|
|
Developed and
Produced by JM Jadu Corp
West Palm Beach,
FL
2010 Florida Building Code, Energy Conservation
Document Number JM-2010-01
This Page is intentionally blank
Contents
1.2 Special
Terms and Definitions
1.3 Vendor
Certification Statement
2.1 Alternative
Compliance Software Program Tests
2.2 Challenging
Compliance Software
3.1.1 Availability to Commission
3.1.3 Compliance
Software Vendor Demonstration..
4.1 User’s
Manual and Help System Requirements
5.0 Required
Compliance Software Capabilities
5.1 Residential
Energy Conservation
6.0 Residential
Energy Performance Testing
6.1 Residential
Accuracy Test cases
7.0 COMMERCIAL
ENERGY CONSERVATION
7.3 Content
and Format of Code Reports
1.0
Overview of Process
This
Manual explains the requirements for approval of Energy Simulated Calculation
Tool (also referred to as compliance software programs) used to demonstrate
compliance with the 2010
Florida Building Code, Energy Conservation “the Energy Code” for
residential and nonresidential building designs. Energy Simulated Tool is
defined as an approved software program or calculation-based methodology that
projects the annual energy use of a building. The code requirement for
residential compliance is specified in Section 405 and Normative Appendix B of
the Energy Code. The nonresidential
code requirements are specified in Section 506 and Normative Appendix B of the Energy
Code. Compliance software programs are used in the performance approach to
demonstrate compliance with the Energy Code for buildings design. The Florida Building
Commission “the Commission” develops and implements the Energy Code.
The
purpose of this Technical Assistance Manual is to outline the Florida Building
Commission approval process for compliance software and to define the procedures,
minimum requirement and assumptions against which compliance software should be
evaluated. The performance compliance requirements and procedures apply to both
residential and nonresidential buildings. The procedures and processes described
in this manual are advisory in nature and an alternative compliance procedure
to that described in this document is acceptable as long as such alternative is
approved by the Commission and designed to preserve the integrity of the
performance compliance process.
The
reference procedures and method described in this manual establish the basis of
comparison for all compliance software. The approval process as outlined in
this manual ensures that a minimum level of energy conservation is achieved
regardless of the compliance software used. This is accomplished by
a)
having candidate compliance software pass a
series of industry standard tests,
b)
identifying minimum input which may be used
to generate the standard reference design,
c)
defining standard reports output
requirements, and
d)
compliance software vendor-certification to
the requirements in this manual and the Energy Code.
1.2 Special Terms and
Definitions
There
are a few special terms that are used in this Manual. The Commission approves
the use of compliance software for compliance. Commission approval means that
the Commission accepts the applicant's certification that compliance software
meets the requirements of the Energy Code and this Manual. The proponent of
candidate compliance software is referred to as a Vendor. In this manual the
term "Energy Code" means the 2010 Florida Building Code, Energy
Conservation. The term "compliance" means that a building design in
an application for a building permit complies with the "Energy Code"
and meets the requirements described for building designs Standards.
1.3 Vendor
Certification Statement
The
vendor shall follow the procedure described in this document to certify to the
Commission that the compliance software meets the requirements of the Energy
Code and the criteria in this document for:
·
Accuracy and reliability when compared to
the standard tests; and
·
Ability to generate minimum code required standard
reference design from user inputs; and
·
Suitability in terms of the accurate calculation
of the correct energy budget, the printing of standardized forms, and
·
The documentation on how the program
demonstrates compliance.
1.4 Approval
Requirements
For
the vendor, the process of receiving approval of compliance software includes
preparing an application, working with the Commission staff to answer questions
from either Commission staff or the public, and providing any necessary
additional information regarding the application. The application includes the
four basic elements outlined below. The Commission staff evaluates the
compliance software based on the completeness of the application and its
overall responsiveness to staff and public comment.
The
basic requirements for approval include:
1) Minimum
Capabilities:
Compliance software shall have all the
required capabilities identified in the 2010 Florida Building Code, Energy Conservation, specifically criteria
found in Normative Appendix B, Tables B-1.1.2 for Residential and B-2.2 for Commercial.
2) Accuracy
of Simulation:
The compliance software shall demonstrate
acceptable levels of accuracy by performing and passing the required
certification tests discussed in Chapters 6 (residential) and 7 (commercial) as
modified by the vendor to address Florida’s specific climate conditions.
The compliance software vendor performs the
certification tests in Chapters 6 and 7. The vendor conducts the specified
tests, evaluates the results and certifies in writing that the compliance
software passes the tests. The Commission may perform spot checks and may
require additional tests to verify that the proposed compliance software is
appropriate for compliance purposes.
When energy analysis techniques are
compared, two potential sources of discrepancies are the differences in user
interpretation when entering the building specifications, and the differences
in the compliance software's algorithms (mathematical models) for estimating
energy use.
The approval tests minimize differences in
interpretation by providing explicit detailed descriptions of the test
buildings that must be analyzed. For differences in the compliance software's
algorithms, the Commission allows algorithms that yield equivalent results.
3) User’s
Manual or Help System:
The vendor shall develop a user’s manual
and/or help system that meets the specifications in Chapter 4.
4) Program
support and Reporting Forms:
The vendor shall provide ongoing user and
enforcement agency support as described in Chapter 3.1.3.
The Commission may hold one or more
workshops with public review and vendor participation to allow for public
review of the vendor's application. Such workshops may identify problems or
discrepancies that may necessitate revisions to the application.
Commission approval of compliance software
programs is intended to provide flexibility in complying with the Energy Code.
However, in achieving this flexibility, the compliance software shall not
degrade the Codes or evade the intent of the Energy Code to achieve a
particular level of energy conservation. The vendor has the burden of proof to
demonstrate the accuracy and reliability of the compliance software relative to
the tests method and to demonstrate the conformance of the compliance software
to the requirements of this manual and the Energy Code.
In addition to explicit and technical
criteria, Commission approval may also depend upon the Commission's evaluation
of:
·
Enforceability in terms of reasonably
simple, reliable, and rapid methods of verifying compliance and,
·
application of energy conservation features
modeled by the compliance software and,
·
the inputs used to characterize those
features by the compliance software users and,
·
dependability of the installation and
energy savings of features modeled by the compliance software.
1.5 Optional
capabilities
Optional
capabilities are a special class of capabilities and user inputs that are not
required of all compliance software but may be included at the option of the
vendor. Additional optional capabilities may be proposed by vendors. For both
cases, the Commission reserves the right to disapprove the certification
application for a specific optional capability if there is not compelling
evidence presented in the public process showing that the optional capability
is sufficiently accurate and suitable to be used for compliance with the Energy
Code. In addition, energy conservation measures modeled by optional
capabilities shall be capable of being verified by local enforcement agencies.
