construction - b.c. homepage - province of british columbia · construction performance ... 26...

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 2015

81

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: A1-006606-01.1

Report Date: 5th June 2015

Contract No: A1-006606-01

Agreement date: 15th March 2015

Program: HPB

65 pages

Copy no. 1 of 1 copy

83

A1-006606-01 final report

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

2015-06-05

85

Simulation study of Energy Savings between NECB 2011 and NECB 2015

A1-006606-01 final report i

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:

Zone 4

Zone 5

Zone 6

Zone 7a

Zone 7b

Zone 8

Energy

Consumption

(kWh/m2)

‘11 ‘13 ‘15 ‘11 ‘13 ‘15 ‘11 ‘13 ‘15 ‘11 ‘13 ‘15 ‘11 ‘13 ‘15 ‘11 ‘13 ‘15

Large Office 144 123 121 168 133 132 176 139 138 165 140 139 163 145 143 172 154 152

Large MURB n/a 137 133 n/a 167 163 n/a 170 166 n/a 173 168 n/a 178 172 n/a 203 197

Strip Mall 270 186 182 318 228 224 368 263 259 388 284 280 441 315 311 549 385 381

Secondary

School 209 152 150 251 183 181 276 194 192 263 203 202 288 214 213 327 247 245

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.

86


A1-006606-01 final report ii

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.

87


A1-006606-01 final report iii

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 # A1-

006606-1, 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.

88


A1-006606-01 final report iv

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background .............................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Objectives ................................................................................................................................ 1

2 Modelling Approach ....................................................................................................................... 2

2.1 Adopted approach .................................................................................................................... 2

3 Code Change Summary .................................................................................................................. 3

3.1 Hot water discharge rates ......................................................................................................... 3

3.2 Pipe and Duct Insulation .......................................................................................................... 3

3.3 Lighting Power and Controls ................................................................................................... 3

3.4 Pumping power ........................................................................................................................ 3

4 Models............................................................................................................................................. 4

4.1 Large Office ............................................................................................................................. 4

4.1.1 Model Description ................................................................................................................. 4

4.1.2 Model Verification ................................................................................................................. 6

4.1.3 Modelled code changes .......................................................................................................... 7

4.1.4 Results from Individual Changes ........................................................................................... 8

4.2 Large MURB ......................................................................................................................... 10

4.2.1 Model Description ............................................................................................................... 10

4.2.2 Model Verification ............................................................................................................... 12

4.2.3 Modelled code changes ........................................................................................................ 13

4.2.4 Results from Individual Changes ......................................................................................... 14

4.3 Strip Mall ............................................................................................................................... 18





4.4 Secondary School ................................................................................................................... 23





5 Overall Savings ............................................................................................................................. 31

5.1 Large Office ........................................................................................................................... 32

89


A1-006606-01 final report v

5.2 Large MURB ......................................................................................................................... 33

5.3 Strip Mall ............................................................................................................................... 34

5.4 Secondary School ................................................................................................................... 35

6 References ..................................................................................................................................... 36

A.1 Effect of proposed changes in water draw ................................................................................ 37

A.1.1 Large Office Building Archetype ....................................................................................... 37

A.1.2 Small Strip Mall Building Archetype ................................................................................. 39

A.1.3 Large Multi-Unit Residential Building Archetype ............................................................. 39

A.1.4 Secondary School Building Archetype ............................................................................... 41

A.2 Effect of proposed changes in pipe insulation ........................................................................... 43

A.3 Effect of proposed changes in lighting power density .............................................................. 44




A.3.4 Secondary School Archetype .............................................................................................. 53

A.4 Effect of proposed changes in limits to pumping power ........................................................... 55




A.4.4 Secondary School Archetype .............................................................................................. 64

90


A1-006606-01 final report 1

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 2015. 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 2015.

1.2 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 <3000 3000 to 3999 4000 to 4999 5000 to 5999 6000 to 6999 ≥ 7000

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

91



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 2011-2015 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.

92



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 2015

6.2.6 Specifies rates for showers (9.5

L/min) and faucets in lavatories (8.3

L/min).

6.2.6 Showers (7.6 L/min); Lavatory faucets (5.7 L/min).

(source – PCF 829 in NECB package

2014_public_review_2014-09-11 -.pdf)

3.2 Pipe and Duct Insulation

NECB 2011 NECB 2015

Table 6.2.3.1 specifies minimum thickness

depending on space and pipe diameter.

PCF 638 – insulation thicknesses increased.

3.3 Lighting Power and Controls

NECB 2011 NECB 2015

4.2 and 4.3 – pretty

much all of each

section

8.4.3.3 adds lux levels to table A-8.4.3.3.(1)A permit modelling of lighting controls.

(source – PCF 839 in NECB package 2014_public_review_2014-09-11 -.pdf)

8.4.4.6 updated to account for occupancy. (source – PCF 839 in NECB package

2014_public_review_2014-09-11 -.pdf)

Changes to 4.2 mentioned in PCF but no changes listed in supplied docs.

3.4 Pumping power

NECB 2011 NECB 2015

8.4.4.15

describes how to

model pumps –

use same

efficiency in

both models.

PCF 582 – limits places on pumping power depending on system and thermal loads:

[5.2.6.3.] ---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.

93



4 Models

4.1 Large Office

4.1.1 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 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

Electrical

Lighting Power

Density

4.2.1.6. 8.8 W/m2

Plug Load Density A-8.4.3.3. 7.5 W/m2

Air side HVAC system

Air Handling Unit 8.4.4.10 Packaged VAV system with

gas furnace, electric reheat and

DX cooling

Supply Fan and

Motor

8.4.4.19 1000 Pa 55% efficiency

Return Fan and

Motor

8.4.4.19 250 Pa 30% efficiency

Fan Performance Table 8.4.4.18 Between 7.5 and 25 kW curve

94



Curve

Outdoor air NBC Part 9,

9.32.3. for

MURBs and

ASHRAE 62.1 for

all others

0.5 L/s/m2

Air-to-Air Heat

Recovery

5.2.10.4 for

MURBS and

5.2.10.1 for all

others

None

Economiser

control

Table 6.5.1.1.3A

for restaurants and

arena, and section

5.2.2.8 A5.2.2.8

for all others

Dry bulb with high limit at 18

°C

Zonal Units VAV boxes

Zonal Units

Efficiency

N/A N/A

Zonal Units Fan

Power

N/A N/A

Cooling

Central Equipment DX cooling

Central Equipment

Efficiency

Table 5.2.12.1 COP 2.78

EIR without fans 0.2748

Performance curve Table 8.4.4.12 DX cooling NECB curve

Chilled water loop

pump

8.4.4.11 N/A

Cooling Tower 8.4.4.12 N/A

Cooling Tower

Fans

5.2.13 N/A

Condenser Water

Loop Pumps

N/A

Heating

Central Equipment 5.2.12.1 Furnace

Central Equipment Et 80% (Furnace)

95



Efficiency

Performance curve Table 8.4.4.22 A NECB furnace curve

Heating water

loop pumps

8.4.4.10 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 6.2.2.1 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

4.1.2 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/m2) Old New

Space Cool 16.8 15.4

Heat Reject 1.0 0.9

Space Heat 29.0 84.3

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 3.8 3.62

Vent. Fans 17.6 15.5

96



Pumps & Aux 12.6 12.5

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 27.3 27.3

Task Lights 0.0 0.0

Area Light 25.1 25.1

Total 133.2 184.6

4.1.3 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 2015. 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.

