Author. Approved. Iain Macdonald, PhD. Trevor Nightingale, PhD Program Leader HPB Program, NRC Construction

Transcription

1 CONSTRUCTION PERFORMANCE SIMULATION OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE 2015 EDITION OF THE NATIONAL ENERGY CODE FOR BUILDINGS (NECB), RELATIVE TO THE 2011 EDITION OF THE NECB Steve Cornick, Aziz Laouadi and Iain Macdonald, 5 th June

2 82

3 PERFORMANCE SIMULATION OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE 2015 EDITION OF THE NATIONAL ENERGY CODE FOR BUILDINGS (NECB), RELATIVE TO THE 2011 EDITION OF THE NECB Author Iain Macdonald, PhD Approved Trevor Nightingale, PhD Program Leader HPB Program, NRC Construction Report No: A Report Date: 5 th June 2015 Contract No: A Agreement date: 15 th March 2015 Program: HPB 65 pages Copy no. 1 of 1 copy 83

4 84

5 PERFORMANCE SIMULATION OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE 2015 EDITION OF THE NATIONAL ENERGY CODE FOR BUILDINGS (NECB), RELATIVE TO THE 2011 EDITION OF THE NECB Steve Cornick, Aziz Laouadi and Iain Macdonald National Research Council Canada Ottawa ON K1A 0R6 Canada A Report for Canadian Codes Center A final report 85

6 PERFORMANCE SIMULATION OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE 2015 EDITION OF THE NATIONAL ENERGY CODE FOR BUILDINGS (NECB), RELATIVE TO THE 2011 EDITION OF THE NECB Steve Cornick, Aziz Laoudi and Iain Macdonald Executive Summary This report details the simulation study undertaken to estimate energy savings resulting from code changes between the 2011 and 2015 editions of the National Energy Code for Buildings (NECB). The study focussed on the four most common building types in Canada (large office, midrise apartment, strip mall and secondary school) and examined performance across all climate zones. Archetype models representing the four building types were supplied and the NRCan authored software CanQuest was used as the basis of the analysis. The supplied models from previously reported results were not fully documented (a report summarising the main inputs and results obtained was available) and CanQuest has not been officially released (the study used beta version v1.0b1r2937). The supplied models were created with an older version of CanQuest and required manual updating of the input files (i.e. editing of files outside of CanQuest). It was not possible to replicate the previously reported results across all climate zones with the current beta version of the software and the supplied models. This resulted in changes to the modelling approach essentially each archetype was modelled in one climate zone and from these results savings estimated in the other zones. The overall results for each archetype are as follows: Energy Consumption (kwh/m2) Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone Large Office Large MURB n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Strip Mall Secondary School In the above Table 11 refers to the report commissioned for NRCC and gives the 2011 estimates [1], 13 gives the results from the previous report commissioned on NECB 2015 modelling work [2], and 15 gives the results from the work commissioned for this report. Note the 2011 study did not contain energy consumption figures for the Large MURB archetype. In conducting this work the authors made several observations on CanQuest. Overall the authors believe that this will be a useful tool for code compliance work: the modelling process is streamlined, parametric options can be explored and (once enabled) the compliance report should provide a clear summary of the modelling results. Several bugs exist within the tool at present, notably conversions between metric and US IP units (the underlying simulation tool requires the use of US IP units). Of particular note: the parametric run interface asks for metric values but converts these to metric when closing the screen (i.e. the underlying code is expecting a number in US IP units and converting it unnecessarily); on examining the input files the conversion from liters to US gallons uses the conversion to imperial gallons (4.2 instead of 3.8), this will overestimate water use/energy associated with water draws. A final report i 86

7 For future studies the more general purpose simulation tool EnergyPlus is recommended over CanQuest. The constrained interface for CanQuest is not suitable for modelling what if studies for energy code development as its focus is on code compliance with existing codes (most of this functionality is enabled behind the scenes and is not transparent to the user). Recent developments around EnergyPlus have enabled the automatic creation of large numbers of archetype models, enabling a more comprehensive examination of proposed code changes. For example, the orientation and FDWR (fenestration and door to wall ratio) can be parameterised and thus changes to wall R- values or daylighting control, for example, can be examined for a range of buildings. This analysis would provide a more targeted approach to code enhancement. A final report ii 87

8 Acknowledgements This investigation is part of the NRC Construction project PERFORMANCE SIMULATION OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE 2015 EDITION OF THE NATIONAL ENERGY CODE FOR BUILDINGS (NECB), RELATIVE TO THE 2011 EDITION OF THE NECB, NRC Project # A , supported by the Canadian Codes Center. The authors are grateful to Elisabeth Girgis from NRC, and to members of the TG-CC steering committee for their assistance. Frédéric Genest s help was invaluable in resolving the pumping power requirements. The authors would also like to thank Heather Knudsen for reviewing the report. Your comments provided us with valuable insights. A final report iii 88

9 Table of Contents 1 Introduction Background Objectives Modelling Approach Adopted approach Code Change Summary Hot water discharge rates Pipe and Duct Insulation Lighting Power and Controls Pumping power Models Large Office Model Description Model Verification Modelled code changes Results from Individual Changes Large MURB Model Description Model Verification Modelled code changes Results from Individual Changes Strip Mall Model Description Model Verification Modelled code changes Results from Individual Changes Secondary School Model Description Model Verification Modelled code changes Results from Individual Changes Overall Savings Large Office A final report iv 89

10 5.2 Large MURB Strip Mall Secondary School References A.1 Effect of proposed changes in water draw A.1.1 Large Office Building Archetype A.1.2 Small Strip Mall Building Archetype A.1.3 Large Multi-Unit Residential Building Archetype A.1.4 Secondary School Building Archetype A.2 Effect of proposed changes in pipe insulation A.3 Effect of proposed changes in lighting power density A.3.1 Large Office Building Archetype A.3.2 Small Strip Mall Building Archetype A.3.3 Large Multi-Unit Residential Building Archetype A.3.4 Secondary School Archetype A.4 Effect of proposed changes in limits to pumping power A.4.1 Large Office Building Archetype A.4.2 Small Strip Mall Building Archetype A.4.3 Large Multi-Unit Residential Building Archetype A.4.4 Secondary School Archetype A final report v 90

