um medical center university campus lake avenue …
TRANSCRIPT
ASH
RA
E L
EVEL 2
EN
ERG
Y AU
DIT R
EPO
RT
UMASS MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER
UNIVERSITY CAMPUS 55 LAKE AVENUE NORTH
WORCESTER, MA
PREPARED FOR
DCAMM
Prepared by
B2Q Associates, Inc.
North Andover, MA
Revision Date
5/26/2015
2 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit
B2Q Associates, Inc. 100 Burtt Rd. Suite 212 Andover, MA 01810
ASHRAE LEVEL 2 ENERGY AUDIT UMASS MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER - UNIVERSITY CAMPUS
Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 6
Contacts .......................................................................................................................................... 8
Approach & Modeling Methodology .............................................................................................. 9
Cost Estimate Methodology ......................................................................................................... 10
Executive Summary Table ............................................................................................................. 11
ACC Building Executive Summary Table ....................................................................................... 13
Facility Description ........................................................................................................................ 14
Baseline Energy Use & Benchmarking .......................................................................................... 15
Energy Use Graphs .................................................................................................................... 15
Benchmarking ........................................................................................................................... 21
eQuest Model Calibration ............................................................................................................. 23
Energy Conservation Measures .................................................................................................... 27
ECM-01.01 (a) Lighting Retrofit ................................................................................................ 28
ECM-04.09 (a)-1 Tighten Occupancy Schedules ....................................................................... 31
ECM-04.09 (a)-2 Install New Occupancy Sensors for HVAC Control ........................................ 34
ECM-09.00 (a) Retrofit AHU-5 Supply Fan with VFD ................................................................ 37
ECM-18.00 (a)-1 Replace Weather Station ............................................................................... 40
ECM-18.00 (a)-2 Calibrate Flow Stations & Reduce Unoccupied Outdoor Air ......................... 44
ECM-18.00 (a)-3 Static Pressure Reset on AHUs 1-4 ................................................................ 47
ECM-18.00 (a)-4 Reprogram Discharge Temperature Reset on AHUs 1-4 ............................... 51
ECM-18.00 (a)-5 Reduce AHU-2 OA Damper Minimum Position ............................................. 55
ECM-18.00 (a)-6 Calibrate Zone CO2 Sensors .......................................................................... 58
ECM-18.00 (a)-7 Replace AHU-4 Return Air CO2 Sensor .......................................................... 61
ECM-18.00 (a)-8 Reduce VAV Unoccupied Flow Set-points ..................................................... 65
ECM-18.00 (a)-9 Reprogram Zone Set-points & Implement Dead-band ................................. 68
ECM-18.00 (a)-10 Reconfigure Unoccupied Zone Temperature Control ................................. 72
Benedict Executive Summary Table .............................................................................................. 76
Facility Description ........................................................................................................................ 77
Baseline Energy Use & Benchmarking .......................................................................................... 78
Energy Use Graphs .................................................................................................................... 78
Benchmarking ........................................................................................................................... 84
eQuest Model Calibration ............................................................................................................. 86
Energy Conservation Measures .................................................................................................... 91
ECM-01.01 (b) Lighting Retrofit ................................................................................................ 92
ECM-02.01 (b) Install Occupancy Sensors ................................................................................ 95
3 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit
ECM-04.09 (b)-1 Fan Coil Unit Controls Upgrade ..................................................................... 98
ECM-04.09 (b)-1A Unoccupied Temperature Set-backs ........................................................... 98
ECM-04.09 (b)-1B Close FCU OA Dampers During Unoccupied Periods ................................ 100
ECM-04.09 (b)-1C Retrofit FCU Fans with EC motors ............................................................. 101
ECM-04.09 (b)-1 Cost Estimate ............................................................................................... 104
ECM-04.09 (b)-2 HW Loop Differential Pressure Reset .......................................................... 105
ECM-12.04 (b) Install Low-E Window Film.............................................................................. 108
Hospital Executive Summary Table ............................................................................................. 110
Facility Description ...................................................................................................................... 111
Baseline Energy Use & Benchmarking ........................................................................................ 112
Energy Use Graphs .................................................................................................................. 112
Benchmarking ......................................................................................................................... 118
eQuest Model Calibration ........................................................................................................... 120
Energy Conservation Measures .................................................................................................. 124
ECM-01.01 (c) Lighting Retrofit............................................................................................... 125
ECM-04.02 (c) Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-1L,1R,1T-7T ............................... 129
ECM-04.09 (c)-1 Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Enable Sequence ....................................... 132
ECM-04.09 (c)-2 Reconfigure AHU-15T/16T Preheat Temperature Control .......................... 136
ECM-04.09 (c)-3 Increase AHU-10T & 11T Minimum Discharge Set-point ............................ 140
ECM-04.09 (c)-4 Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset Schedule ................................ 143
ECM-04.11 (c) Reconfigure Preheat & Discharge Air Reset Schedules on AHU-1B-6B .......... 147
ECM-04.14 (c) Kitchen Hood Controls .................................................................................... 151
ECM-17.03 (c)-1 Complete VAV Conversion AHU-1B-6B, 1T,2T,3T,4T,6T,7T ......................... 154
ECM-17.03 (c)-2 Retrofit Fans with VFDs / Install Branch Duct Dampers .............................. 158
ECM-17.03 (c)-3 Retrofit Fans with VFDs / Reset Speed Based on OAT ................................. 163
ECM-18.00 (c)-1 Replace Preheat Valves & Actuators ........................................................... 167
ECM-18.00 (c)-2 Lock-Out Humidification & Calibrate Humidity Sensors .............................. 171
ECM-18.00 (c)-3 Replace Leaking Preheat Valve on AHU-13T ............................................... 175
ECM-18.00 (c)-4 Duct Static Pressure Reset on AHU-1R, 15T/16T ......................................... 179
ECM-18.00 (c)-5 Adjust AHU-1L Temperature Control ........................................................... 181
ECM-18.00 (c)-6 Optimize Heat Exchanger Reset Schedule ................................................... 185
ECM-18.00 (c)-7 Replace Leaking Chilled Water Valve on AHU-11T ...................................... 188
ECM-18.00 (c)-8 Fix Mixed Air Damper Issues to Improve Economizer ................................. 193
ECM-21.02 (c) Hospital Solar Hot Water ................................................................................ 197
Other Opportunities Reviewed ............................................................................................... 198
Lakeside Executive Summary Table ............................................................................................ 200
Facility Description ...................................................................................................................... 201
Baseline Energy Use & Benchmarking ........................................................................................ 202
Energy Use Graphs .................................................................................................................. 202
Benchmarking ......................................................................................................................... 208
eQuest Model Calibration ........................................................................................................... 210
Energy Conservation Measures .................................................................................................. 215
ECM-01.01 (d) Lighting Retrofit .............................................................................................. 216
ECM-04.09 (d) Modify Mixed Air Temperature Control on AHU 1-10 ................................... 219
4 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit
ECM-04.13 (d) Install Occupancy Sensors in Operating Rooms ............................................. 222
ECM-18.00 (d)-1 Discharge Air Temperature Reset on AHU 1-10 .......................................... 225
ECM-18.00 (d)-2 Static Pressure Reset on AHU 1-8................................................................ 229
ECM-18.00 (d)-3 Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Control ...................................................... 232
ECM-18.00 (d)-4 Optimize Hot Water Supply Temperature Reset ........................................ 235
ECM-18.00 (d)-5 Replace AHU-4 Return Temperature Sensor ............................................... 238
ECM-18.00 (d)-6 Replace Leaking CHW valve on AHU-2 ........................................................ 242
Lazare Research Building (LRB) Executive Summary Table ........................................................ 246
Facility Description ...................................................................................................................... 248
Laboratories ............................................................................................................................ 248
Vivarium (Animal Rooms) ....................................................................................................... 248
Office & Support Areas ........................................................................................................... 249
Baseline Energy Use & Benchmarking ........................................................................................ 250
Energy Use Graphs .................................................................................................................. 250
Benchmarking ......................................................................................................................... 256
eQuest Model Calibration ........................................................................................................... 260
Energy Conservation Measures .................................................................................................. 264
ECM-01.01 (e) : Lighting Retrofit ............................................................................................ 265
ECM-03.00 (e) Replace Cage Washer Pump Motors .............................................................. 269
ECM-03.01 (e)-1 EC Motors on Bio-Safety Cabinet Fans ........................................................ 271
ECM-03.01 (e)-2 EC Motors on DHW & Non-Potable Water Circulators ............................... 273
ECM-03.01 (e)-3 EC Motors on AHU-10, 11 Supply Fans........................................................ 276
ECM-03.01 (e)-4 Retrofit RO Water Pumps with VFDs ........................................................... 280
ECM-04.02 (e) Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-9 ................................................ 283
ECM-04.09 (e)-1: Scheduling and Set-points on AHU-9 Zones ............................................... 287
ECM-04.09 (e)-2 Reprogram AHU-7 Preheat Control Sequence ............................................ 291
ECM-04.09 (e)-3 Reduce Air Change Rates in Labs ................................................................. 295
ECM-04.09 (e)-4 Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset ............................................... 298
ECM-04.09 (e)-5 Process CHW Loop Differential Pressure Reset ........................................... 301
ECM-04.11 (e)-1 Heat Recovery on Make-up Air Units (AHU 1-6) ......................................... 305
ECM-04.11 (e)-2 Install Passive Chilled Beams in Labs ........................................................... 313
ECM-18.00 (e)-1 Static Pressure Reset ................................................................................... 318
ECM-18.00 (e)-2 Discharge Air Temperature Reset ................................................................ 322
ECM-18.00 (e)-3 Replace Leaking Preheat Valves .................................................................. 326
ECM-18.00 (e)-4 Replace Leaking Chilled Water Valve .......................................................... 330
ECM-18.00 (e)-5 Reduce AHU-9 Minimum Outdoor Air ......................................................... 334
ECM-18.00 (e)-6 Reprogram AHU-10, 11 Zone Temperature Set-points ............................... 338
ECM-18.00 (e)-7 Replace Preheat Face/Bypass Damper Actuators ....................................... 342
ECM-18.00 (e)-8 Exhaust Fan Static Pressure Reset ............................................................... 347
ECM-18.00 (e)-9 Temperature Setbacks in Lab Corridors ...................................................... 351
ECM-18.00 (e)-10 Hot Water Supply Temperature Reset ...................................................... 354
Other Opportunities Reviewed ............................................................................................... 358
Medical School Executive Summary Table ................................................................................. 359
Facility Description ...................................................................................................................... 360
5 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit
Baseline Energy Use & Benchmarking ........................................................................................ 362
Energy Use Graphs .................................................................................................................. 362
Benchmarking ......................................................................................................................... 368
eQuest Model Calibration ........................................................................................................... 371
Energy Conservation Measures .................................................................................................. 375
ECM 1.01 (f) Lighting Retrofit ................................................................................................. 376
ECM 3.01 (f)-1 Retrofit FCU & FPB Fans with EC motors ........................................................ 379
ECM 3.01 (f)-2 Retrofit Environmental Room Evaporator Fans with EC Motors ................... 382
ECM 4.07 (f) Upgrade Terminal VAV Mixing Box Controls ..................................................... 384
ECM 9.00 (f)-1 Loading Dock Variable Exhaust Controls ........................................................ 387
ECM 9.00 (f)-2 Reduce Lab Air Changes.................................................................................. 391
ECM 9.00 (f)-3 Install VFDs & CO2 Ventilation Controls on Library AC Units ......................... 394
ECM 17.09 (f) Reclaim Return Air on AC-12 ........................................................................... 400
ECM 18.00 (f)-1 Optimize Perimeter HW Reset ..................................................................... 402
ECM 18.00 (f)-2 Auditorium Scheduling & Occupancy Controls ............................................ 406
ECM 18.00 (f)-3 Replace Heating Valves & Actuators ............................................................ 410
ECM 18.00 (f)-4 Replace Cooling Valves & Actuators ............................................................. 415
ECM 18.00 (f)-5 Repair Economizer Dampers & Optimize Sequence .................................... 419
ECM 18.00 (f)-6 Air-Sealing Repairs on AC Units .................................................................... 424
ECM 18.00 (f)-7 Optimize Static Pressure Reset ..................................................................... 428
ECM-21.02 (f) School Solar Hot Water ................................................................................... 432
Central Plant CHW Pumping Executive Summary ...................................................................... 433
Facility Description .................................................................................................................. 434
Central Plant Load Calibration ................................................................................................ 439
ECM 4.03-1 – Conversion from Constant Volume Primary to Variable Primary Pumping ..... 441
ECM 4.13-1– Coordinated Control of the CHP Primary and Building Tertiary pumping ........ 444
Solar Photovoltaic Executive Summary ...................................................................................... 447
ECM 21-01 (g)-1 Sherman Center Rooftop Photovoltaic Array .............................................. 448
ECM 21-01 (g)-2 Quad Four Dual-Axis Tracker Photovoltaic Array ........................................ 449
ECM 21-01 (g)-3 Plantation Hillside Fixed Tilt Photovoltaic Array ......................................... 450
ECM 21-01 (g)-4 South Road Garage Canopy Photovoltaic Array .......................................... 451
ECM 21-01 (g)-5 Plantation Street Garage Canopy Photovoltaic Array ................................. 452
ECM 21-01 (g)-6 First Road Garage Canopy Photovoltaic Array ............................................ 453
Additional ECM Summary Tables ...................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. ECMs By Building & Measure Category .................................................................................. 454
ECMs By Building & Grouped Implementation Costs ............................................................. 455
ECMs By Measure Category .................................................................................................... 456
Solar Hot Water Report .............................................................................................................. 457
Renewable Energy Technology Report ....................................................................................... 458
6 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit
INTRODUCTION
This focused ASHRAE Level 2 audit was conducted by B2Q Associates, Inc. in collaboration with the Massachusetts Department of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (DCAMM) and the University of Massachusetts Medical Center (UMass). This study is part of DCAMM’s Accelerated Energy Program (AEP), whose focus is to assess the feasibility of a “deep energy retrofit” which includes a goal to reduce purchased energy by 20%-30% and then identify renewable energy systems where financially and technically feasible. The intent is to identify and implement and integrated package of energy efficiency measures and renewable energy systems that will maximize net present value of the building over 10-20 years.
The intent of this report is to present the results associated with Task 1 of the AEP process, which includes an ASHRAE Level 2 audit of all buildings, existing condition assessment, utility analysis, preliminary list of energy conservation measures (ECMs), and a renewable energy and innovative technology assessment.
The buildings included this report are: Ambulatory Care Center (ACC), Benedict Building, Hospital, Lakeside, Lazare Research Building (LRB), and Medical School.
B2Q worked with UMass Medical Facilities and Maintenance staff from June 2014 through the writing of this report in support of the following efforts:
1. Obtain historical energy consumption records in order to establish a baseline for each building, as well as benchmark the facilities’ normalized energy consumption against each other and against other available benchmarking data sets.
2. Gather available documentation for each building including: mechanical and architectural drawings, Testing, Adjusting, and Balancing (TAB) reports, space utilization (occupancy) plans, control sequences of operation, as well as previous technical assistance and scoping studies. Documentation was processed and analyzed to create tables of equipment parameters that were used to establish accurate baseline energy models for each building as well as to be used in developing Opinions of Probable Construction Costs for the ECM’s identified.
3. Walk through mechanical spaces and occupied areas, interview facilities staff, and review building automation system (BAS) controls to gain an understanding of each building’s equipment and document operational strategies.
4. Review lighting reflected ceiling plans as well as past lighting audits and walk through a statistical sample of the occupied areas to gain an understanding of each building’s lighting systems and fixture counts to develop a high level list of recommended lighting upgrades.
5. Review available historical trend data for major air- and water-side equipment in each building to compare documented control sequences to observed operation and identify issues and potential improvement opportunities. In order to accomplish this review of large quantities of data we used a powerful visualization/analytic software tool called
7 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit
CSense which is part of General Electric’s Proficy suite of industrial hardware and software.
6. Modify the existing eQuest models for each building to accurately reflect the baseline conditions documented during the information gathering effort.
7. Identify energy conservation measures for each building; define the necessary eQuest parametric runs and develop spreadsheet models to estimate energy savings for each ECM.
8. Develop budgetary Opinions of Probable Construction Costs for the ECM’s identified and calculate simple payback estimates. These estimates presented in the draft report do not include the cost reduction impact of potential utility incentives. These will be accounted for in the final report after utility review.
8 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit
CONTACTS
UMASS MEDICAL Mark Armington Director Facilities (508) 856-5202 [email protected]
David Macneil Sr. Mechanical Project Manager
(508) 856-4776 [email protected]
Jim Gardner Director of Facilities Maintenance
(508) 856-2009 [email protected]
Joseph Collins Director of Energy Resources
(508) 856-2220 [email protected]
Andrew Doe Mechanical Engineer (508) 856-2498 [email protected]
Matthew Stelmach Sr. Electrical Project Manager
(508) 856-5031 [email protected]
Glenn Myers Maintenance Manager
(508) 856-5477 [email protected]
Steven Blair Assistant Director, Power Plant
(508) 856-2153 [email protected]
Todd Manning Senior Construction Manager
(508) 856-5230 [email protected]
DCAMM
Tony Ransom Program Manager (617) 727-4030 x31561
John Crisley Project Manager (617) 727-4030 x31561
Ray Soohoo Energy Planner (617) 727-4030 x31509
B2Q ASSOCIATES Paul Banks Principal (978) 447-5601 [email protected]
Richard Andelman Vice President (978) 447-5603 [email protected]
Michael Margareci Vice President (978) 447-5602 [email protected]
Kevin Keena Sr. Project Manager (978) 447-5603 [email protected]
Joshua Doolittle Engineer (978) 447-5607 [email protected]
Sam Deptula Engineer (978) 447-5611 [email protected]
Janne Kairento Engineer (978) 447-5610 [email protected]
Patrick Colby Designer (978) 447-5615 [email protected]
Mark Penta Lighting Specialist (978) 447-5602 [email protected]
9 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit
APPROACH & MODELING METHODOLOGY
A prior computer model of each building on campus was developed by Andelman & Lelek and used to analyze the energy savings from applicable EEMs using the eQuest building analysis program. eQuest uses the latest DOE-2.2 building energy analysis software as its calculating engine and this model was customized to the observed operation of HVAC equipment in each building on campus. eQuest also allows for the interactive effects between EEMs to be modeled. For EEMs which were deemed to be too difficult and impractical to be modeled in eQuest, custom spreadsheet calculations were performed by B2Q. The Energy savings Methodology sections of each EEM describe whether a measure was modeled using a spreadsheet or eQuest.
The A&L eQuest model was created using information collected over the course of several site visits, through discussions with facilities staff, equipment submittals, nameplate and physical operating information, building plans, and reviewing existing building automation systems. Worcester, MA TMY3 weather data was used in the analysis. Electric utility cost and cost savings were calculated using the utility rates estimated by B2Q of $0.10/kWh of electricity ($0.12/kWh for ACC only), $0.12/ton-hour of chilled water use, and $10.00/MLb of steam. Existing zoning & equipment information in the A&L model was compared against observations made on site, with necessary adjustments being made to the model baseline. The charts in Appendix B: “eQuest vs. Design Input Sheets” give an overview of the changes made to the baseline model during this process. For each EEM to be modeled in eQuest, parametric runs were created and then compared against the baseline model to calculate energy savings.
Assumptions were made for some inputs to the eQuest models due to the limitations in the availability of design data and as-built documentation. These assumptions were as follows:
“Auto-sizing” was allowed only for design parameters that could not be determined based on nameplate data, mechanical drawings, TAB reports, etc.
Savings for each individual ECM were analyzed against either the baseline model or another parametric run to capture measure interactive effects, where applicable.
10 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit
COST ESTIMATE METHODOLOGY
In order to provide more accurate opinions of probable construction cost for each of the ECMs described below, wherever possible B2Q utilized vendor quotes and/or estimates, including costs from past similar projects. Where this information was unavailable, B2Q utilized industry-standard cost estimating resources like RS Means. All VFD costs from the measures above are based on 18-pulse drives and are assumed to require a motor replacement in order to be compatible with the VFD. For component replacements, such as valves or dampers, B2Q included the cost to reconnect the control point as DDC with new electric actuators. New DDC point costs were standardized at $1,500 per point. A prevailing wage labor rate of $150 per hour was used for all trades. For all measures, line item costs for creating as-builts and contractor commissioning were also included so that UMass Medical Center staff could have accurate and comprehensive records of all work completed. Contingency, project management, engineering, and commissioning costs were estimated as a percentage of the project cost subtotal and these percentages were standardized as shown in the table below, with the exception of reduced engineering and contingency for capital measures with significant cost and increased commissioning for lower cost controls improvements.
Table 1: Summary of standard contingency, project management, engineering, and commissioning mark-ups
Contingency 20%
Engineering 10%
Construction Administration 5%
Commissioning 5%
Construction Observation 10%
Project Closeout & Expenses 5%
11 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE
The table below summarizes estimated energy savings, project costs, and simple payback periods for each of the six (6) buildings included in this study, in addition to the central chilled water pumping analysis and renewables.
Building
Equivalent Electricity Savings5
Equivalent Natural Gas
Savings5
Total Cost
Savings1
Estimated Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
Estimated Potential Electric
Incentive3
Estimated Potential
Gas Incentive3
Estimated Retrofit
Cost After Incentives
Estimated Payback
After Incentives
- kWh therms $ $ yrs $ $ $ yrs
Ambulatory Care Center (ACC) 850,478 161,467 $268,471 $1,502,308 5.6 $255,144 $201,834 $1,045,330 3.9
Benedict 456,057 37,133 $79,060 $1,124,750 14.2 $136,817 $46,417 $941,516 11.9
Hospital 7,164,528 763,680 $1,565,077 $8,694,405 5.6 $2,149,358 $954,601 $5,590,446 3.6
Lakeside6 675,129 260,440 $347,882 $390,915 1.1 $133,952 $256,963 $0 0.0
Lazare Research Building (LRB) 2,884,273 580,299 $858,530 $4,372,635 5.1 $865,282 $725,373 $2,781,979 3.2
Medical School 4,588,945 356,988 $854,250 $5,829,019 6.8 $1,376,684 $446,235 $4,006,100 4.7
Central Plant CHW Pumping 526,782 0 $52,678 $208,575 4.0 $158,035 $0 $50,540 1.0
Solar Photovoltaic2,4 3,656,978 0 $365,698 $16,369,277 44.8 $1,097,093 $0 $15,272,184 41.8
TOTALS 20,803,171 2,160,007 $4,391,646 $38,491,883 8.8 $6,240,951 $2,700,009 $29,550,923 6.7
Notes: (1) The cost savings figures in the summary table above assume the following utility rates: $0.10/kWh, $0.12/ton-hour, $10.00/Mlb. (2) Potential grants are not included in the project economics shown in the table above. (3) Incentives shown in the table are based on incentive rates provided by National Grid and NSTAR for DCAMM’s AEP projects of $0.30/kWh saved and $1.25/therm saved, respectively. All incentives presented in this report are subject to the respective utility’s review and approval. (4) Solar PV Renewables are not eligible for electric utility incentives and are therefore excluded from the preliminary incentive estimate in the table. (5) The Equivalent Electricity Savings and Equivalent Natural Gas Savings are calculated to include the CHW and Steam savings based on a ratio of the central CHW plant fuel source and plant efficiencies. (6) Potential electric and gas incentives at Lakeside were each reduced by $68,586.50 to limit the payback after incentives for this building to 0 years. However, column total incentives are based on the sum of costs and equivalent electricity and gas savings for all buildings and therefore have not been discounted.
Also note that energy savings, implementation costs, and utility incentives for Solar Hot Water measures associated with the Hospital and School are included in totals for those buildings shown in the table above.
12 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit
The table below summarizes the same information presented in the table on the previous page; however, electricity (kWh), chilled water (ton-hours), and steam (Mlbs) energy savings have been listed out separately to provide additional granularity. Refer to the building-level executive summary tables and measure descriptions throughout the report for the energy savings and project economics associated with each energy conservation measure identified.
Building
Electric Energy Savings
CHW Energy Savings
Steam Energy Savings
Equivalent Electricity
Savings
Equivalent Natural Gas
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Estimated Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
- kWh ton-hr Mlb kWh therms $ $ yrs
Ambulatory Care Center (ACC) 652,272 609,866 11,701 850,478 161,467 $268,471 $1,502,308 5.6
Benedict 442,807 40,771 2,989 456,057 37,133 $79,060 $1,124,750 14.2
Hospital 5,985,524 3,627,705 53,120 7,164,528 763,680 $1,565,077 $8,694,405 5.6
Lakeside 324,067 1,080,190 18,585 675,129 260,440 $347,882 $390,915 1.1
Lazare Research Building (LRB) 2,410,232 1,458,588 44,248 2,884,273 580,299 $858,530 $4,372,635 5.1
Medical School 4,045,373 1,672,529 24,901 4,588,945 356,988 $854,250 $5,829,019 6.8
Central Plant CHW Pumping 526,782 0 0 526,782 0 $52,678 $208,575 4.0
Renewables 3,656,978 0 0 3,656,978 0 $365,698 $16,369,277 44.8
TOTALS 18,044,035 8,489,650 155,544 20,803,171 2,160,007 $4,391,646 $38,491,883 8.8
Note: The table above uses the same assumptions for utility rates: $0.10/kWh, $0.12/ton-hour, $10.00/Mlb.
Refer to the Section titled “Error! Reference source not found.” on Page Error! Bookmark not defined. for summary tables with line items for all measures included in this report formatted in three different forms: 1) ECMs by Building and Measure Category, 2) ECMs by Building, and 3) ECMs by Measure Category
13 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ACC BUILDING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE
Notes: The cost savings figures in the summary table above assume the following utility rates: $0.10/kWh, $0.12/ton-hour, $10.00/Mlb.
ECM # ECM
Electric
Energy
Savings
CHW
Energy
Savings
Steam
Savings
Total
Cost
Savings
Retrofit
Cost
Payback
Before
Incentive
- - kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
01.01 (a) Lighting Retrofit 83,832 0 0 $10,060 $116,710 13.9
04.09 (a)-1 Tighten Occupancy Schedules 40,288 35,207 1,605 $25,106 $30,625 1.2
04.09 (a)-2 Install New Occupancy Sensors for HVAC Control 95,875 30,917 1,276 $27,976 $708,110 25.3
09.00 (a) Retrofit AHU-5 Supply Fan with VFD 8,648 0 0 $1,038 $23,000 22.2
18.00 (a)-1 Replace Weather Station 251 39,269 -23 $4,516 $12,700 2.8
18.00 (a)-2 Calibrate Flow Stations & Reduce Unoccupied OA -3,015 63,186 2,039 $27,614 $35,100 1.3
18.00 (a)-3 Static Pressure Reset on AHUs 1-4 162,714 27,859 -182 $21,046 $38,200 1.8
18.00 (a)-4 Reprogram Discharge Temperature Reset on AHUs 1-4 -3,020 73,412 280 11,250 $20,300 1.8
18.00 (a)-5 Reduce AHU-2 OA Damper Minimum Position -236 5,654 320 $3,852 $7,700 2.0
18.00 (a)-6 Calibrate Zone CO2 Sensors 0 19,892 0 $2,387 $52,200 21.9
18.00 (a)-7 Replace AHU-4 Return Air CO2 Sensor 0 6,703 0 $804 $3,500 4.4
18.00 (a)-8 Reduce VAV Unoccupied Flow Set-points -4,505 183,954 2,429 $45,827 $389,900 8.5
18.00 (a)-9 Reprogram Zone Set-points & Implement Deadband 271,440 123,813 3,595 $83,380 $55,650 0.7
18.00 (a)-10 Reprogram Unoccupied Zone Temperature Control 0 0 361 $3,615 $8,613 2.4
652,272 609,866 11,701 268,471 1,502,308 5.6TOTALS
14 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
FACILITY DESCRIPTION
The Ambulatory Care Center (ACC) is a seven story, 258,000 ft2 building that houses a mix of ambulatory clinical care centers, as well as several clinical and translational research programs. The building was opened in 2010 and achieved LEED Silver certification in 2011. The ACC attaches directly to the South Road Patient and Visitor Parking Garage and is directly accessible from three floors. The building is designed to accommodate 183,000 patient visits a year with several floors devoted to exam and treatment rooms. The facility does not have a kitchen or large cafeteria, except for a small café that sells to-go food and beverage items.
Steam and chilled water (CHW) are supplied to the building by the central power plant. There is one set of (3) tertiary CHW pumps that are designed to maintain a CHW loop differential pressure set-point in the building; however it was observed that the pumps do not normally run. The ACC Building receives steam at approximately 50 psig from the central plant.
There are (2) steam to hot water (HW) heat exchangers (HXs) that serve AHUs, fan coil units, VAV boxes, fan powered boxes, and perimeter baseboard. The pair of HXs has one set of (2) pumps that operate lead/lag to circulate the HW throughout the building. Both the HW pumps and the tertiary CHW pumps are equipped with VFDs. Domestic HW is provided by (2) steam to DHW HXs, each with 225 gallons of storage capacity.
There are (7) major air handling units in the building. Of these AHUs, (4) serve occupied areas in the building. These AHUs are all mixed air variable volume with comparative enthalpy economizer strategies, and have hot water (HW) preheat coils & chilled water (CHW) cooling coils. These AHUs all have a design supply airflow capacity of 65,000 cfm and serve both constant volume (CV) and variable volume (VAV) boxes with HW reheat coils. The remaining (2) AHUs are 100% recirculation units that condition electrical substation rooms. These units are CV, have design airflow capacities of 5,000 cfm or less, and feature cooling coils only. The building’s 6th floor pharmacy is served by AHU-7, which is a HEPA filtration unit equipped with a variable speed booster fan. Preconditioned air is supplied to AHU-7 from AHU-1,2,3, and 4, so this unit does not include heating or cooling coils.
There are also (4) fan coil units (FCUs) that serve mechanical and storage spaces and (2) computer room air conditioner (CRAC) units.
There are approximately (8) building exhaust fans serving toilet and general areas, and (5) smoke control pressurization fans serving stairwells and elevator shafts that are normally off.
ACC Building HVAC control is fully DDC through the Siemens building automation system (BAS). Some advanced control strategies such as comparative enthalpy economizer, demand-based discharge temperature reset, demand-controlled ventilation, and hot water reset are already implemented on equipment throughout the building.
A description of the existing lighting systems in the building can be found in the base case description of ECM-8: Lighting Retrofit.
15 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
BASELINE ENERGY USE & BENCHMARKING
ENERGY USE GRAPHS
ELECTRICITY Figure 1 on the following page shows electricity use for the ACC Building for Fiscal Years 2011 – 2014. It can be seen that electricity use is fairly consistent throughout the year, with slight variations between the years likely due to weather effects. According to facilities staff, a LED lighting retrofit was completed in the South Parking Garage in November 2011, which is attached to the ACC Building and is included in its utility meter. The project involved replacing metal halide fixtures with LED fixtures and resulted in an estimated 60,000 kWh in monthly electricity savings. It is not clear why the savings associated with this retrofit are not reflected in the monthly data obtained from power plant records following installation.
In November 2013, a clear drop of approximately 90,000 kWh in monthly electricity consumption is shown in the chart. The source data obtained from power plant records was reviewed to verify that this was not associated with the lighting project described above. According to facilities staff, this reduction may have been the result of changes made to equipment schedules and/or set-points; however this could not be confirmed.
Figure 2 on the following page shows the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. This baseline was determined by taking the average of the FY11-13 data and subtracting the expected electricity savings from the lighting retrofit described above (approximately 60,000 kWh/month). The chart shows that the resulting baseline average is nearly in line with the available data from Fiscal Year 2014, which was excluded from baseline calculations because the dataset was incomplete.
16 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Figure 1: ACC monthly electricity use (kWh) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 2: ACC baseline electricity use (kWh) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013 that has been corrected to reflect the savings associated with the lighting retrofit in the adjacent parking garage.
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ele
ctri
c U
se (
kWh
)
ACC Electric Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ele
ctri
c U
se (
kWh
)
ACC Baseline Electric Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-13)
17 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
STEAM This chart shows the monthly steam consumption for Fiscal Years 2011 – 2014. In Fiscal Years 2012 – 2014, some pronounced variations can be seen between months, possibly due to differentials in meter read dates. It can also be seen that Fiscal Year 2014 has a noticeably higher consumption during the winter months. The bottom graph shows the steam use averaged over Fiscal Years 2011 – 2013, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. Fiscal Year 2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
18 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Figure 3: ACC monthly steam energy use (Lbs) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 4: ACC baseline steam energy use (Lbs) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013.
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ste
am U
se (
lbs)
ACC Steam Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ste
am U
se (
lbs)
ACC Baseline Steam Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-13)
19 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
CHILLED WATER The chart below shows the ACC Building CHW use from Fiscal Years 2011 – 2014.It can be seen that CHW use is failr consistent from year to year, with slight variations between the years likely due to weather effects. The bottom graph shows the CHW use averaged over Fiscal Years 2011 – 2013, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. Fiscal Year 2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
20 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Figure 5: ACC monthly chilled water energy use (ton-days) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 6: ACC baseline chilled water energy use (ton-days) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013.
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
se (
ton
-day
s)
ACC CHW Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
se (
ton
-day
s)
ACC Baseline CHW Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-13)
21 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
BENCHMARKING
BENCHMARKING SUMMARY TABLE The table on the following page summarizes the annual energy consumption and performance metrics for the facility. This was done to provide a clear representation of the actual site and estimated source energy consumption for benchmarking and also for evaluation with energy savings opportunities. Energy use data for Fiscal Years 2011 – 2013 is shown in the table, along with an average of data from the three fiscal years.
22 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Energy Use
Annual site electricity (kWh), chilled water (ton-hours) and 50 lb steam (klbs). These figures are not adjusted for central plant efficiencies (site to source conversion).
Performance Ratings
Performance ratings are provided for electricity in three units of measure: total kWh/ft2, equivalent total kBtu/ft2, and annual average W/ft2. Note that since electric demand utility data was not available for the building, an average demand was calculated based on the building’s annual electricity consumption (kWh) divided by the total number of hours in the year (8,760) and converted to Watts (1000 W/kW).
Performance ratings for chilled water and steam are provided in equivalent kBtu/ft2 based on measured site energy consumption. Estimates for equivalent source kWh/ft2 (electricity) and kBtu/ft2 (natural gas fuel) are also included based on the following assumptions:
Fuel-to-Steam Boiler Efficiency: 80%
Electric Chiller Plant Efficiency: 0.65 kW/ton
Steam-driven Chiller Efficiency: 2.1 COP
Annual Chilled Water Load Assumptions: 20% Steam-driven chillers, 80% Electric Chillers
The total site and source performance ratings sum the equivalent source ratings (kBtu/ft2) for electricity, chilled water, and steam, so that this building can be benchmarked against similar facilities, which may generate steam and chilled water in a central plant captured in the building electricity and natural gas meters.
Site Site Site Source
ft2 FY kWh ton-hrs klbs kWh/ft2 W/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kWh/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kWh/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2
FY11 3,812,917 1,303,008 19,895 14.8 1.69 50.4 60.61 3.2 7.2 77 0 96 188 165
FY12 4,076,971 1,253,904 19,583 15.8 1.80 53.9 58.32 3.1 6.9 76 0 95 188 166
FY13 4,063,194 803,688 18,895 15.7 1.80 53.8 37.38 2.0 4.5 73 0 92 164 157
3 Year Avg. 3,281,485 1,120,200 19,458 12.7 1.45 43.4 52.10 2.8 6.2 75 0 94 171 153
UMass Medical Center ACC Building Energy Use Data
ENERGY USE PERFORMANCE RATINGS
Floor
AreaFiscal Year Electricity CHW 50# Steam Electricity
Steam Total
Source Source
CHW
258,000
23 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
EQUEST MODEL CALIBRATION
Energy and cost savings were estimated using an existing eQuest model of the facility originally developed by Andelman & Lelek and modified to reflect current equipment characteristics, schedules, and internal loads. The model used the TMY3 weather file for Worcester, MA and was calibrated against monthly electricity use over a three year period from July 2010 – July 2013. The model was also calibrated for chilled water and steam use using monthly data obtained from the UMass central plant staff. The charts below compare the baseline utility use and the calibrated eQuest model predicted utility use.
Figure 7: ACC building eQuest model electricity use calibration chart. The baseline monthly electricity use utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly electricity consumption is shown in red
24 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Figure 8: ACC building eQuest model chilled water calibration chart. The baseline monthly chilled water utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly chilled water energy consumption is shown in red.
Figure 9: ACC building eQuest model steam calibration chart. The baseline monthly steam utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly steam consumption is shown in red.
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
sage
(to
n-h
r)
Monthly Chilled Water Usage - ACC
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
Ste
am U
sage
(M
lb)
Monthly Steam Usage - ACC
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
25 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
The table below summarizes the annual end-use energy distribution for electricity, steam, and chilled water at the facility as calculated by the baseline eQuest model. The pie chart on the following page illustrates the baseline eQuest model’s electricity end use using the figures shown in the table.
The “Miscellaneous Equipment” category in the table below can include any of the following equipment types: plug loads (such as appliances, computers, peripherals, laboratory equipment, freezers/refrigerators, etc.), transformer losses assigned to the building, exterior lighting, and elevators.
The following parameters were used to model the estimated miscellaneous loads in the ACC building, based on information gathered during walkthroughs and historical whole-building electricity use:
1. Corridor and Stairwell Plug Loads: 0.10 W/ft2
2. Office, Clinical Exam Room Plug Loads: 0.60 W/ft2
3. Tel/Data Room Plug Loads: 3.0 W/ft2
4. Peak Elevator Electric Demand: 60 kW
In addition, the following parameters were used to model interior lighting loads:
1. Office, Clinical Exam Room, and Corridor Lighting Power Density: 0.78 W/ft2
2. Stairwell Lighting Power Density: 0.60 W/ft2
Table 2: ACC Building eQuest model’s annual energy end-use for each meter (electricity, steam, and chilled water).
kWh MLb ton-hrs
Area Lighting 703,740 0 0
Task lighting 0 0 0
Misc. Equip. 799,424 1,284 0
Space Heating 803 19,214 0
Space Cooling 2,706 0 1,109,864
Heat Rejection 0 0 0
Pumps and Auxiliary 175,196 0 0
Ventilation Fans 1,636,362 0 0
Refrigeration 0 0 0
Heat Pump 0 0 0
Hot Water 0 0 0
Exterior 0 0 0
Total 3,318,232 20,499 1,109,864
BaselineAnnual Energy By
End Use
26 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Figure 10: Pie chart showing ACC Building eQuest model’s annual electricity end use breakdown.
