Hi, I don't understand why the reference guide is asking to calibrate the as-built simulation model to the actual energy use. In a new construction there is no actual energy use yet, unless you document the credits months after completion and occupancy. This makes sense to me for EBOM, but not for NC or CS.What is exactly a calibration of the simulation? Would it be OK to compare against the as-built energy modeling? If I understand correctly the intent is to compare actual usage to predicted usage, so energy modeling should be fine, right??
Thanks
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Robyn Williams Heeks
Tise-Kiester Architects31 thumbs up
December 13, 2010 - 8:57 am
Re: Calibration to actual energy use??
Without knowing exactly where you are looking in the reference guide, I believe the intent of the word "calibrate" is to coordinate the design of your project's metering system / Measurement and Verification Plan with your energy simulation model. In other words, if your energy simulation measures plug loads and lighting loads separately, these values should also be tracked separately in the actual building's metering design - so the design intent can be verified. As regards the "as-built" language, can you provide a page reference?
Gordon Shymko
PrincipalG. F. Shymko & Associates Inc.
138 thumbs up
December 13, 2010 - 1:36 pm
"Calibration" means adjusting the independent variables in the energy model to suit actual conditions. This includes variables like weather, hours of occupany, occupancy densities, and equipment/system operational schedules. After these adjustments are made the model is re-run, and the calibrated results are compared to the actual energy use of the building over the one-year M&V period. This comparison occurs at the system as well as whole-building level. Significant deviations between the actual and projected energy use are then investigated and reconciled/resolved. While properly conducted energy modeling can be surprisingly accurate, it is not perfect and some deviations can be expected. My guidelines for what constitutes acceptable correlation are as follows:
+/- 10% for total annual energy use
+/- 10% for total annual energy use for each energy source
+/- 15% for total monthly energy use
+/- 15% for monthly energy use for each energy source for any month with use higher than 30% of the peak month
+/- 15% for end-uses on an annual basis
+/- 15% for end-uses on a monthly basis for any month with use higher than 30% of the peak month
I hope this helps.....
javier bolanos zeledon
243 thumbs up
December 13, 2010 - 10:18 pm
Yes, thank you very much, it is clear now. So if I understand correctly, if you have just one meter for the whole building and you have a properly planned M&V plan, and you compare the calibrated energy model with the actual annual consumption you are eligible to earn this credit under Option D, right?
Gordon Shymko
PrincipalG. F. Shymko & Associates Inc.
138 thumbs up
December 14, 2010 - 9:10 am
Uh, no. While it could be argued that whole-building meters are sufficient for very small buildings, any building of significant size will require submetering or deductive indirect metering of at least the main energy end-uses e.g. lighting, plug, major mechanical equipment, etc. The extent of the submetering is left to the discretion of the practioner, but it must be sufficient to demonstrate, through the M&V process, that the building and its systems are performing as projected.
javier bolanos zeledon
243 thumbs up
December 14, 2010 - 3:33 pm
thanks a lot!!!
Ismael Arroyo
DirectorEnergetica Soluciones y Consultoria IAC S.A.
3 thumbs up
June 26, 2012 - 7:01 pm
According to the M&V Plan Sample, (3.1 Electricity Baseline Simulation) The energy model files shoud be supplied to the owner, and then be available for verification and calibration.
After 1 year of post-construction occupancy, who is resposible of this calibration process?. Should the company responsible for the energy modelling re-run the program?, Or would be enough to compare the results of the energy measurement with the energy model?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
June 26, 2012 - 8:42 pm
The responsible party can vary. Typically the original energy modeler calibrates the model. It is not nearly enough to compare actual and modeled data.