br><br><br><br> Hi John - thanks for your thoughts!<br><br><br><br> I was relating some of the same concerns with others off-list ... I'm<br>am no infiltration-auditing expert (though some lurk among us here on the<br>lists ^_~), but one thing I can say based on my past attempts to build a<br>better mousetrap regarding infiltration is that where ASHRAE may be generally<br>vague on the topic - they are actually doing a lot to say (if not always<br>directly) that whole building infiltration is a very difficult thing to<br>quantify at best (sorry for excessive use of parentheticals (I mean it!)...).<br><br><br><br> The best guidance imaginable that would still be practical in<br>day-to-day use would have to rely in some part on subjective observations<br>(guesses) regarding envelope constructions. Two brick walls of certain<br>grout/masonry ratios weathered for the same period in the same climate may<br>still have different leakiness because the two masons used slightly different<br>grout mixes... What I'm getting at is you couldn't realistically construct a<br>table that covered every variable, and many variables are not "knowable."<br><br><br><br> That's not to say the residential ACH table isn't useful for<br>subjective estimations, nor that research couldn't be undertaken to raise the<br>bar a notch. As John is alluding, a table providing representative<br>commercial envelope constructions (with accompanying illustrations!) and/or<br>layer combinations could be undertaken that would provide infiltration<br>performance as a function of time. Values could be given for new<br>construction, and after weathering for 1/5/10 years. While new<br>constructions/layers could be assessed in a controlled environment, initial<br>research on aged constructions would need to be done sampling within a single<br>climate zone. Separate/concurrent research could explore determining<br>multipliers on the weathering effects based on varying climate and<br>geography... All things being equal, a beachside wall built in Miami, FL<br>with lots of sun/salt/torrential rain seasons and the occasional hurricane<br>will weather differently over a decade than the same wall in a milder<br>climate. The net result of such research could ultimately produce some<br>really helpful tools in better assessing existing and new constructions for a<br>variety of industries and purposes (energy modeling included).<br><br><br><br> Considering the growing presence and pressing need for better tools<br>in the world of energy modeling, I would put forward prime candidates for<br>whole construction assemblies would be ASHRAE 90.1 baseline constructions as<br>defined in Appendix A.<br><br><br><br> For all I know, such research may be underway or completed years ago<br>- my ear is not quite so close to the ground with the academic world... can<br>anyone comment?<br><br><br><br><br><br> To another point you brought up - eQuest is quite capable of using<br>your personally developed CFM/ft2 values - in the wizards even! In detailed<br>mode you'll find there are inputs for more involved estimations as well if<br>you wish to pursue other methods:<br><br> Error! Filename not specified.<br><br> Error! Filename not specified.<br><br><br><br> Error! Filename not specified.<br><br><br><br> NICK CATON, P.E.<br><br> SENIOR ENGINEER<br><br><br><br> Smith & Boucher Engineers<br><br> 25501 west valley parkway, suite 200<br><br> olathe, ks 66061<br><br> direct <a href="tel:913.344.0036" target="_blank">913.344.0036</a><br><br> fax <a href="tel:913.345.0617" target="_blank">913.345.0617</a><br><br> <a href="http://www.smithboucher.com" target="_blank">www.smithboucher.com</a> <<a href="http://www.smithboucher.com" target="_blank">http://www.smithboucher.com</a>><br><br><br><br> From: <a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>[mailto:<a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>] On Behalf Of John Bixler<br> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 9:23 AM<br> To: <a href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Basic stuff - Infiltration<br><br><br><br> My own personal opinion is that ASHRAE Fundamentals has not rescued<br>us here.<br><br><br><br> As Nick mentioned, the data presented there is for residential houses<br>and relies on incredibly vague and subjective judgment calls by the modeler.<br><br><br><br> Furthermore, the values presented are in the unit's of air changes<br>per hour. To me, this is a terrible way to use the data. Your entries for<br>infiltration then rely on the volume of the room to determine the amount of<br>infiltration. The volume of the room (zone is probably a better term) has<br>NOTHING to do with the infiltration. What if I have a gym that's<br>150'x100'x50' tall, but it only has 10' wide by 50' tall of exterior wall???