11 1 Introduction 1.1 Background The Standing Committee on Energy Efficiency in Buildings (SCEEB) along with its associated task groups, have reviewed and revised the requirements of the National Energy Code of Canada for Buildings (NECB) 2011, to create the 2015 edition of the NECB which is scheduled for publication in late As part of the revisions made to the 2011 edition of the NECB are performance improvements to the prescriptive requirements in Part 3 (Building Envelope), Part 4 (Lighting), Part 5 (Heating, Ventilation, and Air-Conditioning (HVAC) Systems), and Part 6 (Service Water Heating (SWH) Systems). SCEEB is seeking assistance in determining, based on energy modeling, the percent energy efficiency improvement the NECB 2011 compared with the NECB Objectives The objective of this study was to compare the energy consumption of buildings built according to the NECB 2011 to that of buildings built according to the NECB 2015, through energy simulation. The percentage difference in energy consumption will be determined for the entire building and for each building component, namely; HVAC, SHW, lighting, and the envelope losses (heating season) and energy gain (cooling season). The simulations were based on the archetype buildings supplied by the Canadian Codes Center (CCC). The four building archetypes modeled were: midrise apartment, large office, strip mall and secondary school. Collectively these building types represent 85-90% of constructed floor area in Canada (NRCan data). Simulation results for each of the 6 Canadian climate zones below were generated. Table 1: Heating Degree-Days (HDD * ) of Building Location, Celsius degree-days. Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7A Zone 7B Zone 8 HDD < to to to to Representative city/climate (HDD for city) Victoria (2650) Windsor (3400) Montreal/Dorval (4400) Edmonton (5120) Fort McMurray (6250) Yellowknife (8170) * HDD values taken from Table C-2 NBC 2010 A final report 1 91

12 2 Modelling Approach Models for the four archetypes were supplied by the CCC to enable a consistent modelling approach with previous studies. The proposed modelling plan was to: 1. Simulate the supplied models with the current version of CanQuest and confirm that the results were the same as previously reported [2]. 2. Update the models to incorporate the code changes [3] that had not been included in the previous study. 3. Extract results and summarise predicted energy savings. On attempting to simulate the supplied models with the current version of CanQuest it quickly became apparent that a different modelling approach would be required. As clearly stated by the CanQuest developers, there is no model version control between beta versions of the software. The supplied models had been created with an older version of CanQuest than is currently available practically speaking this meant that the models could not be loaded into the current version. In addition to the model/software version incompatibility, there was incomplete documentation describing the modelling approach and assumptions made when the supplied models were created. The modelling report [2] contained a high level summary of the model inputs and results from the simulations. There was no explicit linkage between this information and the models provided, making use of the models difficult. For instance there is a single strip mall model but six office models; naming conventions were not followed resulting in different naming schemes being employed between and within archetypes. This resulted in confusion about what exactly was contained in each model and considerable time was spent trying to resolve issues with the supplied models. 2.1 Adopted approach To overcome the difficulties faced due to the model/software version incompatibility, an updated approach was adopted in consultation with the CCC: 1. Identify one archetype model for each building type (i.e. for a single climate zone). 2. Update the model inputs to agree with code requirements as described in the documentation provided (this was equivalent to the NECB 2015 changes included in the previous study). 3. Verify that the output from CanQuest was equivalent to that previously published [2]. 4. Apply the new code changes to the model and calculate predicted energy savings. 5. Based on these results, extrapolate performance to the remaining climate zones. The modelling approach is detailed in 0where the relationships between the code changes and EUIs are developed. A final report 2 92

13 3 Code Change Summary The tables in the following sections summarise the additional (over the previous report) modelled code changes between NECB 2011 and 2015 [3]. 3.1 Hot water discharge rates NECB 2011 NECB Specifies rates for showers (9.5 L/min) and faucets in lavatories (8.3 L/min) Showers (7.6 L/min); Lavatory faucets (5.7 L/min). (source PCF 829 in NECB package 2014_public_review_ pdf) 3.2 Pipe and Duct Insulation NECB 2011 NECB 2015 Table specifies minimum thickness depending on space and pipe diameter. PCF 638 insulation thicknesses increased. 3.3 Lighting Power and Controls NECB 2011 NECB and 4.3 pretty much all of each section adds lux levels to table A (1)A permit modelling of lighting controls. (source PCF 839 in NECB package 2014_public_review_ pdf) updated to account for occupancy. (source PCF 839 in NECB package 2014_public_review_ pdf) Changes to 4.2 mentioned in PCF but no changes listed in supplied docs. 3.4 Pumping power NECB 2011 NECB describes how to model pumps use same efficiency in both models. PCF 582 limits places on pumping power depending on system and thermal loads: [ ] ---Pumping Power Demand [1] --)The combined pumping power demand required by the motors of all the pumps of a given hydronic system shall not exceed: [a] --)14 Wmotor power per kwthermal-peak for cooling systems, [b] --)4.5 Wmotor power per kwthermal-peak for heating systems, [c] --)12 Wmotor power per kwthermal-peak for heat rejection systems, and [d] --)22 Wmotor power per kwthermal-peak for water-source heat pumps systems. Where: kwthermal-peak is the peak thermal demand of the space at design conditions Wmotor power is the combined power of the pump motors. A final report 3 93

14 4 Models 4.1 Large Office Model Description The supplied model Large Office slab fixed z5.pd2 was used as the basis for the analysis. The model was updated as shown in the table below. Note that for consistency with previous reports, the same table layout has been used. The Supplied Model column is reproduced directly from [2] and only items that have been changed are described in the Updates/changes column. Item Code Section Supplied Model Updates/changes Schedules NECB Schedule Electrical Lighting Power Density W/m 2 MNECB-97 A-Office Occup Sched MNECB-97 A-Office Lights Sched MNECB-97 A-Office Recept Sched MNECB-97 A-Office HotWtr Sched MNECB-97 A-Office Fans Sched MNECB-97 A-Office Heatng Sched MNECB-97 A-Office Coolng Sched M/NECB A Occup Sched M/NECB A Lights Sched M/NECB A Recept Sched M/NECB A HotWtr Sched M/NECB A Fans Sched M/NECB A Heatng Sched M/NECB A Coolng Sched Plug Load Density A W/m 2 Air side HVAC system Air Handling Unit Packaged VAV system with gas furnace, electric reheat and DX cooling Supply Fan and Motor Return Fan and Motor Pa 55% efficiency Pa 30% efficiency Fan Performance Table Between 7.5 and 25 kw curve A final report 4 94

