<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>Here I am trying to keep the "chain letter" going :-)</p>
<p>Nick has hit upon something that's a bit of a sore spot for me,
i.e., modeling buildings by the intent or rationalization of a
building policy, rather than documentation of how buildings
actually behave. I've always been skeptical of this
"pressurization == no infiltration" claim that I've heard going
all the way back to the early 1980s. I can see how pressurization
might keep out infiltration, but wouldn't it then result in
exfiltration, which would be a net loss of conditioned air that
needs to be made up by the air handler? <br>
</p>
<p>The most rigid application of what I call "modeling by intent"
was when I introduced the use of DOE-2 for a new residential
building energy standard in China. When the topic got to be
infiltration, I heard that should be set at 1.0 ACH, which was
mandated as the amount of fresh air needed to an occupied space,
although no equipment nor technology was mentioned for maintaining
such a steady flow of air. It must be "smart air". as one
reviewer commented at a critique in Arizona upon seeing an
architect's drawing with arrows bringing in natural ventilation
horizontally into a building...</p>
<p>Joe<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="90">Joe Huang
White Box Technologies, Inc.
346 Rheem Blvd., Suite 205A
Moraga CA 94556
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://weather.whiteboxtechnologies.com">http://weather.whiteboxtechnologies.com</a> for simulation-ready weather data
(o) (925)388-0265
(c) (510)928-2683
"building energy simulations at your fingertips"
</pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/15/2017 3:23 PM, Nicholas Caton
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:AMXPR04MB247A9BD10D1E432CCC7A3E0B6270@AMXPR04MB247.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]-->
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@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;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
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;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle25
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle26
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle27
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle28
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle29
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle30
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:497576584;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-387932184 67698711 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-text:"%1\)";
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:836194086;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-498945012 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l2
{mso-list-id:1001009814;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-2072475348 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l2:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l2:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l2:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l3
{mso-list-id:1645045461;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:1348376220 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l3:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l3:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l3:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">I
feel like expanding
<s>just a little</s> (<i>who am I kidding?</i>) on Maria’s
quote from the PNNL guidelines’ document regarding
infiltration schedules:
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">“</span></i><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt">The total building infiltration
schedule fraction will be 1.0 when all heating,
ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems are off
and 0.25 when the HVAC systems are in operation.”</span></i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">1.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">For
extra context: That report details an exploration of
options to constructively translate 90.1 envelope
subcommittee advice concerning baseline overall air
infiltration quantities (1.8 CFM/ft2 @ 75Pa) into a
procedure and set of inputs appropriate for usage with
energyplus 3.1+. The above quote, if I am not mistaken,
actually sources from the SSPC 90.1 Envelope Subcommittee…
if not by direct citation. I would not aim any specific
concerns about this prescriptive language at those authors.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">2.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">The
<u>effects</u> of such a fractional schedule (uniformly for
both energyplus and in doe-2, at least) would be to:
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level2
lfo3">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">a.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">reduce
naturally driven infiltration (as determined each interval
between wind / temperature / stack effects) by 75% when
HVAC = ON<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level2
lfo3">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">b.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">not
modify naturally driven infiltration when HVAC = OFF<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">3.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">The
<u>purpose</u> of such a reduction is to (in broad strokes)
represent the effects of aggregate building pressurization
as is typically intended with new commercial HVAC design.
If my building interior is positively pressurized relative
to the exterior, less air should infiltrate in.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">4.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">This
reduction as prescribed is intended to occur every hour that
fans achieving building pressurization are in operation.