The
Commission's purpose in approving additional optional capabilities is to
accommodate new technologies which have only begun to penetrate the market and
new modeling algorithms. Optional capabilities which evaluate measures already
in relatively common use shall have their standard design for the measure based
on the common construction practice for that measure since common practice is
the inherent basis of the Energy Code for all measures not explicitly
regulated. For example, the Commission has no interest in an optional
capability that evaluates the energy impacts of dirt on windows unless a new
technology produces substantial changes in this aspect of a building relative
to buildings without this technology. The burden of proof that an optional
capability should be approved lies with the vendor.
1.5 Application
Checklist
The
following items shall be included in an application package submitted to the
Commission for compliance software approval:
Compliance Software Vendor Certification Letter
The
Vendor shall submit a signed compliance software letter, certifying that the
compliance software meets the Energy Code requirements, including accuracy and reliability
when used to demonstrate compliance with the Energy Codes.
Computer Runs
Copies
of the computer runs specified on machine readable form as specified in
Chapters 6 and 7 to enable verification of the runs.
Compliance Supplement and User's Manual
The
vendor shall submit a complete copy of their compliance software user's manual,
including material on the use of the compliance software for compliance
purposes.
Copy
of the Compliance Software and Weather Data. A machine readable copy of the
compliance software for random verification of compliance analyses. The vendor
shall provide weather data for all
climate zones.
Two
copies of the full application package should be sent to:
Florida
Building Commission
Building
Code and Standards Office
2555
Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tallahassee,
Florida 32399-2100
Following
submittal of the application package, the Commission may request additional information.
This additional information is often necessary due to complexity of compliance
software. Failure to provide such information in a timely manner may be
considered cause for rejection or disapproval of the application. A resubmittal
of a rejected or disapproved application will be considered a new application.
1.6 Types of Approval
This
Manual addresses two types of compliance software approval: full program
approval (including amendments to programs that require approval), and approval
of new program features and updates.
If
compliance software vendors make a change to their programs as described below,
the Commission shall again approve the program. Additionally, any compliance
software program change that affects the energy use calculations for
compliance, the modeling capabilities for compliance, the format and/or content
of compliance forms, or any other change which would affect a building's
compliance with the Energy Conservation Codes requires another approval.
Changes
that do not affect compliance with the Codes such as program changes to the
user interface may follow a simplified or streamlined procedure for approval of
the changes. To comply with this simpler process, the compliance software
vendor shall certify to the Commission that the new program features do not
affect the results of any calculations performed by the program, shall notify
the Commission of all changes and shall provide the Commission with one updated
copy of the program and User's Manual. Examples of such changes include fixing
logical errors in computer program code that do not affect the numerical
results (bug fixes) and new interfaces.
Full Approval & Re-Approval of
Compliance Software
The
Commission requires program approval when a candidate compliance software has
never been previously approved by the Commission, when the compliance software
vendor makes changes to the program algorithms, or when any other change occurs
that in any way affects the compliance results. The Commission may also require
that all currently approved compliance software be approved again whenever
substantial revisions are made to the Codes or to the Commission's approval
process.
The
Commission may change the approval process and require that all compliance
software be approved again for several reasons including:
a) If
the Energy Code undergo a major revision that alters the basic compliance
process, then compliance software would have to be updated and re-approved for
the new process.
b) If
new analytic capabilities come into widespread use, then the Commission may
declare them to be required compliance software capabilities, and may require
all compliance software vendors to update their programs and submit them for
re-approval.
When
re-approval is necessary, the Commission will notify all compliance software
vendors of the timetable for renewal.
A
compliance software program must be re-approved for new optional modeling
capabilities when the vendor adds those optional capabilities. The vendor shall
provide a list of the new optional capabilities and demonstrate that those
capabilities are documented in revised user documentation. This may not include
computer runs previously submitted.
Re-approval
shall be accompanied by a cover letter explaining the type of amendment(s)
requested and copies of other documents as necessary. The timetable for
re-approval of amendments is the same as for full program approval.
Approval of New Features & Updates
Certain
types of changes may be made to previously approved compliance software through
a streamlined procedure, including implementing a computer program on a new
machine and changing executable program code that does not affect the results.
Modifications
to previously approved compliance software including new features and program
updates are subject to the following procedure:
• The
compliance software vendor shall prepare an addendum to the Compliance
Supplement or compliance software user's manual, when new features or updates
affect the outcome or energy conservation measure choices, describing the
change to the compliance software. If the change is a new modeling capability,
the addendum shall include instructions for using the new modeling capability
for compliance.
• The
compliance software vendor shall notify the Commission by letter of the change
that has been made to the compliance software. The letter shall describe in
detail the nature of the change and why it is being made. The notification
letter shall be included in the revised Compliance Supplement or compliance
software user's manual.
• The
compliance software vendor shall provide the Commission with an updated copy of
the compliance software and include any new forms created by the compliance
software (or modifications in the Code reports).
• The
Commission may approve the change, request additional information, refuse to
approve the change or require that the compliance software vendor make specific
changes to either the Compliance Supplement addendum or the compliance software
program itself.
With
Commission approval, the vendor may issue new copies of the compliance software
with the Compliance Supplement addendum and notify compliance software users
and building officials.
2.1 Alternative
Compliance Software Program Tests
Chapters
6 and 7 of this Manual identify a series
of tests to verify that compliance software accurately demonstrate compliance.
A compliance software vendor may propose alternate tests when the vendor
believes that one or more of the standard tests are not appropriate for the
compliance software. The Commission will evaluate the alternate tests and will
accept them if they are found to reflect acceptable engineering techniques.
If
alternate tests are accepted by the Commission, the tests will be available for
use by all compliance software programs. An alternate test will coexist with
the standard test presented in this Manual until the Manual is revised. When a
new version of this Manual is produced, the alternative test may be substituted
for the current test or may continue to coexist with the original test.
2.2 Challenging
Compliance Software
Any challenge to software approval by the
Florida Building Commission shall be in accordance with Chapter 120, Florida Statutes.
3.1 Vendor
Requirements
Each
compliance software vendor shall meet all of the following requirements as part
of the compliance software approval process and as part of an ongoing
commitment to users of their particular program.
3.1.1 Availability to Commission
All
compliance software vendors are required to submit at least one fully working
program version of the compliance software to the Commission’s staff, and shall
provide the Commission’s Technical Advisory Committee and interest groups access
to the software for review during the approval process.
3.1.2 User Support
Compliance
software vendors shall offer support to their users with regard to the use of
the compliance software for compliance purposes.