97



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/m2) Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New

Space Cool 14.2 16.8 15.5 13.4 13.4 12.0

Heat Reject 0.5 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.4

Space Heat 22.1 29.0 35.4 39.3 43.2 52.1

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 3.8 2.7 3.8 2.7 4.0 2.9 4.3 3.1 4.4 3.2 4.9 3.5

Vent. Fans 17.4 17.6 17.5 17.8 18.2 19.2

Pumps & Aux 12.3 12.6 13.3 12.7 12.5 12.5

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Area Light 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1

Total 122.7 121.6 133.2 132.1 138.9 137.8 140.4 139.2 144.6 143.4 153.5 152.1

Saving (%) 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.9

98



Pipe and Duct Insulation (Large Office)



Space Cool 14.2 16.8 15.5 13.4 13.4 12.0

Heat Reject 0.5 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.4

Space Heat 22.1 21.9 29.0 28.8 35.4 35.2 39.3 39.0 43.2 43.0 52.1 51.8

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 3.8 3.8 4.0 4.3 4.4 4.9

Vent. Fans 17.4 17.6 17.5 17.8 18.2 19.2

Pumps & Aux 12.3 12.6 13.3 12.7 12.5 12.5

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Area Light 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1

Total 122.7 122.4 133.2 133.0 138.9 138.7 140.4 140.1 144.6 144.4 153.5 153.2

Saving (%) 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2

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.

99



4.2 Large MURB


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.


Schedules

NECB Schedule MNECB-97 G-Multfam

Heatng Sched

MNECB-97 G-Multfam

Coolng Sched

M/NECB G Heatng Sched

M/NECB G Coolng Sched

Electrical

Lighting Power

Density

4.2.1.6. 3.93 W/m2 6.5 W/m

2 modelled for NECB

2011 and 5.5 W/m2 for NECB

2015

Plug Load Density A-8.4.3.3. 6 W/m2


Air Handling Unit 8.4.4.10 System 4-Single-zone make-

up air system

Supply Fan and

Motor


Return Fan and

Motor

8.4.4.19 No Return Fan

Fan Performance

Curve

Table 8.4.4.18 NA Constant Volume


9.32.3. for

MURBs and

ASHRAE 62.1 for

all others

Overall 0.589 L/s/m2

0.3 L/s/m2 (Corridor) 748 L/s;

1 Bed=75 cfm; 2 Bed=85 cfm;

3 Bed=105 cfm

Air-to-Air Heat

Recovery

5.2.10.4 for

MURBS and

5.2.10.1 for all

others

minimum 50%-65% sensible

efficiency in zone 6, 7 and 8

Economiser Table 6.5.1.1.3A

for restaurants and

N/A

100



control arena, and section

5.2.2.8 A5.2.2.8

for all others

Zonal Units Water source heat pumps

Zonal Units

Efficiency

N/A COPc 3.28, COPh4.2

Zonal Units Fan

Power

N/A 0.0005 kW/L/s

Cooling


Central Equipment

Efficiency

Table 5.2.12.1 SEER 14



Chilled water loop

pump

8.4.4.11 N/A

Cooling Tower 8.4.4.12 0.061 kWfan/kWcap

Cooling Tower

Fans

5.2.13 Centrifugal fan indirect-

contact evaporative cooling

towers

Condenser Water

Loop Pumps

22 Wmotor power per kWthermal-peak for

water-source heat pumps

systems.

Heating

Central Equipment 5.2.12.1 2 Boilers, 88-733 kW and

Furnace

Central Equipment

Efficiency

Et = 83% (Boilers),

Et = 80% (Furnaces)

Performance curve Table 8.4.4.22 A

NECB non-condensing and

NECB furnace curves

Heating water

loop pumps

8.4.4.10 N/A

Motor efficiency CSA C390 premium

Zone heating N/A

101



Domestic Hot water

Demand 2011 ASHRAE

HANDBOOK-

HVAC

Application Table

8 for MURBs/LTC

and Table 7 for all

others

53 L/person/day


Supply

temperature

2011 ASHRAE

HANDBOOK-

HVAC

Application Table

8 for MURBs/LTC

and Table 7 for all

others

49 °C




results for the Large MURB.

Zone 5


Space Cool 12.3 4.6

Heat Reject 0.6 0.3


HP Supp. 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 43.9 43.4

Vent. Fans 8.2 6.2

Pumps & Aux 8.3 6.9

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0


Task Lights 0.0 0.0

Area Light 8.9 8.9

Total 166.7 127.3

102









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).








the floor 1” resulting in savings of 3 W/m and 1 W/m respectively.


The LPD modelled in the previous report was less than that of the NECB 2015 (3.9 compared to 5.0

W/m2). Therefore, the LPD was increased from the value used previously. The LDP values were

determined using the building area method, 6.5 W/m2 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/m2 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 90.1 2010 to auto-

size the pumps. In some cases the auto-sized pumps were smaller than the proposed change.

103






Hot water discharge rates (Large MURB)



Space Cool 4.5 12.3 16.0 10.2 13.9 12.6

Heat Reject 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4

Space Heat 41.5 58.5 39.8 42.2 40.0 59.5

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 43.3 36.9 43.9 37.5 47.0 40.1 50.7 43.3 52.5 44.8 58.8 50.2

Vent. Fans 7.2 8.2 24.6 26.0 26.8 27.7

Pumps & Aux 5.5 8.3 7.5 9.0 9.1 9.3

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Area Light 8.9 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Total 136.8 130.4 166.7 160.1 170.3 163.3 173.2 165.8 177.5 169.8 203.1 193.5

Saving (%) 4.6 4.0 4.1 4.3 4.3 4.7

104



Pipe and Duct Insulation (Large MURB)



Space Cool 4.5 12.3 16.0 10.2 13.9 12.6

Heat Reject 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4

Space Heat 41.5 58.5 39.8 42.2 40.0 59.5

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 43.3 43.1 43.9 43.7 47.0 46.8 50.7 50.5 52.5 52.3 58.8 58.6

Vent. Fans 7.2 8.2 24.6 26.0 26.8 27.7

Pumps & Aux 5.5 8.3 7.5 9.0 9.1 9.3

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Area Light 8.9 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Total 136.8 136.6 166.7 166.5 170.3 170.1 173.2 173.0 177.5 177.3 203.1 202.9

Saving (%) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

105



Lighting Power and Controls (Large MURB)



