[Equest-users] LEED-parking garage question/advice needed

[Carol Gardner]

Hi Pasha,

I would put all 4 buildings and the garage into one model. As Jeremy pointed
out doing so would take care of any metering and shading issues. The only
downside I can think of is the size of the model, which might add to the run
time. Since eQ is so fast, however, it's a difference of 2 minutes vs 30
seconds, just enough time to grab another cup of coffee or to let the dogs
out.

Best,

Carol

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Pasha Korber-Gonzalez <
pasha.pkconsulting at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Nick,
>
> I can't remember how long you've been modeling, but your advice exudes
> 'knowledge beyond your years.'   At least from my perspective, I didn't
> think I could have it a win-win situation for this project, but I like your
> approach.
>
> Also, thanks for pointing out the idea of garages being nothing more than
> building shades & process/ltg loads   I hadn't thought of inputting the
> "idea" of the garage as building shades.  :)
>
> Importing the separate models into one later on seems daunting & tedious,
> but with the separate-to-one approach I guess it can always be an option
> that I decide later if it seems necessary, or for comparative purposes & a
> chance at a sensitivity analysis...
>
> I always appreciate the multitude of intelligent answers and supportive
> comments from fellow simulators on this list.  Now we can keep moving
> forward until the next hurdle.
>
> Thanks,
> Pasha  :)
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Nick Caton <ncaton at smithboucher.com>wrote:
>
>>  A few extra thoughts,
>>
>>
>>
>> In line with Jeremy’s suggestion regarding a campus model being a useful
>> approach… Perhaps you can have your cake and eat it too?
>>
>>
>>
>> The new (3.64) wizard screens have a new input field for each shell that
>> allow you to assign custom prefixes suffixes to each shell – if you utilize
>> this while making separate files (prefix each group of shells with N#,E#,S#,
>> W#), and make a point to define your geometries from a holistic CAD
>> reference, I’ll bet you can end up with 4 distinct files that will all
>> import cleanly into each other when all’s said and done as a final step…
>> you’d want to continue the nomenclature when defining things in detailed
>> mode of course.
>>
>>
>>
>> I haven’t submitted but one garage for LEED, but I’m of the opinion any
>> unconditioned garage isn’t anything more complicated than a collection of
>> building shades and/or process / external lighting loads to an eQuest
>> modeler!  To Kristy’s cautions, one can easily define multiple exterior
>> lighting loads (up to 10 I think) – with distinct magnitudes and/or
>> scheduling… allowing you to model interior/perimeter and daytime/nighttime
>> controls.  Photocell scheduling functions are available for perimeter
>> lighting as well.
>>
>>
>>
>> Pasha, it’ll ultimately come down to how you want to move forward, but 4
>> separate models sounds like it might work for you:  Each would feature
>> distinct component prefixes and building shades mimicking the entire garage,
>> but external lighting/process loads representing a quarter of the garage.
>> When the time comes that a campus model is desireable for whatever reason,
>> you can delete the garage-shades in models 2,3 and 4, and import into #1,
>> then modify your exterior loads to ensure you’re modeling the full garage.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you desire extra accuracy in the separate models, you may want to
>> consider creating some building shades to represent the other 3 buildings –
>> but you’d want to delete those later when importing the files together for a
>> campus  model...
>>
>>
>>
>> ~Nick
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: cid:489575314 at 22072009-0ABB]**
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *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:* equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
>> equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *Pasha
>> Korber-Gonzalez
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:05 AM
>> *To:* Jeremy Poling
>> *Cc:* eQUEST Users List
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] LEED-parking garage question/advice needed
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks Jeremy,
>>
>> I wasn't aware of the 5-year metering requirement for Energy Star...that
>> does help me 'accept' the advice for the model a bit more.  However, it
>> still doesn't sit right with me to split a buiding amongst several model
>> files for the same reason that you mentioned about disproportionate sim
>> results.
>>
>> I liked your observations for the finished model--thanks for sharing your
>> experience on that.  I also like the idea of doing a separate model for the
>> garage itself with the approach of keeping all the models in separate files,
>> but I think I will have to reconsider the multi-files approach versus
>> inputting all 5 structures into one model file.   hmmmm......
>>
>> pkg
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Jeremy Poling <jpoling at epsteinglobal.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> As a note, the USGBC reviewer’s advice is in line with the requirements of
>> Energy Star for detached buildings on a campus with shared parking: for
>> separate buildings on a campus, the parking area (surface and/or garage)
>> must be divided between the buildings when entered into Portfolio Manager.
>> If this is a LEED 2009 project and the owner plans to comply with the 5-year
>> metering requirement via Energy Star, setting up the model in that manner
>> will make it consistent with the mandatory minimum M&V requirements.  I’m
>> not sure what led to the decision to model each building in a separate PD2
>> file (other than scheduling of the design work meaning Building 4’s model
>> won’t be needed for some time after Building 1’s model is done), but it
>> might provide some benefit to model the campus in one file.  I would think
>> this would be true in 2 specific cases:
>>
>> -        If there is a single meter covering all campus electrical use
>> (not uncommon for campuses), allowing the model to calculate a coincident
>> demand for cost purposes that might be lower than the sum of the demands for
