Apartment Inspection Report Template by pxg21373

VIEWS: 134 PAGES: 62

Apartment Inspection Report Template document sample

More Info
									Multifamily (MF) Combined Heat and
 Power (CHP) Level 2 Analysis Tool



                   Piljae Im
         Oak Ridge National Laboratory




                                         1
Webinar Outline
•   Introduction
•   HUD CHP Level 1 Screening Tool
•   MF CHP Level 2 Analysis Tool
•   Quick Starts
•   MF Building Template
•   Example Use of the Tool



                                     2
Introduction: Background
• Promoting the use of combined heat and power (CHP) (cogeneration) in
  multifamily housing is an initiative of the HUD Energy Action Plan.
• To help implement it, beginning in 2003 the Department of Housing and
  Urban Development (HUD) and the Department of Energy/Oak Ridge
  National Laboratory (DOE/ORNL), executed Interagency Agreements
  (IAA) to create feasibility screening software (i.e., Level 1 Screening
  Tool).
• ORNL created, expanded, and validated a Level 1 preliminary screening
  tool that enables the owners of multifamily housing to consider the
  feasibility (cost, savings and paybacks) for installing CHP.
• In May 2010 ORNL created for HUD a Level 2 Multifamily CHP
  Screening Tool (MFCHP) that adapts the BCHP tool used for the Federal
  Energy Management Program (FEMP) for use on multifamily buildings.

                                                                       3
Before the Level 2 Tool
HUD CHP Level 1 Screening Tool
• Level 1 screening tool: Simplified process
  to get a “go/no-go” answer as to whether or
  not a building owner or operator should look
  more carefully into CHP and perhaps enlist
  some engineering support in conducting a
  site inspection and conducting a rigorous
  economic analysis (i.e., Level 2 analysis).
• This tool is “non-technical” and is directed
  specifically toward building owners and
  operators.
• Users of the HUD CHP Screening Tool need
  to type in data from their monthly power and
  fuel bills for one consecutive 12 month
  period as well as some utility rate
                                                 4
  information.
Before the Level 2 Tool
HUD CHP Level 1 Screening Tool
• The program uses these data to estimate fuel use for space and water
  heating and power consumption for air conditioning. The utility costs and
  rate information are combined with correlations for costs of generator
  equipment, installation, and maintenance to estimate simple payback
  periods for a hypothetical CHP system relative to the non-CHP system
  reflected in the utility data.
• Sites with low estimated simple payback periods are encouraged to look
  more seriously into CHP for both its energy savings and cost savings
  opportunities. Sites with high simple payback periods can save the time
  and effort of examining CHP in detail with assurances that they are not
  missing a great opportunity.


                                                                        5
Needs for the Level 2 Tool
• Once the building owner decided to go for further analysis for CHP
  systems after level 1 analysis, a more detailed level 2 analysis will be
  needed.
• A Level 2 analysis is based on detailed site examination, utility usage and
  heat consumption, and it can cost $5,000-10,000 in engineering firm
  charges.
• To provide a Level 2 tool for owners and for analysts that can facilitate
  the efforts
• The MF CHP Level 2 Analysis Tool provides a building energy
  simulation with a full hourly level analysis and cost analysis via simple
  easy-to-use user interfaces.
• This new tool provides a “public” option where anyone can have all the
  information on how it works (can compare results across practitioners
  more easily, and public entities like HUD can require more public results
  be provided on proposed projects).                                        6
MF CHP Level 2 Analysis Tool
• The MF CHP Level 2 Analysis Tool was developed under a
  collaborative effort between the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
  Development and the Department of Energy/Oak Ridge National
  Laboratory as a tool to evaluate the combined cooling, heating and power
  in multifamily housing.
• The MF CHP Level 2 Analysis Tool is a computer program for assessing
  the economic potential of combined cooling, heating, and power (CHP)
  systems for multifamily buildings.
• The original program, the BCHP Screening Tool, which is the similar
  program for commercial buildings (but no MF building type), was
  developed under Department of Energy funding by a collaborative effort
  between GARD Analytics of Park Ridge, Illinois and Oak Ridge National
  Laboratory in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

                                                                      7
MF CHP Level 2 Analysis Tool
• The MF CHP Level 2 Analysis Tool is structured to perform parametric
  analyses between a baseline building, typically a conventional building
  without a CHP system, and up to 25 alternative scenarios with varying
  selections for building mechanical systems and operating schedules.
• The MF CHP Level 2 Analysis Tool consists of the executable program,
  databases for HVAC equipment, electric generators, thermal storage
  systems, prototypical multifamily buildings, and climate data. The
  program also includes DOE-2.1e to calculate heating, cooling, and
  electrical loads.




                                                                      8
MF CHP Level 2 Analysis Tool


           Input through the MF      Output in the MF
                 CHP Tool               CHP Tool



                           DRM Template



           DOE-2 BDL File
           (DOE-2 Input File)

                                    DOE-2 Simulation
                                        Output
            DOE-2 Run for
            System Sizing



           Output for System        DOE-2 Simulation
                Sizing                   Run

                                                        9
Quick Starts
• The tool and User Manual can be downloaded:
       http://eber.ed.ornl.gov/MF_CHP/
• Installation procedure: See the user manual




                                                10
   Quick Starts   Scenario A:   Scenario B:
                   Base Case    Alternative
Input




Results




 Help




                                              11
Quick Starts           Table tab:
                       Input and
                         Result




          Graph tab:     Schematic tab:    Building
           Result           Result        Description:
                                            Result
                                                         12
Add a Scenario   Insert a column (three options)




                                                   13
Add a Scenario: Copy of Current Column
                                  Scenario C added




                                                     14
Three Types of Input Method
• Direct input
• Drop down menu
• Selection from a separate window




                                     15
Drop Down Menu (ex: Story Height)




                                    16
Drop Down Menu (ex: Story Height)




                                    17
Select from a Separate Window (ex: Location)




                                               18
Select from a Separate Window (ex: Location)




                                               19
Inputs: Table Tab

  – Two categories for the inputs: Mandatory & Additional Inputs
  – For a quick run, only the mandatory inputs needs to be entered
  – For more detailed controls, the additional inputs needs to be entered.




                                                                        20
Mandatory Inputs




                   21
Result
Overview of the BCHP Screening Tool
  – Annual Gas and Electricity
    Consumption & Costs
  – Equipment Sizes & Costs
  – System Life Cycle Costs
  – Parametric Analysis of Up to 26
    Systems
  – Simple Payback Relative To
                                                                                            Building Loads: Dec-15
                                                         3,500,000                                                                  1200



    Baseline System                                      3,000,000
                                                                                                                                    1000




                                                                                                                                           Electricity Demand (kW)
  – Hourly Load Profiles for Selected
                                                         2,500,000
                                                                                                                                    800




                                        Load (Btu / h)
                                                         2,000,000


    Dates                                                1,500,000        Cooling Load
                                                                          Heating Load
                                                                                                                                    600


                                                                                                                                    400
                                                         1,000,000        Electrical Load


                                                                                                                                    200
                                                          500,000


                                                                 0                                                                   0
                                                               12:00 AM         6:00 AM             12:00 PM         6:00 PM   12:00 AM
                                                                                                     Time




                                                                                                                                22
Results: Table Tab




                     23
Graph Tab
  – The graphs, also called charts, can be monthly results or
    annual results from the simulation
  – The numbers shown on the graph are taken from the grid
    on the Table tab.




                                                            24
Graph Tab




            25
Schematic Tab
  – Provide a good summary of the energy (elec. and gas)
    flow based on the selected case.
  – Provide the summary of calculated project cost,
    operating cost, annual savings and simple payback.




                                                           26
Schematic Tab




                27
Building Description




                       28
MF Building Template
                        BCHP
Overview of the not need Screening Tool
  – Thermal Model: Does
    to be the same with the actual
    building shape
  – Six zones
  – Perimeter zone and core zone for
    each zone                          Zone            Space Type   Building   Window/Wall
                                                                    Fraction   Ratio (%)
  – Two space types: Corner                                         (%)
    apartment and Inside apartment     North East      Corner       5          21
                                                       Apartments
                                       North Central   Inside       40         23
                                                       Apartments
                                       North West      Corner       5          21
                                                       Apartments
                                       South East      Corner       5          21
                                                       Apartments
                                       South Central   Inside       40         23
                                                       Apartments
                                       South West      Corner       5          21
                                                       Apartments               29
MF Building Defaults
  – Default values for the “thermal characteristics” of each type of zone
Overview of the BCHP Screening Tool
    end use Six zones
 Use                                 Area/Person         Lighting     Plug Load        Person Heat Gain      Sensible Person Heat
                                     (sqft/person)       (W/sqft)      (W/sqft)         (Btuh/person)           (Btuh/person)
 High Rise Multifamily Housing            424               0.8           1                  500                      250


 Use                             Heat Set Point      Cool Set Point     Max Humidity          Min Humidity          Ouside air
                                      (F)                 (F)             (%RH)                  (%RH)            (CFM/person)
 High Rise Multifamily                70                  75                100                    0                   15
 Housing



  – Resources:
  1) ASHRAE Standard 90.1 - 2004,
  2) ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals,
  3) "Estimating Water Heating and Aggregate Electricity Loads in Multifamily Buildings," R. L.
     Ritschard, Y. J. Huang, J. M. Fay, ASHRAE Transactions 1990, Volume 96, Pt. 1, pp. 796-802
  4) “Impact Evaluation of the Energy Retrofits Installed in the Margolis High-Rise Apartment Building,
     Chelsea Housing Authority” M.M. Abraham, H.A. McLain. And J.M. MacDonald, Technical report
     ORNL/CON-413, 1995.
  5) and professional judgment.
                                                                                                                             30
Example: CHP Analysis Study
•   Multifamily Building
•   New Bedford, MA
•   7 story
•   99 one-bedroom apartments
•   82,900 sq.ft. heated floor space
•   No cooling system
•   Utility rate
    – Average electricity: $0.123/kWh
    – Average natural gas: $1.45/Therm
                                         31
Monthly Utility Bills (Before CHP System)

              Month          Elec.                          N.G.
                      kWh            $             Therm           $
     January             43,680           $4,805       3,822           $5,557
     February            43,520           $4,787       7,976       $11,597
     March               39,200           $4,900       5,600           $8,142
     April               42,080           $5,260       3,959           $5,756
     May                 39,680           $4,960       2,904           $4,222
     June                43,680           $5,460       1,646           $2,393
     July                47,360           $5,920           964         $1,401
     August              56,160           $7,020           674          $979
     September           54,240           $6,780           771         $1,121
     October             46,240           $5,780       1,202           $1,747
     November            44,160           $5,520       2,232           $3,245
     December            39,360           $4,920       5,314           $7,726
     Total              539,360          $66,112      37,064       $53,886
     Average Cost                          $0.12                        $1.45


                                                                                32
Preliminary Screening (Level 1)




                                  33
Preliminary Screening (Level 1)




                                  34
Preliminary Screening (Level 1)




                                  35
Preliminary Screening (Level 1)




                                  36
Preliminary Screening (Level 1)




                                  37
Example: Level 2 Analysis - Procedure
•   Base case: Initial Run (As-built)
•   Base case: Calibration
•   Apply generator(s) for the base case building
•   Change the generator options
•   Find the optimal scenario




                                                    38
Example: Level 2 Analysis
• Base case: Initial Run
   –   At least complete the Mandatory Inputs
   –   Use available data/information
   –   Use the best guess for unknown data/or
   –   Leave default values




                                                39
 Building Location




   Building Size

HVAC (No cooling)




Average Utility Rate

            40
Result Screen (Annual
Consumption)
1. Total Annual Elec.       Annual Elec. Use
    Use Simulated vs.
    Utility Bills:
    524,379 kWh
    vs.539,360 kWh
    (2.8% diff.)
2. Total Annual N.G.
    Simulated vs. Utility
    Bills:
    59,175 Therms vs.       Annual N.G. Use
    37,064 Therms
    (59.7 % diff.)
                                      41
                Utility Bills                                      Monthly Elec. Use
       Month         Elec.                        N.G.

