[Bldg-sim] [EXTERNAL] SSc8 vs. EAc1 - LEEDv3 mistake in ext. lighting power calculation...???... (UNCLASSIFIED)

[Eurek, John S NWO]

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

Norbert,

Our electrical engineer ran into this exact thing Wednesday.

Not sure how he resolved it, but you aren't crazy, we found the same thing.

- I'll see what I can find out Tuesday, after Labor Day, if I'm not furloughed.


John Eurek PE, LEED AP
Mechanical Engineer,
US Army Corps of Engineers
Omaha District CENWO-ED-DA
1616 Capitol Avenue
Omaha, NE 68102
Phone: (402) 995-2134
email: john.s.eurek at usace.army.mil



-----Original Message-----
From: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Repka
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 4:10 PM
To: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Bldg-sim] SSc8 vs. EAc1 - LEEDv3 mistake in ext. lighting power calculation...???...

Hi there,

 

I came across a strange thing on a LEEDv3 (v2009) project. One team was working on SSc8 and the other on EAc1. While the exterior lighting power density should be calculated in accordance with A90.1-2007, section 9, Table 1 in both cases, the SSc8 template (referring in the description field to A90.1-2007) was automatically looking up A90.1-2010 values (allowable LPD) while EAc1, table 1.4 was using A90.1-2007 values. I know that usually the LEED reviewer flags (cross-checks SSc8 vs EAc1 ext. lighting calcs) this if inconsistency is found. Has anyone experienced a mistake like this???...and how did you resolve it???

 

Thanks,

Norbert

 

Norbert Repka PhD., 
CGD, LEED(r) BD+C

 

Sustainable

 

AEI | AFFILIATED ENGINEERS, INC.  
5802 Research Park Boulevard | Madison, WI  53719

P: 608.441.6644 | F: 608.238.2614  
nrepka at aeieng.com <mailto:nrepka at aeieng.com>   |  www.aeieng.com <http://www.aeieng.com/>   

 

 


Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE