femp m&v methods: no silver bullet · • captures synergy between multiple ecms – tinker has...

Tampa Convention Center • Tampa, Florida

FEMP M&V Methods: No Silver BulletTinker AFB and Humphreys Engineer Center

Track 12, Session 3

Dusty Wheeler & Jeff StringfieldHoneywell

August 15, 2017

Energy Exchange: Connect • Collaborate • Conserve

Agenda

2

• Discuss the range of M&V Options– What are the applications– Strengths and weaknesses

• Discuss two Combined Approach Case Studies – USACE Humphreys Engineering Center

Option D-A/B– Tinker AFB

Option C-A

• Discuss techniques needed to ensure accuracy– Identifying the performance of existing systems– Identifying variables that impact on-going performance

Energy Exchange: Connect • Collaborate • Conserve3

M&V Options: What choice is best?

No Single Right Answer

• Each option provide benefit in correct application

• Best Choice grows from Engineering knowledge

– Option applications– Project specific goals– Complexity of ECMs– Synergy between ECMs

• Ideal choice may be to combine options


Retrofit Isolation (Options A&B)

Focus analysis around the affected system

Strengths• Direct measurement of system performance• Greatly reduces variables affecting performance• Provides rapid feedback of performance degradation• Provides value beyond M&V requirement

– Predictive Maintenance / OCx• Often less costly to maintain

Weaknesses• Requires extrapolation to whole building meter affect• Difficult to directly correlate to utility bills (at times)• Relies on validity and comprehensiveness of measurements• Relies on validity and comprehensiveness of calculations


Whole Facility Methods(Options C and D)

Focus analysis around entire building

Strengths• Captures synergy between multiple ECMs

– Tinker has 20 ECMs across 60 buildings• Direct result in whole building meter quantity• Provides continuous monitoring of whole building performance

Weaknesses• Inability to identify source of performance variations • Difficulty in identifying and tracking all variables affecting performance• Limited benefit beyond M&V


Humphreys Eng Ctr: Cude / Cude Annex

• Mission: US Army Geospatial Center– Providing geospatial information to the war fighter

• Understand critical operating parameters– Cude: Combination of standard office, server rooms, and

SCIF space– Cude Annex: Entirely SCIF – Distributed server rooms and computer labs

• Known issues– Misalignment of original HVAC design to current use– Extreme comfort issues– Reliability of chilled water system– Age of pri/sec HVAC systems and controls– Data center consolidation


Humphreys Eng Ctr: Cude / Cude Annex

• Require major renovation of major systems– Apply ASHRAE EBCx Process– Install new condensing boiler (CUDE only)– Implement chilled water “Optimization” upgrades– Complete BAS Upgrade– HVAC Renovation (Cude only)

• Required extensive baseline performance measurement– Detailed system functional testing; Datalogging of performance over time

• Required detailed modeling of all HVAC systems– Whole building calibrated hourly energy simulation– Create disaggregated energy balance of baseline– Evaluate design options– Identify Synergism between options


HEC Option D-A/B M&V Approach

ECM Method Baseline Post-Install Performance Period

1.1 Install Condensing Boilers

D/A

Building Energy Model (BEM) calibrated to metered gas data

FPT of equipment performanceMeasure combustion efficiency

Monitor Key parameters against EFD

2.1 Chiller Plant Upgrades D/B

Measured chiller plant performanceBEM calibrated to measured performance

FPTMeasure plant efficiency

Measure plant electrical usage against baseline performance

3.2 BAS Upgrades D/A

BEM calibrated to measured HVAC equipment performance

FPT of operating sequences


4.1 HVAC Retrofits D/A

BEM calibrated to measured HVAC equipment performance

FPT of operating sequences



Existing Conditions Testing

Reading CH-1 CH-2 Chilled Water Supply Temp sp (°F) 46 44 Chilled Water Supply Temp (°F) 45.8 43.5 Common CHW Supply Temp (°F) 45 Chilled Water Flow (gal/min) 863 Condenser sp Water Supply Temp (°F) 82 82

Condenser Water Supply Temp (°F) 79 79 Condenser Water Flow (gal/min) 1045 Compressor Power Draw (kW) 55 116 Cooling Load (tons) 76 117 Chiller Efficiency (kW/ton) 0.73 0.99 CHW Pump Power Draw (kW) 19.9 CW Pump Power Draw (kW) 8.1 7.8 Cooling Tower Fan Power Draw (kW) 7.2 off Total Cooling Load (tons) 192 Plant Efficiency (kW/ton) 1.1

