[Equest-users] Equest-users Digest, Vol 12, Issue 17

mahesh at iaindia.com mahesh at iaindia.com
Tue Mar 17 07:13:05 PDT 2009


Dear All

Do you know how to calculate the total quantity of water required for 
Evaporative cooling using equest

Kindly help  me in this

Regards
Mahesh
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <equest-users-request at lists.onebuilding.org>
To: <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 7:40 PM
Subject: Equest-users Digest, Vol 12, Issue 17


> Send Equest-users mailing list submissions to
> equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> equest-users-request at lists.onebuilding.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> equest-users-owner at lists.onebuilding.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Equest-users digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Ceiling/Bybass VAV System (Tony Kriel)
>   2. Equest errors (mark1st at HOTMAIL.COM)
>   3. Electrical loads (Mike Rabena)
>   4. Re: Electrical loads (Mike Rabena)
>   5. Re: Electrical loads (Brahme, Rohini            UTRC)
>   6. Re: Electrical loads (Hernandez, Arturo)
>   7. Re: Electrical loads (Karen Walkerman)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:06:11 -0500
> From: "Tony Kriel" <tkriel at sustaineng.com>
> Subject: [Equest-users] Ceiling/Bybass VAV System
> To: <bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org>,
> <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
> Message-ID: <002301c9a672$a75ea4d0$0600a8c0 at LakeWaubesa>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> General question:  Has anyone modeled a Ceiling/Bybass VAV System (aka
> Changeover/Bybass VAV System) in eQUEST with a DX air cooled condensing
> unit?
>
>
>
> When I select this system it automatically wants me to assign a CHW loop.
> The sub-tabs under the "Cooling" tab are "greyed-out" for "Unitary Power"
> and "Condenser", basically preventing me from selecting a DX system.
>
>
>
> Is there anyway to override this so I can assign a DX system?
>
>
>
> Thanks, I sure do appreciate the help.
>
>
>
> Tony Kriel, LEED AP
>
> Mechanical Engineer
>
> tkriel at sustaineng.com
>
> (608) 231-9664 ext. 16
>
>
>
> Sustainable Engineering Group, LLC.
>
> 431 Charmany Drive, Suite 102
>
> Madison, WI 53719
>
> www.sustaineng.com
>
>
>
> <mailto:tkriel at sustaineng.com>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090316/d1eb2f83/attachment-0001.htm>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 02:40:35 -0600
> From: <mark1st at HOTMAIL.COM>
> Subject: [Equest-users] Equest errors
> To: <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
> Message-ID: <SNT101-DS4B3ECE1C9E7A6C069A4BCEC980 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I was working on my eQuest simulation for my thesis and I got 4 errors and 
> 1 warning,
> I am using HVAC DX coils with no heating,
> but I got these errors in my report
> any idea about them ...
> thanks
> Marc
>
> "   ActArea 1:  -1.$% of Bldg, or      0 SqFt
> ********************** == 
> ******************************************************
> UNKNOWN COMMAND
> Line  2037:  Circulation Loop:  Domestic Hot Water Loop
> Line  2044:  DW Heater:  Domestic Water Heater
> Line  2051:  Warning Encountered:
>  INPUT-TYPE COEFFICIENTS ..
> HIR-FPLR = *UNUSED*
> Line  2053:  Loads Report
> Line  2057:  Systems Report
> Line  2061:  Plant Report
> Line  2065:  Economics Report
> Line  2070:  Hourly Report:  Hourly Report
> Line  2074:  End
> Line  2074:  Error Encountered:
>
> INPUT DATA MUST INCLUDE AT LEAST ONE SPACE COMMAND (lLineNum = 1000000)
> Line  2074:  Error Encountered:
>
> INPUT DATA MUST INCLUDE AT LEAST ONE SYSTEM COMMAND (lLineNum = 1000000)
> Line  2074:  Error Encountered:
>
> INPUT DATA MUST INCLUDE AT LEAST ONE ZONE COMMAND (lLineNum = 1000000)"
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090317/b6dc74a3/attachment-0001.htm>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 05:53:38 -0500
> From: "Mike Rabena" <mrabena at thepdcgroup.com>
> Subject: [Equest-users] Electrical loads
> To: <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
> Message-ID:
> <CC45736D502FE7479F219430A5673CE5019FB8 at PDCSERVER.PDCGROUP.LOCAL>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> When modeling energy use in a residential high-rise I set up schedules
> for misc. loads like refrigerator, microwave, oven washer/dryer etc.. I
> actually lumped these all into 1 schedule, approximated their actual
> loads and then applied a daily and weekend schedule to approximate their
> use.
