Gerald R. Ford Museum

Transcription

1 Gerald R. Ford Museum Grand Rapids, Michigan Executive Summary Building and Plant Energy Analysis Report: Part I Brendan J. Cullen The Pennsylvania State University AE Senior Thesis Mechanical Option September 30, 2002 The following report is a compilation of research and data in determining energy characteristics of the Gerald R. Ford Museum. The report briefly touches upon the LEED TM Green Building Rating then develops an annual energy consumption comparison, followed by a study on whether the building is in compliance with ASHRAE S Standard The usable space versus the total building space is contrasted, and an analysis is done for the costs of mechanical systems for the addition and renovation to the Museum. In this evaluation, it was found that the LEED TM Green Building Rating could not be directly compared to the Museum due to exemption factors based on the building type. An energy analysis was then done as an alternative, using recorded demand loads from the year 2000 in comparison to projected loads for when the job is completed. It was determined that loads for mechanical equipment would be significantly increased due to new provisions set by the owners of the building. The Museum is further evaluated based on requirements set by ASHRAE Standard 90, and it is was found that while some values meet the envelope criteria, the overall building still failed to comply. Alternative methods were considered for setting assorted U-values, however the building still seemed to fall short of the requirements established by ASHRAE. Following the building envelope analysis, lighting loads were compared and contrasted, and again, it was determined that Museum did not meet the design criteria. Tables in the Standard were used to tweak the lighting loads to acceptable levels due to exemption factors, however the actual office wattage per square foot still broke the maximum level of 1.5 W/ft 2. Finally, the building usable space was analyzed and it was determined that approximately 5.2% of the floor area and 9.6% of the total building volume was deemed unusable due to mechanical equipment. It was then found that the cost of the entire building mechanical systems came to approximately $40.34.

2 What Is The LEED TM Green Building Rating? The purpose of the LEED Green Building Rating is to provide certification to those buildings in compliance with standards set for the improvement of environmental, health and economic performance of buildings. The rating system provides a basis for promoting the U.S. building industry to more sustainable practices. The buildings that apply to the LEED Green Building Rating are mostly commercial, institutional or high rise residential projects, both new and those undergoing major renovation. Unfortunately, buildings such as museums, which provide housing for extremely sensitive artistic and historical objects, do not apply to rating. Since a LEED Green Building Rating cannot be easily obtainable for the Ford Museum, this section of the report will focus on past energy consumption in comparison to the energy needs of the new components being constructed. Past Annual Energy Consumption 2000 Fiscal Year Demand Loads (As Provided By Consumers Energy) MONTH DAYS KWH KW KVA A OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER MAX Since the launch of addition and renovation to the Ford Museum, the former HVAC systems have, and will continue to undergo extensive modifications to meet the new required loads. The above table provides an in-depth look into demands loads from the year 2000 where the majority of the load came from the following sources (neglecting lighting): ITEM Air-Handling Units Chiller Boiler Chilled Water Pumps Heating Water Pumps FORMER LOAD 65 kw 192 kw 1 kw 23 kw 6 kw A substantial component to these mechanical loads is the 192 kw chiller that runs at a maximum demand during the summer months. This load, coupled with the air-handling units and the chilled water pumps are represented in the wide-ranging kilowatt usage as seen during the months of June, July, August and September. As a result of the work being done on the Ford Museum, the following loads replace the former values, which will develop new demand loads in the near future:

3 ITEM Air-Handling Units Condensing Units Chiller Boiler Chilled Water Pumps Heating Water Pumps NEW LOAD 109 kw 12 kw 243 kw 1 kw 33 kw 13 kw The new equipment requirements call for and increased load of 124 kw, resulting in a new 411 kw load, as compared to the previous 287 kw. Given these new values, a rough estimate can be established on the basis that a linear relationship can directly apply to the mechanical kilowatt usage (during the summer months only). If the past trends of energy consumption were to continue as they had in the past, the following demand loads for the building during the summer months in Grand Rapids, Michigan could theoretical apply: Estimated Summer Demand Loads (Following Addition and Renovation) MONTH DAYS KWH KW KVA A JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER MAX Where kw 1000 A = & V PF 3 V A KVA = This data is simply an estimate of possible kw usage for the Gerald Ford Museum following the installation of this new mechanical equipment. This comparison of data can be seen as significant because the building is undergoing alterations that are now seen as a necessity according to the National Archives and Record Administration (NARA). Some of the new standards set NARA include: air-handling units serving collection storage areas with 100% redundancy individually zoned humidification units easily accessible air-handling units computer controlled central building automated management system, high efficiency lighting systems larger generators for emergency power As noticed in the increase in KVA usage, the energy demand of these added components can be extremely costly. However, in order to maintain a working Museum as seen fit by NARA and associated government personnel, these standards are essential.