Cude Chiller Plant


Existing Conditions Datalogging

Cude Chiller Plant

0

1

2

3

4

0 50 100 150 200 250

Chill

er P

lant

EIR

(kW

/ton

)

Cooling Load (tons)

Total Plant EIR as f(load)


Existing Conditions Datalogging

62.0

64.0

66.0

68.0

70.0

72.0

74.0

76.0

78.0

80.0

6/15 6/20 6/25 6/30 7/5 7/10 7/15 7/20 7/25

Spac

e Te

mpe

ratu

re (o

F)

Cude Space Temperatures

842 861 301 863 OpOff NW OpOff NW (Cube) 134

710 113 461 OpOff SE 311 100-C 125

106A OpOff NE 116 309 124



125.0

130.0

135.0

140.0

145.0

150.0

155.0

0 4 8 12 16 20 24

Boile

r Loa

d (M

BH)

Hour

Diurnal Boiler Load



Cude Annex AHUs

72.0

73.0

74.0

75.0

76.0

77.0

78.0

0 4 8 12 16 20 24

Retu

rn A

ir Te

mpe

ratu

re(o

F)

Hour

Diurnal Return Temperature AHU-1

72.0

73.0

74.0

75.0

76.0

77.0

78.0

0 4 8 12 16 20 24

Retu

rn A

ir Te

mpe

ratu

re(o

F)Hour

Diurnal Return Temperature AHU-2


Measurement & Verification (M&V)

1. Developed and Reviewed Existing Conditions Report

2. Extensive use of measured data to define baseline performance

3. Lighting Surveys and data logging

4. Natural Gas Utility Data

5. Data from all sources used to calibrate the BEM

6. Identified Key Parameters affecting baseline usage

Baseline Development - Calibrated Building Energy Model


Energy Modeling

• eQUEST Model

• Gas meter and datalogging form calibrated baseline

• ECM Functional Descriptions established ECM parametric runs

• Used as the basis for scope refinement

• Key parameter sensitivity analysis

• Quantify projected energy savings

-2000

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Ther

ms/

Mon

th

Month

Actual vs DOE-2 Predicted Natural Gas ENERGY (Therms)

56

58

60

62

64

66

68

70

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Cude AHU-A Supply Air T


M&V

Instrumentation to be Installed

1. Full DDC BAS for trending of all sequences of operation

2. BTU meters for HW and CHW

3. kW meters for chillers

4. kW meters through VFDs on all pumps and fans

5. Space temperature sensors for all zones

6. CO2 sensors for both Cude/Cude Annex

7. Air flow measuring stations for Cude/Cude Annex

Ensures continuous tracking of system performance and energy savings


Post Installation M&V Activities

• Detailed FPT for all ECMs

• Make adjustments to BEM for “As-Built” conditions

• Update energy and cost savings

• Continuous monitoring of Key Parameters

• Notify USACE of any operating changes affecting performance

• Annual M&V report with recommendations for enhancedperformance


Tinker AFB Option C/A M&V Approach

• All ECMs were consolidated into one large central plant decentralizing project to simplify the M&V process

• Except for a few, individual buildings were not metered prior to the ESPC project

• No metered baseline data except in central steam plants (for natural gas, electricity, chemicals, operations and maintenance)

• Option C was selected for the first 3 years using the central plant usage as the baseline and new gas and electric meters usage as the post-ECM usage

• During the performance period, Honeywell performs the maintenance and tests the equipment performance per spec


Tinker M&V Options

ECM Number Utility

Pre-Installation M&V Option

Used*

Post-Installation M&V Option

Used*(3 years)

Ongoing M&V Option Used*

1, 2, and 3 Natural Gas C C A

1, 2, and 3 Electricity C C A

1, 2, and 3Water and

SewerA A A

*Existing CSP gas meters minus sub-meters and/or building meters ± adjustments= savings. M&V options include A, B, C, and D of the M&V Guidelines:Measurement and Verification for Federal Energy Projects, Version2.2; and thecurrent version of the International Performance Measurement and VerificationProtocol (IPMVP).