24/7 = correct for multifamily with centrally-driven
ventilation/pressurization (typical multifamily design for
some locales, but not in all markets).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">5.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">To
the best of my knowledge, 75%
<u>is a dart on the wall</u>. I’m not aware of any study
that informed this directly, but it follows logic that
generally infiltration still happens with pressurized
buildings, sometimes, so any aggregate reduction should
remain under 100%. I’m personally convinced there is no
single number that would be appropriately applied to all
buildings/systems, however. Indeed situations exist where
the systems in operation actually de-pressurize the building
interior and would therefore
<u>amplify</u> infiltration (by design, coincidence, or
accident). <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">This
same schedule however is
<u>also</u> the primary vector to factor in “higher than
design state” naturally driven infiltration. This occurs
for example in scenarios where buildings that have doors
that could open for people to enter and exit. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">So
what is this “design state?” Depends on who you ask - I’d
offer 2 perspectives:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">1.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Open
windows & doors are not normally considered by
well-meaning mechanical engineers designing for building
pressurization. If I may reach a bit (I’m sure I cannot
speak for everyone), the broad assumption is that doors,
windows, and other openings are considered in an effectively
closed state
<u>most</u> of the time, and when they are open all bets are
off. While we can compartmentalize and try to mitigate the
effects, we cannot generally design buildings to be
effectively pressurized to combat infiltration on a macro
level while many doors/windows are open, else those doors
would never close and the windows would whistle all day.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">2.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From
a prescriptive/compliance M+V perspective, leakage through
windows and doors are for practical reasons deliberately
excluded to ensure the air-tightness of the rest of the
envelope assembly is what’s being measured in isolation (I’m
sure this varies based on locally prescribed/normal
protocol). Such openings are taped/sealed off to ensure
they do not impact blower door testing results.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">I
suspect this phenomenon of building operation (operable
doors/windows) was for justifications including the above
<u>also</u> not a concern of the envelope committee when
prescribing infiltration schedule factors no higher than 1.0
during occupied/unoccupied hours. …And that’s
<u>totally fine</u> for those interested in setting an
arbitrary bar for something like compliance
modeling/testing: By the book, that reality has been pushed
off the table for discussion and so shouldn’t be a concern
or part of the conversation (unless someone with a big stick
changes their mind on the matter).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">The
reality of operable doors/windows
<u>can</u> however be a meaningful thing to miss if you are
trying to calibrate and/or determine realistic savings
potential for directly-affected ECM scope (including adding
vestibules/compartmentalization to entryways, general
envelope re-sealing packages, and addressing
dysfunctional/non-existent building pressurization
situations).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Some
suggestions for those concerned about getting infiltration
schedules “right” for reasons beyond compliance:
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">1.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Windows/doors/and
other operable envelope openings are not always in closed
state. Consider increasing naturally driven infiltration
rates above those expected/measured for “fully closed”
states during hours where you can expect openings. Typical
elementary school should see values above 1.0 when school
lets in & out (doors/vestibules are held open), and
perhaps also seasonally during nice weather where windows
are operable & actually used. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">2.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Another
dart on the wall to consider: Depending on the occupancy
type, eQUEST wizards seems to suggest hourly factors
approaching 1.25 (25% increase in naturally driven
infiltration) around hours where you’d typically expect
heavier foot traffic around entries (at start/close of
typical weekday occupancy patterns and around lunch hours,
generally). I call it a “dart on the wall” again because
I’m not certain if this is based on any specific study.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">3.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Working
building pressurization systems can be rendered ineffective
over time due to bad pressure sensors / controls / envelope
degradation: a 75% reduction may be too aggressive<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">4.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Building
pressurization systems can be TOO effective for similar
causes – ever notice doors blowing open or not shutting
well? 75% may overly conservative in those cases<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">5.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">A
fractional schedule appropriate for perimeter infiltration
is probably not appropriate for core zones without vertical
exterior exposures (if you presume any infiltration loads
are seen there to begin with).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">6.<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Accounting
for the effects of adding vestibules, rotating doors, and
similar compartmentalization ECM’s requires at least
acknowledging naturally driven infiltration floats above
“everything closed” or “design” levels of infiltration, so
that you can make appropriate relative reductions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">In
closing, I guess I want to emphasis for tone: this is mostly
just my opinion, man! I am not a certified blower door
technician, nor an energyplus developer, nor a
standard/compliance language-crafter… Just a fellow with a
few thoughts I feel others could benefit from considering.