3.1.3 Compliance Software Vendor Demonstration
The
Commission may request compliance software vendors to physically demonstrate
their program's capabilities. One or more demonstrations may be requested
before approval is granted.
4.1 User’s Manual and
Help System Requirements
The Compliance Software User’s Manual and
Help System shall be written in a clear and concise manner.
Each
compliance software vendor is required to publish a compliance supplement or an
independent user's manual which explains how to use the compliance software for
compliance with the Energy Code. The manual may also exist in electronic form,
either on the user’s workstation or web enabled. The document shall deal with
compliance procedures and user inputs to the compliance software. Both the
Compliance Software and the User’s Manual and Help System shall positively
contribute to the user's ability and desire to comply with the Energy Code and
to the enforcement agency's ease of verifying compliance. The Compliance
Software User’s Manual and Help System should minimize or reduce confusion and
clarify compliance applications. The Commission may reject a compliance
software certification submittal whose
Compliance Software User’s Manual and Help System does not serve or meet these
objectives.
The
suggested format is:
Overview
The
Compliance Software User’s Manual and Help System shall:
• Describe
the specific procedures for using the compliance software for compliance with
the Energy Code.
• Provide
instructions for preparing the building input, using the correct inputs, and
using each of the approved optional capabilities (or exceptional methods) for
which the compliance software is approved.
• Explain
how to generate the Code compliance reports and related compliance
documentation. A sample of properly prepared compliance documentation shall be
included as part of the manual or help system.
The
Compliance Software User’s Manual and Help System serve two major purposes:
• It
helps building permit applicants and others use the compliance software
correctly, and guide them in preparing complete compliance documentation to
accompany building permit applications.
• It
helps enforcement agency staff plan check permit applications for compliance
with the Energy Code.
The
Compliance Software User’s Manual and Help System serves as a crucial performance
method reference in resolving questions concerning specific compliance software
program attributes, approved modeling capabilities and procedures in the
context of both compliance and enforcement.
The
Compliance Software User’s Manual and Help System shall contain a chapter or
section on how to model buildings for compliance and how to prepare a building
input file for a compliance run. The following are examples of topics to
include:
• What surfaces to model (exterior,
interior floors, etc.);
• How to enter data about these surfaces;
• How to model exterior shading (fins,
overhangs, etc.);
• Appropriate zoning for compliance
modeling;
• Selection of correct occupancy types;
• How to model similar systems;
• How
to model buildings or portions of a building with no heating or cooling;
• Requirements
for written justification and additional documentation on the plans and in the
specifications for exceptional items;
• Program modeling limitations; and
• This Manual as required reading.
All
program capabilities should be described in sufficient detail to eliminate
possible confusion as to their appropriate use. While references to the
compliance software's regular users manual are acceptable, a complete listing
of all inputs and/or commands necessary for compliance should be included in
the Compliance Software User’s Manual and Help System.
The
Compliance Software User’s Manual and Help System shall contain clear and
detailed information on how to use the compliance software to model buildings
for compliance with the Codes.
Include
the following:
1.
Description of the value or values
associated with each of input.
2.
Restrictions on each variable.
3.
Listing of the range beyond which inputs
are unreasonable for any variable.
4.
Description of options for any user-defined
variable.
5.
A chapter or section which covers each Code
output report.
Appendices, as needed, to provide any
additional background information that is not crucial in explaining the basic
functioning of the program for compliance. For example:
·
An appendix may contain variations of
compliance forms as described above.
·
An appendix may include a series of
construction assembly forms to aid the compliance software user.
·
An appendix may reprint important sections
of the manual that are crucial to modeling buildings correctly for compliance
with the compliance software.
·
Although the organizational format is not
fixed, all information contained in the Compliance Software User’s Manual and
Help System shall be easy to find through use of a table of contents, an Index,
or through a context sensitive help system.
4.2 Statement
The
following statement shall appear, in a box, within the first several pages of
the Compliance Software User’s Manual and Help System:
[Insert
Name of Calculation Method] may be used to show compliance with 2010 Florida Building
Code, Energy Conservation only when the following reference documents are
readily available to the program user:
1. 2010 Florida Building Code, Energy
Conservation Codes
2. This Manual (JM-2010-1.0)
5.0 Required Compliance
Software Capabilities
5.1 Residential Energy Conservation
General
Requirements
Compliance based on simulated energy
performance requires that a proposed residence (proposed design) be
shown to have an annual normalized, modified energy load that is less than or
equal to 80% of the annual energy load of the Standard Reference as
specified in Normative Appendix B, Section B-1.1.1 to make the code 20 percent
more stringent than the “2007” (Effective October 31, 2007) Florida
energy code’s Standard Reference Design (Standard Reference Design)
features.
Compliance
software shall automatically perform a variety of functions including those
described in Sections 401, 402.4, 402.5, and 403.1, 403.2.2, 403.2.3, and 403.3
through 403.9 (referred to as the mandatory provisions) and Section 405
(performance).
Compliance
with this section requires that the mandatory provisions identified in Section
401.2 be met.
• The
compliance software shall accept a specified range of inputs for the proposed
design, and then use these inputs to describe the proposed building on the
required output forms. The proposed building inputs are also used to create a
standard reference design building based on the proposed building and the energy
budget generation rules used to incorporate the prescriptive requirements into
the proposed design.
Certain
building descriptors remain the same for both the proposed and standard design
but others will change in ways that depend upon the design characteristics, the
climate zone, and the prescriptive and mandatory requirements of the Energy Code.
• The
compliance software shall automatically define the standard reference design;
determine the proper capacity of the HVAC equipment for the proposed design;
adjust the HVAC capacity of the proposed design in accordance with the
reference method; and automatically run the standard reference design to
establish the energy budget.
• The
compliance software shall perform the energy budget run in sequence with the
compliance run with no user intervention or input beyond that of the proposed
design. The results are reported in the Performance Certificate of Compliance
Form when the proposed building design complies.
The
applicant shall perform the tests identified in this Manual to assure that the
compliance software produces results in general agreement with the expected
results. These tests verify the implementation of the custom budget procedure,
program accuracy and performance relative to the test cases, and acceptable use
of calculation inputs.
For
tests that DO NOT COMPLY, the vendor shall supply diagnostic output that
indicates noncompliance and gives the TDV energy information needed to evaluate
the test criteria, including the lighting and receptacle portions of the energy
budgets for both proposed and standard design.
5.1.2 Compliance
Report
Documentation
verifying that the methods and accuracy of the compliance software tools shall
conform to the provisions of this section and be provided to the code official.
Compliance software provisions and overall stringency shall be as described in
Normative Appendix B.
Section 405.4.2 Compliance Report
The
compliance software tools shall generate a Form 405 report that documents that
the proposed design complies with Section 405.3. The compliance documentation
shall be submitted to the building official before a building permit is issued
and shall include the following information:
1.
Address or other identification of the
residence;
2.
An inspection checklist documenting the
building component characteristics of the proposed design as listed in Appendix
B, Table B-1.1.2(1). The inspection checklist shall show results for both the
standard reference design and the proposed design, and shall document all inputs
entered by the user necessary to reproduce the results;
3.
Name of individual completing the
compliance report; and
4.
Name and version of the compliance software
tool.
5.
Exception: Multiple orientations. When an
otherwise identical building model is offered in multiple orientations
compliance for any orientation shall be permitted by documenting that the
building meets the performance requirements in each of the four cardinal
(north, east, south and west) orientations.
The
code official shall require the following documents:
1.
An EPL Display Card signed by the builder
providing the building component characteristics of the proposed design shall
be provided to the purchaser of the home at time of title transfer.
2.
Documentation of the component efficiencies
used in the software calculations for the proposed design.
The
building official shall require that an energy performance level (EPL) display
card be completed and certified by the builder to be accurate and correct
before final approval of the building for occupancy. Florida law (Section
553.9085, Florida Statutes) requires the EPL display card to be included as an
addendum to each sales contract for both presold and nonpresold residential
buildings. The EPL display card contains information indicating the energy
performance level and efficiencies of components installed in a dwelling unit.
The building official shall verify that the EPL display card completed and
signed by the builder accurately reflects the plans and specifications
submitted to demonstrate code compliance for the building.
6.0 Residential Energy
Performance Testing
This
Chapter specifies required capabilities that compliance software will be tested
for. All of the required capabilities are described in terms of the
capabilities and algorithms of the 2010 Florida Building Code, Energy
Conservation.
Compliance
software shall account for the energy performance effects of all of the features
described in the Energy Code.
The
modeling procedures and assumptions described in this chapter apply to both the
standard design and proposed design. The requirements for the standard design
include those that compliance software shall apply to new features, altered
existing features, unchanged existing features or all of the above. In order
for compliance software to become approved, it shall, at a minimum, accept all
of the required inputs.
6.1 Residential Accuracy
Test cases
A specific version of HERS
BESTEST for Florida was developed in request to DOE by the Florida Solar Energy
Center (FSEC). In its request, FSEC
noted that the Florida Building Energy –Efficiency Ratings Act of 1993 requires
that Florida’s rating system “be compatible with standard federal rating
systems...where applicable....” The
relevant proposed federal guidelines (DOE 10 CFR Part 437) will require that
energy analysis tools used for energy ratings are tested according to the HERS
BESTEST procedure. In addition, Florida
energy analysis software is used for both code compliance and energy
ratings.
The type of software testing
is based on intermodal comparisons forms one portion of an overall validation
methodology that was first developed by NREL in 1983. And has been further
refined since then by NREL and number of European researchers (Bloomfield,
Bowman and Lomas, Irving, Judkoff, Judkoff and Neymark 1995a, Judkoff et al,
Lomas). The overall validation
methodology consists of three parts:
·
Analytical
Verification – in which the output from a program, subroutine, or algorithm is
compared to the results from a known analytical solution for isolated heat
transfer mechanism under simple boundary conditions
·
Empirical
Validation – in which calculation results from a program, subroutine, or
algorithm, is compared to monitored data from a real structure, test cell, or
laboratory experiment
·
Comparative
testing – in which a program is compared to itself or to other programs. The comparative approach included
“sensitivity testing” and “intermodal comparisons.”
Comparative testing as
applied in the HERS Building Energy Simulation Test (HERS BESTEST) (Judkoff and
Neymark 1995b) method includes a set of public domain reference programs that
have already been subjected to extensive analytical , empirical, and intermodal
testing.
The
reference test cases are found in the “Home Energy Rating System Building
Energy Simulation Test for Florida (Florida-HERS BESTEST),” version August 1997 _ NREL/TP-550-23124a. The volumes of interest are as follows:
Volume 1
Tier 1 and Tier 2 Tests User’s Manual
Volume 2 Tier 1 and Tier 2 Tests Reference
Results
The authors are Ron Judkoff and Joel
Neymark
A copy of the reference test procedures and
sample results may be located from:
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
1617 Cole Boulevard
Golden, Colorado 80401-3393
A national laboratory of the U.S.
Department of Energy
Managed by Midwest Research Institute for
the U.S. Department of Energy under contract No. DE-AC36-83CH10093
Prepared under Task No. 0796.5503
The following initial test procedure is
used to evaluate and calibrate the propose compliance software tool.
Initial Testing Procedures
1)
Using
the test cases identified in the reference document above, simulate the cases
as outlined in the document (Orlando, FL
TMY)
2)
Record
the results using the tables identified in the Test documents
3)
Use
the method identified in Appendix A, and calculate the acceptable range
4)
Determine
if your compliance software pass or fail the tests using the method depicted in
Appendix A
Detail
Testing Procedures
5)
Determine
weather data for the following ten cities
(use City Hall as reference address):
Pensacola, Tallahassee, Jacksonville,
Gainesville, Orlando, West Palm Beach, Miami, Key West, Naples and Tampa
6)
Substitute
the values in Table 2-1
7)
Run
cases in the following Programs identified in the reference document
a.
Blast
3.0 Level 215
b.
DOE
2.1 E-W54
c.
Serires/Suncode
5.7
8)
Repeat
the test cases in the proposed compliance software program
9)
Determine
the pass/fail ranges as specified in
Appendix A
A program may be considered
as having passed successfully through the test when its results compare
favorably with the reference program outputs.
7.0 COMMERCIAL ENERGY
CONSERVATION
Commercial suites of test include
two types of verification. First is that
the compliance software is capable of automatically generating the standard
reference design from user inputs. The
standard reference design generated at a minimum, satisfy the requirements of
Section 506 and Table 2.2 of the Normative Appendix B of the Codes. The second suite of tests involves the calculation
of the Total Building Performance of a Proposed Design.
TOTAL
BUILDING PERFORMANCE
Performance-based
compliance
Compliance based on total building performance
requires that a proposed building (proposed design) be shown to have an annual
energy cost that is less than or equal to the annual energy cost of the
standard reference design. Energy prices shall be taken from a source approved
by the Florida Building Commission. Nondepletable energy collected off site
shall be treated and priced the same as purchased energy. Energy from nondepletable energy sources
collected on site shall be omitted from the annual energy cost of the proposed
design. Refer to Section 506 of the Codes.
Normative Appendix B section B-2.1
states that the Standard Reference Design totals shall be adjusted by a factor
of 0.8.
