<DIV>Hi,Dan</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The comment is a full version,no context missing!I also feel very strange with it.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial Narrow; COLOR: #909090">------------------</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 14px; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; COLOR: #000">
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#3366ff size=2><STRONG>Yongqing Zhao</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><STRONG><FONT color=#006600>Changsha Green Building & Energy Saving Technology CO.,LTD<BR></FONT></STRONG><FONT color=#3366ff>NO.438,Shaoshan Road,Changsha,Hunan,China<BR>Telephone:13574805636</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#3366ff size=2>Email:zhaoyongqing1987@126.com</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> <SPAN>503271081@qq.com</SPAN></FONT> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial Narrow; PADDING-BOTTOM: 2px; PADDING-TOP: 2px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BACKGROUND: #efefef; PADDING-BOTTOM: 8px; PADDING-TOP: 8px; PADDING-LEFT: 8px; PADDING-RIGHT: 8px">
<DIV><B>发件人:</B> "Daniel Knapp";<danielk@arborus.ca>;</DIV>
<DIV><B>发送时间:</B> 2015年5月25日(星期一) 凌晨1:34</DIV>
<DIV><B>收件人:</B> "Nicholas Caton"<ncaton@catonenergy.com>; <WBR></DIV>
<DIV><B>抄送:</B> "赵永青"<zhaoyongqing1987@qq.com>; "Julien Marrec"<julien.marrec@gmail.com>; "equest-users@lists.onebuilding"<equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org>; <WBR></DIV>
<DIV><B>主题:</B> Re: [Equest-users] 回复：RE: Reply： The problem of minimum equipment efficiency requirement of Ashrae 90.1-2007</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I'm with Nick. I find the GBCI reviewer comment as reported to be a bit strange and I wonder if there is some context missing. Is it possible that the seasonal efficiency was much lower than 80% in the baseline, suggesting either oversizing of the baseline boilers or a curve that is different from the proposed curve? </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Best,</DIV>
<DIV>Dan</DIV>
<DIV><BR>
<DIV>—</DIV>
<DIV>Sent from my phone</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR>On May 24, 2015, at 11:38 AM, Nicholas Caton <<A href="mailto:ncaton@catonenergy.com">ncaton@catonenergy.com</A>> wrote:<BR><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">I’m happy you are arriving at the same result, however to be clear I do not think the reviewer is correct to assert the prescribed efficiency is anything other than the full-load efficiency.</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Follow the cited Test Procedure CFR 431 led me to:</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><A href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/10/431.86">https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/10/431.86</A></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in"><I><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">“§ 431.86 (c) (3) (ii) Thermal Efficiency. Use the calculation procedure for the thermal efficiency test specified in Section 11.1 of the HI BTS-2000, Rev 06.07 (incorporated by reference, see§ 431.85).”</SPAN></I></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">I then found the referenced HI standard here (PDF link): <A href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB8QFjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Flaw.resource.org%2Fpub%2Fus%2Fcfr%2Fibr%2F004%2Fhi.BTS-2000.2007.pdf&ei=R-dhVZr3FoffoASKxYC4Bw&usg=AFQjCNGb2HahzcO_Q-BftBzCugY5sPtifg&sig2=k1fojL9GcpjnN6T2fdzOug">https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB8QFjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Flaw.resource.org%2Fpub%2Fus%2Fcfr%2Fibr%2F004%2Fhi.BTS-2000.2007.pdf&ei=R-dhVZr3FoffoASKxYC4Bw&usg=AFQjCNGb2HahzcO_Q-BftBzCugY5sPtifg&sig2=k1fojL9GcpjnN6T2fdzOug</A></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">In that standard, section 5 reads:</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: "><B><SPAN>5.0 TYPES OF TESTS</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: "><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">5.1 </SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Thermal Efficiency Test</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: "><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Shall consist of a test point conducted at 100% ± 2% of the nameplate boiler input. The test shall</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: "><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">yield a complete accounting of the energy input in terms of output and losses.</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: "><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">5.2 </SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Combustion Efficiency Test</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in; TEXT-AUTOSPACE: "><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Shall consist of a test point conducted at 100% ± 2% of the input to the boiler and shall yield an</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">accounting of energy input in terms of products of combustion only.</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">From this, it is clear Et and Ec as prescribed by 90.1 are only the efficiencies as measured at full load. The test procedures following under section 9 deliberately exclude the effects of warmup/standby (equipment is made to warm up and arrive at the mandated operating conditions prior to measurements).</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Section 11.1 of the standard prescribes all the calculations required, including Et = 100*Q</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 8pt">OUT</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> / Q</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 8pt">IN</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> , however the preceding sections makes clear we are in no way standardizing part load performance or warmup/standby performance.