My sincere hope is someone out there can benefit/grow from
some of these perspectives and/or return the favor someday
by setting me straight if/when I’m going down the wrong
path.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">~Nick<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#3A7A46"><img
style="width:7.5625in;height:.0937in" id="_x0000_i1036"
src="cid:part1.D66D205E.38BA79A0@whiteboxtechnologies.com" height="9"
width="726"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#3A7A46">Nick
Caton, P.E., BEMP</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#3A7A46"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable"
style="width:543.0pt;border-collapse:collapse" border="0"
cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="724">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width:172.3pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in"
valign="top" width="230">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#626469">
Senior Energy Engineer</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><br>
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#626469">
Regional Energy Engineering Manager<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#626469">
Energy and Sustainability Services</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><br>
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#626469">
Schneider Electric</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
<td style="width:218.3pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in"
valign="top" width="291">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#57B069">D </span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#626469">913.564.6361
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><br>
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#57B069">M </span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#626469">785.410.3317
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><br>
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#57B069">F </span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#626469">913.564.6380</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><br>
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#57B069">E </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nicholas.caton@schneider-electric.com"><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#626469">nicholas.caton@schneider-electric.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
<td style="width:152.4pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in"
valign="top" width="203">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:right"
align="right"><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#626469">15200
Santa Fe Trail Drive<br>
Suite 204<br>
Lenexa, KS 66219<br>
United States</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height:4.0pt">
<td colspan="3" style="width:543.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
0in;height:4.0pt" valign="top" width="724">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-line-height-alt:4.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#3A7A46"><img
style="width:7.5208in;height:.5104in"
id="_x0000_i1035"
src="cid:part3.F2A8F20C.A4CE1CD3@whiteboxtechnologies.com"
height="49" border="0" width="722"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OLEObject Type="Embed" ProgID="PBrush" ShapeID="_x0000_i1035" DrawAspect="Content" ObjectID="_1551103779">
</o:OLEObject>
</xml><![endif]--><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
Equest-users
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org">mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Maria Karpman via Equest-users<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, March 14, 2017 11:53 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nathan Miller <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:nathanm@rushingco.com"><nathanm@rushingco.com></a>;
Chris Jones <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Christopher.Jones@rwdi.com"><Christopher.Jones@rwdi.com></a>; David
Griffin II <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:DGriffin@archnexus.com"><DGriffin@archnexus.com></a>; Michael
Campbell <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mcamp1206@gmail.com"><mcamp1206@gmail.com></a>; Joe Huang
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com"><yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:equest-users@onebuilding.org">equest-users@onebuilding.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] Wall insulation in
multifamily buildings<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">To
David’s comment about infiltration (“<span
style="color:#1F497D">Lower infiltration will save you
more energy than any other envelope ECM.”),</span> there
are a few caveats.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">a)<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">To
document infiltration-related savings in App G models (e.g.
for LEED), the baseline air leakage would be modeled as 0.4
CFM/SF
<u>@ 75Pa</u> (90.1 2013 G3.1.1.4). 90.1 2013 Table G
further requires that infiltration inputs in the simulation
tool are adjusted to account for factors such as weather and
“…. HVAC system operation….“. 90.1 leaves these adjustments
to the modeler, but PNNL’s
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.510.8703&rep=rep1&type=pdf">Infiltration
Modeling Guidelines for Commercial Building Energy
Analysis</a> mentions in passing (Note 2 on p.6) that “The
total building infiltration schedule fraction will be 1.0
when all heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC)
systems are off and 0.25 when the HVAC systems are in
operation.”</span> <span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
(It’s good that they used Energy Plus for the study, so
results must still be accurate in spite of this seemingly
arbitrary assumption
</span><span style="font-family:Wingdings">J</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">.)</span>
<span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Since
HVAC systems are operating 24/7 in multifamily, infiltration
schedule in the baseline and proposed design would have to
be set to 0.25 of the peak if we follow the PNNL study,
which very significantly reduces infiltration-related
heating load in the model. (The infiltration load is shown
in LS-F report.)</span>
<span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">As
a side note, with LEED v3 and v4, infiltration-reduction
credit can be claimed via exceptional calculation methods,
or by using
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.usgbc.org/credits/new-construction-core-and-shell-schools-new-construction-retail-new-construction-healthc-110">LEED
pilot credit</a> which is based on 90.1 2016 Appendix G
modeling rules with the appropriate adjustment to
performance targets and point scale. (I recommend that you
check out this credit, as it simplifies the baseline model.)</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"
style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="mso-list:Ignore">b)<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Potential
savings from infiltration reduction should be considered in
conjunction with the specified ventilation strategy. In
North East, it is overwhelmingly common to have 100% OA
units serving multifamily corridors with no exhaust, and
continuously running rooftop exhaust fans serving kitchens
and bathrooms in apartments on one vertical stack with no
make-up. Both supply and exhaust rates are often grossly
oversized compared to the minimum CFM required by code, and
since the relevant code (summarized <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://buildingscience.com/sites/default/files/document/ba-1507_ventilation_guidance_final_measure_guideline.pdf">here</a>)
requires that apartments are compartmentalized and envelope
is air-tight, it creates an interesting conundrum for air
</span><span style="font-family:Wingdings">J</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">.