Tinker Central Plant Project


Building Energy Model


Summary of eQuest Energy Models

Facility Number Building Description Function Area SF Model Date

Heating Mbh Baseline Post Savings Baseline Post Savings Baseline Post Savings Baseline Post Savings

10 WHSE SUP EQUIP DEP Warehouse 325,884 1/7/2010 6,538 3,734 2,069 1,665 4,906 3,241 1,665 1,993,318 1,950,268 43,049 424 424 011 WHSE SUP EQUIP DEP Warehouse 80,000 1/7/2010 1,602 140 99 41 184 143 41 467,380 440,825 26,555 90 88 216 HAZARD STOR, DEP Storage 47,678 1/7/2010 956 453 276 178 596 418 178 274,530 221,242 53,288 103 107 -518 WHSE SUP EQUIP DEP Warehouse 326,024 1/7/2010 6,528 3,820 2,405 1,415 5,019 3,603 1,415 2,277,844 2,230,023 47,821 458 472 -13` WHSE SUP EQUIP DEP Warehouse 121,403 2,428 0 0 0 0 0 0

101 BE STOR CV FCLTY Storage 115,683 2,314 0 0 0 0 0 0117 FR STN Storage 15,980 4/26/2010 327 1,379 976 403 1,811 1,408 403 296,596 274,960 21,636 77 75 3200 SHOP AND WAREHOUSE Warehouse 112,336 1/7/2010 3,009 4,308 1,075 3,233 5,659 2,426 3,233 1,852,051 1,526,164 325,888 496 505 -8201 LOG FCLTY DEP OPS Admin 114,706 4/27/2010 2,928 6,073 2,966 3,107 7,977 4,871 3,107 3,765,887 2,673,341 1,092,546 583 586 -3202 DPI Admin 12,406 4/27/2010 338 600 493 107 789 682 107 339,943 272,167 67,776 83 84 0208 HTG FCLTY BLDG Production/Process 17,179 0 0 0 0 0 0210 SHP TURBINE DEP Production/Process 11,424 231 620 382 238 814 576 238 0 0214 SHP ENG TST&STOR/D Production/Process 118,168 4/27/2010 4,376 325 96 230 427 198 230 539,519 485,864 53,655 132 136 -4215 FLY TNG CLASSROOM School/Training 31,452 1/7/2010 642 885 301 584 1,163 579 584 502,407 361,180 141,227 119 123 -4220 SHP A/SE STOR FCLT Storage 31,956 1/7/2010 649 2,057 2,000 57 2,702 2,646 57 329,576 327,852 1,724 68 67 1229 SHP SURV EQUIP Production/Process 26,827 1/7/2010 562 3,440 1,194 2,246 4,519 2,273 2,246 562,900 369,804 193,096 157 154 3230 HG MAINT Hangar 537,940 4/23/2010 17,807 1,362 1,586 -224 1,789 2,013 -224 4,007,058 4,014,263 -7,205 1,076 1,078 -1238 SHP A/SE STOR FCLT Storage 4,350 1/7/2010 99 65 21 45 86 41 45 36,476 33,326 3,151 11 11 0240 HG, MAINT DEP Hangar 187,255 4/23/2010 8,645 11,046 8,662 2,383 14,511 12,127 2,383 2,245,740 2,148,468 97,272 390 379 11241 FIRE PUMP HOUSE Storage 1,158 23 48 54 -7 63 69 -7 0 0244 HQ GROUP Hangar 8,427 5/4/2010 364 33 37 -4 43 47 -4 119,046 104,565 14,481 26 27 -1250 PETROL OPS BLDG Hangar 3,962 1/7/2010 202 185 42 142 243 100 142 69,518 42,082 27,436 15 15 -1255 SQ OPS Admin 69,739 1/7/2010 2,466 2,826 1,245 1,581 3,712 2,131 1,581 1,179,139 956,583 222,556 375 379 -3260 TRML, AIR FRT Admin 151,383 1/7/2010 3,428 1,643 913 730 2,159 1,429 730 1,043,089 975,629 67,460 260 261 -1267 FLD TNG FCLTY School/Training 6,426 12/10/2009 131 127 112 15 167 152 15 50,314 47,783 2,531 12 12 0268 TRML, AIR PSGR Hangar 7,520 12/10/2009 321 118 91 27 155 128 27 73,208 60,230 12,979 22 22 0280 HQ WG Hangar 19,427 1/7/2010 1,009 678 686 -7 891 898 -7 452,687 366,509 86,178 104 106 -2282 SQ OPS Admin 66,255 1/7/2010 2,619 1,310 1,024 286 1,721 1,435 286 1,221,282 1,197,773 23,509 222 221 1283 FLT SIMLTR TNG School/Training 12,779 1/7/2010 281 213 97 115 279 164 115 584,384 538,328 46,056 118 119 -1284 DPI Admin 40,505 1/7/2010 2,253 1,749 430 1,319 2,297 978 1,319 879,102 667,458 211,644 196 201 -5289 ACFT COR CON School/Training 38,527 1/7/2010 786 10,945 13,440 -2,495 14,378 16,873 -2,495 649,916 649,915 0 93 93 0296 WHSE SUP&EQUIP BSE Warehouse 58,500 4/27/2010 1,195 879 521 359 1,155 796 359 521,373 488,356 33,017 85 83 1412 WHSE SUP EQUIP DEP Warehouse 162,947 1/7/2010 3,289 2,947 1,730 1,217 3,871 2,654 1,217 854,554 813,170 41,384 233 232 1416 WHSE SUP EQUIP DEP Warehouse 422,856 1/7/2010 8,487 6,050 3,483 2,566 7,947 5,381 2,566 2,113,805 2,035,415 78,389 522 520 3420 BANK Admin 10,000 1/7/2010 365 380 459 -80 499 579 -80 209,444 121,824 87,620 60 51 9460 BASE PERSONNEL OFC Admin 51,656 5/5/2009 1,823 748 525 223 983 760 223 646,679 576,153 70,526 192 200 -8506 MAT PROCESS, DEP Production/Process 409,750 4/30/2010 8,240 2,171 419 1,751 2,852 1,100 1,751 3,572,925 2,941,404 631,522 700 686 14510 WHSE SUP EQUIP DEP Warehouse 367,507 5/5/2010 7,400 4,114 2,154 1,960 5,405 3,444 1,960 2,388,579 2,312,641 75,938 539 539 0Total 77,469 52,064 25,405 101,769 76,365 25,405 36,120,269 32,225,567 3,894,702

