[Equest-users] natural ventilation scenario and LEED

[r s]

HI Christian,

See LI ID#5489
<http://www.usgbc.org/leed-interpretations?clearsmartf=true&keys=5489#> made
on 10/03/2008

It may be relevant to your design if it is considered unenclosed due to the
nature of fixed openings.
Ruling The project team is requesting guidance on modeling an unenclosed
structure under EAc1 - Whole Building Simulation, and how to satisfy EAp2
for the same building. For the unenclosed portions, the project team may
follow the instruction given in the cited CIR (dated 1/29/2008); treating
the unenclosed portion similarly to an unenclosed parking garage. The
enclosed portions should be modeled as conditioned and adhere to the ASHRAE
90.1-2004 standard Appendix G modeling guidelines. For EAp2, as stated in
the referenced CIR, the applicable minimum requirements of ASHRAE 90.1-2004
must be met under EAp2. This holds true for both the unenclosed and
enclosed portions of the structure. The project must also include occupied
interior space in order to be eligible for certification. Applicable
Internationally.

Regards
Ramya



On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 3:59 PM, David Eldridge <DEldridge at grummanbutkus.com
> wrote:

>  Check the MPRs, but I don’t believe there is any exclusion for buildings
> that have permanent openings or that aren’t conditioned. It does have to be
> regularly occupied. I don’t see why the building wouldn’t be *eligible*for LEED…whether it meets the prerequisites is another question.
>
>
>
> You would still have to be ventilated to satisfy EQP1. The designer will
> have to be able to state that the design complies with ASHRAE 62.1 or other
> more stringent local code. I don’t believe there is a requirement in ASHRAE
> 62.1 for the system to be active, but you’d have to at either comply either
> prescriptively or by providing some calculation that shows the openings
> will be adequate to drive the required OA volumes. Depending on the
> depth/width/height of the warehouse this may actually be your biggest
> hurdle, more than EAP2.
>
>
>
> The definition of “building” in 90.1 allows for “a structure wholly or
> partially  enclosed…affording shelter to persons, animals, or property” so
> I think 90.1 would still apply prescriptively for service water heating,
> electric distribution, manufacturing equipment as applicable, and lighting.
>
>
>
> ASHRAE 90.1 Appendix G may be difficult in a couple of ways pertaining to
> the modeling:
>
>
>
> 1.       90.1-2007 excludes the envelope requirements where there are
> minimum heating and cooling capacity thresholds – you probably won’t hit
> either threshold, therefore you don’t have a prescriptive envelope. When
> you get to the G3.1 table, there isn’t an “out” that says to use the
> proposed case envelope in the baseline…unlike…
>
>  2.       …HVAC section says to substitute a heating and cooling system
> based on what the baseline system is required to have, and there is a
> baseline requirement to model a baseline HVAC system even if the proposed
> doesn’t have HVAC equipment. Subsequently there is a requirement that says
> where there is no proposed system to use the baseline system….so this one
> has a compliance option, even if it seems like the logical procedure would
> be to not have HVAC systems in the model.
>
>
>
> Lighting would seem to work fine at least, so you have one of the three
> main scopes that will work normally, and hopefully show some good
> daylighting effectivness with all of these openings in the roof. DHW could
> also be modeled according to the normal rules.
>
>
>
> David
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> David S. Eldridge, Jr., P.E., LEED AP BD+C, BEMP, BEAP, HBDP
>
> *Grumman/Butkus Associates*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
> equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *Christian
> Stalberg
> *Sent:* Friday, November 22, 2013 2:00 PM
>
> *To:* equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] natural ventilation scenario and LEED
>
>
>
> Joe,
>
>
>
> Okay let me elaborate further.
>
>
>
> This high bay warehouse building has no HVAC whatsoever. Not even
> ventilation fans. Only fixed openings distributed across the walls and at
> the roof. I do not know if LEED specifies modeling only operable windows,
> but that is the example they give in their guidebook. Again, I do not know
> if this building would even qualify as enclosed space and therefore be
> eligible for modeling. I have looked everywhere including the LEEDuser
> forum and am unable to shed light on this issue.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> _
>
> Christian Stalberg
>
> Natural Intelligence, LLC
>
> http://naturalintelligence.us
>
> Tel. 415.531.4610
>
>
>
> *From:* equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [
> mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org<equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org>]
> *On Behalf Of *Joe Huang
> *Sent:* Friday, November 22, 2013 10:58 AM
> *To:* equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] natural ventilation scenario and LEED
>
>
>
> Christian,
>
> I'm still unclear what is the conundrum.  Is it that LEED modeling rules
> only specify operable natural ventilation, or that you're unclear how to
> model fixed, i.e., uncontrolled,  natural ventilation?
>
> Joe
>
> Joe Huang
>
> White Box Technologies, Inc.
>
> 346 Rheem Blvd., Suite 108D
>
> Moraga CA 94556
>
> yjhuang at whiteboxtechnologies.com
>
> http://weather.whiteboxtechnologies.com for simulation-ready weather data
>
> (o) (925)388-0265
>
> (c) (510)928-2683
>
> "building energy simulations at your fingertips"
>
>
> On 11/21/2013 4:58 PM, Christian Stalberg wrote:
>
> I’m getting no responses on the bldg-sim list so am trying here too.
>
>
>
> I have a factory/warehouse that is using natural ventilation for cooling.
> What is unusual is that the openings are fixed openings.
>
>
>
> At first glance it seems that it would not even qualify as an enclosed
> space and therefore would not be eligible for energy modeling for LEED. The
> project is registered at USGBC however, of course I realize that may mean
> nothing.
>
>
>
> If this project could be eligible for LEED certification, I am trying to
> come up with an approach and all I can think of is pretending the openings
> are operable and then following the guidelines as outlined in the Advanced
> Energy Modeling for LEED handbook.
>
>
>
> I would appreciate any guidance anyone can offer on this seeming
> conundrum!
>
>
>
> _
>
> Christian Stalberg
>
> Natural Intelligence, LLC
>
> http://naturalintelligence.us
>
> Tel. 415.531.4610
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20131122/ec683d11/attachment-0002.htm>