<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=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@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:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:black;}
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;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@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="1026" />
</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 bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>The modeler used heat pump for heating and cooling. The exact comment is long (too long for me to type, about 1/3 of a page), but it does talk to using proper efficiency based on Equest autosizing (which as far as I can tell autosizing was used, however there may be issues with the internal loads used, that’s another thing to investigate). I’m not sure how the dummy project example you give will work, without fully building the facility and loads in a model, autosizing isn’t going to really work since the required efficiency is based on system capacity? I’m thinking I will work with the apparent system sizing I have now, update the efficiency based on 90.1, rerun and hope the sizing stays within the same category. Iterate if necessary. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>The comment also brought up the need to break out fan energy from cooling/heating energy, which I guess I had hoped would be worked out with reverting to default. In response to Nathan’s comments, I will review this topic in the latest forums (this one and bldg-sim being the only two I use, any others pertinent?) and hopefully get it straightened out.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>On the flip side, a non-mandatory point is that they also seemed to use too high of an efficiency for cooling. Perhaps that will cancel out the low heating efficiency in the end….<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Thanks so much, anything else is appreciated. I’m sure I’ll be back once I’m fully confused with splitting as Nathan talked about.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><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";color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'> Patrick J. O'Leary, Jr. [mailto:poleary1969@gmail.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:40 PM<br><b>To:</b> Laura Howe, RCE<br><b>Cc:</b> equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] Revert efficiencies to autosize from detailed?<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>short answer: no<br><br>longer answer: equest reverts to a default efficiency of the type of unit selected, in eir/hir not seer/eer or hspf/cop, that is not based on 90.1-2004, 2007, or 2010. the 'easiest' method of determing a 'correct' efficiency (search archives for different methods of calculating a 'correct' efficiency') is to simply open a dummy project, go to the hvac systems, change the efficiency (in seer or eer as applies to the minimum required for your unit type) to the 90.1 required, save the project, then switch it to detailed mode & look at the hvac unit efficiency in eir/hir.<br><br>out of curiosity, what was the exact comment & what did the modeler use for what system types?<br><br>On 6/12/12 2:11 PM, Laura Howe, RCE wrote: <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>HI All-<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>While there are some posts similar to this issue, I want to ask the group for clarification for a slightly different application. Please bear with me for some assistance, I’d sure appreciate it!<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I am working on someone else’s model that has had comments back from GBCI for a LEED project. The model came to me in detailed mode. They note that in the baseline model apparently non-90.1 baseline efficiencies were used. Looking at the model, it does seem that the modeler manually entered efficiencies (they are in red) and they do not seem to be correct (even the GBCI comment notes this). They are less efficient than 90.1. In some of the similar threads on this topic, someone mentioned that you can revert to autosizing by right clicking on the heating and cooling capacity and selecting “restore default”. Since the modeler did not manually input system size, just system efficiency (both cooling and heating hp eff, fan design kw/cfm and total eff frac seem to be manually entered), my question is if I restore those efficiency values to default (using right clicking), will Equest use the proper efficiencies and I’m good to ho? I’ve done this, and it seems to work, although I’m not experienced enough to truly verify this. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>When I compare the two models (original base and my reverted base) I do see where the power demand has dropped (SV-A), and none of the peak loads have changed (LS-A) but the equipment sizing (SV-A) has increased. This all seems correct, do others think I am on track here? Using the correct methodology?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>If I can also confirm another question, LEED specific. I understand 90.1 is the only appropriate base case for LEED even in Washington state, even if portions of their energy code are more stringent, correct? The requirement to achieve a 10% reduction is how I think LEED addresses more stringent state codes so the base doesn’t need to be written specific to those (numerous) state codes. Correct? One comment from the client leads me to think that complying with WA code might explain the difference in equipment efficiencies used in the base case, and even though it doesn’t add up I want to confirm my understanding.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Another issue that further confuses this is that the modeler apparently chose two of the systems to be variable speed (all are system type 4, constant volume in 90.1) and I’m not sure why. The original modeler is not available for questioning. Any ideas? The VFD’s were applied to an office space and data/server room packaged heat pumps, but not a large storage space. Based on what I know right now, it seems those should be modeled constant volume. If I’m updating the base model, I think it makes sense to correct this if the base incorrectly models a more efficient system.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Lastly, can anyone tell me how to change the project descriptor at the top left of the sim reports? It’s got some boilerplate name and it sure would be nice to have the filename show, or at least a single descriptor I can update in each model run.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Thanks so much-<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Laura<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><br><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Equest-users mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre>To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to <a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><o:p></o:p></pre><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>