>> the four separate model
>>
>> -        Credit for daylighting is being pursued and there is a potential
>> for one of the buildings to shade another, making the combined model file
>> more conservative on energy savings from daylighting than the four
>> individual models
>>
>>
>>
>> I have done a split PD2 file approach on a model before and while it made
>> sense when it was setup and the project was small (10K SF total), responding
>> to comments was more difficult.  For example, if there was some error in the
>> baseline U-Value then each model file would have to be corrected
>> individually instead of changing the wall type in a single model (4 changes
>> instead of 1).  Just some thoughts to consider.
>>
>>
>>
>> I would partially agree with the reviewer, though – the parking garage
>> needs to be part of the model and with a split model you would have to put
>> the parking garage into each of the four models.  I probably would have
>> taken a slightly different approach, though – If the campus is not modeled
>> in a single model, the parking garage should be modeled on its own, with the
>> resulting energy divided between the four models proportionate to the number
>> of spaces allocated to each building or the proposed occupancy of each
>> building, since those are the factors that determine how much of the garage
>> each building would use.
>>
>>
>>
>> *JEREMY R. POLING, PE, LEED AP*
>> Associate Vice President,
>>
>> Senior Sustainability Analyst
>> Strategic Services
>> *Site Solutions | Operations | Sustainability*
>>
>> *EPSTEIN*
>> Architecture
>> Interiors
>> Engineering
>> Construction
>>
>> *Epstein is a firm believer in sustainability. We ask that you please
>> consider the environment before printing this e-mail.*
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
>> equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *Walson, Kristy
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:21 AM
>> *To:* 'Pasha Korber-Gonzalez'; eQUEST Users List
>> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] LEED-parking garage question/advice needed
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Pasha,
>>
>>
>>
>> Having modeled a few parking garages in various software at this point, I
>> also do not agree with the LEED representative's suggestion.  In my
>> experience, parking garages typically have daylighting controls to turn off
>> perimeter lights during the day.  This would be tough for a simulation
>> program to model without creating a separate building for the parking
>> garage.  I know you said that the parking garage would not be utilizing any
>> ECM's, but I like to leave my options open in case an owner comes back and
>> decides that the payback is well worth the money spent up-front for
>> controls.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you end up incorporating the lighting as a bulk load on the electrical
>> meter at each building, just remember that you'll need 2 bulk loads - one
>> for daytime garage lighting and one for night time exterior lighting.  If
>> you're sure they won't be adding ECM's at a later date, then I think the
>> bulk load idea will work.  Just be sure to spend some time on your lighting
>> schedule because the lighting savings seen between the baseline and proposed
>> models for a parking garage can be significant and you don't want to lose
>> any of this benefit.  Good luck!
>>
>>
>>
>> *Kristy Walson, PE, LEED AP*
>>
>> *Mechanical Engineer / Sustainable Design*
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
>> equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *Pasha
>> Korber-Gonzalez
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:13 AM
>> *To:* eQUEST Users List
>> *Subject:* [Equest-users] LEED-parking garage question/advice needed
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to get a few opinions from some fellow simulators on a
>> modeling approach for a LEED project.   Please share your opinion/advice if
>> you are interested.
>>
>> Project:    Four separate buildings that surround an open-air parking
>> garage structure (all above grade.)--Location is Miami, FL
>> Intent:    All Four buildings (as a whole project) are going for LEED
>> certification.  Each building will be modeled in it's own .pd2 file as the
>> simulator would prefer to manage the models in this manner versus using a
>> campus modeling approach in a single .pd2 file.
>>
>> USGBC recommendations where that the parking garage should be divided (or
>> split) into four pieces and 1/4 of the parking garage should be included
>> with the buildings in each of the separate model files.
>>
>> The ISSUE is this:   My simulation gut instinct is telling me that this is
>> a really bad way to include the energy use of a parking garage in a project
>> model....(I was actually shocked that this was the advice from a LEED
>> representative.)    So I am trying to advise my colleague that it might be
>> better to not include the actual parking structure (i.e. separate shell) in
>> each model, but to calculate the lighting use (on a schedule of operation)
>> for the parking garage lighting and then simply add in that energy as a kW
>> input on a separate meter and assign a ltg operating schedule to it.    With
>> this approach it would be easier to take the advice of the LEED folks and
>> input 1/4 of the installed kW in each of the separate model files, rather
>> than wasting time with building in (& managing) another shell in each model
>> file.   (FYI-there are no other ECM's that will be accounted for in the
>> parking garage.)
>>
>>
>> What do you think of this approach?   Do you think that it is significant
>> and important to include the "physical" presence of the parking garage in
>> each of the model files?   What approach would you take?
>>
>> Thanks for your time as always...
>>
>> Pasha :)
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Equest-users mailing list
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to
> EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
>
>


-- 
Carol Gardner PE
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20101005/285d2443/attachment-0002.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1459 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20101005/285d2443/attachment-0002.jpeg>