See all forum discussions about NC-2009 EAp2
 Subscribe to new posts about NC-2009 EAp2 Post a new question aboutNC-2009 EAp2
See LEEDuser’s guidance on NC-2009 EAp2»
FAQs about EAp2 :

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?

Our project has a diesel backup generator. Should we include it in our energy model?

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?

View answers »

Forum discussion

NC-2009 EAp2:Minimum Energy Performance

Baseline System 1 Pump Energy

Default Avatar
Wes Lawson
Mechanical Engineer
Bala Consulting Engineers
LEEDuser Basic Member
4 thumbs up

We are putting together a baseline of a high rise residential building. In Appendix G, it states that we need to use 19 w/gpm. However, in the commentary, it states that this is based off of 60' of head and 60% pump efficiency pump. In the Proposed, we have a pump in excess of 125' of head. The fact that our design has such a high head is hurting our comparison with the baseline. Is there any way to alter this 19 w/gpm to align it more closely with the function of the actual building? Can we increase that value to closer to 40 w/gpm, which is the reality due to the increase in head required? Thank you all in advance.

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 Marais.Jean
Jean Marais
b.i.g. Bechtold DesignBuilder Expert
LEEDuser Basic Member
581 thumbs up

Mon, 09/09/2013 - 05:50

what is your current w/gpm? This should improve with bigger equipment, not degrade.
Default Avatar
Wes Lawson
Mechanical Engineer
Bala Consulting Engineers
LEEDuser Basic Member
4 thumbs up

Mon, 09/09/2013 - 21:29

We are looking at about 40 w/gpm based on a 100+ HP pump. This is due to the size and height of the building. It is pushing our proposed building to have 3+times the pump energy of the base, due to the 60' assumption for the 19 w/gpm.
Profile picture for user Marais.Jean
Jean Marais
b.i.g. Bechtold DesignBuilder Expert
LEEDuser Basic Member
581 thumbs up

Tue, 09/10/2013 - 07:53

Waterloops (except drinking water) are usually closed loop systems, so the height of the building does not play a role, only the length and layout of the network with the pressure drop componants on it. I think your HP (heat pump?) does not use water, but is actually a VRF and uses refrigerant. The pump requirement that you refer to is for hot water and does not apply to refrigerant circuits. I'm just guessing here, but my experience is saying that you are missing something.
Default Avatar
Wes Lawson
Mechanical Engineer
Bala Consulting Engineers
LEEDuser Basic Member
4 thumbs up

Tue, 09/10/2013 - 10:45

We are not conveying refrigerant, we are conveying water. We have a heat pump system with an open cooling tower tied to the heat pump loop serving the building via heat exchangers, with boilers to inject heat, etc. We will have 2 sets of pumps. 1 set serving the tower loop and the other set serving the building loop. The compressors are in the heat pumps. There is no outdoor component to the heat pump, as it is not a split system. Due to the network, and related extensive quantity of piping, we do have large pumps. These are 100+ ft head pumps, which is driving the w/gpm to about 40 w/gpm. Am I able to perform any adjustments to the baseline pumping system to more closely reflect out actual set of circumstances?
Profile picture for user sheffer
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow
7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
4454 thumbs up

Tue, 09/10/2013 - 13:26

I am assuming that you have a gas-fired boiler on your loop and are therefore modeling a system #1 in the Baseline.The baseline GPM is auto-sized and the pump energy must be 19 W/GPM according to G3.1.3.5. There are no adjustments or extra allowances I am aware of. The loops are very different and sometimes you pay a penalty in Appendix G comparisons relative to design choices. Hopefully you are making it up elsewhere.
Default Avatar
Wes Lawson
Mechanical Engineer
Bala Consulting Engineers
LEEDuser Basic Member
4 thumbs up

Tue, 09/10/2013 - 13:28

Yes, we are using System 1 as the baseline. Thank you for the confirmation on the 19 w/gpm.
Default Avatar
Wes Lawson
Mechanical Engineer
Bala Consulting Engineers
LEEDuser Basic Member
4 thumbs up

Tue, 09/10/2013 - 13:31

And we cannot put 19 w/gpm in the proposed either, right? We need the BHP? Have you had any success with the head as an input in lieu of the horsepower, or is that trying to find a loophole?
Profile picture for user sheffer
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow
7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
4454 thumbs up

Tue, 09/10/2013 - 13:43

The Proposed must be modeled as designed. The reviewer will check the pump power modeled and the pump power in the mechanical schedule for consistency.
Profile picture for user Marais.Jean
Jean Marais
b.i.g. Bechtold DesignBuilder Expert
LEEDuser Basic Member
581 thumbs up

Tue, 09/10/2013 - 14:00

I have not seen any interpretation or exception on this matter. That doesn't mean that there aren't any and you could check https://www.ashrae.org/standards-research--technology/standards-interpretations/interpretation-for-standard-90-1-2007 My gut feel is that it is the intent of these simulations to heighlight the pros and cons of system choices which should be wholelistically considered. Perhaps you have a fantastic COP, but the downside is water makeup and increased pumping power. What works for one building doesn't always work for another. A closed loop cooling tower may have been a better choice so that you don't need to battle the hydrostatic pressures of a highrise. I assume you have had a close look at the hydrolic simmulation to make sure the pipe sizing is as per local code requirements...these can be quite critical...you just need one badly sized componant on your worst leg of piping and it could scew the whole thing. Good luck.

Add new comment

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