This section establishes
criteria for compliance using total building performance. It may be employed
for evaluating the compliance of all proposed designs, except designs with no
mechanical system. The following systems
and loads shall be included in determining the total building performance: heating systems, cooling systems, service
water heating, fan systems, lighting power, receptacle loads and process loads.
Mandatory
requirements
Compliance with this
section requires that the mandatory and applicable prescriptive criteria of
Sections 502, 503, 504 and 505 be met.
Trade-Offs
Limited to Building Permit
When the building permit being sought applies
to less than the whole building, only the calculation parameters for that part
of the building related to the systems to which the permit applies shall be
allowed to vary. Where an existing
building and addition are calculated to determine compliance in accordance with
Section 101.4.3 and one or more existing components are unable to meet current
prescriptive code minimum requirements, said component(s) need not meet code if
the entire building is brought into compliance with the code. Future building
components shall meet the prescriptive requirements of 502, 503, 504 or 505, as
applicable.
Requirements
specific to credit options
Compliance calculation for
technologies that meet the criteria for various options specified in section
506.3 of the Codes.
Documentation
Compliance software tools
shall be utilized to conform to the provisions of this section. Compliance software provisions and overall
stringency shall be as described in Normative Appendix B.
Compliance
Report
The compliance software tools shall generate a
Form 506 report that documents that the proposed design has annual energy costs
less than or equal to the annual energy costs of the standard reference design.
The compliance documentation shall be submitted to the code official before a
building permit is issued and shall include the following information:
1.
Address
of the building (Section 506.4.1);
2.
An
inspection checklist documenting the building component characteristics of the
proposed design as listed in Table B-2.2 of Appendix B. The inspection
checklist shall show the estimated annual energy cost for both the standard
reference design and the proposed design;
3.
Name
of individual completing the compliance report; and
4.
Name
and version of the compliance software tool.
Additional
documentation (Section 506.4.2).
The code official shall require the following
documents:
1.
Thermal
zoning diagrams consisting of floor plans showing the thermal zoning scheme for
the proposed design.
2.
Input
and output report(s) from the energy analysis simulation program containing the
complete input and output files, as applicable. The output file shall include
energy use totals and energy use by energy source and end-use served, total
hours that space conditioning loads are not met and any errors or warning
messages generated by the simulation tool as applicable;
3.
An
explanation of any error or warning messages appearing in the simulation tool
output; and
4.
A
certification signed by the design professionals responsible under Florida law
for the design of lighting, electrical, mechanical, and plumbing systems and
the building shell providing the building component characteristics of the
proposed design as given in Table B-2.2 of Appendix B. See Section 103.1 of the code.
7.1 Commercial Test
Cases
Standard
Reference Design Standards
The test procedures used in
this approval manual are based on comparing the performance of the proposed
design against a code-minimum Standard Reference Design building as described
in Section 506 and Normative Appendix B, Table 2.2, of the Florida Building Code, Energy Conservation,
which is based on Chapter 11 of ASHRAE 90.1-2004.
This manual is consistent
with ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007, but does not include addenda, approved or
otherwise. ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is under continuous maintenance. This means
that the committee regularly develops, approves and publishes addenda to the
standard. At the time of this writing, a number of addenda to Standard 90.1
have been approved and an even greater number is pending. ASHRAE intends to
gather these addenda and include them in the 2010 publication of the standard.
The COMNET manual will be updated when the 2010 publication of Standard 90.1 is
released.
The modeling rules and
procedures in this manual are consistent with the Performance Rating Method
(PRM) in Appendix G of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007. However, it is not the intent
of this manual to change the Standard Reference Design building defined by the Florida Building Codes, Energy
Conservation. The manual is intended to work in series with, not in
parallel with the PRM.
This method of testing is
provided for analyzing and diagnosing building energy simulation software using
software-to-software and software-to-quasi-analytical-solution comparisons. The
methodology allows different building energy simulation programs, representing
different degrees of modeling complexity, to be tested by comparing the
predictions from other building energy programs to the simulation results
provided by the Rating Software in question.
The tests in this manual are intended to be used for buildings that
are in the planning, design or construction phases. It is also intended to
apply to buildings that are within the scope of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004. The
long-term goal of this manual is to define modeling rules and procedures for
all conceivable design features that may be incorporated in buildings. However,
this goal cannot be fully achieved due to limitations in the development energy
simulation algorithms, and due to the natural lag time between the introduction
of an advanced energy efficiency measure or device and the development of
algorithms to simulate its performance.
The goal of the manual is to provide methods that are as flexible and
accurate as possible. This goal can best be achieved if the manual is a ‘living
document,’ changing and growing as increasing amounts of information and better
modeling methods become available.
A
compliance software vendor may propose alternate tests when the vendor believes
that one or more of the standard tests are not appropriate for the compliance
software. The Commission will evaluate the alternate tests and will accept them
if they are found to reflect acceptable engineering techniques.
If
alternate tests are accepted by the Commission, the tests will be available for
use by all compliance software programs. An alternate test will coexist with
the standard test presented in this Manual until the Manual is revised. When a
new version of this Manual is produced, the alternative test may be substituted
for the current test or may continue to coexist with the original test.
Software Requirements
This chapter contains the software requirements that must be
implemented by approved compliance software. The tests fall into the following
categories:
·
Tests to verify that the software is evaluating
thermal loads and the response of the HVAC systems to these loads in a manner
that is acceptable. These tests reference ASHRAE Standard 140-2007,
Standard Method of Test for Evaluation of
Building Energy
Analysis Computer Programs.
·
Tests to verify that the candidate building or
the proposed design is modeled with the correct fixed and restricted inputs,
including schedules of operation, receptacle loads, process loads and other
components.
·
Tests to verify that the Standard Reference
Design building is created correctly, e.g. that the Standard Reference Design
HVAC system is properly specified and that other components of the Standard
Reference Design are correctly defined.
·
Reference building auto-generation test – use
test cases specific to Florida necessary to verify that the software
automatically generate accurate standard reference design given only the
building information from the proposed design.
General Requirements
Scope
Calculation procedure
Except as specified by this section, the standard reference design and proposed
design shall be configured and analyzed using
identical methods and techniques. The Standard Reference Design totals
for the Total Building Performance compliance method shall be adjusted
by a factor of 0.80 to make the code 20 percent more stringent than the “2007”
Florida energy code’s Standard Reference Design features.
Building specifications
The standard
reference design and proposed
design shall be configured and analyzed as specified
by Table B-2.2.
Calculation software tools
Calculation procedures used to comply with this section shall be
only compliance
software tools approved by the Florida Building Commission to be capable of calculating the annual energy consumption of all
building elements that differ between the standard
reference design and the proposed
design and shall include the following capabilities.
