>>Book Passivhaus conference
>>Email Les and Omar
From 2004 Christensen paper (Designs)…this work does not include:
-
HVAC resizing (Passivhaus does!)
Effects of time-of-day (use a CA climate and use TDV values?)
Embodied energy! (We do that!!)
So…our work could build on/respond to/critique this by:
I like Les’ idea that we could possibly push this. One of the critiques of ZNE
buildings is that PV often gets left behind. (Parker paper – send this to Omar, too).
So stopping at 50%, or suggesting that this is as far as we can go is not really a good
thing. We’ve done similar optimization techniques accounting for embodied
energy, as well. We’ve also compared the optimization results to a Passivhaus
standard.
1) Thermal mass and TDV should be related. What happens when we take TDV
into account?
2) What happens when we take embodied energy into account? Any other
building optimization programs that do this? This would have something to
do with the embodied energy of PV vs other materials.
 What happens if it’s a nonsequential search algorithm? Or a clustered
search/optimization algorithm?
 If they used DOE-2, does that mean that they did NOT take thermal mass into
account, b/c they did not use a dynamic simulation program!? This could be a major
critique.
 Looking more specificially at thermal mass (how?). So, instead of talking
about comparison of thermal mass to something else (a static comparison),
we’ll talk about thermal mass as an optimization parameter.
 Taking embodied energy into account as an optimization parameter! (could
we build this into the BEOpt program? Could we hack the BEOpt program to
do this?)
 Take into account equipment resizing (via Passivhaus measures? Again, use
this as another optimization parameter).
 USE the building America house performance procedures!! Produced by
NREL – use these!!
This would be a significant project, but one that would be worthy of our time and
would result in publishable, original work.
Cite what’s been done before….
--- what has NOT been done is to put this in the context of using passive
strategies…???
--- or…what else has not been done?
--- applying it to very low energy systems!
- scheatzle provides one of the only examples of empirical data? But this wasn’t in
a test chamber, it was in a house…. I can provide empirical data
 perhaps I can pull together a comprehensive reinvestigation of all of this?!
 using it to measure passive stuff…
 zhang just calculated loads…
 rather than using PMV, use a non-invasive way to get feedback from occupants
(infrared?)
 in Tso, they treat meant radiant temp as an uncontrolled variable
-- What if we can also implement control algorithms as a part of the
optimization??! Or…..post-process in E+ or other simulation using control
algorithms to see how much further we can go?! Combine this with empirical
data…..
------!!!!BEopt has climate-specific reference buildings available
Rather than DOE2 TRNSYS, running BEopt with E+ is available
Evaluates DISCRETE options
 Has a document: BA House Simulation Protocols
Effective and nominal R-value taken into account.
If I have an E+ file, can I open it in BEopt??
Doe2 vs. E+ -- simulating thermal mass
Cases must be used for changing climate, economics, geometry, etc. So, building
efficiency can be changed at the building level, but other things must be done at the
case level.
BEopt does not do multiple wall options at present – same wall type wherever there
is conditioned area and exterior conditions; exception is interzonal wall.
 can do work around with a category called: other walls (?)
BEopt has some sample files.
USE BEOPT for the OUTPUTS!!
>>> Part of why it would be good to use BEopt to determine an optimized building
and then understand the role of controls in that building would be to ensure that the
results are highly replicable.
>>Building America program adjusts/normalizes energy savings for large buildings
(b/c it’s easier to achieve energy savings in a larger building)
>> Retrofit analysis needs to use more manual input assumptions
>> BuildingAmerica ‘Technology pathways analysis”
>>Size of HVAC does not change – is this just for retrofit?
Optimization mode
>> You have to select what you want it to optimize between (?)
>>It doesn’t simulate all of the possible options – it uses a search technique…
>> Can select a point from optimization and create a new case off of that and do a
sensitivity…. !!!
>> Have to ask for hourly output – need to select a simulation and then it will re-run
the ones you want.
>> Characteristics of BA B10 building are basically IECC 2009
>> So….BA10 is a methodology?
>>The optimization plot shows “minimum cash flow designs at various energy
saving levels”.
>> Only shows “energy-related cash flow”. No morgatge-related component,
because we have not increased our morgatge to pay for the efficiency
improvements..
>>Point 2 on the graph is the lowest cost point…but…it’s not linear because you
need some investment (cost) to get to the lowest overall cost.
>> Search methodology always looks for the steepest curve (downward) option and
selects that for use – NOT necessarily the greatest energy savings.
>> The nice thing about dealing with small houses/simple systems is that the
control algorithm isn’t about making different parts of the system talk to each other
more efficiently – it can focus more on the comfort equation and exploring that.
--------Comparison of different standards:
Use a B10 benchmark?! Building America B10 benchmark
BEopt will create a b10 benchmark model for you very quickly.
Building America Benchmark has rules about what you can/can’t deviate from, and
this is indicated in the simulation.
- Rules about if you have x in the design building, you have to have y benchmark
system in the building.