FAQs about EAp2 :

Our project has a large process load—75%. Despite our efforts to make an efficient HVAC design, the cost savings are minimal. What can we do to earn this prerequisite and be eligible for LEED certification? Is there any flexibility in how we model the p

Can SHGC be higher in the proposed than in the baseline model?

Our process load is higher than 25%. Do we have to justify that?

Do I need to justify the electrical and fuel rates I am using in my model?

Our local code references ASHRAE 90.1-2010. Should I use that for my documentation, or 90.1-2007?

Can I claim exterior lighting savings for canopy lighting even though a baseline model cannot include shading elements?

The project is built on a site with existing exterior lighting installed. How should this be accounted for?

Can mezzanines open to floors below be excluded from the energy model?

How do I provide a zip code for an international location?

For a project outside the U.S., how do I determine the climate zone?

For a project outside the U.S., how do I determine the Target Finder score?

Do hotel rooms need automatic light shut-off control?

How commonly are the 90.1 mandatory compliance forms submitted as part of EAp2/EAc1?

The Section 9 space-by-space method does not include residential space types. What should I use?

Can the Passive House Planning Package (PHPP) be used to energy model for LEED?

Is it acceptable to model a split-type AC with inverter technology compressor as a heat pump, like modeling VRF?

Can the Trace 700 'LEED Energy Performance Summary Report' by uploaded to LEED Online in lieu of the Section 1.4 tables spreadsheet?

A portion of our building envelope is historic. Can we exclude it from our model?

Which baseline HVAC system do I use if my building has no heating or air conditioning?

For an existing building, do I need to rotate the model?

View answers »

Forum discussion

NC-2009 EAp2:Minimum Energy Performance

Modelling Basement Parking

I'am modelling a building with 2 levels of underground parking, which is unconditioned, opened to the outdoor, and having 4 fans (2 supply and 2 exhaust), while the exhaust fans are DCV's based on CO sensors. I have two alternatives now: 1. To model using with DCV, but found out that I can't put any exhaust fans in my simulation tools, only supply fans are permissible, so instead, I'll be operating the supply fans with DCV. 2. To remove the basement and add fans as electric loads (here the heat transfere between basement and ground floors will be neglected, and I won't be able to place parking lighting loads) I need to know which alternative is acceptable before submission, and need also to know If anyone ca suggest better alternatives. Thanks

0

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.

Go premium for $15.95  »

Wed, 06/19/2013 - 15:13

If the supply flow rate = exhaust flow rate, just double the fan pressure rise to double the fan electric consumption, or if you need to be more exact you can calculate the equivalent pressure rise to account for the energy consumption of both exhaust and supply fans.

Wed, 06/19/2013 - 15:54

Don't do #2. Not sure why you can't model exhaust fans in the simulation, seems like a pretty basic function. If you are attempting to claim savings for CO DCV you need to make the case that it is not standard practice in the project locale. You will also need to do an exceptional calculation.

Thu, 06/20/2013 - 14:32

Thanks Jean, I think this is very reasonable Marcus; I'am using the Unit ventilatior in eQuest, where there's no room for adding exhaust fans. Would you please tell me more about the exceptional calculation? why do I need it, and how to perform? thanks

Thu, 06/20/2013 - 15:02

See section 1.7 of the EAp2 prerequisite form for details. You need to do an exceptional calculation if: 1) your modeling software cannot model a strategy directly and you are performing a workaround; 2) you need to violate a modeling protocol (like a schedule change) in order to show savings; and 3) to claim energy savings related to non-regulated or process loads. A narrative should describe all Baseline and Proposed case assumptions included for this measure as well as the calculation methodology used to determine the projected savings. The narrative and energy savings should be reported separately from the other efficiency measures in Section 1.7 - Table EAp2-7. The Baseline case description should provide evidence that garage demand control ventilation is not standard practice for similar newly constructed facilities where the project is located. Additionally, sufficient information must be provided to justify all Baseline and Proposed Case assumptions used for the calculation of savings including the Baseline ventilation rates, the Proposed Ventilation rates, the Baseline fan power, the Proposed fan power, and the Baseline and Proposed operating schedules. Note that the Baseline fan volume should not exceed the minimum required ASHRAE 62.1 parking ventilation rates of 0.75 cfm/square foot.

Wed, 04/30/2014 - 10:21

Marcus, I need to know if I can consider the parking fans (supply or exhaust) as process load? knowing that supply for basement parking is not required by the ASHRAE 62.1,

Wed, 04/30/2014 - 11:24

1) if you want to take credit for DCV, check out CIR 10371 on 04.02.2014. This is a new ruling. 2) Unless you try 1), the fresh air ventilation rates for baseline = proposed. 3) for a parking garage, the 62.1 required min fresh air rate = 0, so you have met the minimum. 4) for a parking garage 50% open to outside on two or more sides, the 62.1 required exhaust rate = 0, so this requirement is met. 5) If you are not conditioning your zone with the supply air, you can consider the fan(s) a process load.

Wed, 04/30/2014 - 13:00

They are process as Jean indicates. Jean it is my understanding that the minimum ventilation rate for an underground (enclosed) parking garage is 0.75 cfm/sf.

Wed, 04/30/2014 - 13:19

Funny, that. Underground may make it difficalt to get the opening area to outside to be larger than 50% on two sides...but I've seen enough exceptions. We're working on a (non-LEED) project, where, for political reasons and budget application, they dug a gap down to the slab level of the underground parking all the way around, so that the requirement to sprinkler the underground parking falls away. They have a natural smoke exhaust system with plenty of opening.

Wed, 04/30/2014 - 13:37

I am assuming that underground = enclosed and that the 50% cannot be obtained.

Add new comment

To post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.