[Equest-users] Radiant ceilings

[Pasha Korber-Gonzalez]

Hi Adam,

while these systems cannot be modeled explicitly in DOE2.2/eQuest, it can be
your attempt (as well others of us in similar shoes) to model something that
is thermodynamically representative of what your are trying to estimate.
For example could you get a VAV system to thermall act like a radiant
system?   Yes, in some ways by 'turning down' the power consumed by the fans
because a radiant system doesn't consume fan energy with it's operation.
Although a VAV system wouldn't be your best choice, it indicates the way
you'll need to start thinking about how to get done what you are being asked
to do with the limitations you find yourself with.

In short, I'm learning on a project right now how to better represent active
chilled beams for my project.   My approach thus far is to set up (1st) a
Dummy zone (i.e. very little floor area & zero loads) that I can attach a
DOAS System (selected as VAV in eQuest) too.  This will give me my primary
ventilation air system that will "feed" ventilation air to my radiant system
conditioned zones.  The radiant system (represented by a PIU system with
adjustments.) then has the command of "OA from: DOAS system" so that the
occupied zones are fed ventilation air and conditioned by the radiant
system.

This is the approach I'm using for this project.  Is it right?  Is it
wrong?  Is there a better way?----It depends.   I'm trying to make the best
choices based on what my project needs and what information/support I have
found from others.   I also suggest doing a search for 'radiant systems' on
the www.onebuilding.org archives for eQuest & Bldg-Sim at the least.  You
should find more info on which direction/approaches are being applied by
others.

In the end, if you have applied sound engineering theory & fundamentals, and
have reviewed, double & triple checked your results against reference data,
and then you still stand behind your numbers, you should feel that you have
developed a pretty solid model (representation) of your project design.  And
that's the best we can do, until we have the opportunity to M&V the building
after design and verify the validity of our estimatations post-occupancy.
Has anyone else had the opportunity to put thier energy model results to the
test, post-occupancy?

pasha

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:53 AM, Adam M. McMillen <mcmillenam at kjww.com>wrote:

>  Does anyone know if equest can model radiant ceilings (for heating and
> cooling)?
>
>
>
> [image: EmailSigLogo]
>
> * *
>
> *Adam McMillen**, LEED AP BD+C***
>
> Mechanical Engineer | *mcmillenam at kjww.com*
>
>
>
> 1100 Warrenville Road, Suite 400W | Naperville, Illinois 60563
>
> 630.527.2320 | Direct: 630.753.8561 | Fax: 630.527.2321
>
> www.kjww.com
>
>
>
> *“One of the Best AEC Firms to Work For”*
>
> *Building Design + Construction*, March 2008
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
> equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *Dakota Kelley
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 27, 2010 3:52 PM
> *To:* Nick Caton; M. Shields; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] Unmet Hours
>
>
>
> I put one small FYI at the end of Nick’s #3 below, in all caps for the sake
> of the plain text archives…
>
>
>
> Dakota
>
>
>
> *From:* Nick Caton [mailto:ncaton at smithboucher.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 27, 2010 2:33 PM
> *To:* M. Shields; equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] Unmet Hours
>
>
>
> Michael,
>
>
>
> 90.1’s passage (G3.1.2.2) regarding unmet hours requirements is something I
> had to re-read many times to get my head fully wrapped around it… Here’s my
> current interpretation:
>
>
>
> 1.       You need to have 300 or fewer hours in each model.
>
> 2.       The proposed is not allowed to perform worse than the baseline by
> more than 50 unmet hours.  If it does you have to make the baseline
> “underperform” so they’re within 50 of each other.
>
> 3.       The baseline is permitted to perform worse than the proposed (by
> any degree) as long as it’s still 300 or fewer unmet hours. THIS IS MY
> INTERPRETATION AS WELL, BUT IT IS WORTH MENTIONING THAT MORE THAN ONE LEED
> REVIEWER HAS INDICATED THE OPPOSITE.  FOR EXAMPLE, I WAS TOLD I WAS OUT OF
> COMPLIANCE WHEN THE BASELINE HAD 65 UNMET COOLING HOURS AND THE PROPOSED HAD
> 5 UNMET COOLING HOURS.  DO YOU ARGUE, OR JUST REDUCE THE BASELINE HOURS?  IT
> PENALIZES THE BASELINE TO REDUCE THOSE HOURS, SO I WENT AHEAD AND DID WHAT I
> WAS TOLD.
>
>
>
> You haven’t said whether you’re talking about your baseline or proposed
> model, but the above points should guide you as to whether you need to make
> an adjustment.  Refer to G3.1.2.2 for review and further info.
>
>
>
> ~Nick
>
>
>
> [image: cid:489575314 at 22072009-0ABB]**
>
> * *
>
> *NICK CATON, E.I.T.***
>
> PROJECT ENGINEER
>
> 25501 west valley parkway
>
> olathe ks 66061
>
> direct 913 344.0036
>
> fax 913 345.0617
>
> *Check out our new web-site @ *www.smithboucher.com* *
>
>
>
> *From:* equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:
> equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] *On Behalf Of *M. Shields
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 27, 2010 1:19 PM
>
> *To:* equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> *Subject:* [Equest-users] Unmet Hours
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> I am working on filing out the LEED paperwork for submittal and for unmet
> hours I am wondering does the reviewer want the total unmet load hours for
> the building, or an average per zone?  My building has about 100 zones, most
> of which have 0 unmet hours, but I have one zone which has significant (more
> than 50) unmet hours.  Does this mean my model exceeds the requirement that
> the difference between the baseline and the proposed be less than 50 hours?
>
>
>
> Thanks for any advice.
>
>
>
> Michael Shields
>
> Phone: 803-493-4507
> Fax: 803-548-2511
> Email: mshields at fstrategies.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *This message and any attachments contain information intended for a
> specific party and may include sensitive or confidential material. If you
> are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use, or disclose
> to others. Please notify the sender of the delivery error by reply and then
> permanently delete this message and all attachments.*
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20100728/c5902155/attachment-0002.htm>