Determine the interior lighting power allowance by
using the columns designated Space-by-Space Method
in Table 9.6.1. Multiply the floor area(s) of the space(s)
times the allowed LPD for the space type that most
closely represents the proposed use of the space(s). The
product is the lighting power allowance for the space(s).
For space types not listed, selection of a reasonable
equivalent category shall be permitted.
THIS IS MY PROBLEM - A COMMUNITY ART CENTER COULD BE A MUSEUM, IT HAS RETAIL SALES IN THE GIFT SHOP, HAS PUBLIC CLASSES IN IT AND SHOWS THAT SELL AND DISPLAY ART.
REFERRING TO TABLE 9.5.1 FOR LIGHTING POWER DENSITY
COULD BE :
MUSEUM, LIBRARY, PERFORMING ARTS, RETAIL, SCHOOL, OR WORKSHOP.
WE HAVE 4 STUDIOS FOR CLASSES, OFFICES, CORRIDORS, TOILETS AND THE EXTERIOR ENVELOPE RELATED TO THESE AREAS WITHIN THE BOUNDARY FOR LEED.
Studios will use lots of lighting. So too will offices. Want to be sure to start on the right foot.
Can someone tell me what to choose and what would be the best choice?Thanks
Bob
PERMITTED AS A "COMMUNITY ART CENTER" - SO WHICH DO I CHOOSE.
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5868 thumbs up
April 30, 2013 - 2:29 pm
THIS IS MY ANSWER - If you use the Building Area Method you are not just limited to only one building type. You can apply different building types to different parts of the building. Even with that said I would not recommend that you use the BAM especially in your situation as there is not a good, clean fit.
We always use the Space-by-Space method since it is more accurate and generally results in more energy savings. So stick to Table 9.6.1.
Friendly FYI - I know this 90.1 stuff can be frustrating but all CAPS in online correspondence is usually interpreted as shouting. ;-)
Robert Sutton
P.E., C.E.M, President/OwnerSutton Engineered Systems, Inc.
April 30, 2013 - 2:41 pm
I am not shouting - trying to emphasize my text from the 90.1 text. I suppose I am rude and apologize - not intended. No caps.
hereout.
Yes I agree on the space by space but even there it is not a clear choice. Offices easy, Studios - I suppose they are classrooms at 1.4 w/sf, but could be Workshops at 1.9 w/sf since they use lots of lighting to paint and scupt.
Our coridors are transit spaces to the Studios but will also act as exhibit space at times I suppose. Could it be that.
Bu the building is not a Museum I guess and I don't want to choose any space as that. Too low on the density.
So suppose I use the wrong space name - who checks it and signs off on it? GBCI? Or will they accept my decision? No laughing please :-)
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5868 thumbs up
April 30, 2013 - 2:54 pm
Just kidding around Robert, did not think you rude.
When in doubt select the conservative value. Select the one with the lower LPD if you are not certain. If there is some doubt the GBCI reviewer could question your choice so just be prepared to defend it.They will be far less likely to do so if you choice the conservative value.
Robert Sutton
P.E., C.E.M, President/OwnerSutton Engineered Systems, Inc.
April 30, 2013 - 3:27 pm
Ok I understand. But I still have a couple questions:
Exceptions: a. Display or accent lighting that is an essential element for the function performed in galleries, museums, and monuments.
If we use space by space and call the corridors to have art display also, then the portion for egress lighting is 0.9 w/sf. for the remainder we could use what ever we want for lighting artwork? so if we use 1.5 w/sf., or more, and call out the overage as display lighting, assuming we can switch it separately, then will that comply?
Also, some confusion on desk lighting:
Under 9.2.2.3 - p. Furniture-mounted supplemental task lighting that is controlled by automatic shutoff and complies with Section 9.4.1.4(d).
But modeling says in the proposed to do this:
d. Lighting system power shall include all lighting system components shown or provided
for on plans (including lamps, ballasts, task fixtures, and furniture-mounted
fixtures).
