IES Faculty - Closing the Performance Gap

IES – Faculty
Closing the Performance Gap

Eradicating the Performance Gap
Todays Agenda
• What is the Performance Gap?
• Current Practice
• CIBSE TM:54
• Soft landings
• How the Virtual Environment is responding
• Case Studies
• The Future

What is the Performance Gap?

There is a mismatch between the expectations around the
performance of new buildings and the reality of the utility bills.
This difference between expected and realised energy
performance has come to be known as the ‘Performance Gap’.
TM:54

Adapted from Carbon Buzz

Regulated energy: heating, hot water,
cooling, ventilation and lighting

Unregulated energy: plugload, server rooms, security,
external lighting, lifts, etc

Extra occupancy and equipment operating hours:
evening/weekend working

Inefficiencies: Poor control, commissioning,
maintenance, etc

Special Functions: trading floors, server rooms,
cafeterias, etc

Carbon Trust Conclude:
• NCM, theoretical Exercise
• Focus on REAL building analysis
• Soft Landings
• Continued Monitoring of Building

Better energy prediction at design stage is fundamental to
understanding and therefore closing the Performance Gap.
TM:54

Example: Supermarket Bakery
Discussion Point:
Consider the following profile, any comments?
Compliance profile:
Food Prep Equip profile
• The Blue profile is a typical profile that a design team would use as a
best guess of the energy used.

Example: Supermarket Bakery
• The Red line is the actual or measured energy used.
• Using the red line profile in your simulation increases accuracy of the
predictions.
Compliance profile:
Food Prep Equip profile
Measured profile:
Actual Oven Equip
profile

Building Energy Simulation Tools are used to analyse
buildings for a range of purposes. Some of these purposes
require a specific type of model that is specific to its
purpose. However, the differences between these model
types is poorly defined which causes confusion

Within IES we use four model definitions:
• Design Model
• Compliance Model
• Reference Model
• Operational Model

Current Practice
Current Practice – TM 54

Current Practice – TM:54
1. How many have read the TM:54
2. How many of you abide by these
principles in day to day projects
3. We’ll discuss towards the end of
this section.

TM 54 Aim:
1. Compliance does not take into
account all the energy uses in a
building.
2. that the design is built as intended,
the engineering systems are
commissioned effectively and the
operators and occupiers of the
building understand how to operate
and maintain the building.

“In the UK, energy models are used at
the design stage to compare design
options and to check compliance with
Building Regulations. These energy
models are not intended as predictions
of energy use, but are sometimes
mistakenly used as such” TM:54

1. TM 54: Published August 2013
2. KeyPoint 1: Methodology for DSM
calculations at Design to better
understand operational energy
usage (Design Model!)
3. KeyPoint 2: Soft landings / Post
Occupancy Evaluation (Min Ref:
CarbonBuzz.org)

TM:54 Methodology Steps:
1. Establishing Floor Areas
2. Estimating Operating hours and occupancy factors
3. Evaluating Lighting Energy use
4. Evaluating energy use for lifts and escalators
5. Evaluating energy use for small power
6. Evaluating energy use for catering
7. Evaluating energy use for server rooms
8. Evaluating energy use of other equipment
9. Evaluating energy use of domestic hot water
10. Evaluating internal heat gains
11. Evaluating energy use of space heating, cooling, fans
and pumps
12. Evaluating energy use for humidification and
dehumidification
13. Estimating management factors
14. Running scenarios
15. Sensitivity analysis
16. Review against benchmarks
17. Presenting results

Current Practice – Soft Landings

“A process for the graduated handover of a new or refurbished building,
where a period of professional aftercare by the project team is a client
requirement – planned for and carried out from project inception onwards –
and lasting for up to three years post-completion”

University of Cambridge: Centre of Mathematical Sciences

Its been around for a while:
Late 1990s: Initiated by Mark Way “Sea Trials”
2002: University of Cambridge (Trial Project)
2004: scope of service documentation developed with
construction industry sponsorship
2008: Picked up by BSRIA. Open-source
documentation developed into a Framework by
industry task group led by BSRIA
2009: BSRIA “Soft Landings Framework’ published
(free to use)

What is it?:
• It’s a way of working, a new professionalism that says
we have to change the way we do things to deliver better
buildings
• It’s designed to foster greater mutual understanding
between clients, project managers, designers, builders
and occupiers about project objectives
• It is designed to reduce tensions and frustrations that
occur during initial occupancy, and to ensure clients and
occupiers get the best out of their new asset
• It involves greater investment in problem diagnosis and
treatment, and in monitoring, review and post-occupancy
evaluation

