DRAFT
Building Energy Engineering Education Using Case Studies
(Bringing Design Practice to the Classroom)
Objectives
Primary: Develop a database of case studies for different types of buildings analyzed with
different energy conservation options using different building energy analysis programs.
Secondary: Develop supporting teaching materials and courses based on case studies.
Abstract
All commercial buildings today must comply with energy codes. This is done with building
energy analysis computer programs. The minimum qualification of the building energy analyst
required by A-E design firms is a degree in mechanical, electrical or architectural engineering
and proficiency in one or more energy analysis programs. Present engineering education
provides this. Additional qualification requirement of the building energy analyst position is at
least five years of practical design experience leading to professional engineering registration.
The energy program does a theoretical evaluation of the building for energy use which does not
take into account several practical constraints and issues. A database of case studies of building
energy analysis can be used to teach practice in the classroom.
Background
Forty percent of U.S. primary energy was consumed in the buildings sector. The industrial
sector was responsible for 32% and the transportation sector 28% of the total. Of the 40 quads
consumed in the buildings sector, homes accounted for 54% and commercial buildings
accounted for 46%. As for energy sources, 76% came from fossil fuels, 15% from nuclear
generation, and 8% from renewables. Source: USDOE- Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy.
http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/ChapterIntro1.aspx
Lighting represents roughly 40 percent of the energy consumption in the commercial building
sector. The diversity of this sector presents some challenges to effectively mining energy saving
opportunities. For example, schools, hospitals and office buildings have varying lighting
requirements based upon the workspace in question. Source: Consortium for Energy Efficiency
http://www.cee1.org/com/com-lt/com-lt-main.php3
The first attempt to control building energy consumption was the ASHRAE-IESNA Standard 90
by American Society of Heating & Air-conditioning and the Illuminating Engineering Society of
North America in 1975. This standard has been updated in 1980, 1989, 1999, 2001, 2004, 2007
and 2010. The building energy use standard gets more stringent with each update. The Energy
Policy Act of 1992 called on USDOE to support the adoption and mandatory enforcement of
energy codes in all states. By the year 2004 all US States had an Energy Code. Source: USDOE
1
DRAFT
Building Energy Codes Program - http://www.energycodes.gov/about/ State and city codes are
based ASHRAE Standard 90.
Energy consumption and the manufacture of building materials result in atmospheric pollution
and climate change. The US Green Building Council (USGBC) introduced LEED (Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design) certification of buildings that rates buildings for
environmental friendliness. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=1989
Although not mandatory, almost all building owners and designers feel an obligation to reach
the minimum LEED standards. Three major components of the LEED credit rating system are
Materials & Resources, Energy & Atmosphere, and Indoor Air Environmental Quality. All three
components require building energy analysis.
All commercial buildings must now comply with building energy codes. There are two methods
for complying with code requirements. The prescriptive method requires that the building’s
envelope, lighting, mechanical & electrical systems must meet minimum performance
requirements separately using a detailed component breakdown. The performance method
requires that the building as whole comply with the minimum requirements of the code for that
type and size of building. An extension of this method is the energy cost budget method which
is designed to reduce energy cost by reducing the demand cost on the electrical power supply.
USDOE has programs like RES-check and COM-check for the first method. This second method
requires the use of building energy analysis programs. The USDOE programs for this method
are EnergyPlus and DOE2. Code compliance of most commercial building is by using the second
method – the performance method.
Commercial building energy codes & standards and the LEED rating system are enforced with
building energy modeling, simulation and analysis computer programs at the time of submitting
the building construction documents and with measurement & verification after the building is
occupied and in operation. The programs are complex and the scope includes analyzing almost
all components of the architectural, lighting, mechanical & electrical systems.
The procedure consists of comparing the proposed building model design with a baseline
model. The baseline has to be identical to the proposed architectural model in terms of
dimensions of plans, sections & elevations. The baseline envelope materials and mechanical &
electrical systems are specified by ASHRAE Std90 and the building energy codes for different
building types & locations. The proposed model can change the envelope and other
construction materials and the energy consuming lighting, mechanical & electrical systems to
save energy but not the architectural dimensional model.
