[Bldg-sim] Ashrae 90.1 - Unmet hours

Rosenberg, Michael I michael.rosenberg at pnl.gov
Mon Oct 26 20:37:09 PDT 2009


I think eQuest and any DOE2 based software does report the hours of
loads not being met as required by Appendix G. In the BEPS report it
gives "PERCENT OF HOURS ANY SYSTEM ZONE OUTSIDE OF THROTTLING RANGE". My
understanding of this number is that it is a percentage of scheduled fan
run-time hours, so some calculation may be necessary.

 

__________________________ 

Michael Rosenberg 
Senior Commercial Buildings Energy Analyst 
ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT DIRECTORATE 

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 
2032 Todd Street 
Eugene, OR 97405 
(541) 844-1960 
michael.rosenberg at pnl.gov 
www.pnl.gov 

From: Nick Caton [mailto:ncaton at smithboucher.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 8:20 PM
To: Rosenberg, Michael I; Crockett, Jim; Kendra Tupper
Cc: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: RE: [Bldg-sim] Ashrae 90.1 - Unmet hours

 

Mike,

 

I appreciate you bringing this up.  This definition drives straight to
the heart of defining the issue-at-hand...  Since I kinda presented both
sides of the issue at once - I'd like to clarify where I stand regarding
what the correct interpretation should be.  

 

The logic is as follows:  If a modeled year has 8,760 hours, can there
be 10,000 unmet load hours?  By strict reading of the standard's
definition below, I would put my foot down stating there can only be
8,760, at most.  

 

By common practice however, it appears a majority (myself included) sum
unmet cooling/heating hours between the zones, even if they should fall
on the same modeled hour, against the intent of the standard.  

 

My pure speculation (for what it's worth, as a young EIT) is this
practice developed because eQuest BDL reports don't present the crunched
numbers in a way that makes the sum of unmet load hours, as intended by
90.1, easy to determine.  I wouldn't be shocked to learn other energy
modeling software packages generate LEED compliance summaries featuring
unmet load hour totals in sync with the real intent of ASHRAE 90.1.

 

If there's anything I've learned from going out on a limb, it's that I'm
sure to learn something whether I fall or not!

 

~Nick

 

 

 

NICK CATON, E.I.T.

PROJECT ENGINEER

25501 west valley parkway

olathe ks 66061

direct 913 344.0036

fax 913 345.0617

Check out our new web-site @ www.smithboucher.com 

 

From: Rosenberg, Michael I [mailto:michael.rosenberg at pnl.gov] 
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 7:39 PM
To: Nick Caton; Crockett, Jim; bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: RE: [Bldg-sim] Ashrae 90.1 - Unmet hours

 

Nick,

 

Your interpretation is the correct one. According to the definitions in
Standard 90.1.

unmet load hour: an hour in which one or more zones is outside of the
thermostat setpoint range.

 

 

Mike

__________________________ 

Michael Rosenberg 
Senior Commercial Buildings Energy Analyst 
ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT DIRECTORATE 

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 
2032 Todd Street 
Eugene, OR 97405 
(541) 844-1960 
michael.rosenberg at pnl.gov 
www.pnl.gov 

From: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Nick Caton
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 5:33 PM
To: Crockett, Jim; bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] Ashrae 90.1 - Unmet hours

 

Jim,

 

That's actually a really good question that I was afraid to ask when I
first encountered it - kudos to you!  I've currently resolved to follow
what others seemed to be doing within and outside of my office:  Sum up
all unmet hours for cooling and heating between the zones just as you
describe.   In your example, I'd agree that the unmet hours of your 301
zone building total 301.

 

I do agree that this doesn't seem intuitively to be the intent of the
standard, however between what is suggested within 90.1, the LEED
handbook, and the LEED credit templates - I honestly can't see any clear
indication either way on which is the appropriate interpretation.  

 

I think the appropriate metric for ensuring appropriately sized systems
should be something like: "hours of the modeled year in which at least
one zone has an unmet cooling/heating load,"  but I think that was
avoided by all concerned parties because it's too wordy!

 

My acting interpretation, again referencing your example, is that all
systems of your 301 zone example affecting the zones with unmet
cooling/heating hours should have their heating/cooling/overall sizing
capacity ratios increased incrementally until the design hours fall
below 300 (and/or within 50 of the sum from the other model, depending
on your situation).

 

Afraid I'm only really adding to the discussion here without providing a
solid answer.  Would like to echo the desire to see anyone's experiences
that would help us know the "right" way to interpret this (in my case,
specifically in the context of a LEED submittal).

 



 

NICK CATON, E.I.T.

PROJECT ENGINEER

25501 west valley parkway

olathe ks 66061

direct 913 344.0036

fax 913 345.0617

Check out our new web-site @ www.smithboucher.com 

 

From: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Crockett,
Jim
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 4:27 PM
To: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: [Bldg-sim] Ashrae 90.1 - Unmet hours

 

Ashrae 90.1 (2004) Appendix G3.1.2.2 requires a baseline building to
have less than 300 unmet hours.  What exactly does this mean?

 

To illustrate my question:  assume you have a building with 301 zones,
and each zone has 1 unmet hour per year.  This gives you a total of 301
unmet hours, and requires you to increase your baseline equipment
capacity.  But you could argue that, on average, the building has only 1
unmet hour per year.

 

Have any of you run into this?  Is it addressed in an addendum
somewhere, etc?

 

Any help is appreciated.  Thanks,

 

 

 

Jim Crockett, P.E.

 

Senior Project Engineer

Energy & Carbon Management

Nexant, Inc.

4021 S. 700 E., Suite 250

Salt Lake City, Utah 84107

 

(801) 639-5603 - phone

(801) 266-4786 - fax

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20091026/3782de79/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1459 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20091026/3782de79/attachment-0001.jpeg>


More information about the Bldg-sim mailing list