Space Cool 5.1 4.8 12.9 12.6 16.6 16.3 10.8 10.5 14.5 14.2 13.2 12.9

Heat Reject 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4

Space Heat 39.3 40.2 56.3 57.2 37.6 38.5 40.0 40.9 37.8 38.7 57.3 58.2

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 43.3

43.9

47.0

50.7

52.5

58.8

Vent. Fans 7.3 7.3 8.3 8.3 24.7 24.7 26.1 26.1 26.9 26.9 27.8 27.8

Pumps & Aux 5.5 8.3 7.5 9.0 9.1 9.3

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Area Light 14.7 12.5 14.7 12.5 14.9 12.6 14.9 12.6 14.9 12.6 14.9 12.6

Total 136.8 139.4 166.7 169.1 170.3 172.9 173.2 175.9 177.5 180.2 203.1 204.8

Saving (%) -1.9 -1.4 -1.5 -1.6 -1.5 -0.8

106



Pumping power (Large MURB)



Space Cool 4.5 12.3 16.0 10.2 13.9 12.6

Heat Reject 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4

Space Heat 41.3 41.5 58.3 58.5 39.6 39.8 42.0 42.2 39.8 40.0 59.3 59.5

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 43.3

43.9

47.0

50.7

52.5

58.8

Vent. Fans 7.2 8.2 24.6 26.0 26.8 27.7

Pumps & Aux 5.8 5.5 8.6 8.3 7.8 7.5 9.3 9.0 9.4 9.1 8.6 8.3

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Area Light 8.9 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Total 136.9 136.8 166.8 166.7 170.3 170.3 173.3 173.2 177.6 177.5 203.2 203.1

Saving (%) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1

107



4.3 Strip Mall


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.


Schedules

NECB Schedule Schedule C with Saturday

schedules used on Sundays

until 6pm

Electrical

Lighting Power

Density

4.2.1.6. 15.5 W/m2 15.1 W/m

2 modelled for NECB


2015



Air Handling Unit 8.4.4.10 Dedicated Packaged constant

system with gas furnace and

DX cooling

Supply Fan and

Motor


Return Fan and

Motor


Fan Performance

Curve



9.32.3. for

MURBs and

ASHRAE 62.1 for

all others

0.9 L/s/m2

Air-to-Air Heat

Recovery

5.2.10.4 for

MURBS and

5.2.10.1 for all

others

None

Economiser

control

Table 6.5.1.1.3A

for restaurants and

arena, and section

Dry bulb with high limit at

18˚C

108



5.2.2.8 A5.2.2.8

for all others

Zonal Units None

Zonal Units

Efficiency

N/A None

Zonal Units Fan

Power

N/A N/A

Cooling

Central Equipment DX Cooling

Central Equipment

Efficiency

Table 5.2.12.1 SEER 14


Performance curve Table 8.4.4.12 DX Cooling NECB Curve

Chilled water loop

pump

8.4.4.11 N/A


Cooling Tower

Fans

5.2.13 N/A

Condenser Water

Loop Pumps

N/A

Heating

Central Equipment 5.2.12.1 Furnace

Central Equipment

Efficiency

Et 80% Furnace


N/A

Heating water

loop pumps

8.4.4.10 N/A

Motor efficiency CSA C390 N/A

Zone heating N/A

Domestic Hot water

Demand 2011 ASHRAE N/A

109



HANDBOOK-

HVAC

Application Table

8 for MURBs/LTC

and Table 7 for all

others

Efficiency Table 6.2.2.1 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



results for the Strip Mall.

Zone 5


Space Cool 8.0 8.0

Heat Reject 0.0 0.0


HP Supp. 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 0.0 0.0


Pumps & Aux 1.0 1.0

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0


Task Lights 0.0 0.0


Total 227.5 227.6

110





The strip mall does not consider DHW draws. Therefore, no changes were modelled for hot water

discharge rates.


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.


The supplied model used the NECB 2011 LPD (15.1 W/m2) this was adjusted to the NECB 2015

value (13.5 W/m2).

Pumping power

There are no pumps in the Strip Mall archetype. Therefore, no changes were modelled.

111






Hot water discharge rates (Strip Mall)

No change from previous results.

Pipe and Duct Insulation (Strip Mall)


Lighting Power and Controls (Strip Mall)



Space Cool 1.5 1.1 8.0 7.6 5.5 5.1 2.2 1.8 2.9 2.5 1.5 1.1

Heat Reject 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 88.2 91.2 122.9 125.9 160.6 163.6 183.9 186.9 213.8 216.8 285.3 288.3

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Vent. Fans 23.2 23.5 23.9 23.9 24.3 24.8

Pumps & Aux 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.4 1.5

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Area Light 62.1 55.6 62.1 55.6 62.1 55.6 62.1 55.6 62.1 55.6 62.1 55.6

Total 186.0 182.2 227.5 223.6 263.2 259.3 283.5 279.6 314.5 310.6 385.2 381.3

Saving (%) 2.0 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.0

Pumping power (Strip Mall)


112



4.4 Secondary School


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.


Schedules

NECB Schedule Schedule D with Saturday and

Sunday schedules used on

Monday-Sunday in July and

August

Electrical

Lighting Power

Density

4.2.1.6. 10.1 W/m2 10.7 W/m

2 modelled for NECB


2015



Air Handling Unit 8.4.4.10 System 3 - Single Zone

Packaged Rooftop Unit with

baseboard heating

Supply Fan and

Motor

8.4.4.19 Backward inclined with inlet

vanes at 640Pa 40% efficiency

Return Fan and

Motor


Fan Performance

Curve



9.32.3. for

MURBs and

ASHRAE 62.1 for

all others

0.98 L/s/m2

Air-to-Air Heat Recovery 5.2.10.4 for

Air-to-Air Heat

Recovery

5.2.10.4 for

MURBS and

5.2.10.1 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

113



Economiser

control

Table 6.5.1.1.3A

for restaurants and

arena, and section

5.2.2.8 A5.2.2.8

for all others

Dry bulb with high limit at 18˚C

Zonal Units None

Zonal Units

Efficiency

N/A None

Zonal Units Fan

Power

N/A N/A

Cooling


Central Equipment

Efficiency

Table 5.2.12.1 EER 9.5 for main AHUs, EER

9.8–11 for gym, cafeteria, and

auditorium units

EIR without fans EIR 0.275 for main AHUs, EIR

0.225-0.262 for gym, cafeteria,

and auditorium units


Chilled water loop

pump

8.4.4.11 N/A


Cooling Tower

Fans

5.2.13 N/A

Condenser Water

Loop Pumps

N/A

Heating

Central Equipment 5.2.12.1 Boilers at 88-733 kW and

Furnaces

Central Equipment

Efficiency

Et = 83% (Boilers), Et = 80%

(Furnaces)


NECB non-condensing and

NECB furnace curves

Heating water

loop pumps

8.4.4.10 Constant speed, 4.5 Wmotor

power per kWthermal-peak

114



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


Supply

temperature

2011 ASHRAE

HANDBOOK-

HVAC

Application Table

8 for MURBs/LTC

and Table 7 for all

others

60°C




results for the Secondary School. Note that Zone 4 was used for comparison in this case.

