[BLDG-SIM] LEED Building Orientation

[Amanda Bogner]

The new addendum r to ASHRAE 90.1 states the following:
a. Orientation. The baseline building performance shall be generated by
simulating the building with its actual orientation and again after rotating
the entire building 90, 180, and 270 degrees, then averaging the results.
The building shall be modeled so that it does not shade itself.

Exceptions

(a) If it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Program Evaluator
that the building orientation is dictated by site considerations. 

(b) Buildings where the vertical fenestration area on each orientation
varies by less than 5%.

 

The USGBC has stated that using the addendums to 90.1 is acceptable when
documenting EAp2 and EAc1.  But be careful, as you'll need to incorporate
the other changes specified by the addendum too.  

Amanda E. Bogner, PE LEED AP

BVM Engineering, Inc.

404.806.2018 EXT 103 

404.806.2019 (fax)

 

 

 

 

  _____  

From: BLDG-SIM at gard.com [mailto:BLDG-SIM at gard.com] On Behalf Of Brandon
Nichols
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 7:48 PM
To: BLDG-SIM at gard.com
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] LEED Building Orientation


All,
 
The building rotation requirement is utterly nonsensical.  For a full-text
rant on the subject, see my previous post:
 
http://www.gard.com/ml/bldg-sim-archive/msg04038.html 
 
In summary:
 
1) In the case of many new buildings (90% or more I would estimate), there
is very little latitude for changing the orientation.  For example the main
street and therefore the lobby and entryway may be on one side and one side
only of the building, the aspect ratio of the building may not fit on the
lot in two of the four orientations, etc.
 
2) The fictitious, etheral 'averaged' building does not exist even in the
computer code of the best analysis programs we have at our disposal to date.

 
3) All baseline numbers for each of the four orientations would need to be
extracted from the analysis software, and averaged on a spreadsheet.
Similarly each and every EEM would need to be extracted, and the project's
comparative analysis done on a spreadsheet instead of the within the
analysis software itself.  Thanks, but I have a life, wife and family.
 
4) If this requirement still sounds like a good idea from the comfort of
your tenured office, I say come on out and run couple of dozen real-life
energy code and LEED compliance simulations for me within budget and on
deadline in Q1-Q2 2008 and you'll begin to understand what I'm talking
about.
 
Why not simply allow selecting the orientation closest to, without
performing worse than, the 'average' as the baseline?  This simple change
would allow the baseline numbers to reside within the analysis software.
 
Alternatively the eQuest developers are rumored to be working on a 90.1
Appendix G compliance module.  Upon release, if it automates the averaging I
may be inclined retire some portion of this diatribe.  
 
Best idea yet, drop this as a requirement, and make it optional where it
makes sense to do so. Utilize by default the far more intuitive (and useful
in terms of energy incentives) 'code minimum' baseline building, oriented
identically to the proposed.  This is the approach I've been able to
convince our state energy code and utility rebate reviewers to accept -- its
just hardened LEED extremists who still seem to have their head in the sand
on this.  
 
 
Regards
 
 
Brandon Nichols, PE, LEEDR AP
Mechanical
HARGIS ENGINEERS

600 Stewart Street

Suite 1000

Seattle, WA 98101

www.hargis.biz

 

d | 206.436.0400  c | 206.228.8707

o | 206.448.3376  f  | 206.448.4450

 
 

  _____  

From: BLDG-SIM at gard.com [mailto:BLDG-SIM at gard.com] On Behalf Of
Edward.A.Decker at jci.com
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 3:59 PM
To: BLDG-SIM at gard.com
Cc: BLDG-SIM at gard.com
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] LEED Building Orientation



Can you not apply various fenestrations and shading to the model without
having to change its orientation? For an existing building, including LEED
EB, what additional benefit could be gained by rotating the model since you
cannot change the orientation? 
_____________________________________________
Edward A. Decker




"Leonard Sciarra" <leonard_sciarra at gensler.com> 
Sent by: BLDG-SIM at gard.com 


11/29/2007 06:18 PM 


Please respond to
leonard_sciarra at gensler.com



To
<BLDG-SIM at gard.com> 

cc

Subject
[BLDG-SIM] LEED Building Orientation	

		




This is true, however, even with an existing building, you as the
designer/engineer have the option of "working" the facades and applying
appropriate fenestration, shading, etc... you can still make good/bad
decisions and the fact that your footprint is fixed should not give the
design team a waiver from the fact that the sun still rises in the east and
sets in the west.  In fact it may be a benefit if perhaps your building is
shaded on the west by itself. 
  
Leonard Sciarra, AIA, LEED ap 
312.577.6580 (Dir) 
G E N S L E R | Architecture & Design Worldwide 
30 West Monroe Street 
Chicago IL, 60603 
312.456.0123 
leonard_sciarra at gensler.com 





  _____  

From: BLDG-SIM at gard.com [mailto:BLDG-SIM at gard.com] On Behalf Of Ross-Bain,
Jeff
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 2:40 PM
To: BLDG-SIM at gard.com
Cc: keith_lane at g-g-d.com
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] LEED Building Orientation

Here is my question to and response from the USGBC regarding this issue: 
  
  
Dear LEED Info, 
  
There has been a lot of chat on this item and I wonder if there is a USGBC
position - I found no reference to this in the CIR's: 
  
Do existing buildings undergoing renovation require the four-point compass
orientation analysis? 
  