229,678 Plant Fuel Consumption33.7% Bldg Heating Req

kWhModeled MMBtu kWCalibrated MMBtu


Baseline Results

-

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

kWh

Electric Energy

Pumps & Aux.

Vent. Fans

Hot Water

HP Supp.

Space Heat

Refrigeration

Heat Reject.

Space Cool

Ext. Usage

Misc. Equip.

Area Lights

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Ther

ms

Steam Energy Hot WaterMisc. Equip.Space Heat


Central Plant Summary Baseline Model

Facility Number

Include in

Baseline In/ Out Building Description Area SFYear Built

Steam Service Hrs/Yr Pipe Total Heating DHW Process

Unins.Pipe Total

Makeup (Leaks,

Blowdown, Vents) Boiler Total

2101 FALSE 0 SHP ACFT GEN PURP 0 1953 8760 50 50 5,928 11 0 5,340 11,2792110 FALSE 0 SHP, REFL VEH 0 1956 8760 729 729 3,200 0 0 193 3,3932122 TRUE 1 ACFT COR CON 324,709 1943 8760 26 26 20,496 0 1,609 234 22,3392136 TRUE 1 HG, MAINT DEP 147,875 1990 8760 594 594 5,515 6 0 156 5,6782210 FALSE 0 SHP ALTNR DRIVE/D 0 1975 4500 189 189 2,241 11 359 16 2,6282211 FALSE 0 SHP ACFT & ENG DEP 0 1989 8760 7 7 270 0 1,547 16 1,8332212 TRUE 1 HTG FCLTY BLDG 9,000 1990 4380 144 144 270 6 0 8 284 0 33,936 33,9362280 TRUE 1 ACFT COR CON 133,280 1979 8760 109 109 93,651 11 203 38 93,9033001 TRUE 1 SHP JET ENG I/MNT 2,734,551 1943 8760 288 288 29,422 858 111,576 5,340 147,195

3001 Plant TRUE 1 HTG FCLTY BLDG 100,000 1943 8760 - 0 3,000 2 0 0 3,002 295,281 158,768 454,0503102 TRUE 1 HG, MAINT DEP 181,027 1943 8760 146 146 7,782 6 0 156 7,9443105 TRUE 1 HG, MAINT DEP 66,395 1942 8760 13 13 1,037 6 0 37 1,0813108 FALSE 0 SHP ACFT & ENG DEP 0 1943 8760 23 23 3,798 4 0 1,901 5,7043113 TRUE 1 LAB, PME 30,940 1943 8760 1,838 1,838 431 4 0 19 4543125 TRUE 1 LAB, Q/C DEP 3,474 1988 8760 125 125 83 0 35 0 1193220 TRUE 1 INTEGR SPT FCLTY 136,159 1974 8760 388 388 6,378 9 0 28 6,4143221 TRUE 1 SHP JET ENG I/MNT 152,061 1988 8760 1,901 1,901 19,177 9 9,099 28 28,3123225 TRUE 1 ACFT COR CON 46,500 1999 8760 221 221 46,361 6 1,664 39 48,0703228 TRUE 1 ACFT COR CON 54,510 2003 8760 1,000 1,000 65,061 0 1,664 39 66,7643234 TRUE 1 TST CELL 63,160 1974 8760 748 748 6,796 4 0 39 6,8393703 TRUE 1 SHP ENG TST&STOR/D 81,064 1954 8760 26 26 2,540 0 0 23 2,5633705 TRUE 1 SHP ACFT GEN PURP 424,247 1955 8760 130 130 6,539 0 219 37 6,7953707 TRUE 1 SHP, AVIONICS 85,250 1991 8760 532 532 2,038 4 291 9 2,3433708 TRUE 1 SHP, AVIONICS 70,000 1993 8760 41 41 1,140 11 0 24 1,175