Balanced ventilation is still a rarity in NE even in high
performance buildings. Old editions of ASHRAE Fundamentals
had a way of taking into account this dynamics (see below),
which was crude but better than “one size fits all” approach
in the PNNL study. So I’d use ASHRAE’s method in lieu of
PNNL’s to model infiltration savings for LEED, and to decide
whether tighter envelope should be pursued for a given
project.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph"><img
style="width:9.0833in;height:5.8437in" id="_x0000_i1025"
src="cid:part7.C78A6267.31E7E178@whiteboxtechnologies.com"
height="561" border="0" width="872"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Nathan,
thanks for clarifying your plug load observations. Your
explanation makes total sense. On the related note, the
latest LEED EAc1 template includes the following info (based
on ASHRAE Applications handbook) for the impact of occupant
demographics on HW usage. Perhaps you can reference this
data (also used in EPA HRMF program) to justify modeling
lower plug loads for certain projects. But I can also see
that rating authorities may reject this logic and insist on
using “typical” plug loads in the model, recognizing that
occupant demographics may change over the life of the
building. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><img
style="width:13.3541in;height:1.1875in" id="Picture_x0020_2"
src="cid:part8.86DFD154.7DB48E5C@whiteboxtechnologies.com"
height="114" border="0" width="1282"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
Nathan Miller [mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nathanm@rushingco.com">nathanm@rushingco.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, March 14, 2017 9:38 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Chris Jones <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Christopher.Jones@RWDI.com">Christopher.Jones@RWDI.com</a>>;
David Griffin II <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:DGriffin@archnexus.com">DGriffin@archnexus.com</a>>;
Maria Karpman <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:maria.karpman@karpmanconsulting.net">maria.karpman@karpmanconsulting.net</a>>;
Michael Campbell <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:mcamp1206@gmail.com">mcamp1206@gmail.com</a>>;
Joe Huang <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users@onebuilding.org">equest-users@onebuilding.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [Equest-users] Wall insulation in
multifamily buildings</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I
can’t think of the last high-rise project I worked on that
stayed anywhere near 25% WWR. 40-50% is very much the norm
in Seattle (climate where I do most of my modeling work).
Owners want 60%+. Mid-rise resi (and mixed use), I do tend
to see 25-35% WWR as typical.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">When
we do the envelope sensitivity analysis on high rise
multifamily projects, honestly the glazing percentage isn’t
as bad a penalty as you’d think. Like on the order of
0.1-0.25% energy penalty for each 1% increase in glazing
when we are already in the 40%+ glazing band, meaning we are
comparing extra glazing to opaque wall. This is with a WSHP
system serving residences. If it is more of a traditional
hydronic job, that penalty seems to go up a little, but
still isn’t a killer. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Using
standard ESMFHRSG plug loads we see the conditioning load of
the buildings driven by internal loads, ventilation, and
infiltration, not envelope. Related to the previous comment
in this thread from Maria:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">“I
am curious about the reasoning behind Nathan’s comment that
“… many of us in the Seattle market are starting to believe
the standard plug/misc load assumptions from the Energy Star
MF High Rise Sim Guidelines overestimate that energy use”.<span
style="color:#1F497D">
</span>EPA’s plug loads are 4 times lower than COMNET’s for
Multifamily/Residential, and are also lower than the loads
in PNNL High Rise Apartment prototype. Passive house
protocols are the only two sources that I know off that
prescribe lower in-unit loads - Passivehaus Institute (PHI)
loads are less than half of EPA’s, and US passive house
off-shoot (PHIUS) loads are 15% lower than EPA’s. In
general, in-unit electricity consumption can vary
significantly depending on occupant demographics (by factor
of 10 based on some papers), so both COMNET and PHI may be
correct for <u>some</u> apartments. We compared EPA
assumptions to the in-unit electricity usage in several
apartment complexes in NJ, and the numbers were in the right
ballpark, so appear to represent reasonable averages.” </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Her
comment made me realize I’m suffering a bit from
selection-bias. The projects I tend to model are the newest
multifamily projects to hit the market. These projects in
Seattle are almost all studios and 1 BR, with a few 2 BR and
penthouses sprinkled in. They aren’t serving as housing for
families, but more professionally-employed individuals, who
don’t cook much, who probably concentrate their electronics
(laptop plus maybe a flat screen) more than the typical
American family, and certainly do less laundry. Some of the
trend on housing design seems to be minimal living space and
more amenities. That is probably why the national averages
for dwelling unit plug loads seem high for THE TYPE OF
PROJECTS I WORK ON. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Hope
that makes more sense (given some reflection).