27 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES
Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) associated with the major air- and water-side equipment and terminal devices were identified following field investigations and a review of trend data from the facility’s Siemens building automation system. ECMs vary in scope from low cost measures limited to schedule, sequence, and set-point optimization, to more complex measures which may require larger capital investment associated with equipment replacement or retrofit.
28 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-01.01 (A) LIGHTING RETROFIT
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 01.01 (a) Lighting Retrofit
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
83,832 $8,383 0 $0 0 $0 $8,383 $116,710 13.9
BASE CASE The lighting consists of 1’ by 4’ one lamp 32 Watt T8 fixtures, and 2’x4’ two and three lamp 32 Watt T8 fixtures. There is a substantial number of 13 Watt recessed cans that contain 13 Watt compact fluorescents (CFLs). The facility also contains a large quantity of 2’x2’ two and three lamp 14 Watt T5 volumetric fixtures. The lens type on most fixtures is either prismatic or volumetric. The recessed cans do not have a lens. Occupancy sensors for lighting control are installed throughout the facility in the majority of spaces.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to upgrade existing lamps and ballasts to newer high efficiency units where applicable. Refer to the Opinion of Probable Cost Table on the following page for a breakdown of proposed equipment types and quantities. We recommend replacing 4’ 32 Watt T8 lamps with high efficiency 25 or 28 Watt lamps and NEMA Premium (NP) electronic ballasts. We also recommend replacing CFLs and incandescent floods with LED lamps. The recommendations do not include fixture upgrades or replacement in an effort to present a more effective retrofit approach. There is no change recommended for the existing T5 fixtures.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in electricity use by installing high efficiency fluorescent lamps and more efficient ballasts. The energy savings calculations make estimates for annual run hours of each fixture based on information obtained from facilities and maintenance staff. The calculations assume that run hours remain the same in the proposed case.
ASSUMPTIONS The audit was performed, room-by-room, on all of floor A (with the exception of areas that were inaccessible), and floors one and two. Given the consistency on the floor plan and area/room type between floor two, and floors three, four and five, those floors were estimated based upon room size and corresponding fixture type and quantity from the audit of floor two. A high level walk through of those floors was performed and apparent differences captured in the audit data. Areas on floors six and seven that were identified on the floor plan as being
29 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
different from the preceding floors were reviewed and added to the audit. The remaining, similar areas on floors six and seven were extrapolated from the audit results of the floors below. Occupancy sensing and other lighting controls are excluded from this measure due to the nature of the spaces served and 24/7 building operation.
30 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The cost estimate for this measure is shown in the table below. The labor cost for the recommended retrofits are included in the material costs below.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3-Audit
Retrofit - 1 Lamp 32 Watt T8 with NP Ballast
with 1 Lamp 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 114 $45 $5,130 $0 0 0 $0 $5,130
2 3-Audit
Retrofit - 3 Lamp 3 foot 30 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 3 Lamp 25 Watt T8 with HP Ballast ea 11 $60 $660 $0 0 0 $0 $660
3 3-Audit
Retrofit - 2 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 2 Lamp 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 969 $55 $53,295 $0 0 0 $0 $53,295
4 3-Audit
Retrofit - 3 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 3 Lamp 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 2 $60 $120 $0 0 0 $0 $120
4 3-Audit
Replace 13 Watt Compact Florescents lamps
(CFL's) with 5 Watt LED's ea 661 $5 $3,305 $0 0 0 $0 $3,305
Subtotal $62,510
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $12,600
3 Other Engineering 15% $11,300
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $3,800
Commissioning 20% $15,100
Construction Observation 10% $7,600
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $3,800
Total $116,710
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost01-01 (a): Retrofit Lighting Fixtures
General Materials Labor
Sources
31 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-04.09 (A)-1 TIGHTEN OCCUPANCY SCHEDULES
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (a)-1 Tighten Occupancy Schedules
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
40,288 $4,835 35,207 $4,225 1,605 $16,047 $25,106 $30,625 1.2
BASE CASE The majority of thermal zones in the building are currently setback using a global occupancy schedule (Monday - Friday 5:30am - 7:30pm). However, there are areas in the building that have occupancy patterns that are not occupied as late as 7:30pm and could benefit from customized scheduling.
PROPOSED CASE We propose tightening the existing occupancy schedule in the areas of the building that are generally occupied during typical office hours to Monday - Friday 6:00am - 6:00pm. The proposed schedule and specific zones included in this measure will be reviewed with UMass Medical Facilities and Maintenance staff prior to implementation.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the increase in hours that zones are unoccupied as a result of tighter occupancy schedules. During the unoccupied mode, zone temperature set-points set back and VAV box airflow set-points are reset to 40% of their occupied minimums, resulting in less fan, heating, and cooling energy consumed at the VAV box and upstream AHU.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQUEST model. The run was performed on the zones listed in the table above that are served by the AHU-1,2,3,4 system. The parametric run changed the following parameters:
Base Case
COOL-TEMP-SCH: Health Cool Sch
o M-F 5:00am - 8:00pm: 72.0°F
o All other hours: 95°F
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: Health Heat Sch
o M-F 5:00am - 8:00pm: 72°F
o All other hours: 60°F
32 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
MIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.70
HMIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.65
MIN-FLOW-SCH: Min Flow AS
o M-F 5:00am - 8:00pm: -999 [Calculate based on MIN-FLOW-RATIO]
o All other hours: 0.30
Proposed Case
COOL-TEMP-SCH: Prop Health Cool Sch
o M-F 6:00am - 6:00pm: 72.0°F
o All other hours: 95°F
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: Prop Health Heat Sch
o M-F 6:00am - 6:00pm: 72°F
o All other hours: 60°F
MIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.70
HMIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.65
MIN-FLOW-SCH: Min Flow AS
o M-F 5:00am - 5:00pm: -999 [Calculate based on MIN-FLOW-RATIO]
33 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: PB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: KK
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Controls Programming ea 414 $0 $0 $150 1 0.15 $9,315 $9,315
2 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 414 $0 $150 1 0.1 $6,210 $6,210
Subtotal $16,725
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $3,400
3 Other Engineering 15% $3,100
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,100
Commissioning 15% $3,100
Construction Observation 10% $2,100
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,100
Total $30,625
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.09 (a)-1: Tighten Occupancy Schedules
General Materials Labor
34 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-04.09 (A)-2 INSTALL NEW OCCUPANCY SENSORS FOR HVAC
CONTROL
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (a)-2 Install New Occupancy Sensors for HVAC Control
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
95,875 $11,505 30,917 $3,710 1,276 $12,761 $27,976 $708,110 25.3
BASE CASE The majority of thermal zones in the building are currently setback using a global occupancy schedule (Monday - Friday 5:30am - 7:30pm). Setbacks include lower minimum airflow set-points and the following temperature set-points: 60°F heating / 95°F cooling. However, there are areas throughout the building that are either continuously unoccupied or have occupancy patterns that differ from the global schedule. Most zones are equipped with occupancy sensors that control lighting operation, but do not interface with the building automation system and do not control HVAC set-points or schedules.
PROPOSED CASE We propose replacing all existing occupancy sensors with units that feature two outputs for sending signals to separate lighting and HVAC controllers. This would enable the global building automation system equipment schedule to be overridden in the event that an office zone becomes unoccupied during the day prior to 7:30pm.
We recommend maintaining a global occupied schedule start time on each week day in order to ensure that zones are able to recover to occupied temperature set-points. If no occupancy is detected by the sensor for a duration of 60 minutes after the start of the normally occupied period, the zone would then be set-back until occupancy is detected.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the increase in hours that zones are unoccupied due to occupancy sensor control. During the unoccupied mode, zone temperature set-points set back and VAV box airflow set-points are reset to 40% of their occupied minimums, resulting in less fan, heating, and cooling energy consumed at the VAV box and upstream AHU.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the eQuest model using the results of ECM-7.1 as the baseline for savings calculations. This was done in order to account for the overlap between the two measures. The run was performed
35 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
on the approximately 50% of zones that are served by the AHU-1,2,3,4 system to simulate the benefits of installing occupancy sensors. The parametric run changed the following parameters:
Base Case
COOL-TEMP-SCH: Health Cool Sch
o M-F 5:00am - 8:00pm: 72.0°F
o All other hours: 95°F
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: Health Heat Sch
o M-F 5:00am - 8:00pm: 72°F
o All other hours: 60°F
MIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.70
HMIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.65
MIN-FLOW-SCH: Min Flow AS
o M-F 5:00am - 8:00pm: -999 [Calculate based on MIN-FLOW-RATIO]
o All other hours: 0.30
Proposed Case - Applied to Approximately 50% of Thermal Zones
COOL-TEMP-SCH: Prop Health Cool Sch
o M-F 7:00am - 12:00pm, 1:00pm - 4:00pm: 72.0°F
o All other hours: 95°F
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: Prop Health Heat Sch
o M-F 7:00am - 12:00pm, 1:00pm - 4:00pm: 72.0°F
o All other hours: 60°F
MIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.70
HMIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.65
MIN-FLOW-SCH: Min Flow AS
o M-F 7:00am - 12:00pm, 1:00pm - 4:00pm: -999 [Calculate based on MIN-FLOW-RATIO]
o All other hours: 0.30
36 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: PB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: KK
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Occupancy Sensors ea 414 $150 $62,100 $150 1 2 $124,200 $186,300
2 3 Controls Points ea 414 $250 $103,500 $150 1 1 $62,100 $165,600
3 3 Controls Programming ea 414 $0 $150 1 1 $62,100 $62,100
4 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
5 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 414 $0 $150 1 0.1 $6,210 $6,210
Subtotal $421,410
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $84,300
3 Other Engineering 15% $75,900
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $25,300
Commissioning 5% $25,300
Construction Observation 10% $50,600
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $25,300
Total $708,110
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.09 (a)-2: Install Occupancy Sensors for HVAC Control
General Materials Labor
Sources
37 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-09.00 (A) RETROFIT AHU-5 SUPPLY FAN WITH VFD
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 09.00 (a) Retrofit AHU-5 Supply Fan with VFD
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
8,648 $1,038 0 $0 0 $0 $1,038 $23,000 22.2
BASE CASE AHU-5 is a 100% recirculation constant volume air handling unit with a 5 hp supply fan that provides mechanical cooling for Electric Room 801 in the penthouse. The system is configured to cycle the supply fan on as needed to meet the zone cooling set-point. A review of historical trend data showed that the cycle time for the AHU ranges between 30 - 120 minutes, and when the system was running, the chilled water valve was only partially open, indicating that the unit is typically operating at part load. Figure 11 on Page 38 shows a sample weeklong period of operation including the supply fan status, chilled water valve position, zone temperature, and discharge air temperature.
PROPOSED CASE We propose retrofitting the AHU-5’s supply fan with a VFD and revising the existing sequence of operation to minimize fan power. We recommend operating the supply fan continuously at minimum speed (15 Hz, adjustable) and modulating the chilled water valve to maintain the zone temperature set-point. If the chilled water valve is fully open and the zone temperature set-point is not met, the supply fan speed would slowly increase as necessary to meet the set-point. The reverse would occur once the set-point is met.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in AHU-5’s fan energy that is used to meet the zone cooling load.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a one-line spreadsheet model. Trend data was used to estimate the existing cycling ratio, or percentage of time spent running. It was estimated that the proposed VFD unit would run continuously at an average VFD speed equal to the cycling ratio of the base case. A VFD exponent of 2.5 was estimated, based on the low minimum static pressure requirements of the supply fan.
38 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Figure 11: The trend screenshot below shows typical operation of AHU-5 over a 10 day period in July. The system maintains the zone temperature (RED) to between 76-80°F by cycling on every 30-120 minutes. The supply temperature (ORANGE) while running with the chilled water valve (PINK) partially open is never lower than 70°F.
39 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By:
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 5 HP VFD est 1 $2,500 $2,500 $150 1 16 $2,400 $4,900
2 3 Controls - 4pts ea 4 $1,000 $4,000 $150 1 4 $2,400 $6,400
2 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
Subtotal $13,100
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $2,700
3 Other Engineering 15% $2,400
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $800
Commissioning 10% $1,600
Construction Observation 10% $1,600
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $800
Total $23,000
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-09.00 (a): Retrofit AHU-5 Supply Fan with VFD
General Materials Labor
Sources
40 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-18.00 (A)-1 REPLACE WEATHER STATION
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (a)-1 Replace Weather Station
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
251 $30 39,269 $4,712 -23 -$226 $4,516 $12,700 2.8
BASE CASE Historical trend logs show that the building’s outdoor air temperature sensor is consistently reading approximately 5°F higher than the sensors for other buildings on the UMass Medical campus. The disparity was found to occur during the day and at night, which suggests that calibration drift may be the root cause as opposed to improper placement or shielding. A higher temperature measurement during daylight hours only often indicates that the sensor is picking up additional heat from direct or reflected radiation. Since the sensor for ACC is also reading higher at night, calibration is the most likely cause. Figure 12 on Page 42 shows a comparison between ACC’s outdoor air temperature and the Hospital’s outdoor air temperature measurement.
Since the building’s four AHUs feature a comparative enthalpy economizer strategy, the accuracy of temperature and humidity sensors are crucial to efficient operation during mild weather. Trend data shows that the apparent sensor drift is preventing airside economizer operation when conditions are appropriate.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend calibrating the building’s outdoor air weather station, including temperature and relative humidity sensors, to improve the effectiveness of the existing comparative enthalpy economizer strategy. We also recommend implementing a schedule to calibrate these sensors on an annual basis going forward to maintain the persistence of savings associated with this measure.
This measure will reduce mechanical cooling energy used at the four AHUs during periods when the outdoor air enthalpy is between 0-3.5 Btu/lb less than the return air enthalpy of each AHU. This range approximately corresponds to an average sensor drift of 5°F, with some variation due to fluctuations in relative humidity.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in mechanical cooling energy that is used when economizer was inappropriately locked-out in the base case as a result of the outdoor air temperature reading higher than actual.
41 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on AHU-1,2,3,4 and changed the economizer’s comparative enthalpy enable offset (Outdoor Air Enthalpy < Return Air Enthalpy) from 3.5 Btu/lb in the base case to 0 Btu/lb in the proposed case. The 3.5 Btu/lb existing case offset represents the enthalpy differential corresponding to the outdoor air temperature sensor drift of 5°F at an average outdoor air relative humidity of 65%. By implementing a positive offset in the base case eQuest model, the economizer sequence is limited to operate only when the outdoor air enthalpy is less than the return air enthalpy by 3.5 Btu/lb, which reduces the number of hours the economizer can be enabled.
42 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Figure 12: The trend screenshot below shows the difference between the ACC outdoor air temperature measurement (RED) and the Hospital outdoor air temperature measurement (BLUE). The difference ranges between 3-10°F during the year, which an average of 5°F.
43 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: PB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: KK
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2
New Weather Station(s) -incl redundant
reference station ea 2 $1,000 $2,000 $150 1 8 $2,400 $4,400
3 3 Programming ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
5 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal $7,400
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,500
3 Other Engineering 15% $1,400
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $500
Commissioning 5% $500
Construction Observation 10% $900
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $500
Total $12,700
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost ECM-18.00 (a)-1: Replace Weather Station
General Materials Labor
Sources
44 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-18.00 (A)-2 CALIBRATE FLOW STATIONS & REDUCE UNOCCUPIED OUTDOOR
AIR
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (a)-2 Calibrate Flow Stations & Reduce Unoccupied Outdoor Air
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
-3,015 -$362 63,186 $7,582 2,039 $20,394 $27,614 $35,100 1.3
BASE CASE According to the as-built controls submittal for the building, AHU-1,2,3, and 4 are equipped with separate modulating minimum and maximum outdoor air dampers. The minimum outdoor air dampers are specified to modulate in order to maintain an effective outdoor airflow set-point based on return and zone air CO2 measurements. The minimum outdoor airflow set-point should between 40% - 100% of design outdoor airflow, corresponding to 7,800 cfm - 19,500 cfm. If the AHU return air CO2 measurement is below set-point (750 ppm) and all zone CO2 measurements are below alarm (950 ppm), then the minimum outdoor airflow set-point should be at its lowest.
Historical trend logs show that each of the four major air handling units have an actual minimum outdoor air ratio ranging between 32% - 48%, which corresponds to a minimum airflow of approximately 11,500 cfm - 24,000 cfm depending on the total supply airflow. The data suggests that none of the AHUs reach the 7,800 cfm minimum described in the original sequence and minimum outdoor airflow was not observed to reset during unoccupied periods when the building’s main exhaust fans shut down.
The trend logs also suggest that the outdoor airflow stations may be out of calibration. Minimum outdoor airflow was calculated using mixed air temperature, return air temperature, and an accurate outdoor air temperature, and then compared against the measured minimum outdoor air flow. In all cases, the calculated flow using temperatures was greater than the measured flow.
PROPOSED CASE We propose calibrating the outdoor airflow stations on AHU-1, 2, 3, and 4 and implementing a new outdoor air sequence of operation. Specifically, each AHU would maintain an occupied minimum airflow set-point of 12,500 cfm, which would reset higher as necessary to maintain the return air CO2 set-point of 750 ppm or if any individual zone CO2 exceeds 950 ppm. A minimum set-point of 12,500 cfm per AHU is recommended based on an analysis of building exhaust fans to maintain proper building pressurization during occupied periods.
45 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
In addition, we recommend a further reduction in outdoor airflow during unoccupied periods when the building’s six general and toilet exhaust fans shut down. Combined, these fans have a design flow of 42,400 cfm and are currently scheduled Monday-Friday 5:30am - 7:30pm. During unoccupied periods, the total building exhaust flow decreases by nearly 90% and as a result, less outdoor air is necessary to maintain pressurization. Similarly, since the building is primarily unoccupied at night and on weekends, less ventilation is necessary to maintain CO2 set-points. We recommend reducing the minimum outdoor airflow set-point on each of the two running AHUs to 3,000 cfm during unoccupied periods, resulting in a total ventilation rate of 6,000 cfm.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in heating and mechanical cooling energy that is necessary to condition excess amounts of outdoor air.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the eQuest model, using the results of ECM-2.2 as the baseline for savings calculations. This was done in order to avoid double-counting savings between the two measures. The run was performed on AHU-1,2,3,4 and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
Outdoor airflow calculation type: Fraction of hourly flow
Minimum outdoor airflow ratio: 43%
Minimum outdoor airflow schedule: None
Proposed Case
Outdoor airflow calculation type: Fraction of design flow
Minimum outdoor airflow ratio: 19.2% [Occupied]
Minimum outdoor airflow schedule:
o 19.2% [Monday – Friday 5:30am – 7:30pm]
o 5% [Monday – Friday 7:30pm – 5:30am, All Day Saturday – Sunday]
46 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: PB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: KK
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Controls ea 4 $0 $150 1 4 $2,400 $2,400
2 3 TAB ea 4 $0 $150 2 8 $9,600 $9,600
3 4 Damper/Actuator Allowance ea 4 $500 $2,000 $150 2 2 $2,400 $4,400
4 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
5 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 4 $0 $150 1 4 $2,400 $2,400
Subtotal $19,400
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $3,900
3 Other Engineering 15% $3,500
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,200
Commissioning 15% $3,500
Construction Observation 10% $2,400
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,200
Total $35,100
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (a)-2: Calibrate Flow Stations & Reduce Unoccupied Outdoor Air
General Materials Labor
47 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-18.00 (A)-3 STATIC PRESSURE RESET ON AHUS 1-4
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (a)-3 Static Pressure Reset on AHUs 1-4
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
162,714 $19,526 27,859 $3,343 -182 -$1,823 $21,046 $38,200 1.8
BASE CASE AHU-1, 2, 3, and 4 are variable volume units that control to a fixed duct static pressure set-point of 1.5” WC. The majority of terminal boxes served by these units have minimum airflow set-points of approximately 25% of maximum, indicating an opportunity to reduce duct static during periods of low load.
PROPOSED CASE We propose resetting the duct static pressure set-point on AHU-1, 2, 3, and 4 using a new cascading control algorithm. Every 15 minutes the BAS will perform a damper position “high select” on all VAV boxes served by the AHUs. If the average of the top five (user selectable from 1 to 10) “high select” boxes is between 85% and 90% open the system shall hold its current discharge pressure set-point. If the average is below 80% open the BAS logic shall cascade its duct static pressure set-point down to a low of 1.0” WC. If the average of the top five boxes is greater than 90% then the system duct static pressure set-point shall cascade up to a maximum of 1.85” WC. The cascading reset loop shall be tuned to avoid unnecessary hunting.
This proposed sequence ensures that sufficient static pressure is maintained in order to supply enough airflow to meet demand, while allowing for “rogue“ non-critical zone(s) that are consistently at or near maximum flow.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in AHU fan horsepower needed to maintain a lower duct static pressure set-point when the system is at part load.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on AHU-1,2,3,4 and changed the supply fan “EIR f(PLR)” performance curve that calculates fan input power as a function of airflow part load ratio. The curve used in the base case is the standard curve available from the eQuest library. A custom curve was developed for the proposed case to model a demand-based duct static pressure reset. At maximum a fan part load ratio of 30%, the proposed fan energy input ratio (EIR) was 0.297 compared to an existing EIR of 0.372, resulting in 20% savings at lowest part load. EIR is defined to be the ratio of electric energy input (Btu/hr) to the rated energy
48 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
output (Btu/hr) of the fan. The chart below illustrates the existing and proposed can fan curves used to estimate energy savings.
Figure 13: Existing and proposed case fan curves [EIR = f(Part Load Ratio)] used to model demand-based static pressure reset energy savings.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Ele
ctri
c In
pu
t R
atio
Part Load Ratio
AHU-1,2,3,4 Static Pressure Reset Curve
Existing Case Curve (No SP Reset) Proposed Case Curve (SP Reset)
49 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Figure 14: The trend screenshot below shows that duct static pressure is maintained at the set-point of 1.85” WC.
50 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: PB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: KK
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3
Controls Programming-Assumes polling
zone based feedback ea 4 $0 $150 1 24 $14,400 $14,400
2 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 4 $0 $150 1 8 $4,800 $4,800
4 $0 $0 $0
5 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal $20,400
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $4,100
3 Other Engineering 15% $3,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,300
Commissioning 20% $4,900
Construction Observation 10% $2,500
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,300
Total $38,200
ECM-18.00 (a)-3: Static Pressure Reset on AHUs 1-4
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
General Materials Labor
Sources
51 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-18.00 (A)-4 REPROGRAM DISCHARGE TEMPERATURE RESET ON
AHUS 1-4
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00-7 Reconfigure Discharge Temperature Reset on AHUs 1-4
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
-3,020 -$302 73,412 $8,809 280 $2,803 $11,311 $20,300 1.8
BASE CASE AHU-1, 2, 3, and 4 are equipped with hot water preheat, chilled water cooling, and control to a discharge air temperature set-point that resets based on zone temperature error. The sequence of operation states that if any zone is more than 1°F above the effective zone cooling set-point, the AHU discharge air temperature set-point resets to the minimum of 55°F. Historical trend data available between May – September shows that the discharge air temperature set-points on any of the four major AHUs did not reset above the 55°F minimum.
Terminal box trends show that many zones temperatures that were not meeting their effective temperature set-points, which is restricting the AHU discharge set-point from resetting higher. The primary air damper positions on boxes in these zones were found to only partially open, however, suggesting that the boxes may need to be rebalanced for the current loads.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend rebalancing terminal boxes that are unable to meet zone temperature set-points and reconfigure the existing demand-based discharge temperature reset to work in tandem with static pressure reset proposed in ECM-3. The discharge air temperature set-point on AHUs 1-4 is not currently resetting because zone temperature set-points are not being met in several zones. This is likely due to improper minimum and maximum airflow set-points on the terminal boxes in these zones. As a result, we propose rebalancing these zones so that they are able to accurately meet zone set-points. The proposed sequence of operation is to reset the discharge temperature set-point higher only after the AHU duct static pressure set-point has reached minimum. This will reduce the potential for the two reset sequences to fight each other, which would reduce their energy savings.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in chilled water energy consumption and terminal reheat and perimeter baseboard energy consumption during periods when the discharge
52 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
temperature set-point resets higher. A comparatively small fan energy penalty is modeled as part of the measure, since higher primary air temperatures may require zones with larger internal loads to supply more airflow to meet cooling set-points during the shoulder seasons.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on AHU-1,2,3,4 and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
Cool Control: Warmest
Reset Priority: Simultaneous
Maximum Cooling Reset Temp: 55°F
Minimum Cooling Reset Temp: 55°F
Proposed Case
Cool Control: Warmest
Reset Priority: Simultaneous
Maximum Cooling Reset Temp: 60°F
Minimum Cooling Reset Temp: 55°F
In the base case, the “maximum cooling reset temp” of 55°F was specified to limit the demand-based reset from enabling a set-point than 55°F, based on observations made from historical trend data.
53 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Figure 15: The trend screenshot below shows the discharge air temperatures for AHU-1, 2, 3, and 4 between 6/1/2014 - 7/30/2014. When in the occupied mode, each AHU discharges at a constant 55°F.
54 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: PB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: KK
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3
Controls Programming-Assumes polling
zone based feedback and SP reset is in
place ea 4 $0 $150 1 8 $4,800 $4,800
2 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 4 $0 $150 1 8 $4,800 $4,800
$0 $0 $0
$0 $0
Subtotal $10,800
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $2,200
3 Other Engineering 15% $2,000
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $700
Commissioning 20% $2,600
Construction Observation 10% $1,300
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $700
Total $20,300
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (a)-4: Reconfigure Discharge Temperature Reset on AHUs 1-4
General Materials Labor
Sources
55 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-18.00 (A)-5 REDUCE AHU-2 OA DAMPER MINIMUM POSITION
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (a)-5 Reduce AHU-2 OA Damper Minimum Position
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
-236 -$28 5,654 $678 320 $3,202 $3,852 $7,700 2.0
BASE CASE Historical trend data shows that the maximum outdoor air (economizer) damper on AHU-2 does not close during periods when economizer and demand-controlled ventilation sequences are disabled. The damper’s minimum position was observed to be 20%, compared to a 0% minimum on the other three identical AHUs. The maximum outdoor air dampers can have a 0% minimum position because modulating minimum outdoor air dampers are used to maintain sufficient outdoor airflow at all times for building pressurization and ventilation.
The minimum outdoor air ratio calculated for AHU-2 using outdoor, return, and mixed air temperatures was the highest of all four AHUs at approximately 46%.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend reducing the minimum position of the maximum outdoor air damper on AHU-2 from 20% to 0%. This will reduce heating and cooling energy consumption associated with conditioning additional outdoor air during periods when economizer and demand-controlled ventilation sequences are disabled.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in heating and mechanical cooling energy that is necessary to condition excess amounts of outdoor air.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on the AHU-1,2,3,4 system and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
Minimum OA Schedule: Min OA Annual
Minimum outdoor airflow ratio: 45% [all hours]
Proposed Case
Minimum OA Schedule: Min OA Annual
56 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Minimum outdoor airflow ratio: 43% [all hours]
57 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: PB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: KK
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Controls Programming ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
2 3 TAB ea 1 $0 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
3 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
5 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal $4,200
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $900
3 Other Engineering 15% $800
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $300
Commissioning 10% $600
Construction Observation 10% $600
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $300
Total $7,700
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (a)-5: Reduce AHU-2 OA Damper Minimum Position
General Materials Labor
Sources
58 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-18.00 (A)-6 CALIBRATE ZONE CO2 SENSORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (a)-6 Calibrate Zone CO2 Sensors
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 19,892 $2,387 0 $0 $2,387 $52,200 21.9
BASE CASE Historical trend data shows that the maximum outdoor air (economizer) damper on AHU-2 was open up to 100% in the summer when the outdoor air enthalpy was greater than the return enthalpy and economizer should be disabled. The demand controlled ventilation sequence should have also been disabled based on return air CO2, which peaked at 510 ppm during an occupied period in July. According to the original sequence of operation, demand controlled ventilation may also be enabled if any zone’s CO2 measurement exceeds an alarm set-point of 950 ppm. Although trend data was not available for all zones, it is possible that one or more zone CO2 measurements were above this alarm threshold, activating the DCV sequence and causing the outdoor air damper to open above minimum.
A portable CO2 sensor was used to determine if concentrations above 950 ppm were typical in densely occupied zones, or if sensor calibration may be an issue. Measurements were taken at approximately 11:30am on a weekday in a densely occupied area of the fourth floor, which according to an Operating Engineer was estimated to have the highest CO2 concentration in the building due to dense occupancy. However, the highest measurement recorded during the test was 550 ppm. This suggests that one or more zone CO2 sensors may be out of calibration, especially if these sensors have not been calibrated since installation.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend calibrating (40) zone CO2 sensors to reduce heating and cooling loads during periods when the economizer sequence is disabled. We also recommend reviewing AHU-2’s return air CO2 set-point and zone air CO2 alarm thresholds to determine if an overridden set-point is causing the demand controlled ventilation sequence to activate instead of a miscalibrated sensor.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in heating and mechanical cooling energy that is necessary to condition excess amounts of outdoor air when the demand-controlled ventilation sequence was incorrectly enabled due to faulty CO2 sensor measurements.
59 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a bin spreadsheet model. Trend data collected from the Siemens BAS between May and August 2014 was used to determine the existing case average outdoor air ratio for AHU-2 during periods when economizer was disabled but the max-outdoor air damper position was greater than 0%. In the proposed case, the outdoor air fraction was set to 32% to model the benefits of correcting the issue with the demand-controlled ventilation sequence and closing the maximum-outdoor air damper.
60 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: PB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: KK
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Calibrate CO2 Sensors ea 40 $0 $150 1 4 $24,000 $24,000
2 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 0 $0 $0
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 40 $0 $150 1 1 $6,000 $6,000
4 $0 $0 $0
5 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal $30,000
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $6,000
3 Other Engineering 15% $5,400
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,800
Commissioning 10% $3,600
Construction Observation 10% $3,600
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,800
Total $52,200
General Materials Labor
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (a)-6: Calibrate Zone CO2 Sensors
61 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-18.00 (A)-7 REPLACE AHU-4 RETURN AIR CO2 SENSOR
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (a)-7 Replace AHU-4 Return Air CO2 Sensor
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 6,703 $804 0 $0 $804 $3,500 4.4
BASE CASE Historical trend data shows that the return air CO2 measurement on AHU-4 typically reached over 1,000 ppm and as high as 1,120 ppm each weekday. See Figure 16 on Page 63 for a chart that shows the return air CO2 trend over time. It is suspected that this sensor is out of calibration based on the following observations:
The return air ducts for each of the four major AHUs are headered on each floor, which should allow for partial mixing of the return air
The return air CO2 measurements on the three other AHUs are consistently lower than AHU-4. For example, AHU-3’s peak CO2 measurement of 710 ppm on 7/14/2014 is the closest in magnitude to AHU-4, a 390 ppm difference.
In the sample of zone trend data downloaded, the peak zone CO2 measurement found was 810 ppm. No zone CO2 measurements reviewed approached or exceeded the typical return air CO2 of AHU-4.
As a result of the elevated return air CO2 measurement, the maximum outdoor air damper on AHU-4 was found to be above minimum position during occupied periods throughout the summer months when the economizer sequence was disabled.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend replacing the return air CO2 sensor on AHU-4 to improve the efficiency of the demand-controlled ventilation sequence by providing accurate CO2 concentration feedback to the controls. This should reduce the amount of outdoor air that must be conditioned during periods when economizer is disabled.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in heating and mechanical cooling energy that is necessary to condition excess amounts of outdoor air when the demand-controlled ventilation sequence was incorrectly enabled due to faulty CO2 sensor measurements.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a bin spreadsheet model. Trend data collected from the Siemens BAS between May and August 2014 was used to
62 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
determine Return air conditions, supply air conditions, and mixed air conditions. TMY3 weather data for Worcester, MA was used was used to determine the exact amount of run hours spent by the unit in each temperature bin. Savings were taken by comparing the energy use of AHU-4 under the current air mixing behavior and under a situation where the OA dampers remain at minimum position for all hours when economizer mode is locked out. The minimum outside air percentage used to calculate proposed case energy use was 30%.
63 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Figure 16: The trend screenshot below shows a typical two-week period of Return Air CO2 Concentration (RED) and supply fan speed (BLUE). The highlighted timestamp on 7/7/2014 at 11:45 am indicates the return air CO2 reached nearly 1,100 ppm during the occupied period. This is inconsistent with field measurements taken using a properly calibrated handheld meter.
64 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: PB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: KK
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Replace CO2 Sensor ea 1 $500 $500 $150 1 4 $600 $1,100
2 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 0 $0 $0
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
4 $0 $0 $0
5 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal $1,700
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $400
3 Other Engineering 15% $400
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $200
Commissioning 10% $300
Construction Observation 10% $300
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $200
Total $3,500
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (a)-7: Replace AHU-4 Return Air CO2 Sensor
General Materials Labor
Sources
65 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-18.00 (A)-8 REDUCE VAV UNOCCUPIED FLOW SET-POINTS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (a)-8 Reduce VAV Unoccupied Flow Set-points
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
-4,505 -$541 183,954 $22,075 2,429 $24,293 $45,827 $389,900 8.5
BASE CASE The majority of the building’s VAV boxes are configured to maintain an unoccupied airflow set-point that is 40% of the occupied minimum airflow set-point and approximately 25% of the maximum VAV airflow. Historical trend data shows that this continuous supply of conditioned air limits the zones from ever reaching unoccupied temperature set-points. Although the unoccupied set-points are relatively aggressive (60°F heating / 95°F), the full benefit of the set-back is not being realized as a result of the continuous airflow.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend that all VAV box minimum airflow set-points be reduced to 0 cfm during the unoccupied mode while maintaining the existing zone temperature set-backs. According to ASHRAE 62.1-2013, the most recent standard for facility ventilation requirements, ventilation should be supplied to a zone when it is expected to be occupied. Ventilation is not required during periods when a zone is unoccupied and as a result, supply airflow set-points can be reduced to 0 cfm in areas without continuous exhaust flow and/or space pressurization requirements.
In the proposed case, perimeter hot water baseboard shall be used as the first stage of heat if the zone reaches the unoccupied heating set-point. If the zone cannot meet the set-point with the baseboard on, the VAV airflow set-point shall be reset higher and the reheat valve shall open as necessary to meet the set-point. In zones equipped with fan-powered terminal boxes, the primary air damper shall remain closed during the unoccupied period and the fan and heating coil shall be used to maintain the zone heating set-point.
If the zone reaches the unoccupied cooling set-point, the VAV airflow set-point shall be reset to maintain the set-point. At all times during the unoccupied mode, VAV airflow set-points shall be limited to their current unoccupied minimums.
As part of this measure, we recommend a revision to the existing AHU staging sequence that currently shuts down two out of four AHUs during unoccupied periods. Due to the proposed reduction in unoccupied minimum airflow set-points throughout the building, we propose shutting down a third unit if the following conditions are met:
66 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
The supply fan on each running AHU reaches minimum speed (20 Hz)
Duct static pressure is greater than the effective set-point
Once the third AHU is shut down, it would remain off until the running unit’s supply fan speed reaches 45 Hz.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in fan, heating, and mechanical cooling energy that is necessary to supply excess conditioned air to zones during unoccupied periods. VAV reheat and perimeter baseboard heating savings is not anticipated since the majority of zones do not currently reach the unoccupied heating set-point throughout the year.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on the zones served by the AHU-1,2,3,4 system and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
MIN-FLOW-SCH: Min Flow Ratio
o Monday - Friday 5:00am - 8:00pm: 0.70
o All other hours: 0.30
Proposed Case
MIN-FLOW-SCH: ECM#6.1 Min Flow Ratio
o Monday - Friday 5:00am - 8:00pm: 0.70
o All other hours: 0.05
67 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: PB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: KK
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 VAV Controls ea 414 $0 $0 $150 1 0.5 $31,050 $31,050
2 3 AHU Controls (Shut Down 3rd AHU) ea 1 $0 $0 $150 1 24 $3,600 $3,600
3 3 TAB ea 414 $0 $0 $150 1 2 $124,200 $124,200
4 4 Damper/Actuator Allowance ea 20 $500 $10,000 $150 2 4 $24,000 $34,000
5 3 As-built ea 414 $0 $0 $150 1 0.25 $15,525 $15,525
6 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 414 $0 $0 $150 1 0.25 $15,525 $15,525
Subtotal $223,900
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $44,800
3 Other Engineering 15% $40,400
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $13,500
Commissioning 10% $26,900
Construction Observation 10% $26,900
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $13,500
Total $389,900
General Materials Labor
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (a)-8: Reduce VAV Box Unoccupied Flow Set-points
68 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-18.00 (A)-9 REPROGRAM ZONE SET-POINTS & IMPLEMENT DEAD-BAND
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (a)-9 Reprogram Zone Set-points & Implement Dead-band
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
271,440 $32,573 123,813 $14,858 3,595 $35,949 $83,380 $55,650 0.7
BASE CASE Historical trend data shows that zones throughout the building have occupied temperature set-points that range between 68-76°F, potentially contributing to inefficient operation and simultaneous heating and cooling. The control sequence of operation does not describe any limitations on local thermostat set-point adjustment and trends suggest that occupants have a band of at least 8°F. In addition, zones were observed to have a single effective set-point during occupied periods and a mode point that defined whether the zone was in heating or cooling. Some zones were observed to switch between heating and cooling modes throughout the day as the zone temperature cycled around the single effective set-point.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend setting global occupied and unoccupied heating and cooling zone temperature set-points and allowing a maximum local adjustment of +/- 2°F by occupants. We recommend implementing occupied set-points of 71°F heating and 73°F cooling (2°F dead-band), and maintaining the existing unoccupied set-points of 60°F heating and 95°F cooling. Implementing separate occupied heating and cooling set-points with at least a 2°F dead-band may reduce energy consumption by allowing zones to ‘drift’ between the set-points before reheat is needed or additional cooling airflow is supplied.