</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Rounding back to 90.1… section 6.4.1.1 further cements the notion (“packaged boilers” fall under 1992 EPACT):</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><IMG id=_x0000_i1028 border=0 src="cid:6F92315D@3C151328.D26F6255" width=398 height=337><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">All this reinforces the point that 90.1 simply does not prescribe part load performance for baseline boilers. To perform a simulation in compliance with Appendix G the onus is upon the energy modeler to make reasonable, defensible assumptions on that front. I don’t see how forcing full-load efficiencies at all part-load conditions and removing standby/startup operation energies is more reasonable or reflects reality better than the defaults. </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">If this is a new GBCI position they plan to hard-line on, then I would speculate it would be equally fair (albeit far more unrealistic for condensing cases) to give your proposed boilers the same treatment… extra work for a step backwards from reality…?</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Thoughts?</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">~Nick</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt">NICK CATON, P.E.</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><BR></SPAN><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Owner</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Caton Energy Consulting</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><BR></SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> 1150 N. 192<SUP>nd</SUP> St., #4-202</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> Shoreline, WA 98133<BR> office: 785.410.3317</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><A><SPAN style="COLOR: #561782">www.catonenergy.com</SPAN></A></SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN><SPAN lang=ZH-CN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: SimSun">冷面寒枪</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> [mailto:<A href="mailto:zhaoyongqing1987@qq.com">zhaoyongqing1987@qq.com</A>] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, May 24, 2015 7:13 AM<BR><B>To:</B> Nicholas Caton; Julien Marrec<BR><B>Cc:</B> <A href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding">equest-users@lists.onebuilding</A><BR><B>Subject:</B> </SPAN><SPAN lang=ZH-CN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: SimSun">回复：</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">RE: [Equest-users] Reply</SPAN><SPAN lang=ZH-CN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: SimSun">：</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> The problem of minimum equipment efficiency requirement of Ashrae 90.1-2007</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Hi,Nick</SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> Than you for your insight!</SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> Except default curve and start up time, Min-Ratio also will result in discrepancy between annual equivalent HIR and nominal HIR. After I revised curve ,set start-time and Min-Ratio to 0,and hourly report and PS-C report indicate that the annual equivalent HIR is accord with nominal HIR</SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> </SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">------------------</SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><STRONG><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Yongqing Zhao</SPAN></STRONG><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt"></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><STRONG><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Changsha Green Building & Energy Saving Technology CO.,LTD</SPAN></STRONG><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><BR></SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">NO.438,Shaoshan Road,Changsha,Hunan,China<BR>Telephone:13574805636</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt"></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><A href="mailto:Email%3Azhaoyongqing1987@126.com">Email:zhaoyongqing1987@126.com</A></SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt"></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> <A href="mailto:503271081@qq.com">503271081@qq.com</A></SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt"> </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">------------------ </SPAN><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">原始</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">邮</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">件</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> ------------------</SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: #efefef"><B><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">发</SPAN></B><B><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">件人</SPAN></B><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">:</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> "Nicholas Caton";<<A href="mailto:ncaton@catonenergy.com">ncaton@catonenergy.com</A>>;</SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: #efefef"><B><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">发</SPAN></B><B><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">送</SPAN></B><B><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">时间</SPAN></B><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">:</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> 2015</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">年</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">5</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">月</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">24</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">日</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">(</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">星期天</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">) </SPAN><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">晚上</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">9:53</SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: #efefef"><B><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">收件人</SPAN></B><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">:</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> "</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">赵</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">永青</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">"<<A href="mailto:503271081@qq.com">503271081@qq.com</A>>; "Julien Marrec"<<A href="mailto:julien.marrec@gmail.com">julien.marrec@gmail.com</A>>; </SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: #efefef"><B><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">抄送</SPAN></B><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">:</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> "<A href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding">equest-users@lists.onebuilding</A>"<<A href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</A>>; </SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: #efefef"><B><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">主</SPAN></B><B><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">题</SPAN></B><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">:</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> RE: [Equest-users] Reply</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">：</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> The problem of minimum equipment efficiency requirement of Ashrae 90.1-2007</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>I received some similar review language very recently suggesting 80% efficiency is expected at all/most part load conditions for the baseline boiler…. Similar context in that case with the boiler rarely operating near full load.</P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>My comment has other issues that would cloud the topic at-hand, but here is truncated version:</P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">“…Furthermore, the average boiler efficiencies in the Baseline PS-C output reports, calculated by dividing the boiler energy consumption by the annual boiler heating energy generated was… [approximately 5% lower than the nominal efficiency input & documented]. Revise the baseline boiler efficiency to 80% and revise the boiler curve for the Baseline case as necessary to have an average efficiency that is near 80%. Provide updated PS-C reports for the Baseline confirming that the average baseline efficiency is near 80%.”</P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>This is the first time I have run into commentary checking up on PS-C’s output at all, and I’m using the same library curves as always for typical baseline boilers. </P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>I believe the PS-C discrepancy is explained both by the non-flat library curve and by the boiler’s default start-up loads, in combination.</P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Here is the default library curve – it is (roughly, but not quite) linear:</P>
<P class=MsoNormal><image002.png></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><image003.png></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>[For those unfamiliar, the Y-axis is a unitless multiplier] </P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>If I’m not mistaken, this curve serves double-duty: it simultaneously applies the hourly PLR to the full capacity (as either input or auto-sized) and also accounts for increased HIR (lower efficiency) as the PLR drops. My understanding in equation form:</P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Energy Consumed (for the hour) = (Boiler full capacity as input/autosized) * (Boiler nominal HIR input @ full load) * HIRf(PLR)</P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>If all of that is true, a perfectly “flat efficiency” curve, returning your nominal input HIR at all efficiencies, would therefore be Z = X. That’s plotted above for reference with a light/thin line. </P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Even with such a “flat efficiency” curve applied to a test-case, PS-C’s outputs still suggest an annual equivalent HIR higher than the nominal input. Zeroing out the startup/standby inputs as well is required to get PS-C to report your nominal HIR = annual fuel / annual load:</P>
<P class=MsoNormal><IMG id=Picture_x0020_5 border=0 src="cid:2CC43B98@3C151328.D26F6255" width=585 height=179></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>I think the correct response (which perhaps I’ve mostly composed above) is to demonstrate the causes (library curve shape, startup/standby defaults), and to assert these are all appropriately applied to the baseline boiler, though <U>none of this is regulated by 90.1</U> to the best of my knowledge so it might be relatively shaky territory. </P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>I would wager 90% of all eQuest baseline boilers submitted to GBCI to date probably don’t mess with the library curves or standby/startup inputs, but that’s pure speculation on my part.</P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Has anybody ever tried to explain/justify the default boiler curve and default startup/standby inputs? Do we know where those defaults come from?</P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>~Nick</P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B>NICK CATON, P.E.</B><BR><B>Owner</B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B> </B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B>Caton Energy Consulting</B><BR> 1150 N. 192<SUP>nd</SUP> St., #4-202</P>
<P class=MsoNormal> Shoreline, WA 98133<BR> office: 785.410.3317</P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #561782"><A href="http://www.catonenergy.com/">www.catonenergy.com</A></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B>From:</B> Equest-users [mailto:<A href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</A>] <B>On Behalf Of </B>???<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, May 24, 2015 5:34 AM<BR><B>To:</B> Julien Marrec<BR><B>Cc:</B> <A href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding">equest-users@lists.onebuilding</A><BR><B>Subject:</B> [Equest-users] Reply<SPAN lang=ZH-CN style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: SimSun">：</SPAN> The problem of minimum equipment efficiency requirement of Ashrae 90.1-2007</P>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Hi,<SPAN class=grn>Julien </SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>I understand his meaning is keep a constant efficiency and I know the flat efficiency in equest is a curve that is y=x, but I can't confirm if a constant efficiency is Ashrae 90.1-2007's original intent.