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:1.0pt"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#632423"> </span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:4.0pt"><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#6F1200">Nathan
Miller, PE, LEED AP BD+C</span></b><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#632423">
–
</span></b><i><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">Mechanical
Engineer/Senior Energy Analyst</span></i><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:3.0pt;line-height:115%"><b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#6F1200">RUSHING</span></b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#BFAB7F">
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">|</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#BFAB7F">
</span><b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#6F1200">O</span></b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#A50021">
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">206-285-7100
|</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#BFAB7F"></span><b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#6F1200">C</span></b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#A50021">
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">207-650-3942</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:115%"><b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#6F1200"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.rushingco.com/"><span
style="color:#6F1200">www.rushingco.com</span></a></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
Equest-users [mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Chris Jones via Equest-users<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, March 14, 2017 7:46 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> David Griffin II <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:DGriffin@archnexus.com">DGriffin@archnexus.com</a>>;
Maria Karpman <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:maria.karpman@karpmanconsulting.net">maria.karpman@karpmanconsulting.net</a>>;
Michael Campbell <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:mcamp1206@gmail.com">mcamp1206@gmail.com</a>>;
Joe Huang <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users@onebuilding.org">equest-users@onebuilding.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] Wall insulation in
multifamily buildings</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">My
only comment is that developers and contractors like curtain
wall (window wall for high rise MURBS) because it is less
expensive to install and can be installed in any weather.
This may be the main reason we see glass towers north of the
49<sup>th</sup>.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" style="width:6.25in" border="0"
cellpadding="0" cellspacing="20" width="600">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width:52.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in"
valign="top" width="70">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.rwdi.com/assets/logos/RWDI-logo.gif"><span
style="color:#1F497D;text-decoration:none"><img
style="width:.7291in;height:.7291in"
id="Picture_x0020_1"
src="cid:part23.4698481B.04DFBD30@whiteboxtechnologies.com"
alt="Title: RWDI - Description: RWDI logo"
height="70" border="0" width="70"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td style="width:363.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in"
valign="top" width="484">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span
style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#005EB8">Christopher
Jones, </span></b><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#005EB8">P.Eng.
</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#999999">|
</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#999999">Senior
Energy Analyst</span><span
style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><br>
</span><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#999999">RWDI</span></b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#999999"><br>
901 King Street West, Suite 400, Toronto, ON M5V
3H5 Canada<br>
Tel: (519) 823-1311 ext 2052<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.rwdi.com/"><span
style="color:#999999">rwdi.com</span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<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">
Equest-users [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org">mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>David Griffin II via Equest-users<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, March 13, 2017 7:46 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Maria Karpman; Michael Campbell; Joe Huang<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] Wall insulation in
multifamily buildings</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
name="_MailEndCompose"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I
thought I might chime in on this discussion as well to
drive a few points home.</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I
have attached a file illustrating a graph to explain Joe’s
comment below. It shows diminishing returns from increased
insulation. When it comes to effective envelope ECMs for
projects. I focus on two very important things:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">1)</span><span
style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D">
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Lower
infiltration will save you more energy than any other
envelope ECM. However, it is hard to get an owner to buy off
on this and enforce the requirement with the contractor.
Typically, an envelope consultant will be brought in to
assist the architect with details, supervise the contractor
during construction, and test the building (or a portion
thereof) to verify performance. You can see how something
like this is hard sell to an owner because it can be a
costly process, and if the building fails the blower door
test, the contractor has a $$ issue and the a lot of rework.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">2)</span><span
style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D">
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Window-to-Wall
Ratio (WWR) reduction is great. On the curve illustrated in
the attached file, you essentially replace an expensive
window with a cheaper wall assembly and saving more energy!
It’s a true win-win-win. However, windows exist for more
reasons than daylight controls. Comfort and views are
essential for occupants. Some architects may also argue they
are essential for aesthetics as well, so you have to have a
target in mind for the project you are willing to negotiate.