<br>If I use the ASHRAE method and rely on air changes per hour, the zone will be<br>modeled with a HUGE GIGANTIC REALLY REALLY LARGE amount of infiltration.<br><br><br><br> Yet this seems to be the only recourse we have that is grounded in<br>any sort of defendable data.<br><br><br><br> I have looked and looked for a reliable report or other source for<br>real world commercial/institutional construction infiltration values to no<br>avail. It would be so incredibly useful.<br><br><br><br> I have, over the course of my energy modeling career, developed a set<br>of seemingly practical infiltration values to use, using the units of "CFM<br>per sq ft of gross external wall area" available in Trane Trace (I don't<br>believe these units are an option in eQuest). These values were developed by<br>taking a number of buildings with no infiltration and arbitrarily adding<br>infiltration in, until I get a reasonable utility consumption value. Hardly<br>scientific and no way could I defend these values if they came under<br>scrutiny, other than to say "well, you got a better idea????"<br><br><br><br> Some may say "Eh, who cares about infiltration anyway?". Well, it<br>makes a bigger difference then you'd think.<br><br><br><br> A novice user who relies on the ASHRAE air changes per hour is likely<br>significantly oversizing their cooling equipment in large rooms (ie<br>conference, assembly, gyms, etc) which is exactly where you don't want to be<br>oversizing cooling equipment.<br><br><br><br> Think about the components of a heating load - envelope conduction<br>losses, taking in cold OA...and infiltration. Envelope losses are generally<br>small, the design community likes to temper their OA (rightfully so), so<br>where is a major component of the heating (consumption) load coming from?<br>Infiltration really adds up.<br><br><br><br> How do you justify replacing leaky, wood sash windows? How bout<br>making a switch to spray foam insulation? How about modeling door seals?<br><br><br><br> I've rambled enough. Point being, we all are forced to use arbitrary<br>numbers for something that is a significant component of both equipment<br>sizing and energy modeling and it just makes me mad and embarrassed when I<br>have to explain to a client or colleague "well those are really important,<br>but completely imaginary, numbers..."<br><br><br><br> From: <a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>[mailto:<a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>] On Behalf Of Bruce<br>Easterbrook<br> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 5:41 PM<br> To: John Bixler<br> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Basic stuff - Infiltration<br><br><br><br> Since 1922!<br> Bruce Easterbrook P.Eng.<br> Abode Engineering<br> ASHRAE Member<br><br> On 09/08/2011 06:11 PM, lawrence Lile wrote:<br><br> Good ol ASHRAE Fundamentals! Why didn't I think of looking there?<br>Thanks!<br><br><br><br><br><br> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Nick Caton <<a href="mailto:ncaton@smithboucher.com" target="_blank">ncaton@smithboucher.com</a>><br>wrote:<br><br> Hi Lawrence,<br><br><br><br> My copy of ASHRAE Principles of HVAC includes a table (5-1) excerpted<br>from ASHRAE Fundamentals, 2001 (Table 7, Ch 28). This table provides air<br>change rates as a function of subjective envelope airtightness ("tight" /<br>"medium" / "loose") and as a function of the outdoor design temperature.<br>Upon reviewing the referenced Fundamentals chapter, I learned this table is<br>built from research surveying residential homes of various vintages, so it<br>helps to know that these are "tight" to "loose" residential constructions.<br><br><br><br> In any case, I've used and cited this resource before when modeling<br>infiltration and calculating sizing loads for non-residential projects as<br>well. I've searched, but have yet to come up with an equivalent table based<br>on surveying and measuring commercial constructions from a<br>subjective/objective standpoint... That might be handier, but in the meantime<br>this is a good tool for "converting" your subjective observations into the<br>right ballpark.<br><br><br><br> ~Nick<br><br><br><br> Error! Filename not specified.<br><br><br><br> NICK CATON, P.E.