Zone 4


Space Cool 4.1 4.0

Heat Reject 0.0 0.0


HP Supp. 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 8.8 8.7


Pumps & Aux 2.6 2.6

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0

115




Task Lights 0.0 0.0


Kitchen 26 26

Total 151.6 150.7







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).








the floor 1” resulting in savings of 3 W/m and 1 W/m respectively.


The supplied model used the NECB 2011 LPD (10.7 W/m2) this was adjusted to the NECB 2015

value (9.4 W/m2).

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.

116






Hot water discharge rates (Secondary School)



Space Cool 4.1 7.5 6.0 4.2 4.7 3.5

Heat Reject 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 53.5 77.1 86.1 94.4

102.9

130.2

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 8.8 6.4 9.0 6.5 9.5 6.9 10.1 7.3 10.4 7.6 11.6 8.4

Vent. Fans 24.2 24.3 25.3 25.5 25.6 25.5

Pumps & Aux 2.6 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.5

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Area Light 25.4 28.4 31.0 32.9 34.8 40.0

Kitchen 26.0 28.9 31.0 32.9 34.8 40.0

Total 151.6 149.2 182.5 180.0 193.6 191.0 203.0 200.2 214.4 211.5 246.6 243.5

Saving (%) 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3

117



Pipe and Duct Insulation (Secondary School)



Space Cool 4.1 7.5 6.0 4.2 4.7 3.5

Heat Reject 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 53.5 77.1 86.1 94.4

102.9

130.2

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 8.8 8.6 9.0 8.8 9.5 9.3 10.1 9.9 10.4 10.2 11.6 11.4

Vent. Fans 24.2 24.3 25.3 25.5 25.6 25.5

Pumps & Aux 2.6 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.5

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Area Light 25.4 28.4 31.0 32.9 34.8 40.0

Kitchen 26.0 28.9 31.0 32.9 34.8 40.0

Total 151.6 151.4 182.5 182.3 193.6 193.4 203.0 202.8 214.4 214.2 246.6 246.4

Saving (%) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

118



Lighting Power and Controls (Secondary School)



Space Cool 4.1 4.0 7.5 7.4 6.0 5.9 4.2 4.1 4.7 4.6 3.5 3.4

Heat Reject 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 53.5 55.0 77.1 78.6 86.1 87.6 94.4 95.9 102.9 104.4 130.2 131.7

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 8.8 9.0 9.5 10.1 10.4 11.6

Vent. Fans 24.2 24.1 24.3 24.2 25.3 25.2 25.5 25.4 25.6 25.5 25.5 25.4

Pumps & Aux 2.6 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.5

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Area Light 25.4 23.5 25.4 23.5 25.4 23.5 25.4 23.5 25.4 23.5 25.4 23.5

Kitchen 26.0 28.9 31.0 32.9 34.8 40.0

Total 151.6 151.0 182.5 181.9 193.6 193.0 203.0 202.4 214.4 213.8 246.6 246.1

Saving (%) 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2

119



Pumping power (Secondary School)



Space Cool 4.1 7.5 6.0 4.2 4.7 3.5

Heat Reject 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 53.5 52.6 77.1 76.2 86.1 85.2 94.4 93.5 102.9 102 130.2 129.3

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Hot Water 8.8 9.0 9.5 10.1 10.4 11.6

Vent. Fans 24.2 24.3 25.3 25.5 25.6 25.5

Pumps & Aux 2.6 3.4 3.3 4.1 3.3 4.1 3.5 4.3 3.5 4.3 3.5 4.3

Ext Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Area Light 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4

Kitchen 26.0 28.9 31.0 32.9 34.8 40.0

Total 151.6 151.6 182.5 182.6 193.6 193.7 203.0 203.6 214.4 214.5 246.6 246.6

Saving (%) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

120



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].

121



5.1 Large Office

Zone 4

Zone 5

Zone 6

Zone 7a

Zone 7b

Zone 8

Energy

Consumption

(kWh/m2)

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

Space Cool 8.2 14.2 15.3 16.8 12.5 15.5 7.3 13.4 7 13.4 4.6 12

Heat Reject 10.1 0.5 14 1 15.5 0.8 10.4 0.5 9.4 0.5 8.4 0.4

Space Heat 28.2 22.1 21.8 38.9 29 28.8 48.3 35.4 35.2 48.1 39.3 39 47.8 43.2 43 59.9 52.1 51.8

HP Supp. n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0

Hot Water 7.7 3.8 2.7 7.8 3.8 2.7 8.3 4 2.9 8.8 4.3 3.1 9 4.4 3.2 8.4 4.9 3.5

Vent. Fans 8.6 17.4 10.2 17.6 9.5 17.5 9.5 17.8 9 18.2 8.4 19.2

Pumps & Aux 5.2 12.3 6.1 12.6 6.3 13.3 5 12.7 4.9 12.5 4.3 12.5

Ext Usage n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0

Misc. Equip. 35.1 27.3 35.1 27.3 35.1 27.3 35.1 27.3 27.3 35.1 27.3

Task Lights n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0

Area Light 40.3 25.1 40.3 25.1 40.3 25.1 40.3 25.1 40.3 25.1 40.3 25.1

Total 143.5 122.7 121.3 167.7 133.2 131.9 175.7 138.9 137.6 164.6 140.4 138.9 162.6 144.6 143.2 171.7 153.5 151.8

Saving (%) 1.1 1 0.9 1.1 1 1.1

122



5.2 Large MURB

Zone 4

Zone 5

Zone 6

Zone 7a

Zone 7b

Zone 8

Energy

Consumption

(kWh/m2)

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

Space Cool n/a 4.5 4.8 n/a 12.3 12.6 n/a 16 16.3 n/a 10.2 10.5 n/a 13.9 14.2 n/a 12.6 12.9

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 41.4 40.4 n/a 58.4 57.4 n/a 39.8 38.6 n/a 42.2 41 n/a 40 38.8 n/a 59.4 58.4


Hot Water n/a 43.3 36.7 n/a 43.9 37.3 n/a 47 39.9 n/a 50.7 43.1 n/a 52.5 44.6 n/a 58.8 50

Vent. Fans n/a 7.2 7.3 n/a 8.2 8.3 n/a 24.6 24.7 n/a 26 26.1 n/a 26.8 26.9 n/a 27.7 27.8

Pumps & Aux n/a 5.6 5.3 n/a 8.4 8.1 n/a 7.6 7.3 n/a 9.1 8.8 n/a 9.2 8.9 n/a 9.1 8.8


Misc. Equip. n/a 25.8 25.8 n/a 25.8 25.8 n/a 25.8 25.8 n/a 25.8 25.8 n/a 25.8 25.8 n/a 25.8 25.8