On commercial projects, I generally shoot for 25% WWR.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">3)</span><span
style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D">
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Window
upgrades are next since they have the most potential to save
energy on the illustrated curve. Since you tried to minimize
the WWR on #2, this ECM will be cheaper than it would have
been otherwise – always saving the client $$ </span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Wingdings;color:#1F497D">J</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">
This includes glazing and frames.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">4)</span><span
style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D">
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">After
all three of the above items are addressed, I start to talk
about added insulation in the walls, roof, etc.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Anyway,
this is my approach on new construction. Is this what you
guys see, or am I missing something?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Let
me know.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" style="width:100.0%" border="0"
cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width:60.0pt;padding:0in 9.75pt 0in 0in"
valign="top" width="80">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.archnexus.com"><span
style="border:solid windowtext
1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><img
style="width:.8333in;height:1.0312in"
id="_x0000_i1028"
src="cid:part29.D695D5A4.749EA079@whiteboxtechnologies.com"
alt="Image removed by sender. ARCH | NEXUS"
height="99" border="0" width="80"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td style="width:.75pt;border:none;border-left:solid
#009AD9 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in" valign="top"
width="1">
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td style="padding:0in 0in 0in 6.75pt">
<table class="MsoNormalTable" style="width:100.0%"
border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"
width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" style="padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#52616E">DAVID
W. GRIFFIN II</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" style="padding:4.5pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#52616E">BEMP<br>
ENERGY ANALYST</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" style="padding:4.5pt 0in 4.5pt
0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#52616E">2505
E Parleys Way<br>
Salt Lake City, UT 84109 </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="width:100.0%;padding:0in 0in 0in
2.25pt" nowrap="nowrap" width="100%">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#52616E">Office</span></b><span
style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#52616E"> 801.924.5028
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td style="padding:0in 0in 0in 0in"><br>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" style="padding:4.5pt 0in 0in 0in"
nowrap="nowrap">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#52616E"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.archnexus.com"><span
style="color:#52616E;text-decoration:none">archnexus.com</span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" style="padding:4.5pt 0in 0in 0in"
nowrap="nowrap">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://twitter.com/arch_nexus"><span
style="border:solid windowtext
1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><img
style="width:.3125in;height:.2291in"
id="_x0000_i1029"
src="cid:part32.B65E69E0.9D68B70E@whiteboxtechnologies.com"
alt="Image removed by sender. Twitter"
height="22" border="0" width="30"></span></a><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.facebook.com/pages/Architectural-Nexus/179588705397563?ref=ts&fref=ts"><span
style="border:solid windowtext
1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><img
style="width:.3125in;height:.2291in"
id="_x0000_i1030"
src="cid:part32.B65E69E0.9D68B70E@whiteboxtechnologies.com"
alt="Image removed by sender. Facebook"
height="22" border="0" width="30"></span></a><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYRPWKF-yp-AUiI8ia2XfKw?feature=mhee"><span
style="border:solid windowtext
1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><img
style="width:.3125in;height:.2291in"
id="_x0000_i1031"
src="cid:part32.B65E69E0.9D68B70E@whiteboxtechnologies.com"
alt="Image removed by sender. Youtube"
height="22" border="0" width="30"></span></a><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.linkedin.com/company/architectural-nexus"><span
style="border:solid windowtext
1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><img
style="width:.3125in;height:.2291in"
id="_x0000_i1032"
src="cid:part32.B65E69E0.9D68B70E@whiteboxtechnologies.com"
alt="Image removed by sender. LinkedIn"
height="22" border="0" width="30"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
Maria Karpman via Equest-users [<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org">mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, March 10, 2017 9:24 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Michael Campbell; Joe Huang<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] Wall insulation in
multifamily buildings</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Few
more thoughts on this:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in">1)<span
style="font-size:7.0pt">
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">I
agree with Joe and David that R-19 “…has already captured
most of the energy losses (or savings) for the wall”. R-19
is better than 90.1 2016 requirements for steel-framed wall
in climate zone 4A, and since 90.1 requirements are set
taking into account cost effectiveness, it is not surprising
that further improvement does not often pay off.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in">2)<span
style="font-size:7.0pt">
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Overwhelming
majority of high performance multifamily projects have
efficient heating systems, often condensing boilers or VRF
HPs, which lowers heating costs and potential savings from
envelope improvements.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in">3)<span
style="font-size:7.0pt">
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Most
multifamily projects in North East have gas heating, and gas
is cheap compared to electricity. For example EPA EStar MFHR
projects in NY typically use $0.15/kWh and $1/Therm in
performance rating calculations, which effectively makes BTU
of electricity ~4.4 times more expensive than BTU of gas.
