See all forum discussions about CI-v4 EQp1
 Subscribe to new posts about CI-v4 EQp1 Post a new question aboutCI-v4 EQp1
See LEEDuser’s guidance on CI-v4 EQp1»
FAQs about EQp1 :

A building has fan-assisted ventilation and no mechanical cooling system. Does this qualify as natural ventilation?

What options are available to mechanically ventilated projects outside the U.S. to meet this prerequisite?

View answers »

Forum discussion

CI-v4 EQp1:Minimum indoor air quality performance

Our project needs some clarification regarding Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance Calculator.

One of my LEED v4 ID+C project getting below comments from LEED reviewer for Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance Calculator (Project having AHU with VAV Boxes).

LEED Reviewer Comment:

Option 1: ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2010
1. For all the project spaces, the Ventilation Rate Procedure (VRP) calculation has been performed with values
for Zone Primary Air Fraction (Ep), however, the mechanical floor plan and schedules provided within Project
Information indicate that project spaces are served by VAV boxes (without secondary recirculation).
Therefore, for the project spaces, the Ep must not be considered in the VRP calculation.
Provide a narrative and update the VRP calcul ation as required. Additionally, note that in the Minimum IAQ
Performance Calculator, the zone discharge air flow (Vdz) and zone primary air flow (Vpz) for VAV boxes
without secondary recirculation are the same, and equal to the minimum airflow for the VAV box at the worst
case conditions. Ensure that all the parameters reported in the VRP calculation are actual and consistent with
the supporting documentation.

 

My Ques: We revise the Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance Calculator as per below

Zone Discharge Airflow (Vdz), 

Zone primary Airflow (Vpz) are same,

Zone Secondary Recirculation Fraction (Er) is 0 and Zone Primary Air Fraction (Ep) is 1 

Is correct ? or Please Share other ways guys.

 

0
Post a reply

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

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

Go premium for $15.95  »

Profile picture for user Dave.Hubka_2
Dave Hubka
Practice Leader - Sustainability
EUA
LEEDuser Expert
510 thumbs up

Tue, 09/19/2023 - 12:26

for VAV boxes with no secondary recirculation: Vdz = Vpz = lowest scheduled airflow at VAV box.  Er = 1.0 Ep is auto-calculated. (user does not select or enter value)

Wed, 09/20/2023 - 03:53

Thanks for your prompt response Mr. Dave Hubka.

Fri, 01/19/2024 - 05:05

Hi @Davehubka  ,  One of our another project having the same question as Preliminary review comment and clarification as well , I have attached Preliminary review comment and clarification raised by the reviewer team in below, This Preliminary review comment comes in the project   It appears that the calculations may not have been performed for the worst-case conditions, as it is not clear if the cooling or heating condition calculations analyze the lowest supply airflow rate that can reasonably be expected to occur when each space is fully occupied. This lowest supply flow condition when occupied is anticipated to be the worst-case ventilation condition. For interior zones in cooling mode, this flowrate is expected to be somewhere in between the minimum flow setting and the design cooling flowrate. For the heating condition, this flowrate is generally expected to be the heating minimum flowrate. This clarification occurs on the project after the  preliminary review  1. (Preliminary Review Item #1) The response narrative provided indicates that the space was considered at worst-case conditions, but then states that sufficient documentation was not available and requests an exception. Confirm that the ventilation systems were considered at worst-case conditions and indicate the source of the system performance information utilized in the VRP calculations.
  Please guide us to assist on this path, as well as guide as if we go to the case2 : System unable to meet the required airflows means what we need to submit  
Profile picture for user Dave.Hubka_2
Dave Hubka
Practice Leader - Sustainability
EUA
LEEDuser Expert
510 thumbs up

Fri, 01/19/2024 - 12:48

If case 2 is pursued the team would need to complete an engineering assessment of the system's maximum outdoor air delivery rate AND demonstrate that the physical constraints of the existing ventilation system do not allow the system to meet the ASHRAE 62.1 ventilation rates during worst-case condition. Engineering Assessment / Physical Constraints can be difficult to demonstrate as acceptable to GBCI - in my past project experience. My recommendation is to continue to pursue Opt 1.   Without seeing your ventilation layout it is not possible to pinpoint the correct solution.  However, when coming across the GBCI comment provided above, the solution is typically "increase the scheduled supply air to the critical zone(s) until the system level can demonstrate compliance with 62.1".  

Sat, 02/01/2025 - 09:59

Thanks for the response, Could you please let me know where we find the recirulation air ?

Add new comment

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