There is published reference data (resembling case studies) on building energy consumption in
the US and also reference building energy models for different types of buildings but they do
not teach engineering students how to perform building energy analysis for energy code
compliance and LEED certification. The building models are very simple. Examples:
Building Energy Data Book
2
DRAFT
http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/default.aspx
Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS)
http://www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/detailed_tables_2003.html
Commercial Buildings Resource Database
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/commercial_initiative/resource_database/
Vision & Rationale
The use of energy computer programs was not mandatory until States introduced energy
codes. Except for California and Florida, most States introduced codes just before the deadline
of 2004. Federal buildings had 10CFR434 which does not have to be as stringent as ASHRAE
Std90. LEED certification is not mandatory. Energy computer programs were therefore not
used on most projects until the introduction of energy codes.
All architectural-engineering design firms (AEDs) in the USA must now have expertise in the use
of at least one of the major recognized energy computer programs or they have to subcontract
this work to a firm or individual that does.
The building energy modeler and analyst is a vital profession within the building industry.
Energy program results are used to compare alternative design options and make decisions
when selecting envelope, systems and plant. They are also used to show energy code
compliance and for sustainable buildings certification.
Design decisions are also based on: (1) first & maintenance costs, (2) reliability & durability of
systems, plant and equipment, (3) ease of operation and maintenance, (4) availability of parts &
maintenance staff at the location, and (5) environmental impacts. Such decisions require many
years of practical design experience. It is not included in university education.
Different programs can produce different results depending on several factors one of which is
due to erroneous use of the programs because of the (lack of) educational and experience level
of the person using the program. Energy programs are based almost entirely on theory.
Undergraduate and graduate programs in this field emphasize theory.
A meaningful, practical and cost effective energy analysis requires the engineer to have a
background in A-E (architectural-engineering) design practice which includes following through
with construction supervision and resolving problems during operation. The energy analyst
should have a full perspective of the building through design, construction and operation.
Academic education of this science is presently based on understanding theory used by the
energy analysis program.
The results of energy programs are not used in design and therefore do no not directly affect
construction and operation. More detailed specialized analysis programs are used during
design. The design process considers every item that consumes energy separately such as stair
3
DRAFT
pressurization fans, escalators, etc. Equipment consumes energy. Energy programs only
consider major equipment items and they are all approximately lumped under equipment loads
in watts per square foot and equipment gas and fuel oil usage in energy per square foot.
Energy program users are mainly Architectural-Engineering Designers (AEDs) that use the
programs on real building projects. They are also used by academic institutions for teaching in
the classroom and for research but the teaching faculty have little or no experience in A-E
design practice and therefore emphasize theory. This theory is now buried in black boxes
(software) of the computer program and it is possible to use (or misuse) the program by
someone who does not understand the underling engineering theory. Building energy
education therefore begins with learning the engineering but the final decisions have to be
based on practical experience.
The success and value of energy programs should be measured by its use on real building
projects for design-evaluation, code-compliance and LEED-certification. Educational programs
must reflect this. Case Studies of different building types with their energy conservation
options are the best way for teaching and learning correct use of building energy analysis
programs from a whole project life cycle perspective. This also levels the playing field in
ensuring the correct use of the program for code compliance and LEED certification by all users.
Most of the case studies posted on websites and magazine articles consist of very brief
summaries only, and are intended to promote the AE design firm. They emphasize pictures of
the buildings and the names of the companies, architects & engineers. There are no details of
how they were analyzed. Examples are the ASHRAE Journal and the ASHRAE High Performance
Buildings magazine - http://www.ashrae.org/resources--publications/periodicals/ashrae-journal
http://www.hpbmagazine.org/
A database of case studies covering different building types and sizes in different locations
based on real projects should be developed by the industry for reference purposes. The same
case studies projects should be analyzed with different programs and they should give
approximately the same results. Small differences in results are due to differences in modeling
theory. For example the newer USDOE Energy-Plus differs from the older USDOE DOE2
program in heat transfer.
The purpose is not to compare and check programs. The purpose is to ensure that they are all
used correctly and users of different programs are competing on the same playing field. This
ensures that one program does not produce more energy savings because of user ignorance
and incorrect use.
Energy programs are very complex and it is difficult for code authorities to check the modeling
details. Certification of energy analysts is a solution but a two year engineering graduate
program that teaches theory and practice that ensures that buildings are analyzed correctly for
code compliance. The main purpose of the case study approach for teaching building energy
analysis is that the programs are used based also on the practical needs of the building owner,
4
DRAFT
financial constraints and limitations of the building location social environment, and not just
energy saving options based theory.
