<i style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"> a 10.0 EER packaged DX unit with efficiencies entered in the wizard is shown in the detailed interface with a cooling-only EIR of 0.2878 </i><i style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"> ,but in your SV-A report ,cooling EIR is 0.310(EIR=11.0<11.86),larger than</i><i style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"> 0.2878 (EER = 11.86) in eQUEST detail interface.So the GBCI reviewer think your calculation is not correct.</i><div><br></div><div><br></div><div style="font-size: 12px;font-family: Arial Narrow;padding:2px 0 2px 0;">------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------</div><div style="font-size: 12px;background:#efefef;padding:8px;"><div><b>发件人:</b> "Ting Wang"<wangting.ioz@gmail.com>; </div><div><b>发送时间:</b> 2013年5月27日(星期一) 下午4:35</div><div><b>收件人:</b> "equest-users"<equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org>; </div><div><b>主题:</b> Re: [Equest-users] Cooling EIR and Supply Fan Energy broken downfor PVAV w/ PFP (System 6)</div></div><div><br></div><div dir="ltr">Sorry, the screen cap was's very clear.<div><br></div><div><img src="cid:36B6CFBF@6A728222.671DA351 sample_1_.jpg" style=""><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><img src="cid:36B6CFC0@6A728222.671DA351 sample.jpg" style=""><br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Ting Wang <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wangting.ioz@gmail.com" target="_blank">wangting.ioz@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">Dear eQuest folks,<div><br></div><div><div>The following comment turned up twice in the preliminary and final design phase review. </div><div><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><br>
</span></div><div><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><i>The SV-A reports indicates that the cooling efficiencies for the HVAC systems
were not correctly reflected in the Baseline model and the supply fan energy
has not been broken out as required. The response narrative to the Preliminary
Review comment number 1 indicates that the cooling efficiencies were
recalculated and then entered in the Wizard; however as stated in the
Preliminary Review, eQUEST performs this step automatically between the wizard
and detailed interface (for example, a 10.0 EER packaged DX unit with
efficiencies entered in the wizard is shown in the detailed interface with a
cooling-only EIR of 0.2878 (EER = 11.86)) Section G3.1.2.1 requires that where
efficiency ratings, such as EER and COP, include fan energy, the descriptor
shall be broken down into its components so that supply fan energy can be
modeled separately. Note that the cooling efficiency without the fan power is
typically rated higher than when the fan power is included as a component in
the rated efficiency If appealing this prerequisite, revise the Baseline model
so that fans have been broken out separately from the cooling EIR indicates in
the SV-A report. </i></span><br></div><div><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><i><br></i></span></div><div><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">I attach the sample SV-A and SV-B report below. I modeled this type 6 baseline system using a PIU, which, based on my digging in the archived mailing list, is the closest way to model a VAV system with PFP boxes. The cooling EIR was automatically generated in eQuest assuming the supply fan energy (ARI 340/360) was subtracted from EER 10. Actually, in the previous comment response, I calculated cooling EIR using two approaches found in the archived mails (ARI and non-ARI conditions). But our reviews tended to neglect the narratives and focus on how to confirm </span><span style="font-size:16px">the supply fan energy has been broken out per G3.1.2.1, although the SV-B report already showed the modeled PFan.</span></div>
<div><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><i><br></i></span></div><div><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><i><img src="cid:36B6CFBF@6A728222.671DA351 sample.jpg" width="420" height="138"><img src="cid:36B6CFC0@6A728222.671DA351 sample_1_.jpg" width="420" height="96"><br>
</i></span></div><div><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Any ideas on what additional proof documents I need to provide to meet the reviewer's requirements?</span></div><div>
<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div>Thanks</div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">-- <br><b><font color="#333399">王 亭<br>Ting Wang / Environment Consultant</font></b><div><b><font color="#333399">BEIJING EVENDESIGN LTD.</font></b><br>
<b><font color="#333399">T:</font></b> +86 10 8776 5074 - 801<br>
<font color="#333399"><b>M:</b> </font>+86 13910854291<br><b><font color="#333399">E: </font></b><a href="mailto:wangting.ioz@gmail.com" target="_blank">wangting.ioz@gmail.com</a></div>
</font></span></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><b><font color="#333399">王 亭<br>Ting Wang / Environment Consultant</font></b><div><b><font color="#333399">BEIJING EVENDESIGN LTD.</font></b><br><b><font color="#333399">T:</font></b> +86 10 8776 5074 - 801<br>
<font color="#333399"><b>M:</b> </font>+86 13910854291<br><b><font color="#333399">E: </font></b><a href="mailto:wangting.ioz@gmail.com" target="_blank">wangting.ioz@gmail.com</a></div>
</div></div></div>