Note that if ECM-10 is implemented, we recommend reducing the unoccupied cooling set-point to 85°F in order to reduce zone recovery time on design cooling days.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from an overall reduction in conditioned airflow and reheat energy used to meet temperature set-points that are higher or lower than the systems were designed for. In addition, savings result from a reduction in simultaneous heating and cooling that may be occurring in adjacent zones with different temperature set-points. Mixing between these zones can cause equipment to ‘fight’ each other, with one VAV box typically in cooling and the other in heating.
69 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on the zones served by the AHU-1,2,3,4 system and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
MIN-FLOW-SCH: Min Flow Ratio
o Monday - Friday 5:00am - 8:00pm: 0.70
o All other hours: 0.30
COOL-TEMP-SCH: Health Cool Sch
o Monday - Friday 5:00am - 8:00pm: 72°F
o All other hours: 95°F
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: Health Heat Sch
o Monday - Friday 5:00am - 8:00pm: 72°F
o All other hours: 60°F
Proposed Case
MIN-FLOW-SCH: ECM#6.2 Min Flow Ratio
o Monday - Friday 5:00am - 8:00pm: 0.50
o All other hours: 0.30
COOL-TEMP-SCH: ECM#6.2 Health Cool Sch
o Monday - Friday 5:00am - 8:00pm: 73°F
o All other hours: 95°F
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: ECM#6.2 Health Heat Sch
o Monday - Friday 5:00am - 8:00pm: 71°F
o All other hours: 60°F
70 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
Figure 17: Level 3 VAV 051 - The trend screenshot below shows the VAV box switching between heating and cooling modes with an estimated 1°F deadband. The highlighted timestamp indicates the reheat valve (PINK) opens directly after the zone temperature (ORANGE) reaches 1°F below the effective set-point (BLUE). Before this point in time, the equipment had been in cooling mode, as indicated by the airflow (RED) being greater than minimum (450 cfm) and the reheat valve being closed.
71 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: PB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: KK
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Controls Programming ea 414 $0 $0 $150 1 0.35 $21,735 $21,735
2 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 414 $0 $0 $150 1 0.15 $9,315 $9,315
4 $0 $0 $0
5 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal $31,650
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $6,400
3 Other Engineering 15% $5,800
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $2,000
Commissioning 10% $3,900
Construction Observation 10% $3,900
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $2,000
Total $55,650
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (a)-9: Reprogram Zone Set-points & Implement Dead-band
General Materials Labor
Sources
72 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ECM-18.00 (A)-10 RECONFIGURE UNOCCUPIED ZONE TEMPERATURE
CONTROL
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (a)-10 Reprogram Unoccupied Zone Temperature Control
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 0 $0 361 $3,615 $3,615 $8,613 2.4
BASE CASE A review of historical trend data has shown that each zone has a single effective unoccupied set-point that is set based on a mode point, which can be either heating or cooling. In the heating mode, the zone’s unoccupied temperature set-point is 60°F and in the cooling mode the unoccupied temperature set-point is 95°F. However, the boxes listed in Table 3 below were found to be in full reheat during the unoccupied period when the effective set-point was 95°F. It is possible that an error in their control sequences is resulting in the device’s mode not matching the effective unoccupied set-point. See Figure 18 on Page 74 for a trend screenshot illustrating this issue on Level 1 VAV 010.
Table 3: Terminal boxes identified to be reheating during the unoccupied period with an effective set-point of 95°F
LEVEL-1 LEVEL-2 LEVEL-3 LEVEL-5 LEVEL-6
10 35 11 000CC 10
033E 36 52 20 14
53 42 56 30 20
65 56 71 104 48
82 107 5C15 64
120 117 096A
210A 121 233
2C02 208
3035
PROPOSED CASE We recommend reconfiguring unoccupied temperature control to allow zones to drift between unoccupied heating and cooling set-points without establishing a mode. For example, during the unoccupied period, the heating set-point would be 60°F and the cooling set-point would be 95°F. Each terminal box would remain at minimum airflow and reheat would be disabled until the zone temperature reaches either of the unoccupied set-points. Zones would then be maintained as necessary to the appropriate set-point.
73 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Ambulatory Care Center
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in reheat energy used by terminal boxes that were observed to be reheating when unnecessary during the unoccupied mode. This issue was not found to impact the fan or cooling energy consumption of surrounding zones during overnight and weekend periods since the unoccupied zone cooling set-point of 95°F was not observed to be reached at any point. However, the additional heating supplied by the faulty boxes may result in excess energy consumption during the recovery period as zone temperatures are brought down to occupied set-points.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a bin spreadsheet model. Energy savings were modeled for a typical VAV box that was observed to be 100% reheating during the unoccupied period. The energy model assumed that the reheat coils were designed for a 20°F air temperature rise with coil valves 100% open. The results were then extrapolated to all other VAV boxes using individual minimum airflow set-points to appropriately scale the savings. Hot water energy savings were converted to steam savings using an estimated heat exchanger and distribution efficiency of 97% and a steam heating value of 1,000 Btu/lb.
74 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
Figure 18: Level 1 VAV 010 - The trend screenshot below shows how the zone reheat valve (LIGHT BLUE) is opening during each unoccupied period in an attempt for the system to meet the effective unoccupied set-point (DARK BLUE) of 95°F. Although the VAV box should be in a setback cooling mode based on the high unoccupied set-point, an unknown error is causing the box to enter the heating mode.
75 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMASS MEDICAL Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: ACC Building Estimated By: PB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: KK
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Controls Programming ea 33 $0 $0 $150 1 0.5 $2,475 $2,475
2 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 33 $0 $0 $150 1 0.25 $1,238 $1,238
Subtotal $4,313
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $900
3 Other Engineering 15% $800
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $300
Commissioning 25% $1,400
Construction Observation 10% $600
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $300
Total $8,613
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (a)-10: Reconfigure Unoccupied Zone Temperature Control
General Materials Labor
Sources
76 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
BENEDICT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE
Notes: The cost savings figures in the summary table above assume the following utility rates: $0.10/kWh, $0.12/ton-hour, $10.00/Mlb.
ECM # ECM
Electric
Energy
Savings
CHW
Energy
Savings
Steam
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit
Cost
Payback
Before
Incentive
- - kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
01.01 (b) Lighting Retrofit 57,116 0 0 $5,712 $110,150 19.3
02.01 (b) Install Occupancy Sensors 129,208 9,802 -293 $11,171 $67,100 6.0
04.09 (b)-1 FCU Controls Upgrade 244,142 25,308 3,297 59,801 $848,600 14.2
04.09 (b)-1a Unoccupied Set-backs & Zone Temperature Control 116,132 25,453 2,159 $35,636 - -
04.09 (b)-1b Close FCU OA Dampers During Unoccupied Periods -2,032 -145 1,138 $11,160 - -
04.09 (b)-1c Retrofit FCU Fans with EC Motors 130,042 0 0 $13,004 - -
04.09 (b)-2 HW Loop dP Reset 7,258 0 -22 $501 $8,100 16.2
12.04 (b) Install Low-E Window Film 5,083 5,661 7 $1,253 $90,800 72.5
442,807 40,771 2,989 $78,438 $1,124,750 14.3TOTALS
77 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
FACILITY DESCRIPTION
The Benedict building on the UMMC campus, constructed in 1992, is approximately 80,000 ft2 and consists of three above grade levels and one basement level below grade. The building serves as a primary care clinic providing serves such as preventative care, routine examinations, medical consultation services, and others. The building is primarily occupied between 8:00am - 5:00pm Monday - Friday, with little to no operation at night and on weekends.
Steam and chilled water (CHW) are provided by the central plant. There are no tertiary CHW pumps in the building. All fan coil units (FCUs) using chilled water operate off the pressure of the central loop. Steam is supplied to the building at 50 psig and is used only for HVAC heating; domestic hot water is generated by electric heaters.
There are (2) steam to hot water (HW) heat exchangers that serve fan coil units and perimeter baseboard. The pair of HXs has a single set of VFD pumps that operate lead/lag to circulate the HW throughout the building. The heat exchangers operate with a hot water supply temperature reset, ranging between 200°F and 140°F at ambient temperatures between 20°F and 60°F. The pump VFDs modulate to maintain a fixed loop differential pressure set-point of 18 psig.
The airside equipment in the building consists primarily of (70) fan coil units serving zones throughout the building. All fan coils are constant volume, have fixed outdoor air sections, and have both a HW heating and CHW cooling coil. They have no economizer mode or relief ductwork that could enable economizer mode and always receive a fixed volume of return air. FCUs range in size from 400 to 1,200 cfm. Perimeter spaces are also equipped with HW baseboards to provide additional heating. There are also (3) HW unit heaters that serve mechanical and storage spaces in the basement level.
There are approximately (8) building exhaust fans, ranging from 1,000 to 2,000 cfm, serving general building exhaust.
Fan coil units are locally controlled through feedback from Johnson digital wall thermostats that are adjustable with at least 8°F of range. The Johnson controllers have been partially integrated with the campus’ Siemens building automation system; however most points are read from the Johnson controller with limited capabilities to adjust temperature set-points or control sequences.
A description of the existing lighting systems in the building can be found in the base case description of ECM-5: Lighting Retrofit.
78 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
BASELINE ENERGY USE & BENCHMARKING
ENERGY USE GRAPHS
ELECTRICITY Figure 19 on the following page shows electricity use for the Benedict for fiscal year (FYs) 11 – 14. It can be seen that electricity use is fairly consistent between FY-11 and FY-12, except with an inexplicable reduction in use beginning in March FY2013 and continuing for all of FY2014. Figure 20 shows the electric use averaged over FYs 2011-2012, which was taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. FY2013&14 were excluded from the baseline average as their lower usage values were considered to be uncharacteristic of the facility.
79 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
Figure 19: Benedict monthly electricity use (kWh) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 20: Benedict baseline electricity use (kWh) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2012.
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ele
ctri
c U
se (
kWh
)
Benedict Electric Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ele
ctri
c U
se (
kWh
)
Benedict Baseline Electric Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-12)
80 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
STEAM Figure 21 shows the monthly steam consumption for FYs 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2014. It can be seen that FY10 and FY11 follow fairly consistent profiles, but that FY12 and FY14 have vastly different profiles. Discussions with facility staff indicated that this is likely due to data that was missing for all or some portion of these years. Also note that steam data is unavailable for FY13. Figure 22 shows the steam use averaged over FYs 2010-2011, which was taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. All other years were excluded from the baseline average due to their likely inaccuracies due to data issues.
81 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
Figure 21: Benedict monthly 50 lb steam energy use (Lbs) for Fiscal Years 2010 - 2014.
Figure 22: Benedict baseline 50 lb steam energy use (Lbs) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2010 - 2011.
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ste
am U
se (
lbs)
Benedict Steam Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
FY 10
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ste
am U
se (
lbs)
Benedict Steam Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY10-11)
82 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
CHILLED WATER Figure 23 on the following page shows the Benedict CHW use from FYs 11 – 14. It can be seen that FY11 and FY12 follow fairly consistent profiles, but that FY13 and FY14 have differing profiles on certain months, possibly due to meter read date or data collection issues. Figure 24 shows the CHW use averaged over FYs 2011-2012, which was taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. All other years were excluded from the baseline average due to their likely inaccuracies due to data issues. It is noteworthy that the winter CHW consumption is approximately 1,300 ton-days/month, which is approximately 1/2 of the peak summer CHW consumption. Since cooling loads are expected to be very low in the building during the winter months, this may indicate an issue with the calculation for Benedict’s chilled water usage.
83 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
Figure 23: Benedict monthly chilled water energy use (ton-days) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 24: Benedict baseline chilled water energy use (ton-days) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2012.
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
se (
ton
-day
s)
Benedict CHW Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
se (
ton
-day
s)
Benedict Baseline CHW Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-12)
84 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
BENCHMARKING
BENCHMARKING SUMMARY TABLE The table on the following page summarizes the annual energy consumption and performance metrics of the facility. This was done to provide a clear representation of the actual site and estimated equivalent source energy consumption for benchmarking and also for evaluation with energy savings opportunities. Energy use data for the fiscal years 2010 – 2012 is shown in the table, along with an average of data from an estimated typical year. Fiscal years 2013 and 2014 were excluded from this table because of one or more months of utility data was missing for those periods.
85 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
Energy Use
Annual site electricity (kWh), chilled water (ton-hours) and 50 lb steam (klbs). These figures are not adjusted for central plant efficiencies (site to source conversion).
Performance Ratings
Performance ratings are provided for electricity in three units of measure: total kWh/ft2, equivalent total kBtu/ft2, and annual average W/ft2. Note that since electric demand utility data was not available for the building, an average demand was calculated based on the building’s annual electricity consumption (kWh) divided by the total number of hours in the year (8,760) and converted to Watts (1000 W/kW).
Performance ratings for chilled water and steam are provided in equivalent kBtu/ft2 based on measured site energy consumption. Estimates for equivalent source kWh/ft2 (electricity) and kBtu/ft2 (natural gas fuel) are also included based on the following assumptions:
Fuel-to-Steam Boiler Efficiency: 80%
Electric Chiller Plant Efficiency: 0.65 kW/ton
Steam-driven Chiller Efficiency: 2.1 COP
Annual Chilled Water Load Assumptions: 20% Steam-driven chillers, 80% Electric Chillers
The total site and source performance ratings sum the equivalent source ratings (kBtu/ft2) for electricity, chilled water, and steam, so that this building can be benchmarked against similar facilities, which may generate steam and chilled water in a central plant captured in the building electricity and natural gas meters.
Site Site Site Source
ft2 FY kWh ton-hrs klbs kWh/ft2 W/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kWh/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kWh/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2
FY10 1,230,290 516,936 5,282 15.8 1.80 53.8 79.44 4.2 9.5 68 0 85 201 162
FY11 1,230,034 516,456 5,000 15.8 1.80 53.8 79.37 4.2 9.4 64 0 80 197 158
FY12 1,253,040 518,544 1,653 16.0 1.83 54.8 79.69 4.2 9.5 21 0 26 156 105
Est. Typ. Year 1,241,537 517,500 5,141 15.9 1.82 54.3 79.53 4.2 9.5 66 0 82 200 161
UMass Medical Center Benedict Building Energy Use Data
ENERGY USE PERFORMANCE RATINGS
Floor
AreaFiscal Year Electricity CHW 50# Steam Electricity
Steam Total
Source Source
CHW
78,087
86 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
EQUEST MODEL CALIBRATION
Energy and cost savings were estimated using an existing eQuest model of the facility originally developed by Andelman & Lelek and modified to reflect current equipment characteristics, schedules, and internal loads. The model used the TMY3 weather file for Worcester, MA and was calibrated against monthly electric, CHW, and steam use for an estimated typical year as determined using the methods described on the benchmarking summary table above. The charts below compare the estimated typical year data and the calibrated eQuest model predicted utility use.
Both electric and steam use were able to be reasonably calibrated to utility data, however there was a major discrepancy with the CHW use for the entire year. It can be seen that the measured CHW use is higher than the eQuest Output by somewhere between 20,000 and 30,000 ton-days each month. We believe that this somewhat consistent offset suggests an issue with the utility data, as interviews with facility staff revealed that this value was not a direct measurement, but rather a calculated value, as the meter serving meter serving benedict also serves different areas on campus.
Figure 25: Benedict building eQuest model electricity use calibration chart. The baseline monthly electricity use utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly electricity consumption is shown in red.
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
Ele
ctri
city
Usa
ge (
kWh
)
Monthly Electricity Usage - Benedict
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
87 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
Figure 26: Benedict building eQuest model chilled water calibration chart. The baseline monthly chilled water utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly chilled water energy consumption is shown in red.
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
Ch
illed
Wat
er U
sage
(to
n-h
r)
Monthly Chilled Water Usage - Benedict
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
88 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
Figure 27: Benedict building eQuest model steam calibration chart. The baseline monthly steam utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly steam consumption is shown in red.
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
Stea
m U
sage
(M
lb)
Monthly Steam Usage - Benedict
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
89 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
The table below summarizes the annual end-use energy distribution for electricity, CHW, and steam at the facility as calculated by the baseline eQuest model. The pie chart on the following page illustrates the baseline eQuest model’s electricity end use using the figures shown in the table below.
The “Miscellaneous Equipment” category in the table below can include any of the following equipment types: plug loads (such as appliances, computers, peripherals, laboratory equipment, freezers/refrigerators, etc.), transformer losses assigned to the building, exterior lighting, and elevators.
The following parameters were used to model the estimated miscellaneous loads in the Benedict building, based on information gathered during walkthroughs and historical whole-building electricity use:
1. Lobby, Lounge, Corridor, and Stairwell Plug Loads: 0.10 W/ft2
2. Office Plug Loads: 0.80 W/ft2
3. Exam Room Plug Loads: 1.0 W/ft2
In addition, the following parameters were used to model interior lighting loads:
1. Exam Room Lighting Power Density: 1.5 W/ft2
2. Conference Room, Lounge, Office Lighting Power Density: 1.0 - 1.3 W/ft2
Table 4: Benedict Building eQuest model’s annual energy end-use for each meter (electricity, steam, and chilled water).
kWh MLb ton-hrs
Area Lighting 616,834 0 0
Task lighting 0 0 0
Misc. Equip. 294,190 880 0
Space Heating 0 4,307 0
Space Cooling 0 0 137,028
Heat Rejection 0 0 0
Pumps and Auxiliary 9,719 0 0
Ventilation Fans 293,958 0 0
Refrigeration 0 0 0
Heat Pump 0 0 0
Hot Water 0 0 0
Exterior 0 0 0
Total 1,214,701 5,187 137,028
BaselineAnnual Energy By
End Use
90 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
Table 5: Pie chart showing Benedict Building eQuest model’s annual electricity end use breakdown.
91 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES
Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) associated with the major air- and water-side equipment and terminal devices were identified following field investigations and a review of trend data from the facility’s Siemens building automation system. ECMs vary in scope from low cost measures limited to schedule, sequence, and set-point optimization, to more complex measures which may require larger capital investment associated with equipment replacement or retrofit.
92 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
ECM-01.01 (B) LIGHTING RETROFIT
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 01.01 (b) Lighting Retrofit
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
57,116 $5,712 0 $0 0 $0 $5,712 110,150 19.3
BASE CASE The lighting consists of 2’ by 4’ three and two lamp 32 Watt T8 fluorescent fixtures, and 2’x2’ three and two lamp 17 Watt fluorescent fixtures. There are also a small number of 13 Watt compact fluorescent (CFL) recessed can fixtures. The lens type on the fixtures is either prismatic or volumetric. The cans do not have a lens.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to upgrade existing lamps and ballasts to newer high efficiency units where applicable. Refer to the Opinion of Probable Cost Table on the following page for a breakdown of proposed equipment types and quantities. We recommend replacing 4’ 32 Watt T8 lamps with high efficiency 28 Watt lamps and NEMA Premium (NP) electronic ballasts. We also recommend replacing CFLs and incandescent floods with LED lamps. The recommendations do not include fixture upgrades or replacement in an effort to present a more effective retrofit approach. Lighting controls such as occupancy sensors are recommended as a separate measure (refer to ECM-02.01 (b)).
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in electricity use by installing high efficiency fluorescent lamps and more efficient ballasts. The energy savings calculations make estimates for annual run hours of each fixture based on information obtained from facilities and maintenance staff. The calculations assume that run hours remain the same in the proposed case.
ASSUMPTIONS The audit was performed room-by-room on all of floor A (with the exception of areas that were inaccessible), and all of floor 1, and part of the floor 2. Given the consistency on the floor plan between floors one, two and three, and the room size and resulting fixture type and quantity, captured in the audit, the remaining areas of floors two and three were estimated based upon room size and count. A high level walk through of the estimated areas was performed and any differences were captured in the audit data. Occupancy sensing and other lighting controls are
93 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
excluded from this measure due to the nature of the spaces served and 24/7 building operation.
COST ESTIMATE The cost estimate for this measure is shown in the table below. The labor cost for the recommended retrofits are included in the material costs below.
94 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Benedict Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3-Audit
Retrofit - 3 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 3 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast ea 877 $60 $52,620 $0 0 0 $0 $52,620
2 3-Audit
Retrofit - 2 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 2 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with LP
Ballast ea 98 $60 $5,880 $0 0 0 $0 $5,880
3 3-Audit
Retrofit - 3 Lamp 2 foot 17 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 3 Lamp 2 foot 17 Watt T8 with LP
Ballast ea 1 $60 $60 $0 0 0 $0 $60
4 3-Audit
Retrofit - 2 Lamp 2 foot 17 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 2 Lamp 2 foot 17 Watt T8 with LP
Ballast. ea 8 $60 $480 $0 0 0 $0 $480
5 3-Audit
Replace 13 Watt Compact Florescents lamps
(CFL's) with 5 Watt LED's ea 2 $5 $10 $0 0 0 $0 $10
Subtotal $59,050
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $11,900
3 Other Engineering 15% $10,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $3,600
Commissioning 20% $14,200
Construction Observation 10% $7,100
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $3,600
Total $110,150
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-5: Lighting Retrofit
General Materials Labor
Sources
95 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
ECM-02.01 (B) INSTALL OCCUPANCY SENSORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 02.01 (b) Install Occupancy Sensors
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
129,208 $12,921 9,802 $1,176 -293 -$2,926 $11,171 67,100 6.0
BASE CASE There is currently no automated lighting control in place in Benedict. Interviews with facility staff indicated that a significant amount of the lighting in Benedict remains on 24 hours per day, although the building is unoccupied at night and on weekends. According to staff, corridor and other general lighting is generally left on at all times, while some office and exam room lighting is switched off at night at the discretion of the occupants. Based on this anecdotal evidence, it is estimated that approximately 40% of lighting in the building remains on at night and on weekends.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend replacing the existing lighting wall switches with units that are equipped with built-in occupancy sensors to reduce unnecessary lighting run hours and extended lamp life.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This measure will result in energy savings from a reduction in run hours for the lighting fixtures in the building.
Energy savings were derived from a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The eQuest daily lighting schedule was significantly reduced, with unoccupied period lighting power density reduced as shown in Table 6 on the following page. The average ratio of lights on during unoccupied periods was reduced from 40% in the existing case to 10% in the proposed case through the use of occupancy sensors.
96 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
Table 6: Summary table of existing and proposed case hourly average zone lighting power density schedule
Time Period
Base
Case
Lighting
Intensity
Schedule
Proposed
Case
Weekday
Lighting
Intensity
Schedule
Proposed
Case
Weekend
Lighting
Intensity
Schedule
12am-1am 60% 10% 10%
1am-2am 60% 10% 10%
2am-3am 60% 10% 10%
3am-4am 60% 10% 10%
4am-5am 60% 10% 10%
5am-6am 60% 10% 10%
6am-7am 80% 80% 10%
7am-8am 90% 90% 10%
9am-10am 100% 100% 10%
10am-11am 100% 100% 10%
11am-12pm 100% 100% 10%
12pm-1pm 100% 100% 10%
1pm-2pm 100% 100% 10%
2pm-3pm 100% 100% 10%
3pm-4pm 100% 100% 10%
4pm-5pm 90% 90% 10%
5pm-6pm 80% 80% 10%
6pm-7pm 70% 70% 10%
7pm-8pm 60% 60% 10%
8pm-9pm 60% 60% 10%
9pm-10pm 60% 60% 10%
10pm-11pm 60% 10% 10%
11pm-12am 60% 10% 10%
eQuest Model Base & Proposed Case
Lighting Intensities (% of full load)
97 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
COST ESTIMATE The costs for this measure include the labor & material cost to connect the BAS into the lighting circuit, along with the labor cost for control programming and documentation associated with implementing the new lighting schedule.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Benedict Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2 Wall Switch Occ Sensors ea 363 $35 $12,705 $150 1 0.5 $27,225 $39,930
3 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
Subtotal $42,330
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $8,466
3 Other Engineering 15% $7,620
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $2,540
Commissioning 10% $5,080
Construction Observation 10% $5,080
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $2,540
Total $73,700
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-02.01 (b): Install Occupancy Sensors
General Materials Labor
Sources
98 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
ECM-04.09 (B)-1 FAN COIL UNIT CONTROLS UPGRADE
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (b)-1 FCU Controls Upgrade
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
244,142 $24,414 25,308 $3,037 3,297 $32,972 $60,423 848,600 14.2
ECM-04.09 (B)-1A UNOCCUPIED TEMPERATURE SET-BACKS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (b)-1a Unoccupied Set-backs & Zone Temperature Control
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
116,132 $11,613 25,453 $3,054 2,159 $21,591 $36,258 - -
BASE CASE Based on a review of fan coil unit historical trend data, there are currently only a few zones that set-back to unoccupied zone temperature set-point at night and on weekends when the building is closed. The majority of fan coils were found to run continuously, controlling to a single set-point that did not reset on a schedule, despite the building being completely unoccupied at night and on weekends according to facility staff. Any set-point changes that were observed are due to local adjustments at each FCU’s thermostat by occupants. Space temperature set-points are adjustable by at least +/-4°F at the thermostats according to field investigation and historical trend data review. As a result, zones were observed to control to a variety of set-points ranging from 68°F to 78°F, which may be contributing to additional energy consumption and possible simultaneous heating and cooling between adjacent zones in the core of the building that are open to each other.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend reconfiguring all zone temperature set-points to 70°F heating and 72°F cooling with no more than +/-2°F of adjustment at each local thermostat to reduce energy consumption and limit simultaneous heating and cooling. We also recommend implementing occupancy-based scheduling on the building’s fan coil units. All fan coils would shut down between 7:30pm - 6:30am Monday-Friday and all day on weekends. We propose implementing separate temperature set-back schedules for perimeter and core zones and limiting the setback in perimeter zones to improve recovery time at the start of the occupied period.
99 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
In core areas, we propose a implementing an occupied mode schedule of 6:30am - 7:30pm on weekdays with set-backs of 64°F heating and 78°F cooling during unoccupied mode. In perimeter zones, we propose implementing a heating setback of 67°F, as there are known issues with morning warm-up in perimeter zones during the winter.
This measure will involve replacing the existing Johnson fan coil controllers with Siemens controllers and adding new programming to implement the scheduling and set-points described above. All existing wall mounted thermostats will be replaced with programmable thermostats.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This measure will result in heating and cooling energy savings during the setback periods by reducing the heating or cooling loads on the fan coils and perimeter baseboard. Heating and cooling savings may also be realized by reducing the simultaneous heating and cooling resulting from set-point fighting between adjacent zones.
The energy savings associated with the temperature setbacks were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. For each applicable zone, the “OFF1 Heat Wk”, “OFF1 Cool Wk”, and “Perim Heating WS” parameters were set to reference the proposed schedules described above.
A bin spreadsheet model was used to calculate energy savings associated with establishing global heating and cooling set-points with +/- 2°F of local adjustment. The additional energy used to maintain existing case zone temperature set-points was estimated based on the average difference between the observed set-points and the recommended set-points, as well as fan coil unit design airflow. The savings calculations assume that 25% of FCUs in the building have occupied zone set-points outside the proposed case range of 71-73°F.
100 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
ECM-04.09 (B)-1B CLOSE FCU OA DAMPERS DURING UNOCCUPIED PERIODS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (b)-1b Close FCU OA Dampers During Unoccupied Periods
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
-2,032 -$203 -145 -$17 1,138 $11,381 $11,160 - -
BASE CASE Each FCU in Benedict has a ceiling plenum return and ducted outdoor air section, and maintains a fixed outside air percentage for all hours of operation. A review of ductwork drawings and BAS screenshots indicates that there is no modulating mixed air control, with only a two-position damper on the outside air duct. FCU fans run continuously for all hours of the year despite the building having no occupancy at night and on weekends.
For the purposes of energy modeling, the base case for this measure assumes that ECM-1.1: Unoccupied Temperature Set-backs has been implemented, significantly
PROPOSED CASE We recommend implementing an occupancy based ventilation sequence on the FCUs in Benedict. During unoccupied periods, all twelve outside air dampers will be closed, except during periods when weather conditions would allow outside air to be used to reduce mechanical cooling loads. We recommend keeping outdoor air dampers open during occupied periods to provide sufficient ventilation for the building.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This measure results in savings by reducing heating and cooling loads on FCUs during unoccupied periods when ventilation is unnecessary.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The FCU minimum outdoor air flow schedule was adjusted so that during unoccupied periods, outdoor air would be reduced to 0%.
101 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
ECM-04.09 (B)-1C RETROFIT FCU FANS WITH EC MOTORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (b)-1c Retrofit FCU Fans with EC Motors
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
130,042 $13,004 0 $0 0 $0 $13,004 - -
BASE CASE There are 69 total fan coil units in Benedict, all of which are equipped with permanent split capacitor (PSC) AC fan motors. According to available documentation, all fan-powered boxes are series-type with reheat coils, ranging in airflow capacity from 460 to 2,000 cfm, and feature motors ranging from 58 Watts to 1/2 nominal hp. Fractional horsepower PSC motors such as these typically operate at efficiencies between 20-45% and do not have speed modulation capabilities. Interviews with facility staff revealed that the majority of fans run continuously, as only a few zones in the building have setbacks.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to replace the 69 existing fan powered box Permanent Split Capacitor (PSC) motors with high-efficiency, electronically-commutated (EC) motors. These motors have significantly increased fan efficiency, on the order of 3 – 4 times greater than the PSC motors. Because the EC motors are direct current (DC) motors, they are able to vary their speed based on an input signal of 0 – 10 V without the need for a VFD. We recommend utilizing this capability to increase energy savings beyond what can be achieved from increased fan efficiency alone by controlling fan speed to meet zone temperature in sequence with heating and cooling to minimize fan energy. For example, the fan speed would increase as the difference between the zone temperature and zone temperature set-point increases. These additional energy savings are especially important during low load periods when the fan could be operated at a minimum speed.
This measure would require replacement of each fan motor, the addition of a fan speed (0-10V) control output to each FCU’s controller, and programming changes to accommodate to the new fan motor capabilities and implement a fan speed control sequence.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This measure results in fan energy savings at all times when the FCUs are in operation, along with additional savings during times when the fan motors are allowed to reduce speed per the temperature control sequence
102 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
This measure was modeled using a bin spreadsheet by establishing existing case and proposed case fan load profiles as a function of outdoor air temperature. The existing case model assumed a constant speed fan profile with fixed motor efficiencies based on the motor size and design airflow. The chart below summarizes the efficiency curves used to define each FCU’s motor power consumption.
Figure 28: Chart showing efficiency curves for typical PSC motors.
In the proposed case, a fan speed profile was estimated as a function of outdoor air temperature, assuming average fan speeds would be lowest at outdoor temperatures between 40°F-50°F. Fans were modeled to operate at 100% speed during the warmest outdoor conditions and 90% at the coldest conditions, due to the greater supply air ΔT developed in the heating mode. The chart below summarizes the efficiency curves used to define proposed case FCU EC motor power consumption.
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
Effi
cien
cy (
W/c
fm)
Airflow (cfm)
PSC Motor Efficiency
PSC Motor Size 1
PSC Motor Size 2
PSC Motor Size 3
PSC Motor Size 4
103 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
Figure 29: Chart showing efficiency curves for typical EC motors.
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000
Effi
cien
cy (
W/c
fm)
Airflow (cfm)
EC Motor Efficiency
EC Motor Size 1
EC Motor Size 2
EC Motor Size 1 Extrapolation
Poly. (EC Motor Size 1)
104 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
ECM-04.09 (B)-1 COST ESTIMATE The costs for this measure include replacement of the existing Johnson FCU controllers, wall thermostats, and necessary programming to implement ECMs 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3. Also included are materials and labor to replace each FCU’s motor with an EC motor.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Benedict Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
3 3 BAS Control points (1) ea 69 $750 $51,750 $150 1 5 $51,750 $103,5001 3 Modulating Damper Actuators ea 69 $300 $20,700 $150 1 1 $10,350 $31,050
2 3 BAS Control points (1) ea 69 $750 $51,750 $150 1 5 $51,750 $103,500
1 3 EC Motors ea 69 $300 $20,700 $150 1 2 $20,700 $41,400
2 3 New BAS Controllers (3 points) ea 207 $600 $124,200 $150 1 5 $155,250 $279,450
3 3 General Conditions-ceiling ea 69 $50 $3,450 $150 1 2 $20,700 $24,1504 3 As-built ea 69 $0 $0 $150 1 0.5 $5,175 $5,175
5 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 69 $0 $0 $150 1 0.5 $5,175 $5,175
Subtotal $593,400
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 10% $59,340
3 Other Engineering 10% $65,274
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $32,637
Commissioning 5% $32,637
Construction Observation 5% $32,637
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $32,637
Total $848,600
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
ECM-04.09 (b)-1 Fan Coil Unit Controls Upgrade
General Materials Labor
Sources
105 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
ECM-04.09 (B)-2 HW LOOP DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE RESET
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (b)-2 HW Loop dP Reset
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
7,258 $726 0 $0 -22 -$225 $501 8,100 16.2
BASE CASE The two steam converters in the building, HX-1&2, serve all FCUs and baseboard radiators. The two pumps serving them, HWP-1&2, have VFDs that maintain a constant loop differential pressure set-point of 18 psig.
A review of trend data showed that the building hot water loop operated in May, June, and July with an average temperature differential of 13°F with the pump VFD above minimum speed, indicating a potential opportunity to reduce the loop’s differential pressure set-point.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend implementing an outdoor air temperature reset schedule for the hot water loop differential pressure set-point. The table below summarizes the proposed reset schedule.
Outdoor Air Temperature
Hot Water Loop dP Set-point
30°F 18 psig
60°F 12 psig
The loop would maintain its current set-point of 18 psig at outdoor air temperatures below 30°F, but would linearly reset between 30°F and 60°F down to a minimum set-point of 12 psig to reduce pumping power.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This measure results in pumping energy savings during lower heating load periods when the differential pressure set-point is reduced below its current set-point.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQUEST model. The run was performed on the “HW Loop” system which serves the FCUs and perimeter baseboard throughout the building. The following parameters were changed as part of the parametric run.
106 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
Base Case
HEAD-STPT-CTRL: Fixed
Proposed Case
HEAD-STPT-CTRL: Valve-Reset
107 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
COST ESTIMATE The costs for this measure include the labor cost for control programming and documentation associated with sequence changes.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Benedict Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2 Pressure sensors ea 4 $150 $600 $150 1 4 $2,400 $3,000
3 3 Programming ea 4 $0 $150 1 4 $2,400 $2,400
3 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
5
Subtotal $7,800
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,560
3 Other Engineering 15% $1,404
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $468
Commissioning 20% $1,872
Construction Observation 10% $936
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $468
Total $14,600
Sources
General Materials Labor
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.09 (b)-2: HW Loop Differential Pressure Reset
108 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Benedict
ECM-12.04 (B) INSTALL LOW-E WINDOW FILM
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 12.04 (b) Install Low-E Window Film
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
5,083 $508 5,661 $679 7 $65 $1,253 90,800 72.5
BASE CASE Interviews with facility staff revealed an issue with Southern-facing spaces over-heating in warmer weather due to solar gain. Exterior windows in Benedict are original to the building, constructed in 1992.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend installing low-emissivity (Low-E) window film on the existing glazing in all south & west facing exterior windows in Benedict. The properties of the window film reflect solar radiation, reducing the heat gain in south & west facing spaces during daylight hours, especially during the summer months when radiation intensity is greatest.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This measure results in energy savings from a reduction in the amount of heat gain through solar exposure. Although this measure results in a reduction of seasonal cooling loads, there is a comparatively small heating energy penalty during colder weather.
Energy savings were derived from a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. In the proposed case, window construction and performance was reconfigured to model low-e characteristics using the eQuest glass library. Similar center U values were used between the base & proposed case, with a lower solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) being used on applicable windows in the proposed case. Specifically, the window type was changed from “VE12M Clr/Air/Clr 6” to “VE42M Brz/Air/Clr 6”.
109 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The costs for this measure include the labor and material cost to install low-emissivity window film on all exterior windows on the southern and western faces of the Benedict building.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Benedict Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2 Window Film ea 5400 $10 $54,000 $150 1 0 $0 $54,000
3 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
3 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
4
5
Subtotal $54,000
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $10,800
3 Other Engineering 15% $9,720
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $3,240
Commissioning 5% $3,240
Construction Observation 10% $6,480
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $3,240
Total $90,800
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-4: Install Low Emissivity Window Film
General Materials Labor
110 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
HOSPITAL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE
Notes: The cost savings figures in the summary table above assume the following utility rates: $0.10/kWh, $0.12/ton-hour, $10.00/Mlb. Costs and savings for ECM-17.03(c)-2 and 17.03(c)-3 are not included in column totals due to significant overlap with 17.03(c)-1. These three ECMs represent different options for converting the Hospital’s main B-Level and Penthouse AHUs to variable volume.
