ASHRAE 2010 Winter Conference January 24, 2010 Orlando, Florida
29
Using the Benchmark Building Models for the Standard 90.1 Development Bing Liu, P.E., C.E.M. LEED AP Senior Research Engineer Pacific Northwest National Laboratory ASHRAE 2010 Winter Conference January 24, 2010 Orlando, Florida
description
Using the Benchmark Building Models for the Standard 90.1 Development Bi ng Liu, P.E., C.E.M. LEED AP Senior Research Engineer Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. ASHRAE 2010 Winter Conference January 24, 2010 Orlando, Florida. ASHRAE Standard 90.1 Background. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of ASHRAE 2010 Winter Conference January 24, 2010 Orlando, Florida
Using the Benchmark Building Models for the
Standard 90.1 Development
Bing Liu, P.E., C.E.M. LEED AP
Senior Research Engineer
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
ASHRAE 2010 Winter ConferenceJanuary 24, 2010Orlando, Florida
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 Background
Energy design standard for commercial and high-rise (> 3 stories) multi-family residential buildingsBaseline of many above-code programs for commercial building energy efficiency, including AEDGs, Standard 189.1, and LEEDDeveloped in an ANSI consensus process by ASHRAE and IESNA in a 3-year publication cycle.
2
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 Goal: 30% improvement in stringency over Standard 90.1-2004
3
PNNL’s Simulation Support to 90.1
Energy Saving AnalysesSupport subcommittees’ new proposalsDevelop the building load profiles for MSCUpdate the regression equations for ESC
Progress Indicator
Track the energy saving impacts during development of the 90.1-2010 in achieving the 30% goal
DOE’s Determination
Estimate the energy savings of 90.1-2007 and 90.1-2010 as part of DOE’s Determination Quantitative Analysis.
4
90.1 Simulation - Prototype Buildings
5
Serial No ASHRAE PrototypeTotal Floor Area
(x1000 ft²) Weights1 Large Office 220,134 2.66%2 Medium Office 400,091 4.84%3 Small Office 371,009 4.49%4 Standalone Retail 1,009,246 12.21%5 Strip Mall 375,093 4.54%6 Primary School 330,418 4.00%7 Secondary School 685,508 8.29%8 Hospital 228,131 2.76%9 Outpatient Health Care 289,171 3.50%
10 Full Service Restaurant 43,650 0.53%11 Quick Service Restaurant 38,809 0.47%12 Large Hotel 327,562 3.96%13 Small hotel/motel 113,837 1.38%
14 Non-refrigerated warehouse 1,105,951 13.38%15 High-rise apartment 593,241 7.18%16 Mid-rise apartment 484,343 5.86% Covered by Prototypes 6,616,193 80.0%
17 No Prototype 1,649,785 20.0%18 Total 8,265,977 100.0%
CBECS Type
Total Floor Area
(x1000 ft²) Weights17A Pubic Assembly 414,953 5.02%17B Food Sales 96,990 1.17%17C Other 769,423 9.31%17D Public Order and Safety 121,907 1.47%17E Religious Worship 184,143 2.23%17F Service 62,369 0.75%
McGraw-Hill Construction Data by Building Type
Floor area (ft²) No. of Floors Aspect
Ratio WWR
84,360 10 2.75 15%
Non-benchmark Building:High-rise Apartment
HVAC system: Water-source heat pump systemFluid cooler and boiler
PNNL report on construction weights: http://www.pnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-19116.pdf
90.1 Simulation - Representative Climate Cities
6
ZoneClimate Zone Name & Type Mechanical Envelope
1A Very Hot - Humid Miami FL Miami FL1B Very Hot - Dry Riyadh, Saudi Arabia2A Hot - Humid Houston, TX2B Hot - Dry Phoenix AZ Phoenix AZ3A Warm - Humid Memphis, TN Memphis, TN3B Warm - Dry El Paso, TX3C Warm - Marine San Francisco, CA4A Mixed - Humid Baltimore, MD Baltimore, MD4B Mixed - Dry Albuquerque NM4C Mixed - Marine Salem OR5A Cool - Humid Chicago IL Chicago IL5B Cool - Dry Boise ID5C Cool - Marine Vancouver, BC6A Cool - Humid Burlington VT6B Cool - Dry Helena MT Helena MT7 Very Cold Duluth, MN Duluth, MN8 Subarctic Fairbanks, AK Fairbanks, AK