1.
Computer generation of the standard reference design using only the input for the proposed design. The calculation procedure shall not allow
the user to directly modify the building component characteristics of the standard reference design.
2.
Building operation for a full calendar year
(8760 hours).
3.
Climate data for a full calendar year (8760
hours) and shall reflect approved
coincident hourly data for temperature, solar
radiation, humidity and wind speed for the building location.
4.
Ten or more thermal zones.
5.
Thermal mass effects.
6.
Hourly variations in occupancy, illumination,
receptacle loads, thermostat settings, mechanical ventilation, HVAC equipment
availability, service hot water usage and any process loads.
7.
Part-load performance curves for mechanical
equipment.
8.
Capacity and efficiency correction curves for
mechanical heating and cooling equipment.
9.
Printed code official inspection
checklist listing each of the proposed
design component characteristics from Table
506.5.1(1) determined by the analysis to provide compliance, along with their
respective performance ratings (e.g., R-value, U-factor, SHGC, HSPF, AFUE, SEER, EF, etc.).
Calculation Methods
The Compliance Software shall calculate the annual consumption of all end
uses in buildings, including fuel and electricity for:
·
HVAC (heating, cooling, fans, and ventilation);
·
Lighting (both interior and exterior);
·
Receptacles and miscellaneous electric;
·
Service water heating;
·
Process energy uses;
·
Commercial refrigeration systems; and
·
All other energy end uses that typically pass
through the building meter
The Compliance Software shall perform a simulation on an hourly time
interval (at a minimum) over a one year period (8760 hours) with the ability to
model changes in weather parameters, schedules, and other parameters for each
hour of the year. This is typically achieved by specifying a 24-hour schedule
for each day of the week plus holidays.
Error Handling
The software shall identify error conditions when unmet loads exceed
300 hours, prevent completion of the Compliance analysis, and provide
information to the user describing the error that has occurred and what steps
the user should take to remedy the situation.
Climate Data (need to confirm)
The Compliance Software shall perform simulations using hourly values of
climate data, such as temperature and humidity, derived from WYEC (Weather Year
for Energy Calculation) or TMY (Typical Meteorological Year) climate data.
The Compliance Software shall calculate solar radiation on exterior
surfaces on an hourly basis from the values of direct normal irradiance and
diffuse horizontal irradiance contained in the climate data, taking ground
reflectance into account.
Utility Rates (need to confirm acceptable
source)
The Compliance Software shall be capable of simulating time-of-use rates
and apply both demand and energy charges for each time period of the rate
schedule.
Systems Simulation
General
The Compliance Software shall be capable of modeling:
·
The Standard Reference Design building systems
defined in 2010 Florida Building Codes.
·
The lighting, water heating, HVAC and
miscellaneous equipment detailed in the Standards.
·
All compulsory and required features as listed in
Normative Appendix B and Section 506 of the Energy Codes.
·
The capability to model multiple zone systems
shall allow at least 10 thermal
blocks to be served by one multiple zone system.
·
The Compliance
Software shall be capable of modeling plenum air return.
Managing User Input
This section addresses the processes of data entry and the validation
of user input data that can be performed prior to and independent of the energy
simulation.
Building Descriptor Inputs and Restrictions
Building descriptors are discussed in Section 506 and listed in
tabular form in Normative Appendix B. All
inputs shall conform with the input conditions and restrictions specified in Normative
Appendix B and Section 506.
Four levels of restriction are specified for building descriptors. The
most limiting restriction is a prescribed value. This is an input that must be
used in all instances, with no variation. A critical default may be overridden,
but when it is, the user must provide special documentation. A default is provided
for convenience and may be overridden by the user with no special
documentation. For many inputs there is no restriction.
Restrictions apply to all required inputs. If the software provides a
means for the user to input building descriptors listed as optional in
Normative Appendix B, all input conditions and restrictions in Normative
Appendix B and Section 506 pertaining to those building descriptors shall be
met.
The software user interface shall:
1)
clearly indicate when a building descriptor has
an associated default,
2)
indicate what the default value is, and
3)
provide a convenient means for the user to
over-ride the default. When critical default values are overridden, the
software interface shall notify the user that documentation of the revised
assumption is required.
The software is not required to provide a means for users to enter
data for building descriptors designated as prescribed in Normative Appendix B
and Section 506. However, if the user is permitted to input values for
prescribed inputs, the software must inform the user that a prescribed value
and not the value input by the user will be used in the Compliance.
No restrictions are specified for unsanctioned inputs. If the software
uses unsanctioned inputs, the software documentation or help system shall
specify the applicability of the building descriptors, its definition, the
units in which it is expressed, restrictions on input for the proposed design,
and, if applicable, how the building descriptor is defined for the Standard
Reference Design building.
Compliance Software may not provide default assumptions other than
those specified in Normative Appendix B and Section 506. However, the software may
assist the user in describing the proposed design by displaying typical values
for building descriptors, provided deliberate action by the user is necessary
before a displayed value is used.
Data Validation
Compulsory
Input Checks
The software shall check to ensure that valid entries have been made
for all compulsory building descriptors before the user is permitted to proceed
with the next step in the Compliance process. Normative Appendix B and Section
506 specify the compulsory building descriptors.
Handling of
Missing Inputs
If a required input is missing or invalid, the software shall:
1)
notify the user that the input is missing or
invalid,
2)
identify the input field(s) with missing or
invalid data, and
3)
prevent the user from moving to the next step of
the Compliance process.
The software may provide additional information designed to help the
user correct the deficiency.
Validity
Checks
The software shall check all user inputs to ensure that the following
conditions are met:
1)
Simulation
Tool Limits-Inputs do not exceed the minimums or maximums for
the parameters permitted by the simulation engine.
2)
Compliance
Rule Limits-Inputs do not exceed minimums or maximums for the
descriptors specified in the Energy Codes.
3)
Simulation
Tool Discrete Options-Inputs
correspond with valid discrete or list options for parameters available in the
simulation engine.
4)
Compliance
Rule Discrete Options-Inputs
correspond with valid discrete options provided for in Energy Codes.
Handling
Invalid Input
When invalid data is entered, the software shall:
1)
notify the user of the invalid input,
2)
identify the nonconforming input field, and
3)
prevent execution of the next step of the
Compliance process
The software may provide additional information designed to help the
user correct the deficiency.
Consistency
Checks
The consistency checks described above are intended to identify errors
and oversights in user input and thereby help ensure that the building
description is complete and interpretable by the energy analysis program.
Examples of consistency checks include that window should not exceed the areas
of wall in which they are contained and that the necessary plant equipment has
actually been connected to the secondary HVAC systems. The software may include
additional consistency checks provided these additional consistency checks are
clearly documented in the user documentation or on-line help.