Which is it? Or am I not confused and not reading well.
Robert Sutton
P.E., C.E.M, President/OwnerSutton Engineered Systems, Inc.
April 30, 2013 - 4:07 pm
Here is what I have in my project:
Within the boundary of certification....
Spac-by space method - Watt/SF LPD factors to use:
Offices 1.1 w/sf (open or closed)
Conf 1.3
Classroom (Studios) – 1.4, but could be called Multi-purpose too at 1.3 w.sf maybe. More use as a classroom however.
Corridors 0.9 for egress area, for specialized artworks exhibit, 1.0 w/sf = total 1.9 w/sf ?? Is that possible??
Vestibule to Restrooms same as egress corridors at 0.9
Active Storage 0.8 – closets and storage rooms in office area.
Inactive Storage 0.3 - not sure we have any of this.
Restrooms 0.9
Elec/Mech 1.5
Communication (servers & tele) Room 1.5
Jan Closet 1.5
That is all we have to model.
Seem reasonable?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5868 thumbs up
April 30, 2013 - 4:23 pm
The display lighting is exempted from having to meet the requirements of the standard. Any exempted lighting gets modeled identically as process lighting in both models based on what was installed.
The task lighting distinction is the control. If automatically controlled, with say a motion sensor, it is exempted (and therefore modeled identically as process lighting). If manually controlled it is included as part of the regular lighting power density and is not exempted.
Your values look reasonable except for the display lighting. You don't get to add anymore to the baseline allowance than has been installed in the proposed case.
Robert Sutton
P.E., C.E.M, President/OwnerSutton Engineered Systems, Inc.
April 30, 2013 - 4:32 pm
Thanks. So when you are referring to task lighting you are talking about my first question of desk lighting. Actually, we may not have any now that I look at what we have planned.
To your first paragraph.... does this mean I could manually switch artworks lighting in my corridors and then have occupancy sensor corridor lighting for egress needs. This may allow us to use some track lights to accent artworks, but not be dinged for doing so. We still would have a secondary system of lighting at 0.9 w/sf for the Corridors. I understand the energy modeling part of it has to be added in both so we technically are not penelized. If we model it as LED then it could be just fine on energy use too. We prefer that over Halogen but could go that way also.
So do you think I could do this proposed scenario for the Corridors?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5868 thumbs up
April 30, 2013 - 5:02 pm
The display lighting is not task lighting.
The display lighting is modeled identically no matter how it is controlled. The regulated corridor lighting can be credited for occupancy sensors according to Table G3.2.
Robert Sutton
P.E., C.E.M, President/OwnerSutton Engineered Systems, Inc.
April 30, 2013 - 5:10 pm
sorry, as in the movie, I feel we have a failure to communicate....
I was not suggesting the display lights were Task lights. I was saying that there would be two sets of lights in the corridors. The dorridors will serve two purposes - egress hallways, and display space for artworks. The lights for egress hallways will be motion controlled and use 0.9 w/sf. The lights for display will be separately controlled (switched) for use during display for the artworks along the corridor walls. Can we do that? If we do then can I use say 1.0 w/sf for the display lights and another 0.9 for the egress?
I will call the spaces Corridor / Linear Art Display or something like that. By using display lighting I will not be penalized for having it except for the energy. The energy will be modeled in both baseline and proposed the same with the same LPD for the display lights. We could model low energy use lamps like LED in track lights.
Is that clear and will it be allowed? It is an art center and they want the hallsways to use for display but also serve as egress.
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5868 thumbs up
April 30, 2013 - 8:23 pm
Yes you can add process lighting on top of the non-process lighting in the same space. You will need to have them on a different lighting schedule within the same model and use the identical schedules in both models.
Sounds to me like you got it.
Robert Sutton
P.E., C.E.M, President/OwnerSutton Engineered Systems, Inc.
April 30, 2013 - 10:18 pm
Great news. I hope to send this to the team and get positive results. Thanks.
Bob