ECM # ECM
Electric
Energy
Savings
CHW
Energy
Savings
Steam
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit
Cost
Payback
Before
Incentive
- - kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
01.01 (c) Lighting Retrofit 524,392 0 0 $52,439 $1,025,490 19.6
04.02 (c) Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-1L, 1R, 1T-7T 1,827 168,536 -13 $20,277 $36,850 1.8
04.09 (c)-1 Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Enable Sequence on AHU-1B-6B 3,255 0 0 $326 $11,400 35.0
04.09 (c)-2 Reconfigure AHU-15T/16T Preheat Temperature Control 84 20,813 229 $4,792 $5,800 1.2
04.09 (c)-3 Increase AHU-10T & 11T Minimum Discharge Set-point 187 8,722 70 $1,767 $5,800 3.3
04.09 (c)-4 Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset Schedule 120,840 0 -384 $8,245 $12,000 1.5
04.11 (c) Reconfigure Preheat & Discharge Reset Schedules on AHU-1B-6B 0 281,337 5,468 88,437 $120,700 1.4
04.14 (c) Kitchen Hood Controls 43,857 14,479 2,429 $30,413 $184,800 6.1
17.03 (c)-1 Complete VAV Conversion on AHU-1B-6B & 1T,2T,3T,4T,6T,7T 5,256,107 2,983,462 41,457 $1,298,198 $6,562,276 5.1
17.03 (c)-2 Retrofit Fans with VFDs & Install Branch Duct Dampers 2,429,314 1,165,401 13,359 $516,368 $3,306,679 6.4
17.03 (c)-3 Retrofit Fans with VFDs & Reset Speed vs OAT 3,025,217 3,394,859 43,237 $1,142,278 $929,379 0.8
18.00 (c)-1 Replace Preheat Valves & Actuators on AHU-1B-6B, 1T-7T 0 33,302 400 $7,992 $83,700 10.5
18.00 (c)-2 Lock-out Humidification & Calibrate Return Air %RH Sensors 0 0 2,408 $24,081 $38,200 1.6
18.00 (c)-3 Replace Leaking Preheat Valve on AHU-13T 0 12,333 148 $2,960 $5,000 1.7
18.00 (c)-4 Duct Static Pressure Reset on AHU-1R, 15T/16T 9,665 3,250 14 $1,492 $19,700 13.2
18.00 (c)-5 Adjust AHU-1L Temperature Control 27,088 10,771 36 $4,361 $4,100 0.9
18.00 (c)-6 Optimize Heat Exchanger Reset Schedule -1,566 0 526 $5,099 $12,000 2.4
18.00 (c)-7 Replace Leaking CHW Valve on AHU-11T 0 18,390 223 $4,435 $4,650 1.0
18.00 (c)-8 Fix Mixed Air Dampers to Improve Economizer -213 72,310 -533 $3,327 $22,500 6.8
21.02 (c) Hospital Solar Hot Water 0 0 644 $6,437 $539,439 83.8
5,985,524 3,627,705 53,120 $1,565,077 $8,694,405 5.6TOTAL
111 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
FACILITY DESCRIPTION
The hospital building on the UMMC campus was constructed in 1970, is approximately 700,000 ft2, and stands 10 stories tall, 2 of which are subgrade. The facility houses 417 licensed acute care beds, and contains bone marrow transplant, catheterization, radiation therapy, and neurology departments, among others, and also features a Level 1 trauma center. The building has a full service kitchen and cafeteria that provides three meals per day to patients, employees, and visitors. Most areas of the facility are occupied 24/7.
Steam is supplied at approximately 50 psig, which is converted at (7) steam to hot water (HW) heat exchangers (HXs) to serve AHU preheat coils, fan coil units, reheat coils, and induction units. Each HX has a set of pumps that operate in a lead/lag sequence to circulate the HW throughout the building. The majority of the main HW pumps are equipped with VFDs. Domestic HW is generated via HXs and is stored in (2) 900 gallon tanks.
There are approximately 30 air handling units (AHUs) throughout the building. There are (7) AHUs located in the basement that serve B-Level through Level 2. These constant volume AHUs are typically rated at between 45,000 and 60,000 cfm. Outside air supplied to these units from an intake at the penthouse level via a large shaft that is pressurized using a booster fan. Each AHU is equipped with a dedicated preheat coil circulator for freeze protection and to maintain design flow through the coil. The majority of AHUs serve terminal reheat coils.
There are 15 AHUs located in the tower penthouse that serve the Levels 3 - 8, two are used exclusively as backup units. These primarily serve constant volume or variable volume boxes with HW reheat coils, except for AHU-5T which provides primary ventilation air for the induction units on floors 3 – 8. AHUs-1T – 7T supply approximately 35,000 – 65,000 CFM depending on the unit and are all equipped with dedicated circulators on both the HW preheat coils and CHW cooling coils. AHUs-9T – 16T are smaller units that serve the Bone Marrow Transplant Unit (BMTU) on the 8th Floor. Only AHUs-7T, 15T, & 16T are equipped with VFDs. In addition to the major AHUs, there are also (5) H&V units that serve mechanical spaces and (3) Liebert CRAC units totaling 36 tons.
There are approximately (40) building exhaust fans, serving isolation rooms, lab fume hoods, operating rooms, general exhaust, and kitchen exhaust hoods.
Hospital HVAC is primarily controlled by the Siemens BAS, which was recently upgraded. Some recently upgrade terminal devices are controlled by the Automated Logic building automation system that primarily controls equipment in the School building.
For details on the Hospital’s lighting systems, refer to ECM-16’s existing case description.
112 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
BASELINE ENERGY USE & BENCHMARKING
ENERGY USE GRAPHS
ELECTRICITY The top graph below shows electricity use for the hospital for FYs 11 – 14. It can be seen that electricity use is very consistent throughout the year, with slight variations between the years likely due to weather effects. The bottom graph shows the electric use averaged over FYs 2011-2013, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. FY2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
113 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 30: Hospital monthly electricity use (kWh) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 31: Hospital baseline electricity use (kWh) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013.
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ele
ctri
c U
se (
kWh
)
Hospital Electric Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ele
ctri
c U
se (
kWh
)
Hospital Baseline Electric Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-13)
114 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
STEAM The top chart below shows the monthly steam consumption for FYs 11 – 14. It can be seen that FY 11 and FY 14 have a noticeably higher consumption during the winter months, possibly due to a higher amount of heating degree days during these years. The bottom graph shows the steam use averaged over FYs 2011-2013, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. FY2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
115 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 32: Hospital monthly steam energy use (Lbs) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 33: Hospital baseline steam energy use (Lbs) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013.
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
14,000,000
16,000,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ste
am U
se (
lbs)
Hospital Steam Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
14,000,000
16,000,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ste
am U
se (
lbs)
Hospital Steam Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-13)
116 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
CHILLED WATER The top chart below shows the Hospital CHW use from FYs 11 – 14. It can be seen that CHW use is very consistent from year to year. It is noteworthy that the winter CHW consumption is approximately 20,000 ton-days/month, which is approximately 1/3 of the peak summer CHW consumption. This may indicate an opportunity to improve winter economizer mode and reduce simultaneous heating and cooling. The bottom graph shows the CHW use averaged over FYs 2011-2013, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. FY2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
117 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 34: Hospital monthly chilled water energy use (ton-days) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 35: Hospital baseline chilled water energy use (ton-days) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013.
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
se (
ton
-day
s)
Hospital CHW Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
se (
ton
-day
s)
Hospital Baseline CHW Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-13)
118 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
BENCHMARKING
BENCHMARKING SUMMARY TABLE The table on the following page summarizes the annual energy consumption and performance metrics by the facility. This was done to provide a clear representation of the actual site energy consumption for benchmarking and also for evaluation with energy savings opportunities. Energy use data for Fiscal year 2011 – 2013 is shown in the table, along with an average of data from the three fiscal years.
119 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Energy Use
Annual site electricity (kWh), chilled water (ton-hours) and 50 lb steam (klbs). These figures are not adjusted for central plant efficiencies (site to source conversion).
Performance Ratings
Performance ratings are provided for electricity in three units of measure: total kWh/ft2, equivalent total kBtu/ft2, and annual average W/ft2. Note that since electric demand utility data was not available for the building, an average demand was calculated based on the building’s annual electricity consumption (kWh) divided by the total number of hours in the year (8,760) and converted to Watts (1000 W/kW). Electricity consumption was converted from units of kWh to kBtu using the following factor: 3.413 kBtu = 1 kWh.
Performance ratings for chilled water and steam are provided in equivalent kBtu/ft2 based on measured site energy consumption. Estimates for equivalent source kWh/ft2 (electricity) and kBtu/ft2 (natural gas fuel) are also included based on the following assumptions:
Fuel-to-Steam Boiler Efficiency: 80%
Electric Chiller Plant Efficiency: 0.7 kW/ton
Steam-driven Chiller Efficiency: 2.1 COP
Annual Chilled Water Load Assumptions: 20% Steam-driven chillers, 80% Electric Chillers
The total site and source performance ratings sum the equivalent source ratings (kBtu/ft2) for electricity, chilled water, and steam, so that this building can be benchmarked against similar facilities, which may generate steam and chilled water in a central plant captured in the building electricity and natural gas meters.
Site Site Site Source
ft2 FY kWh ton-hrs klbs kWh/ft2 W/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kWh/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kWh/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2
FY11 21,580,813 9,923,424 103,029 30.1 3.4 103 166 8.9 19.8 144 0 180 413 333
FY12 21,652,335 10,433,928 97,894 30.2 3.4 103 175 9.3 20.8 137 0 171 414 327
FY13 22,434,606 10,240,224 96,127 31.3 3.6 107 171 9.1 20.4 134 0 168 412 326
3 Year Avg. 21,889,251 10,199,192 99,017 30.5 3.5 104 171 9.1 20.3 138 0 173 413 328
Source
Electricity
716,558
PERFORMANCE RATINGS
UMass Medical Center Hospital Building Energy Use Data
BLDG INFO ENERGY USE
Floor
AreaFiscal Year Electricity CHW 50# Steam
Steam TotalCHW
Source
120 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
EQUEST MODEL CALIBRATION
Energy and cost savings were estimated using an existing eQuest model of the facility originally developed by Andelman & Lelek and modified to reflect current equipment characteristics, schedules, and internal loads. The model used the TMY3 weather file for Worcester, MA and was calibrated against monthly electricity use over a three year period from July 2010 – July 2013. The model was also calibrated for chilled water and steam use using monthly data obtained from the UMass central plant staff. The charts below compare the actual monthly utility use averaged over FY2011-2013 and the calibrated eQuest model predicted utility use.
It can be seen that electric, CHW, and steam use were all able to be calibrated well.
Figure 36: Hospital building eQuest model electricity use calibration chart. The baseline monthly electricity use utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly electricity consumption is shown in red.
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
Ele
ctri
city
Usa
ge (
kWh
)
Monthly Electricity Usage
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
121 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 37: Hospital building eQuest model chilled water calibration chart. The baseline monthly chilled water utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly chilled water energy consumption is shown in red.
Figure 38: Hospital building eQuest model steam calibration chart. The baseline monthly steam utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly steam consumption is shown in red.
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
sage
(to
n-h
r)
Monthly Chilled Water Usage
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
Ste
am U
sage
(M
lb)
Monthly Steam Usage
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
122 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Table 7 on the following page summarizes the annual end-use energy distribution for electricity, CHW and steam at the facility as calculated by the baseline eQuest model. The pie chart on the following page illustrates the baseline eQuest model’s electricity end use using the figures shown in the table.
The “Miscellaneous Equipment” category in the table below can include any of the following equipment types: plug loads (such as appliances, computers, peripherals, laboratory equipment, freezers/refrigerators, etc.), transformer losses assigned to the building, exterior lighting, and elevators.
The following parameters were used to model the estimated miscellaneous loads in the Hospital building, based on information gathered during walkthroughs and historical whole-building electricity use:
1. Lobby, Café, and Corridor Plug Loads: 0.10 W/ft2
2. Office Plug Loads: 0.75 W/ft2
3. Patient Room, Clinic, and ER Patient Area Plug Loads: 1.0 W/ft2
4. Laboratory, MRI, ICU, and Surgery Plug Loads: 3.0 W/ft2
5. Kitchen Plug Loads: 10.0 W/ft2
In addition, the following parameters were used to model interior lighting loads:
1. Patient Room Lighting Power Density: 0.70 W/ft2
2. Corridor Lighting Power Density: 1.0 W/ft2
3. Office Lighting Power Density: 1.1 W/ft2
4. Kitchen Lighting Power Density: 1.2 W/ft2
5. Laboratory and Exam Room Lighting Power Density: 1.4 - 1.5 W/ft2
6. Surgery and ICU Lighting Power Density 2.2 W/ft2
123 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Table 7: Hospital Building eQuest model’s annual energy end-use for each meter (electricity, steam, and chilled water).
Figure 39: Pie chart showing Hospital Building eQuest model’s annual electricity end use breakdown.
kWh MLb ton-hrs
Area Lighting 4,368,300 0 0
Task lighting 0 0 0
Misc. Equip. 4,625,527 9,244 0
Space Heating 0 101,023 0
Space Cooling 0 0 9,550,203
Heat Rejection 0 0 0
Pumps and Auxiliary 716,785 0 0
Ventilation Fans 12,743,550 0 0
Refrigeration 0 0 0
Heat Pump 0 0 0
Hot Water 0 0 0
Exterior 0 0 0
Total 22,454,161 110,267 9,550,203
Baseline
Annual Energy By End Use
124 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES
Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) associated with the major air- and water-side equipment and terminal devices were identified following field investigations and a review of trend data from the facility’s Siemens building automation system. ECMs vary in scope from low cost measures limited to schedule, sequence, and set-point optimization, to more complex measures which may require larger capital investment associated with equipment replacement or retrofit.
125 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-01.01 (C) LIGHTING RETROFIT
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 01.01 (c) Lighting Retrofit
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
524,392 $52,439 0 $0 0 $0 $52,439 $1,025,490 19.6
BASE CASE The lighting in the hospital was updated between 1996 and 1998 and primarily consists of one, two, and four lamp fluorescent fixtures, containing 4’ 32 Watt T8 lamps with normal and low power ballasts. There are also a limited number of one, two, and three lamp 17 Watt T8 fluorescents, and 18 Watt compact fluorescents (CFLs) scattered throughout that facility. The halls, staff areas/stations and patient rooms on floors three through seven for the most part, remain unchanged from the fixtures and lamps that were installed as a part of the 1996-1998 lighting project.
UMass recently upgraded lighting in three buildings on campus, with the entire project consisting of approximately 10,000 28 Watt T8 lamps. An estimated 5,300 of these were dedicated to the Hospital. UMass staff ‘relamped’ a large portion of the halls, entryways, and common area fluorescent fixtures that remain on during all hours of the year.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to upgrade existing lamps and ballasts to newer high efficiency units where applicable. Refer to the Opinion of Probable Cost Table on the following page for a breakdown of proposed equipment types and quantities. We recommend replacing 4’ 32 Watt T8 lamps with high efficiency 28 Watt lamps and NEMA Premium (NP) electronic ballasts. We also recommend replacing CFLs and incandescent floods with LED lamps. The recommendations do not include fixture upgrades or replacement in an effort to present a more effective retrofit approach. Lighting controls such as occupancy sensors are not recommended due to the nature of the spaces and the 24/7 building operation.
The recent upgrade project described in the Base Case decreased the overall number of 4’ fluorescent fixtures that are candidates for retrofits as a part of this ECM. The impact of the upgrades are included in the in the Measure Economics summary table above and the Cost Estimate table.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in electricity use by installing high efficiency fluorescent lamps and more efficient ballasts. The energy savings calculations make estimates
126 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
for annual run hours of each fixture based on information obtained from facilities and maintenance staff. The calculations assume that run hours remain the same in the proposed case.
ASSUMPTIONS A room by room audit of floors one, two, and three were performed. There were significant changes to floors one and two from what was on the Noresco audit. Areas that were eliminated or reconfigured were captured in the audit. Because floors three through seven consist primarily of staff stations, and single and double size patient rooms, and remain unchanged from the lighting work done 1996/1998, the recommendations and calculations have been done based upon a lighting update done to one floor (floor three) and extrapolated through the remaining five patient floors. Occupancy sensing and other lighting controls are excluded from this measure due to the nature of the spaces served and 24/7 building operation.
COST ESTIMATE The cost estimate for this measure is shown in the table on the following page. The labor cost for the recommended retrofits are included in the material costs below.
127 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3-Audit
Retrofit - 2 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 2 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast ea 3370 $55 $185,350 $0 0 0 $0 $185,350
2 3-Audit
Retrofit - 1 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 1 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast ea 1523 $45 $68,535 $0 0 0 $0 $68,535
3 3-Audit
Retrofit - 2 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with LP
Ballast with 2 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with LP
Ballast ea 2839 $60 $170,340 $0 0 0 $0 $170,340
4 3-Audit
Retrofit - 1 Lamp 2 foot 17 watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 1 Lamp 2 foot 17 watt T8 with LP
Ballast ea 670 $45 $30,150 $0 0 0 $0 $30,150
5 3-Audit
Retrofit - 4 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 4 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast ea 1412 $65 $91,780 $0 0 0 $0 $91,780
6 3-Audit
Retrofit - 2 Lamp 2 foot 17 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 2 Lamp 2 foot 17 Watt T8 with LP
Ballast ea 37 $55 $2,035 $0 0 0 $0 $2,035
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-16: Lighting Retrofit
General Materials Labor
128 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
7 3-Audit
Retrofit - 1 Lamp 3 Foot 25 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 1 Lamp 3 Foot 15 Watt T8 with LP
Ballast ea 2 $45 $90 $0 0 0 $0 $90
8 3-Audit
Retrofit 3 Lamp 2 Foot 17 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 3 Lamp 2 Foot 17 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast ea 40 $60 $2,400 $0 0 0 $0 $2,400
9 3-Audit
Replace 13 Watt Compact Florescents lamps
(CFL's) with 5 Watt LED's ea 102 $5 $510 $0 0 0 $0 $510
10 3 Audit
Replace 18 Watt Compact Florescents lamps
(CFL's) with 9 Watt LED's ea 585 $5 $2,925 $0 0 0 $0 $2,925
11 3 Audit
Replace 2 Lamp 13 Watt Compact Florescents
fixtures with 9 Watt LED's ea 188 $5 $940 $0 0 0 $0 $940
Subtotal $551,190
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $110,300
3 Other Engineering 15% $99,300
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $33,100
Commissioning 20% $132,300
Construction Observation 10% $66,200
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $33,100
Total $1,025,490
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-16: Lighting Retrofit
General Materials Labor
Sources
129 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-04.02 (C) COMPARATIVE ENTHALPY ECONOMIZER ON AHU-1L,1R,1T-7T
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.02 (c) Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-1L, 1R, 1T-7T
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
1,827 $183 168,536 $20,224 -13 -$130 $20,277 $36,850 1.8
BASE CASE AHU-1L is a single zone variable volume AHU that serves the Hospital’s Remillard Lobby. The unit has a 10,000 cfm design supply airflow, a 15 hp supply fan motor, 3 hp return fan motor, and a single point economizer with a 50°F high limit lockout. This relatively low lockout temperature significantly limits the number of hours during the year which the economizer can operate.
AHU-1R is a multi-zone variable volume AHU that serves the Hospital’s new 2nd floor Catheterization Lab. The unit has a 32,000 cfm design supply airflow, a 60 hp supply fan motor, 30 hp return fan motor, and comparative economizer with a 0°F offset between outdoor and return air temperature.
AHU-1T, 2T, 3T, 4T, 5T, 6T, and 7T are multi-zone constant volume AHUs that serve Level 3 through Level 8 of the Hospital. Each AHU features an economizer sequence with a 70°F outdoor air lock-out.
PROPOSED CASE We propose implementing a comparative enthalpy economizer on AHU-1L, AHU-1R, and the seven penthouse AHUs identified in the existing case with a 0 Btu/lb offset so that the sequence is enabled whenever the outdoor air enthalpy is less than the return air enthalpy. This measure will include the installation of a new return air relative humidity sensor on AHU-1L and AHU-1R.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in mechanical cooling energy during periods when the outdoor air enthalpy is less than each AHU’s return air enthalpy, but economizer was not enabled in the existing case. In addition, the existing comparative economizer on AHU-1R using temperature only causes the sequence to be active during periods when the outdoor temperature may be less than the return, but the enthalpy may be greater, resulting in excess total mechanical cooling energy.
130 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on hAHU1R and hAHU1L and changed the following parameters:
hAHU1R Base Case
OA-CONTROL: Dual Temperature
DUAL-TEMP-DT: 0°F
DUAL-ENTHALPY-DH: n/a Proposed Case
OA-CONTROL: OA Temperature
DUAL-TEMP-DT: n/a
DUAL-TEMP-DT: 0 Btu/lb hAHU1L
Base Case
OA-CONTROL: Outdoor Temperature
DRYBULB-LIMIT: 50°F
DUAL-ENTHALPY-DH: n/a Proposed Case
OA-CONTROL: Dual Enthalpy
DRYBULB-LIMIT: n/a
DUAL-ENTHALPY-DH: 0 Btu/lb hAHU1T,2T,3T,4T,5T,6T, and 7T
Base Case
OA-CONTROL: Outdoor Temperature
DRYBULB-LIMIT: 70°F
DUAL-ENTHALPY-DH: n/a Proposed Case
OA-CONTROL: Dual Enthalpy
DRYBULB-LIMIT: n/a
DUAL-ENTHALPY-DH: 0 Btu/lb
131 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 6 $900 $900
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 12 $1,800 $1,800
3 3 Humidity Sensor ea 9 $750 $6,750 $150 1 2 $2,700 $9,450
4 3 BAS Programming ea 9 $0 $150 1 6 $8,100 $8,100
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $20,250
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $4,100
3 Other Engineering 15% $3,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,300
Commissioning 15% $3,700
Construction Observation 10% $2,500
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,300
Total $36,850
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.02 (c): Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-1L, AHU-1R, and AHU-1T-7T
General Materials Labor
Sources
132 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-04.09 (C)-1 RECONFIGURE PREHEAT CIRCULATOR ENABLE
SEQUENCE
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (c)-1 Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Enable Sequence on AHU-1B-6B
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
3,255 $326 0 $0 0 $0 $326 $11,400 35.0
BASE CASE AHU 1B – 6B each have a dedicated preheat coil circulator pump that is primarily used for freeze protection and to maintain the necessary flow through the coil. The design info for each circulator is shown in the chart below.
All six pumps are enabled based on outdoor air temperature, turning on when below 50°F. See Figure 40 on Page 134 for a trend screenshot showing this sequence in more detail. This method of control is intended to ensure the pumps are circulating hot water through the coil when the unit is calling for heating.
Historical trend logs and the controls sequence of operation indicate that the circulators are enabled at outdoor air temperatures less than 50°F. However, it was observed that all six circulators turned on more than a dozen times in May 2014, despite there being no call for heating. This example represents instances when the pumps are running and consuming energy unnecessarily.
Unit
Name
Pump
Quantity
Design
Flow
Design
HeadVFD
Average
Speed
Pump
Motor
Rating
Shaft
Power
Input
Power
gpm ft WC hp bhp kW
AHU-1B 1 256 25 Yes 25% 5 0.1 0.1
AHU-2B 1 256 25 Yes 25% 5 0.1 0.1
AHU-3B 1 220 35 Yes 25% 5 0.1 0.1
AHU-4B 1 208 25 Yes 25% 5 0.1 0.1
AHU-5B 1 174 25 Yes 25% 5 0.1 0.0
AHU-6B 1 208 25 No 100% 5 2.0 1.7
Totals 6 30 2.4 2.0
HW Circulator Pump Information
133 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
PROPOSED CASE We recommend modifying the existing preheat circulator sequence of operation by enabling pumps for operation based on heating load instead of outdoor air temperature. In the proposed case, pumps would start and run when the discharge or preheat discharge air temperature control loops call for heating. Once enabled, the pump variable speed drives would operate according to the existing control sequence. This measure will reduce the energy consumption of the circulators without have adverse impacts on equipment freeze protection.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This measure will result in energy savings due to a reduction in run hours of the dedicated AHU heating coil circulator pumps. Savings were calculated using an 8,760 hour spreadsheet using TMY3 (Typical Meteorological Year 3) weather data for Worcester, MA. Energy savings are derived from the reduction in preheat circulator run hours during periods when the outdoor air temperature is below 50°F but preheat is not necessary to meet discharge air temperature set-points.
In the base case model, pump run hours were limited to when the outdoor air temperature was below 50°F. The proposed case model recalculated pump run hours, limiting operation only to periods when the outdoor air temperature was low enough to require the heating coil valve to be open. This outdoor air temperature threshold was different for each AHU due to differences in minimum outdoor air ratios, observed discharge air temperatures, and return air temperatures.
134 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 40: The trend scatterplot below shows the preheat circulator VFD speed (Hz) for AHU-2B versus outdoor air temperature (°F). The pattern is typical of the B-Level AHUs and shows that the pumps are enabled at outdoor air temperatures below 50°F. The chart also shows that the VFD speed is directly proportional to outdoor air temperature.
135 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for programming labor. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 6 $0 $150 1 2 $1,800 $1,800
3 3 BAS Programming ea 6 $0 $150 1 4 $3,600 $3,600
4 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $6,000
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,200
3 Other Engineering 15% $1,100
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $400
Commissioning 20% $1,500
Construction Observation 10% $800
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $400
Total $11,400
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.09 (c)-1: Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Enable Sequence on AHU-1B-6B
General Materials Labor
Sources
136 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-04.09 (C)-2 RECONFIGURE AHU-15T/16T PREHEAT
TEMPERATURE CONTROL
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (c)-2 Reconfigure AHU-15T/16T Preheat Temperature Control
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
84 $8 20,813 $2,498 229 $2,286 $4,792 $5,800 1.2
BASE CASE AHU-15T and AHU-16T have a separate preheat coil discharge set-point and discharge air set-point. The preheat discharge set-point is fixed at 55°F and the discharge air set-point of 52°F, which was found to result in unnecessary simultaneous heating and cooling during the winter and shoulder seasons. Figure 41 on Page 138 illustrates this issue on AHU-15T.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend eliminating the preheat coil’s discharge set-point and controlling the mixed air dampers, preheat coil, and chilled water coil in sequence to the discharge air temperature set-point. For freeze protection, we propose implementing a 45°F preheat discharge air low-limit that would be maintained at all times.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in simultaneous heating and cooling that will occur when the preheat and chilled water coils properly control to the same set-point.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQUEST model. The run was performed on AHU-15T/16T and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
PREHEAT-SOURCE: Hot Water Loop
HEAT-SOURCE: Not Installed
PREHEAT-CAPACITY: Autosized
PREHEAT-T : 55°F
COOL-CONTROL: Constant
COOL-SET-T: 52°F
137 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Proposed Case
PREHEAT-SOURCE: Not Installed
HEAT-SOURCE: Hot Water Loop
PREHEAT-T : n/a
COOL-CONTROL: Constant
COOL-SET-T: 52°F
138 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 41: The trend screenshot of AHU-15T below shows that the preheat leaving air temperature (RED) is controlled to a 55°F minimum set-point while the discharge air temperature (ORANGE) is controlled to a fixed set-point (DARK BLUE) of 52°F. The trend also shows that the preheat valve (LIGHT BLUE) is opening to maintain the preheat set-point and that the mixed air temperature (PINK) is lower than the preheat temperature, confirming preheat is enabled.
139 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 2 $0 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,200
3 3 BAS Programming ea 2 $0 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,200
4 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $3,000
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $600
3 Other Engineering 15% $600
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $200
Commissioning 20% $800
Construction Observation 10% $400
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $200
Total $5,800
General Materials Labor
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.09 (c)-2: Reconfigure AHU-15T/16T Preheat Temperature Control
140 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-04.09 (C)-3 INCREASE AHU-10T & 11T MINIMUM DISCHARGE
SET-POINT
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (c)-3 Increase AHU-10T & 11T Minimum Discharge Set-point
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
187 $19 8,722 $1,047 70 $701 $1,767 $5,800 3.3
BASE CASE AHU-10T and AHU-11T are constant volume 100% outdoor air make-up air units that serve the 8th Floor Bone Marrow Transplant Unit (BMTU). AHU-10T serves four rooms, each with a zone reheat, and AHU-11T serves three rooms, each with a zone reheat. Both AHUs have discharge air temperature set-points that reset linearly based on outdoor air temperature according to the following schedule:
Outdoor Air Temperature
Discharge Temperature Set-point
0°F 75°F
55°F 55°F
The original sequence of operation describes a minimum discharge air set-point of 57°F; however, the observed minimum discharge set-point was 55°F. Historical trend data showed that zone reheats were active for the majority of the summer, suggesting that the minimum discharge air temperature may be too low for the zone loads.
PROPOSED CASE We propose increasing the minimum discharge air set-point in the outdoor air reset schedule from 55°F to 57°F to reduce reheat during the summer months and shoulder seasons. The proposed outdoor air reset is shown in the table below:
Outdoor Air Temperature
Discharge Temperature Set-point
0°F 75°F
55°F 57°F
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in mechanical cooling energy and reheat primarily during periods when the outdoor air temperature is greater than 55°F.
141 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQUEST model. The run was performed on AHU-15T/16T and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
COOL-RESET-SCH: DAT Reset 2 Sch
o Outdoor Drybulb High Temperature: 55°F
o Outdoor Drybulb Low Temperature: 0°
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor Low: 75°F
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor High: 55°F
Proposed Case
COOL-RESET-SCH: ECM#3.2 DAT Reset Sch
o Outdoor Drybulb High Temperature: 55°F
o Outdoor Drybulb Low Temperature: 0°
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor Low: 75°F
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor High: 57°F
142 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 2 $0 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,200
3 3 BAS Programming ea 2 $0 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,200
4 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $3,000
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $600
3 Other Engineering 15% $600
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $200
Commissioning 20% $800
Construction Observation 10% $400
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $200
Total $5,800
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.09 (c)-3: Increase AHU-10T & 11T Minimum Discharge Set-point
General Materials Labor
Sources
143 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-04.09 (C)-4 HOT WATER LOOP DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE RESET
SCHEDULE
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (c)-4 Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset Schedule
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
120,840 $12,084 0 $0 -384 -$3,839 $8,245 $12,000 1.5
BASE CASE Historical trend data shows that the loop differential pressure set-point on HX-1, 2, 3, 4, and 7 is fixed at 15 psig. Figure 42 on Page 145 shows an example loop differential pressure trend and the corresponding pump VFD speed. During the summer months, these loops may be over pumped by maintaining a differential set-point that is greater than necessary to maintain flow at the further coils.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend implementing a loop differential pressure reset as a function of outdoor air temperature, using the parameters defined in the table below.
Outdoor Temperature
Loop dP Set-point
°F psig
30°F 15
70°F 10
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in pumping power needed to maintain a lower loop differential pressure set-point when the system is at part load.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on the “HW Loop” system which models HX-1, 2, 3, 4, and 7. The following parameters were changed as part of the parametric run.
Base Case
HEAD-STPT-CTRL: Fixed
Proposed Case
144 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
HEAD-STPT-CTRL: Valve-Reset
145 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 42: The trend screenshot below shows the VFD speeds (BLUE, ORANGE) for the two pumps serving HX-1 and the loop’s differential pressure (RED). The differential pressure is approximately constant throughout the year, ranging between 13-15 psig.
146 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 5 $0 $150 1 4 $3,000 $3,000
3 3 BAS Programming ea 5 $0 $150 1 4 $3,000 $3,000
4 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $6,600
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,400
3 Other Engineering 15% $1,200
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $400
Commissioning 15% $1,200
Construction Observation 10% $800
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $400
Total $12,000
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.09 (c)-4: Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset Schedule on HX-1-4 and HX-7
General Materials Labor
Sources
147 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-04.11 (C) RECONFIGURE PREHEAT & DISCHARGE AIR RESET
SCHEDULES ON AHU-1B-6B
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.11 (c) Reconfigure Preheat & Discharge Reset Schedules on AHU-1B-6B
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 281,337 $33,760 5,468 $54,676 $88,437 $120,700 1.4
BASE CASE AHU-2B—6B are currently equipped with separate preheat coil discharge air and supply air reset schedules that can result in simultaneous heating and cooling during periods when the outdoor air temperature is less than 50°F. The set-points reset based on outdoor air temperature and are shown in the table below. Figure 43 below shows the reset in graphical form.
Preheat Discharge Discharge
OAT DAT-SP OAT DAT-SP
10°F 65°F 5°F 62°F
42°F 55°F 55°F 55°F
Figure 43: B-Level AHU preheat- and discharge-air temperature resets as a function of outdoor air temperature.
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
68
70
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Dis
char
ge S
et-
po
int
(°F)
Outdoor Air Temperature (°F)
B-LEVEL AHU Temperature Resets
Discharge Air Temperature Set-point Preheat Discharge Set-point
148 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 43 above includes a dashed blue line that is offset from the discharge air temperature set-point by 2°F to indicate the approximate temperature that the chilled water coil must meet in order for the discharge set-point to be satisfied as a result of heat added by the supply fan and motor. Based on the measured fan motor input power, the motor efficiency, estimated fan efficiency, and design airflow of the AHU, the heat generated at the fan was calculated to be 2.02°.
Note that although AHU-1B should be configured with the same set-point resets as the other B-Level AHUs, historical trend data showed that the discharge air temperature set-point on this AHU remained fixed throughout the year at 53°F. However, the preheat leaving air set-point reset was found to be the same as other AHUs.
The chart shows that when each AHU’s mixed air temperature is lower than the preheat discharge air temperature set-point, simultaneous heating and cooling becomes an issue due to the difference in discharge set-points. For example, at an outdoor air temperature of 20°F, AHU-3B’s mixed air temperature will be approximately 53°F at 36% outdoor air. The preheat coil will first increase the temperature of the supply air to 62°F to meet its set-point. The chilled water coil will then lower the air temperature to approximately 58°F in order to meet the 60°F discharge air temperature set-point. Although this scenario uses approximately 566 kBtu/hr of heating energy and 21 tons of cooling, the sequence could be reconfigured to eliminate virtually all of the consumption in this example.
The Hospital’s Facilities and Maintenance staff have indicated that the AHU preheat and discharge air resets have been configured in this way to prevent freezestat trips and the associated equipment shutdowns, as well as a precaution against coil freezing. One of the primary reasons that freezestat trips were an issue before implementing the separate preheat reset was the lack of sufficient mixing of the outdoor and return air. Outdoor air enters each mixing plenum from a vertical set of louvers on the side along the back of the unit while return air enters from the top of the unit, which allows cold outdoor air to quickly sink to the floor of the AHU without properly mixing with the return. During the winter, this could result in a freezestat trip if cool air is not evenly preheated across the coil.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend installing air mixers in each of the AHU mixed air plenums to help equalize the temperature of the air leaving the primary filter bank and entering the preheat coil and freezestat. We also propose a revision to the preheat discharge air reset so that the preheat set-point is always 2°F lower than the effective discharge air temperature reset in order to account for fan and motor heat gain. The table below shows the proposed preheat and discharge air resets as a function of outdoor air.
Preheat Discharge Discharge
OAT DAT-SP OAT DAT-SP
5°F 60°F 5°F 62°F
55°F 53°F 55°F 55°F
149 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in simultaneous heating and cooling that was observed to occur as a result of the differences in the preheat coil leaving air set-point and discharge air set-point resets.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a bin-type spreadsheet model that calculated the average magnitude of unnecessary preheat energy (Btu/hr) used by all AHUs at different outdoor air conditions. This energy was calculated using the following equation:
𝑄 [𝐵𝑡𝑢
ℎ𝑟] = 1.08 ∗ 𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦 𝐴𝑖𝑟𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 ∗ (𝑃𝑅𝐻𝑇𝑆𝑃 − ( 𝐷𝐴𝑇𝑆𝑃 − 𝛥𝑇𝐹𝑎𝑛,𝑚𝑜𝑡𝑜𝑟))
Where ‘Supply Airflow’ is equal to the total supply airflow of all seven AHUs included in this measure and ‘ΔTFan,Motor’ is equal to the average temperature rise across the fan and motor as a result of mechanical and electrical losses to the airstream.
Hot water energy savings were converted to steam savings assuming a steam heating value of 1,000 Btu/lb and a 97% conversion and distribution efficiency.
The model assumed that the amount of wasted chilled water energy was equal to the amount of unnecessary preheat energy, since minimal latent cooling would occur at the cooler outdoor air temperatures that this measure focuses on.
150 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 6 $0 $150 1 2 $1,800 $1,800
3 3 BAS Programming ea 6 $0 $150 1 4 $3,600 $3,600
4 3 Air Blenders ea 6 $5,000 $30,000 $150 2 16 $28,800 $58,800
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $64,800
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $13,000
3 Other Engineering 15% $11,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $3,900
Commissioning 20% $15,600
Construction Observation 10% $7,800
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $3,900
Total $120,700
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.11 (c): Reconfigure Preheat & Discharge Air Reset Schedules on AHU-1B-6B
General Materials Labor
Sources
151 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-04.14 (C) KITCHEN HOOD CONTROLS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.14 (c) Kitchen Hood Controls
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
43,857 $4,386 14,479 $1,737 2,429 $24,290 $30,413 $184,800 6.1
BASE CASE There are 4 kitchen exhaust fans which serve the exhaust hoods over the various appliances. The kitchen provides breakfast, lunch and dinner and operates from 5 AM to 7PM, 365 days per year. Make-up air to the kitchen/cafeteria is supplied by AHU-2-B which has a total air supply of 59,700 CFM, which brings in ~23,000 CFM of outside air. The existing fans run constant speed, maintaining a fixed air flow during all run hours. The existing fans already have VFD’s controlling the motor speeds, which were set during the balancing effort.
Fan Serves Nameplate Calculated Input
Power Balanced Airflow
Tag Equipment hp kW cfm
KEF-1 Grease Hood Level A 10.0 7.3 7,381
KEF-2 Kettle Hood Level A 7.5 5.5 7,076
KEF-3 Grease Hood Level 1 3.0 2.4 2,365
KEF-4 Dishwasher Level 1 7.5 5.5 7,584
TOTALS 28.0 20.7 24,406
PROPOSED CASE The proposed case is to install new control systems utilizing smoke or infrared cooking sensors and temperature sensors in all the kitchen hoods and connect the controller to the existing VFDs. KEF-3 serves 2 grease hoods and KEF-1, 2- 4 each serve single hoods. The control systems will operate the exhaust fan motor VFDs at a low of 50% speed until heat is generated from cooking equipment or smoke/cooking is sensed. The VFD will ramp to full speed immediately when smoke/cooking is sensed, and will ramp up more slowly if only a temperature rise is detected (e.g. from ovens under the hood). Similarly, the fan VFDs will ramp down when there is no cooking activity. The kitchen exhaust fan controllers will be tied into the existing Siemens building control system for monitoring and alarm purposes. The installation should include an interlock with both the hood and building fire prevention system. It should also include a manual override to instantly ramp the VFDs to full exhaust air flow and the control system should revert to full flow in the event of a failure. To help maintain the proper air balance in the space a new damper will be installed in the supply air ductwork that serves the
152 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
kitchen/cafeteria. Also a new space differential pressure sensor should be installed to monitor the kitchen air pressure relative to the surrounding spaces; feedback from this sensor will be used to regulate the supply air damper. The damper actuator and sensor will be tied into the existing Siemens control system.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY The energy savings for this measure were calculated using time of day profiles combined with a temperature-based bin model. The bin model uses 5oF temperature bins and TMY3 weather data for Boston, MA. The base case is modeled with the exhaust fans operating 5,110 hours per year. The kitchen MAU scheduling was included in Phase 1 EEM 2: DDC Control of AHUs and therefore it is assumed to be implemented for the base case. In the proposed case, it is assumed that the BAS will also turn the exhaust fans off at the same time as the MAU. The assumed flow profile is shown in the table below. The average fan speed is assumed to increase to 100% during periods of high cooking for the three meals each day. The average fan speed is assumed to be reduced to 75% in the hours before and after each meal to account for the variability in cooking start and end times for each meal.