Area Light n/a 8.9 12.5 n/a 8.9 12.5 n/a 9 12.6 n/a 9 12.6 n/a 9 12.6 n/a 9 12.6

Total n/a 136.9 132.8 n/a 166.8 162.5 n/a 170.3 165.7 n/a 173.3 168.2 n/a 177.6 172.2 n/a 203.2 196.7

Saving (%) 3 2.6 2.7 2.9 3 3.2

123



5.3 Strip Mall

Zone 4

Zone 5

Zone 6

Zone 7a

Zone 7b

Zone 8

Energy

Consumption

(kWh/m2)

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

NECB 2011

2013 Report

2015 NRCC

Space Cool 5.1 1.5 1.1 21.5 8 7.6 15 5.5 5.1 5.6 2.2 1.8 7/0 2.9 2.5 3.3 1.5 1.1

Heat Reject 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Space Heat 147.7 88.2 91.2 177.5 122.9 125.9 233.6 160.6 163.6 255.1 183.9 186.9 312.6 213.8 216.8 423.8 285.3 288.3


Hot Water 18.4 0 18.5 0 19.5 0 20.8 0 21.4 21.4 0 25.2 0

Vent. Fans 29.4 23.2 31.8 23.5 30.5 23.9 27.3 23.9 31.4 24.3 28 24.8

Pumps & Aux 0 1.1 0 1 0 1.1 0 1.4 0 1.4 0 1.5


Misc. Equip. 9.8 10 9.8 10 9.8 10 9.8 10 9.8 10 9.8 10


Area Light 59.2 62.1 55.6 59.2 62.1 55.6 59.2 62.1 55.6 59.2 62.1 55.6 59.2 62.1 55.6 59.2 62.1 55.6

Total 269.6 186 182.2 318.3 227.5 223.6 367.7 263.2 259.3 387.9 283.5 279.6 441.3 314.5 310.6 549.3 385.2 381.3

Saving (%) 2 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.2 1

124



5.4 Secondary School

Secondary

School

Zone 4

Zone 5

Zone 6

Zone 7a

Zone 7b

Zone 8

Energy

Consumption (kWh/m2)

NECB

2011

2013

Report

2015

NRCC

NECB

2011

2013

Report

2015

NRCC

NECB

2011

2013

Report

2015

NRCC

NECB

2011

2013

Report

2015

NRCC

NECB

2011

2013

Report

2015

NRCC

NECB

2011

2013

Report

2015

NRCC

Space Cool 8.9 4.1 3.9 17.2 7.5 7.3 14.6 6 5.8 9.2 4.2 4 9.6 4.7 4.5 7.1 3.5 3.3

Heat Reject 5.7 0 11.5 0 12.1 0 7.5 0 7.3 0 5.8 0 0

Space Heat 72.5 53.5 55.6 93.1 77.1 79.2 118.2 86.1 88.2 115.8 94.4 96.5 139 102.9 105 178.9 130.2 132.3


Hot Water 38.8 8.8 8.6 39.3 9 8.8 41.5 9.5 9.3 44.2 10.1 9.9 45.4 10.4 10.2 51.2 11.6 11.4

Vent. Fans 11.7 24.2 24 12.9 24.3 24.1 12.5 25.3 25.1 11.9 25.5 25.3 12.1 25.6 25.4 10.6 25.5 25.3

Pumps & Aux 25 2.6 3.4 30.5 3.3 4.1 30.8 3.3 27.6 3.5 4.3 28.3 3.5 4.3 26.7 3.5 4.3


Misc. Equip. 15.2 7 15.2 7 15.2 7 15.2 7 15.2 7 15.2 7


Area Light 31.2 25.4 21.6 31.2 28.4 22.4 31.2 31 23 31.2 32.9 23.5 31.2 34.8 24 31.2 40 25.2

Kitchen n/a 26 n/a 28.9 n/a 31 n/a 32.9 n/a 34.8 n/a 40

Total 209 151.6 150.1 250.8 182.5 181 276.2 193.6 192.1 262.6 203 201.5 288.0 214.3 212.8 326.6 246.6 245.2

Saving (%) 1 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6

125



6 References

1. Caneta Research Inc., 2010. “Performance Simulation of Proposed Changes to NECB

Relative to MNECB and ASHRAE 90.1-2007 Final Report” May 2010.

2. Footprint, 2013. “Energy Modelling Report. Modelling of the National Energy Code for

Buildings 2015” Final report, revision 2.

3. NECB. “Technical Changes by Code Section”

http://web.archive.org/web/20140320150029/http:/www.nationalcodes.nrc.gc.ca/eng/public_

review/2013/necb_technical.php. Accessed multiple times between 1/Feb/2015 and

7/May/2015

126

http://web.archive.org/web/20140320150029/http:/www.nationalcodes.nrc.gc.ca/eng/public_review/2013/necb_technical.php

http://web.archive.org/web/20140320150029/http:/www.nationalcodes.nrc.gc.ca/eng/public_review/2013/necb_technical.php



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)

Component Factor R2

Hot water 0.940 1

Total 0.940 1

Factor, [ekWh/m2/y]/[L/person/day]

Water draw

Description Hot water Total

4.55 Baseline 4.29 85.3

3.185 -30% 3.01 84.0

5.915 30% 5.58 86.6

EUI, ekWh/m3/y

Water draw, L/person/day

127



Baseline ekWh/m2/y Draw 4.55 L/person/day

Large Office Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8

Hot Water 3.8 3.8 4.0 4.3 4.4 4.9

Total 122.6 133.2 138.8 140.4 144.6 153.5

Reduced ekWh/m2/y Draw 3.19 L/person/day


Hot Water 2.7 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.2 3.5

Total 121.6 132.1 137.8 139.2 143.4 152.1

Percent Change in EUI


Hot Water -28.2 28.2 28.2 28.2 28.2 28.2

Total -0.79 -0.80 -0.74 -0.86 -0.86 -0.90

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.

128



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.


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 0 0 0 0 0 0

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).

Component Factor R2

Hot water 0.587 1

Total 0.587 1

Factor, [ekWh/m2/y]/[l/person/day]

Water draw


59.1 Baseline 34.7 107

44.3 -25% 26.0 98.1

73.9 25% 43.3 115

EUI, ekWh/m3/y

Water draw, l/person/day

129




Large MURB Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8

Hot Water 43.3 43.9 47.0 50.7 52.5 58.8

Total 136.8 166.7 170.3 173.2 177.5 203.1



Hot Water 36.9 37.5 40.1 43.3 44.8 50.2

Total 130.4 160.1 163.3 165.8 169.8 193.5



Hot Water -14.7 -14.7 -14.7 -14.7 -14.7 -14.7

Total -4.64 -3.98 -4.11 -4.29 -4.34 -4.74


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

130



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).

