Hi eQuesters...
I'm now running the latest 3.65 version and I have a new model (baseline)
that is showing results that seem very low in order of magnitude. My
baseline file is producing 11 kWh/ft2.
All throttling range hours are in check for the time being. I'd like if
someone could give my model a 'second pair of eyes' and see if there is
something that I've input, or haven't input that is causing this low order
of magnitude on results.
This is an office building, quite large, and approximately 80% glass.
I've attached the files and the weather file. If anyone has a bit of time
to take a look.
My phone number is 308-763-1593 if it is easier to give me a call if you'd
like.
I appreciate any comments or time anyone can offer.
Thanks!
Pasha
And you are only cooling to 76 DegF, and not on weekends.
Again, try these to help you.
JOhn
Hi eQuesters...
I'm now running the latest 3.65 version and I have a new model (baseline) that is showing results that seem very low in order of magnitude.? My baseline file is producing 11 kWh/ft2.
All throttling range hours are in check for the time being.? I'd like if someone could give my model a 'second pair of eyes' and see if there is something that I've input, or haven't input that is causing this low order of magnitude on results.
This is an office building, quite large, and approximately 80% glass.
I've attached the files and the weather file.? If anyone has a bit of time to take a look.
My phone number is 308-763-1593 if it is easier to give me a call if you'd like.
I appreciate any comments or time anyone can offer.
Thanks!Pasha
_______________________________________________
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
A few observations:
? Don?t equate GLASS-CONDUCTANCE with assembly U-value (see the associated help entry) ? fixing this will bump up your solar conductive gains a bit
? Site EUI is ~40 ? not bonkers low? see next point.
? I was not familiar with the climate in Tel Aviv, so worth a check. Visualizing drybulb from the provided weather file demonstrates really decent annual temperatures ? you don?t ever stray very far from 70-75. In fact through the dead of summer 75 looks like the 24 hour average between day and night temps:
? This weather data also looks to be in general agreement with some cursory googling, so not terribly suspect:
Give yourself some moderate internal loads (lighting/plug load densities look in line with 90.1-2007), and this should probably be a cooling-dominated building on an annual basis, with heating/cooling enduses not playing a dominant role.
All of that is reflected in the present outputs:
I performed a few other cursory spot-checks, and I didn?t find anything seriously awry in terms of baseline hydronic efficiencies or related calculations (you?ll want to revisit tower and pumping power inputs before finishing, but they?re in the right ballpark now).
You might find a helpful swing in fan energies after doing your Pfan calcs, but be sure to document / seek out any fan static pressure credits you can claim (I observe fans are user-defaulted to 4? static at present).
From there you might find it beneficial to dig deeper into not missing any process loads (i.e. elevator banks & garage ventilation are probably in play for this case).
Altogether, this doesn?t look like a climate conducive to relatively bad baseline EUI?s (if that makes sense)!
~Nick
Nick Caton, P.E.
Senior Energy Engineer
Energy and Sustainability Services
Schneider Electric
D 913.564.6361
M 785.410.3317
E nicholas.caton at schneider-electric.com
F 913.564.6380
15200 Santa Fe Trail Drive
Suite 204
Lenexa, KS 66219
United States
Thanks John & Nick, I appreciate the feedback. Yes the climate is fairly moderate and temperate in characteristics, but I had really expected to see a more significant EUI for the baseline model. Maybe I was expecting too much!
Your general feedback and time gives me more confidence that I'm not as far off as I initially thought.
Thanks! I hope I can return the favor sometime!
Pasha
Ph: 308-763-1593
Hi Pasha,
Actually the kWh/sq. feet is 48.94 .
As the conditioned area is 401,689 sq. feet and the built-up area excluding
the basements is 400,936 sq. feet.
The consumptions are as follows:
1. in kWh 11,181,000 kWh.
2. Also in extra Btu 28.93 MMBtuh which is heating.
So the overall energy consumption is as 19,659,544 kWh.
Hence as per the above 19,659,544 kWh/ 401,689 sq. feet. the energy
performing index 48.94 kWh/ sq. feet.
As the basements are unconditioned and also there has been no lighting
miscellaneous load so the energy performance index has not been calculated
as per the loads of basements. Hence there has been no consideration of
energy load as there has not been so the basements has been excluded from
the area calculations.
Also, i find there is plenty of glasses so there can be high EUI or EPI.
Please relax.
*Thanks.*
Sharad.
Hi Sharad-- thank you for taking the time to look at this, very
appreciated. I'm glad that you pointed out the EUI of 48.94 kWh/ sq.
feet. I think I was mis-calculating this somehow because my kWh/sq ft was
coming out much lower (around 12.8) so this is where my concern was coming
from. I'll go back to my numbers and see if I was maybe including the area
of the parking garages...I'll check on this.
Also, yes you are right about the glass, there is close to 80% glass on
some facades of the building.
Thanks again for your feed back. This is helpful to me.
As always I love being a part of this eQuest list, it is so helpful to have
so many "eQuest friends" to go to for extra support. :)
Take care, if I can ever be of help to you in the future please call on me.