This further shrinks contribution of heating toward the
total building energy $, and reduces potential savings from
envelope improvements. (Using source energy instead of $ in
performance rating calculations makes envelope improvements
more appealing, because with EPA PM site-to-source
conversions BTU of electricity has only ~ 3 times greater
weight than BTU of gas.)
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in">4)<span
style="font-size:7.0pt">
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">I
am curious about the reasoning behind Nathan’s comment that
“… many of us in the Seattle market are starting to believe
the standard plug/misc load assumptions from the Energy Star
MF High Rise Sim Guidelines overestimate that energy use”.<span
style="color:#1F497D">
</span>EPA’s plug loads are 4 times lower than COMNET’s for
Multifamily/Residential, and are also lower than the loads
in PNNL High Rise Apartment prototype. Passive house
protocols are the only two sources that I know off that
prescribe lower in-unit loads - Passivehaus Institute (PHI)
loads are less than half of EPA’s, and US passive house
off-shoot (PHIUS) loads are 15% lower than EPA’s. In
general, in-unit electricity consumption can vary
significantly depending on occupant demographics (by factor
of 10 based on some papers), so both COMNET and PHI may be
correct for <u>some</u> apartments. We compared EPA
assumptions to the in-unit electricity usage in several
apartment complexes in NJ, and the numbers were in the right
ballpark, so appear to represent reasonable averages. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
Equest-users [mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Michael Campbell via Equest-users<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, March 09, 2017 9:55 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Joe Huang <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> equest-users <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] Wall insulation in
multifamily buildings</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Wow, thank you everyone for the extremely
helpful responses. <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">To answer a few of the questions... the
project is in NJ, Climate Zone 4A.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I did account for the thermal bridging
of the walls studs. This project has some metals studs
and some wood studs and I accounted for both using
Appendix A of ASHRAE 90.1-2013.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Nathan, thanks for the input
specifically regarding the Energy Star Multifamily High
Rise inputs values. This particular project is
participating in the ESMFHR Program so I am using their
guidelines for equipment/plug loads.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Joe
Huang via Equest-users <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org"
target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p>I'd say the message is that R-19 wall insulation has
already "captured" most of the energy losses (or
savings) for the wall.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>(leaning heavily on my cane...) Back in 1986, I did a
project in support of ASHRAE and DOE residential
energy standards where I did what then seemed an
endless number of DOE-2 simulations (~ 20,000) for
five prototypical residences in 45 US climates, from
which using regression analyses I came up with the
component loads (KBtu/ft2) for various components of
the building (walls, roofs, internal loads, windows,
etc.). Just picking out the wall component loads for
an apartment in Seattle, Miami, and DC, I get the
following:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">
Seattle Miami
Washington DC<br>
HL CL HL CL
HL CL<br>
R-0 28.8 0.8 1.1 4.7 23.1
1.5 <br>
R-11 10.9 0.4 0.3 1.5
8.9 0.8<br>
R-19 7.1 0.3 0.2 0.9 5.9
0.5<br>
R-34 3.9 0.2 0.1 0.5 3.2
0.3<br>
<br>
So, by R-19, you're already on the flat part of the
curve and more insulation buys you very little.
