[Equest-users] Equest-users Digest, Vol 46, Issue 23

[Fisnik Rushiti]

Nic,

In addition to what others did mention, do not be surprised if (and this 
is due to the increase of insulation) for internal load type of the 
building actually you get higher energy use and, not the savings, relate 
this explanation to the  thermos: , higher R (resistance) value, less 
heat transfer, smaller time lag differential through envelope, more 
cooling internaly needed due to thermostat set points.
Note that your building location, climate data is very important as always.

Kind Regards,
Fisnik

Fisnik Rushiti, Dipl.Eng.Arch.
Energy Analyst
608-232-4323
Flad Architects
644 Science Drive
PO Box 44977
Madison, WI  53711
P 608-238-2661
F 608-238-6727
E frushiti at flad.com
www.flad.com

please consider the environment before printing this email


On 1/25/2012 3:34 PM, equest-users-request at lists.onebuilding.org wrote:
> From:
> nic <ffonics at gmail.com>
> Date:
> 1/25/2012 3:00 PM
>
> To:
> equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
>
>
> I am attempting to establish a few alternatives compared to an ASHRAE 
> 90.1 Wall construction. This much seems pretty straightforward with 
> the only change between alternatives being a different construction 
> applied to the exterior above grade walls. All alternatives are 
> modeled as delayed and with layered materials. The wall from outside 
> to inside is stucco(finish) R0.08 + Cont. Insulation R-VARIES + Ext 
> sheathing R0.56 + Framing/Insulation R-VARIES* + Int. Sheating R0.56 
> (air films do not change, infiltration does not change, etc.)
>
> *framing 16" Mtl OC taken into account
>
> <<< I should mention the building is very much internal load dominant 
> as an education building with a lot of laboratory space >>>
>
> The problem described below has been input into eQuest using material 
> properties for all continuous insulation and a representative R-value 
> for framing/insulation.
>
>
> BASELINE - 90.1 - R6* + 7.5 ci na
>
> ALT1 - only ext insulation R0.9 + 12 ci -8% savings (% energy under 
> EUI - kBtu/sf/yr)
>
> ALT2 - improved ext insulation R6* + 12 ci +1% savings
>
> ALT3 - improved cavity insulation R7.1* + 7.5 ci +1% savings
>
> ALT4 - all insulation improved R7.1* + 12 ci +2% savings
>
> I guess the question really is; does the issue lie within the vav 
> systems or the envelope or both?
>
> As a novice, I greatly appreciate any help.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20120125/b18bf857/attachment.htm>