<br><br> SENIOR ENGINEER<br><br><br><br> Smith & Boucher Engineers<br><br> 25501 west valley parkway, suite 200<br><br> olathe, ks 66061<br><br> direct <a href="tel:913.344.0036" target="_blank">913.344.0036</a><br><br> fax <a href="tel:913.345.0617" target="_blank">913.345.0617</a><br><br> <a href="http://www.smithboucher.com" target="_blank">www.smithboucher.com</a> <<a href="http://www.smithboucher.com" target="_blank">http://www.smithboucher.com</a>><br><br><br><br> From: <a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>[mailto:<a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>] On Behalf Of lawrence<br>Lile<br> Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 12:50 PM<br><br><br> To: <a href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br><br> Subject: [Equest-users] Basic stuff - Infiltration<br><br><br><br> In building modeling programs one always has to provide precise<br>values for infiltration. In the real world, I will know one of two things:<br>almost nothing (The building appears to be kinda leaky with old windows), or<br>I will have a blower door test done at a specific pressure. How do I convert<br>subjective ("kinda leaky") or objective (Blower door test) leakage into<br>numbers that make sense in the program? Is there a guide one can use?<br><br><br><br><br><br> --Lawrence<br><br><br><br><br><br> _______________________________________________<br> Equest-users mailing list<br><br><a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to<br><a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><br><br><br><br>________________________________<br><br> If this email is spam, report it to <a href="http://www.OnlyMyEmail.com" target="_blank">www.OnlyMyEmail.com</a><br><<a href="https://support.onlymyemail.com/view/report_spam/MTM0MTU4OjEzMTcyNDUzMjQ6amJpeGxlckBzZWJlc3RhLmNvbTpkZWxpdmVyZWQ" target="_blank">https://support.onlymyemail.com/view/report_spam/MTM0MTU4OjEzMTcyNDUzMjQ6amJ<br>peGxlckBzZWJlc3RhLmNvbTpkZWxpdmVyZWQ</a>><br><br><br> _______________________________________________<br> Equest-users mailing list<br><br><a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to<br><a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><br><br><br><br><br><br> ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br> From: "Mehta, Gaurav" <<a href="mailto:Gaurav.Mehta@stantec.com" target="_blank">Gaurav.Mehta@stantec.com</a>><br> To: "<a href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</a>><br> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 11:12:31 -0600<br> Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] RE : Infiltration effect in Climate 1<br><br><br> Richard,<br><br><br><br> Are you using the default infiltration rate (0.038 cfm/ft2 of<br>external wall area) for the perimeter spaces?<br><br><br><br> eQUEST calculates the cfm based on the external wall area and then<br>converts this to an infiltration flow (cfm/ft2 of floor area of the space).<br><br><br><br> As Fredrick has pointed out this infiltration flow assigned by eQUEST<br>to each perimeter space is not depended on the climate.<br><br><br><br> See the help section screenshot below:<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> It is a flat rate assigned to each space and does not include any<br>wind speed correction and inside-outside temperature difference. The 0.038<br>cfm/ft2 (of external wall area) infiltration rate was included in the ASHRAE<br>Standard 90.1-1989 as a beginning assumption and that's what shows up in<br>eQUEST as default.<br><br><br><br> It is good that you are questioning the effect of infiltration on the<br>energy use of building that you are modeling. In the absence of blower door<br>test results it is difficult to imagine the real infiltration rate in a<br>building as it depends on many factors such as the workmanship of the actual<br>construction, stack effect, inside-outside temperature difference, wind-speed<br>and how well the building is pressurized by the HVAC system.<br><br><br><br> I'll suggest go through the following study by PNNL: Infiltration<br>Modeling Guidelines for Commercial Building Energy Analysis<br><<a href="http://www.pnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-18898.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.pnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-18898.p<br>df</a>><br><br><br><br> Although the report is Energy Plus specific but it can be applied to<br>eQUEST as well. In a recent project I used the PNNL guidelines and further<br>converted the infiltration flow for each space to air-changes per hour to<br>take the wind-speed correction into account. This method still has limitation<br>of not taking into account the inside-outside temperature difference (see<br>above screen-shot). I found the rest of the methods that include both<br>wind-speed correction and inside-outside temperature difference to be<br>specific to residential buildings.<br><br><br><br> Hope it helps.