Component Factor R2

Hot water 1.11 0.9719

Total 1.11 0.9719

Factor, [ekWh/m2/y]/[L/person/day]


Secondary

School Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8

Hot Water 8.8 9.0 9.5 10.1 10.5 11.6

Total 151.6 182.5 193.6 203.0 214.4 246.6


Secondary

School Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8

Hot Water 6.4 6.5 6.9 7.3 7.6 8.4

Total 149.2 180.0 191.0 200.2 211.5 243.5


Secondary School Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8

Hot Water -27.8 -27.8 -27.8 -27.8 -27.8 -27.8

Total -1.61 -1.37 -1.36 -1.38 -1.36 -1.26

Water draw


8.18 Baseline 8.74 125

6.14 -25% 7.28 123

10.2 25% 11.9 128

EUI, ekWh/m3/y

Water draw, L/person/day

131




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.

132



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.

Floor plate Riser

perimeter+ 2*height

Archetype Length Width

Floor-

Floor

height #Floors

Saving

(W/m)

Saving

(W/m) Saving (W)

Saving

(kWh/year)

Saving

(kWh/m2/

year)

Office 36.6 36.6 3.9 10 1 3 380.4 3332.3 0.25

MURB 34.1 34.1 3 10 1 3 316.4 2771.7 0.24

School 202.5 202.5 4 1 1 3 834 7305.8 0.18

Strip Mall 36.6 36.6 3.9 1 0 0 0 0 0

In all cases the accumulated savings are less than 1 kWh/m2/year. To accumulate significant savings

would require an order of magnitude more piping in each building.

133



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/m2/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.


LPD Description Heating Cooling Fans

8.83 2015 value 89.1 9.87 3.66

9.7 2011 value 87.5 10.0 3.761

11.84 1.1 W/ft2 83.6 10.4 4.01

LPD, lighting power density, W/m2

Heating, Space heating EUI, ekWh/m2/y [*]

Cooling, Space cooling EUI, ekWh/m2/y [†]

Fan, Fans usage EUI, ekWh/m2/y;

Component Factor R2

Heating -1.84 1

Cooling 0.171 1

Fan 0.118 0.9998

Factor, [ekWh/m2/y]/[W/m

2]

* Space heating is calculated from the CanQuest output (in Btu x 10

6) by multiplying the result by

106 then by 0.0029307107, then dividing the result by the building area.

† Other EUIs are calculated from the CanQuest output (in kWh x 10


103 then dividing the result by the building area.

134



Thus,

EUI = original EUI + LPD * factor

2011 Levels ekWh/m2/y LPD 9.7 W/m

2


Area Lights 27.6 27.6 27.6 27.6 27.6 27.6

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps &

Aux. 12.3 12.6 13.3 12.7 12.5 12.5

Vent. Fans 17.5 17.7 17.6 17.9 18.3 19.3

Hot Water 3.8 3.8 4.0 4.3 4.4 4.9

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 20.5 27.4 33.8 37.7 41.6 50.5

Heat Reject. 0.5 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.4

Space Cool 14.3 16.9 15.6 13.5 13.5 12.1

Total 121.4 131.9 137.6 139.1 143.3 152.2

2015 Proposed Changes

‡ ekWh/m

2/y LPD 8.83 W/m

2


Area Lights 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1

Task Lights 0 0 0 0 0 0

Misc. Equip. 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3

Ext. Usage 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pumps & Aux. 12.3 12.6 13.3 12.7 12.5 12.5

Vent. Fans 17.4 17.6 17.5 17.8 18.2 19.2

Hot Water 3.8 3.8 4 4.3 4.4 4.9

HP Supp. 0 0 0 0 0 0

Space Heat 22.1 29 35.4 39.3 43.2 52.1

Heat Reject. 0.5 1 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.4

Space Cool 14.2 16.8 15.5 13.4 13.4 12

Total 122.6 133.2 138.8 140.4 144.6 153.5

‡ This table is taken from the original EUI results.

135





Area Lights -8.97 -8.97 -8.97 -8.97 -8.97 -8.97

Vent. Fans -0.59 -0.58 -0.58 -0.57 -0.56 -0.53

Space Heat 7.80 5.84 4.73 4.24 3.85 3.17

Space Cool -1.03 -0.88 -0.95 -1.10 -1.10 -1.22

Total -0.99 -0.84 -0.87 -0.79 -0.77 -0.73

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/m2

136





13.5 2015 Value 108 7.32 10.5

15.07 2011 value 105 7.77 10.5

6.5 50% 2015 value 121 5.58 10.3


Heating, Space heating EUI, ekWh/m2/y [§]

Cooling, Space cooling EUI, ekWh/m2/y [**]

Fans, Fan usage EUI, ekWh/m2/y;

Component Factor R2

Heating -1.90 1

Cooling 0.262 0.9998

Fan 0.019 0.9981


2]

2011 Levels††

ekWh/m2/y LPD 15.1 W/m

2


Area Lights 62.1 62.1 62.1 62.1 62.1 62.1

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps &

Aux. 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.4 1.5

Vent. Fans 23.2 23.5 23.9 23.9 24.3 24.8

Hot Water 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

§ Space heating is calculated from the CanQuest output (in Btu x 10



** Other EUIs are calculated from the CanQuest output (in kWh x 10



†† This table is taken from the original EUI results.

137



Space Heat 88.2 122.9 160.6 183.9 213.8 285.3

Heat Reject. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Cool 1.5 8.0 5.5 2.2 2.9 1.5

Total 186.0 227.5 263.2 283.5 314.5 385.2

2015 Proposed Changes ekWh/m2/y LPD 13.5 W/m

2


Area Lights 55.6 55.6 55.6 55.6 55.6 55.6

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps & Aux. 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.4 1.5

Vent. Fans 23.2 23.5 23.9 23.9 24.3 24.8

Hot Water 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 91.2 125.9 163.6 186.9 216.8 288.3

Heat Reject. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Cool 1.1 7.6 5.1 1.8 2.5 1.1

Total 182.2 223.6 259.3 279.6 310.6 381.3



Area Lights -10.4 -10.4 -10.4 -10.4 -10.4 -10.4

Vent. Fans -0.13 -0.13 -0.13 -0.13 -0.12 -0.12

Space Heat 3.38 2.43 1.86 1.62 1.40 1.05

Space Cool -27.4 -5.13 -7.47 -18.7 -14.2 -27.4

Total -2.06 -1.73 -1.49 -1.38 -1.25 -1.02

In summary, for a 10% reduction in LPD there is a maximum decrease in total EUI of 2%.



fans) is increased by 1-2%. The total decrease in EUI is attributable to a decrease in lighting

power.

138



Strip Mall: Percent change in EUIs for a 10% reduction LPD, from 15.1 (2011 NECB) to

13.5 (2015 NECB) W/m2

139





5.5 2015 Value 100 4.85 6.33

6.5 2011 value 99.5 5.06 6.37

3.9 Existing model 101 4.605 6.28


Heating, Space heating EUI, ekWh/m2/y [‡‡]

Cooling, Space cooling EUI, ekWh/m2/y [§§]

Fans, Fan usage EUI, ekWh/m2/y;

Component Factor R2

Heating -0.688 0.9671

Cooling 0.179 0.9944

Fan 0.037 0.9999


2]

2011 Levels ekWh/m2/y LPD 6.5 W/m

2


Area Lights 14.7 14.7 14.9 14.9 14.9 14.9

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps &

Aux.