  
  
Jeffrey, 
  
If the existing building being renovated is pursuing LEED-NC rather than
LEED-EB, then it would indeed be required to undergo the specified analysis.
This analysis is used to establish the baseline for energy performance using
the ASHRAE standard.  LEED doesn't have any specific exemptions for existing
buildings in this requirement, but if ASHRAE has some kind of exemption, we
will honor that. 
  
  
So I guess the question then becomes an interpretation of the Appendix G
(Table G3.1 (f)) comment for existing buildings. Rotate or not? 
  
My take has always been that new buildings have the option to consider
orientation but existing buildings cannot be re-oriented so rotating the
model does not really prove anything. 
  
Any 90.1 code committee members or others out there have an interpretation? 
  
Regards, 

Jeffrey G. Ross-Bain, PE, LEED 
Smith Dalia Architects 
621 North Ave NE 
Suite C-140 
Atlanta, GA, 30308 
404-892-2443 
 <http://www.smithdalia.com/> www.smithdalia.com 


P Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really
need to. 


  _____  


From: BLDG-SIM at gard.com [mailto:BLDG-SIM at gard.com] On Behalf Of Neuhauser,
Ken
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 2:31 PM
To: BLDG-SIM at gard.com
Cc: keith_lane at g-g-d.com
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] LEED Building Orientation 
  
I am not the authority, Keith, but I believe that your interpretation (that
existing buildings do not get rotated in the baseline) is consistent with
the intent of Appendix G.  In new construction, the decisions regarding
building orientation will affect performance and that performance should be
measured against the baseline (although, there are cases, such as a building
that adjoins buildings to either side, where rotating the baseline through
all four orientations does not make sense).  If you're improving an existing
building, the existing conditions of building enclosure components,
including orientation, are an appropriate baseline.  When we apply Appendix
G to existing buildings, we have also found that "existing building
envelopes" sometimes needs to be parsed into existing building envelope
components.  For example, in a mill rehab, the bearing walls may be
serviceable and appropriately modeled "as is" in the baseline, but missing
windows or windows that are clearly not serviceable we model as per the
ASHRAE minimum compliance. 
  
You should note, also, that an addendum to the standard has removed the
provision in the table under G3.1, 5c to distribute windows uniformly in
horizontal bands across the four orientations.  That should make all of our
lives easier. 
  
Regards, 
Ken Neuhauser, M.Arch, MSc.Arch, LEED AP 
Architectural Project Manager 
Conservation Services Group, Inc. 
40 Washington Street 
Westborough, MA 01581 
Ph. 508 836-9500 ext. 13226 
Fax 508 836-3181 
 <http://www.csgrp.com/> www.csgrp.com   
  
  
  

  _____  


From: BLDG-SIM at gard.com [mailto:BLDG-SIM at gard.com] On Behalf Of Keith Lane
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 2:40 PM
To: BLDG-SIM at gard.com
Subject: [BLDG-SIM] LEED Building Orientation 
  
I am modeling an existing building for Energy & Atmosphere Credit 1:
Optimize Energy Performance. In LEED and table G3.1 No. 5(a) of ASHREA
Standard 90.1-2004, it states that "the baseline building performance shall
be generated by simulating the building with its actual orientation and
again after rotating the entire building 90, 180, 270 degrees, then
averaging the results". However table G3.1 No. 5(f) of ASHREA Standard
90.1-2004 states: "for existing building envelopes, the baseline building
design shall reflect existing conditions prior to any revisions that are
part of the scope of work being evaluated." Would this mean that you do not
need to simulate the building for the four orientations? It just doesn't
seem to make sense to simulate the building in such a manner if it is
existing. I am new energy modeling for LEED credit and sincerely appreciate
any assistance. 
  
Thank you, 
  
Keith Lane, LEED AP 
Mechanical Engineer 
Garcia.Galuska.DeSousa 
Consulting Engineers                     Inc.                         
370 Faunce Corner Road, Dartmouth, MA 02747 
p.508.998.5700                          f. 508.998.0883 
  
  
  
================== 
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed 
to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe 
from this mailing list send a blank message to 
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM 
  
  
================== 
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed 
to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe 
from this mailing list send a blank message to 
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM 

==================
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed 
to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe 
from this mailing list send a blank message to 
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM



=====================================================You received this
e-mail because you are subscribed 
to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe 
from this mailing list send a blank message to 
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM




==================

You received this e-mail because you are subscribed 

to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe 

from this mailing list send a blank message to 

BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM


======================================================
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed 
to the BLDG-SIM at GARD.COM mailing list.  To unsubscribe 
from this mailing list send a blank message to 
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at GARD.COM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20071130/4fa8a933/attachment.htm>