Handling
Inconsistent Input
If the proposed design fails a consistency check, the software shall:
1)
notify the user that an inconsistency exists,
2)
identify the specific consistency check that has
been failed,
3)
identify the inconsistent input fields, if
feasible, and
4)
prevent execution of the next step of the
Compliance process
The software may provide additional information designed to help the
user correct the deficiency.
7.2 Accuracy Tests
ASHRAE Standard 140-2007 Tests
This method of testing is provided for analyzing and diagnosing
building energy simulation software using software-to-software and software-to-quasi-analytical-solution
comparisons. The methodology allows different building energy simulation
programs, representing different degrees of modeling complexity, to be tested
by comparing the predictions from other building energy programs to the simulation
results provided by the Compliance Software in question.
COMNET software is required
to perform the ASHRAE Standard 140-2007 suite of software tests and the results
of these tests shall conform to the COMNET acceptance requirements. All tests
shall be completed in accord with the requirements of ASHRAE Standard 140-2007.
The resulting estimates of energy consumption shall fall between the minimum
and maximum values established by COMNET, unless a valid explanation is
provided. The portfolio folder for Appendix E contains spreadsheets wherein the
software vendor enters the results of the Standard 140 simulations for
comparison against the criteria. When results from candidate software fall
outside the COMNET acceptance range or when candidate software is unable to
perform one of the tests, the vendor shall provide an explanation of the reason
as per ASHRAE Standard 140-2007 requirements. The portfolio folder for Appendix
E also contains a methodology paper that describes how the acceptance criteria
were developed.
A PDF copy of the document
can be downloaded from the following URL:
http://www.comnet.org/mgp/content/31-ashrae-standard-140-2007-tests
Modeling
Assumptions and Standard Reference Design Building Tests
The previous suite of tests, based on ASHRAE Standard 140-2007,
verifies that the simulation engine produces results that are reasonable. Each
test requires a simulation to be run. The tests in this section are intended to
verify that the software correctly constructs the proposed design and Standard
Reference Design buildings and correctly applies the proposed design input
restrictions specified in Section B-2.2 and Normative Appendix B of the Energy Code. Each
test described in this section requires a minimum of five simulations, plus the
sizing calculations: one simulation of the proposed design and four simulations
of the Standard Reference Design building (one for each of four orientations).
The simulations described in this section uses five prototype buildings. The vendor may modify the tests to ensure
compliance to Section B-2.2 and Normative Appendix B of the Energy Code. Chapter 2.1 of this manual describes the
document procedures regarding modified tests.
Prototypes A1, A3 and A20 are all the same five-zone, 150 ft x 150 ft,
floor plate, but with one, three and 20 stories. Prototypes B1 and C1 are
five-zone, one-story, square prototype buildings measuring 200 ft x 200 ft and
400 ft x 400 ft respectively. Prototype D is a more complex, mixed use building
with a below-grade garage, retail on the first level, office space on levels
two and three, and four stories of multi-family housing over the office. Figure
3.3-1 [9] is an image of all of the prototype buildings, positioned next to
each other. Portfolio Appendix E has a Google Sketchup file with the detailed
geometry for each of the prototypes. The portfolio folder also has a spreadsheet
with tabular detail on each of the prototype buildings along with forms for the
software vendor to complete.
7.3 Content and Format
of Code Reports
Test
Report Overview
This chapter
provides a summary of the requisite content and format of the COMNET standard
reports. The establishment of these reports will standardize the way energy
modeling output data is presented to various Compliance authorities. By
standardizing the reports, all Compliance authorities will be able to view the
same building information and evaluate the project for certification.
Content
Building information
will be organized into four standard reports:
1)
Building
Summary
2)
Energy
Measures
3)
Energy
Results
4)
Representations
The Building Summary
contains basic building information such as project title, location, and size
(see Figure 4.2.2-1 [13]). This brief report provides essential building data
at a glance. The Energy Measures report will list the design features that are
different between the proposed design and the standard design (see Table
4.2.2-5 [14]). Credit is offered based on these measures. The Energy Results
report will contain a summary of fuel types and end uses (see Table 4.2.2-6
[15] and Table 4.2.2-7 [16]). The Representations report will have all relevant
building titles and claims (see Table 4.2.2-8 [17] and Table 4.2.2-9 [18]).
Format
The required formats
for building information reports are electronic (pdf) and hard copy. The hard
copy standard reports will be in PDF (Portable Document File). Both report
formats will be automatically generated by the software. Each page of the
report will have a header with the project name and date.
Using the Spreadsheets
Four spreadsheets are provided in Appendix E for documenting results
from candidate software and comparing to the COMNET acceptance ranges. These
parallel the spreadsheets provided with ASHRAE Standard 140-2007. For each of
the spreadsheets, the fields where data is entered are shaded pale yellow. The
tabs where data is entered and where results are reviewed are shown in Table
3.2.1-1 [8].
A program may be though of
as having passed successfully through the test when its results compare
favorable with the reference program outputs.
Appendix
A
Procedure
for Developing Example Pass/Fail Criteria
The certifying agency using
HERS BESTEST may adopt this procedure for developing example pass/fail criteria
or develop their own procedure. Neither DOE, NREL, or the authors of this
report can be held responsible for any misfortunes that occur due to the use of
this procedure in your certification program.
Passing
a Test
A HERS tool may be thought
of as having passed successfully through the test series when it results
compare favorably with reference program outputs in a case-by-case and a
sensitivity basis (difference or delta (Δ) between certain cases).
Example pass/fail ranges
based on fictitious reference used for this appendix were developed according
to the procedure described in the following section and are presented in Table
H-1. A HERS tool would pass a case if its result for that case falls within the
passing range represented by “Example Range Max” and “Example Range Min” shown
in Table H-1. A HERS tool would pass HER BESTEST if its results are passing for
all the cases (including the differences in the results for certain cases).
Procedure
for Developing Example Passing Ranges
Example values relevant to
the discussion below are included in Table H-1. The example passing ranges for
each case were developed as follows:
1)
Determine
the maximum reference result, the minimum reference result, the sample mean
(average) of the reference results, and the sample standard deviation (n-1
method) of the reference results. There quantities are shown in Table H-1 as
“Ref Max”, “Ref Min”, “Ref Mean”, and “Ref Stds,” respectively.