What does it do?:
• Provides a framework of activities for the entire project
team
• Drives for clarity at inception and briefing about client
needs and operational outcomes
• Requires the early setting of performance targets (such
as energy use) and a method of reality-checking them
• Places greater emphasis on building readiness
• Requires a Soft Landings team to be on site during the
initial settling-in period
• Requires the project team to be involved for up to three
years to fine-tune the building and monitor its
performance

Work Stages:
Stage 1: Inception and briefing clarify operational outcomes
in the client’s requirements
Stage 2: Design development & construction review past
experience, agree performance metrics, agree design
targets, regularly reality-check
Stage 3: Pre-handover Prepare for occupation, train FM
staff, demonstrate control systems, review monitoring
strategy of occupants and energy use
Stage 4: Initial aftercare support staff in first few weeks of
occupation, be resident on site to respond to queries and
react to emerging issues
Stage 5: Long term aftercare monitor, review, fine-tune, and
perform periodic feedback studies for up to three years

Why do it; Benefits?
• Helps with management of end-user expectations about comfort
and usability
• Provides for regular reality-checking of assumptions as design
develops
• Begins the process of closing the gap between design targets and
operational energy and environmental performance
• Creates greater confidence in the built product
• Creates project team involvement and ownership of the project
• Makes the migration into the new building a positive event
• Supports occupants in their new building, keeping them
informed, making them happier, and removing barriers to
productivity

University of Cambridge:
• No-blame attitude adopted by client and team
• Post completion of first phase, a POE was carried
out to measure building performance of the
recently occupied buildings
• The results were incorporate into the final phases
• Final appraisal revealed that the occupants and
the University viewed the project as a great
success.

1. Mentioned in TM:54
2. Free to use
3. Open to public
4. Central database for gathering
benchmark data
5. Have you used it?
6. Good start but want more,….?!

How the VE is Responding

 Radiators and chilled ceilings may now be
autosized
 Using specified room temperatures and loads
(either manually entered or generated by a
System Loads analysis)
 Users can elect to autosize the number of
units of a chosen type and the required water
flow.

New features: Master templates!!

How the VE responds
New features: Design Options!!

How the VE responds
How the VE is Responding – Future(ish)

How the VE responds
Enhanced Operational Model within the VE:
1. BMS/Recorded data is collected and imported into VE
Cloud
2. Creates Free Form Data (FFD’s) Profiles
3. FFD’s are assigned to the project VE-Model in ApPro
4. Model is simulated in Apache
5. Results reviewed with Vista’s powerful analytic tools
6. User gets better understand of building performance
and identification of potential energy savings.
Cloud

How the VE responds
Examples

How the VE responds
Example 1
-
Office Building

Office Building: Lighting
2. The Compliance office electrical Lighting profile is taken
from the ASHRAE 90.1 methodology.
• Compliance lighting profile with ASHRAE 90.1 Office lighting
profile assigned
Closer view
of profile

Measured Lighting
Load
Office Building: Lighting
Compliance Lighting
load profile
Security guard
turns lights on
and off at
weekend
• The annual lighting load when the ASHRAE 90.1 Compliance lighting
profile (blue) was used in the Operational Model is 63.6 MWh.
• IES Cloud solutions was used to import the actual measured lighting load
into the Operational Model. The actual recorded lighting load (red) is
131.6 MWh and is considerably different compared with the Compliance
profile.

Office Building: Boiler Energy
3. Impact of using the actual profile on annual boiler energy
Compliance Profile
results for Boiler
Energy
Measured Profile
results for Boiler
Energy
• Significantly higher Lighting load to the building
• This will result in higher heat gain to the building, consequently
annual heating energy reduced by 40%, and heating plant
capacity reduced by 18%

Office Building: Chiller Energy
4. Impact on annual chiller energy of using actual lighting profile
Compliance profile
results for Chiller
Energy
Actual Profile
results for Chiller
Energy
• Significantly higher heat gain results in the annual chiller energy
increasing by 45%, cooling plant capacity increased by 31%

Enhanced Operational Models
Example 2
-
Supermarket Bakery

Retail Supermarket: Food Preparation Equipment
1. Use compliance profile to calibrated the Operational model
(Supermarket Equipment).
2. This is the Food Prep equipment profile as defined by the
ASHRAE 90.1 Compliance procedure.
• This profile was used as the basis of the Operational Model