>
>
>
> My schedules showed pretty low percentages since these appliances would
> not be used much.
>
>
>
> I received comments from the client and another modeler that these loads
> are inconsequential and should not be incorporated into the model.
>
> Here is the comment
>
> Plug-ins are typically assumed to be the copiers, medical equipment, etc
> and I would think refrigerators, microwaves because how do we really
> measure the use of such things in a current comprehensive computer
> modeling situation - it's beyond a scope of comparison in a finite way
> - that's why MISC should be junked.
>
>
>
>
>
> Any opinions?
>
>
>
> Mike Rabena, P.E., LEED AP
>
>
>
> 14011 Park Dr.
>
> Suite 209
>
> Tomball, TX 77377
>
> PH:  281-356-9002- EXT 202
>
> FX:   281-356-9008
>
> Cell: 832-493-2066
>
>
>
> Website: www.thepdcgroup.com
> <blocked::BLOCKED::http://www.thepdcgroup.com/>
>
> P.E. Registrations: TX, LA. OH. CO. MS. CA. FL. OK
>
> The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.
> This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual(s) or
> organization(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an
> authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its
> attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited.
> If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the
> sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090317/0eef1120/attachment-0001.htm>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: image/png
> Size: 20558 bytes
> Desc: image001.png
> URL: 
> <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090317/0eef1120/attachment-0001.png>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 05:57:50 -0500
> From: "Mike Rabena" <mrabena at thepdcgroup.com>
> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Electrical loads
> To: <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
> Message-ID:
> <CC45736D502FE7479F219430A5673CE5019FB9 at PDCSERVER.PDCGROUP.LOCAL>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> The last question is specific to LEED EA Credit 1
>
>
>
> Mike Rabena, P.E., LEED AP
>
>
>
> 14011 Park Dr.
>
> Suite 209
>
> Tomball, TX 77377
>
> PH:  281-356-9002- EXT 202
>
> FX:   281-356-9008
>
> Cell: 832-493-2066
>
>
>
> Website: www.thepdcgroup.com
> <blocked::BLOCKED::http://www.thepdcgroup.com/>
>
> P.E. Registrations: TX, LA. OH. CO. MS. CA. FL. OK
>
> The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.
> This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual(s) or
> organization(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an
> authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its
> attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited.
> If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the
> sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You
>
>
>
> From: Mike Rabena
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 5:54 AM
> To: 'equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org'
> Subject: Electrical loads
>
>
>
> When modeling energy use in a residential high-rise I set up schedules
> for misc. loads like refrigerator, microwave, oven washer/dryer etc.. I
> actually lumped these all into 1 schedule, approximated their actual
> loads and then applied a daily and weekend schedule to approximate their
> use.
>
>
>
> My schedules showed pretty low percentages since these appliances would
> not be used much.
>
>
>
> I received comments from the client and another modeler that these loads
> are inconsequential and should not be incorporated into the model.
>
> Here is the comment
>
> Plug-ins are typically assumed to be the copiers, medical equipment, etc
> and I would think refrigerators, microwaves because how do we really
> measure the use of such things in a current comprehensive computer
> modeling situation - it's beyond a scope of comparison in a finite way
> - that's why MISC should be junked.
>
>
>
>
>
> Any opinions?
>
>
>
> Mike Rabena, P.E., LEED AP
>
>
>
> 14011 Park Dr.
>
> Suite 209
>
> Tomball, TX 77377
>
> PH:  281-356-9002- EXT 202
>
> FX:   281-356-9008
>
> Cell: 832-493-2066
>
>
>
> Website: www.thepdcgroup.com
> <blocked::BLOCKED::http://www.thepdcgroup.com/>
>
> P.E. Registrations: TX, LA. OH. CO. MS. CA. FL. OK
>
> The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.