Hour of
Day
Fan VFD
Speed (%)
Hour of
Day
Fan VFD
Speed (%)
1 0% 13 100%
2 0% 14 75%
3 0% 15 50%
4 0% 16 50%
5 50% 17 100%
6 75% 18 100%
7 100% 19 50%
8 100% 20 0%
9 50% 21 0%
10 50% 22 0%
11 50% 23 0%
12 100% 24 0%
153 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The opinion of probable cost for this measure is based on previous vendor quotes for the furnishing and installation of new kitchen hood controls systems. It also includes the cost to interface to the BAS, an allocation for air flow measurements, and commissioning.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Kitchen hood controllers ea 4 $20,000 $80,000 $150 2 16 $19,200 $99,200
2 3 Hood Air Flow Measurements ea 5 $0 $150 1 8 $6,000 $6,000
3 3 New supply air duct damper ea 1 $1,000 $1,000 $150 2 8 $2,400 $3,400
4 3 Siemens monitoring and control points ea 4 $750 $3,000 $150 1 5 $3,000 $6,000
5 4 Duct Air Flow Measurements ea 1 $0 $150 2 8 $2,400 $2,400
6 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 16 $2,400 $2,400
7 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 4 $0 $150 1 8 $4,800 $4,800
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $124,200
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 10% $12,500
3 Other Engineering 10% $13,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $6,900
Commissioning 10% $13,700
Construction Observation 5% $6,900
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $6,900
Total $184,800
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.14 (c): Kitchen Exhaust Hood Controls
General Materials Labor
Sources
154 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Note: The three (3) following measures are presented as separate options for reducing the energy consumption of the Hospital’s constant volume air handling units. The costs and savings estimates for these measures overlap and as a result, only the cost and savings for the first option (ECM-17.03 (c)-1) is included in building’s executive summary totals.
ECM-17.03 (C)-1 COMPLETE VAV CONVERSION AHU-1B-6B, 1T,2T,3T,4T,6T,7T
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY
BASE CASE All six major B-Level AHUs (AHU-1B, 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, and 6B) are constant volume with hot water preheat coils, chilled water cooling coils, steam humidification, and have fixed fractions of outdoor air. Six of the seven total penthouse AHUs (AHU-1T, 2T, 3T, 4T, 6T, and 7T) are also constant volume and feature the same coil configuration as the basement level AHUs, but feature modulating mixed air dampers with a single-point economizer.
The supply fan motor nameplate ratings on the AHUs range from 60 hp up to 125 hp and the return fans on applicable AHUs range from 15 to 50 hp. The table below summarizes key parameters for the AHUs included in this measure. AHUs serve zones via 386 constant volume zone reheats equipped with hot water coils.
AHU-# Total
Supply Supply Fan Return Fan Preheat Capacity CHW Capacity
cfm hp hp MBH tons
AHU-1B 49,560 125 30 3,840 433
AHU-2B 59,740 100 20 3,840 195
AHU-3B 58,240 125 25 3,300 240
AHU-4B 58,240 125 30 3,120 210
AHU-5B 41,750 100 25 2,610 165
AHU-6B 52,680 100 30 3,120 210
AHU-1T 35,600 75 25 2,520 175
AHU-2T 43,530 (2) 50 15 2,700 308
AHU-3T 46,400 75 15 2,520 210
AHU-4T 4,320 75 20 2,880 216
ECM # 17.03 (c)-1
Electric
Energy
Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW
Energy
Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam
Savings
Steam
Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit
Cost
Payback
Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
5,256,107 $525,611 2,983,462 $358,015 41,457 $414,571 $1,298,198 $6,562,276 5.1
Complete VAV Conversion on AHU-1B-6B & 1T,2T,3T,4T,6T,7T
155 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
AHU-6T 66,500 125 50 3,420 245
AHU-7T 44,940 125 15 3,780 373
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes a complete conversion of the twelve (12) AHUs included in the table above from constant volume to variable volume. This would include replacing each AHU’s supply and return fan motor, retrofitting each motor with an 18 pulse VFD, and replacing each zone reheat with a variable volume box and new reheat coil. As part of this measure, the existing terminal device pneumatic controls would be replaced with full DDC controls, which include new digital thermostats, new actuators, flow stations, and controllers. Note that although we have carried costs for replacement of the existing zone reheats with new VAV boxes, a hybrid approach could be taken to potentially reduce capital costs. The existing reheat coil could be re-used with a new valve and actuator and a new VAV box without a coil could be installed upstream to provide flow control to each zone. Each supply fan VFD would be controlled by a new duct static pressure sensor to be located approximately 2/3rds of the way down the duct system, and each return fan VFD would be controlled to track the supply fan VFD speed. VAV boxes would be configured with a proposed average minimum airflow of 50%, varying depending on the air change rate requirements in each individual zone. VAV controls would control space temperature by modulating terminal unit dampers. On a drop in space temperature below the effective heating set-point, the VAV damper would close to maintain the minimum airflow set-point and the reheat valve would open as necessary. On a rise is space temperature above the effective cooling set-point, the reheat valve would remain closed and the damper would modulate to maintain the set-point.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in fan, mechanical cooling, preheat, and reheat energy that is used to supply conditioned air at constant volume during all hours of the year.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on the model systems shown in the table on the following page.
156 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
AHU-# BASE CASE PROPOSED CASE
MIN-FLOW-
RATIO FAN EIR f(PLR)
FAN-CONTROL
MIN-FLOW-RATIO
FAN EIR f(PLR)
FAN-CONTROL
AHU-1B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.50 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-2B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.50 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-3B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.50 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-4B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.50 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-5B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.50 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-6B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.50 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-1T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.50 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-2T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.50 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-3T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.50 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-4T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.50 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-6T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.50 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-7T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.50 VSD FPLR Variable
COST ESTIMATE The cost estimate on the following page was developed using budget quotes for VFDs and motors replacement, as well as estimates for installation of new VAV boxes, BAS points, programming, TAB, ceiling and duct work, and electrical installation. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable. The cost estimate assumes that sufficient floor space is available in the basement mechanical room to accommodate the proposed 18-pulse VFDs. This assumption should be verified during the schematic design process to determine if sufficient space exists.
157 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 13 $0 $150 1 16 $31,200 $31,200
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 13 $0 $150 1 24 $46,800 $46,800
3 2 125 hp VFD and Motor ea 5 $16,000 $80,000 $150 2 6 $9,000 $89,000
4 2 100 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $13,843 $41,529 $150 2 6 $5,400 $46,929
5 2 75 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $11,189 $33,566 $150 2 6 $5,400 $38,966
6 2 60 hp VFD and Motor ea 1 $9,297 $9,297 $150 2 6 $1,800 $11,097
7 2 50 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $7,507 $22,520 $150 2 6 $5,400 $27,920
8 2 30 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $5,568 $16,703 $150 2 6 $5,400 $22,103
9 2 25 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $5,076 $15,228 $150 2 6 $5,400 $20,628
10 2 20 hp VFD and Motor ea 2 $4,370 $8,740 $150 2 6 $3,600 $12,340
11 2 15 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $3,948 $11,844 $150 2 6 $5,400 $17,244
12 3 Startup/Freight ea 26 $250 $6,500 $150 1 8 $31,200 $37,700
13 3 BAS Programming ea 13 $0 $150 1 24 $46,800 $46,800
14 3 BAS Control Points ea 1,211 $1,500 $1,816,500 $0 $1,816,500
15 3 VAV Boxes ea 386 $1,500 $579,000 $150 2 4 $463,200 $1,042,200
16 3 Electrical - Controls ea 399 $250 $99,750 $150 1 8 $478,800 $578,550
17 3 TAB ea 386 $150 1 4 $231,600 $231,600
18 3 General Conditions - Ceiling ea 386 $50 $19,300 $150 2 2 $231,600 $250,900
19 3 OA Flow Stations ea 12 $3,000 $36,000 $150 1 8 $14,400 $50,400
Subtotal $4,418,876
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 10% $441,900
3 Other Engineering 10% $486,100
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $243,100
Commissioning 5% $243,100
Construction Observation 10% $486,100
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $243,100
Total $6,562,276
General Materials Labor
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-17.03 (c)-1: Complete VAV Conversion on AHU-1B-6B and AHU-1T-7T
158 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-17.03 (C)-2 RETROFIT FANS WITH VFDS / INSTALL BRANCH DUCT
DAMPERS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY
BASE CASE All six major B-Level AHUs (AHU-1B, 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, and 6B) are constant volume with hot water preheat coils, chilled water cooling coils, steam humidification, and have fixed fractions of outdoor air. Six of the seven total penthouse AHUs (AHU-1T, 2T, 3T, 4T, 6T, and 7T) are also constant volume and feature the same coil configuration as the basement level AHUs, but feature modulating mixed air dampers with a single-point economizer. AHU-5T is a constant volume make-up air unit that serves patient room induction units.
The supply fan motor nameplate ratings on the AHUs range from 60 hp up to 125 hp and the return fans on applicable AHUs range from 15 to 50 hp. The table below summarizes key parameters for the AHUs included in this measure. AHUs serve zones via 386 constant volume zone reheats equipped with hot water coils.
AHU-# Total
Supply Supply Fan Return Fan Preheat Capacity CHW Capacity
cfm hp hp MBH tons
AHU-1B 49,560 125 30 3,840 433
AHU-2B 59,740 100 20 3,840 195
AHU-3B 58,240 125 25 3,300 240
AHU-4B 58,240 125 30 3,120 210
AHU-5B 41,750 100 25 2,610 165
AHU-6B 52,680 100 30 3,120 210
AHU-1T 35,600 75 25 2,520 175
AHU-2T 43,530 (2) 50 15 2,700 308
AHU-3T 46,400 75 15 2,520 210
AHU-4T 4,320 75 20 2,880 216
AHU-6T 66,500 125 50 3,420 245
AHU-7T 44,940 125 15 3,780 373
ECM # 17.03 (c)-2
Electric
Energy
Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW
Energy
Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam
Savings
Steam
Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit
Cost
Payback
Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
2,429,314 $242,931 1,165,401 $139,848 13,359 $133,589 $516,368 $3,306,679 6.4
Retrofit Fans with VFDs & Install Branch Duct Dampers
159 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes retrofitting the supply and return fans on the AHUs included in the table above with VFDs and installing modulating dampers at strategic locations in each AHU’s supply ducts. Each supply fan VFD would be controlled by a new duct static pressure sensor that would be located as far as possible down the supply duct while still being upstream of modulating branch duct dampers. Modulating branch duct dampers are recommended as an alternative to a full VAV conversion by reusing the existing zone reheats. The proposed dampers would be used to implement scheduling in non-critical areas where airflow could be reduced to approximately 70% of existing flow during nighttime periods. The table below summarizes the areas of the building that we propose a scheduled airflow reduction by installing branch duct dampers on each floor. The table also indicates the ratio of areas served by each AHU that we estimate can be turned down at night. For example, we have assumed that critical areas served by AHU-1B, 2T, and 7T would require design airflow at all times and therefore the turndown of this equipment would be less.
AHU-# Areas Served Ratio of Areas for Branch Duct Airflow Reduction
AHU-1B L2 Operating Rooms, L2 Neurology, L1 Emergency Room 30%
AHU-2B Cafeteria 100%
AHU-3B General Supply LB & LA 100%
AHU-4B E.B.S., Bio Med
General Supply LB & LA 100%
AHU-5B General Supply LA, L1, Parts of LB 100%
AHU-6B General Supply LB & L1 100%
AHU-1T Doctors’ Offices
General Supply L3,4,5,6,7,8 100%
AHU-2T 2A-T: L3,6,7 ICU; L4 Nursery
2B-T: L3,5,6,7 ICU; L4 Delivery 30%
AHU-3T Elevator area, hallways, common corridor areas
General Supply L3,4,5,6,7,8 100%
AHU-4T Nurses Stations
General Supply L3,4,5,6,7,8 100%
AHU-6T L2 East Side 100%
AHU-7T Laboratory Supply
L2 50%
Each supply fan VFD would be controlled by new duct static pressure sensors to be located in strategic locations upstream of branch duct dampers, in order to ensure that the proper flow balance is maintained at all times. In addition, static pressure sensors would be installed downstream of each branch duct damper to maintain proper flow to each branch zone during
160 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
periods when flow is reduced. Branch duct dampers would modulate to maintain a minimum downstream static pressure at all times; in the even the branch duct damper is fully open and static pressure is not met, the AHU supply fan would ramp higher as necessary to maintain the set-point. As part of this measure, we recommend installing outdoor airflow stations on each AHU in order to maintain building pressurization during periods when fans turn down. The existing case outdoor airflow would be maintained at all times by modulating outdoor air dampers and return fan speeds. For B-Level AHUs, the booster fan serving the common outdoor air plenum would be controlled to maintain the necessary outdoor airflow to each unit.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in fan, mechanical cooling, preheat, and reheat energy that is used to supply conditioned air at constant volume during all hours of the year.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on the model systems shown in the table below.
AHU-# BASE CASE PROPOSED CASE
MIN-FLOW-
RATIO FAN EIR f(PLR)
FAN-CONTROL
MIN-FLOW-RATIO
FAN EIR f(PLR)
FAN-CONTROL
AHU-1B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.91 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-2B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-3B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-4B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-5B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-6B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-1T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-2T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.91 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-3T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-4T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-6T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable
AHU-7T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.85 VSD FPLR Variable
For the ratio of thermal zones served by each AHU indicated in the proposed case table above, the following minimum flow schedule was implemented as part of the parametric run:
Monday - Friday 6:00pm - 6:00am: 70%
Monday - Friday 6:00am - 6:00pm, All Day Saturday - Sunday: 100%
161 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The cost estimate on the following page was developed using budget quotes for VFDs and motors replacement, as well as estimates for installation of branch duct dampers, static pressure sensors, BAS points, programming, TAB, ceiling and duct work, and electrical installation. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
162 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 12 $0 $150 1 24 $43,200 $43,200
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 12 $0 $150 1 32 $57,600 $57,600
3 2 125 hp VFD and Motor ea 5 $16,000 $80,000 $150 2 6 $9,000 $89,000
4 2 100 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $13,843 $41,529 $150 2 6 $5,400 $46,929
5 2 75 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $11,189 $33,566 $150 2 6 $5,400 $38,966
7 2 50 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $7,507 $22,520 $150 2 6 $5,400 $27,920
8 2 30 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $5,568 $16,703 $150 2 6 $5,400 $22,103
9 2 25 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $5,076 $15,228 $150 2 6 $5,400 $20,628
10 2 20 hp VFD and Motor ea 2 $4,370 $8,740 $150 2 6 $3,600 $12,340
11 2 15 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $3,948 $11,844 $150 2 6 $5,400 $17,244
12 3 Startup/Freight ea 25 $250 $6,250 $150 $0 $6,250
13 3 BAS Programming ea 12 $0 $150 1 24 $43,200 $43,200
14 3 BAS Control Points ea 345 $1,500 $517,500 $0 $517,500
15 1 Branch Duct Dampers ea 80 $500 $40,000 $150 2 8 $192,000 $232,000
16 3 Sheetmetal Cut in ea 80 $250 $20,000 $150 2 8 $192,000 $212,000
17 3 TAB ea 92 $150 1 8 $110,400 $110,400
18 3 General Conditions-ceiling ea 80 $50 $4,000 $150 2 8 $192,000 $196,000
19 3 Electrical-controls ea 92 $500 $46,000 $150 1 8 $110,400 $156,400
20 3 OA Flow Stations ea 12 $3,000 $36,000 $150 1 8 $14,400 $50,400
Subtotal $1,900,079
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $380,100
3 Other Engineering 15% $342,100
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $114,100
Commissioning 10% $228,100
Construction Observation 10% $228,100
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $114,100
Total $3,306,679
Sources
ECM-17.03 (c)-2: Retrofit Fans with VFDs/ Install Branch Duct Dampers for AHU-1B-6B and AHU-1T,2T,3T,4T,6T,7T
General Materials Labor
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
163 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-17.03 (C)-3 RETROFIT FANS WITH VFDS / RESET SPEED BASED ON
OAT
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY
BASE CASE All six major B-Level AHUs (AHU-1B, 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, and 6B) are constant volume with hot water preheat coils, chilled water cooling coils, steam humidification, and have fixed fractions of outdoor air. Six of the seven total penthouse AHUs (AHU-1T, 2T, 3T, 4T, 6T, and 7T) are also constant volume and feature the same coil configuration as the basement level AHUs, but feature modulating mixed air dampers with a single-point economizer. AHU-5T is a constant volume make-up air unit that serves patient room induction units.
The supply fan motor nameplate ratings on the AHUs range from 60 hp up to 125 hp and the return fans on applicable AHUs range from 15 to 50 hp. The table below summarizes key parameters for the AHUs included in this measure. AHUs serve zones via constant volume 386 zone reheats equipped with hot water coils.
AHU-# Total
Supply Supply Fan Return Fan Preheat Capacity CHW Capacity
cfm hp hp MBH tons
AHU-2B 59,740 100 20 3,840 195
AHU-3B 58,240 125 25 3,300 240
AHU-4B 58,240 125 30 3,120 210
AHU-5B 41,750 100 25 2,610 165
AHU-6B 52,680 100 30 3,120 210
AHU-1T 35,600 75 25 2,520 175
AHU-3T 46,400 75 15 2,520 210
AHU-4T 4,320 75 20 2,880 216
AHU-6T 66,500 125 50 3,420 245
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes retrofitting the supply and return fans on the AHUs included in the table above with VFDs and resetting the supply fan speed on each AHU based on outdoor air
ECM # 17.03 (c)-3
Electric
Energy
Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW
Energy
Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam
Savings
Steam
Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit
Cost
Payback
Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
3,025,217 $302,522 3,394,859 $407,383 43,237 $432,374 $1,142,278 $929,379 0.8
Retrofit Fans with VFDs & Reset Speed vs OAT
164 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
temperature. AHU-1B, AHU-2T, and AHU-7T are not included in this measure since these units serve critical spaces that require design airflow at all times. The table below summarizes the proposed reset schedule.
Outdoor Temperature
Supply Fan VFD Speed
°F %
30°F 60%
70°F 100%
As part of this measure, we recommend installing duct static pressure sensors as far as possible down the supply duct of each AHU that would be used to override the outdoor air reset in the event the duct static dropped below a minimum threshold. Although the system’s terminal devices are constant volume, the static pressure measurement could be used as a tool to ensure that sufficient flow is maintained to the further zones under all conditions. In addition, we recommend installing new temperature sensors in a sample of zones throughout the hospital that would be used to override the supply fan speed outdoor air reset on each AHU. If the zone temperature in any zone reaches more than 2°F (adjustable) above the set-point, the AHU fan speed would reset higher. We also recommend installing outdoor airflow stations on each AHU in order to maintain building pressurization during periods when fans turn down. The existing case outdoor airflow would be maintained at all times by modulating outdoor air dampers and return fan speeds. For B-Level AHUs, the booster fan serving the common outdoor air plenum would be controlled to maintain the necessary outdoor airflow to each unit.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in fan, mechanical cooling, preheat, and reheat energy that is used to supply conditioned air at constant volume during all hours of the year.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on the model systems shown in the table on the following page.
165 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
AHU-# BASE CASE PROPOSED CASE
MIN-FLOW-
RATIO FAN EIR f(PLR)
FAN-CONTROL
MIN-FLOW-RATIO
FAN EIR f(PLR)
FAN-CONTROL
COOL-CONTROL
AHU-2B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable Warmest
AHU-3B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable Warmest
AHU-4B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable Warmest
AHU-5B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable Warmest
AHU-6B 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable Warmest
AHU-1T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable Warmest
AHU-3T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable Warmest
AHU-4T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable Warmest
AHU-6T 1.00 n/a Constant 0.70 VSD FPLR Variable Warmest
COST ESTIMATE The cost estimate on the following page was developed using budget quotes for VFDs and motors replacement, as well as estimates for installation of new static pressure and zone temperature sensors, BAS points, programming, TAB, and electrical installation. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
166 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 12 $0 $150 1 24 $43,200 $43,200
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 12 $0 $150 1 32 $57,600 $57,600
3 2 125 hp VFD and Motor ea 5 $16,000 $80,000 $150 2 6 $9,000 $89,000
4 2 100 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $13,843 $41,529 $150 2 6 $5,400 $46,929
5 2 75 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $11,189 $33,566 $150 2 6 $5,400 $38,966
7 2 50 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $7,507 $22,520 $150 2 6 $5,400 $27,920
8 2 30 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $5,568 $16,703 $150 2 6 $5,400 $22,103
9 2 25 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $5,076 $15,228 $150 2 6 $5,400 $20,628
10 2 20 hp VFD and Motor ea 2 $4,370 $8,740 $150 2 6 $3,600 $12,340
11 2 15 hp VFD and Motor ea 3 $3,948 $11,844 $150 2 6 $5,400 $17,244
12 3 Startup/Freight ea 25 $250 $6,250 $150 $0 $6,250
13 3 BAS Programming ea 12 $0 $150 1 16 $28,800 $28,800
14 3 BAS Control Points ea 24 $1,500 $36,000 $0 $36,000
15 3 Electrical-controls ea 12 $500 $6,000 $150 1 8 $14,400 $20,400
16 3 TAB ea 12 $150 1 16 $28,800 $28,800
17 3 OA Flow Stations ea 9 $3,000 $27,000 $150 1 8 $10,800 $37,800
Subtotal $533,979
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $106,800
3 Other Engineering 15% $96,200
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $32,100
Commissioning 10% $64,100
Construction Observation 10% $64,100
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $32,100
Total $929,379
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-17.03 (c)-3: Retrofit Fans with VFDs & Reset Speed Based on OAT for AHU-1B-6B and AHU-1T,2T,3T,4T,6T,7T
General Materials Labor
Sources
167 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-18.00 (C)-1 REPLACE PREHEAT VALVES & ACTUATORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (c)-1 Replace Preheat Valves & Actuators on AHU-1B-6B, 1T-7T
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 33,302 $3,996 400 $3,996 $7,992 $83,700 10.5
BASE CASE Historical trend logs show that upon startup of each major basement (AHU-1B-6B) and penthouse (AHU-1T-7T) AHU preheat coil circulator, the preheat discharge air temperature rises significantly even when the valve was fully closed. This may be due to a leaking valve or insufficient pressure at the pneumatic actuator to hold the valve closed when the coil circulator is on. See Figure 44 on Page 169 for a trend screenshot that illustrates the air temperature rise observed across a typical AHU preheat coil when the pump turns on.
PROPOSED CASE For each of the AHUs listed in the table above, we recommend replacement of the preheat coil valve with a new valve body and replacement of the existing pneumatic actuator with an electric actuator to eliminate the hot water leakage observed when the circulator was enabled. As part of the measure, the valve controls would be converted to fully DDC and the programming updated for an electrically actuated valve.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in heating energy used during periods when the preheat pumps are active and the heating demand is less than the amount the results from valve leakage. In addition, chilled water savings result from the additional mechanical cooling needed to meet discharge set-points after supply air is preheated more than necessary.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using an 8,760 hour spreadsheet model that calculates the sensible heat gain across each AHU’s preheat coil based on trend data observations. The average temperature rise across each coil was first calculated using trends of mixed air and preheat leaving air temperature during periods when the circulator was on but the preheat valve was closed. For the thirteen AHUs analyzed, this average differential ranged from 0.25°F to 7.1°F. Energy savings were then calculated and extrapolated using TMY3 weather data for Worcester, MA. For each AHU, if the hourly outdoor air temperature was greater than the point at which heating was required but less than or
168 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
equal to the pump enable temperature (50°F for all AHUs), wasted heating energy was calculated using the following equation:
𝑄 [𝐵𝑡𝑢
ℎ𝑟] = 1.08 ∗ 𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦 𝐴𝑖𝑟𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 [𝑐𝑓𝑚] ∗ 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝛥𝑇 [°𝐹]
Where ‘Supply Airflow’ is equal to each AHU’s total supply airflow documented in the latest available testing, adjusting, and balancing (TAB) report.
Heating energy savings (Btu) were summed across all AHUs for the entire year and divided by a steam heating value of 1,000 Btu/lb to calculate the measure’s annual steam savings (Lbs).
169 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 44: The trends screenshot for AHU-2B below shows the large difference between preheat leaving air temperature (PINK) and mixed air temperature (LIGHT BLUE) when the preheat circulator status (ORANGE) is on but the preheat control valve (RED) is closed. The typical speed of the circulator VFD (DARK BLUE) ranges between 40-50% during these periods.
170 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 6 $900 $900
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 13 $0 $150 1 2 $3,900 $3,900
3 3 4 in. Control Valve ea 13 $450 $5,850 $150 2 4 $15,600 $21,450
4 3 Valve Actuator ea 13 $350 $4,550 $150 1 2 $3,900 $8,450
5 3 Insulation Repair ea 13 $150 $1,950 $150 1 2 $3,900 $5,850
6 3 DDC Control Point ea 13 $250 $3,250 $150 1 4 $7,800 $11,050
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $51,600
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $10,400
3 Other Engineering 10% $6,200
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $3,100
Commissioning 5% $3,100
Construction Observation 10% $6,200
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $3,100
Total $83,700
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (c)-1: Replace Preheat Valves & Actuators on AHUs 1B-6B and AHU-1T-7T
General Materials Labor
Sources
171 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-18.00 (C)-2 LOCK-OUT HUMIDIFICATION & CALIBRATE HUMIDITY
SENSORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (c)-2 Lock-out Humidification & Calibrate Return Air %RH Sensors
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 0 $0 2,408 $24,081 $24,081 $38,200 1.6
BASE CASE All major mixed air AHUs at the hospital are equipped with steam humidification and fixed return air relative humidity minimum set-points. However, the humidification valves on many of the AHUs were found to be open throughout the summer as a result of low return air relative humidity measurements. Figure 45 on Page 173 shows a historical trend of the return air relative humidity measurements and steam humidification valve positions for a sample of the major Hospital AHUs.
At the typical AHU summer discharge air temperature of 55°F, it is unlikely that return air relative humidity would be below the minimum set-point of 30%, especially when considering the latent heat added at the zone level from infiltration and occupants. As a result, the relative humidity sensors may be out of calibration. The list below includes the AHUs found to have a potential calibration issue.
B-LEVEL T-LEVEL
AHU-1B AHU-1T
AHU-2B AHU-2T
AHU-4B AHU-3T
AHU-5B AHU-4T
AHU-6B AHU-5T
AHU-6T
AHU-7T
PROPOSED CASE We recommend implementing a summer humidification lockout on the AHUs listed in the table above when outdoor air temperatures are greater than 70°F. We also propose calibrating each of the AHU return air relative humidity sensors to ensure that humidification equipment is controlling to an accurate target during periods when the system is enabled.
172 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in steam consumption during periods when the AHU return air relative humidity sensors were reading low and humidification was not necessary.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a bin spreadsheet model that calculated the average steam humidifier load on each AHU included in this measure during periods when the outdoor air temperature was greater than 70°F. Humidifier load was estimated based on historical trend data of steam valve position available between 5/3/2014 - 7/31/2014 and the nameplate capacity of each AHU’s humidifier. Energy savings were extrapolated to the entire year using TMY3 weather data for Worcester, MA by multiplying the average humidifier load by the annual number of hours that the outdoor air temperature is greater than 70°F (906). Steam savings assumed a heating value of 1,000 Btu/lb.
173 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 45: Trend screenshot of AHU-1B showing the steam humidification valve opening 100% during periods when the return air relative humidity is below the minimum set-point of 35%.
174 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 12 $0 $150 1 4 $7,200 $7,200
3 3 BAS Programming ea 12 $0 $150 1 2 $3,600 $3,600
4 3 Sensor Calibration ea 8 $0 $150 1 4 $4,800 $4,800
5 3 Sensor Replacement ea 4 $750 $3,000 $150 1 1 $600 $3,600
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $20,400
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $4,100
3 Other Engineering 15% $3,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,300
Commissioning 20% $4,900
Construction Observation 10% $2,500
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,300
Total $38,200
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (c)-2: Lock-out Humidification & Calibrate Humidity Sensors on AHU-1B-6B and AHU-1T-7T
General Materials Labor
175 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-18.00 (C)-3 REPLACE LEAKING PREHEAT VALVE ON AHU-13T
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (c)-3 Replace Leaking Preheat Valve on AHU-13T
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 12,333 $1,480 148 $1,480 $2,960 $5,000 1.7
BASE CASE AHU-13T is a make-up air unit that serves bone marrow transfer unit. During the summer, trend data suggests the preheat valve on AHU-13T is leaking by, with a 20°F average temperature rise between the outdoor air temperature and the unit discharge temperature observed when the preheat valve commanded fully closed. This results in wasted heating and cooling energy necessary to maintain the discharge air temperature set-point. Figure 48 on Page 190 shows an example trend screenshot that illustrates this issue. The table below summarizes key specifications for AHU-13T and its discharge air set-point reset schedule.
HVAC Type
Supply
Fan HP
Supply
Fan Qty
Measured
Supply Air Flow
Constant Volume 3 HP 1 2,909 CFM
Zone Temp
Error
Unit DAT
set-point
-1oF 57 oF
1oF 95 oF
Unconditioned outdoor air is initially preheated by a separate coil upstream of AHU-13T during the winter. This coil controls to the leaving air set-point reset schedule below, and was integrated into the energy model.
OAT PHT set-
point
5oF 62 oF
50 oF 55 oF
176 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 46: The trend screenshot below shows the preheat valve (BLUE) and chilled water valve (RED) positions on AHU-13T, as well as the temperature of the air entering the AHU (PINK) and the discharge air temperature (ORANGE). The areas highlighted in gray show periods when only the chilled water valve was 60-70% open, but the discharge air temperature was equal to or greater than the entering (outdoor) air temperature. This is likely due to a leaking preheat valve.
177 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
PROPOSED CASE We recommend replacing AHU-13T’s preheat valve to eliminate leak-by.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This savings associated with this measure were calculated using a customized, hourly spreadsheet model. Hourly TMY3 data was used for Worcester, MA. The magnitude of the leakby was calculated for each hour of the year and the resulting excess heating load was calculated using the formula below:
𝑄𝑆𝑖𝑚 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡/𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙 = 1.08 × 𝐶𝐹𝑀𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦 × ∆𝑇𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔
Where,
Qsim heat/cool = simultaneous heating and cooling load from leakby, in Btu/hr. This load occurs
on both the heating and cooling coils.
CFMSupply = Total supply CFM across preheat and cooling coils.
∆Tpreheat = 𝑇𝐷𝐴 > 𝑇𝑀𝐴 + 𝑇𝑆𝐹 = Magnitude of the temperature drop across the cooling coil
𝑇𝐷𝐴= discharge air temperature
𝑇𝑀𝐴= mixed air temperature
𝑇𝑆𝐹= calculated temperature rise resulting from supply fan sensible heat dissipation
The temperature rise across the fan and motor is calculated with the following equation:
∆𝑇𝑆𝐹 = 2545 ∗ 𝑃 ∗ [(1 − 𝐸𝐹) + (
1𝐸𝑀
− 1)]
1.08𝑄
Where, ΔTSF = Temperature Rise across Motor and Fan 2545 = Btu/hp P = Shaft Power (bhp) EM = Motor Efficiency 1.08 Btu/hr-CFM-°F Q = Air Flow Rate (CFM)
Modeling Assumptions:
Simultaneous load on the cooling coil is equal in magnitude to the leakby load on the preheat coil.
In both the base & proposed case, the unit continuously operates at 100% outdoor air.
178 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The estimated cost for this measure includes an allocation for the replacement of the chilled water valve and commissioning following installation. An estimated opinion of probable cost for this measure is presented in the chart below.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
2 1 2 in. Control Valve ea 1 $350 $350 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,550
3 1 Insulation Repair ea 1 $150 $150 $150 1 2 $300 $450
4 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $2,600
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $600
3 Other Engineering 15% $500
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $200
Commissioning 15% $500
Construction Observation 10% $400
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $200
Total $5,000
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (c)-3: Replace Leaking Preheat Valve on AHU-13T
General Materials Labor
Sources
179 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-18.00 (C)-4 DUCT STATIC PRESSURE RESET ON AHU-1R, 15T/16T
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (c)-4 Duct Static Pressure Reset on AHU-1R, 15T/16T
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
9,665 $967 3,250 $390 14 $135 $1,492 $19,700 13.2
BASE CASE AHU-1R is a multi-zone VAV AHU that serves the Hospital’s new 2nd floor Catheterization Lab. The unit has a 32,000 cfm design supply airflow, a 60 hp supply fan motor, 30 hp return fan motor, and controls to a fixed duct static pressure set-point of 1.5” WC.
AHU-15T and AHU-16T are both multi-zone VAV AHUs that serve the Hospital’s new 8th floor Bone Marrow Transplant Unit (BMTU). One AHU in the pair runs at all times, with the other serving as a backup in the event of a failure. Each unit has a 7,730 cfm design supply airflow, a 15 hp supply fan motor, 7.5 hp return fan motor, and controls to a fixed duct static pressure set-point of 1.7” WC.
PROPOSED CASE We propose resetting the duct static pressure set-point on AHU-1R and AHU-15T/16T using a new cascading control algorithm. Every 15 minutes the BAS will perform a damper position “high select” on all VAV boxes served by each AHU. If the average of the top two “high select” boxes is between 85% and 90% open the system shall hold its current duct static pressure set-point. If the average is below 80% open the BAS logic shall cascade its static pressure set-point down to a low of 0.8” WC. If the “high select” average of the top five boxes is greater than 90% then the system duct static pressure set-point shall cascade up to maximum (1.5” WC for AHU-1R, 1.7” WC for AHU-15T/16T). The cascading reset loop shall be tuned to avoid unnecessary hunting.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in AHU fan horsepower needed to maintain a lower duct static pressure set-point when the system is at part load.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on hAHU1R and hAHU15T/16T and changed the supply fan “EIR f(PLR)” performance curve that calculates fan input power as a function of airflow part load ratio. The curve used in the base case is the standard curve available from the eQuest library. A custom curve was developed for the proposed case to model a demand-based duct static pressure reset.
180 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
3 3 BAS Programming ea 3 $0 $150 1 20 $9,000 $9,000
4 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $10,800
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $2,200
3 Other Engineering 15% $2,000
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $700
Commissioning 15% $2,000
Construction Observation 10% $1,300
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $700
Total $19,700
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (c)-4: Duct Static Pressure Reset on AHU-1R, 15T/16T
General Materials Labor
Sources
181 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-18.00 (C)-5 ADJUST AHU-1L TEMPERATURE CONTROL
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (c)-5 Adjust AHU-1L Temperature Control
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
27,088 $2,709 10,771 $1,293 36 $360 $4,361 $4,100 0.9
BASE CASE AHU-1L is a single zone variable volume AHU that serves the Hospital’s Remillard Lobby. The unit has a 10,000 cfm design supply airflow, a 15 hp supply fan motor, 3 hp return fan motor, and a single point economizer.
Historical trend data for AHU-1L shows that the unit’s discharge air temperature resets to maintain the zone temperature set-point. However, the unit consistently cycles between full heating and cooling, hunting to maintain the set-point. Figure 47 on Page 183 shows how the preheat and chilled water valves cycle between 0% and 100% open, and the supply fan speed cycles between its minimum speed (62%) in heating and near 100% speed in cooling. This control sequence may be causing excess fan, heating, and cooling energy to maintain the zone at set-point.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend implementing a heating/cooling set-point dead-band of 2°F and reconfiguring the AHU’s temperature control loop to be less sensitive in order to reduce excessive cycling. In the proposed case, the occupied zone heating set-point would be 71°F and the occupied cooling set-point would be 73°F. The dead-band will allow the zone temperature to drift from one set-point to the other before switching between heating and cooling modes, and may reduce energy consumption during mild outdoor air conditions.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in fan, heating, and mechanical cooling energy used by AHU-1L as a result of unnecessary cycling between heating and cooling modes.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on hAHU1L and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
MIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.62
THROTTLING-RANGE: 0.1°F
182 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COOL-TEMP-SCH: AHU-1L Cool Ann
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: AHU-1L Heat Ann Proposed Case
MIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.40
THROTTLING-RANGE: 2°F
COOL-TEMP-SCH: 247 Cool Ann
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: 247 Heat Ann
183 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 47: The trend screenshot below of AHU-1L shows that supply chilled water valve (DARK BLUE) and hot water valve (ORANGE) on the unit constantly cycles between 0% and 100% to maintain the zone temperature (LIGHT BLUE) at the 72°F set-point. The supply fan VFD speed (RED) also changes constantly, ramping up in cooling and ramping down in heating.
184 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 2 $300 $300
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 3 BAS Programming ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
4 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $2,100
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $500
3 Other Engineering 15% $400
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $200
Commissioning 15% $400
Construction Observation 10% $300
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $200
Total $4,100
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (c)-5: Adjust AHU-1L Temperature Control
General Materials Labor
Sources
185 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-18.00 (C)-6 OPTIMIZE HEAT EXCHANGER RESET SCHEDULE
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (c)-6 Optimize Heat Exchanger Reset Schedule
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
-1,566 -$157 0 $0 526 $5,256 $5,099 $12,000 2.4
BASE CASE Historical trend data shows that hot water supply set-point on HX-1, 2, 3, 4, and 7 resets based on outdoor air temperature according to the limits shown in the table below.