5.5 8.3 7.5 9.0 9.1 8.3

Vent. Fans 7.3 8.3 24.7 26.1 26.9 27.8

Hot Water 43.3 43.9 47.0 50.7 52.5 58.8

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 39.3 56.3 37.6 40.0 37.8 57.3

Heat Reject. 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4

Space Cool 5.1 12.9 16.6 10.8 14.5 13.2

Total 141.1 170.8 174.6 177.6 181.9 206.5

‡‡ Space heating is calculated from the CanQuest output (in Btu x 10

6) by multiplying the result by 10

6 then by

0.0029307107, 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.

140



2015 Proposed Changes ekWh/m2/y LPD 5.5 W/m

2


Area Lights 12.5 12.5 12.6 12.6 12.6 12.6

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps & Aux. 5.5 8.3 7.5 9.0 9.1 8.3

Vent. Fans 7.3 8.3 24.7 26.1 26.9 27.8

Hot Water 43.3 43.9 47.0 50.7 52.5 58.8

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 40.2 57.2 38.5 40.9 38.7 58.2

Heat Reject. 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4

Space Cool 4.8 12.6 16.3 10.5 14.2 12.9

Total 139.4 169.1 172.9 175.9 180.2 204.8



Area Lights -15.4 -15.4 -15.4 -15.4 -15.4 -15.4

Vent. Fans -0.60 -0.53 -0.18 -0.17 -0.16 -0.16

Space Heat 2.15 1.50 2.25 2.11 2.24 1.48

Space Cool -4.30 -1.69 -1.31 -2.02 -1.50 -1.65

Total -1.19 -0.98 -0.98 -0.96 -0.94 -0.83

In summary, for a 15% reduction in LPD there is a maximum decrease in total EUI of 1.2%.



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.

141



Large MURB: Percent change in EUIs for a 15% reduction LPD, from 6.5 (2011 NECB) to

5.5 (2015 NECB) W/m2.

142



A.3.4 Secondary School Archetype


9.4 2015 Value 61.4 3.614 23.9

10.7 2011 value 58.9 3.84 24.1

5.38 0.5 W/ft2 69.3 3.094 23.4


Heating, Space heating EUI, ekWh/m2/y [***]

Cooling, Space cooling EUI, ekWh/m2/y [†††]

Fans = Fans usage EUI, ekWh/m2/y;

Component Factor R2

Heating -1.94 0.9999

Cooling 0.137 0.9951

Fan 0.129 0.9998

Factor, [ekWh/m2/y]/[W/m2]

2011 Levels ekWh/m2/y LPD 10.7 W/m2


Kitchen 26 28.9 31 32.9 34.8 40

Area Lights 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps & Aux. 2.6 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.5

Vent. Fans 24.3 24.4 25.4 25.6 25.7 25.6

Hot Water 8.8 9.0 9.5 10.1 10.5 11.6

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 52.5 76.1 85.1 93.4 101.9 129.2

Heat Reject. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Cool 4.2 7.6 6.1 4.3 4.8 3.6

Total 152.0 182.9 194.0 203.4 214.8 247.1

*** Space heating is calculated from the CanQuest output (in Btu x 10



††† Other EUIs are calculated from the CanQuest output (in kWh x 10



143



2015 Proposed Changes ekWh/m2/y LPD 9.4 W/m2


Kitchen 26 28.9 31 32.9 34.8 40

Area Lights 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps & Aux. 2.6 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.5

Vent. Fans 24.1 24.2 25.2 25.4 25.5 25.4

Hot Water 8.8 9.0 9.5 10.1 10.5 11.6

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 55.0 78.6 87.6 95.9 104.4 131.7

Heat Reject. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Cool 4.0 7.4 5.9 4.1 4.6 3.4

Total 151.0 181.9 193.0 202.4 213.8 246.1



Area Lights -12.2 -12.2 -12.2 -12.2 -12.2 -12.2

Vent. Fans -0.69 -0.69 -0.66 -0.66 -0.65 -0.66

Space Heat 4.81 3.32 2.97 2.70 2.48 1.95

Space Cool -4.26 -2.35 -2.93 -4.16 -3.72 -4.98

Total -0.70 -0.58 -0.55 -0.53 -0.50 -0.43

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.

144



Secondary School: Percent change in EUI’s for a 12% reduction LPD, from 10.7 (2011

NECB) to 9.4 (2015 NECB) W/m2.

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 5.2.6.3.1 clauses through d.

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.

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).

145



4. Linear relationships between various EUIs were derived expressing the change in EUI

(ekWh/m2/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.


Pumping Power Description Heating Cooling Heat Reject. Pumps

39.04 2015 value 57.9 14.9 1.29 10.3

19.52 50% NECB 58.7 14.4 1.26 5.46

78.08 200% NECB 56.8 15.8 1.33 17.8

50.43 CanQuest auto-size 58.6 15.2 1.30 11.6

Total Pumping power of all pumps covered by 5.2.6.3.1 , kW

Heating, Space heating EUI, ekWh/m2/y [‡‡‡]

Cooling, Space cooling EUI, ekWh/m2/y [§§§]

Heat rejection, ekWh/m2/y

Total Pump energy, ekWh/m2/y;

Component Factor R2

Heating -0.032 0.9967

Cooling 0.024 0.9955

Heat rejection 0.001 0.9908

Pump energy 0.208 0.9914

Factor, [ekWh/m2/y]/kW

Thus,

EUI = original EUI + Pump power * factor

‡‡‡ Space heating is calculated from the CanQuest output (in Btu x 10



§§§ Other EUIs are calculated from the CanQuest output (in kWh x 10



146



Auto sized

Archetype ekWh/m2/y

Pump energy 50.4 kW for

Z5


Area Lights 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps & Aux. 15.0 15.7 15.1 14.9 14.9 15.0

Vent. Fans 17.6 17.5 17.8 18.2 19.2 17.6

Hot Water 3.8 4.0 4.3 4.4 4.9 3.8

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 28.6 35.0 38.9 42.8 51.7 28.6

Heat Reject. 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.4 1.0

Space Cool 17.1 15.8 13.7 13.7 12.3 17.1

Total 135.5 141.2 142.7 146.9 155.8 135.5

2015 Proposed Changes ekWh/m2/y

Pump energy 39.0 kW for Z5


Area Lights 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.3

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps & Aux. 12.3 12.6 13.3 12.7 12.5 12.5

Vent. Fans 17.4 17.6 17.5 17.8 18.2 19.2

Hot Water 3.8 3.8 4.0 4.3 4.4 4.9

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 22.1 29.0 35.4 39.3 43.2 52.1

Heat Reject. 0.5 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.4

Space Cool 14.2 16.8 15.5 13.4 13.4 12.0

Total 122.6 133.2 138.8 140.4 144.6 153.5

147





Pumps & Aux. -16.2 -15.9 -15.2 -15.8 -16.0 -16.0

Space Heat 1.69 1.28 1.05 0.94 0.86 0.71

Heat Reject. -2.80 -1.42 -1.77 -2.80 -2.80 -3.48

Space Cool -1.89 -1.61 -1.74 -2.01 -2.01 -2.23

Total -1.92 -1.70 -1.70 -1.61 -1.57 -1.48

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.

