<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 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@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;}
/* 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;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@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 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'>I wanted to follow up on this issue, as I received some clarification from the USGBC reviewer. Also, this project is pursuing LEED for Homes certification, not one of the commercial ratings, so this won’t apply to all LEED projects. <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'>Under LEED for Homes, given some of the ambiguity of Table G3.1.1A, one may model the whole building as “Residential”, Systems 1 or 2. There is the option to go with a direct read of the table and use System 7 for the common spaces, but I will not be pursuing it.<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'>Since this building has a Proposed Design with DOAS (fossil fuel heat) and split system heat pumps (electric heat) in the apartments, the HVAC system type is considered hybrid, and my baseline systems will be System 1 throughout the building. <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’t say I am not pleased by this direction, as it makes for a much simpler modeling process, but it will likely create some savings issues with the fan power for the DOAS in the Proposed Design, as well as the differences in fuel cost for electric vs. gas. <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'>Thanks for the feedback. This was a fun refresher on the ins and outs of Appendix G for me.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></a></p><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"'> r s [mailto:ramyashivkumar@gmail.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 02, 2013 4:53 PM<br><b>To:</b> Robert Stephenson<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] Residential Baseline HVAC System Type (Not Again)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Hi Robert,<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Here are some questions that maybe worth considering before you decide and my take on this issue.<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>What is the total area of the project? What portion are the corridors?<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>If its a 30 story residential building- I would say your approach with the system classification ( System 1 & system 7) is fine. Note that system 1 and 7 is when the building uses fossil fuel.<o:p></o:p></p><div><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Note that corridors are considered non-residential and so can technically also be modeled as System 3 as well. I have presented both scenarios successfully.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>The bottom line is to have the same OA supplied to each zone/ apartment and so you dont necessarily have to duplicate a DOAS in the Baseline but include preheat or dehumidifcation at each baseline system to keep it the same if necssary. Therefore you dont have to model exhaust recovery as well in the Baseline model. Also note that incase you do model DOAS no extra fan power allowance can be taken for the DOAS system (as in no double counting this OA). <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>With regards to different fuel for the apartment versus corridors, there is an ASHRAE interpretation for hybrid buildings which you can read to understand if it should be system 2 and system 7 or system 2 and system 8. This has mainly to do with what the majority heat source in your building is in terms of area and capacity. However, note that if make up air units also provide ventilation to the apartments. If they do then your apartment is hybrid.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Hope this helps.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Ramya<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Robert Stephenson <<a href="mailto:rstephenson@veic.org" target="_blank">rstephenson@veic.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>I have reviewed the list archives on this issue and found some conflicting opinions for residential buildings. To give some background, I am working on a model for a large adaptive reuse project that includes the conversion of a warehouse building to residential apartments. The proposed design includes split system heat pumps in the units (Electric Heat) and several RTUs (fossil fuel heat) serving as DOASs w/ energy recovery conditioning the corridor spaces and supplying/exhausting air from the residential apartment spaces. The corridor spaces exceed 25,000 square feet and 5 floors. I have the proposed design squared away, but I was hoping for an endorsement of my approach to the baseline before reconfiguring almost everything under my air-side HVAC tab.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>For the baseline systems my strict reading of Table G3.1.1A along with the exceptions under G3.1.1 would indicate that for my baseline design I would do the following:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>-Apartment spaces: System 2 PTHP.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>-Corridor spaces: System 7 VAV w/ Reheat. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>I am hesitant to plunge forward, as System 7 seems an unrealistic baseline for this application. I am also a bit confused as to how I should model the outside air delivery in my baseline. I believe I should deliver outside air via the central systems as I did in the proposed design rather than directly at the PTHP in each unit. Since the building is in Climate Zone 3A, I would not include an economizer, but I might have to include exhaust air heat recovery for cooling if the design supply air capacity for these systems exceeds 5,000 CFM, per G3.1.2.10. Am I interpreting that correctly?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>To top it off, there was also a school of thought within the archives that one should model the whole baseline building with System 2 for this situation. It would certainly be less complicated, but create issues around fuel use type and fan power.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Any feedback is much appreciated.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Robert Stephenson<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Technical Energy Analyst<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Evaluation, Measurement & Verification Services<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><b>Vermont Energy Investment Corporation</b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><a href="mailto:rstephenson@veic.org" target="_blank">rstephenson@veic.org</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><a href="tel:%28802%29%20540-7886" target="_blank">(802) 540-7886</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><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">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>