Outdoor Temperature
HWST Set-point
°F °F
0°F 180°F
60°F 160°F
PROPOSED CASE We recommend revising the existing hot water reset on HX-1, 2, 3, 4, and 7 to increase the system’s efficiency during periods of low thermal load. During the summer months, a hot water supply temperature of 160°F may not be necessary to satisfy induction unit and terminal reheat loads. The table below summarizes the proposed reset parameters.
Outdoor Temperature
HWST Set-point
°F °F
0°F 180°F
60°F 140°F
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from an increase in the hot water distribution system’s efficiency by reducing losses through piping, fittings, pumps, and the heat exchangers at lower hot water supply temperatures.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on the “HW Loop” system which models HX-1, 2, 3, 4, and 7. The following parameters were changed as part of the parametric run.
186 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Base Case
HEAT-SETPT-CTRL: OA-RESET
HEAT-RESET-SCH: Schedule RESET-TEMP
o Outdoor Drybulb High Temperature: 60°F
o Outdoor Drybulb Low Temperature: 0°F
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor Low: 180°F
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor High: 160°F
Proposed Case
HEAT-SETPT-CTRL: OA-RESET
HEAT-RESET-SCH: Schedule RESET-TEMP
o Outdoor Drybulb High Temperature: 60°F
o Outdoor Drybulb Low Temperature: 0°F
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor Low: 180°F
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor High: 140°F
187 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 5 $0 $150 1 4 $3,000 $3,000
3 3 BAS Programming ea 5 $0 $150 1 4 $3,000 $3,000
4 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $6,600
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,400
3 Other Engineering 15% $1,200
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $400
Commissioning 15% $1,200
Construction Observation 10% $800
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $400
Total $12,000
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (c)-6: Optimize Heat Exchanger Reset Schedule on HX-1-4 and HX-7
General Materials Labor
Sources
188 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-18.00 (C)-7 REPLACE LEAKING CHILLED WATER VALVE ON AHU-11T
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (c)-7 Replace Leaking CHW Valve on AHU-11T
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 18,390 $2,207 223 $2,228 $4,435 $4,650 1.0
BASE CASE AHU-11T is a dedicated outdoor air system that serves bone marrow transfer unit. During the heating season, the OA is preheated in a separate unit, prior to entering AHU-11T. The cooling valve on AHU-11T is leaking by, with a 15°F average temperature drop between the preheat air temperature and the unit discharge temperature observed when both the heating and cooling valves are commanded fully closed. This results in wasted cooling energy as well as an extra simultaneous load on the heating coil whenever 15°F of cooling is not required. The tables below shows AHU-11T specifications and DAT reset schedule.
HVAC Type
Supply
Fan HP
Supply
Fan Qty
Measured
Supply Air Flow
Constant Volume 3 HP 1 1,830 CFM
OAT Unit DAT
set-point
0oF 75 oF
65 oF 55 oF
The preheat temperature set-point follows the reset schedule below, and was integrated into the energy model.
OAT PHT set-
point
5oF 62 oF
50 oF 55 oF
189 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
The graph below shows the difference between outdoor air temperature (OAC) and supply air temperature (SAT), as well as supply air temperature set-point (SAT), heating coil output (HCO), and cooling coil output (CCO). The two gray highlighted areas represent occurrences in June, during which the heating valve is open, and the cooling valve appears closed. In actuality, the cooling valve is leaking by, causing a temperature drop that the heating coil needs to compensate for. During such mild weather, heating should not be needed, and represents wasted energy. During colder months, the cooling energy is not required at all, and represents even more wasted energy.
190 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 48: The trend screenshot below shows the preheat valve (BLUE) and chilled water valve (RED) positions on AHU-11T, as well as the temperature of the air entering the AHU (PINK) and the discharge air temperature (ORANGE). The areas highlighted in gray show periods when only the preheat valve was open, but the discharge air temperature was equal to or lower than the entering (outdoor) air temperature. This is likely due to a leaking chilled water valve.
191 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
PROPOSED CASE Repair or replace chilled water valve actuator and replace valve if needed to eliminate leakby. No other changes are made to the unit.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This savings associated with this measure were calculated using a customized, hourly spreadsheet model. Hourly TMY3 data was used for Worcester, MA. The magnitude of the leakby was calculated for each hour of the year and the resulting excess cooling load was calculated using the formula below:
𝑄𝑆𝑖𝑚 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡/𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙 = 1.08 × 𝐶𝐹𝑀𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦 × ∆𝑇𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔
Where,
Qsim heat/cool = simultaneous heating and cooling load from leakby, in Btu/hr. This load occurs
on both the heating and cooling coils.
CFMSupply = Total supply CFM across preheat and cooling coils.
∆Tpreheat = 𝑇𝐷𝐴 > 𝑇𝑀𝐴 + 𝑇𝑆𝐹 = Magnitude of the temperature drop across the cooling coil
𝑇𝐷𝐴= discharge air temperature
𝑇𝑀𝐴= mixed air temperature
𝑇𝑆𝐹= calculated temperature rise resulting from supply fan sensible heat dissipation
The temperature rise across the fan and motor is calculated with the following equation:
∆𝑇𝑆𝐹 = 2545 ∗ 𝑃 ∗ [(1 − 𝐸𝐹) + (
1𝐸𝑀
− 1)]
1.08𝑄
Where, ΔTSF = Temperature Rise across Motor and Fan 2545 = Btu/hp P = Shaft Power (bhp) EM = Motor Efficiency 1.08 Btu/hr-CFM-°F Q = Air Flow Rate (CFM)
Modeling Assumptions:
Simultaneous load on the cooling coil is equal in magnitude to the leakby load on the preheat coil.
In both the base & proposed case, the unit continuously operates at 100% outdoor air.
192 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The estimated cost for this measure includes an allocation for the replacement of the chilled water valve and commissioning following installation. An estimated opinion of probable cost for this measure is presented in the chart below.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 2 $300 $300
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 1 2 in. Control Valve ea 1 $350 $350 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,550
4 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $2,450
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $500
3 Other Engineering 15% $500
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $200
Commissioning 15% $500
Construction Observation 10% $300
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $200
Total $4,650
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (c)-7: Replace Leaking Chilled Water Valve on AHU-11T
General Materials Labor
193 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-18.00 (C)-8 FIX MIXED AIR DAMPER ISSUES TO IMPROVE
ECONOMIZER
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (c)-8 Fix Mixed Air Dampers to Improve Economizer
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
-213 -$21 72,310 $8,677 -533 -$5,329 $3,327 $22,500 6.8
BASE CASE AHU-2T, 3T, 4T, and 7T are multi-zone constant volume AHUs that serve Level 3 through Level 8 of the Hospital. Each AHU features an economizer sequence with a 70°F outdoor air lock-out. However, trends of outdoor air, return air, mixed air temperature suggest that when the outdoor air damper is commanded fully open, the return air damper is not closing completely or sealing well. Figure 49 on Page 195 shows that when AHU-2T’s outdoor air damper position is 100%, the mixed air temperature is between the outdoor air and return air temperatures. The table below summarizes the estimated actual maximum outdoor air ratio achieved while economizer is enabled for each AHU included in this measure.
AHU-# Maximum % OA
AHU-2T 65%
AHU-3T 88%
AHU-4T 92%
AHU-7T 95%
PROPOSED CASE We recommend inspecting the mixed air dampers on the four AHUs listed in the table above and making improvements as needed to ensure that the outdoor air dampers are fully opening and return air dampers are closing tightly. This may include adjusting pneumatic damper actuator spring tension, replacing damper seals, or adjusting damper linkages.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in mechanical cooling energy used by increasing the maximum outdoor air ratio to 100% during periods when economizer is enabled.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on hAHU-2T, hAHU3T, hAHU4T, and hAHU7T, and changed the following parameters:
194 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Parameter hAHU2T hAHU3T hAHU4T hAHU7T
BASE MAX-OA-FRACTION 0.65 0.88 0.92 0.95
OA-CONTROL OA Temperature
PROPOSED MAX-OA-FRACTION 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
OA-CONTROL OA Temperature
195 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Figure 49: The trend screenshot below shows the mixed air (BLUE), return air (ORANGE), and outdoor air (RED) temperature measurements for AHU-2T, as well as the mixed air damper position (PINK). The shaded areas show that when the outdoor air damper is fully open, the mixed air temperature does not equal the outdoor air temperature as would be expected; the calculated quantity of outdoor air is approximately 65%.
196 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Hospital Building Estimated By: JAB
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 2 $300 $300
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 16 $2,400 $2,400
3 3 Damper Investigation and Testing ea 4 $0 $150 2 2 $2,400 $2,400
4 3 Damper Improvements ea 4 $500 $2,000 $150 2 4 $4,800 $6,800
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $11,900
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $2,400
3 Other Engineering 20% $2,900
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $800
Commissioning 15% $2,200
Construction Observation 10% $1,500
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $800
Total $22,500
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (c)-8: Fixed Mixed Air Damper Issues to Improve Economizer on AHU-2T-4T and AHU-7T
General Materials Labor
Sources
197 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
ECM-21.02 (C) HOSPITAL SOLAR HOT WATER
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 21.02 (c) Hospital Solar Hot Water
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 0 $0 644 $6,437 $6,437 $539,439 83.8
MEASURE DESCRIPTION Solar water heating is the conversion of sunlight into renewable energy for water heating using a solar thermal collector. The solar hot water system proposed by BEAM includes a glazed flat plate collector system consisting of 96 7’x4’ panels with a total surface area of 2,697 ft2. The target loads for the heating system in the Hospital building are shows, bathroom sinks, and the kitchen/cafeteria, which are estimated at 3,500 gallons/day. The system would include a 2,700 gallon buffer tank to be installed in the 9th floor mechanical room, adjacent to the existing 1,980 gallon domestic hot water tanks. For more details, refer to the BEAM’s report in the Appendix, which includes additional details on the proposed solar hot water systems for the Hospital and School buildings.
198 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
OTHER OPPORTUNITIES REVIEWED
ECONOMIZER IMPROVEMENTS ON AHU-1B-6B
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
-664 -$66 883,491 $106,019 -5,100 -$51,002 $54,950 - -
All six major B-Level AHUs (AHU-1B, 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, and 6B) are constant volume with hot water preheat coils, chilled water cooling coils, steam humidification, and have fixed fractions of outdoor air. According to the most recent balancing reports, the fixed fraction ranges between 32% and 50%, with the average being 38%. Outdoor air is supplied to these AHUs via a large shaft that connects to an intake plenum located at the penthouse level. The shaft is pressurized using an axial fan equipped with a 60 hp nameplate motor and a VFD that operates at a fixed speed of 40 Hz (67%). At this speed, the outdoor airflow through the fan is approximately 147,000 cfm, according to a memo attached to the fan’s VFD enclosure.
The original HVAC airflow riser diagram (Plan No. H-31) suggests that each basement AHU features relief dampers and ducts that could exhaust air to the Level A Areaway. However, upon further investigation, it was determined that all basement AHUs do not have any form of return relief. All exhaust air leaves the zones served by the basement AHUs via dedicated exhaust fans, stack effect, and/or exfiltration.
We propose investigating the feasibility of installing return air relief or increasing zone-level exhaust in tandem with a new sequence operation for the outdoor air booster fan VFD in order to take greater advantage of outdoor air during mild weather. The sequence would consist of increasing the speed of the booster fan VFD to 100% and reducing the amount of recirculated air to raise the fraction of outdoor air when conditions are appropriate.
This opportunity would require further investigation to determine if it would be feasible considering the location, configuration, and size of the basement AHUs.
Potential energy savings are derived from the reduction in mechanical cooling energy that is used to condition mixed air during periods when an economizer sequence could be active.
The potential energy savings were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on the following model systems: hAHU1B, hAHU2B, hAHU3B, hAHU4B, 7B, hAHU5B, and hAHU6B. The parametric run changed the following parameters:
199 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Hospital
Parameter hAHU1B hAHU2B hAHU3B hAHU4B,7B hAHU5B hAHU6B
BASE MIN-OUTSIDE-AIR 0.33 0.39 0.35 0.71 0.39 0.31
OA-CONTROL Fixed Fraction
PROPOSED
MIN-OUTSIDE-AIR 0.33 0.39 0.35 0.71 0.39 0.31
MAX-OA-FRACTION 0.55 0.57 0.55 0.92 0.78 0.54
OA-CONTROL OA Enthalpy
ENTHALPY-LIMIT 24 Btu/lb
200 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
LAKESIDE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE
Notes: The cost savings figures in the summary table above assume the following utility rates: $0.10/kWh, $0.12/ton-hour, $10.00/Mlb.
ECM # ECM
Electric
Energy
Savings
CHW
Energy
Savings
Steam
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit
Cost
Payback
Before
Incentive
- - kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
01.01 (d) Lighting Retrofit 61,418 0 0 $6,142 $133,865 21.8
04.09 (d) Modify Mixed Air Temperature Control on AHU 1-10 0 67,135 3,106 $39,119 $27,900 0.7
04.13 (d) Install Occupancy Sensors in Operating Rooms 97,720 20,518 721 $19,448 $115,600 5.9
18.00 (d)-1 Discharge Air Temperature Reset on AHU 1-10 -41,322 810,228 12,559 $218,688 $33,700 0.2
18.00 (d)-2 Static Pressure Reset on AHU 1-8 198,073 49,857 -5 $25,736 $31,700 1.2
18.00 (d)-3 Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Control on AHUs 1-10 8,175 0 0 $817 $27,900 34.1
18.00 (d)-4 Optimize HWST Reset 4 0 547 $5,475 $8,200 1.5
18.00 (d)-5 Replace AHU-4 Return Temperature Sensor 0 1,074 6 $184 $3,900 21.2
18.00 (d)-6 Replace Leaking CHW Valve on AHU-2 0 131,378 1,651 $32,273 $8,150 0.3
324,067 1,080,190 18,585 $347,882 $390,915 1.1TOTALS
201 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
FACILITY DESCRIPTION
The Lakeside building on the UMMC campus is approximately 270,000 ft2 and stands 3 stories tall. The Lakeside also has two sub-grade levels. It was constructed in 2004, and features a 60,000 ft2 emergency department accommodating more than 100,000 patient visits annually, along with 10 operating suites, an ICU, and patient & family care centers. Most areas in the facility are occupied 24 hours per day.
Steam and chilled water (CHW) are provided by the central plant. There are no tertiary CHW pumps in the building. All air handlers using chilled water operate off the pressure of the central loop. The Lakeside building receives steam from the central plant at 50 psig for HVAC loads and 125 psig for sterilization.
There is (1) steam to hot water (HW) heat exchanger (HX) that serve AHUs, fan coil units, and reheat coils. The HX has a set of three constant volume pumps, two of which operate at any given time to circulate the HW throughout the building.
There are (10) air handling units (AHUs) serving the building, all of which are located in mechanical spaces on the third floor. The units are referred to as AHU-1 through AHU-10. (8) of the air handlers serve the majority of spaces throughout the building, with AHU-9&10 serving second floor operating rooms. AHU-9 and AHU-10 operate lead/lag such that only one unit operates at a time; in the event of a failure, the lag AHU automatically starts. These units rotate lead and lag roles on a regular basis to balance run hours on the equipment.
All AHUs in the building are variable volume with supply and return fan VFDs and all feature economizer capabilities with a preheat coil, steam humidifier, and cooling coil. These units are all equipped with dedicated preheat coil circulators, which are used for freeze protection and to maintain the necessary hot water flow. HW coils have three-way valves while CHW coils have two-way valves. All units have a design capacity of 40,000 cfm, and a minimum outside air percentage of 33%. These primarily serve variable volume boxes, some of which are equipped with HW reheat coils. There are also approximately (4) Fan coil units (FCUs) that primarily serve mechanical and storage spaces in the basement.
There are also (8) pressurization fans serving elevators & stairwells and approximately (25) building exhaust fans serving isolation rooms, mechanical rooms, electrical rooms, and general exhaust. Exhaust fans range in size from 3,000 cfm to 23,000 cfm. Pressurization fans run only in the event of a fire and approximately half of exhaust fans run 24/7.
Lakeside HVAC is primarily controlled by the Siemens building automation system (BAS). Air handlers typically control to a constant discharge air temperature set-point of 55oF, however AHU-3 was seen to control to 60oF. The HX has an reset schedule based on outdoor air temperature for the hot water supply temperature set-point.
A description of the existing lighting systems in the building can be found in the base case description of ECM-9: Lighting Retrofit.
202 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
BASELINE ENERGY USE & BENCHMARKING
ENERGY USE GRAPHS
ELECTRICITY The top graph below shows electricity use for the Lakeside for fiscal years (FYs) 11 – 14. It can be seen that electricity use is very consistent throughout the year, with slight variations between the years likely due to weather effects. The bottom graph shows the electric use averaged over FYs 2011-2013, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. FY2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
203 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Figure 50: Lakeside monthly electricity use (kWh) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 51: Lakeside baseline electricity use (kWh) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013.
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ele
ctri
c U
se (
kWh
)
Lakeside Electric Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ele
ctri
c U
se (
kWh
)
Lakeside Baseline Electric Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-13)
204 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
STEAM The top chart below shows the monthly steam consumption for FYs 11 – 14. It can be seen that there is a significant difference between steam use in some months. This may be due to differences in meter read dates, but may also be due to known issues with the accuracy of the Lakeside steam meter. Also note the significant increase in summer steam usage seen in FY14. The bottom graph shows the steam use averaged over FYs 2011-2013, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. FY2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
205 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Figure 52: Lakeside monthly 50 lb steam energy use (Lbs) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 53: Lakeside baseline 50 lb steam energy use (Lbs) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013.
0
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ste
am U
se (
lbs)
Lakeside 50# Steam Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ste
am U
se (
lbs)
Lakeside Steam Use FY 11 - FY 13
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-13)
206 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
CHILLED WATER The top chart below shows the Lakeside CHW use from FYs 11 – 14. It can be seen that CHW use is very consistent from year to year, with slight variations between the years likely due to weather effects. The bottom graph shows the CHW use averaged over FYs 2011-2013, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. FY2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
207 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Figure 54: Lakeside monthly chilled water energy use (ton-days) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 55: Lakeside baseline chilled water energy use (ton-days) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013.
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
se (
ton
-day
s)
Lakeside CHW Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
se (
ton
-day
s)
Lakeside Baseline CHW Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-13)
208 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
BENCHMARKING
BENCHMARKING SUMMARY TABLE The table on the following page summarizes the annual energy consumption and performance metrics for the facility. This was done to provide a clear representation of the actual site and estimated equivalent source energy consumption for benchmarking and also for evaluation with energy savings opportunities. Energy use data for Fiscal year 2011 – 2013 is shown in the table, along with an average of data from the three fiscal years.
209 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Energy Use
Annual site electricity (kWh), chilled water (ton-hours) and 50 lb steam (klbs). These figures are not adjusted for central plant efficiencies (site to source conversion).
Performance Ratings
Performance ratings are provided for electricity in three units of measure: total kWh/ft2, equivalent total kBtu/ft2, and annual average W/ft2. Note that since electric demand utility data was not available for the building, an average demand was calculated based on the building’s annual electricity consumption (kWh) divided by the total number of hours in the year (8,760) and converted to Watts (1000 W/kW).
Performance ratings for chilled water and steam are provided in equivalent kBtu/ft2 based on measured site energy consumption. Estimates for equivalent source kWh/ft2 (electricity) and kBtu/ft2 (natural gas fuel) are also included based on the following assumptions:
Fuel-to-Steam Boiler Efficiency: 80%
Electric Chiller Plant Efficiency: 0.65 kW/ton
Steam-driven Chiller Efficiency: 2.1 COP
Annual Chilled Water Load Assumptions: 20% Steam-driven chillers, 80% Electric Chillers
The total site and source performance ratings sum the equivalent source ratings (kBtu/ft2) for electricity, chilled water, and steam, so that this building can be benchmarked against similar facilities, which may generate steam and chilled water in a central plant captured in the building electricity and natural gas meters.
Site Site Site Source
ft2 FY kWh ton-hrs klbs kWh/ft2 W/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kWh/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kWh/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2 kBtu/ft2
FY11 7,864,925 2,425,344 23,570 29.1 3.33 99.4 107.79 5.7 12.8 87 0 109 295 241
FY12 7,812,691 2,649,024 20,110 28.9 3.30 98.8 117.73 6.3 14.0 74 0 93 291 227
FY13 7,732,755 2,389,392 21,210 28.6 3.27 97.7 106.20 5.7 12.6 79 0 98 282 228
3 Year Avg. 7,803,457 2,487,920 21,630 28.9 3.30 98.6 110.57 5.9 13.2 80 0 100 289 232
UMass Medical Center Lakeside Building Energy Use Data
ENERGY USE PERFORMANCE RATINGS
Floor
AreaFiscal Year Electricity CHW 50# Steam Electricity
Steam Total
Source Source
CHW
270,000
210 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
EQUEST MODEL CALIBRATION
Energy and cost savings were estimated using an existing eQuest model of the facility originally developed by Andelman & Lelek and modified to reflect current equipment characteristics, schedules, and internal loads. The model used the TMY3 weather file for Worcester, MA and was calibrated against monthly utility use over a three year period from July 2010 – July 2013. The model was also calibrated for chilled water and steam use using monthly data obtained from the UMass central plant staff. The charts below compare the actual monthly utility use averaged over FY2011-2013 and the calibrated eQuest model predicted utility use. Operation of the building was inferred from a review of trend data, generally extending from May 2014 to September 2014.
Monthly electricity and chilled water use were able to be reasonably calibrated to utility data. Peak winter steam usage was also able to be calibrated; however there was a major discrepancy with the steam use during warmer months. Based on discussions with facilities staff, the Lakeside steam meter has known calibration and turndown issues, and is planned for replacement.
Figure 56: Lakeside building eQuest model electricity use calibration chart. The baseline monthly electricity use utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly electricity consumption is shown in red.
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
Ele
ctri
city
Usa
ge (
kWh
)
Monthly Electricity Usage - Lakeside
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
211 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Figure 57: Lakeside building eQuest model chilled water calibration chart. The baseline monthly chilled water utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly chilled water energy consumption is shown in red.
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
Ch
illed
Wat
er U
sage
(to
n-h
r)
Monthly Chilled Water Usage - Lakeside
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
212 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Figure 58: Lakeside building eQuest model steam calibration chart. The baseline monthly steam utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly steam consumption is shown in red.
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
Stea
m U
sage
(M
lb)
Monthly Steam Usage - Lakeside
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
213 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Table 8 on Page 214 summarizes the annual end-use energy distribution for electricity, steam, and CHW at the facility as calculated by the baseline eQuest model. The pie chart on the following page illustrates the baseline eQuest model’s electricity end use using the figures shown in the table.
The “Miscellaneous Equipment” category in the table below can include any of the following equipment types: plug loads (such as appliances, computers, peripherals, laboratory equipment, freezers/refrigerators, etc.), transformer losses assigned to the building, exterior lighting, and elevators.
The following parameters were used to model the estimated miscellaneous loads in the Hospital building, based on information gathered during walkthroughs and historical whole-building electricity use:
1. Lobby, Café, and Corridor Plug Loads: 0.10 W/ft2
2. Office Plug Loads: 0.75 W/ft2
3. Patient Room, Clinic, and ER Patient Area Plug Loads: 1.0 W/ft2
4. Laboratory, MRI, ICU, and Surgery Plug Loads: 3.0 W/ft2
5. Kitchen Plug Loads: 10.0 W/ft2
In addition, the following parameters were used to model interior lighting loads:
1. Patient Room Lighting Power Density: 0.70 W/ft2
2. Corridor Lighting Power Density: 1.0 W/ft2
3. Office Lighting Power Density: 1.1 W/ft2
4. Kitchen Lighting Power Density: 1.2 W/ft2
5. Laboratory and Exam Room Lighting Power Density: 1.4 - 1.5 W/ft2
6. Surgery and ICU Lighting Power Density 2.2 W/ft2
214 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Table 8: Lakeside Building eQuest model’s annual energy end-use for each meter (electricity, steam, and chilled water).
Figure 59: Pie chart showing Lakeside Building eQuest model’s annual electricity end use breakdown.
kWh MLb ton-hrs
Area Lighting 1,942,103 0 0
Task lighting 0 0 0
Misc. Equip. 2,755,013 174 0
Space Heating 0 37,442 0
Space Cooling 0 0 1,895,914
Heat Rejection 0 0 0
Pumps and Auxiliary 67,403 0 0
Ventilation Fans 3,027,529 0 0
Refrigeration 0 0 0
Heat Pump 0 0 0
Hot Water 0 0 0
Exterior 0 0 0
Total 7,792,048 37,616 1,895,914
BaselineAnnual Energy By
End Use
215 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES
Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) associated with the major air- and water-side equipment and terminal devices were identified following field investigations and a review of trend data from the facility’s Siemens building automation system. ECMs vary in scope from low cost measures limited to schedule, sequence, and set-point optimization, to more complex measures which may require larger capital investment associated with equipment replacement or retrofit.
216 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
ECM-01.01 (D) LIGHTING RETROFIT
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 01.01 (d) Lighting Retrofit
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
61,418 $6,142 0 $0 0 $0 $6,142 $133,865 21.8
BASE CASE The lighting consists primarily of 1’ by 4’ fixtures with 32 Watt T8 lamps, and 2’ by 4’ fixtures, also with two or three lamp 32 Watt T8 lamps. There is also a significant quantity of recessed can fixtures containing 13 Watt compact florescent lamps (CFLs). The lens type on the fixtures is primarily either prismatic or volumetric. The cans do not have a lens.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to upgrade existing lamps and ballasts to newer high efficiency units where applicable. Refer to the Opinion of Probable Cost Table on the following page for a breakdown of proposed equipment types and quantities. We recommend replacing 4’ 32 Watt T8 lamps with high efficiency 28 Watt lamps and NEMA Premium (NP) electronic ballasts. We also recommend replacing CFLs and incandescent floods with LED lamps. The recommendations do not include fixture upgrades or replacement in an effort to present a more effective retrofit approach. Lighting controls such as occupancy sensors are not recommended due to the nature of the spaces and the 24/7 building operation.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY
Energy savings are derived from the reduction in electricity use by installing high efficiency fluorescent lamps and more efficient ballasts. The energy savings calculations make estimates for annual run hours of each fixture based on information obtained from facilities and maintenance staff. The calculations assume that run hours remain the same in the proposed case.
ASSUMPTIONS The audit was performed, room-by-room, on all of the floors in the building. An audit was done on the staff areas, (referred to as ‘Pods’), and extrapolated to like areas in the building. The operating room areas on floor two were inaccessible, and are not included in the audit and resulting kWh and cost numbers. Occupancy sensing and other lighting controls are excluded from this measure due to the nature of the spaces served and 24/7 building operation.
217 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
COST ESTIMATE The cost estimate for this measure is shown in the table below. The labor cost for the recommended retrofits are included in the material costs below.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Lakeside Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3-Audit
Retrofit - 2 Lamp 32 Watt T8 with NP Ballast
with 2 Lamp 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 98 $55 $5,390 $0 0 0 $0 $5,390
2 3-Audit
Retrofit - 3 Lamp 32 Watt T8 with NP Ballast
with 3 Lamp 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 10 $60 $600 $0 0 0 $0 $600
3 3-Audit
Retrofit - 3 Lamp 32 Watt T8 with NP Ballast
with 3 Lamp 25 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 209 $60 $12,540 $0 0 0 $0 $12,540
4 3-Audit
Retrofit - 1 Lamp 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast
with 1 Lamp 25 Watt T8 with LP Ballast ea 433 $45 $19,485 $0 0 0 $0 $19,485
5 3-Audit
Retrofit - 1 Lamp 32 Watt T8 with NP Ballast
with 1 Lamp 25 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 441 $45 $19,845 $0 0 0 $0 $19,845
6 3-Audit
Retrofit - 2 Lamp 32 Watt T8 with NP Ballast
with 2 Lamp 25 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 88 $55 $4,840 $0 0 0 $0 $4,840
7 3-Audit
Retrofit - 4 Lamp 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast
with 4 Lamp 25 Watt T8 with LP Ballast ea 42 $65 $2,730 $0 0 0 $0 $2,730
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-01.01 (d): Retrofit Lighting Fixtures
General Materials Labor
218 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Lakeside Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
8 3-Audit
Retrofit - 3 Lamp 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast
with 3 Lamp 25 Watt T8 with LP Ballast ea 12 $60 $720 $0 0 0 $0 $720
9 3-Audit
Retrofit - 4 Lamp 32 Watt T8 with NP Ballast
with 4 Lamp 25 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 46 $65 $2,990 $0 0 0 $0 $2,990
10 3-Audit
Retrofit - 2 Foot 2 U Lamp 17 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 2 Foot 2 Lamp 17 Watt T8 with LP
Ballast ea 12 $55 $660 $0 0 0 $0 $660
11 3-Audit
Replace 13 Watt Compact Florescents lamps
(CFL's) with 5 Watt LED's ea 373 $5 $1,865 $0 0 0 $0 $1,865
Subtotal $71,665
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $14,400
3 Other Engineering 15% $13,000
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $4,400
Commissioning 20% $17,300
Construction Observation 10% $8,700
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $4,400
Total $133,865
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-01.01 (d): Retrofit Lighting Fixtures
General Materials Labor
Sources
219 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
ECM-04.09 (D) MODIFY MIXED AIR TEMPERATURE CONTROL ON
AHU 1-10
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (d) Modify Mixed Air Temperature Control on AHU 1-10
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 67,135 $8,056 3,106 $31,062 $39,119 $27,900 0.7
EXISTING CASE The mixed air dampers on all Lakeside AHUs each control to a mixed air temperature set-point that is not directly tied to the discharge air set-point. The constant mixed air and discharge air temperature set-points for each unit in Lakeside are listed in the table below.
Table 9: List of mixed air and discharge air temperature set-points on each AHU
A review of historical trend data indicated that an improper offset between mixed and discharge temperature set-points is causing unnecessary heating and/or cooling in many AHUs. For example, the mixed air set-point on AHU-8 is 59°F, while the discharge air set-point is 55°F, which limits the function of the AHU’s economizer sequence and uses additional chilled water energy to constantly cool the mixed air from 59°F to 55°F at the discharge of the AHU.
Another example is AHU-9, where the mixed air set-point is significantly lower than the discharge set-point. This condition is resulting in unnecessary heating energy during the shoulder seasons since the 49°F mixed air must constantly be heated to 55°F at the discharge of the AHU.
Unit
Existing
MAT
Setpoint
Existing
DAT
Setpoint
AHU-1 53 55
AHU-2 55 55
AHU-3 55 60
AHU-4 55 55
AHU-5 49 55
AHU-6 49 55
AHU-7 52 55
AHU-8 59 55
AHU-9 49 55
AHU-10 48 55
220 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
PROPOSED CASE We recommend reconfiguring the mixed air temperature control sequence on all AHUs so that the mixed air temperature set-point continuously resets to track the discharge air temperature set-point, rather than maintaining its own fixed set-point. The following sequence changes are recommended as part of this measure:
During periods when economizer is enabled, the mixed air dampers shall modulate to maintain the active discharge air temperature set-point. If there is not a call for cooling, the dampers shall remain at minimum position.
If the dampers are fully open and there is still a call for cooling (discharge air temperature above set-point), the chilled water valve shall modulate to maintain set-point
When economizer is disabled, the mixed air dampers shall go to minimum position and the chilled water valve shall modulate to maintain the discharge air temperature set-point.
If at any time the mixed air temperature decreases below a low limit set-point (40°F adj.), the mixed air dampers shall modulate to maintain the low limit and an alarm shall be generated at the building automation system.
The proposed sequence may reduce heating and cooling energy consumption during periods when the offset between discharge and mixed air temperature set-points results in unnecessary heating or mechanical cooling energy consumption.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in unnecessary heating and cooling that was observed to occur as a result of the differences in AHU mixed air set-points and discharge air set-points
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a 8,760 hour spreadsheet model that calculated the magnitude of unnecessary preheat energy (Btu/hr) or chilled water energy (Btu/hr) used by each AHU for each hour of the year. This energy was calculated using the following equation:
𝑄 [𝐵𝑡𝑢
ℎ𝑟] = 1.08 ∗ 𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦 𝐴𝑖𝑟𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 ∗ (𝑀𝐴𝑇𝑆𝑃 − ( 𝐷𝐴𝑇𝑆𝑃 − 𝛥𝑇𝐹𝑎𝑛,𝑚𝑜𝑡𝑜𝑟))
Where ‘Supply Airflow’ is equal to the supply airflow of each AHU included in this measure and ‘ΔTFan,Motor’ is equal to the average temperature rise across the fan and motor as a result of mechanical and electrical losses to the airstream.
Hot water energy savings were converted to steam savings assuming a steam heating value of 1,000 Btu/lb and a 97% conversion and distribution efficiency.
221 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
COST ESTIMATE The costs for this measure include engineering design to create the revised sequence, BAS programming costs, and commissioning.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Lakeside Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2 Programming ea 10 $0 $0 $150 1 4 $6,000 $6,000
2 3 As-built ea 10 $0 $150 1 2 $3,000 $3,000
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 10 $0 $150 1 4 $6,000 $6,000
4
5
Subtotal $15,000
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $3,000
3 Other Engineering 15% $2,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $900
Commissioning 20% $3,600
Construction Observation 10% $1,800
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $900
Total $27,900
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.09 (d): Modify Mixed Air Temperature Control on AHU 1-10
General Materials Labor
Sources
222 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
ECM-04.13 (D) INSTALL OCCUPANCY SENSORS IN OPERATING ROOMS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.13 (d) Install Occupancy Sensors in Operating Rooms
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
97,720 $9,772 20,518 $2,462 721 $7,214 $19,448 $115,600 5.9
EXISTING CASE VAV boxes serving the building’s operating rooms currently operate at constant volume and were not observed to have any form of airflow setback. This may be due to the inconsistency in operating room use patterns, which makes it difficult to implement scheduling that could reduce the energy consumption of the equipment serving these areas.
Figure 60 on Page 223 shows a trend screenshot of AHU-9, which serves the operating rooms. The trend shows that over a ten day period, the supply fan speed of the AHU is nearly constant, indicating no airflow set-backs on the downstream terminal devices.
PROPOSED CASE We propose implementing an occupancy schedule in the operating rooms so that between 11:00pm and 5:00am Monday - Sunday, the airflow set-points on VAV boxes serving these areas are reduced to 40% of the existing occupied set-points. As part of this measure, we also propose installing wall switches and occupancy sensors in each of the operating rooms so that schedules can be overridden and airflow can immediately be brought back up to occupied set-points on demand. We do not recommend any adjustments to zone temperature set-points as part of the scheduling, so that operating rooms are maintained at constant temperature and humidity at all times.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This measure will result in fan, cooling, and heating energy savings during unoccupied periods when airflow to the operating rooms can be reduced, while still maintaining occupied temperature set-points.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. For operating room areas on the second floor, the model’s MIN-FLOW-SCH parameter was modified to reduce minimum VAV box airflow from 100% to 40% between 11:00pm and 5:00am Monday - Friday.
223 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Figure 60: The trend screenshot below shows the supply fan speed (%) for AHU-9 serving the operating rooms between 7/7/2014 and 7/14/2014. The trend indicates that supply airflow set-points at terminal devices are constant and no scheduling is implemented, since AHU-9’s supply fan speed does not fluctuate on a daily basis.
224 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
COST ESTIMATE The cost estimate for this measure includes the material and labor cost to install space-mounted override switches, the labor cost to enable turndown on the operating room terminal devices, and the labor cost for control programming and documentation associated with sequence changes.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Lakeside Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Room pressurization sensors est 10 $1,500 $15,000 $150 1 8 $12,000 $27,000
2 3 Override Switches ea 10 $800 $8,000 $150 1 8 $12,000 $20,000
3 3 Programming est 10 $0 $150 1 4 $6,000 $6,000
4 3 As-built ea 10 $0 $150 1 2 $3,000 $3,000
5 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 10 $0 $150 1 4 $6,000 $6,000
Subtotal $62,000
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $12,400
3 Other Engineering 15% $11,200
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $3,800
Commissioning 20% $14,900
Construction Observation 10% $7,500
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $3,800
Total $115,600
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.13 (d): Install Occupancy Sensors in Operating Rooms
General Materials Labor
225 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
ECM-18.00 (D)-1 DISCHARGE AIR TEMPERATURE RESET ON AHU 1-10
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (d)-1 Discharge Air Temperature Reset on AHU 1-10
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
-41,322 -$4,132 810,228 $97,227 12,559 $125,593 $218,688 $33,700 0.2
EXISTING CASE All air handlers in Lakeside with the exception of AHU-3 have a constant discharge air temperature set-point of 55°F, with AHU-3 having a constant set-point of 60°F. Historical trend data reviews and the original sequence of operation indicate that the discharge temperature set-points do not reset. Trends also show consistent periods during warm weather when approximately 60% of the terminal devices on a given building level were reheating. Figure 61 on Page 227 shows a sample of terminal device reheat valve positions during a week long period in July 2014.
Though trend data was not available for these units during the winter, the patterns observed during spring and summer operation suggest that a much greater amount of reheat may be used during the winter months as a result of the AHU’s fixed discharge set-points.
PROPOSED CASE We propose implementing a discharge air temperature reset schedule in the sequence of operation whereby the set-point is reset up or down based on terminal box reheat valve position. Every five minutes, the BAS will poll the terminal boxes associated with each AHU. If the number of boxes with reheat valves closed is less than a specified threshold (2-3 recommended), then the discharge air temperature set-point would be increased by 0.5°F. If the number of boxes with their reheat valves closed exceeds the set-point, the discharge air temperature would be decreased. The proposed minimum and maximum reset temperatures for the sequence are 55°F and 62°F, respectively.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY An excessively low AHU discharge air temperature requires terminal VAV boxes to use additional reheat energy during mild and cooler weather. Raising the AHU discharge air temperature during these periods can reduce this amount of unnecessary reheat energy used by terminal devices, often without increasing heating energy consumption at the air handler. This is accomplished by modulating the AHU’s mixed air damper to maintain the discharge air temperature set-point without opening the preheat coil during mild weather.