Several engineering colleges have two year post graduate degree programs in building energy
analysis. The entry requirement is usually an undergraduate degree in mechanical or electrical
engineering. Example: Master of Energy Engineering at the Engineering College of the
University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC)
http://www.cs.uic.edu/bin/view/MIE/MastersOfEnergyEngineering
Few building energy programs in colleges, if any, emphasize engineering practice because there
are no case studies or teaching materials for such programs. This information presently exists
only in the heads of practicing architectural engineering designers. This project will be
developed mainly by architects and engineers in practice. (See Appendix ? for supporting A-E
design firms) and will bring practical experience to the classroom.
Scope
There are two parts to the scope of this project corresponding to the primary and secondary
objectives as described below.
Primary: Develop a database of case studies for different types of buildings analyzed with
different energy conservation options using different building energy analysis programs.
Secondary: Develop supporting teaching materials and courses based on the case studies.
Primary: Case Studies of Building Energy Performance Analysis
The case studies would discuss the pros and cons of the various energy conservation options for
the given building type, location and cost budget. The architectural design would demonstrate
passive energy savings such as day-lighting. The case studies would also show how to write
client reports and establish standard formats for the energy reports.
The case study buildings should be extended to the schematic design level with riser diagrams,
equipment (use energy) schedules, ductwork and piping system schematics and control
sequence of operation of systems (corresponds to “Load Management” in DOE2.1E). This
ensures that the energy analysis decisions are also based practice and not just theory.
The case studies would be in two categories. The first would consist of contributions by A-E
design firms. They would show the energy savings features of different types of buildings based
on real projects. The firms would be credited and also help promote the services of the firm
since there will be no compensation for their contributions. Alternatively, A-E firms could
provide drawings and schedules of past projects and graduate students could analyze them
with different energy programs (DOE2.1E, eQUEST-DOE2.2, TRNSYS, TRACE, HAP & EnergyPlus)
and later compare the results with measurement and verification (M&V).
5
DRAFT
Since the year 2000, many building projects have been submitted for Code Compliance and
LEED Certification. Presently this information is scattered in the archives of code authorities. It
is not analyzed statistically and organized for easy reference in the design of future buildings.
This project will try and rectify the situation.
The second category would consist of projects that can be used for teaching. The buildings for
the case studies could be based on completed buildings but would be simplified to eliminate
details and repetition and to demonstrate ideas and issues for teaching. Graduate architectural
students would be responsible for creating plans of different types of buildings. It would
include different types and sizes of hospital, office, retail, hotel buildings. A project case study
for teaching should be analyzed by several energy analysis programs comparing different
energy savings strategies. This would be the task of graduate engineering students. The
students will require guidance and supervision from practitioners and faculty.
The purpose of the database of case studies is not to compare the results of the programs but
because it gives the student a better understanding of energy analysis, it brings experience to
the classroom, some programs are better suited for specific options, and employers expect
proficiency in two or more programs.
Secondary: Develop Courses in Energy Efficient Building Design
Educational programs are required to teach building energy analysis with case studies. The
courses would be for two-year graduate programs. These programs would be for Architectural
Engineering and Architecture Colleges and will emphasize building design practice. The courses
would emphasize inter-disciplinary design integration and production since each disciple has its
own group (AIA, ASHRAE, ASCE, ASPE, NFPA, etc.)
The proposed graduate programs will be developed by A-E design firms to meet their needs and
emphasize inter-disciplinary design practice. The course lecture notes would explain the merits
of various alternatives of building envelopes, systems, plants and equipment and advice on the
suitability for different building types, locations and cost budget. Designing to a cost budget and
life-cycle cost analysis will require developing a simplified cost estimating system.
This graduate program can be taught by Adjunct staff working full time at A-E firms if it is
offered in the evenings, weekend and internet. If the 1 to 3 hour lecture-modules of the
courses have been fully prepared and documented, then several adjuncts can teach one course.
The teaching materials could include external links to several websites for each topic. For
example, manufacturers of building components and equipment provide good educational
materials on the use and applications of their products and for the building system.
6
DRAFT
Building Energy Performance Analysis Database
The figures below show the proposed initial structure of the database. The project is ongoing
and the scope and structure can change based on contributions by A-E design firms.