Progress Indicator - Overview
To measure progress toward the 30% improvement goal in Standard 90.1-2010
Baseline is 90.1-2004 prototypesIncorporate the published and BOD-approved addenda to all 16 prototype buildingsApply in all 17 climate zonesUpdate PI and report to SSPC 90.1 at each quarterly meeting
Assign final construction weights to each prototype by climate zone
National weighted-average EUI and energy cost for each prototypeNational weighted energy and cost saving percentage
Results are preliminary
7
Progress Indicator - Addenda44 addenda to 200444 approved addenda to 2007 (through Jan 1, 2010)
Descriptions No. of Addenda
Published and Approved Addenda 88
Addenda in section 5 through 10 (prescriptive sections) 68
Addenda with no energy saving impacts 31
Addenda with energy savings 37
Savings that can be captured in PI 29
Savings that cannot be captured in PI 8
8
17 addenda pending for BOG approval in Orlando meeting 3 addenda have been modeled in Jan2010 PI
Jan2010 PI Summary
99
Jan2010 PI Summary
Building Prototype Site Energy [kBtu/sf] Energy Cost [$/sf]Site Energy
SavingsEnergy Cost
Savings90.1-2004 Jan’10 PI 90.1-2004 Jan’10 PI Small office 40.1 35.6 $1.05 $0.93 11.3% 11.4%Medium office 46.9 40.8 $1.23 $1.04 13.0% 15.5%Large office 40.6 35.8 $1.03 $0.93 11.7% 10.1%Standalone retail 71.1 58.2 $1.73 $1.36 18.2% 21.0%Strip mall 75.7 62.7 $1.78 $1.45 17.2% 18.6%Primary school 71.1 61.8 $1.62 $1.42 13.0% 12.4%Secondary school 62.8 54.0 $1.45 $1.26 14.0% 13.2%Outpatient healthcare 153.2 135.2 $3.60 $3.17 11.8% 11.9%Hospital 154.4 145.4 $3.39 $3.18 5.8% 6.2%Small hotel 69.2 65.0 $1.53 $1.44 6.1% 6.3%Large hotel 153.0 142.7 $2.93 $2.77 6.7% 5.7%
Warehouse 27.4 23.6 $0.56 $0.50 14.0% 10.9%Fast food restaurant 527.9 505.2 $10.21 $9.71 4.3% 4.9%Sit-down restaurant 370.5 352.4 $7.40 $6.89 4.9% 6.9%Mid-rise apartment 43.5 39.7 $1.04 $0.95 8.7% 8.4%High-rise apartment 37.5 35.8 $1.01 $0.97 4.6% 4.5%National-weighted average 69.1 61.2 $1.58 $1.39 11.4% 12.0%
10
Progress Indicator SummaryBuilding
Type Building Prototype October 2009 January 2010
OfficeSmall office 10.4% 11.3%Medium office 11.6% 13.0%Large office 9.5% 11.7%
RetailStandalone retail 15.9% 18.2%Strip mall 9.4% 17.2%
EducationPrimary school 11.7% 13.0%Secondary school 10.1% 14.0%
Health CareOutpatient healthcare 11.0% 11.8%Hospital NA 5.8%
LodgingSmall hotel 5.9% 6.1%Large hotel 3.1% 6.7%
Warehouse Warehouse 14.9% 14.0%
Food ServiceFast food restaurant 0.5% 4.3%Sit-down restaurant 2.6% 4.9%
ApartmentMid-rise apartment 8.7% 8.7%High-rise apartment NA 4.6%
National-weighted Average 9.8% 11.4%11
Small Office
12
Medium Office
13
Large Office
14
Standalone Retail
15
Strip Mall Retail
16
Primary School
17
Secondary School
18
Hospital
19
Outpatient Healthcare
20
Small Hotel
21
Large Hotel
22
Warehouse
23
Fast Food Restaurant
24
Sit-down Restaurant
25
Mid-Rise Apartment
26
High-Rise Apartment
27
Progress Indicator - Next Steps
Apply additional BOD-approved addenda to PIM (chiller performance)S (DX performance)E (energy recovery)BG (W2W heat pumps)BW (PTACs)More…
Continue the enhancement of prototype buildings
28
Time for Questions…
29
PNNL’s Commercial Simulation Team
Bing [email protected]
• Mike Rosenberg• Dr. Weimin Wang• Brian Thornton• Dr. Krishnan Gowri• Dr. Yulong Xie• Yunzhi Huang• Dr. Heejin Cho• Dr. Jian Zhang