> This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual(s) or
> organization(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an
> authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its
> attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited.
> If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the
> sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090317/7eb3d1e9/attachment-0001.htm>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: image/png
> Size: 20558 bytes
> Desc: image001.png
> URL: 
> <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090317/7eb3d1e9/attachment-0001.png>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 08:52:23 -0400
> From: "Brahme, Rohini            UTRC" <BrahmeR at utrc.utc.com>
> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Electrical loads
> To: "Mike Rabena" <mrabena at thepdcgroup.com>,
> <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
> Message-ID:
> <6B126C65D016E2439B381C6CDB783CF40164FD1C at UUSNWEG1.na.utcmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> There is a requirement of 25% of the total cost should be misc loads for
> LEED.
>
> Also, when you look at the breakdown of energy efficient residences, the
> plug loads is a big chunk.
>
> -Rohini
>
>
>
> From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
> [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Mike
> Rabena
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:58 AM
> To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Electrical loads
>
>
>
> The last question is specific to LEED EA Credit 1
>
>
>
> Mike Rabena, P.E., LEED AP
>
>
>
> 14011 Park Dr.
>
> Suite 209
>
> Tomball, TX 77377
>
> PH:  281-356-9002- EXT 202
>
> FX:   281-356-9008
>
> Cell: 832-493-2066
>
>
>
> Website: www.thepdcgroup.com
> <blocked::BLOCKED::http://www.thepdcgroup.com/>
>
> P.E. Registrations: TX, LA. OH. CO. MS. CA. FL. OK
>
> The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.
> This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual(s) or
> organization(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an
> authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its
> attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited.
> If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the
> sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You
>
>
>
> From: Mike Rabena
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 5:54 AM
> To: 'equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org'
> Subject: Electrical loads
>
>
>
> When modeling energy use in a residential high-rise I set up schedules
> for misc. loads like refrigerator, microwave, oven washer/dryer etc.. I
> actually lumped these all into 1 schedule, approximated their actual
> loads and then applied a daily and weekend schedule to approximate their
> use.
>
>
>
> My schedules showed pretty low percentages since these appliances would
> not be used much.
>
>
>
> I received comments from the client and another modeler that these loads
> are inconsequential and should not be incorporated into the model.
>
> Here is the comment
>
> Plug-ins are typically assumed to be the copiers, medical equipment, etc
> and I would think refrigerators, microwaves because how do we really
> measure the use of such things in a current comprehensive computer
> modeling situation - it's beyond a scope of comparison in a finite way
> - that's why MISC should be junked.
>
>
>
>
>
> Any opinions?
>
>
>
> Mike Rabena, P.E., LEED AP
>
>
>
> 14011 Park Dr.
>
> Suite 209
>
> Tomball, TX 77377
>
> PH:  281-356-9002- EXT 202
>
> FX:   281-356-9008
>
> Cell: 832-493-2066
>
>
>
> Website: www.thepdcgroup.com
> <blocked::BLOCKED::http://www.thepdcgroup.com/>
>
> P.E. Registrations: TX, LA. OH. CO. MS. CA. FL. OK
>
> The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.
> This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual(s) or
> organization(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an
> authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its
> attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited.
> If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the
> sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090317/322c64e8/attachment-0001.htm>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: image/png
> Size: 20558 bytes
> Desc: image001.png
> URL: 
> <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090317/322c64e8/attachment-0001.png>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 08:25:50 -0500
> From: "Hernandez, Arturo" <ahernandez at owpp.com>
> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Electrical loads
> To: "Brahme, Rohini            UTRC" <BrahmeR at utrc.utc.com>, "Mike
> Rabena" <mrabena at thepdcgroup.com>,
> <equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
> Message-ID:
> <3D717C1ADEF2334AA91C22EFC7ACD7070E8449BC at chgo-ex.corp.owpp.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> FOR LEED the 25% is not a requirement. It is more of a guideline for
> energy modelers to account for energy consumption on their plug loads.
