<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:dt="uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=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]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">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 width="726" height="9" style="width:7.5625in;height:.0937in" id="_x0000_i1036" src="cid:image001.png@01D29D6B.F3900850"><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" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="724" style="width:543.0pt;border-collapse:collapse">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="230" valign="top" style="width:172.3pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">
<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 width="291" valign="top" style="width:218.3pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">
<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 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 width="203" valign="top" style="width:152.4pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" align="right" style="text-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 width="724" colspan="3" valign="top" style="width:543.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in;height:4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-line-height-alt:4.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#3A7A46"><img border="0" width="722" height="49" style="width:7.5208in;height:.5104in" id="_x0000_i1035" src="cid:image002.png@01D29D6B.F3900850"><!--[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 [mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org]
<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 <nathanm@rushingco.com>; Chris Jones <Christopher.Jones@rwdi.com>; David Griffin II <DGriffin@archnexus.com>; Michael Campbell <mcamp1206@gmail.com>; Joe Huang <yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com><br>
<b>Cc:</b> equest-users@onebuilding.org<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 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 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 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 border="0" width="872" height="561" style="width:9.0833in;height:5.8437in" id="_x0000_i1025" src="cid:image004.jpg@01D29DB0.CB159580"><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 border="0" width="1282" height="114" style="width:13.3541in;height:1.1875in" id="Picture_x0020_2" src="cid:image006.jpg@01D29DB0.CB159580"><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 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 href="mailto:Christopher.Jones@RWDI.com">Christopher.Jones@RWDI.com</a>>; David Griffin II <<a href="mailto:DGriffin@archnexus.com">DGriffin@archnexus.com</a>>; Maria Karpman <<a href="mailto:maria.karpman@karpmanconsulting.net">maria.karpman@karpmanconsulting.net</a>>;
Michael Campbell <<a href="mailto:mcamp1206@gmail.com">mcamp1206@gmail.com</a>>; Joe Huang <<a href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a 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 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 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 href="mailto:DGriffin@archnexus.com">DGriffin@archnexus.com</a>>; Maria Karpman <<a href="mailto:maria.karpman@karpmanconsulting.net">maria.karpman@karpmanconsulting.net</a>>; Michael Campbell <<a href="mailto:mcamp1206@gmail.com">mcamp1206@gmail.com</a>>;
Joe Huang <<a href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a 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" border="0" cellspacing="20" cellpadding="0" width="600" style="width:6.25in">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="70" valign="top" style="width:52.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.rwdi.com/assets/logos/RWDI-logo.gif"><span style="color:#1F497D;text-decoration:none"><img border="0" width="70" height="70" style="width:.7291in;height:.7291in" id="Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image009.jpg@01D29DB0.CB159580" alt="Title: RWDI - Description: RWDI logo"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td width="484" valign="top" style="width:363.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">
<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 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 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 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 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" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" style="width:100.0%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="80" valign="top" style="width:60.0pt;padding:0in 9.75pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.archnexus.com"><span style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><img border="0" width="80" height="99" style="width:.8333in;height:1.0312in" id="_x0000_i1028" src="cid:image012.jpg@01D29DB0.CB159580" alt="Image removed by sender. ARCH | NEXUS"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td width="1" valign="top" style="width:.75pt;border:none;border-left:solid #009AD9 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td style="padding:0in 0in 0in 6.75pt">
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" style="width:100.0%">
<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 width="100%" nowrap="" style="width:100.0%;padding:0in 0in 0in 2.25pt">
<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"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td nowrap="" 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"><a 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 nowrap="" colspan="2" style="padding:4.5pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://twitter.com/arch_nexus"><span style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><img border="0" width="30" height="22" style="width:.3125in;height:.2291in" id="_x0000_i1029" src="cid:image014.jpg@01D29DB0.CB159580" alt="Image removed by sender. Twitter"></span></a><a 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 border="0" width="30" height="22" style="width:.3125in;height:.2291in" id="_x0000_i1030" src="cid:image014.jpg@01D29DB0.CB159580" alt="Image removed by sender. Facebook"></span></a><a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYRPWKF-yp-AUiI8ia2XfKw?feature=mhee"><span style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><img border="0" width="30" height="22" style="width:.3125in;height:.2291in" id="_x0000_i1031" src="cid:image014.jpg@01D29DB0.CB159580" alt="Image removed by sender. Youtube"></span></a><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/company/architectural-nexus"><span style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><img border="0" width="30" height="22" style="width:.3125in;height:.2291in" id="_x0000_i1032" src="cid:image014.jpg@01D29DB0.CB159580" alt="Image removed by sender. LinkedIn"></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 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 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 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 href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> equest-users <<a 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 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 href="mailto:yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com" target="_blank">yjhuang@whiteboxtechnologies.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a 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 href="tel:(925)%20388-0265" target="_blank">(925)388-0265</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>(c) <a href="tel:(510)%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 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 href="mailto:mcamp1206@gmail.com" target="_blank">
<mcamp1206@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a 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 href="tel:(206)%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 href="tel:(207)%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 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 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 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 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 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 href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to <a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG">
EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:7.0pt">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</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 href="mailto:solutions@rwdi.com">solutions@rwdi.com</a> or call +1.519.823.1311.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:7.0pt">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</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>
</body>
</html>