4 What is ASHRAE Standard ? ASHRAE Standard 90 is an adopted standard by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-conditioning Engineers that develops set requirements for various aspects involved in the design of the building envelope, mechanical systems, and lighting systems. The Standard sets minimum requirements where buildings must meet all criteria established in order to be considered in compliance. The overall purpose of the Standard is to promote energy-efficient design to applicable buildings, as clearly defined in scope of the document. In many instances, the requirements are set guidelines that may be considered for alteration, dependant upon unique circumstances where conditions may cause the building or its elements to be exempt. Application of the Ford Addition and Renovation to Standard 90 As mentioned in the ASHRAE Standard, any addition and/or alteration must comply with the provisions as stated in Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 or 11 (dependant on certain building characteristics). However, for the purposes of this report, Section 5 and Section 9 will be the main focus of study. Values of existing conditions pertaining to these sections will be compared and contrasted to those requirements as stated in the Standard. For Section 5 conclusions will be draw based on the requirements of the building envelope, setting minimum values for insulation, solar heat gain coefficients, U-factors, F-factors, C-factors, etc. As for Section 9, values will be compared pertaining to lighting requirements and various power allowances for both the building interior and exterior. Building Envelope In order for the Addition and Renovation of the Gerald Ford Museum to comply with the building envelope requirements; an appropriate climate, space conditioning category, and class of construction had to be determined. Using the U.S. Climate Data provided in Appendix D of the Standard, the appropriate codes were found for Grand Rapids, Michigan. It was then determined that Table B-17 would be applicable in comparing the elements of the actual building to the ASHRAE Standard. Within Table-B17, values were chosen for a nonresidential building and the appropriate opaque element that applied to each type of constructed section. Thus, the following comparisons were made using the relative information provided (See attached sheets at end of report for chart details).

5 Roof Construction: Outside Air Film EPDMMembrane 2" FoamInsul. 4" L.W. Conc. Metal Pan Inside Air Film Roof R- Element Value Outside Air Film 0.17 EPDM Membrane 0.1 2" Foam Insulation 10 4" Light Weight Concrete 0.44 Metal Pan 0.05 Inside Air Film 0.61 TOTAL U-Value From Table B-17, it was determined that the maximum U-Value for Insulation Entirely above Deck is U Therefore the roof construction does not comply. It is also noted in the Standard that the Insulation Minimum R-Value is R The actual roof contains foam insulation with an R-Value of 10, therefore that value also does not comply. Typical Wall Type I Construction: Outside Air Film 1' Concrete Block 3 1/2" Batt. Insul. 5/8" Gypsum Inside Air Film Wall R- Element Value Outside Air Film '-0" Concrete /2" Batt. Insul. (R-11) 11 5/8" Gypsum Board 0.56 Inside Air Film 0.68 TOTAL U-Value For Walls, Above Grade, the maximum U-Value for a Mass type is U-0.087, where as the actual U-Value only equates to

6 For the minimum insulation R-Value, Table B-17 reads an R-7.6, however the Batt. Insulation is an R-11. Therefore, this wall type meets the ASHRAE Standard for both requirements. Typical Wall Type II Construction: Outside Air Film 1' Concrete Block 3 1/2" Batt. Insul. 5/8" Gypsum 3/4" Plywood Inside Air Film Wall R- Element Value Outside Air Film '-0" Concrete /2" Batt. Insul. (R-11) 11 3/4" Plywood /8" Gypsum Board 0.56 Inside Air Film 0.68 TOTAL U-Value For Walls, Above Grade, the maximum U-Value for a Mass type is U-0.087, where as the actual U-Value only equates to For the minimum insulation R-Value, Table B-17 reads an R-7.6, however the Batt. Insulation is an R-11. Therefore, this wall type also meets the ASHRAE Standard for both requirements. Glass: For determining fenestration requirements, the percent glass as compared to gross wall area had to be calculated (Note: There are no existing skylights within the building). The calculations are as follows: Outside Air Film 1/4" Thick Glass 1/2" Air Gap 2" Glass Fiber Inside Air Film Glass Element R-Value Outside Air Film /4" Thick Glass 1.2 1/2" Air Gap " Glass Fiber 8 Inside Air Film 0.68 TOTAL 10.5 U-Value 0.095