15 Curve Outdoor air NBC Part 9, for MURBs and ASHRAE 62.1 for all others 0.5 L/s/m 2 Air-to-Air Heat Recovery Economiser control Zonal Units Zonal Units Efficiency Zonal Units Fan Power Cooling Central Equipment for MURBS and for all others Table A for restaurants and arena, and section A for all others N/A N/A None Dry bulb with high limit at 18 C VAV boxes N/A N/A DX cooling Central Equipment Efficiency Table COP 2.78 EIR without fans Performance curve Table DX cooling NECB curve Chilled water loop pump N/A Cooling Tower N/A Cooling Tower Fans Condenser Water Loop Pumps N/A N/A Heating Central Equipment Furnace Central Equipment Et 80% (Furnace) A final report 5 95

16 Efficiency Performance curve Table A NECB furnace curve Heating water loop pumps N/A Motor efficiency CSA C390 N/A Zone heating Electric baseboard Domestic Hot water Demand 2011 ASHRAE HANDBOOK- HVAC Application Table 8 for MURBs/LTC and Table 7 for all others 3.8 L/person/day Efficiency Table Heat Input Ratio = 1.25 Supply temperature 2011 ASHRAE HANDBOOK- HVAC Application Table 8 for MURBs/LTC and Table 7 for all others 60 C Pump efficiency CSA C390 Premium Model Verification The updated model was verified against previously reported results. The following table shows the results for the Large Office. Zone 5 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans A final report 6 96

17 Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Total Modelled code changes For the Large Office archetype, the following changes were modelled. Hot water discharge rates This code change was modelled by adjusting the total daily hot water draw in the CanQuest models. The hot water draw was parameterized by varying the hot water consumption, L/person/day. The reduction in shower draw from the 2011 NECB is 20%, whereas the reduction in faucet draw from the 2011 NECB is 31%. For the Large Office model this change was modelled by reducing the total daily hot water draw by 30% (representing mainly faucet draws). Pipe and Duct Insulation This change was not explicitly modelled in CanQuest. The approach taken was to estimate the total length of pipework in the office archetype and to use the 50% saving factors from the PCF (i.e. assuming half of the heat loss is useful energy to the building). These were then applied to the existing CanQuest results. The pipe length was estimated as twice the total height of the building plus the perimeter of the building times the number of floors. The vertical pipes were assumed to be 2 and those servicing the floor 1, resulting in savings of 3 W/m and 1 W/m respectively. Lighting Power and Controls The LPD modelled in the previous report was equal to the NECB Therefore, no changes were made to the LPD in the Large Office model. The available version of CanQuest coupled with the lack of model documentation precluded any modelling of daylight or other controls. These are non-trivial exercises and require a careful approach regarding the assumptions used to generate the model. Therefore, daylighting and controls were not modelled in the current study. Pumping power To model these changes a two stage process was used. The initial calculation was used to size the equipment. From this calculation, the limit on pumping power was set according to the NECB 2015 requirements. For the office model it was discovered that these values were already being used. Therefore, no changes were made to the Large Office model. A final report 7 97

18 4.1.4 Results from Individual Changes For clarity, only results that differ from the old model are shown in the new column in the following tables (i.e. empty cells represent data that does not change between old and new models). Hot water discharge rates (Large Office) Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Total Saving (%) A final report 8 98

19 Pipe and Duct Insulation (Large Office) Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Total Saving (%) Lighting Power and Controls (Large Office) No changes in results as the current NECB 2015 requirements were included in the supplied model. Pumping power (Large Office) No changes in results as the current NECB 2015 requirements were included in the supplied model. A final report 9 99

20 4.2 Large MURB Model Description The supplied model NECB Archetype-Large Murb-Windsor_2015.pd2 was used as the basis for the analysis. The model was updated as shown in the table below. Note that for consistency with previous reports, the same table layout has been used. The Supplied Model column is reproduced directly from [2] and only items that have been changed are described in the Updates/changes column. Item Code Section Supplied Model Updates/changes Schedules NECB Schedule Electrical MNECB-97 G-Multfam Heatng Sched MNECB-97 G-Multfam Coolng Sched M/NECB G Heatng Sched M/NECB G Coolng Sched Lighting Power Density W/m W/m 2 modelled for NECB 2011 and 5.5 W/m 2 for NECB 2015 Plug Load Density A W/m 2 Air side HVAC system Air Handling Unit System 4-Single-zone makeup air system Supply Fan and Motor Return Fan and Motor Pa 40% efficiency No Return Fan Fan Performance Curve Table NA Constant Volume Outdoor air NBC Part 9, for MURBs and ASHRAE 62.1 for all others Overall L/s/m L/s/m 2 (Corridor) 748 L/s; 1 Bed=75 cfm; 2 Bed=85 cfm; 3 Bed=105 cfm Air-to-Air Heat Recovery Economiser for MURBS and for all others Table A for restaurants and minimum 50%-65% sensible efficiency in zone 6, 7 and 8 N/A A final report

21 control arena, and section A for all others Zonal Units Zonal Units Efficiency Zonal Units Fan Power Cooling Central Equipment N/A N/A Water source heat pumps COPc 3.28, COPh kw/l/s DX cooling Central Equipment Efficiency Table SEER 14 EIR without fans Performance curve Table DX cooling NECB curve Chilled water loop pump N/A Cooling Tower kwfan/kwcap Cooling Tower Fans Condenser Water Loop Pumps Centrifugal fan indirectcontact evaporative cooling towers 22 Wmotor power per kwthermal-peak for water-source heat pumps systems. Heating Central Equipment Boilers, kw and Furnace Central Equipment Efficiency Et = 83% (Boilers), Et = 80% (Furnaces) Performance curve Table A NECB non-condensing and NECB furnace curves Heating water loop pumps N/A Motor efficiency CSA C390 premium Zone heating N/A A final report