Plant Losses MMBtu/YrDistribution Losses MMBtu/Yr Building Losses MMBtu/Yr


Central Plant Summary Post-ECM Model

Facility Number

Steam from

Plant? In/ Out Building Description Area SFYear Built

Steam Service Hrs/Yr Pipe Total

Heating Loads

DHW Loads

Process Loads

Unins Pipe Total

Makeup (Leaks,

Blowdown, Vents) Boiler Total

2101 FALSE 0 SHP ACFT GEN PURP 0 1953 8760 0 0 5,928 11 0 5,340 11,2792110 FALSE 0 SHP, REFL VEH 0 1956 8760 0 0 3,200 0 0 193 3,3932122 FALSE 0 ACFT COR CON 0 1943 8760 0 0 12,193 71 1,893 0 14,1572136 FALSE 0 HG, MAINT DEP 0 1990 8760 0 0 4,374 6 0 0 4,3802210 FALSE 0 SHP ALTNR DRIVE/D 0 1975 4500 0 0 2,241 11 359 16 2,6282211 FALSE 0 SHP ACFT & ENG DEP 0 1989 8760 0 0 270 0 1,547 16 1,8332212 FALSE 0 HTG FCLTY BLDG 0 1990 4380 0 0 270 6 0 0 2762280 TRUE 1 ACFT COR CON 133,280 1979 8760 109 109 93,651 11 203 0 93,8653001 TRUE 1 SHP JET ENG I/MNT 2,634,551 1943 8760 288 288 29,422 858 111,576 0 141,855

3001 Plant TRUE 1 HTG FCLTY BLDG 100,000 1943 8760 - 0 3,000 2 1,866 0 4,868 81,528 94,627 181,0233102 TRUE 1 HG, MAINT DEP 181,027 1943 8760 146 146 7,782 6 0 0 7,7883105 TRUE 1 HG, MAINT DEP 66,395 1942 8760 13 13 1,037 6 0 0 1,0433108 FALSE 0 SHP ACFT & ENG DEP 0 1943 8760 0 0 3,798 4 0 1,901 5,7043113 TRUE 1 LAB, PME 30,940 1943 8760 1,838 1,838 431 4 0 0 4353125 TRUE 1 LAB, Q/C DEP 3,474 1988 8760 125 125 83 1 35 0 1203220 TRUE 1 INTEGR SPT FCLTY 136,159 1974 8760 388 388 6,378 9 0 0 6,3863221 TRUE 1 SHP JET ENG I/MNT 152,061 1988 8760 1,901 1,901 19,177 9 9,099 0 28,2853225 FALSE 0 ACFT COR CON 0 1999 8760 0 0 47,077 6 1,958 0 49,0413228 FALSE 0 ACFT COR CON 0 2003 8760 0 0 65,529 11 1,958 0 67,4983234 FALSE 0 TST CELL 0 1974 8760 0 0 5,135 4 0 0 5,1393703 FALSE 0 SHP ENG TST&STOR/D 0 1954 8760 0 0 1,329 4 0 0 1,3333705 FALSE 0 SHP ACFT GEN PURP 0 1955 8760 0 0 3,284 11 219 0 3,5143707 FALSE 0 SHP, AVIONICS 0 1991 8760 0 0 1,690 4 364 0 2,0583708 FALSE 0 SHP, AVIONICS 0 1993 8760 0 0 616 11 0 0 627

Distribution Losses MMBtu/Yr Building Losses MMBtu/Yr Plant Losses MMBtu/Yr


So What Does it All Mean?

• All options have strengths and weaknesses

• Right choice need to be determine based on application

• Combined approach may increase accuracy of result

• All options require detailed understanding of baseline performance

• All options require comprehensive Cx process after ECM installation


Contact Information

Mark “Dusty” Wheeler: [email protected]

Jeff Stringfield: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

femp m&v methods: no silver bullet · • captures synergy between multiple ecms – tinker has...

Documents