7 All Orientations Glass Transmission = 7336 ft 2 Wall Transmission = ff 2 Vertical Glazing, % of Wall: 7336 % = 100 = 31% Therefore, the Assembly Maximum SHGC for all orientations, as read from Table-B17, is 0.39, and a U fixed of North-Oriented Glass Transmission = 640 ft 2 Wall Transmission =3840 ft 2 Vertical Glazing, % of Wall: 640 % = 100 = 14% Therefore, the Assembly Maximum SHGC for north-oriented walls, as read from Table-B17, is 0.49 and a U fixed of Actual Building Values The given SHGC for the assembly shown is equal to 0.042, and the U- Factor is equal to Therefore, the vertical glazing complies with the ASHRAE Standard for both the overall building and the north orientation. Slab-On-Grade & Opaque Doors: It is assumed the slab-on-grade is typical and the F-value meets the criteria for the unheated slab-on grade floor systems given in Standard-90. It is also assumed that the doors are typical and also comply with the Standard in that the U-value is less than Conclusions After careful consideration of several guidelines within the ASHRAE Standard 90, it is concluded that several factors could in fact increase (or in some cases decrease) values to meet the requirements given. One consideration in calculating the U-values for vertical fenestration is to take into account permanent projections. If permanent projections exist, multipliers can be used to increase the maximum required U-value, provided the projections meets ASHRAE s criteria. In this case it is not necessary because the fenestration meets the Standard, yet it could still be incorporated into the calculations. In regards to the calculations for other elements that might not have complied to the Standard, there are still other alternative factors. In the case of the roof, tests could be conducted in accordance with ASTM E903 and E408 for total solar reflectance and minimum thermal emittance, respectively. If these tests reveal values that result in exemption of the Standard, the maximum U-values could be substantially higher, thus resulting in compliance with the requirements.

8 Interior Lighting Space-by-Space Method In order to develop an accurate evaluation of whether the Ford Museum meets the Standard 90 lighting requirements, the power loads of various spaces must be analyzed. The following values represent the existing generalized lighting conditions as documented by the design engineers of the Addition and Renovation of the Ford Museum: ITEM LOAD CONNECTED LOAD Temporary Exhibit Spaces 5 W/ft 2 25,000 W Offices Spaces 3 W/ft 2 6,300 W Support Spaces 3 W/ft 2 7,800 W According to Table in the ASHRAE Standard 90, the following values are most closely related previous mentioned spaces: ITEM LOAD CONNECTED LOAD General Exhibit 1.6 W/ft 2 8,000 W Office (Enclosed) 1.5 W/ft 2 3,150 W Support Area Lighting 2.5 W/ft 2 6,500 W In comparing these numbers, it is concluded that the ASHRAE Standard 90 values do not match up to the given values for the Museum, therefore the building does not comply with this method. However, there are exceptions that may allow the lighting loads to be increased. These few exceptions will be discussed further at the conclusion of the lighting analysis. Exterior Lighting No exterior lighting alterations were made during the Addition and Renovation to the Gerald Ford Museum. Conclusions After general analysis of lighting in various areas of the Museum, it was determined that the building certainly did not meet the standards set by ASHRAE. However, in the case of spaces such as the Exhibit space and other showing areas, a majority of the lighting is to be considered display or accent lighting and therefore would be exempt from the requirements. The Standard specifically states that any lighting of this type may be an exception to the rule and does not necessarily result in non-efficient design. When using the Space-by-Space Method in a case such as a museum, there are additive allowances for the values shown in the table above. If the additional lighting power was to be added to these values, the following would result: ITEM LOAD ADDITION TOTAL Office (Enclosed) 1.5 W/ft W/ft 2 = 1.5 W/ft 2 General Exhibit 1.6 W/ft W/ft 2 = 5.5 W/ft 2 Support Area Lighting 2.5 W/ft W/ft 2 = 3.5 W/ft 2 With the additional wattage per square foot, the lighting for Ford Museum seems to be slightly closer to the Standard, yet it still does not comply. In regards to lighting control applications, the majority of the lighting within office spaces, exhibit spaces, and conference spaces all how individual controls, which seems to meet the requirements set by the Standard.

9 Usable Space Analysis When attempting to determine the overall efficiency of building, one aspect to consider is that of lost profitable space due to elements such as mechanical and electrical equipment. The following table provides a break down of lost space in the Gerald R. Ford Museum due to these types of equipment additives: Building Totals: Floor Area (ft 2 ) Volume (ft 3 ) Space Electrical Room (113) 610 6,200 Boiler Room (301) 190 1,900 Fan Room (300) 517 6,032 Mech. Room (213) 545 7,630 Mech. Room (200) ,720 Machine Room (102) Machine Room (123) 72 1,050 Machine Room (400) Shaft Space 65 1,200 Estimated Plenum Space 17,000* 68,000 TOTALS 2, ,762 o Total approximate floor space = 55,000 ft 2 o Total building volume = 1,137,630 ft 3 Percent _ UnusableFloorSpace = 2,865 55,000 = 5.2% Percent _ TotalBuildingVolume = 108,762 1,137,630 = 9.6% Equipment Clearances: After investigating the placement of the mechanical equipment located within each mechanical room, it was determined that each air-handling unit had efficient room to allow for maintenance. It some instances there is close to eleven feet perpendicular to the access doors, allowing for ease of tasks such as removing cooling coils. In addition to the air-handling units, there is clearance throughout nearby duct work to allow for access to equipment such as the air efficiency filters that are placed within the mechanical rooms. There are also several access doors located in adjacent ductwork throughout the building in areas where there exists VAV boxes, re-heat coils, steam distributors, gas phase filters and also where there has been the installation of smoke and fire dampers. * Not included in unusable floor space