2)
Calculate
the 90% confidence interval for the population mean assuming a Student’s “t”
distribution based on the reference results (Spiegel). The extremes (confidence
limits) of the 90% confidence interval for the population mean are determined
from:
Table H-1
The confidence coefficient
(t_█(c@)) is determined from the number of samples
and the desired confidence interval. Tables of these coefficients and an
explanation of how to use the tables should be available in an introductory
statistics text
book. For this example with three examples and a desired confidence interval of
90%:
The resulting confidence
limits are shown in Table H-1 as “Ref 90% Conf Max” and “Ref 90% Conf Min”
3)
Calculate:
(Ref
Max) + 4 MBtu
And
(Ref
Min) – 4 MBtu
The
results of these calculations are shown in Table H-1 as “Ref Max + 4 MBtu” and
“Ref Min – 4 MBtu)
4)
The
example passing range (“Range Max”, “Range Min”) is then determined by taking
the maximum of “Ref 90% Conf Max” and “Ref Max + 4MBtu” as “Range Max” and the
minimum of “Ref 90% Conf Min” and “Ref Min – 4MBtu) and “Range Min”. Therefore,
using Table H-1, a HERS tool passes a case if its test result falls within the
range for that case. Notice in Table H-1 fictitious sets of results are given
such that the confidence interval range setting and the “Ref Max + 4MBtu” and
“Ref Min – 4MBtu” range setting set the range extremes for Case #1 and Case #2
respectively (it is also possible to have were one range setting method sets
one extreme and the other range setting method sets the other extreme as show
in the “Delta Case #1-Case #2 results of Table H-1).
Procedure
for Developing Example Passing Ranges for HERS Programs That Designate Heating
and Cooling Seasons.
The same procedure
described in the previous section can be applied to developing passing ranges
for HERS programs that designate heating and cooling seasons. In this case, the
annual reference results must be replaced by season reference results developed
from the monthly output corresponding to the designated heating and cooling
seasons. The remainder procedure then applies.
Adjusting
Passing Ranges
A certifying agency may
prefer to adjust the example range setting criteria to suit its particular
need. To assist with this, some background and other thoughts about range
setting are included in the following section.
Background
In choosing our algorithms
for determining passing ranges, we wanted to have some buffer zone around the
reference results because:
The reference results do
not represent truth, but rather the state of the art in thermal analysis of
buildings. A result just outside the range of reference results should pass. Where
reference results ranges are very narrow, we wanted to have some allowable
disagreement based on economic criteria that would still pass.
Determining passing ranges
using the widest range possible range created by a 90% confidence interval and
by extending reference results extremes by 4 MBtu at each extreme serves this
purpose described below.
Use of confidence intervals
provides some theoretical basis for developing passing ranges (Spiegel). The
90% confidence level was chosen because a 95% confidence interval for the
population mean widens the range of passing beyond our level of comfort based
on allowable fuel cost uncertainty. Similarly, we felt the passing range
produced with an 80% confidence interval would be too narrow. To adjust
confidence intervals, we would choose a confidence coefficient that corresponds
to a confidence interval within the range of 80% to 95%.
Where reference results are
very close together, the 4 MBtu factor was used because at typical gas prices
it represents roughly $25/y, which we take as a threshold of economic
uncertainty concern. Depending on fuel prices, climate, mortgage lending
policy, and other circumstance in specific regions, it may also make sense to
adjust this factor.
Case
Discrimination
Some cases may deserve to
have more strict passing criteria than would be generated using the range
setting described above. Possible examples are case with higher loads. In these
cases were the percentage disagreements between references results can be
roughly consistent with those for lower load cases, the higher loads produce a
greater extension of the passing range in terms of estimated fuel cost than is
seen for lower load cases.
Appendix
B
This paper identified here describes a
methodology to evaluate the accuracy of whole-building energy simulation
programs. The methodology is also used to identify and diagnose differences in
simulation predictions that may be caused by algorithmic differences, modeling
limitations, coding errors, or input errors. The methodology has been adopted
by ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140 (ANSI/ASHRAE 2001, 2004), Method of Test for the Evaluation of Building Energy Analysis
Computer Programs.
References
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140-2004. Standard Method of Test for the Evaluation of Building Energy Analysis Computer Programs. (2004). Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers.
Judkoff, R. (1988). Validation of Building Energy Analysis Simulation Programs at the Solar Energy Research Institute. Energy and Buildings, Vol. 10, No. 3, p. 235. Lausanne, Switzerland: Elsevier Sequoia.
Judkoff, R., and J. Neymark. (1995a). International Energy Agency Building Energy Simulation Test (BESTEST) and Diagnostic Method. NREL/TP-472-6231. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. http://www.nrel.gov/docs/legosti/old/6231.pdf (PDF 13.8 MB)
Judkoff, R., and J. Neymark. (1995b). Home Energy Rating System Building Energy Simulation Test (HERS BESTEST). NREL/TP-472-7332. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. http://www.nrel.gov/docs/legosti/fy96/7332a.pdf (PDF 5.6 MB)
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/legosti/fy96/7332b.pdf (PDF 1.9 MB)
Judkoff, R., D. Wortman, B. O'Doherty, and J. Burch. (1983). A Methodology for Validating Building Energy Analysis Simulations. SERI/TR-254-1508. Golden, CO: Solar Energy Research Institute (now National Renewable Energy Laboratory).
Neymark, J.; Girault, P.; Guyon, G.; Judkoff, R.; LeBerre, R.; Ojalvo, J.; Reimer, P. (2004). ETNA BESTEST Empirical Validation Test Specification. Golden, Colorado: J. Neymark & Associates; Moret sur Loing, France: Electricité de France. In collaboration with National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado.
Neymark, J., and R. Judkoff. (2002a). International Energy Agency Building Energy Simulation Test and Diagnostic Method for Heating, Ventilating, and Air-Conditioning Equipment Models (HVAC BESTEST) Volume 1: Cases E100-E200. NREL/TP-550-30152. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy02osti/30152.pdf (PDF 4.5 MB)
Neymark, J.; Judkoff, R. (2004). International Energy Agency Building Energy Simulation Test and Diagnostic Method for Heating, Ventilating, and Air-Conditioning Equipment Models (HVAC BESTEST) Volume 2: Cases E300–E545. NREL/TP-550-36754. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/36754.pdf (PDF 15.4 MB)
California Energy Commission’s Residential
Alternative Calculation Method (AC M) Approval Manual, 2008 Building Efficiency
Standards, CEC-400-2008-002-CMF.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2008publications/CEC-400-2008-002/CEC-400-2008-002-CMF.PDF
California Energy Commission’s Non-Residential Alternative
Calculation Method (AC M) Approval Manual, 2008 Building Efficiency Standards, CEC-400-2008-003-CMF.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2008publications/CEC-400-2008-002/CEC-400-2008-003-CMF.PDF
State of
Florida Building Commission, 2010 Florida Building Codes, Energy Conservation. http://www.floridabuilding.org/c/default.aspx