Dear community,
I am wondering how I should read the language of the 90.1 in the following case:
- My project includes lots of process and related HVAC, which have been designed to 90% completion stage according to the turn-key terminology
- But an important part of the process will not be installed at this stage and therefore the construction drawings won't show this part, neither in terms of machine process nor in terms of related HVAC. Only provisions are there.
If I read the 90.1 2007 I can find only the following, which is related to the topic:
"When the performance rating method is applied to buildings in which energy related features have not yet been designed (e.g., a lighting system), those yet-to be-designed features shall be described in the proposed design exactly as they are defined in the baseline building design. Where the space classification for a space is not known, the space shall be categorized as an office space."
Clearly, according to this statement, I should model the project as it is event thought it won't be installed now and that we don't have the construction drawings wich will correspond to the very future installation.
"Where the HVAC zones and systems have not yet been designed, thermal blocks shall be defined based on similar internal load densities, occupancy, lighting, thermal and space temperature schedules, and in combination with the following guidelines"
In this case again, it is pretty clear that what defines the condition to simulate a generic space is the condition of whether or not it has been defined.
Now, in both these statement, I see one point which is not clear: "not yet designed" for LEED means "not emitted the construction drawings" or "not designed at all"?
You see my worry is that I do not define the baseline properly if this very point is not clear.
Thank you for your clarifications,
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
January 30, 2013 - 10:18 am
This is a bit of grey area. You may be able to ignore it or you could include it. How far off in the future is the design and installation? If it is several years a way I might be tempted to ignore it. If imminent after construction I would try to include it. The standard would probably fall on the not designed at all side of your question.
If you include it and it has not been designed then those sections of the standard you mention basically say it must be modeled identically if it has not been designed.
Valentin Grimaud
Thermal EngineerTERAO Green Building Engineering
43 thumbs up
January 31, 2013 - 1:28 am
Well in this case I think I really have to include it. The missing part on the construction drawings has been designed and allowed for in the provisioned capacities of chillers and boilers. Only there won't be construction drawings for now. But there are non-final detailed drawings already detailing the systems.
In addition, it would be weird to have this part of the factory turned into offices (and thus we would have to give it more office type thermal approach more dealing with envelope which would be inconsistent with the rest of the factory's design).
It seems to me that the language tends to have us include it. right?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
January 31, 2013 - 8:56 am
That sounds right to me based on what you have shared.