I have a CI project which is approximately 31,000 SF of mostly office space. There is a 600 SF workout room and the remaining are all offices, conference rooms, and other standard office type spaces.
Per the "bird's eye view" narrative, "Certain spaces, such as greenhouses, gymnasiums, warehouses or manufacturing facilities often operate outside of the ranges defined by ASHRAE-55, which can put the project in conflict with designing either mechanical and passive systems that meet the credit requirements. If you have these spaces in your project, check with GBCI on whether you can earn the credit through an alternative compliance path."
Ashrae 55 has two methods of compliance under Section 5.2 which address how a mechanically ventilated space can comply with the Standard. Under option 1, we can use Section 5.2.1.1 the Graphical Method, which may be applied to spaces where the occupants have activity levels that result in metabolic rates between 1.0 met and 1.3 met...". The other option is to use Section 5.2.1.2 Computer Model method for general Indoor Application, which applies "to spaces where the occupants have activity levels that result in average metabolic rates between 1.0 met and 2.0 met..."
In the gymnasium/workout room application, we have a metabolic rate of 3.5, which excludes us from complying with the only two methods available for documenting compliance with Ashrae 55. In the birds eye narrative above, it informs us that we should consult the GBCI for how to comply with Ashrae 55 for this type of space. What are the methods for contacting the GBCI to find out if I can exclude this space? Alternatively, Does anyone have any methods for complying with Ashrae 55 for a work out room? This is a small workout room in an office space which will be used off-hours or during lunch hours. It's rarely occupied and never occupied during business hours.
Thanks.
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11478 thumbs up
October 22, 2010 - 8:53 am
James, you can submit a CIR to GBCI, and/or use the "Feedback" link or hotline number on LEED Online to get in touch with them. Let us know what you learn!
Barbara McCrary
Mechanical Engineer, PE, LEED AP BD&CHHB Engineers, P.C., Prattville, AL
119 thumbs up
November 22, 2010 - 8:49 pm
I am working on a very large (175,000 sf) office building with a small (400 sf) gym also, so am eagerly awaiting what you find out about this!
James Del Monaco
Sustainability Director, PEP2S Engineering, Inc.
64 thumbs up
November 23, 2010 - 10:36 am
Tristan, I actually met with one of the GBCI reviewers last week at Greenbuild and asked him how he (and the GBCI) view ASHRAE 55 with regards to gyms and similar type spaces (e.g. kitchens) that fall outside the metabolic rate and clothing ranges listed for using the graphical method and computer model method. In spaces like these, the GBCI understands that occupant comfort is not necessarily the driving factor for design and ASHRAE 55 does not give us a method of compliance, since it was generally written for office spaces. No matter what a designer does in a gymnasium, occupants working out will not be able to achieve thermal comfort according to ASHRAE 55. However, the GBCI informed me that as long as we show them that we put some thought process into thermal comfort in these spaces then they will accept that. The design in these spaces will need to address air speed, temperature, etc. One example we discussed was a gymnasium with spectator seating. Obviously if you increase the air speed too much in the gym, the sporting participants would be more comfortable, but the spectators would then be uncomfortable. The same would hold true for air temperature, if we lower the air temperature to make the sporting participants more comportable, the spectators would most likely be uncomfortable. As long as we make good design decisions in these spaces and document it including a narrative about the design intent, then we should be covered. In another example we discussed, we have a 600 SF gym which is part of a 30,000 SF office TI. For this project we added space fans in the small gymspace in addition to making good decision decisions for the air speed and temperature from the house system and that would show that we thought about occupant comfort in this space and would therefore comply.
One important note from the reviewer was that providing a narrative and explaining the background and design intent was the best method of communicating with them our intent.
This is the direction I was given at the Greenbuild from a GBCI reviewer. I am submitting my project this week so I won't know for sure what the final outcome is from the actual review, but I feel better knowing I have some direction and can at least reference my discussion with the GBCI Reviewer as a reason for pursuing the credit using this path.
Gail Vittori
Co-DirectorCtr for Max Potential Building Sys
56 thumbs up
November 2, 2011 - 3:04 pm
Hi James, I am wondering whether you received a review response to the GBCI reviewer's recommended approach for dealing with metabolic rates in the 600 sf gym? We are working with a project in which work activities for a number of employees exceed the rates designated under ASHRAE 55. We would be interested to know how the narrative approach describing background and design intent was received during an actual review.