               kWh            $           Therm           $

January         43,680        $4,805        3,822         $5,557

February        43,520        $4,787        7,976        $11,597

March           39,200        $4,900        5,600         $8,142

April           42,080        $5,260        3,959         $5,756

May             39,680        $4,960        2,904         $4,222

June            43,680        $5,460        1,646         $2,393
                                                                   Monthly N.G. Use
July            47,360        $5,920          964         $1,401

August          56,160        $7,020          674          $979

September       54,240        $6,780          771         $1,121

October         46,240        $5,780        1,202         $1,747

November        44,160        $5,520        2,232         $3,245

December        39,360        $4,920        5,314         $7,726

Total          539,360       $66,112       37,064        $53,886

Average Cost                      $0.12                    $1.45                       42
• Discrepancy between the initial simulation and
  Utility Bills
  – Default assumption (average MF characteristics) vs.
    actual building characteristics
  – Unknown input parameters (e.g., windows-to-wall ratio,
    boiler & chiller size, operation schedule, etc.)
  – Equipment performance data
  – Actual weather vs. typical weather file


       Need Calibration !

                                                         43
• Base Case: Calibration with Utility
  Bills/Measure data
  – Tune the initial simulation to be matched with the utility
    bills (i.e., actual use)
  – Annual total
  – Monthly total
  – Useful input parameters for calibration
     •   SHW use (Btu/h-person)
     •   Infiltration rate (ACH)
     •   Lighting and Equipment load (W/sq.ft)
     •   Building insulation value (R-value)
     •   Type of windows (if unknown)
     •   Cooling/Heating room set temperatures
     •   Others                                              44
• Input Changed

1.Too low heating energy
: Change air infiltration
rate from 0.5 to 0.75
2.Too high SWH use:
Change service water
heating density (Btu/h-
person) from 2500 to 500




                            45
Result Screen (Annual
Consumption)

1.Total Annual Elec. Use
Simulated vs. Utility
Bills:
526,320 kWh vs.
539,360 kWh
 2. Total Annual N.G.
Simulated vs. Utility
Bills:
36,137 Therms vs.
37,064 Therms
(2.5% diff.)               46
Add a Generator
  – The MF building has a 75 kW reciprocating engine.
  – Change the corresponding default values to be the same
    with the base case scenario




                                                             47
Add a Generator
  – The MF building has a 75 kW reciprocating engine.
  – Change the corresponding default values to be the same
    with the base case scenario
  – Select a reciprocating engine (5.f. Generator)




                                                             48
Add a Generator
  – The MF building has a 75 kW reciprocating engine.
  – Change the corresponding default values to be the same
    with the base case scenario
  – Select a reciprocating engine (5.f. Generator)
  – Input 75 kW (6.c. Generator Sizing (direct input))




                                                             49
Add a Generator
  – The MF building has a 75 kW reciprocating engine.
  – Change the corresponding default values to be the same
    with the base case scenario
  – Select a reciprocating engine (5.f. Generator)
  – Input 75 kW (6.c. Generator Sizing (direct input))
  – Check with III.2. Generator Operation : Thermal demand
    Option for summer and winter




                                                        50
Check Result

 No Changes in Elec. Use

 Reduced Space Heating

 Reduced SWH

 N.G Use for Generator




 Total N.G. Use
                                                     51
                           Elec. Onsite Generation
Select Schematic tab




                       52
Select Case B




                53
                                System
           Cost Analysis
                                Configuration




Heat Recovery              Space and SW
                                                54
Summary                    Heating
Double Click




               55
56
Click




        57
58
Double Click




               59
60
Next Step: Analyze and find the optimal generator
           and the schedule for the building
  Input parameters can be changed for the analysis
  – Size of generator
      • 30, 45, 70, 100 kW…
  – Number of generators
  – Type of generator
      • Reciprocating, Gas turbine, Micro turbine
  – Generator operating option
      •   Thermal demand
      •   Electric demand
      •   Greater/lesser demand
      •   Maximum output
  – Heat used for space heating/service water heating
                                                        61
           Thanks!

Question/feedback/comment

            Piljae Im
  Oak Ridge National Laboratory
         imp1@ornl.gov
          865-241-2312


                                  62

								
To top