Technical Support Document: 50% Energy Savings Design Technology Packages for Medium Office Buildings

Thornton, Brian; Wang, Weimin; Lane, Michael; Rosenberg, Michael; Liu, Bing

doi:10.2172/969179

Cited by 29 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Water-based radiant cooling systems are gaining popularity as an energy efficient approach for conditioning buildings [1][2][3]. The design of radiant systems is complicated because of the coupling between thermal load, building structure and the hydronic system and because of the important impact of both radiation and convection on thermal comfort.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cooling load differences between radiant and air systems

Feng

Schiavon

Bauman

2013

Energy and Buildings

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unlike the case of air systems where the cooling load is purely convective, the cooling load for radiant systems consists of both convective and radiant components. The main objectives of this energy simulation study were to investigate whether the same design cooling load calculation methods can be used for radiant and air systems by studying the magnitude of the cooling load differences between radiant and air systems over a range of configurations and to suggest potential improvements in current design guidelines. Simulation results show that 1) zone level 24-hour total cooling energy of radiant systems can be 5-15% higher than air systems due to differences in conduction load through the building envelope; 2) peak cooling load at the radiant system hydronic level can be 7-31% higher than air system for zones without solar load. The differences can increase up to 93% at the hydronic level for floor system in zones with solar load; 3) the cooling load differences between the two systems originate from: a) radiant cooling surface(s) directly remove part of the radiant heat gain and reduce heat accumulation in the building mass; b) only part of the convective heat gain becomes instantaneous cooling load. This indicates that simplified methods such as Radiant Time Series Method is not appropriate for cooling load calculation in radiant system design. Radiant systems should be modeled using a dynamic simulation tool that is capable of capturing radiant heat transfer for cooling load calculation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cooling load differences between radiant and air systems

Feng

Schiavon

Bauman

2013

Energy and Buildings

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The work presented here extends the 50% Energy Savings Design Technology Packages for Medium Office Buildings TSD developed at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (Thornton, Wang et al 2009) to encompass office buildings with larger footprints and high-rise design. It is a stand-alone report that is not part of a formal project under ASHRAE's Special Project procedures to develop an Advanced Energy Design Guide for Large Offices.…”

Section: Executive Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Its main goal was to evaluate the potential for new large office buildings in the United States to achieve a 50% net site energy savings compared to a baseline defined by minimal compliance with respect to ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90. 1-2004, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings (ASHRAE 2004c.The work presented here extends the 50% Energy Savings Design Technology Packages for Medium Office Buildings TSD developed at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (Thornton, Wang et al 2009) to encompass office buildings with larger footprints and high-rise design. It is a stand-alone report that is not part of a formal project under ASHRAE's Special Project procedures to develop an Advanced Energy Design Guide for Large Offices.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Detailed design recommendations were not provided in recognition that they will be a focus of future work to develop a corresponding Advanced Energy Design Guide and that many design details will likely be project specific when reaching for the 50% energy reduction goal. Many of the assumptions in Thornton, Wang et al (2009) have been changed for this report to more accurately portray the practices followed in designing large office buildings, especially pertaining to heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) design. For example, the baseline variable air volume (VAV) system included central chillers and boilers with hot and cold water coils where the Medium Office TSD assumed a rooftop VAV with direct expansion cooling coils and direct gas-fired heating.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As in the Medium Office TSD, in-slab hydronic radiant heating and cooling with a dedicated outdoor air system (DOAS) was adopted as a primary energy-saving strategy, but with the radiant heating and cooling assumed to be via a slab ceiling rather than a slab floor. While this design is uncommon in the United States, it has been identified as a promising energy-saving strategy (Thornton, Wang et al 2009). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Technical Support Document: Strategies for 50% Energy Savings in Large Office Buildings

Leach¹,

Lobato²,

Hirsch³

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We are indebted to a number of retailers and building industry professionals for taking the time to provide equipment and construction cost estimates and to review our analysis assumptions and earlier versions of this report. John Priebe of The Abo Group arranged for the procurement of envelope construction cost data from Cumming Corporation and HVAC system cost data from RMH Group. Stefan Coca of Cumming Corporation provided us with an extensive set of envelope cost data for low-rise and high-rise large office constructions. Bob Stahl of RMH Group, with assistance from Phil Kocher and Jim Bradburn from RMH Group, provided us with detailed HVAC schematics, equipment lists, and overall system costs for our baseline and lowenergy HVAC systems. Bob also provided us with estimates for incremental costs associated with improved component efficiencies. Steven Taylor of Taylor Engineering and Fiona Cousins of Arup Engineering provided us very detailed review of both our analysis assumptions and our overall approach. David Okada of Stantec Engineering provided review of an initial list of possible energy efficiency measures (EEMs).We would like to thank all of the peer reviewers for their time and constructive feedback. NREL colleagues Anthony Florita, Andrew Parker, Rois Langner, Daniel Studer, Michael Deru, and Shanti Pless all reviewed the report during its development. Stefanie Woodward and Stephanie Price of NREL proofread and edited the document. Carol Kerstner assisted with final edits and prepared the document for publication.Several other NREL colleagues provided valuable guidance and information during the modeling process, either directly or through their past work. Eric Bonnema and Brent Griffith provided extensive modeling assistance. Ian Doebber and Kyle Benne provided modeling assistance and significant insight into the modeling process, especially in regards to the setup and control of the radiant heating and cooling system model. Jennifer Scheib and Rob Guglielmetti provided electric lighting and daylighting EEM data. Nicholas Long and Eric Bonnema provided Opt-EPlus assistance. Michael Deru and Kristin Field provided review of our code compliant high-rise baseline, including our schedule sets. Jenni Sonnen coordinated graphic design work by Joshua Bauer to provide us with figures for the report. Eric Bonnema, Brent Griffith, and Michael Deru shared their computing resources for the optimization process.ii Executive SummaryThis Technical Support Document (TSD) was developed by the Commercial Buildings Group at NREL, under the direction of the DOE Building Technologies Program. Its main goal was to evaluate the potential for new large office buildings in the United States to achieve a 50% net site energy savings compared to a baseline defined by minimal compliance with respect to ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90. 1-2004, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings (ASHRAE 2004c.The work presented here extends the 50% Energy Savings Design Technology Packages for Medium Office Buildi...

show abstract

Integrated Design and Retrofit of Buildings

Krarti¹

2018

Optimal Design and Retrofit of Energy Efficient Buildings, Communities, and Urban Centers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technical Support Document: 50% Energy Savings Design Technology Packages for Medium Office Buildings

Cited by 29 publications

References 10 publications

Cooling load differences between radiant and air systems

Cooling load differences between radiant and air systems

Technical Support Document: Strategies for 50% Energy Savings in Large Office Buildings

Integrated Design and Retrofit of Buildings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About