<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19298"></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT size=2>
<P><FONT size=3 face=Calibri>Lee,</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face=Calibri>Your outputs show cooling savings around 13% and
heating savings 3.5%. As others have suggested earlier, you need to take a look
at every end-use separately. The heating </FONT><FONT size=3
face=Calibri>consumption in this project is driving your total energy
consumption, as heating represents 55% of your total. I would take a look at
measures that might save your heating energy consumption.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Calibri><FONT size=3><SPAN
class=668233614-23082012>One</SPAN> thing I noticed is that you are
assuming almost 90% occupancy 24/7 in this project. This is not typical of a
residential building. Most of your other schedules (for e.g. heating, lighting,
plug loads) follow<SPAN class=668233614-23082012> </SPAN>similar patterns too. I
would take a closer look at these, unless of course these are intentionally set
high.</FONT></FONT></P>
<P></FONT><FONT size=3><FONT face=Calibri>And I did not see any improvements on
the walls or roofs. Just on the glazing.<SPAN class=668233614-23082012>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><FONT face=Calibri><SPAN class=668233614-23082012></SPAN>Best of
luck<SPAN class=668233614-23082012>.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></P></DIV><BR>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT size=2 face=Tahoma><B>From:</B> Lee Chorney
[mailto:leec@alliedconsulting.net] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, August 22, 2012
4:50 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Umesh Atre<BR><B>Cc:</B>
equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Equest-users] Huge
envelope changes having small affect onenergy savings<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>That is correct it is a 4 story residential building. I did a
parametric run were I changed the Air Chang per hour and U-values for the
windows and wall. I only saw a five percent energy savings when I thought with
such a drastic change (Wall R value from 4 to 30), the difference would be much
better. I have attached the file as a rar.<BR><BR>Thanks in
advance,<BR><BR>Lee<BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Umesh Atre <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:umesh@innovativedesign.net"
target=_blank>umesh@innovativedesign.net</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote><U></U>
<DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial><SPAN>Could you also
share the equest pd2 files so that someone may take a look at the
output?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial><SPAN>From the input
files, it looks like the only changes you have are on the u-value and
air-changes/hr (?). No change on the wall/roof
construction.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial><SPAN>Also, looks like
you are modeling a 3-4 story residential building.</SPAN></FONT><FONT
color=#0000ff face=Arial></FONT><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us align=left>
<HR>
<FONT face=Tahoma>
<DIV class=im><B>From:</B> <A
href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org"
target=_blank>equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</A> [mailto:<A
href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org"
target=_blank>equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</A>] <B>On Behalf Of
</B>Lee Chorney<BR></DIV><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, August 22, 2012 3:43
PM<BR><B>To:</B> <A href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org"
target=_blank>equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</A><BR><B>Subject:</B> Re:
[Equest-users] Huge envelope changes having small affect onenergy
savings<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=h5>
<DIV></DIV>Hi Guys,<BR><BR>Here all the .inp files. 1.inp is the base and
2.inp is the proposed.<BR><BR>Thank you,<BR><BR>Lee<BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Lee Chorney <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:leec@alliedconsulting.net"
target=_blank>leec@alliedconsulting.net</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>Hi All,<BR><BR><BR>I recently did a model where I had the
same system in both base and proposed but I changed the R-Value from 4
(base) to 20 (proposed). I also changed the window U-value from .80 (base)
to .35 (proposed). After I did the run, I saw only a 5% savings between the
heating and cooling use in the model. When I looked at the loads I saw the
base had twice as much cooling and heating load than the proposed. Does any
know why the energy savings would only be 5% when you have a huge difference
between the cooling and heating
loads?<BR><BR>Thanks,<BR><BR>Lee<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></BODY></HTML>