[Equest-users] LEED review comments

[Jeremy Poling]

16 comments is not too unusual - I've seen even more on a few projects.

 

One comment based on your email and I apologize if I'm reading into it,
but it appears that you may have changed the names of energy end-uses
along the left-hand side of Tables 1.8.1 and 1.8.2 to match the eQuest
output (just based on the things they are asking you to confirm).  One
thing I have found that avoids some of the general "confirm this"
questions is to avoid changing defaults that are setup in the templates.
Instead, if there is something that is different or unusual, use the
special circumstances narrative to explain the difference or why a
default was changed.  

 

I got the impression that review teams have some sort of basic script
that they must review on the models as a minimum - this based on three
completely different projects going to three different review teams and
all of those projects receiving a comment with the same wording asking
us to "explain the Heat Rejection end use as this project does not
appear to include a cooling tower."  My basic lesson from that
experience is to try to avoid changing defaults unless necessary (i.e.
flow rates for plumbing fixtures must be changed in some cases to match
manufacturer literature) and always explain why something was changed in
the special circumstances narrative.  It helps tame down the comments
some!  Good luck with the review!

 

JEREMY R. POLING, PE, LEED AP
Associate Vice President,

Senior Sustainability Analyst
Strategic Services
Site Solutions | Operations | Sustainability

EPSTEIN
Architecture
Interiors
Engineering
Construction

Epstein is a firm believer in sustainability. We ask that you please
consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

 

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Sam
Mason
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 12:27 PM
To: Heather.Hardie-Hill at CH2M.com; eQUEST-users at onebuilding.org
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] LEED review comments

 

Heather,

I hope your first EAc1 review doesn't discourage you and I understand
reaching out for guidance.  

 

1.       It sounds like you did indeed model frames so I would just
provide the additional information on the conductance of the frames and
build a Window5 model to determine the assembly U-value and include both
for the reviewer. 

2.       While not the strangest comment I've seen the GBCI, it is up
there for random and your response seems okay. However, is the
percentage of lighting end-use energy extremely high for the project or
is there another reason they state for making this comment? Just be
thorough in your response.

3.       Pumps and auxiliary energy  includes at least three things:
pumps, furnace pilot lights, and internal energy sources defined as a
space load that use electricity or natural gas.  Without seeing your inp
files, hard to say though.

 

Good luck. It is hard to provide much more help without knowing more
about the project but hopefully this will get you started.

 

Sam

--

Sam Mason

Atelier Ten

 

From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of
Heather.Hardie-Hill at CH2M.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 1:09 PM
To: eQUEST-users at onebuilding.org
Subject: [Equest-users] LEED review comments

 

Hello eQuest Users!

    I realize that this is an eQuest users forum and not necessarily a
LEED help forum but from reading past posts it sound like many of you
have quite a few LEED projects under your belts and I could really use
some advice/help. I just received my first EAc1 LEED review back and
there are 16 comments. Is that normal? I want to make sure that I
understand how eQuest is working for a few of these comments so that I
can answer them completely and correctly.

 

so here are my review comment/questions:

1.	"The Proposed windows were modeled with a U-value of 0.29, which
does not appear to account for the impact of the window frames on the
whole assembly as required by ASHRAE modeling protocol." 

	*	The U-Value of 0.29 is indeed the center of glass
U-Value however I included frame conductance and frame width in the
model. 
	*	Is that enough to account for the "whole assembly"
U-Value? 
	*	or do I need to find a published whole assembly U-Value
for the specified window? 
	*	If I do need the whole assembly U-Value, then should I
remove the frame information from the model?

2.	"Please confirm that the energy consumption attributed to "Area
Lights" on Table 1.8.1 and 1.8.2 represents internal lighting energy
consumption and demand or provide a narrative describing any alternative
uses."

	*	the area lights information came from the "Ambient
Lights" column of the Annual Enduse Summary... so I would say yes, it
represents the lighting energy consumption and demand. Right? 

3.	"Please provide a narrative to describe the end use for the
modeled "Pumps & Auxiliary" as shown on Table 1.8.1 and 1.8.2"

	*	I have not been able to figure out exactly what is
contributing to this load (besides the pumps of course). What, according
to eQuest, is considered "Auxiliary"?

I think that is it for now... I'm sure as I start making adjustments
that I will have additional questions. (The building runs off of a
central chiller plant so I've used the "Required Treatment of District
Thermal Energy in LEED-NC version 2.2" document as a guideline and
haven't quite wrapped my head around the comments related to that)

 

I know that one of the first things you might ask is to see my .inp and
.pd2 files... unfortunately it is for a confidential client and I am
unable to share that information.

 

One more quick thing... Although I do not regularly contribute to the
forum I try to read all of the threads as they come through (admittedly,
I'm a little behind right now). It is comforting to know that I am not
the only one having issues with energy modeling and eQuest. It is also
comforting knowing that I can ask you questions and I don't have to bang
my head against a wall trying to figure it all out on my own! so, thanks
in advance for the help!!!!

 

Heather Hardie-Hill

EIT, LEEDTM AP

 

CH2M HILL

Industrial & Advanced Technologies

Portland, OR 97201

e: heather.hardie-hill at ch2m.com

 

 


________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20100616/8061b7fb/attachment-0002.htm>