22 Domestic Hot water Demand 2011 ASHRAE HANDBOOK- HVAC Application Table 8 for MURBs/LTC and Table 7 for all others 53 L/person/day Efficiency Table Heat Input Ratio = 1.25 Supply temperature 2011 ASHRAE HANDBOOK- HVAC Application Table 8 for MURBs/LTC and Table 7 for all others 49 C Pump efficiency CSA C390 Premium Model Verification The updated model was verified against previously reported results. The following table shows the results for the Large MURB. Zone 5 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Total A final report

23 4.2.3 Modelled code changes Hot water discharge rates This code change was modelled by adjusting the total daily hot water draw in the CanQuest models. The hot water draw was parameterized by varying the hot water consumption, L/person/day. The reduction in shower draw from the 2011 NECB is 20%, whereas the reduction in faucet draw from the 2011 NECB is 31%. For the large MURB model this change was modelled by reducing the total daily hot water draw by 25% (representing a combination of shower and faucet draws). Pipe and Duct Insulation This change was not explicitly modelled in CanQuest. The approach taken was to estimate the total length of pipework in the office archetype and to use the 50% saving factors from the PCF (i.e. assuming half of the heat loss is useful energy to the building). These were then applied to the existing CanQuest results. The pipe length was estimated as twice the total height of the building plus the perimeter of the building times the number of floors. The vertical pipes were assumed to be 2 and those servicing the floor 1 resulting in savings of 3 W/m and 1 W/m respectively. Lighting Power and Controls The LPD modelled in the previous report was less than that of the NECB 2015 (3.9 compared to 5.0 W/m 2 ). Therefore, the LPD was increased from the value used previously. The LDP values were determined using the building area method, 6.5 W/m 2 for the 2011 NECB and 5.5 W/m 2 for the proposed 2015 NECB. The authors were unable to find any mention of values used in the supplied model, especially 3.9 W/m 2 for the living areas and 7.1 W/m 2 for the common areas. Pumping power Pump sizing was not specified in the supplied models. A two stage process was used to model these changes. The initial calculation was used to size the equipment, the boiler and chilled water loop. For example for Zone 5 the capacity of the boiler was 172 kw. Using the proposed code change, 22 Wmotor per kw yielded a pump size of 3.79 kw. From this calculation the limit on pumping power was set. This is the value used to compare with the Footprint results. Since the NECB is silent on pump power the NECB 2011 comparison case was determine using the default setting in CanQuest (i.e. auto-sized). The beta version of CanQuest used for this work uses ASHRAE to autosize the pumps. In some cases the auto-sized pumps were smaller than the proposed change. A final report

24 4.2.4 Results from Individual Changes For clarity, only results that differ from the old model are shown in the new column in the following tables (i.e. empty cells represent data that does not change between old and new models). Hot water discharge rates (Large MURB) Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Total Saving (%) A final report

25 Pipe and Duct Insulation (Large MURB) Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Total Saving (%) A final report

26 Lighting Power and Controls (Large MURB) Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Total Saving (%) A final report

27 Pumping power (Large MURB) Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Total Saving (%) A final report

28 4.3 Strip Mall Model Description The supplied model Strip mall.pd2 was used as the basis for the analysis. The model was updated as shown in the table below. Note that for consistency with previous reports the same table layout has been used. The Supplied Model column is reproduced directly from [2] and only items that have been changed are described in the Updates/changes column. Item Code Section Supplied Model Updates/changes Schedules NECB Schedule Schedule C with Saturday schedules used on Sundays until 6pm Electrical Lighting Power Density W/m W/m 2 modelled for NECB 2011 and 13.5 W/m 2 for NECB 2015 Plug Load Density A W/m 2 Air side HVAC system Air Handling Unit Dedicated Packaged constant system with gas furnace and DX cooling Supply Fan and Motor Return Fan and Motor Pa 40% efficiency No Return Fan Fan Performance Curve Table NA Constant Volume Outdoor air NBC Part 9, for MURBs and ASHRAE 62.1 for all others 0.9 L/s/m 2 Air-to-Air Heat Recovery Economiser control for MURBS and for all others Table A for restaurants and arena, and section None Dry bulb with high limit at 18 C A final report

29 A for all others Zonal Units Zonal Units Efficiency Zonal Units Fan Power Cooling Central Equipment N/A N/A None None N/A DX Cooling Central Equipment Efficiency Table SEER 14 EIR without fans Performance curve Table DX Cooling NECB Curve Chilled water loop pump N/A Cooling Tower N/A Cooling Tower Fans Condenser Water Loop Pumps N/A N/A Heating Central Equipment Furnace Central Equipment Efficiency Et 80% Furnace Performance curve Table A N/A Heating water loop pumps N/A Motor efficiency CSA C390 N/A Zone heating N/A Domestic Hot water Demand 2011 ASHRAE N/A A final report

30 HANDBOOK- HVAC Application Table 8 for MURBs/LTC and Table 7 for all others Efficiency Table N/A Supply temperature 2011 ASHRAE HANDBOOK- HVAC Application Table 8 for MURBs/LTC and Table 7 for all others N/A Pump efficiency CSA C390 N/A Model Verification The updated model was verified against previously reported results. The following table shows the results for the Strip Mall. Zone 5 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Total A final report

31 4.3.3 Modelled code changes Hot water discharge rates The strip mall does not consider DHW draws. Therefore, no changes were modelled for hot water discharge rates. Pipe and Duct Insulation The strip mall does not contain significant piping (all units are serviced by packaged equipment). Therefore, no changes were modelled for pipe and duct insulation. Lighting Power and Controls The supplied model used the NECB 2011 LPD (15.1 W/m 2 ) this was adjusted to the NECB 2015 value (13.5 W/m 2 ). Pumping power There are no pumps in the Strip Mall archetype. Therefore, no changes were modelled. A final report

32 4.3.4 Results from Individual Changes For clarity, only results that differ from the old model are shown in the new column in the following tables (i.e. empty cells represent data that does not change between old and new models). Hot water discharge rates (Strip Mall) No change from previous results. Pipe and Duct Insulation (Strip Mall) No change from previous results. Lighting Power and Controls (Strip Mall) Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Total Saving (%) Pumping power (Strip Mall) No change from previous results. A final report

33 4.4 Secondary School Model Description The supplied model Secondary School NECB_1004_Zone5.pd2 was used as the basis for the analysis. The model was updated as shown in the table below. Note that for consistency with previous reports, the same table layout has been used. The Supplied Model column is reproduced directly from [2] and only items that have been changed are described in the Updates/changes column. Item Code Section Supplied Model Updates/changes Schedules NECB Schedule Schedule D with Saturday and Sunday schedules used on Monday-Sunday in July and August Electrical Lighting Power Density W/m W/m 2 modelled for NECB 2011 and 9.4 W/m 2 for NECB 2015 Plug Load Density A W/m 2 Air side HVAC system Air Handling Unit System 3 - Single Zone Packaged Rooftop Unit with baseboard heating Supply Fan and Motor Return Fan and Motor Backward inclined with inlet vanes at 640Pa 40% efficiency No Return Fan Fan Performance Curve Table NA Constant Volume Outdoor air NBC Part 9, for MURBs and ASHRAE 62.1 for all others 0.98 L/s/m 2 Air-to-Air Heat Recovery for Air-to-Air Heat Recovery for MURBS and for all others 50% sensible effectiveness for zones 4, 5, 6, 7a, 7b, and 8 for main AHUs; 50% sensible effectiveness for zones 6, 7a, 7b, and 8 for gym's AHU A final report

34 Economiser control Zonal Units Zonal Units Efficiency Zonal Units Fan Power Cooling Central Equipment Central Equipment Efficiency EIR without fans Table A for restaurants and arena, and section A for all others N/A N/A Table Dry bulb with high limit at 18 C None None N/A DX cooling EER 9.5 for main AHUs, EER for gym, cafeteria, and auditorium units EIR for main AHUs, EIR for gym, cafeteria, and auditorium units Performance curve Table DX cooling NECB curve Chilled water loop pump N/A Cooling Tower N/A Cooling Tower Fans Condenser Water Loop Pumps N/A N/A Heating Central Equipment Boilers at kw and Furnaces Central Equipment Efficiency Et = 83% (Boilers), Et = 80% (Furnaces) Performance curve Table A NECB non-condensing and NECB furnace curves Heating water loop pumps Constant speed, 4.5 Wmotor power per kwthermal-peak A final report

35 Motor efficiency CSA C390 Premium Zone heating Hydronic baseboard Domestic Hot water Demand 2011 ASHRAE HANDBOOK- HVAC Application Table 8 for MURBs/LTC and Table 7 for all others 2.3 L/person/day Efficiency Table Heat Input Ratio = 1.25 Supply temperature 2011 ASHRAE HANDBOOK- HVAC Application Table 8 for MURBs/LTC and Table 7 for all others 60 C Pump efficiency CSA C390 Premium Model Verification The updated model was verified against previously reported results. The following table shows the results for the Secondary School. Note that Zone 4 was used for comparison in this case. Zone 4 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage A final report

36 Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Kitchen Total Modelled code changes Hot water discharge rates This code change was modelled by adjusting the total daily hot water draw in the CanQuest models. The hot water draw was parameterized by varying the hot water consumption, L/person/day. The reduction in shower draw from the 2011 NECB is 20%, whereas the reduction in faucet draw from the 2011 NECB is 31%. For the secondary school model this change was modelled by reducing the total daily hot water draw by 25% (representing a combination of shower and faucet draws). Pipe and Duct Insulation This change was not explicitly modelled in CanQuest. The approach taken was to estimate the total length of pipework in the office archetype and to use the 50% saving factors from the PCF (i.e. assuming half of the heat loss is useful energy to the building). These were then applied to the existing CanQuest results. The pipe length was estimated as twice the total height of the building plus the perimeter of the building times the number of floors. The vertical pipes were assumed to be 2 and those servicing the floor 1 resulting in savings of 3 W/m and 1 W/m respectively. Lighting Power and Controls The supplied model used the NECB 2011 LPD (10.7 W/m 2 ) this was adjusted to the NECB 2015 value (9.4 W/m 2 ). Pumping power A two stage process was used to model these changes. The initial calculation was used to size the equipment, the boiler. For example for Zone 4 the capacity of the boiler was 1740 kw. Using the proposed code change, 4.5 Wmotor per kw yielded a pump size of 7.83 kw. From this calculation the limit on pumping power was set. The Footprint model pump size for Zone 4 was 5.18 kw. The Footprint pump sizing and the NECB 2015 were used for comparison. A final report

37 4.4.4 Results from Individual Changes For clarity, only results that differ from the old model are shown in the new column in the following tables (i.e. empty cells represent data that does not change between old and new models). Hot water discharge rates (Secondary School) Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Kitchen Total Saving (%) A final report

38 Pipe and Duct Insulation (Secondary School) Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Kitchen Total Saving (%) A final report

39 Lighting Power and Controls (Secondary School) Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Kitchen Total Saving (%) A final report

40 Pumping power (Secondary School) Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage Misc. Equip Task Lights Area Light Kitchen Total Saving (%) A final report

41 5 Overall Savings The combined savings were calculated for each building type assuming the principle of superposition holds. The 2013 Report results are from the previous modelling work carried out for the NECB 2015 changes [2] and the 2015 NRCC are the combined savings from the current work. The values in the 2011 NECB columns were taken from the May 2010 report prepared for NRCC [1]. A final report

42 5.1 Large Office Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) NECB Report 2015 NRCC NECB Report 2015 NRCC NECB Report Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp. n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 Misc. Equip Task Lights n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 Area Light Total Saving (%) NRCC NECB Report 2015 NRCC NECB Report 2015 NRCC NECB Report 2015 NRCC A final report

43 5.2 Large MURB Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) NECB Report 2015 NRCC NECB Report 2015 NRCC NECB Report Space Cool n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Heat Reject n/a 0.1 n/a 0.6 n/a 0.5 n/a 0.3 n/a 0.4 n/a 0.4 Space Heat n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a HP Supp. n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 Hot Water n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Vent. Fans n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Pumps & Aux n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Ext Usage n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 Misc. Equip. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Task Lights n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 Area Light n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Total n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Saving (%) NRCC NECB Report 2015 NRCC NECB Report 2015 NRCC NECB Report 2015 NRCC A final report

44 5.3 Strip Mall Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Energy Consumption (kwh/m 2 ) NECB Report 2015 NRCC NECB Report 2015 NRCC NECB Report Space Cool / Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp. n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 Misc. Equip Task Lights n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 Area Light Total Saving (%) NRCC NECB Report 2015 NRCC NECB Report 2015 NRCC NECB Report 2015 NRCC A final report