> If the 25% of the Process Load is not reached then you should
> documentation explaining your assumptions. For example in a hospital you
> would typically go over the 25%, this doesn't  mean you stop at 25%, you
> should account for whatever your plug load is and do not have to submit
> extra documentation (unless asked). On the other hand if you had a
> school, you would probably fall short of the 25% making you submit extra
> documentation with your assumptions. As long as your assumptions are
> reasonable the 25% should not be a big issue. In your case you would
> have give your schedule and energy intensity of your plug loads and
> explain your assumptions based on a reference.
>
>
>
> ARTURO HERNANDEZ, LEED AP
>
>
>
> From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
> [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Brahme,
> Rohini UTRC
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 7:52 AM
> To: Mike Rabena; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Electrical loads
>
>
>
> There is a requirement of 25% of the total cost should be misc loads for
> LEED.
>
> Also, when you look at the breakdown of energy efficient residences, the
> plug loads is a big chunk.
>
> -Rohini
>
>
>
> From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
> [mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Mike
> Rabena
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:58 AM
> To: equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Electrical loads
>
>
>
> The last question is specific to LEED EA Credit 1
>
>
>
> Mike Rabena, P.E., LEED AP
>
>
>
> 14011 Park Dr.
>
> Suite 209
>
> Tomball, TX 77377
>
> PH:  281-356-9002- EXT 202
>
> FX:   281-356-9008
>
> Cell: 832-493-2066
>
>
>
> Website: www.thepdcgroup.com
> <blocked::BLOCKED::http://www.thepdcgroup.com/>
>
> P.E. Registrations: TX, LA. OH. CO. MS. CA. FL. OK
>
> The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.
> This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual(s) or
> organization(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an
> authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its
> attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited.
> If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the
> sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You
>
>
>
> From: Mike Rabena
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 5:54 AM
> To: 'equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org'
> Subject: Electrical loads
>
>
>
> When modeling energy use in a residential high-rise I set up schedules
> for misc. loads like refrigerator, microwave, oven washer/dryer etc.. I
> actually lumped these all into 1 schedule, approximated their actual
> loads and then applied a daily and weekend schedule to approximate their
> use.
>
>
>
> My schedules showed pretty low percentages since these appliances would
> not be used much.
>
>
>
> I received comments from the client and another modeler that these loads
> are inconsequential and should not be incorporated into the model.
>
> Here is the comment
>
> Plug-ins are typically assumed to be the copiers, medical equipment, etc
> and I would think refrigerators, microwaves because how do we really
> measure the use of such things in a current comprehensive computer
> modeling situation - it's beyond a scope of comparison in a finite way
> - that's why MISC should be junked.
>
>
>
>
>
> Any opinions?
>
>
>
> Mike Rabena, P.E., LEED AP
>
>
>
> 14011 Park Dr.
>
> Suite 209
>
> Tomball, TX 77377
>
> PH:  281-356-9002- EXT 202
>
> FX:   281-356-9008
>
> Cell: 832-493-2066
>
>
>
> Website: www.thepdcgroup.com
> <blocked::BLOCKED::http://www.thepdcgroup.com/>
>
> P.E. Registrations: TX, LA. OH. CO. MS. CA. FL. OK
>
> The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.
> This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual(s) or
> organization(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an
> authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its
> attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited.
> If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the
> sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090317/19511341/attachment-0001.htm>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: image/png
> Size: 20558 bytes
> Desc: image001.png
> URL: 
> <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20090317/19511341/attachment-0001.png>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:10:33 -0400
> From: Karen Walkerman <kwalkerman at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] Electrical loads
> To: "Hernandez, Arturo" <ahernandez at owpp.com>
> Cc: Mike Rabena <mrabena at thepdcgroup.com>,
> equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> Message-ID:
> <69a9bc0a0903170710s5d0c4f6dhcb69e8d83925a351 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> I would hardly say that residential internal loads are inconsequential. 
> You
> can get average yearly energy use for refrigerators and washing machines
> from the energy star website.  You'll then have to break it down into 
> power
> density and a yearly use schedule.  Also check out:
>
> http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs2001/enduse2001/enduse2001.html
>
> for general appliance yearly energy use.  Funny thing is that residential
> apartment lighting seems to be the most difficult parameter to nail down.
