Re: [EnergyPlus_Support] Re: Sizing according to ASHRAE 90.1

Site:Location,
MILAN_ITA Design_Conditions,     !- Location Name
      45.62,     !- Latitude {N+ S-}
       8.73,     !- Longitude {W- E+}
       1.00,     !- Time Zone Relative to GMT {GMT+/-}
     211.00;     !- Elevation {m}

! WMO=160660 Time Zone=EUW: (GMT+01:00) Amsterdam, Berlin, Bern, Rome, Stockholm, Vienna
! Data Source=ASHRAE 2009 Annual Design Conditions
RunPeriodControl:DaylightSavingTime,
   Last Sunday in March,    !- StartDate
   Last Sunday in October;    !- EndDate

! Using Design Conditions from "Climate Design Data 2009 ASHRAE Handbook"
! MILAN_ITA Extreme Annual Wind Speeds, 1%=6.8m/s, 2.5%=5m/s, 5%=3.9m/s
! MILAN_ITA Extreme Annual Temperatures, Max Drybulb=-12.1°C Min Drybulb=34°C

! MILAN_ITA Annual Heating Design Conditions Wind Speed=0.2m/s Wind Dir=0
! Coldest Month=JAN
! MILAN_ITA Annual Heating 99.6%, MaxDB=-9.1°C
SizingPeriod:DesignDay,
MILAN Ann Htg 99.6% Condns DB,     !- Name
          1,      !- Month
         21,      !- Day of Month
WinterDesignDay,!- Day Type
       -9.1,      !- Maximum Dry-Bulb Temperature {C}
        0.0,      !- Daily Dry-Bulb Temperature Range {C}
DefaultMultipliers, !- Dry-Bulb Temperature Range Modifier Type
           ,      !- Dry-Bulb Temperature Range Modifier Schedule Name
    Wetbulb,      !- Humidity Condition Type
       -9.1,      !- Wetbulb at Maximum Dry-Bulb {C}
           ,      !- Humidity Indicating Day Schedule Name
           ,      !- Humidity Ratio at Maximum Dry-Bulb {kgWater/kgDryAir}
           ,      !- Enthalpy at Maximum Dry-Bulb {J/kg}
           ,      !- Daily Wet-Bulb Temperature Range {deltaC}
     98816.,      !- Barometric Pressure {Pa}
        0.2,      !- Wind Speed {m/s} design conditions vs. traditional 6.71 m/s (15 mph)
          0,      !- Wind Direction {Degrees; N=0, S=180}
         No,      !- Rain {Yes/No}
         No,      !- Snow on ground {Yes/No}
         No,      !- Daylight Savings Time Indicator
ASHRAEClearSky, !- Solar Model Indicator
           ,      !- Beam Solar Day Schedule Name
           ,      !- Diffuse Solar Day Schedule Name
           ,      !- ASHRAE Clear Sky Optical Depth for Beam Irradiance (taub)
           ,      !- ASHRAE Clear Sky Optical Depth for Diffuse Irradiance (taud)
       0.00;      !- Clearness {0.0 to 1.1}

! MILAN_ITA Annual Cooling (DB=>MWB) 1%, MaxDB=30.6°C MWB=21.9°C
SizingPeriod:DesignDay,
MILAN Ann Clg 1% Condns DB=>MWB,     !- Name
          7,      !- Month
         21,      !- Day of Month
SummerDesignDay,!- Day Type
       30.6,      !- Maximum Dry-Bulb Temperature {C}
         12,      !- Daily Dry-Bulb Temperature Range {C}
DefaultMultipliers, !- Dry-Bulb Temperature Range Modifier Type
           ,      !- Dry-Bulb Temperature Range Modifier Schedule Name
    Wetbulb,      !- Humidity Condition Type
       21.9,      !- Wetbulb at Maximum Dry-Bulb {C}
           ,      !- Humidity Indicating Day Schedule Name
           ,      !- Humidity Ratio at Maximum Dry-Bulb {kgWater/kgDryAir}
           ,      !- Enthalpy at Maximum Dry-Bulb {J/kg}
           ,      !- Daily Wet-Bulb Temperature Range {deltaC}
     98816.,      !- Barometric Pressure {Pa}
          2,      !- Wind Speed {m/s} design conditions vs. traditional 3.35 m/s (7mph)
        240,      !- Wind Direction {Degrees; N=0, S=180}
         No,      !- Rain {Yes/No}
         No,      !- Snow on ground {Yes/No}
         No,      !- Daylight Savings Time Indicator
       ASHRAETau, !- Solar Model Indicator
           ,      !- Beam Solar Day Schedule Name
           ,      !- Diffuse Solar Day Schedule Name
      0.488,      !- ASHRAE Clear Sky Optical Depth for Beam Irradiance (taub)
      1.889;      !- ASHRAE Clear Sky Optical Depth for Diffuse Irradiance (taud)

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:08 AM, FrancescoP <direzionecontraria@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Unfortunately, I have another doubt. What is the best solution for the choice of the weather data for the sizing period? I know that I have to respect paragraph G3.1.2.2.1 but I don't have statistical data to develop "design days developed using 99.6% heating design temperature and 1% dry-bulb and 1% wetbulb cooling design temperatures".
Is using the same test reference year that I use for the annual simulation acceptable for LEED reviewers?
In that case, I would use the object "SizingPeriod:WeatherFileDays" and I would create two objects: one with the three coldest months (field "Day of Week for Start Day": WinterDesignDay) the other one with the three warmest months (field "Day of Week for Start Day": WinterDesignDay). Do you think it is a good idea?
Best Regards
Francesco