45 5.4 Secondary School Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Secondary School Energy NECB NECB NECB NECB NECB NECB Consumption (kwh/m Report NRCC 2011 Report NRCC 2011 Report NRCC 2011 Report NRCC 2011 Report NRCC 2011 Report NRCC ) Space Cool Heat Reject Space Heat HP Supp. n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 Hot Water Vent. Fans Pumps & Aux Ext Usage n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 Misc. Equip Task Lights n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 Area Light Kitchen n/a 26 n/a 28.9 n/a 31 n/a 32.9 n/a 34.8 n/a 40 Total Saving (%) A final report

46 6 References 1. Caneta Research Inc., Performance Simulation of Proposed Changes to NECB Relative to MNECB and ASHRAE Final Report May Footprint, Energy Modelling Report. Modelling of the National Energy Code for Buildings 2015 Final report, revision NECB. Technical Changes by Code Section review/2013/necb_technical.php. Accessed multiple times between 1/Feb/2015 and 7/May/2015 A final report

47 Appendix A Modelling details The following sections provide a different view on the modelling undertaken in support of this project. The information is included in the hope that the relationships generated may be useful in guiding future code developments. The sections are presented by code change then building type rather than the building type, code change format used in the main section of the report. A.1 Effect of proposed changes in water draw Modelling approach: The objective is to update total daily hot water draw in the CanQuest archetype models. The hot water draw will be parameterized by varying the hot water consumption, l/person/day. The reduction in shower draw from the 2011 NECB is 20% whereas the reduction in faucet draw from the 2011 NECB is 31%. A.1.1 Large Office Building Archetype For the large office archetype the per person daily draw was varied by +/- 30%. It was assumed that the majority of draws are from faucets. This corresponds to the change in faucet discharge rates from 8.3 to 5.7 L/min for lavatory faucets. The baseline draw was obtained from the archetype models provided. The only change in energy use was in the gas consumption used for hot water heating (and correspondingly the total gas use). The change was linear; a given change in draw produces a given change in gas consumption. Thus, EUI = original EUI * (1 - Water draw * factor) Water draw Description Hot water Total 4.55 Baseline % % EUI, ekwh/m 3 /y Water draw, L/person/day Component Factor R 2 Hot water Total Factor, [ekwh/m 2 /y]/[l/person/day] A final report

48 Baseline ekwh/m 2 /y Draw 4.55 L/person/day Large Office Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Hot Water Total Reduced ekwh/m 2 /y Draw 3.19 L/person/day Large Office Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Hot Water Total Percent Change in EUI Large Office Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Hot Water Total In summary, for a 30% reduction in water draw there is a maximum decrease in total EUI of 0.90%. The reduction in hot water heating is 28%, presumably representing the decrease in hot water consumption corrected for the efficiency of the system. Large Office Building: Percent change in EUIs for a 30% reduction in hot water draw, from 4.55 (2011 NECB) to 3.19 (2015 NECB) L/person/day. A final report

49 A.1.2 Small Strip Mall Building Archetype A reduction in hot water draw was not considered for the strip mall archetype. The amount of energy used for domestic hot water for this type of building was considered to be negligible; consequently changes in EUI were not estimated. Percent Change in EUI Strip Mall Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Hot Water n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Total A.1.3 Large Multi-Unit Residential Building Archetype For the large MURB archetype the per person daily draw was varied by +/- 25%. It was assumed that the mix of draws from faucets and showers averaged to a total reduction in hot draws of 25%. The baseline draw was obtained from the archetype models provided. The only change in energy use was in the gas consumption used for hot water heating (and correspondingly the total gas use). Water draw Description Hot water Total 59.1 Baseline % % EUI, ekwh/m 3 /y Water draw, l/person/day Component Factor R 2 Hot water Total Factor, [ekwh/m 2 /y]/[l/person/day] A final report

50 Baseline ekwh/m 2 /y Draw 59.1 L/person/day Large MURB Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Hot Water Total Reduced ekwh/m 2 /y Draw 44.3 L/person/day Large MURB Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Hot Water Total Percent Change in EUI Large MURB Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Hot Water Total In summary, for a 25% reduction in water draw there is a maximum decrease in total EUI of 4.2%. The reduction in hot water heating is 13%. Large Multi-Unit Residential Building: Percent change in EUIs for a 25% reduction in hot water draw, from 59.1 (2011 NECB) to 44.3 (2015 NECB) l/person/day A final report

51 A.1.4 Secondary School Building Archetype For the secondary school archetype the per person daily draw was varied by +/- 25%. It was assumed that the mix of draws from faucets and showers averaged to a total reduction in hot draws of 25%. The baseline draw was obtained from the archetype models provide by Footprint [2]. The only change in energy use was in the gas consumption used for hot water heating (and correspondingly the total gas use). Water draw Description Hot water Total 8.18 Baseline % % EUI, ekwh/m 3 /y Water draw, L/person/day Component Factor R 2 Hot water Total Factor, [ekwh/m 2 /y]/[l/person/day] Baseline ekwh/m 2 /y Draw 8.18 L/person/day Secondary School Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Hot Water Total Reduced ekwh/m 2 /y Draw 6.14 L/person/day Secondary School Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Hot Water Total Percent Change in EUI Secondary School Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Hot Water Total A final report

52 In summary, for a 25% reduction in water draw there is a maximum decrease in total EUI of 1.6%. The reduction in hot water heating is 28%. Secondary School: Percent change in EUIs for a 25% reduction in hot water draw, from 8.18 (2011 NECB) to 6.14 (2015 NECB) L/person/day. A final report

53 A.2 Effect of proposed changes in pipe insulation Piping heat losses are not explicitly modelled in the archetype CanQuest models. To estimate the effect on the overall building energy intensity the data provided in the PCF was used. Two tables were presented in the PCF and it was decided to use the savings in the 50% table (as some of the heat lost from piping will provide useful energy to the building as pipework is inside the thermal envelope). A detailed model was not possible within the scope of this project as pipe runs, enclosures and terminal devises would need to be explicitly modelled to capture the underlying physics. However, the approach used is expected to provide a usable estimate of the savings potential. Archetype Length Width Floor- Floor height #Floors Floor plate Saving (W/m) Riser Saving (W/m) perimeter+ 2*height Saving (W) Saving (kwh/year) Office MURB School Strip Mall In all cases the accumulated savings are less than 1 kwh/m 2 /year. To accumulate significant savings would require an order of magnitude more piping in each building. Saving (kwh/m 2 / year) A final report