3. In this case the retail bakery ovens operated very
differently, see actual measurements below (red).
Compliance Profile for
Food Prep Equip .
• The actual measurement is a substantially different profile in terms of
time of operation and total energy required.
• The Compliance equipment load profile was 126.5 MWh Vs 32.2 MWh for
the actual building profile.
Measured Profile for
Actual Oven Equip.
Retail Supermarket: Equipment

Retail Supermarket: Boiler Energy
3. The actual equipment profile used in the OM caused
significant differences in annual boiler energy
Compliance Profile
results for Boiler Energy
Measured Profile
Boiler Energy results
• Significantly lower equipment load resulting in less heat gain to the building
and annual heating energy increasing by 47% and Boiler Capacity by 23%

Retail Supermarket: Chiller Energy
4. The impact on annual chiller energy of using the
equipment load is less dramatic but still significant.
Compliance profile
results for
Chiller Energy
Measured profile
Chiller Energy results
• Significantly lower heat gain results in the annual chiller energy reducing by
21% for the actual building with the chiller plant capacity 15% oversized.

Enhanced Operational Models
Example 3
-
Warehouse

Warehouse: Lighting
1. This example is a warehouse. There was good information
collected from the building which helped calibrate the
Operational Model. The BMS system collected metered
data for both lighting and equipment.
2. The Compliance profile used in the OM was the ASHRAE
90.1 Warehouse lighting profile with dimming control

Warehouse: Lighting
3. The actual lighting load for the warehouse was different –
tending to use less energy
Compliance Profile
for Lighting load
Actual Lighting
profile
• Calibrating the Operational Model with the actual lighting load profile
resulted in a lighting load of 53.4 MWh compared to 73.6 MWh for the
Compliance profile

Warehouse: Equipment
4. Also the equipment load was measured and was much
lower in the actual building when compared to the
Compliance profile
Compliance Profile
Warehouse Equip.
Actual measurements
for Warehouse Equip.
• The annual equipment load using the Compliance profile was 72.5
MWh Vs 27.7 MWh for the measured load.

Warehouse: Boiler Energy
5. The combined impact of the actual equipment and lighting
loads on the annual boiler energy compared with the
Compliance profiles is shown below
Measured Profile
Compliance Profile
• Due to the lower heat gain from lighting and equipment, the annual heating energy
was 34% higher in the Operational Model when compared with the Compliance
profile.

Warehouse: Boiler Energy
6. Compare the Measured and Compliance profiles results
with the actual heating energy
Measured profiles
(Boiler Energy)
Compliance profiles
(Boiler Energy)
Actual Boiler Load

The Future
The Future

The Future
Decision Making tools
for City Architects &
Urban Planners
Closing the Gap,
through BIM Design
optimisation tools
SMART Buildings &
retrofit design &
retrofitting tools
Intelligent & Model
Based Control
District modelling and
Simulation

The Future
1. The Internet of Things (IoE, IoT)
2. Cisco – Barcelona test bed,
3. “in 20 years time each of us could be
exposed to between 3,000 and 5,000
‘things’ in our everyday life. The ability
to Connect with ‘things’ Monitor
‘things’ , Search, Manage, Control and
Play. Connection of physical with digital
world. how do we fit in? If we can
better manage energy – not only in
buildings – perhaps we can get to grips
with the deathwish we appear to have
wrt climate. John Barrett :Cork Institute of Technology

The Future
NEST Thermostat
• Easy to use
• Wifi connected
• Learning algorithms
• Cloud based control
NEST Protect
• Easy to use
• Wifi connected
• Cloud based control

The Future
They all talk together for added benefit
Benefit1:
if the smoke alarm
sense fire and/or senses
CO it will auto shutoff
the boiler through the
thermostat
Benefit2:
the smoke alarm has
motion detectors. It can
turn the boiler through
the thermostat on
when you get home

The Future
Imagine what could happen to the nondomestic sector..

The Future
A glimpse to the possibilities of our cities…....

Phew – we got there!
Questions & Open Forum

IES Faculty - Closing the Performance Gap

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to IES Faculty - Closing the Performance Gap

Similar to IES Faculty - Closing the Performance Gap (20)

More from IES VE

More from IES VE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

IES Faculty - Closing the Performance Gap

Editor's Notes