226 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQUEST model. The run was performed on AHU-1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
COOL-CONTROL: Constant
COOL-RESET-SCH: n/a
Proposed Case
COOL-CONTROL: Reset
RESET-PRIORITY: Simultaneous (Airflow and Temperature)
COOL-MAX-RESET-T: 62°F
COOL-MIN-RESET-T: 55°F
227 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Figure 61: The trend screenshot below shows a sample of VAV box reheat valve positions between 7/23/2014 and 7/30/2014. A majority of reheat valves are open during this period, suggesting there may be an opportunity to implement a discharge air temperature reset. At the timestamp highlighted (7/28/2014 5:00am), four out of eight VAV boxes have reheat valves that are 100% open, and seven out of eight are at least partially open.
228 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
COST ESTIMATE The costs for this measure include the labor cost for control programming and documentation associated with sequence changes.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Lakeside Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2 Programming ea 10 $0 $0 $150 1 8 $12,000 $12,000
2 3 As-built ea 10 $0 $150 1 2 $3,000 $3,000
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 10 $0 $150 1 2 $3,000 $3,000
4
5
Subtotal $18,000
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $3,600
3 Other Engineering 15% $3,300
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,100
Commissioning 20% $4,400
Construction Observation 10% $2,200
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,100
Total $33,700
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (d)-1: Discharge Air Temperature Reset on AHU-1-10
General Materials Labor
229 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
ECM-18.00 (D)-2 STATIC PRESSURE RESET ON AHU 1-8
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (d)-2 Static Pressure Reset on AHU 1-8
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
198,073 $19,807 49,857 $5,983 -5 -$54 $25,736 $31,700 1.2
EXISTING CASE The sequence of operation for the Lakeside AHUs and their respective terminal boxes is as follows:
The VFD speed shall modulate to maintain a fixed static pressure set-point.
Static pressure set-point is currently a fixed value for all AHUs. The observed static pressure set-point for each AHU is given in the table below:
AHU Units AHU-1 AHU-2 AHU-3 AHU-4 AHU-5 AHU-6 AHU-7 AHU-8
Existing Static Set-point
" WC 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.75 1.75
VAV box damper position shall modulate between its minimum position and 100% open to maintain the space thermostat set-point. Upon reaching minimum position, if the space temperature remains below the set-point, the reheat valve shall modulate to maintain space temperature.
Though trend data is not available for VAV damper positions, a review of terminal reheat valve positions showed a significant amount of reheat, even through the summer, suggesting that many boxes may be at minimum position.
PROPOSED CASE We propose resetting the duct static pressure set-point on each AHU using a new cascading control algorithm. Every 15 minutes the BAS will perform a damper position “high select” on all VAV boxes served by each of the AHUs. If the average of the top five (user selectable from 1 to 10) “high select” boxes is between 85% and 90% open the system shall hold its current discharge pressure set-point. If the average is below 80% open the BAS logic shall cascade its duct static pressure set-point down to a low of 1.0” WC. If the average of the top five boxes is greater than 90% then the system duct static pressure set-point shall cascade up to a maximum of either 1.25” WC or 1.5” WC, depending on the observed existing case static pressure set-point. The cascading reset loop shall be tuned to avoid unnecessary hunting.
230 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
This proposed sequence ensures that sufficient static pressure is maintained in order to supply enough airflow to meet demand, while allowing for “rogue“ non-critical zone(s) that are consistently at or near maximum flow.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in AHU fan horsepower needed to maintain a lower duct static pressure set-point when the system is at part load.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run, performed on AHU-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8, changed the supply fan “EIR f(PLR)” performance curve that calculates fan input power as a function of airflow part load ratio. The curve used in the base case is the standard curve available from the eQuest library. A custom curve was developed for the proposed case to model a demand-based duct static pressure. A single curve was applied to all units involved, despite slightly different static pressure set-points and intended resets for some AHUs.
The custom fan curve applied to the proposed case produces an energy input ratio of 0.16 at the maximum turndown of 0.25” WC. The table below shows the existing static pressure set-points on the units involved in this measure, along with their expected minimum static pressure set-points.
Unit
Existing
SP
Setpoint
(in. WG)
Proposed
Minimum SP
Setpoint
(in. WG)
AHU-1 1.75 1.50
AHU-2 1.75 1.50
AHU-3 1.50 1.25
AHU-4 1.50 1.25
AHU-5 1.50 1.25
AHU-6 1.50 1.25
AHU-7 1.75 1.50
AHU-8 1.75 1.50
231 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
COST ESTIMATE The costs for this measure include the labor cost for control programming and documentation associated with sequence changes.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Lakeside Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2 Programming ea 8 $0 $0 $150 1 8 $9,600 $9,600
2 3 As-built ea 8 $0 $150 1 2 $2,400 $2,400
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 8 $0 $150 1 4 $4,800 $4,800
4
5
Subtotal $16,800
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $3,400
3 Other Engineering 15% $3,100
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,100
Commissioning 20% $4,100
Construction Observation 10% $2,100
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,100
Total $31,700
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (d)-2: Static Pressure Reset on AHU 1-8
General Materials Labor
Sources
232 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
ECM-18.00 (D)-3 RECONFIGURE PREHEAT CIRCULATOR CONTROL
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (d)-3 Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Control on AHUs 1-10
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
8,175 $817 0 $0 0 $0 $817 $27,900 34.1
BASE CASE Each AHU in Lakeside has a 3/4 hp preheat circulator for freeze protection and to maintain the necessary flow through the coil. The design information for each circulator pump is given in the table below.
Design Head
Design Flow
Estimated Pump
Efficiency
Estimated Motor
Efficiency
Estimated Input
Power
ft WC gpm % % kW
20 65 65% 90% 0.561
The circulators were observed to operate based on outside air temperature, including the unit serving AHU-10, which acts as a back-up to AHU-9 and typically does not operate. It was noticed that the outside air temperature set-points were different between nearly all of the pumps in the building. The table below summarizes the outdoor air temperature enable set-points for each AHU’s preheat circulator.
AHU AHU-2 AHU-3 AHU-4 AHU-5 AHU-6 AHU-7 AHU-8 AHU-9 AHU-10
Pump Enable
OAT 55°F 55°F 55°F 47°F 47°F 47°F 48°F 50°F 50°F
PROPOSED CASE We recommend modifying the existing preheat circulator sequence of operation by enabling pumps for operation based on heating load instead of outdoor air temperature. In the proposed case, pumps would start and run when the discharge or preheat discharge air temperature control loops call for heating. In order to maintain freeze protection on these AHUs, we recommend implementing an outdoor air temperature override so that pumps are enabled below 35°F. This measure will reduce the energy consumption of the circulators without have adverse impacts on equipment freeze protection.
233 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This measure will result in energy savings due to a reduction in run hours of the dedicated AHU heating coil circulator pumps. Savings were calculated using an 8,760 hour spreadsheet using TMY3 (Typical Meteorological Year 3) weather data for Worcester, MA. Energy savings are derived from the reduction in preheat circulator run hours during periods when the outdoor air temperature is below the existing enable set-point but preheat is not necessary to meet discharge air temperature set-points.
In the base case model, pump run hours were limited to when the outdoor air temperature was below the existing enable set-point. The proposed case model recalculated pump run hours, limiting operation only to periods when the outdoor air temperature was low enough to require the heating coil valve to be open. This outdoor air temperature threshold was different for each AHU due to differences in minimum outdoor air ratios, observed discharge air temperatures, and return air temperatures.
234 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
COST ESTIMATE The costs for this measure include the labor cost for control programming and documentation associated with sequence changes.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Lakeside Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2 Programming ea 10 $0 $0 $150 1 4 $6,000 $6,000
2 3 As-built ea 10 $0 $150 1 2 $3,000 $3,000
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 10 $0 $150 1 4 $6,000 $6,000
4
5
Subtotal $15,000
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $3,000
3 Other Engineering 15% $2,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $900
Commissioning 20% $3,600
Construction Observation 10% $1,800
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $900
Total $27,900
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (d)-3: Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Control on AHU 1-10
Sources
General Materials Labor
235 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
ECM-18.00 (D)-4 OPTIMIZE HOT WATER SUPPLY TEMPERATURE RESET
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (d)-4 Optimize HWST Reset
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
4 $0 0 $0 547 $5,475 $5,475 $8,200 1.5
EXISTING CASE The hot water converters in Lakeside serve air handlers, VAV reheats, and baseboard radiators. A review of trend data showed that the hot water supply temperature set-point resets based on outdoor air temperature with the set-point ranging between 190°F and 180°F. The original Siemens controls submittal for the HW converters showed a reset schedule ranging between 190°F and 150°F.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend revising the existing hot water reset to increase the system’s efficiency during periods of low thermal load. During the summer months, a hot water supply temperature of 180°F may not be necessary to satisfy terminal reheat loads. The table below summarizes the proposed reset parameters.
Outdoor Air Temperature HWST Set-point
0°F 190°F
60°F 150°F
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from an increase in the hot water distribution system’s efficiency by reducing losses through piping, fittings, pumps, and the heat exchangers at lower hot water supply temperatures.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQUEST model. The run was performed on the “HW Loop” system which models the building’s hot water loop using estimated piping lengths and dimensions based on available drawings. The following parameters were changed as part of the parametric run.
236 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Base Case
HEAT-SETPT-CTRL: OA-RESET
HEAT-RESET-SCH: Schedule RESET-TEMP
o Outdoor Drybulb High Temperature: 60°F
o Outdoor Drybulb Low Temperature: 0°F
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor Low: 190°F
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor High: 180°F
Proposed Case
HEAT-SETPT-CTRL: OA-RESET
HEAT-RESET-SCH: Schedule RESET-TEMP
o Outdoor Drybulb High Temperature: 60°F
o Outdoor Drybulb Low Temperature: 0°F
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor Low: 190°F
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor High: 150°F
237 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
COST ESTIMATE The costs for this measure include the labor cost for control programming and documentation associated with sequence changes.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Lakeside Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2 Programming ea 3 $0 $0 $150 1 4 $1,800 $1,800
2 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 3 $0 $150 1 4 $1,800 $1,800
4
5
Subtotal $4,200
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $900
3 Other Engineering 15% $800
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $300
Commissioning 20% $1,100
Construction Observation 10% $600
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $300
Total $8,200
Labor
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (d)-4: Optimize Hot Water Supply Temperature Reset
General Materials
Sources
238 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
ECM-18.00 (D)-5 REPLACE AHU-4 RETURN TEMPERATURE SENSOR
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (d)-5 Replace AHU-4 Return Temperature Sensor
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 1,074 $129 6 $55 $184 $3,900 21.2
EXISTING CASE Trend data showed that the return air temperature sensor on AHU-4 was out of calibration, reading approximately 2°F higher than the actual expected temperature. Figure 62 on Page 240 illustrates the calibration issue. When the unit is commanded to minimum outside air, the mixed air temperature is not between the return and outdoor air temperature measurements, as would be expected. However, when the unit is commanded to 100% outside air, the outside and mixed air temperatures are essentially equal, as expected. This suggests that the return air temperature sensor is out of calibration since the outdoor air mixed air temperature sensors appear to be calibrated relative to each other.
The return air sensor calibration issue is affecting the efficiency of economizer sequence by enabling economizer during periods when the outdoor air temperature and enthalpy are greater than the return conditions. This may result in excess chilled water energy consumption during periods when the outdoor air temperature is within approximately 2°F of the return temperature.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend replacing the return air temperature sensor on AHU-4 for efficient economizer operation.
ENERGY SAVINGS Energy savings are derived from the reduction in mechanical cooling energy that is used when economizer was inappropriately enabled in the existing case as a result of the return air temperature reading lower than actual.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on AHU-4 and changed the economizer’s comparative enthalpy enable offset (Outdoor Air Enthalpy < Return Air Enthalpy) from -1.0 Btu/lb in the base case to 0 Btu/lb in the proposed case. The -1.0 Btu/lb existing case offset represents the enthalpy differential corresponding to the return air temperature sensor drift of 2°F at an average outdoor air relative humidity of 65%. By implementing a negative offset in the base case eQuest model, the economizer sequence is allowed to operate when the outdoor air
239 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
enthalpy is greater than the return air enthalpy by approximately 1.0 Btu/lb, which can result in additional mechanical cooling energy consumption.
240 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Figure 62: The trend screenshot below shows two periods when the mixed air damper is at minimum position, but the mixed air temperature is lower than both the return and outdoor air temperature measurements. This suggests a potential sensor calibration issue.
241 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
COST ESTIMATE The costs for this measure include the labor and material cost for sensor recalibration and or replacement for the return air temperature sensor on AHU-4.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Lakeside Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Replace return air sensor ea 1 $600 $600 $150 1 4 $600 $1,200
2 3 Calibration ea 1 $0 $150 2 1 $300 $300
3 4 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
4
5
Subtotal $2,100
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $500
3 Other Engineering 15% $400
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $200
Commissioning 5% $200
Construction Observation 10% $300
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $200
Total $3,900
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (d)-5: Replace AHU-4 Return Air Temperature Sensor
General Materials Labor
Sources
242 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
ECM-18.00 (D)-6 REPLACE LEAKING CHW VALVE ON AHU-2
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (d)-6 Replace Leaking CHW Valve on AHU-2
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 131,378 $15,765 1,651 $16,508 $32,273 $8,150 0.3
EXISTING CASE The chilled water valve on AHU-2 is leaking by, with a 5oF temperature drop observed between the mixed and discharge air temperature when both the heating and cooling valves were commanded fully closed. This is resulting in wasted cooling energy as well as an additional simultaneous load on the heating coil during certain parts of the year. The table below shows AHU-2 specifications.
HVAC
Type
Supply
Fan HP
Supply
Fan Qty
Return
Fan HP
Return
Fan Qty
Calculated
Supply Air Flow
Unit MAT
Set-point
Unit DAT
set-point
VAV 75 HP 1 25 HP 1 40,000 CFM 55oF 55oF
Figure 63 on Page 244 illustrates the conditions that indicate a potential leaking chilled water valve.
PROPOSED CASE We recommend replacing the chilled water valve to eliminate leak-by and reduce the associated unnecessary mechanical cooling and preheat energy consumption.
ENERGY SAVINGS This savings associated with this measure were calculated using a customized, hourly spreadsheet model and hourly TMY3 weather data from Worcester, MA. The magnitude of the chilled water valve leakby was calculated for each hour of the year using historical trend data and the resulting excess cooling load was calculated using the formula below:
𝑄𝑆𝑖𝑚 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡/𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙 = 1.08 × 𝐶𝐹𝑀𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦 × ∆𝑇𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔
Where,
Qsim heat/cool = simultaneous heating and cooling load from leakby, in Btu/hr. This load occurs
on both the preheat and chilled water coils when cooling is not needed.
CFMSupply = Total supply airflow
243 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
∆Tcooling = 𝑇𝐷𝐴 < 𝑇𝑀𝐴 + 𝑇𝑆𝐹 = Magnitude of the temperature drop across the cooling coil
𝑇𝐷𝐴= discharge air temperature
𝑇𝑀𝐴= mixed air temperature
𝑇𝑆𝐹= calculated temperature rise resulting from supply fan sensible heat dissipation
The temperature rise across the fan and motor is calculated with the following equation:
∆𝑇𝑆𝐹 = 2545 ∗ [𝑃 (
1𝐸𝑀
− 1) + 𝑃(1 − 𝐸𝐹)]
1.08𝑄
Where, ΔTSF = Temperature Rise across Motor and Fan 2545 = Btu/hp P = Shaft Power (bhp) EM = Motor Efficiency EF = Fan Mechanical Efficiency 1.08 Btu/hr-CFM-°F Q = Air Flow Rate (CFM)
Modeling Assumptions:
No savings during periods when the mixed air temperature is greater than 55oF, as it is assumed that the mechanical cooling will be needed to meet this discharge air temperature set-point
Simultaneous load on the cooling coil is equal in magnitude to the leakby load on the cooling coil.
In both the base & proposed case, the unit operates with the minimum outside air percentage determined numerically from trend data, approximately 50%.
244 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
Figure 63: The trend screenshot below shows the potential chilled water valve leak-by on AHU-2. During periods when the chilled water valve position (PINK) and preheat valve position (ORANGE) are both 0% (as indicated by the periods highlighted in gray), the discharge air temperature (BLUE) is less than the mixed air temperature (RED). Typically, the temperature difference is between 4°F and 7°F.
245 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lakeside
COST ESTIMATE The estimated costs for this measure includes an allocation for the replacement of the valve bodies, valve actuators or controls, functional testing of valves to determine what part of the device has failed, and commissioning of each valve to verify correction operation after repair.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Lakeside Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 6 $900 $900
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 2 $300 $300
3 3 4 in. Control Valve ea 1 $450 $450 $150 2 4 $1,200 $1,650
4 3 Insulation Repair ea 1 $150 $150 $150 1 2 $300 $450
5 3 DDC Control Point ea 1 $250 $250 $150 1 4 $600 $850
Subtotal $4,150
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $900
3 Other Engineering 15% $800
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $300
Commissioning 20% $1,100
Construction Observation 10% $600
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $300
Total $8,150
General Materials Labor
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (d)-6: Replace Leaking CHW Valve on AHU-2
246 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
LAZARE RESEARCH BUILDING (LRB) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE
The cost savings figures in the summary table on the following page assume the following utility rates: $0.10/kWh, $0.12/ton-hour, $10.00/Mlb.
247 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM # ECM
Electric
Energy
Savings
CHW
Energy
Savings
Steam
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit
Cost
Payback
Before
Incentive
- kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
1.01 (e) Lighting Retrofit 1,270,300 0 0 $127,030 $302,250 2.4
03.00 (e) Replace Cage Washer Pump Motors 1,252 0 0 $125 $11,500 91.9
03.01 (e)-1 EC Motors on Bio-Safety Cabinet Fans 58,412 0 0 $5,841 $167,148 28.6
03.01 (e)-2 EC Motors on DHW Circulators 35,222 0 0 $3,522 $40,544 11.5
03.01 (e)-3 EC Motors on AHU-10 & 11 23,063 4,527 27 $3,120 $16,500 5.3
03.01 (e)-4 Retrofit RO Water Pumps with VFDs 69,848 0 0 $6,985 $42,770 6.1
04.02 (e) Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-9 425 2,449 0 $337 $10,650 31.6
04.09 (e)-1 Scheduling and Set-points on AHU-9 Zones 13,052 6,278 325 $5,306 $39,650 7.5
04.09 (e)-2 Reprogram AHU-7 Preheat Control Sequence 23,886 269,211 2,828 $62,976 $10,000 0.2
04.09 (e)-3 Reduce Air Change Rates in Labs 12,778 129,252 6,732 $84,109 $682,450 8.1
04.09 (e)-4 Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset 940 0 34 $431 $10,000 23.2
04.09 (e)-5 Process CHW Loop Differential Pressure Reset 7,874 0 0 $787 $20,500 26.0
04.11 (e)-1 Heat Recovery on Make-up Air Units (AHU 1-6) -300,403 9,269 20,367 $174,743 $995,504 5.7
04.11 (e)-2 Install Passive Chilled Beams in Labs 405,347 233,302 2,120 $89,734 $1,862,993 20.8
18.00 (e)-1 Static Pressure Reset 321,723 89,563 -320 $39,718 $54,000 1.4
18.00 (e)-2 Discharge Air Temperature Reset -2,510 462,855 -693 $48,365 $17,200 0.4
18.00 (e)-3 Replace Leaking Preheat Valves 0 168,570 2,141 $41,634 $19,050 0.5
18.00 (e)-4 Replace Leaking Chilled Water Valve 0 41,958 533 $10,363 $10,425 1.0
18.00 (e)-5 Reduce AHU-9 Minimum Outdoor Air 16,536 14,135 1,347 $16,818 $8,500 0.5
18.00 (e)-6 Reprogram AHU-10, 11 Zone Temperature Set-points 618 3,761 20 $716 $3,900 5.4
18.00 (e)-7 Replace Preheat Face/Bypass Damper Actuators 235,436 7,635 3,529 $59,754 $14,400 0.2
18.00 (e)-8 Exhaust Fan Static Pressure Reset 213,924 0 0 $21,392 $6,600 0.3
18.00 (e)-9 Temperature Set-backs in Lab Corridors 3,465 15,823 954 $11,782 $19,500 1.7
18.00 (e)-10 Hot Water Supply Temperature Reset -956 0 4,304 $42,940 $6,600 0.2
TOTALS 2,410,232 1,458,588 44,248 $858,530 $4,372,635 5.1
248 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
FACILITY DESCRIPTION
The University of Massachusetts, Aaron Lazare Medical Research Laboratory Building is a 10 story, 398,697 ft2 facility housing teaching and research laboratories, a vivarium, supporting offices, and support equipment facilities. The vivarium is located on Level 1, staff offices are located on the east side of each floor, the main mechanical rooms are located on Level 10 (penthouse), and laboratories located on Levels 2 - 9. A kitchen and cafeteria are also located on level 1 which are generally unused since the opening of the Sherman Center’s cafeteria.
LABORATORIES Conditioned air to the laboratories is provided by six (6), 100% outside-air AHUs located in the penthouse. Each air handler is equipped with two (2) supply fans. The two (2) fans are equipped with variable frequency drives (VFDs) controlling static pressure in the supply ducts. These six (6) AHUs are manifolded into two (2) separate systems, with AHUs 1, 4 and 5 serving Levels 2-5, and AHUs 2, 3, and 6 serving Levels 6-9.
Exhaust for the laboratories is provided by (18) rooftop exhaust fans, with three (3) ancillary, in-line exhaust fans providing some local exhaust. The eighteen (18) major exhaust fans are combined into groups of 3 (i.e. EX1: 1a, 1b, and 1c.... EX2: 2a, 2b, 2c... etc...) and are manifolded immediately below the roof line to form six (6) major vertical exhaust duct drops. These six (6) duct drops are again combined into groups of three (3) to serve two (2) separate systems (levels 2-5, or 6-9). The numbering of the groups corresponds to the AHU numbering (EX 1, 4 and 5 serving levels 2-5, and EX 2, 3, and 6 serving levels 6-9). Each of the three (3) duct drops are cross-connected on each level that they serve.
The ventilation systems for the laboratories are designed to operate as a variable volume system, with once through air (100% outside air). The laboratory-level air delivery is temperature dependent (load driven) for 98% of the laboratories (3 laboratories on the 8th level vary according to fume hood sash positions).
There are several different types of local exhaust ventilation systems:
88 constant volume laboratory fume hoods
24 variable volume laboratory fume hoods
Miscellaneous bathroom exhausts and general exhaust for offices and hallways.
24 canopy exhausts (glass-wash areas).
VIVARIUM (ANIMAL ROOMS) Conditioned air to the vivarium is provided by two (2), 100% outside-air AHUs (AHU 7 & 8) located in first level mechanical room. Each air handler is equipped with two (2) supply fans. The two (2) fans in are equipped with variable frequency drives (VFDs) controlled by feedback
249 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
from static pressure sensors in the supply ducts. Each of the AHUs serves half of the vivarium and has a cross connection in the event that one AHU needs to be shut down for maintenance.
Exhaust for the vivarium is provided by six (6) rooftop exhaust fans, with one (1) other in-line exhaust fan providing exhaust to the cage wash area. The six (6) major exhaust fans are combined into groups of three (EX7: 7a, 7b, and 7c.... EX8: 8a, 8b, 8c) and are manifolded immediately below the roof line to form two (2) major vertical exhaust duct drops. These two (2) duct drops serve two (2) separate areas of the vivarium.
The ventilation systems for the vivarium area are designed and operate as a constant volume system with once through air (100% outside air). The effective design air change rate for the vivarium is 17.6 ACH. In May 2013, the Vivarium’s air change rate was reduced to an average of 13.4 ACH as part of a wider airflow reduction project in the laboratory areas of the facility.
OFFICE & SUPPORT AREAS Conditioned air to the offices is provided by AHU-9 and is located in the penthouse. This AHU is coupled with a return air fan (RF-9). RF-9 returns air back from the space to the intake of AHU-9 for re-conditioning and re-circulation. AHU-9 must provide a minimal amount of fresh or outside air makeup, therefore only a percentage of the air from RF-9 can be re-circulated. The two fans on this unit are equipped with variable frequency drives (VFDs) and are controlled by feedback from static pressure sensors in the duct. This AHU serves the offices and hallways on the east side of levels 2-9 and the conference rooms and cafeteria on the 1st level.
A description of the existing lighting systems in the building can be found in the base case description of ECM-01.01-1: Lighting Retrofit.
250 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
BASELINE ENERGY USE & BENCHMARKING
ENERGY USE GRAPHS
ELECTRICITY Figure 64 on the following page shows electricity use for the LRB for fiscal years 11 – 14. It can be seen that electricity use is fairly consistent throughout fiscal year 11 and 12, with slight variations between the years likely due to weather effects. There is significantly higher usage in fiscal year 2013, possibly due to energy use resulting from the construction of the nearby Sherman Center.
Figure 65 shows the electric use averaged over fiscal years 2011-2012, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. Fiscal year 2013 was excluded due to the data being abnormally high, and fiscal year 2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
251 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 64: LRB monthly electricity use (kWh) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 65: LRB baseline electricity use (kWh) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2012.
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ele
ctri
c U
se (
kWh
)
LRB Electric Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ele
ctri
c U
se (
kWh
)
LRB Baseline Electric Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-12)
252 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
STEAM Figure 66 shows the monthly steam consumption for fiscal years 11 – 14. It can be seen that steam use is fairly consistent throughout fiscal year 11 and 12, with slight variations between the two years likely due to weather effects. There is significantly higher usage in fiscal year 2013, which may be due to energy use resulting from the construction of the nearby Sherman Center. In fiscal year 2014, some pronounced variations can be seen between months, possibly due to differentials in meter read dates or meter calibration.
Figure 67 shows the steam use averaged over fiscal years 2011-2012, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. Fiscal year 2013 was excluded due to the data being abnormally high, and fiscal year 2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
253 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 66: LRB monthly steam energy use (Lbs) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 67: LRB baseline steam energy use (Lbs) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2012.
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ste
am U
se (
lbs)
LRB 50# Steam Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ste
am U
se (
lbs)
LRB Steam Use FY 11 - FY 13
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-12)
254 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
CHILLED WATER Figure 68 shows the LRB CHW use from fiscal years 11 – 14. Differences in CHW use can be seen between years, with data from FYs 2011-2012 showing the most consistency. In fiscal year 2013 and 2014, some pronounced variations can be seen between months, possibly due to differentials in meter read dates. Data use in fiscal year 2013 is also higher during summer months, possibly due to energy use resulting from the Sherman center construction.
Figure 69 shows the CHW use averaged over fiscal years 2011-2012, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. Fiscal year 2013 was excluded due to the likely impact of the Sherman center construction, and fiscal year 2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
255 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 68: LRB monthly chilled water energy use (ton-days) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 69: LRB baseline chilled water energy use (ton-days) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2012.
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
se (
ton
-day
s)
LRB CHW Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
se (
ton
-day
s)
LRB Baseline CHW Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11-12)
256 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
BENCHMARKING
BENCHMARKING SUMMARY TABLE The table on the following page summarizes the annual energy consumption and performance metrics for the facility. This was done to provide a clear representation of the actual site and estimated equivalent source energy consumption for benchmarking and also for evaluation with energy savings opportunities. Energy use data for fiscal years 2011 – 2012 is shown in the table, along with an average of data from the two fiscal years.
257 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Energy Use
Annual site electricity (kWh), chilled water (ton-hours) and 50 lb steam (klbs). These figures are not adjusted for central plant efficiencies (site to source conversion).
Performance Ratings
Performance ratings are provided for electricity in three units of measure: total kWh/ft2, equivalent total kBtu/ft2, and annual average W/ft2. Note that since electric demand utility data was not available for the building, an average demand was calculated based on the building’s annual electricity consumption (kWh) divided by the total number of hours in the year (8,760) and converted to Watts (1000 W/kW).
Performance ratings for chilled water and steam are provided in equivalent kBtu/ft2 based on measured site energy consumption. Estimates for equivalent source kWh/ft2 (electricity) and kBtu/ft2 (natural gas fuel) are also included based on the following assumptions:
Fuel-to-Steam Boiler Efficiency: 80%
Electric Chiller Plant Efficiency: 0.65 kW/ton
Steam-driven Chiller Efficiency: 2.1 COP
Annual Chilled Water Load Assumptions: 20% Steam-driven chillers, 80% Electric Chillers
The total site and source performance ratings sum the equivalent source ratings (kBtu/ft2) for electricity, chilled water, and steam, so that this building can be benchmarked against similar facilities, which may generate steam and chilled water in a central plant captured in the building electricity and natural gas meters.
Site Site Site Source
ft2 FY kWh ton-hrs klbs
kWh
/ft2
W
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
kWh
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
kWh
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
FY11 16,537,140 2,282,952 81,083 41.5 4.74 141.7 69 3.2 8.2 204 0 254 414 415
FY12 16,545,070 2,711,040 90,563 41.5 4.74 141.7 82 3.8 9.7 227 0 284 451 449
2 Year Avg. 16,541,105 2,496,996 85,823 41.5 4.74 141.7 75 3.5 9.0 215 0 269 432 432
UMass Medical Center Lazare Research Building Energy Use Data
Steam Total
Source Source
CHW
BLDG INFO ENERGY USE PERFORMANCE RATINGS
Floor
AreaFiscal Year Electricity CHW
50#
SteamElectricity
398,370
258 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
BENCHMARKING COMPARISON The table below benchmarks the LRB’s total source energy usage intensity (kBtu/ft2) against three other academic/research laboratories in New England, as well as a sample of facilities similar to the LRB available through the Labs21 database. The criteria used for the Labs21 benchmark sample are:
Lab Area / Gross Area Ratio: 0.60 - 0.90
Occupancy hours per week: Standard (<= 80 hours)
Lab Type: Chemical, Biological, Chemical/Biological, Combination/Others
Lab Use: Research/Development, Teaching, Combination/Others
Climate Zone: 5A (Cool - Humid) The table also compares the LRB’s building characteristics such as gross floor area and estimated laboratory floor area ratio to the other buildings.
In order to compare each of the buildings’ energy use benchmarks, all electricity, chilled water, and steam energy consumption was converted to estimated equivalent source energy (kBtu). For example, Academic Lab 1 is supplied steam and chilled water from district systems, but Academic Labs 2 and 3 have on-site chiller plants and district steam. As a result, a direct site electricity use comparison between these buildings and the LRB could be misleading.
NEW ENGLAND ACADEMIC LABS
The table shows that the LRB’s source energy usage intensity (EUI) is higher than all three of the comparison buildings, including the Academic Lab 3 which has a similar ratio of floor area utilized as laboratory space (80%). On average, the LRB’s source EUI is 30% higher than the three comparison buildings and is 75% higher than Academic Lab 3, which may be driven by the amount of 100% outdoor air systems in the LRB and the lack of any heat recovery. However, since Academic Labs 1 and 2 have a significantly lower ratio of laboratory floor area compared to the LRB, it is logical that their source EUI is lower.
Two additional site benchmarks are included in the table: Site Electricity Use Intensity (kWh/ft2) and Average Electric Demand (W/ft2). Average Electric Demand is calculated by dividing the building’s annual electricity consumption by 8,760 hours/year, and multiplying by 1000 W/kW to determine the annual average demand at the facility. Both of these benchmarks compare
ft2 132,998 178,612 81,304 130,971 - 398,370
% 40% 40% 80% 53% 72% 80%
kBtu/ft2 343 396 248 329 596 432
kWh/ft2 30.2 32.5 26.7 29.8 33.4 41.5
W/ft2 3.4 3.7 3.0 3.0 3.8 4.7
Units
New
England
Academic
Lab 1
New
England
Academic
Lab 2
New
England
Academic
Lab 3
Average
of
Lab 1-3
Lazare
Research
Building
Gross Floor Area
Ratio of Laboratory Floor Area
Source Energy Use Intensity (EUI)
Site Electricity Use Intensity
Average Electric Demand
Labs 21
Benchmark
Sample
Average
259 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
only the average annual electricity consumption in each of the buildings. Although Academic Lab 2 and 3 have electric chiller plants included on the building metering and the LRB does not, the LRB intensity and average demand is still greater that all three labs. This may be the result of the amount of floor area dedicated to laboratory space in the LRB, or could be driven by the types of research and experimentation ongoing at each of the buildings.
LABS21 BENCHMARKING SAMPLE
The average source EUI of the Labs21 benchmarking sample of buildings is 38% greater than the source EUI of the LRB with a comparable ratio of laboratory floor area. However, the average quantity of occupancy hours among the building sample was 60 hours/week, which is higher than the typical occupancy at LRB. This may be one of the reasons why the LRB has a lower source EUI compared to the sample average. The data from individual buildings included in the Labs21 average is included in the table below, and shows significant variability among buildings.
Labs21 Benchmarking - Building Results
Laboratory Type Benchmarking
Year Source EUI
kBtu/ft2 Lab Floor
Area Occupancy
Hours / Week Climate
Zone
ChemicalBiological 2011 361.25 60% 80 5A
ChemicalBiological 2012 702.3 65% 70 5A
CombinationOthers 2010 448.48 65% 60 5A
Chemical 2007 501.9 66% 50 5A
CombinationOthers 2007 371.58 67% 66 5A
ChemicalBiological 2007 689.02 70% 72 5A
CombinationOthers 2003 662.46 70% 72 5A
CombinationOthers 2003 675.22 70% 54 5A
CombinationOthers 2003 506.82 70% 54 5A
CombinationOthers 2003 559.53 70% 60 5A
CombinationOthers 2007 180.57 70% 60 5A
Chemical 2002 357.51 71% 72 5A
Biological 2007 825.77 72% 30 5A
Chemical 2011 687.82 74% 40 5A
Biological 2012 601.9 75% 40 5A
CombinationOthers 2013 670.17 76% 65 5A
ChemicalBiological 2011 293.3 76% 71 5A
CombinationOthers 2008 755.94 80% 50 5A
CombinationOthers 2011 606.6 80% 60 5A
CombinationOthers 2007 355.62 80% 66 5A
Chemical 2008 801.47 80% 60 5A
Chemical 2011 1498.23 80% 60 5A
Averages 596.1 72% 59.6
260 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
EQUEST MODEL CALIBRATION
Energy and cost savings were estimated using an existing eQuest model of the facility originally developed by Andelman & Lelek and modified to reflect current equipment characteristics, schedules, and internal loads. The model used the Typical Meteorological Year Three (TMY3) weather file for Worcester, MA and was calibrated against monthly electricity use over a three year period from July 2010 – July 2013. The model was also calibrated for chilled water and steam use using monthly data obtained from the UMass central plant staff. The charts below compare the baseline utility use and the calibrated eQuest model predicted utility use.
Figure 70: LRB eQuest model electricity use calibration chart. The baseline monthly electricity use utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly electricity consumption is shown in red
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
Ele
ctri
city
Usa
ge (
kWh
)
Monthly Electricity Usage
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
261 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 71: LRB eQuest model chilled water calibration chart. The baseline monthly chilled water utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly chilled water energy consumption is shown in red.
Figure 72: LRB eQuest model steam calibration chart. The baseline monthly steam utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly steam consumption is shown in red.
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
sage
(to
n-h
r)
Monthly Chilled Water Usage
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
Ste
am U
sage
(M
lb)
Monthly Steam Usage
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
262 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
The table below summarizes the annual end-use energy distribution for electricity, steam, and chilled water at the facility as calculated by the baseline eQuest model. The pie chart below illustrates the baseline eQuest model’s electricity end use using the figures shown in the table.
The “Miscellaneous Equipment” category in the table below can include the following equipment types: plug loads (such as laboratory equipment, computers, freezers, refrigerators, bio-safety cabinet fans), transformer losses assigned to the building, and elevators. The relatively high fraction of miscellaneous loads in the LRB (41% of annual electricity consumption) can be attributed to the large amount of plug loads, especially the high density ultra-low temperature (ULT) freezers.
The following parameters were used to model the estimated miscellaneous loads in the building, based on information gathered during walkthroughs and historical whole-building electricity use:
1. Bay Laboratory/Alcove Plug Loads: 1.8 W/ft2
2. Laboratory Corridor Plug Loads: 8.0 W/ft2 (high density of ULT freezers)
3. Average Transformer Losses: 40 kW
4. Peak Elevator Load: 35 kW
In addition, the following parameters were used to model interior lighting loads:
1. Office, Corridor, and Core Laboratory Lighting Power Density: 1.1 W/ft2
2. Bay Laboratory and Alcove Lighting Power Density: 1.4 W/ft2
Table 10: LRB eQuest model’s annual energy end-use for each meter (electricity, steam, and chilled water).
End Use
Electricity Steam Chilled Water
kWh Mlbs ton-hours
Area Lighting 2,983,426 0 0
Task lighting end-use energy 0 0 0
Miscellaneous Equipment 7,576,124 15,965 138,980
Space Heating 0 63,978 0
Space Cooling 0 0 2,983,371
Heat Rejection 0 0 0
Pumps and Auxiliary 604,780 0 0
Ventilation Fans 6,018,620 0 0
Refrigeration 0 0 0
Heat Pump 0 0 0
Hot Water 0 0 0
Exterior 0 0 0
TOTALS 17,182,950 79,943 3,122,351
263 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 73: Pie chart showing LRB eQuest model’s annual electricity end use breakdown.
Area Lighting 16%
Miscellaneous Equipment
41%
Pumps and Auxiliary
4%
Ventilation Fans 39%
Baseline Model Annual Electricity End Uses
264 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES
Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) associated with the major air- and water-side equipment and terminal devices were identified following field investigations and a review of trend data from the facility’s Siemens building automation system. ECMs vary in scope from low cost measures limited to schedule, sequence, and set-point optimization, to more complex measures which may require larger capital investment associated with equipment replacement or retrofit.