7
DRAFT
8
DRAFT
9
DRAFT
10
DRAFT
Costs and Timeline
The estimated cost is $300,000 over three years to organize and establish the program. The
cost of BEPARC project engineering development and educational programs will be with
volunteer time and resources from A-E design professionals and academic faculty. Funding
from NSF is required to establish and BEPARC.org. This consists of two parts (A) and (B)
Part (A) involves developing a system to receive and organize project case studies from the A-E
industry into a database and to search and retrieve information from the database; training
seminars; and administration of the project.
Part (B) requires graduate research students (Ph.D. candidates) to analyze the case studies
submitted by A-E design firms with multiple energy analysis programs, index them and enter
into them into the database. It also includes validating energy analysis computer programs with
measurement & verification of completed buildings and developing & maintaining the
supporting databases such as design criteria, codes, standards and cost estimating for LCCA.
The database of case studies will be available to all contributing colleges and A-E design firms.
Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT) will be responsible submitting the application to NSF, for
hosting the BEPARC organization on the IIT campus, and for technical and financial
administration.
Cost Breakdown
Etc
Principal-Investigator (PI) and Co- Principal-Investigators (Co-PIs)
11
DRAFT
Co-PI – Varkie Thomas
Varkie C. Thomas is Research Professor with the Ph.D. Program at the College of Architecture,
Illinois Institute of Technology Chicago, where he teaches graduate courses in Energy Efficient
Building Design and advises doctoral candidates specializing in this topic.
Academic: B.Sc. (Honors) in Mathematics from Bombay University, 1961; Post-Graduate
Diploma in Environmental Engineering from London South Bank University, 1964; PostGraduate Diploma (with Distinction) and Ph.D. in Industrial Management from Strathclyde
University Glasgow, UK, 1969. Registered Professional Engineer (P.E.) and Certified Energy
Manager (CEM - Association. of Energy Engineers).
1969-70 - Fortran Programmer-Engineer at Syska & Hennessy to develop M-E design programs.
This included debugging, maintaining, enhancing and supporting the APEC (Automated
Procedures for Engineering Consultants) programs. He developed programs for ReliabilityMaintainability of Chillers & Boilers and Evaporative Cooling Pond/Tower Analysis.
1971-74 - Project M-E Engineer at Jaros, Baum & Bolles for Federal Reserve Bank Buildings in
Minneapolis and Boston; State University of New York, Purchase; New York; Dartmouth College
Ice Rink, New Hampshire; and Dow Corning Chemical Laboratories, Midland, Michigan.
1975-84 Systems Manager at McQuay Corporation; Director of Systems Development at
International Environmental Corp., and Senior Research Engineer at Johnson Controls.
Developed M-E design programs that were supported and marketed worldwide by McDonnell
Douglas Automation and Control Data Cybernet, and HVAC equipment selection programs
based on AMCA and ARI standards. Taught short courses at the College of Engineering,
University of Wisconsin-Extension (UWEX) Madison, WI
1985 to 2005 - Associate Partner and the M-E Engineering Coordinator at Skidmore, Owings &
Merrill (SOM) for the multibillion dollar Canary Wharf infrastructure London; Director for M-E
Engineering Systems Development for the IBM Architecture & Engineering Series (AES)
software developed at SOM; and Building Energy Analyst.
Code Compliance & USGBC LEED certification Projects: Samsung Building, Korea; Airport
Terminal, Dubai; United Airlines World Headquarters, Chicago; Continental Airlines Terminal,
Newark NJ; 7 S. Dearborn (proposed world’s tallest), Chicago; Long Arts Center, Austin TX; Arts
Center San Francisco; Minto Towers Toronto; Manulife Office Tower Boston; Messilah Hotel
Kuwait; Cancer Research Center NYC; Peninsula Hotel Tokyo; Yangpu University, China; VAMC
Hospital Chicago; Korea World Trade Center; Police College Kuwait; 160-story Burj-Dubai; AlHamra-Kuwait; Greenland Center, Nanjing; ChemSunny Beijing.
1992 to 97 Adjunct Professor at Penn State, Associate Professor at Oklahoma, member of the
United Nations Technical Program to China in 1991 and Visiting Professor from Purdue to
Malaysia in 1996/97 funded by the World Bank.
12