</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>------------------</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><STRONG>Yongqing Zhao</STRONG></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><STRONG>Changsha Green Building & Energy Saving Technology CO.,LTD</STRONG><B><BR></B>NO.438,Shaoshan Road,Changsha,Hunan,China<BR>Telephone:13574805636</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><A href="mailto:Email%3Azhaoyongqing1987@126.com">Email:zhaoyongqing1987@126.com</A></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <A href="mailto:503271081@qq.com">503271081@qq.com</A> </P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>------------------ <SPAN lang=JA>原始</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA>邮</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA>件</SPAN> ------------------</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: #efefef"><B><SPAN lang=JA>发</SPAN></B><B><SPAN lang=JA>件人</SPAN></B><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">:</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> "Julien Marrec";<<A href="mailto:julien.marrec@gmail.com">julien.marrec@gmail.com</A>>;</SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: #efefef"><B><SPAN lang=JA>发</SPAN></B><B><SPAN lang=JA>送</SPAN></B><B><SPAN lang=JA>时间</SPAN></B><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">:</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> 2015</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA>年</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">5</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA>月</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">24</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA>日</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">(</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA>星期天</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">) </SPAN><SPAN lang=JA>晚上</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">8:19</SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: #efefef"><B><SPAN lang=JA>收件人</SPAN></B><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">:</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> "</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA>赵</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA>永青</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">"<<A href="mailto:503271081@qq.com">503271081@qq.com</A>>; </SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: #efefef"><B><SPAN lang=JA>抄送</SPAN></B><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">:</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> "<A href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding">equest-users@lists.onebuilding</A>"<<A href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</A>>; </SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: #efefef"><B><SPAN lang=JA>主</SPAN></B><B><SPAN lang=JA>题</SPAN></B><B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">:</SPAN></B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"> Re: [Equest-users] The problem of minimum equipment efficiency requirement of Ashrae 90.1-2007</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Hey,</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>He's saying that you need to make sure that the curve boiler-fPLR gives you a constant efficiency. As far as I remember, the default atmospheric curve from equest is like this.</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Don't be confused by "flat". A flat efficiency curve is when you plot efficiency=f(PLR). In equest, it should be a curve that is y=x</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Look at the curve you used.</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Best,</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Julien</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><BR>Envoyé de mon iPhone</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><BR>Le 24 mai 2015 à 11:27, "<SPAN lang=JA>赵</SPAN><SPAN lang=JA>永青</SPAN>" <<A href="mailto:503271081@qq.com">503271081@qq.com</A>> a écrit :</P></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt; MARGIN-TOP: 5pt">
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>I get the energy model comments from LEED reviewer as following:</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>The narrative response indicates that the Baseline boiler has been modeled utilizing operating performance curves and a boiler HIR of 1.25. However, since the boiler operation HIR is based on the performance curves, the HIR is less than 1.25 in the part-load condition, which is inappropriate. Revise the Baseline boilers to include a flat efficiency of 80% for all part-loads. Provide eQuest input files or screen shots verifying the boiler efficiency has been modeled as required.</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <<A href="mailto:545E22AD@FA528147.9F996155">545E22AD@FA528147.9F996155</A>></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>However, I can not understand it very much. The minimum equipment efficiency requirement(80 % Et) of Ashrae 90.1-2007 should be base on full load condition.Why the LEED reviewer raise such a question?Any insight is appreciate!!</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Thanks</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>------------------</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><STRONG>Yongqing Zhao</STRONG></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><STRONG>Changsha Green Building & Energy Saving Technology CO.,LTD</STRONG><B><BR></B>NO.438,Shaoshan Road,Changsha,Hunan,China<BR>Telephone:13574805636</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Email:zhaoyongqing1987@<A href="http://126.com/">126.com</A></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <A href="mailto:503271081@qq.com">503271081@qq.com</A> </P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> </P></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5pt; MARGIN-TOP: 5pt">
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>_______________________________________________<BR>Equest-users mailing list<BR><A href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org">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></P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV><SPAN>_______________________________________________</SPAN><BR><SPAN>Equest-users mailing list</SPAN><BR><SPAN><A href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</A></SPAN><BR><SPAN>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></SPAN><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV></DIV></DIV>