<div dir="ltr"><div>I see. Thanks for this information. When I model the cooling season separately in another file with economizer and without energy recovery, then I am avoiding having to use these inefficient motors, which saves energy. Can we say that modeling cooling season with no energy recovery is a good idea then? Can you think of any problem that might arise with this approach? Would you please let me know?</div>
<div> </div><div>Thank you very much,</div><div>Best Regards,</div><div> </div><div>Simge Andolsun, PhD.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Patrick J. O'Leary, Jr. <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:poleary1969@gmail.com" target="_blank">poleary1969@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 text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
a delta t of "0" will make it run all of the time. i.e. erv supply
fan motor, exhaust motor, and wheel motor. and these motors aren't
typically very efficient.<div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
On 11/14/13 1:36 PM, Simge Andolsun wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Dear Patrick,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks for your response. I actually had set my schedule to
OA Exhaust DT when get these results. The delta T I used was
"0" so that the system would benefit from every bit of
temperature difference. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div>Best Regards,</div>
<div>S. Andolsun</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 2:32 PM,
Patrick J. O'Leary, Jr. <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:poleary1969@gmail.com" target="_blank">poleary1969@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" 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">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> how are you
controlling the erv/energy recovery? the default is for
it to run when the supply fan runs. this will cost you
more in energy than it saves. set the control method
based on a delta T between the exhaust air and the outside
air you'll see the savings in cooling mode. in my climate
zone (2b/southern arizona) the best delta t i found is 27
d f.<br>
<br>
once you set up the erv to run based on a delta t you can
set up some parametric runs (set up one & then copy
& rename it in the .inp file to save time) to try
different delta t values without having to change each
hvac unit every time you want to try a different delta t.
<div>
<div><br>
<br>
On 11/14/13 12:30 PM, Simge Andolsun wrote: </div>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Dear eQuest users,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>In my models, I realized that using energy
recovery in the cooling season always gives
higher cooling energy consumption results than
turning off the energy recovery and using
economizer only instead. I tried using OA
Heat/Cool with Bypass OA or Bypass
Exhaust thinking that such configuration would
capture the best benefit of energy recovery and
let the outside/exhaust air bypass when
economizer is more beneficial. Then, I read in
the eQuest manuals that this configuration
still lets the energy recovery run when it is
not beneficial in warm months and just opens up
the economizer dampers to compensate for
the unnecessary heating of the outside air. So,
the loss caused by the energy recovery eats up
the benefit that is provided with the
economizer.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thus, I thought, may be, I should use two
separate files to maximize the benefit from both
the economizer and the energy recovery. The
first file would be for heating (with OA
Heating) where the energy recovery would be on
whenever it can heat the outside air. Then the
second file would be for cooling where there
would be no energy recovery but the economizer
would be available whenever the outside air is
favorable for cooling. Finally, I would get
heating energy consumption from the heating file
and the cooling energy consumption from the
cooling file. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>The only thing that stops me from following
this approach is that I am wondering whether
there was a logical reason why bypass
configurations of eQuest give higher cooling
energy consumption than the economizer only
case. Shouldn't they be giving exactly the same
cooling energy consumption? Is it because part
of the outside/exhaust air is being bypassed in
the bypass configurations instead of fully? or
may it be because it is known that setting the
energy recovery and economizer for the best
benefit is pretty hard in reality and that's
why it was assumed that it would not
function ideally? Or, is there a completely
different reason that I do not know?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Would you please help me with this question?</div>
<div>I'd appreciate it very much.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div>Best Regards,</div>
<div>S. Andolsun, PhD</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Equest-users mailing list
<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>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to <a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>