<br><br><br><br> Thanks.<br><br><br><br> Best regards,<br><br><br><br> Gaurav<br><br><br><br> Gaurav Mehta, LEED® AP BD+C<br> Sustainable Building Analyst<br> Stantec<br><br> 1932 First Avenue Suite 307<br> Seattle WA 98101<br> Ph: <a href="tel:%28206%29%20770-7779" target="_blank">(206) 770-7779</a> <tel:%28206%29%20770-7779><br> Fx: <a href="tel:%28206%29%20770-5941" target="_blank">(206) 770-5941</a> <tel:%28206%29%20770-5941><br> <a href="mailto:Gaurav.Mehta@stantec.com" target="_blank">Gaurav.Mehta@stantec.com</a><br><br> <a href="http://stantec.com" target="_blank">stantec.com</a> <<a href="http://www.stantec.com" target="_blank">http://www.stantec.com</a>><br><br><br><br> The content of this email is the confidential property of Stantec and<br>should not be copied, modified, retransmitted, or used for any purpose except<br>with Stantec's written authorization. If you are not the intended recipient,<br>please delete all copies and notify us immediately.<br><br><br><br> ü Please consider the environment before printing this email.<br><br><br><br> From: <a href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>[mailto:<a href="mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>] On Behalf Of Genest, Frederic<br> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 6:03 PM<br> To: ROBERT GOMEZ; <a href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br> Subject: [Bldg-sim] RE : Infiltration effect in Climate 1<br><br><br><br><br><br> Hello Richard.<br><br> I'm not used to eQuest, but since it is using DOE in the background,<br>same as EE4 I'm using more frequently, I'll try to answer correctly.<br><br> Climate Zone has nothing to do with infiltration rates, except when<br>in comes to wind speed and such. However, I don't think DOE is considering<br>wind speed when calculating infiltration rates; it is usually defined as a<br>constant, based on a value such as ACH or cfm/ft.sq. of wall area.<br><br> As such, I would start to check your infiltration inputs to see what<br>is defined, first in eQuest and then in the DOE input file. I'm pretty sure<br>you'll find your answer somewhere there.<br><br> Also note that design infiltration rate and "actual, under operating<br>conditions" infiltration rate, are two different things. The average constant<br>infiltration rate is adequate enough for the later one.<br><br> Also, if you ever need to model a real infiltration from blower door<br>test results, I personnaly use the 50 Pa value divided by 20 for actual,<br>normal operation conditions, while the 75 Pa value would be divided by 35 (in<br>whatever units those values are provided).<br><br> Regards.<br><br><br><br> Frederic Genest, ing., M.Sc.A.<br> LEED AP, ASHRAE HBDP<br> <a href="mailto:fgenest@pageaumorel.com" target="_blank">fgenest@pageaumorel.com</a><br><br> Pageau Morel et associés<br> 210 Cremazie Ouest, suite 110<br> Montréal, Qc H2P 1C6<br> T) <a href="tel:514-382-5150" target="_blank">514-382-5150</a> begin_of_the_skype_highlighting<br><a href="tel:514-382-5150" target="_blank">514-382-5150</a> end_of_the_skype_highlighting<br>begin_of_the_skype_highlighting <a href="tel:514-382-5150" target="_blank">514-382-5150</a><br>end_of_the_skype_highlighting F)<a href="tel:514-384-9872" target="_blank">514-384-9872</a><br> <a href="http://www.pageaumorel.com" target="_blank">www.pageaumorel.com</a><br><br><br> -------- Message d'origine--------<br> De: ROBERT GOMEZ [mailto:<a href="mailto:rsg4999@yahoo.com" target="_blank">rsg4999@yahoo.com</a>]<br> Date: dim. 31/07/2011 23:05<br> À: <a href="mailto:bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br> Objet : [Bldg-sim] Infiltration effect in Climate 1<br><br> Hello all,<br><br> I'm currently involved in a project that is located in International<br>Climate Zone 1 (Very Hot - Humid). The building has no heating system, HVAC<br>systems are only for cooling. Infiltration effect is smaller than I expected<br>from the eQuest energy model result. I know it has something to do with the<br>climate. Can anyone tell me the reason why?<br><br> Thanks in advance!<br><br><br> Richard Gulli<br> Project Engineer<br><br><br> _______________________________________________<br> Equest-users mailing list<br><br><a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to<br><a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><br><br><br><br><br><br>Classification: UNCLASSIFIED<br>Caveats: NONE<br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Equest-users mailing list<br><a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br>To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to <a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>