[Bldg-sim] ASHRAE 90.1 building rotation reasoning

[JHANSEN]

On a sort of related topic - was there ever an addenda that allowed  
you to use the Uvalue and SC for the NORTH walls instead of the Uall  
for all orientations.  Just got called out on this for a recent  
project, but have used the North coefficients on at least 5 previous  
projects successfully... Trying to understand the LEED inconsistency.   
For that matter, why even have an entry on the EAc1 for the North  
orientation coefficients?


On May 12, 2009, at 2:20 PM, "Cramer Silkworth" <silkworth at transsolar.com 
 > wrote:

> Shoot, I was thinking of the fenestration distribution change in  
> Addedum A. Sorry all.
>
> -Cramer
>
>
> From: Robby Oylear [mailto:robbyo at rushingco.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 2:05 PM
> To: Cramer Silkworth; christopher.zabaneh at ibece.net
> Cc: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
> Subject: RE: [Bldg-sim] ASHRAE 90.1 building rotation reasoning
>
> I think you’re mistaken.  You may be thinking of addenda a  which re 
> moves the requirement to spread all glazing equally across all orien 
> tations of the building.  Which addenda removes the requirement to r 
> otate your building?
>
>
>
> Robby Oylear, LEED® AP
>
> Mechanical Engineer
>
> direct: 206.788.4571
>
> cell: 206.354.2721
>
> www.rushingco.com
>
>
>
> From: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org 
> ] On Behalf Of Cramer Silkworth
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:02 AM
> To: christopher.zabaneh at ibece.net
> Cc: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
> Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] ASHRAE 90.1 building rotation reasoning
>
>
>
> Christopher,
>
>
>
> One of the addenda to 90.1 removes this requirement and the use of  
> addenda is accepted by USGBC, so you don't need to waste your time.
>
>
>
> -Cramer
>
>
>
> J. Cramer Silkworth
>
> Transsolar Inc.
>
> Technical consulting for energy efficiency and user comfort in  
> buildings. Stuttgart - Munich - New York
>
> 134 Spring Street Suite 601
>
> New York, NY 10012
>
> 212-219-2255
>
> silkworth at transsolar.com
>
>
>
>
>    From: Christopher Zabaneh [mailto:christopher.zabaneh at ibece.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:33 PM
> To: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
> Subject: [Bldg-sim] ASHRAE 90.1 building rotation reasoning
>
> What is the original reasoning behind the ASHRAE 90.1 Appendix G  
> building rotations through 0, 90, 180 and 270 degrees?
>
>
>
> If the building is only going to have one orientation, why go  
> through the trouble of rotating and averaging the building values  
> when there should be only one base case?
>
>
>
> Are steps being taken by ASHRAE or the energy modeling community to  
> change this?
>
>
>
> Thanks kindly,
>
>
>
> Christopher F. Zabaneh
>
> B.Sc.Eng, LEED® AP
> IBE Consulting Engineers
> 14130 Riverside Drive, Suite 201
> Sherman Oaks, CA 91423-2313
> p    (818) 377-8220  X 295
> f     (818) 377-8230
> IDEAS FOR THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
>
> This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use  
> of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and  
> privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or  
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,  
> please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of  
> the original message.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bldg-sim mailing list
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090512/7eb90bc9/attachment-0001.htm>