10 Mechanical Cost Analysis The following is a cost breakdown for the mechanical work done in Addition and Renovation to the Ford Museum. The data is provided by Leach Wallace Associates and references the finalized cost submittal. Quantity Material Labor Division 15 - Mechanical No. Units Unit Measure Per Unit Subtotals Per Unit Subtotals Subtotals Demolition 20,500 EA ,000 41,000 Permanent Exhibit AHU (AHU-5) 1 EA 145, ,000 15,000 15, ,000 Gas Phase Filtration 1 EA 21,000 21,000 2,500 2,500 23,500 Humidifier (AHU-5) 4 EA 4,700 18,800 1,000 4,000 22,800 First Floor VAV AHU (AHU-1) 1 EA 31,200 31,200 8,000 8,000 39,200 Humidifier (AHU-1) 1 EA 6,000 6,000 1,000 1,000 7,000 Collection Storage AHU (AHU-2 & 3) 2 EA 12,400 24,800 5,000 10,000 34,800 Condensing Units 2 EA 7,400 14,800 2,500 5,000 19,800 Gas Phase Filtration (AHU-2 & 3) 1 EA 4,500 4, ,000 Humidifier (AHU-2 & 3) 2 EA 3,500 7,000 1,000 2,000 9,000 Supply Air Terminal 20 EA 2,475 49, ,500 55,000 Air Devices - Linear 51 EA 149 7, ,525 9,124 Ductwork 46,805 LBS 0 14, , ,585 Ductwork Insulation 33,350 SF 0 9, ,362 67,034 Plumbing Fixtures 4 EA 1,100 4,400 1,375 5,500 9,900 Domestic Water, Sanitary and Vent Pipe LS - 8,000 15,000 23,000 3" Roof Drains 4 EA 1,040 4,160 1,655 6,620 10,780 4" Overflow Drains 4 EA 1,510 6,040 2,710 10,840 16,880 Dom. Hot Water Heater, 30 gal elec. 2 EA 1,500 3,000 3,000 6,000 9,000 Dom. Hot Water Heater, 15 gal elec. 1 EA , Ton Air Cooled Screw Chiller 1 EA 96,100 96,100 10,000 10, ,100 Chilled Water Pumps 2 EA 4,925 9,850 1,850 3,700 13,550 Chilled Water Piping/Insulation LS - 8,400 14,500 22,900 Retrofit EX VAV with DDC Controls 13 EA 1,400 18, ,800 26,000 Hot Water Heating Pumps 2 EA 3,925 7,850 1,200 2,400 10,250 Hot Water Heating Piping/Insulation LS - 15,200 35,000 50,200 Heating Boilers (500 MBH) 1 EA 6,475 6,475 4,150 4,150 10,625 Balancing LS ,000 20,000 Return Fan (RF-5) 1 EA 7,935 7,935 1,080 1,080 9,015 Hot Water Reheat Coil (AHU-5) 3 EA 1,100 3, ,110 Sound Attenuator 4 EA 2,750 11, ,600 12,600 Return Fan (RF-1) 1 EA 4,660 4, ,470 Hot Water Reheat Coil (AHU-2 & 3) 2 EA 1,100 2, ,740 Air Devices - 24" Lay-in 36 EA 242 8, ,076 9,788 Flexible Duct 600 LF 4 2, ,686 4,206 Exhaust Fan 3 EA 740 2, ,544 Unit Heaters 2 EA Automatic Temperature Controls LS , ,000 Division 15 Total $585,547 $591,643 $1,177,190

11 Material Cost per Sq. Ft.: Total Renovated & Added Area = ft 2 585,547 material _ cos t / sq. ft. = = $ ,180 Total Cost per Sq. Ft.: 1,177,190 cos t / sq. ft. = = $ ,180 Conclusions Considering the building application and type, this estimate is very reasonable. The bulk of the addition and renovation costs are actually due to the enhanced mechanical systems. The reason for this is due to the objective set by the owners to maintain quality historical objects and documents, minimizing damage due to atmospheric hazards.