<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    just looking in the advanced energy modeling for leed manual (from
    aug 2010) i can't find anything about the reviewer's comment, though
    it does mention 90.1-2004 addenda for appendix g did change the
    language for schedules, outside air, to match the 90.1-2007 appendix
    requirement i quoted below.<br>
    <br>
    have you tried contacting the review team thru the project
    resources?  for leed 3/2009 there is an option buried in the
    submittal process that allows some communication w/the review team
    so either you, or the project lead, should be able to ask the
    reviewer to clarify the source of the comment requirement prior to
    marking your comment responses as done & possibly getting the
    same comment again.  i've found it useful to respond to reviewer's
    comments by referring to ashrae chapter, section, and verse
    (90.1-2007 in this case) and quoting the relevant text so if there's
    a usgbc interpretation that is different from the ashrae text,
    addenda, or interpretations the reviewer ends up telling what the
    source of the comment is.  <br>
    <br>
    there could be a usgbc cir addressing the subject, does anyone
    know?  the usgbc position on simulating non-tradable exterior
    lighting the same in both proposed and baseline cases is in an old
    cir only - not in the usgbc modeling guide, not in 90.1, not in the
    usgbc handbooks.<br>
    <br>
    On 4/26/12 6:16 AM, Ramana Koti wrote:
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAJaiD7qxLaqN4RF7PUoGWdznPeE7tjSxXOCP2yHJqM5kee+vzQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div class="gmail_extra">Patrick, it is a LEED 2009 (v3) project.
        I'm slightly confused by this one but trying to follow the
        reviewer's suggestion. Thanks for pointing this out.</div>
      <div class="gmail_extra"> </div>
      <div class="gmail_extra">RK.<br>
        <br>
      </div>
      <div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Patrick
        J. O'Leary, Jr. <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
            href="mailto:poleary1969@gmail.com" target="_blank">poleary1969@gmail.com</a>></span>
        wrote:<br>
        <blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"
          class="gmail_quote">
          <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> is this a leed 2.2 or
            3.0 project?<br>
            <br>
            i'm guessing, without looking in my leed manuals, this is a
            usgbc requirement for at least 2.2.  for leed 3, 90.1-2007,
            appendix g, table 3.1, no. 4 schedules, specifically states
            the "hvac fans that provide outdoor air for ventilation
            shall run continuously whenever spaces are occupied and
            shall be cycled on and off to meet heating and cooling loads
            during unoccupied hours."  90.1-2004 doesn't specify fans
            specifically for outdoor air for ventilation, it just says
            hvac fans - which is the same as the system supply fan in a
            non-doas/economizer capable of completely closing the
            outdoor air damper system so the outdoor air can't be shut
            off.<br>
            <br>
            so the comment is contrary to the 90.1-2007 (and/or 2004
            depending on systems) simulation requirement.  the 90.1-2004
            user's manual appendix g section doesn't address the
            scheduling for hvac fans during unoccupied modes.
            <div>
              <div class="h5"><br>
                <br>
                On 4/24/12 9:54 AM, R B wrote:
                <blockquote type="cite">
                  <div class="gmail_extra">I normally have a min sch
                    specified at the zone level - 0 for unoccupied hours
                    and -999 for other hours that takes care of this
                    comment.</div>
                  <div class="gmail_extra">There is an hourly report for
                    fan coming on during night cycle flag (or something
                    similar). If you do not have the fan coming on or do
                    not have the night cycle control, you should be ok.
                    You can also look at the hourly report for OA ratio
                    and whether fan is on/off during the unoccupied
                    time.</div>
                  <div class="gmail_extra">-Rohini</div>
                  <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
                    <br>
                     </div>
                  <div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:23
                    AM, Ramana Koti <span dir="ltr"><<a
                        moz-do-not-send="true"
                        href="mailto:ramana.koti@gmail.com"
                        target="_blank">ramana.koti@gmail.com</a>></span>
                    wrote:<br>
                    <blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"
                      class="gmail_quote">
                      <div>Dear All,</div>
                      <div> </div>
                      <div>One of the LEED review comments on a
                        university building project I'm working
                        on suggests to verify that all systems
                        in baseline and proposed models contain zero
                        outside air flow when fans are cycled on to meet
                        setback temperatures during unoccupied hours. </div>
                      <div> </div>
                      <div>What is the best way to go about verifying
                        this? In the 'Hourly Report Block' options under
                        a system, I find 'Hourly summed zone OA CFM for
                        DCV calculation (cfm)' and 'Hourly max zone
                        OA/total flow for DCV calculation (cfm/cf/). Is
                        one or both of these options under an hourly
                        report, the way to go or is there a better way
                        of doing it?</div>
                      <div> </div>
                      <div>Thanks,</div>
                      <div>Ramana.</div>
                      <br>
                      _______________________________________________<br>
                      Equest-users mailing list<br>
                      <a moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true"
                        href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG"
                        target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><br>
                      <br>
                    </blockquote>
                  </div>
                  <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
                  </div>
                  <br>
                  <fieldset></fieldset>
                  <br>
                  <pre>_______________________________________________
Equest-users mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a>
</pre>
                </blockquote>
                <br>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
      <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>