<br>
<br>
Incidentally, this data base of component loads was
then turned into a PC program called PEAR (Program for
Energy Analysis of Residences) that then multiplied
the regression curves by the component scalar (ft2 of
wall, e.g.), and added them up to derive the heating
and cooling energy use of a house.<br>
PEAR is now so out-of-date technologically that the
display no longer functions, but I still think there's
some good basic information contained in the data
base. David - maybe something that could be updated
and maintained by IBPSA? Or better yet, put it on the
Web ?<br>
<br>
source: "Technical documentation for a Residential
Energy Use Data Base Developed in Support of ASHRAE
Special Project 53", Huang, Ritschard, and Bull,<br>
LBL-24306, November 1987.<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>Joe Huang<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>White Box Technologies, Inc.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>346 Rheem Blvd., Suite 205A<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Moraga CA 94556<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com" target="_blank">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://weather.whiteboxtechnologies.com" target="_blank">http://weather.whiteboxtechnologies.com</a> for simulation-ready weather data<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>(o) <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%28925%29%20388-0265" target="_blank">(925)388-0265</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>(c) <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%28510%29%20928-2683" target="_blank">(510)928-2683</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>"building energy simulations at your fingertips"<o:p></o:p></pre>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 3/9/2017 2:07 PM, David
Eldridge via Equest-users wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">R-19
is not the worst starting point, I’d expect
diminishing returns going from good
insulation to great insulation, but a much
bigger jump in efficiency from poor to good
insulation levels.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Make
sure you are modeling the cavity insulation
accurately including any equivalent assembly
resistance due to the studs. i.e. continuous
insulation requirements are there because
the cavity insulation is de-rated quite a
bit from the studs and which can be
important in colder climates.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">In
terms of an overall percentage difference
due to envelope changes you may also see
that window performance dominates if the WWR
is relatively high.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">David</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><u><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">
</span></u><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">David
S. Eldridge, Jr., P.E., LEED AP BD+C,
BEMP, BEAP, HBDP</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#244061">Grumman/Butkus
Associates</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><u><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">
</span></u><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid
#E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
Equest-users [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Nathan Miller via
Equest-users<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, March 09, 2017
2:52 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Michael Campbell <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:mcamp1206@gmail.com"
target="_blank">
<mcamp1206@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org"
target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] Wall
insulation in multifamily buildings</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<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"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Don’t
know where your building is located, but on
the Seattle area multifamily projects we
routinely model, envelope has very little
impact on building energy use. DHW and
ventilation seem to be the items we have the
most influence over that really can change
the energy consumption.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">FWIW,
many of us in the Seattle market are
starting to believe the standard plug/misc
load assumptions from the Energy Star MF
High Rise Sim Guidelines (if you are using
them) overestimate that energy use, and
result in more “free heat” in the building
and thus less sensitivity to envelope
changes (among other implications).
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:1.0pt"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#632423"> </span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:4.0pt"><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#6F1200">Nathan
Miller, PE, LEED AP BD+C</span></b><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#632423">
–
</span></b><i><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">Mechanical
Engineer/Senior Energy Analyst</span></i><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-top:3.0pt;line-height:115%"><b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#6F1200">RUSHING</span></b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#BFAB7F">
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">|</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#BFAB7F">
</span><b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#6F1200">O</span></b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#A50021">
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%28206%29%20285-7100"
target="_blank">206-285-7100</a> |</span><b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#6F1200">C</span></b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#A50021">
</span><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%28207%29%20650-3942"
target="_blank">207-650-3942</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:115%"><b><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#6F1200"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.rushingco.com/"
target="_blank"><span
style="color:#6F1200">www.rushingco.com</span></a></span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
Equest-users [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org"
target="_blank">mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Michael Campbell via
Equest-users<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, March 09, 2017 3:44
PM<br>
<b>To:</b> equest-users <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org"
target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Equest-users] Wall
insulation in multifamily buildings</span><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>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Hello
eQUEST Users,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">I've been
working on a model for a multifamily
building, 5 stories, approximately
300,000 square feet. I've been
running a few iterations of the model
to see how changes to the wall
assembly affect the model results. <br>
<br>
What I've found is that changes in the
wall assembly seem to have a minimal
impact on the model results. I just
did a comparison where I took an
assembly with R-19 cavity insulation
and 2" rigid insulation and compared
that to the same assembly but without
the rigid insulation. This was
applied to the entire building. What
I found was only a 0.4% increase in
total energy cost after taking out the
rigid insulation. I'm wondering if
others have found similar results in
multifamily buildings?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Any input
is appreciated.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Thank
you,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Mike
Campbell<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Equest-users mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Equest-users mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG">
EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center"><span style="font-size:7.0pt">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:7.0pt">RWDI - A
Platinum Member of Canada's 50 Best Managed Companies</span></b><span
style="font-size:7.0pt">
<br>
This communication is intended for the sole use of the
party to whom it was addressed and may contain information
that is privileged and/or confidential. Any other
distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly
prohibited. If you received this email in error, please
notify us immediately by replying to this email and delete
the message without retaining any hard or electronic
copies of same. Outgoing emails are scanned for viruses,
but no warranty is made to their absence in this email or
attachments. If you require any information supplied by
RWDI in a different format to facilitate accessibility,
contact the sender of the email, email
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:solutions@rwdi.com">solutions@rwdi.com</a>
or call +1.519.823.1311.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center"><span style="font-size:7.0pt">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%">
</span></div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
______________________________________________________________________<br>
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email
Security.cloud service.<br>
______________________________________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>