54 A.3 Effect of proposed changes in lighting power density Modelling approach: Due to difficulties in duplicating the original modelling work the following approach was taken for estimating the effect of changes in lighting loads. 1. The EUI results taken from [2] were assumed to be the baseline for the different archetypes in the different zones. 2. For lighting power density studies the Zone 5 location, Windsor, was used for analysis. The Windsor area has the highest number of cooling degree days (CDD10 and CDD18) in Canada (ASHRAE 2013 Handbook Fundamentals). 3. For each Zone 5 archetype three different LPDs were modelled. The 1997 MNECB LPDs were used, as were the 2011 NECB values. The third LPD was the proposed 2015 change. 4. A linear relationship between the space heating and cooling EUI as well as the fan EUI was derived expressing the change in EUI (ekwh/m 2 /y) given a unit change in LPD (W/m 2 ). 5. The change in heating, cooling, and fan energies for a given change in LPD was calculated by modifying the original EUI results [2]. The change in total EUI was then calculated by summing the various component EUIs. A.3.1 Large Office Building Archetype LPD Description Heating Cooling Fans value value W/ft LPD, lighting power density, W/m 2 Heating, Space heating EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y [*] Cooling, Space cooling EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y [ ] Fan, Fans usage EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y; Component Factor R 2 Heating Cooling Fan Factor, [ekwh/m 2 /y]/[w/m 2 ] * Space heating is calculated from the CanQuest output (in Btu x 10 6 ) by multiplying the result by 10 6 then by , then dividing the result by the building area. Other EUIs are calculated from the CanQuest output (in kwh x 10 3 ) by multiplying the result by 10 3 then dividing the result by the building area. A final report

55 Thus, EUI = original EUI + LPD * factor 2011 Levels ekwh/m 2 /y LPD 9.7 W/m 2 Large Office Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Area Lights Task Lights Misc. Equip Ext. Usage Pumps & Aux Vent. Fans Hot Water HP Supp Space Heat Heat Reject Space Cool Total Proposed Changes ekwh/m 2 /y LPD 8.83 W/m 2 Large Office Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Area Lights Task Lights Misc. Equip Ext. Usage Pumps & Aux Vent. Fans Hot Water HP Supp Space Heat Heat Reject Space Cool Total This table is taken from the original EUI results. A final report

56 Percent Change in EUI Large Office Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Area Lights Vent. Fans Space Heat Space Cool Total In summary, for a 9% reduction in LPD there is a maximum decrease in total EUI of 1%. The reduction in cooling loads is offset by an increase in heating loads due to the reduction of internal gains. In fact the net change in space conditioning energy (heating, cooling, and fans) is increased by 2-3%. The total decrease in EUI is attributable to a decrease in lighting power. Also noteworthy is that for this case the equipment loads are equal to the lighting loads, hence the reduction in internal gains is actually 5%. Large Office Building: Percent change in EUIs for a 10% reduction LPD, from 9.7 (2011 NECB) to 8.8 (2015 NECB) W/m 2 A final report

57 A.3.2 Small Strip Mall Building Archetype LPD Description Heating Cooling Fans Value value % 2015 value LPD, lighting power density, W/m 2 Heating, Space heating EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y [ ] Cooling, Space cooling EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y [**] Fans, Fan usage EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y; Component Factor R 2 Heating Cooling Fan Factor, [ekwh/m 2 /y]/[w/m 2 ] 2011 Levels ekwh/m 2 /y LPD 15.1 W/m 2 Strip Mall Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Area Lights Task Lights Misc. Equip Ext. Usage Pumps & Aux Vent. Fans Hot Water HP Supp Space heating is calculated from the CanQuest output (in Btu x 10 6 ) by multiplying the result by 10 6 then by , then dividing the result by the building area. ** Other EUIs are calculated from the CanQuest output (in kwh x 10 3 ) by multiplying the result by 10 3 then dividing the result by the building area. This table is taken from the original EUI results. A final report

58 Space Heat Heat Reject Space Cool Total Proposed Changes ekwh/m 2 /y LPD 13.5 W/m 2 Strip Mall Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Area Lights Task Lights Misc. Equip Ext. Usage Pumps & Aux Vent. Fans Hot Water HP Supp Space Heat Heat Reject Space Cool Total Percent Change in EUI Strip Mall Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Area Lights Vent. Fans Space Heat Space Cool Total In summary, for a 10% reduction in LPD there is a maximum decrease in total EUI of 2%. The reduction in cooling loads is offset by an increase in heating loads due to the reduction of internal gains. In fact the net change in space conditioning energy (heating, cooling, and fans) is increased by 1-2%. The total decrease in EUI is attributable to a decrease in lighting power. A final report

59 Strip Mall: Percent change in EUIs for a 10% reduction LPD, from 15.1 (2011 NECB) to 13.5 (2015 NECB) W/m 2 A final report

60 A.3.3 Large Multi-Unit Residential Building Archetype LPD Description Heating Cooling Fans Value value Existing model LPD, lighting power density, W/m 2 Heating, Space heating EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y [ ] Cooling, Space cooling EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y [ ] Fans, Fan usage EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y; Component Factor R 2 Heating Cooling Fan Factor, [ekwh/m 2 /y]/[w/m 2 ] 2011 Levels ekwh/m 2 /y LPD 6.5 W/m 2 Large MURB Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Area Lights Task Lights Misc. Equip Ext. Usage Pumps & Aux Vent. Fans Hot Water HP Supp Space Heat Heat Reject Space Cool Total Space heating is calculated from the CanQuest output (in Btu x 10 6 ) by multiplying the result by 10 6 then by , then dividing the result by the building area. Other EUIs are calculated from the CanQuest output (in kwh x 10 3 ) by multiplying the result by 10 3 then dividing the result by the building area. A final report