148




A reduction in pumping power was not considered for the strip mall archetype. The HVAC system

in each store was a packaged roof-top unit with natural gas fired heating and DX cooling, providing

constant volume ventilation to the space. Consequently there were no primary circulation loops

defined.



Pumping power n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Total 0 0 0 0 0 0


In determining the pumping power for the water loop heat pump pump (WHLP Pump) the

pump was sized according the capacity of the heating portion (the boilers). The WLHP

provides both heat and cooling to the residential units. The logic for this was that the pump

should be oversized or right sized for heating and undersized for cooling (i.e. the pump

should run flat out for cooling applications).

Pumping Power Description Heating Pumps

3.79 2015 value 20.4 2.31

7.58 200% NECB 19.7 3.59

11.4 300% NECB 19.0 4.69

4.89 CanQuest auto-size 20.2 2.70


Heating, Space heating EUI, ekWh/m2/y [****]

Cooling, Space cooling EUI, ekWh/m2/y [††††]

Heat rejection, ekWh/m2/y

Total Pump energy, ekWh/m2/y;

Component Factor R2

Heating -0.181 0.9976



2]

**** Space heating is calculated from the CanQuest output (in Btu x 10



†††† Other EUIs are calculated from the CanQuest output (in kWh x 10



149



Auto-sized archetype ekWh/m2/y


Z5


Area Lights 8.9 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps & Aux. 5.8 8.6 7.8 9.3 9.4 8.6

Vent. Fans 7.2 8.2 24.6 26.0 26.8 27.7

Hot Water 43.3 43.9 47.0 50.7 52.5 58.8

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 41.3 58.3 39.6 42.0 39.8 59.3

Heat Reject. 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4

Space Cool 4.5 12.3 16.0 10.2 13.9 12.6

Total 136.9 166.6 170.3 173.3 177.6 202.2

2015 Proposed Changes ekWh/m2/y


Z5


Area Lights 8.9 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps & Aux. 5.5 8.3 7.5 9.0 9.1 8.3

Vent. Fans 7.2 8.2 24.6 26.0 26.8 27.7

Hot Water 43.3 43.9 47.0 50.7 52.5 58.8

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 41.5 58.5 39.8 42.2 40.0 59.5

Heat Reject. 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4

Space Cool 4.5 12.3 16.0 10.2 13.9 12.6

Total 136.8 166.8 170.3 173.2 177.5 203.2

150





Pumps & Aux. -4.87 -3.28 -3.62 -3.03 -3.00 -3.28

Space Heat 0.39 0.28 0.41 0.39 0.41 0.27

Total -0.09 -0.07 -0.01 -0.07 -0.07 -0.06

In summary, for a 19% reduction in pumping power in Zone 5 there is a decrease in total

EUI of 0.1%. Pumping energy represents a small part of the overall EUI, 4 to 5% of the

energy use.

Large MURB: Percent change in EUIs for a reduction pumping power, 2011 NECB auto-

sized to 2015 NECB proposed limits.

151



Secondary School Archetype: (note Zone 4 was used as the base zone)

Pumping Power Description Heating Pumps

5.18 Footprint[2] at 4.686

kW] value 52.8 2.61

2.59 50% Footprint 53.9 1.69

10.4 200% Footprint 51.2 4.07

3.65 CanQuest auto-size 53.4 2.09


Heating, Space heating EUI, ekWh/m2/y [‡‡‡‡]

Pump energy, ekWh/m2/y;

Component Factor R2

Heating -0.338 0.9930


Factor, [ekWh/m2/y]/kW

NECB Proposed ekWh/m2/y


Z4

Secondary school Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7a Zone 7b Zone 8

Kitchen 26.0 28.9 31.0 32.9 34.8 40.0

Area Lights 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps & Aux. 3.4 4.1 4.1 4.3 4.3 4.3

Vent. Fans 24.2 24.3 25.3 25.5 25.6 25.5

Hot Water 8.8 9.0 9.5 10.1 10.5 11.6

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 52.6 76.2 85.2 93.5 102.0 129.3

Heat Reject. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Cool 4.1 7.5 6.0 4.2 4.7 3.5

Total 151.7 182.6 193.7 203.1 214.5 246.6

‡‡‡‡ Space heating is calculated from the CanQuest output (in Btu x 10



152



2015 Footprint Results ekWh/m2/y Pump energy 5.18 for Z4


Kitchen 26.0 28.9 31.0 32.9 34.8 40.0

Area Lights 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4

Task Lights 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Misc. Equip. 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Ext. Usage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumps & Aux. 2.6 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.5

Vent. Fans 24.2 24.3 25.3 25.5 25.6 25.5

Hot Water 8.8 9.0 9.5 10.1 10.5 11.6

HP Supp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Heat 53.5 77.1 86.1 94.4 102.9 130.2

Heat Reject. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Space Cool 4.1 7.5 6.0 4.2 4.7 3.5

Total 151.6 182.5 193.6 203.0 214.4 246.6



Pumps & Aux. 31.3 24.6 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2

Space Heat -1.70 -1.18 -1.06 -0.96 -0.88 -0.70

Total -0.06 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.04 -0.00

The results for the secondary school are atypical. First, the pump power limit in the

proposed NEB 2015 is higher than the Footprint report results by 34%. Consequently the

change in pumping EUI is positive. Second, the increased pumping energy reduces the space

heating EUI by about 1.7%. There was no change in cooling since the HW pumps should

not be running when the AC is operating. The end result of the increase in pumping power is

to decrease the total EUI by at most 0.06%.

153



Secondary school: Percent change in EUIs for an increase in pumping power from Footprint

results to 2015 NECB proposed limits.

A.4.4 Secondary School Archetype

Modelling approach: The following approach was taken for estimating the effect of changes in

pumping power.

1. The EUI results taken from “ENERGY MODELLING REPORT MODELLING OF THE

NATIONAL ENERGY CODE FOR BUILDINGS 2015 FINAL REPORT-REVISION 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 5.2.6.3.1 clauses through d.

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.

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.

§§§§ “ENERGY MODELLING REPORT MODELLING OF THE NATIONAL ENERGY CODE

FOR BUILDINGS 2015 FINAL REPORT-REVISION 2”

154



3. For each Zone 5 archetype four different pumping power criteria were modelled. The

exception here was the secondary school archetype where Zone 4 was used (there was little

to no space heating when the other zones were run). 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).

4. Linear relationships between various EUIs were derived expressing the change in EUI

(ekWh/m2/y) given a unit change in total pumping power (kW).

5. The change in EUI for a given change in total 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.

155

construction - b.c. homepage - province of british columbia · construction performance ... 26...

Documents