>
> --
> Karen
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Hernandez, Arturo 
> <ahernandez at owpp.com>wrote:
>
>>  *FOR LEED* the 25% is not a requirement. It is more of a guideline for
>> energy modelers to account for energy consumption on their plug loads. If
>> the 25% of the Process Load is not reached then you should documentation
>> explaining your assumptions. For example in a hospital you would 
>> typically
>> go over the 25%, this doesn?t  mean you stop at 25%, you should account 
>> for
>> whatever your plug load is and do not have to submit extra documentation
>> (unless asked). On the other hand if you had a school, you would probably
>> fall short of the 25% making you submit extra documentation with your
>> assumptions. As long as your assumptions are reasonable the 25% should 
>> not
>> be a big issue. In your case you would have give your schedule and energy
>> intensity of your plug loads and explain your assumptions based on a
>> reference.
>>
>>
>>
>> *ARTURO HERNANDEZ, LEED AP*
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
>> equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *Brahme, Rohini
>> UTRC
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 17, 2009 7:52 AM
>> *To:* Mike Rabena; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] Electrical loads
>>
>>
>>
>> There is a requirement of 25% of the total cost should be misc loads for
>> LEED.
>>
>> Also, when you look at the breakdown of energy efficient residences, the
>> plug loads is a big chunk.
>>
>> -Rohini
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
>> equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *Mike Rabena
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:58 AM
>> *To:* equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] Electrical loads
>>
>>
>>
>> The last question is specific to LEED EA Credit 1
>>
>>
>>
>> *Mike Rabena, P.E., LEED AP*
>>
>> *[image: PDC LOGO]***
>>
>> *14011 Park Dr.*
>>
>> *Suite 209*
>>
>> *Tomball, TX 77377*
>>
>> *PH:  281-356-9002- EXT 202*
>>
>> *FX:   281-356-9008*
>>
>> *Cell: 832-493-2066*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> Website: *www.thepdcgroup.com*
>>
>> P.E. Registrations: TX, LA. OH. CO. MS. CA. FL. OK
>>
>> * **The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.
>> This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual(s) or
>> organization(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an
>> authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby 
>> notified
>> that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its 
>> attachments,
>> if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have
>> received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by 
>> return
>> email and delete this email from your system. Thank You*
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Mike Rabena
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 17, 2009 5:54 AM
>> *To:* 'equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org'
>> *Subject:* Electrical loads
>>
>>
>>
>> When modeling energy use in a residential high-rise I set up schedules 
>> for
>> misc. loads like refrigerator, microwave, oven washer/dryer etc.. I 
>> actually
>> lumped these all into 1 schedule, approximated their actual loads and 
>> then
>> applied a daily and weekend schedule to approximate their use.
>>
>>
>>
>> My schedules showed pretty low percentages since these appliances would 
>> not
>> be used much.
>>
>>
>>
>> I received comments from the client and another modeler that these loads
>> are inconsequential and should not be incorporated into the model.
>>
>> Here is the comment
>>
>> *Plug-ins are typically assumed to be the copiers, medical equipment, etc
>> and I would think refrigerators, microwaves because how do we really 
>> measure
>> the use of such things in a current comprehensive computer modeling
>> situation ? it?s beyond a scope of comparison in a finite way  - that?s 
>> why
>> MISC should be junked.*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Any opinions?
>>
>>
>>
>> *Mike Rabena, P.E., LEED AP*
>>
>> *[image: PDC LOGO]***
>>
>> *14011 Park Dr.*
>>
>> *Suite 209*
>>
>> *Tomball, TX 77377*
>>
>> *PH:  281-356-9002- EXT 202*
>>
>> *FX:   281-356-9008*
>>
>> *Cell: 832-493-2066*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> Website: *www.thepdcgroup.com*
>>
>> P.E. Registrations: TX, LA. OH. CO. MS. CA. FL. OK
>>
>> * **The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.
>> This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual(s) or
>> organization(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an
>> authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby 
>> notified
>> that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its 
>> attachments,
>> if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have
>> received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by 
>> return
>> email and delete this email from your system. Thank You*
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20090317/b94559f6/attachment.htm>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Equest-users mailing list
> Equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
>
>
> End of Equest-users Digest, Vol 12, Issue 17
> ******************************************** 




More information about the Equest-users mailing list