61 2015 Proposed Changes ekwh/m 2 /y LPD 5.5 W/m 2 Large MURB Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Area Lights Task Lights Misc. Equip Ext. Usage Pumps & Aux Vent. Fans Hot Water HP Supp Space Heat Heat Reject Space Cool Total Percent Change in EUI Large MURB Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Area Lights Vent. Fans Space Heat Space Cool Total In summary, for a 15% reduction in LPD there is a maximum decrease in total EUI of 1.2%. The reduction in cooling loads is offset by an increase in heating loads due to the reduction of internal gains. In fact the net change in space conditioning energy (heating, cooling, and fans) is increased by 1%. The total decrease in EUI is attributable to a decrease in lighting power. Also noteworthy is that for this case the equipment load is double the lighting load, hence the large reduction in LPD produces little change in total EUI. A final report

62 Large MURB: Percent change in EUIs for a 15% reduction LPD, from 6.5 (2011 NECB) to 5.5 (2015 NECB) W/m 2. A final report

63 A.3.4 Secondary School Archetype LPD Description Heating Cooling Fans Value value W/ft LPD, lighting power density, W/m 2 Heating, Space heating EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y [***] Cooling, Space cooling EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y [ ] Fans = Fans usage EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y; Component Factor R 2 Heating Cooling Fan Factor, [ekwh/m2/y]/[w/m2] 2011 Levels ekwh/m2/y LPD 10.7 W/m2 Secondary School Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Kitchen Area Lights Task Lights Misc. Equip Ext. Usage Pumps & Aux Vent. Fans Hot Water HP Supp Space Heat Heat Reject Space Cool Total *** Space heating is calculated from the CanQuest output (in Btu x 10 6 ) by multiplying the result by 10 6 then by , then dividing the result by the building area. Other EUIs are calculated from the CanQuest output (in kwh x 10 3 ) by multiplying the result by 10 3 then dividing the result by the building area. A final report

64 2015 Proposed Changes ekwh/m2/y LPD 9.4 W/m2 Secondary School Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Kitchen Area Lights Task Lights Misc. Equip Ext. Usage Pumps & Aux Vent. Fans Hot Water HP Supp Space Heat Heat Reject Space Cool Total Percent Change in EUI Secondary School Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Area Lights Vent. Fans Space Heat Space Cool Total In summary, for a 12% reduction in LPD there is a maximum decrease in total EUI of 0.70%. The reduction in cooling loads is offset by an increase in heating loads due to the reduction of internal gains. In fact the net change in space conditioning energy (heating, cooling, and fans) is increased by 3%. The total decrease in EUI is attributable to a decrease in lighting power. Also noteworthy is that for this case the equipment load is double the lighting load, hence the large reduction in LPD produces little change in total EUI. A final report

65 Secondary School: Percent change in EUI s for a 12% reduction LPD, from 10.7 (2011 NECB) to 9.4 (2015 NECB) W/m 2. A.4 Effect of proposed changes in limits to pumping power Modelling approach: The following approach was taken for estimating the effect of changes in pumping power. 1. The EUI results taken from [2] were assumed to be the baseline for the different archetypes in the different zones. The proposed limits to pumping power were incorporated into the models, specifically the proposed new Sentence clauses through d. a. 14 W motor power per kw thermal-peak for cooling systems, b. 4.5 W motor power per kw thermal-peak for heating systems, c. 12 W motor power per kw thermal-peak for heat rejection systems, and d. 22 W motor power per kwt hermal-peak for water-source heat pumps systems. 2. The pumping power values for the report [2] were calculating by applying the above limits to the installed capacity of boilers, chillers, and cooling towers. For example, the installed capacity of the boilers (two) for the large office archetype model located in Windsor is 3.74 mbtu/h, which translates into a pumping power limit of 4.94 kw for the hot water loop. The installed capacity was estimated from a preliminary loads calculation. 3. For each Zone 5 archetype four different pumping power criteria were modelling. The proposed 2015 restrictions were used, as were one-half and twice the 2015 limits. In the fourth case the pumping power values were auto-sized by the software. The auto-sized values were considered to be the NECB 2011 baseline (i.e. there were no restrictions in the 2011 code). A final report

66 4. Linear relationships between various EUIs were derived expressing the change in EUI (ekwh/m 2 /y) given a unit change in pumping power (kw). 5. The change in EUI for a given change in pumping power was calculated by modifying the original EUI results [2]. The change in total EUI was then calculated by summing the various component EUIs. A.4.1 Large Office Building Archetype Pumping Power Description Heating Cooling Heat Reject. Pumps value % NECB % NECB CanQuest auto-size Total Pumping power of all pumps covered by , kw Heating, Space heating EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y [ ] Cooling, Space cooling EUI, ekwh/m 2 /y [ ] Heat rejection, ekwh/m 2 /y Total Pump energy, ekwh/m 2 /y; Component Factor R 2 Heating Cooling Heat rejection Pump energy Factor, [ekwh/m 2 /y]/kw Thus, EUI = original EUI + Pump power * factor Space heating is calculated from the CanQuest output (in Btu x 10 6 ) by multiplying the result by 10 6 then by , then dividing the result by the building area. Other EUIs are calculated from the CanQuest output (in kwh x 10 3 ) by multiplying the result by 10 3 then dividing the result by the building area. A final report

67 Auto sized Archetype ekwh/m 2 /y Pump energy 50.4 kw for Z5 Large Office Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Area Lights Task Lights Misc. Equip Ext. Usage Pumps & Aux Vent. Fans Hot Water HP Supp Space Heat Heat Reject Space Cool Total Proposed Changes ekwh/m 2 /y Pump energy 39.0 kw for Z5 Large Office Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Area Lights Task Lights Misc. Equip Ext. Usage Pumps & Aux Vent. Fans Hot Water HP Supp Space Heat Heat Reject Space Cool Total A final report

68 Percent Change in EUI Large Office Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8 Pumps & Aux Space Heat Heat Reject Space Cool Total In summary, for a 23% reduction in pumping power in Zone 5 there is a decrease in total EUI of 1.7%. The reduction in cooling loads is offset by an increase in heating loads due to the reduction of internal gains. The maximum decrease in energy is predicted to be in Zone 4, around 1.9% of the 2011 EUI. Large Office Building: Percent change in EUI s for a reduction pumping power, 2011 NECB auto-sized to 2015 NECB proposed limits. A final report