265 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-01.01 (E) : LIGHTING RETROFIT
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 1.01 (e) Lighting Retrofit
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
1,270,300 $127,030 0 $0 0 $0 $127,030 $302,250 2.4
BASE CASE The facility’s lighting consists primarily of two-lamp, 26 Watt compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) in recessed and pendant cans, 1’ by 24’ two-lamp 32 Watt T8 fixtures (labs), and 2’ by 8’ two- and four-lamp 32 Watt T8 fixtures. The remaining 4’ fluorescents consist of 2’ by 4’ one-, three-, and four-lamp 32 Watt T8 fixtures. In addition, there is also a significant quantity of 2’ by 2’ two- and three-lamp 17 Watt T8 fluorescent fixtures, and 50 and 60 Watt incandescent flood lights in both recessed and pendant cans.
The remaining lighting consists of a small amount of 1’ by 2’ one lamp 17 Watt T8 and 1’ by 4’ one lamp 32 Watt T8. The lens type on most of the fluorescent fixtures was found to be prismatic, parabolic, or volumetric. With the exception of the first floor lobby and the large common area adjacent to the lobby, the recessed and pendant CFL and incandescent floods lights do not have lenses.
UMass recently upgraded lighting in three buildings on campus, with the entire project consisting of approximately 10,000 28 Watt T8 lamps. An estimated 2,400 of these were dedicated to the LRB. UMass staff re-lamped a large portion of the halls, entryways, and common area fluorescent fixtures that remain on during all hours of the year.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to upgrade existing lighting lamps and ballasts to newer high efficiency units where applicable. Refer to the Opinion of Probable Cost Table on the following page for a breakdown of proposed equipment types and quantities. We recommend replacing 4’ 32 Watt T8 lamps with high efficiency 28 Watt lamps and NEMA Premium (NP) electronic ballasts. We also recommend replacing CFLs and incandescent floods with LED lamps and installing occupancy sensors in some areas of the building. The recommendations do not include fixture upgrades or replacement in an effort to present a more cost effective retrofit approach.
The recent upgrade project described in the Base Case decreased the overall number of 4’ fluorescent fixtures that are candidates for retrofits as a part of this ECM. The impact of the upgrades are included in the in the Measure Economics summary table above and the Cost Estimate table.
266 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in electricity use by replacing existing lighting fixtures, lamps, and ballasts with high efficiency equipment. Savings were estimated using a custom spreadsheet model that calculates existing and proposed case annual energy consumption based on the power consumption of each lighting fixture and the associated annual run hours.
ASSUMPTIONS An audit was performed on the first and second floors of the building to record fixture types and quantities (with the exception of areas that were inaccessible). Since Levels 3 - 9 are very similar in floor plan layout and space utilization to the second floor, a walk-through of the higher floors was performed to only to confirm floor plan information and note any significant differences. Level A (basement), the Penthouse (Level 10), and interstitial space were inaccessible, but the types of fixtures, lamps, and their quantity were captured from the lighting plans and are included in this measure’s scope.
267 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Lazare Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3-Audit
Replace 26 Watt Compact Florescents lamps
(CFL's) with 13 Watt LED's ea 1745 $5 $8,725 $0 0 0 $0 $8,725
2 3-Audit
Retrofit - 12 Lamp 24 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 12 Lamp 24 foot 28 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast (Labs) ea 295 $225 $66,375 $0 0 0 $0 $66,375
3 3-Audit
Retrofit - 2 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 2 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast ea 737 $55 $40,535 $0 0 0 $0 $40,535
4 3-Audit
Retrofit - 2 Lamp 8 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 2 Lamp 8 foot 28 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast ea 64 $55 $3,520 $0 0 0 $0 $3,520
5 3-Audit
Retrofit - 1 Lamp 4 foot 32 watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 1 Lamp 4 foot 28 watt T8 with NP
Ballast ea 16 $45 $720 $0 0 0 $0 $720
6 3-Audit
Retrofit - 3 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 3 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast ea 29 $60 $1,740 $0 0 0 $0 $1,740
7 3-Audit
Retrofit - 4 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 4 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast ea 32 $65 $2,080 $0 0 0 $0 $2,080
8 3-Audit
Retrofit - 4 Lamp 8 Foot 32 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 4 Lamp 8 Foot 28 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast ea 48 $130 $6,240 $0 0 0 $0 $6,240
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-01.01-1: Lighting Retrofit
General Materials Labor
268 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Lazare Building Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
9 3-Audit
Retrofit 1 Lamp 2 Foot 17 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 1 Lamp 2 Foot 17 Watt T8 with LP
Ballast ea 4 $45 $180 $0 0 0 $0 $180
10 3-Audit
Retrofit 2 Lamp 2 Foot 17 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 2 Lamp 2 Foot 17 Watt T8 with LP
Ballast ea 226 $55 $12,430 $0 0 0 $0 $12,430
11 3-Audit
Retrofit 3 Lamp 2 Foot 17 Watt T8 with NP
Ballast with 3 Lamp 2 Foot 17 Watt T8 with LP
Ballast ea 48 $60 $2,880 $0 0 0 $0 $2,880
12 3 Audit
Replace 60 Watt Incandescent Flood lamps
with 25 Watt LED's ea 265 $5 $1,325 $0 0 0 $0 $1,325
13 3 Audit
Replace 50 Watt Incandescent Flood lamps
with 25 Watt LED's ea 24 $5 $120 $0 0 0 $0 $120
14 3 Audit Wall Switch Occupancy Sensors ea 172 $90 $15,480 $0 0 0 $0 $15,480
Subtotal $162,350
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $32,500
3 Other Engineering 15% $29,300
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $9,800
Commissioning 20% $39,000
Construction Observation 10% $19,500
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $9,800
Total $302,250
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-01.01-1: Lighting Retrofit
General Materials Labor
Sources
269 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-03.00 (E) REPLACE CAGE WASHER PUMP MOTORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 03.00 (e) Replace Cage Washer Pump Motors
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
1,252 $125 0 $0 0 $0 $125 $11,500 91.9
BASE CASE The facility’s two animal cage washers feature a total of six 3600 rpm water pumps, each rated at 7.5 hp and 87.5% nominal efficiency. Each washer is estimated to operate for five cycles per day, each lasting one hour, seven days per week.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to replace the existing TEFC cage washer pump motors with premium efficient units, which would have NEMA nominal efficiencies of 89.5% or greater. Since it has a long payback, this measure could be considered at end-of-life replacement as cage washer pump motors fail or are scheduled for preventative maintenance replacement.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in pump energy that is used by improving the full load efficiency of the motors.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using spreadsheet calculation comparing the full load input power of the existing motors at 87.5% efficiency to the proposed motors at 89.5% efficiency. Annual run hours were estimated assuming seven running hours per day on each pump motor, and five days of operation per week, based on information provided by facilities staff.
270 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2 7.5 hp Motor ea 6 $900 $5,400 $150 1 2 $1,800 $7,200
2 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 0 $0 $0
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 2 $300 $300
Subtotal $7,500
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,500
3 Other Engineering 5% $500
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $500
Commissioning 5% $500
Construction Observation 5% $500
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $500
Total $11,500
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost ECM-03.00 (e): Replace Cage Washer Motors
General Materials Labor
Sources
271 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-03.01 (E)-1 EC MOTORS ON BIO-SAFETY CABINET FANS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 03.01 (e)-1 EC Motors on Bio-Safety Cabinet Fans
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
58,412 $5,841 0 $0 0 $0 $5,841 $167,148 28.6
BASE CASE The building has an estimated 142 biosafety cabinets that are used as enclosed, ventilated laboratory workspaces for safely handling materials contaminated (or potentially contaminated) with pathogens requiring a defined biosafety level. Each cabinet features a constant speed blower fan that recirculates filtered air from within the cabinet to the laboratory. A sample survey of cabinets found that their blower fan motors are typically either 1/3 or 3/4 hp permanent split capacitor (PSC) type, which can have full load efficiencies of 65% or lower.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposed to replace the existing biosafety cabinet blower fan motors with high efficiency electronically-commutated (EC) motors. These direct current motors have higher full- and part-load efficiencies. We do not recommend including variable speed control due to the higher first cost associated with the necessary sensors and programming.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in fan energy that is used by improving the full load efficiency of the blower motors.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using spreadsheet calculation comparing the full load input power of the existing PSC motors (assuming 60% average efficiency) to the proposed EC motors (assuming 93% average efficiency). The quantity and annual run hours of bio-safety cabinets in the building were estimated based on a walkthrough of typical laboratories on the 2nd, 4th, and 8th floors, as well as information provided by facilities staff. Annual run hours were estimated assuming eight running hours per day on each cabinet fan and five days per week of operation. A diversity factor of 75% was applied to the savings estimate to account for cabinets which may not be used on a given day.
272 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 1/3 hp EC Motor ea 85 $435 $36,975 $150 1 2 $25,500 $62,475
2 3 3/4 hp EC Motor ea 57 $464 $26,448 $150 1 2 $17,100 $43,548
3 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 0 $0 $0
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 142 $0 $150 1 0.25 $5,325 $5,325
Subtotal $111,348
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $22,300
3 Other Engineering 5% $6,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $6,700
Commissioning 5% $6,700
Construction Observation 5% $6,700
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $6,700
Total $167,148
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-03.01 (e)-1: EC Motors on Bio-safety Cabinet Fans
General Materials Labor
Sources
273 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-03.01 (E)-2 EC MOTORS ON DHW & NON-POTABLE WATER
CIRCULATORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 03.01 (e)-2 EC Motors on DHW Circulators
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
35,222 $3,522 0 $0 0 $0 $3,522 $40,544 11.5
BASE CASE Domestic hot water (DHW) is circulated throughout the building via a constant speed in-line pump located in the basement. Non-potable water is circulated to the laboratories via a constant speed in-line pump located in the penthouse. Each pump motor is 3 hp with a 73.0% nameplate efficiency, and one pump in each set is estimated to run 8,760 hours per year.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to replace the AC motors on each of the two pumps with high efficiency electronically commutated (EC) motors. These direct current motors have higher full-load efficiencies and feature variable speed control. In addition, they maintain a higher efficiency at part load compared with the existing induction motors. As part of this measure, the speed of the motors would be controlled to maintain a loop differential pressure set-point, which would allow for lower flow during periods of low or no load, especially at night and on weekends when the building is primarily unoccupied.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in pump electricity that is used by improving the full and part load efficiency of the motors, as well as from the implementation of variable speed control.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a time of day spreadsheet model. Estimated weekday and weekend load profiles were developed, assuming that loads would peak in the mid-morning and mid-afternoon when labs may be at greatest occupancy density. Refer to Figure 74 on the following page for the proposed case speed profiles used in the energy model.
274 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 74: Chart showing the proposed case domestic hot water and non-potable water circulation pump speed profiles for typical weekday and weekend operation
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Cir
c P
um
p S
pe
ed
(%
)
Circulator Speed Profiles
Circ Pump VFD Speed Weeked
275 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 3 hp EC Motor & Pump Set ea 2 $3,772 $7,544 $150 1 4 $1,200 $8,744
2 3 dP Sensor ea 2 $250 $500 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,700
3 3 BAS Points & Programming ea 6 $1,500 $9,000 $150 1 2 $1,800 $10,800
4 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
5 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 4 $0 $150 1 8 $4,800 $4,800
Subtotal $26,644
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $5,400
3 Other Engineering 5% $1,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,700
Commissioning 5% $1,700
Construction Observation 5% $1,700
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,700
Total $40,544
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-03.01 (e)-2: EC Motors on Domestic & Non-Potable Water Circulators
General Materials Labor
Sources
276 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-03.01 (E)-3 EC MOTORS ON AHU-10, 11 SUPPLY FANS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 03.01 (e)-3 EC Motors on AHU-10 & 11
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
23,063 $2,306 4,527 $543 27 $270 $3,120 $16,500 5.3
BASE CASE AHU-10 and AHU-11 supply conditioned recirculation air to the elevator machine rooms located in the penthouse. Each AHU features a chilled water coil and 3 hp two-speed supply fan; the fan speed is controlled to maintain a fixed zone cooling set-point of 72°F.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to replace the fan motors on each of the two units with high efficiency electronically commutated (EC) motors. These direct current motors have higher full-load efficiencies and feature variable speed control. In addition, they maintain a higher efficiency at part load compared with the existing induction or permanent split capacitor (PSC) motors.
For each unit, we recommend controlling the speed of the fan to maintain zone temperature set-points using the following sequence:
If the zone temperature is less than or equal to the effective temperature set-point, the supply fan shall be at minimum speed (50%, adjustable) and the chilled water valve shall be closed
Upon a rise in zone temperature above the set-point, the chilled water valve shall open to meet the set-point
If the chilled water valve position is greater than 90% and the zone temperature is still above set-point, the supply fan speed shall increase as necessary to meet the set-point
Upon a drop in zone temperature, the reverse shall occur. The control sequence shall be tuning to prevent hunting of the chilled water valve and supply fan.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in fan energy that is used by improving the full load and part load efficiency of the supply fan motors. The variable speed capability of the motors also offers greater turndown capability and speed control compared to a two-speed motor.
277 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on the AHU-10, 11 system and CAC-1, 2 system and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
AHU-10, 11
FAN-CONTROL: Two Speed
MIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.5
CAC-1, 2
FAN-CONTROL: Constant Volume
MIN-FLOW-RATIO: 1.0
Proposed Case
AHU-10, 11
FAN-CONTROL: Fan EIR fPLR
MIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.3
CAC-1, 2
FAN-CONTROL: Fan EIR fPLR
MIN-FLOW-RATIO: 0.5
278 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 75: The trend screenshot below shows the supply fan amperage (BLUE), chilled water valve position (RED), and zone temperature (ORANGE) for AHU-10 serving an elevator machine room. The fan motor amperage trend is consistently between 6.6 - 6.8 amps.
279 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 3 hp EC Motor ea 2 $1,800 $3,600 $150 1 4 $1,200 $4,800
2 3 BAS Points & Programming ea 2 $1,500 $3,000 $150 1 2 $600 $3,600
3 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
Subtotal $10,800
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $2,200
3 Other Engineering 5% $700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $700
Commissioning 5% $700
Construction Observation 5% $700
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $700
Total $16,500
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost ECM-03.01 (e)-3: EC Motors on AHU-10, 11 Supply Fans
General Materials Labor
280 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-03.01 (E)-4 RETROFIT RO WATER PUMPS WITH VFDS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 03.01 (e)-4 Retrofit RO Water Pumps with VFDs
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
69,848 $6,985 0 $0 0 $0 $6,985 $42,770 6.1
BASE CASE Filtered and de-ionized water is circulated to the laboratory spaces via a pair of two-stage pumps manufactured by Grundfos. Each pump is rated at 25 hp and has a nameplate efficiency of 88.5%. The pumps supply 350 gpm at 210 feet of head; the relatively high head requirement is the result of the reverse osmosis (RO) filtration that occurs downstream of the pump set. The pumps are controlled in a lead/lag sequence and switch lead positions to maintain equal run hours on the equipment.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to replace the existing TEFC RO filter pump motors with premium efficient units, which would have NEMA nominal efficiencies of 89.5% or greater. In addition, this measure includes installing a VFD on each of the pumps and controlling the speed of the motor to a loop differential pressure set-point. During periods of low filtered water usage, the loop differential pressure would increase and the pump speed would ramp down. Due to the high minimum head requirement of the RO loop, we have assumed a minimum pump speed of no lower than 70% to maintain flow.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in pump energy that is used by improving the full load efficiency of the motors and by reducing their speed during periods of low load on the loop.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using spreadsheet calculation comparing the full load input power of the existing motors at 88.5% efficiency to the proposed motors at 89.5% efficiency. Estimated typical weekday and weekend RO load profiles were developed to model the proposed case pump speeds and corresponding energy consumption. The table below illustrates the weekday and weekend speed profiles used in the proposed case spreadsheet models.
281 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 76: Proposed case weekday and weekend RO pump speed profiles, assuming a minimum pump speed of 70%.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Cir
c P
um
p V
FD S
pe
ed
RO Pump VFD Speed (Proposed Case)
Weekday Weekend
282 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2 25 hp TEFC Motor ea 2 $2,025 $4,050 $150 1 2 $600 $4,650
2 3 25 hp VFD (18 Pulse) ea 2 $4,860 $9,720 $150 1 4 $1,200 $10,920
3 3 BAS Points & Programming ea 4 $1,500 $6,000 $150 1 2 $1,200 $7,200
4 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
5 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
Subtotal $25,170
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $5,100
3 Other Engineering 15% $4,600
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,600
Commissioning 5% $1,600
Construction Observation 10% $3,100
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,600
Total $42,770
Materials Labor
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost ECM-03.01 (e)-4: Replace Motors on RO Water Pumps
General
283 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-04.02 (E) COMPARATIVE ENTHALPY ECONOMIZER ON AHU-9
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.02 (e) Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-9
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
425 $43 2,449 $294 0 $0 $337 $10,650 31.6
BASE CASE AHU-9 is a mixed air unit with a design supply airflow of 60,000 cfm and serves office and administration areas along the eastern perimeter of the building. The unit features a comparative economizer that is based on the difference between outdoor and return air dry bulb temperature. When the outdoor air temperature is less than the return air temperature, the economizer is enabled regardless of humidity conditions. Refer to Figure 77 on Page 285 for a trend screenshot illustrating this sequence.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to implement a comparative enthalpy economizer on AHU-9 so that the sequence is enabled when the outdoor air enthalpy is less than the return air enthalpy. This measure will include the installation of a new return air relative humidity sensor in order to calculate return air enthalpy. The building’s existing weather station will be used to calculate outdoor air enthalpy.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in mechanical cooling energy that is used when the outdoor air temperature is less than the return air temperature, but the total heat content of the air (enthalpy) is greater. Similarly, savings are realized when the outdoor air temperature is greater than the return, but the enthalpy of the outdoor air is lower.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on AHU-9 and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
OA-CONTROL: Dual Temperature
DUAL-TEMP-DP: 0°F
Proposed Case
OA-CONTROL: Dual Enthalpy
284 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
DUAL-ENTHLAPY-DH: 0 Btu/lb
285 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 77: The trend screenshot below illustrates the comparative economizer sequence on AHU-9. When the outdoor air temperature (BLUE) is greater than the return air temperature (ORANGE), the outdoor air damper position (RED) goes from fully open (14 psig) to minimum position (6 psig). The period highlighted by the vertical rule (black line) indicates this switch over from economizer to minimum outdoor air.
286 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Return Humidity Sensor ea 1 $350 $350 $150 1 4 $600 $950
2 3 BAS Points & Programming ea 1 $1,500 $1,500 $150 1 2 $300 $1,800
3 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 4 $0 $150 1 4 $2,400 $2,400
Subtotal $5,750
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,200
3 Other Engineering 15% $1,100
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $400
Commissioning 15% $1,100
Construction Observation 10% $700
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $400
Total $10,650
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.02 (e): Comparative Enthalpy Economzier on AHU-9
General Materials Labor
287 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-04.09 (E)-1: SCHEDULING AND SET-POINTS ON AHU-9 ZONES
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (e)-1 Scheduling and Set-points on AHU-9 Zones
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
13,052 $1,305 6,278 $753 325 $3,247 $5,306 $39,650 7.5
BASE CASE AHU-9 serves office and administration areas on Levels 2 - 9 along the eastern perimeter of the building. The existing schedule for AHU-9 is Monday - Saturday 5:45am - 7:00pm, although the historical trends from June and September 2014 show the unit ran several Sundays. Maintenance personnel have indicated that during the summer, the AHU is sometimes scheduled to run at night and on weekends during the summer due to previous issues with loss of space temperature control and excessive recovery times. During the winter, perimeter radiant panels are used to maintain unoccupied heating set-points while AHU-9 is off and as a result, recovery has not been an issue. See Figure 78 on Page 289 for a trend chart showing AHU-9’s operation during June 2014.
The majority of office and support zones served by AHU-9 were observed to be occupied between 6:30am - 7:30pm Monday - Friday with an occupied zone temperature set-point of 72°F. During unoccupied periods in the summer, a 2°F temperature setback was observed. However, since AHU-9 was off for a significant number of hours during the unoccupied period, zone temperatures often rose higher than unoccupied cooling set-points during the summer months. For example, the typical unoccupied cooling set-point is 74°F but zone temperatures were observed to reach up to 82°F over weekend periods.
Some office zones were found to have fixed temperature set-points so that whenever AHU-9 was running, the terminal box would control to the occupied set-point regardless of actual occupancy.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to implement global occupied and unoccupied heating and cooling zone temperature set-points in the Building Automation System. Based on walkthroughs of the office areas, thermostats do not appear to have local adjustment capabilities, so no limitation on user adjustment is necessary. We recommend implementing occupied set-points of 71°F heating and 73°F cooling (2°F dead-band), and unoccupied set-points of 62°F heating and 80°F cooling. Implementing separate occupied heating and cooling set-points with a 2°F dead-band may reduce energy consumption by allowing zones to ‘drift’ between the set-points before reheat is needed or additional cooling airflow is supplied.
288 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
We also recommend reprogramming the equipment schedule for AHU-9 so that the unit runs on weekends only when necessary to maintain unoccupied setbacks. During the unoccupied period, if three (adjustable) or more zones are not meeting their set-points, we recommend cycling AHU-9 on until those zone set-points are met.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in fan, heating, and mechanical cooling energy that is used by tightening equipment schedules to match the occupancy of the building’s office areas and implementing more effective space temperature set-points.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on AHU-9 and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
FAN-SCHEDULE: AHU-9 Fan Sch
COOL-TEMP-SCH: S1 Sys1 (PMZS) Cool Sch
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: S1 Sys1 (PMZS) Heat Sch
NIGHT-CYCLE: No
Proposed Case
FAN-SCHEDULE: ECM-04.09-1 AHU-9 Fan Sch
COOL-TEMP-SCH: ECM-04.09-1 AHU-9 Cool Sch
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: ECM-04.09-1 AHU-9 Heat Sch
NIGHT-CYCLE: Cycle on Any
289 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 78: The trend screenshot below shows the operation of AHU-9 during the month of June 2014. The supply airflow trend shows that the AHU typically operates six days per week, but ran constantly between 6/21 - 6/25, possibly as a result of very warm outdoor air temperatures.
290 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Programming ea 105 $0 $150 1 1 $15,750 $15,750
3 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 4 $0 $150 1 8 $4,800 $4,800
Subtotal $21,750
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $4,400
3 Other Engineering 15% $4,000
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,400
Commissioning 15% $4,000
Construction Observation 10% $2,700
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,400
Total $39,650
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.09 (e)-1: Scheduling and Set-points on AHU-9 Zones
General Materials Labor
291 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-04.09 (E)-2 REPROGRAM AHU-7 PREHEAT CONTROL SEQUENCE
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (e)-2 Reprogram AHU-7 Preheat Control Sequence
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
23,886 $2,389 269,211 $32,305 2,828 $28,282 $62,976 $10,000 0.2
BASE CASE AHU-7 is one of two make-up air units that serve the vivarium on the first floor. Historical trend data shows that the preheat valve on AHU-7 is maintaining a minimum preheat discharge air temperature of 57°F at all times. This is contributing to simultaneous heating and cooling since the chilled water coil must constantly supply air at approximately 47°F to meet the 50°F minimum discharge air temperature set-point. Figure 79 on Page 293 shows a trend screenshot that illustrates this sequence of operation on AHU-7.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to reconfigure the preheat temperature control sequence for AHU-7 so that it performs as described in the as-built sequence of operation:
In heating operation, the cooling coil valve is closed. In this mode, the [preheat] valves and face and bypass damper modulate to maintain the preheat discharge temperature at the preheat discharge temperature set-point. The preheat discharge set-point is reset between 5 degrees below set-point to the discharge air set-point as necessary to maintain the unit discharge temperature at the discharge temperature set-point.
The preheat discharge air temperature set-point should properly reset to maintain the unit discharge air temperature set-point without the need for mechanical cooling.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in steam preheat and chilled water energy that is used when outdoor air is preheated to a temperature higher than necessary and then subsequently cooled to meet the discharge air set-point.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on AHU-7 and changed the following parameters:
292 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Base Case
PREHEAT-SOURCE: Steam Loop
PREHEAT-T: 57°F
Proposed Case
PREHEAT-SOURCE: Not Installed
PREHEAT-T: n/a
HEAT-SOURCE: Steam Loop
293 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 79: The trend screenshot below shows that the preheat discharge air temperature (blue) is maintained at a minimum temperature of approximately 57-58°F. During periods highlighted in gray, the preheat valve (orange) opens to maintain this minimum set-point. The chilled water valve then opens meet the discharge air temperature set-point (Light Blue) of 50°F.
294 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Programming ea 1 $0 $150 1 16 $2,400 $2,400
2 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 4 $0 $150 1 4 $2,400 $2,400
Subtotal $5,400
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,100
3 Other Engineering 15% $1,000
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $400
Commissioning 15% $1,000
Construction Observation 10% $700
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $400
Total $10,000
ECM-04.09 (e)-2: Reprogram AHU-7 Preheat Control Sequence
General Materials Labor
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
295 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-04.09 (E)-3 REDUCE AIR CHANGE RATES IN LABS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (e)-3 Reduce Air Change Rates in Labs
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
12,778 $1,278 129,252 $15,510 6,732 $67,321 $84,109 $682,450 8.1
BASE CASE The average minimum air change rate in the building’s laboratories is currently 9.9 ACH, which includes alcoves and fume hoods. Since the hoods are constant volume and require a high amount of exhaust relative to the floor space the alcoves occupy, the air change rates in these areas are higher than the rest of the laboratories. Excluding alcoves, the average air change rate in the labs is approximately 4.6 ACH. Based on a review of testing, adjusting, and balancing reports available from the most recent airflow reduction, the limiting factor for many of the VAV boxes is the minimum airflow recommended by the box’s manufacturer. The as-built mechanical schedules indicate most boxes have a 4:1 turndown, which is confirmed by recent testing, adjusting, and balancing records. Below a certain threshold, accurate flow control is not guaranteed and as a result, boxes were balanced so that their minimums were no lower than the manufacturer’s recommendation.
According to the 2011 Edition of ASHRAE HVAC Applications, Chapter 14, “Reducing ventilation requirements in laboratories and vivariums based on real time sensing of contaminants in the room environment offers opportunities for energy conservation. This approach can potentially reduce lab air change rates down safely to as low as 2 air changes per hour when the lab air is “clean” and the fume hood exhaust or room cooling load requirements do not require higher airflow rates. Previous lab environment studies have shown that lab rooms are on average “clean” of contaminants in excess of about 98% of the time.”
PROPOSED CASE A review of the facility’s existing Aircuity real-time contaminant monitoring system suggests that a lower air change rate in line with ASHRAE’s guidance may be possible during unoccupied periods. This measure proposes to consider reducing the average air change rate in labs on levels 2 - 9 (excluding alcoves) to 2.5 ACH between 10:00pm - 6:00am Monday - Sunday. This unoccupied flow reduction would be accomplished by retrofitting the existing VAV and VEV boxes with new differential pressure transducers that are used to calculate airflow, which would allow for greater turndown while maintaining control stability and flow measurement accuracy.
296 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
The proposed sequence would maintain the existing temperature and contaminant (TVOC, CO2, and particulates) control sequences so that if the zone cooling set-point is not met or a contaminant concentration above the allowable threshold is detected, supply and exhaust airflows would automatically be increased as necessary according to the existing sequences.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in fan, heating, and cooling energy that is used as a result of lower make-up and exhaust airflow during unoccupied periods.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on all Level 2 - 8 bay lab zones and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
MIN-FLOW-SCH: undefined
MIN-FLOW/AREA: 0.7 (Bay Labs), 0.65 (Alcoves/Corridors)
Proposed Case
MIN-FLOW-SCH (Bay Labs): ECM-04.09-3 Min Flow Sch
o Monday - Sunday 6:00am - 10:00pm: 0.70
o All other hours: 0.38 (54.3% of existing, 2.5/4.6 ACH)
MIN-FLOW/AREA: 0.65 (Alcoves/Corridors)
297 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 dP Transducer Replacement ea 404 $100 $40,400 $150 1 2 $121,200 $161,600
2 3 Programming ea 404 $0 $150 1 1.25 $75,750 $75,750
3 3 TAB ea 404 $0 $150 2 1 $121,200 $121,200
4 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 40 $6,000 $6,000
5 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 4 $0 $150 1 24 $14,400 $14,400
Subtotal $378,950
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $75,800
3 Other Engineering 15% $68,300
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $22,800
Commissioning 15% $68,300
Construction Observation 10% $45,500
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $22,800
Total $682,450
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.09 (e)-3: Reduce Air Change Rates in Labs
General Materials Labor
Sources
298 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-04.09 (E)-4 HOT WATER LOOP DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE RESET
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (e)-4 Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
940 $94 0 $0 34 $337 $431 $10,000 23.2
BASE CASE Three hot water loops are used to supply heat to different terminal devices throughout the building. One loop (HE-3/4) supplies hot water to the office and lab reheats, one (HE-5/6) serves reheats in the vivarium, and the third loop (HE-1/2) serves perimeter radiant panels and baseboard in the labs and offices. All three loops were observed to operate at a fixed differential pressure set-point. HE-1/2 operates at 12.00 psig while HE-3/4 and HE-5/6 both operate at 10.00 psig.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to implement a load driven differential pressure reset on the loop served by HE-1/2 based on average radiant panel hot water valve position. Every 15 minutes, the Siemens BAS will poll the radiant panel valve positions and perform a ‘high select’ of the five most open valves. If the average of the five most open valve positions is between 80-90%, the loop differential set-point will be maintained at its current level. If the average of the top five is below 80%, the differential set-point will be cascaded lower to a possible minimum of 6 psig. If the average of the five most open valve positions is greater than 90%, the set-point will be cascaded higher up to a maximum of 12 psig.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in pumping power needed to maintain a lower loop differential pressure set-point when the system is at part load.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on the “Radiation HW Loop” system which models HE-1/2 and the associated pumps (HWP-1, 2). The following parameters were changed as part of the parametric run.
Base Case
HEAD-STPT-CTRL: Fixed
Proposed Case
299 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
HEAD-STPT-CTRL: Valve-Reset
300 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Programming ea 1 $0 $150 1 24 $3,600 $3,600
2 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 4 $0 $150 1 4 $2,400 $2,400
Subtotal $6,600
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,400
3 Other Engineering 5% $400
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $400
Commissioning 5% $400
Construction Observation 5% $400
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $400
Total $10,000
General Materials Labor
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.09 (e)-4: Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset
Sources
301 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-04.09 (E)-5 PROCESS CHW LOOP DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE RESET
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.09 (e)-5 Process CHW Loop Differential Pressure Reset
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
7,874 $787 0 $0 0 $0 $787 $20,500 26.0
BASE CASE The building’s process chilled water loop is used as a condenser water loop for the environmental room DX compressors. The loop pumps (SCHP-3, SCHP-4) are equipped with variable frequency drives (VFD) and modulate to maintain a fixed differential pressure set-point of 12 psig. A typical weekday and weekend daily load profile for the loop was developed using approximately four weeks of historical trend data points including supply and return temperature, pump status, and pump VFD speed. The data indicated that the daily load profile was consistent and was not directly impacted by outdoor air conditions, since environmental rooms are generally located in the core of the building and are well-insulated.
Figure 80: The chart below shows the typical weekend and weekend load profiles for the building’s process chilled water loop. These profiles were developed using loop design data and approximately four weeks of historical trend data for supply and return loop temperatures, as well as pump VFD speed.
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM
Pro
cess
CH
W L
oad
(M
MB
tu/h
r)
Hour of Day
Process CHW Load Profile
Weekday Weekend
302 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
PROPOSED CASE We proposed adding a flow meter to the process chilled water loop and cascading the differential pressure set-point based on loop flow. The loop set-point would be set to a maximum of 12 psig at 90% of design flow (333 gpm) and would be set to a minimum of 6 psig at 60% of design flow (222 gpm). This will allow the control system to maintain the necessary pressure at varying loads.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in pumping power needed to maintain a lower loop differential pressure set-point when the system is at part load.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using spreadsheet models for the typical weekday and weekend process loop loads. In the existing case, total pump head was calculated using the following affinity law equation, based on the observed average pump speed at each hour of the day.
𝐻2
𝐻1= (
𝑁2
𝑁1)
2
Where H2 is the calculated head, H1 is the pump design head, and the ratio of N2/H1 represents the hourly observed pump speed. Existing case pump input power was calculated using the following equation.
𝐼𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 (𝑘𝑊) =
(𝑄 ∗ 𝐻)(3960 ∗ 𝜂, 𝑝𝑢𝑚𝑝)
𝜂, 𝑚𝑜𝑡𝑜𝑟∗ 0.746 [
𝑘𝑊
𝑏ℎ𝑝]
Where Q is the hourly average loop flow calculated based on pump speed and the design flow of the loop, H is the calculated pump head, η, pump is the estimated mechanical efficiency on the pump, and η, motor is the is the estimated electrical efficiency on the motor.
In the proposed case, a loop differential pressure set-point reset profile was specified based on the existing case loop flow. The new hourly pump head was calculated as the difference between the existing case head and the reduction in the loop differential pressure set-point. The proposed case pump motor input power was calculated using the same equation above, substituting the new pump head profile.
303 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 81: The trend screenshot below shows the differential pressure (RED) for the building’s process chilled water loop, and chilled water pump VFD signal (BLUE/ORANGE) in Hz. The chart shows that the dP set-point remained fixed throughout the month of July.
304 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 CHW Flow Meter ea 1 $4,000 $4,000 $150 1 12 $1,800 $5,800
2 3 BAS Points & Programming ea 1 $1,500 $1,500 $150 1 2 $300 $1,800
3 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 4 $0 $150 1 4 $2,400 $2,400
Subtotal $11,200
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $2,300
3 Other Engineering 15% $2,100
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $700
Commissioning 15% $2,100
Construction Observation 10% $1,400
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $700
Total $20,500
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.09 (e)-5: Process CHW Loop Differential Pressure Reset
General Materials Labor
305 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-04.11 (E)-1 HEAT RECOVERY ON MAKE-UP AIR UNITS (AHU 1-6)
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.11 (e)-1 Heat Recovery on Make-up Air Units (AHU 1-6)
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
-300,403 -$30,040 9,269 $1,112 20,367 $203,671 $174,743 $995,504 5.7
BASE CASE The six VAV make-up air units serving the building lab areas (AHU-1 through AHU-6) each have a corresponding set of three exhaust fans which are used to remove contaminants and maintain adequate lab pressurization. The table below summarizes the nameplate design parameters for each of the AHUs.
Unit No.
Service
Design Supply Fan Data
Total Supply Airflow
Motor Namplate
Measured bhp
Total Static
External Static
Fan Type
cfm hp bhp " WC " WC
AHU-1 Labs FL-2,3,4,5 70,000 75 (2) x 57.3 7.50 3.00 Vane Axial
AHU-2 Labs FL-6,7,8,9 70,000 75 (2) x 57.3 7.50 3.00 Vane Axial
AHU-3 Labs FL-2,3,4,5 70,000 75 (2) x 57.3 7.50 3.00 Vane Axial
AHU-4 Labs FL-6,7,8,9 70,000 75 (2) x 57.3 7.50 3.00 Vane Axial
AHU-5 Labs FL-2,3,4,5 70,000 75 (2) x 57.3 7.50 3.00 Vane Axial
AHU-6 Labs FL-6,7,8,9 70,000 75 (2) x 57.3 7.50 3.00 Vane Axial
Each AHU’s corresponding set of three Strobic exhaust fans are staged based on measured exhaust airflow, and each is equipped with a VFD that modulates to maintain a duct static pressure set-point. For example, one exhaust fan operates if the measured airflow is less than 22,000 cfm. If the airflow is between 22,000 - 45,000 cfm, a second exhaust fan stages on. The third exhaust fan stages on if the measured airflow exceeds 45,000 cfm. Common plenums measuring 84” W x 76” H x 20’ 4” L connect each set of three exhaust fans directly below the roof surface.
The make-up and exhaust systems are completely separated due to the contaminated nature of the exhaust and there is no form of heat recovery currently installed to precondition outdoor air.
306 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes a new run-around heat recovery loop on each of the make-up air units located in the penthouse serving labs on Floors 2 - 9. The two make-up units serving the vivarium are not included in this measure due to the location of the units on the first floor.
This measure would include installing a new coil in each of the six exhaust ducts located in the penthouse corresponding to AHU 1-6. Due to the relatively high velocities in the exhaust ducts, the heat recovery coils would be located in the plenums directly below the roof-mounted Strobic fans, since these have significantly larger cross sectional areas. For example, the horizontal cross sectional area of each exhaust plenum is approximately 140 ft2, which would result in an average coil face velocity of 500 fpm at design capacity (70,500 cfm). The coils would be constructed of either stainless steel or coated aluminum to handle the potentially corrosive exhaust leaving the laboratory fume hoods.
A new coil would also be installed between the outdoor air intake and steam preheat of each MAU, which may require relocation of the pre-filter section. A 20% glycol water loop would connect the two coils and a new control sequence added to take advantage of exhaust heat recovery when the outdoor air temperature is below the MAU’s discharge air temperature set-point, or when the outdoor air temperature is greater than the exhaust air temperature. The loop would remain off when the outdoor air temperature is between the discharge air temperature set-point and the exhaust air temperature to prevent unwanted heat transfer.
The proposed sequence of operation for the run-around heat recovery loop would be as follows:
When the outdoor air temperature is less than preheat discharge air temperature set-point by more than 4°F (adjustable), the run-around loop would operate to preheat the outdoor air up to the set-point. If the discharge air temperature set-point is not met using the heat recovery coil alone, the preheat coil valve shall modulate as necessary to maintain the effective preheat discharge set-point.
When the outdoor air temperature is between the preheat discharge air temperature set-point and the exhaust air temperature, the heat recovery loop shall be off, the preheat valve closed, and the chilled water valve shall modulate to maintain the discharge air temperature set-point.
When the outdoor air temperature is greater than the exhaust air temperature by more than 4°F (adjustable), the run-around loop would operate to precool the outdoor air as much as possible. The chilled water valve would modulate to maintain the effective discharge air temperature set-point.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in steam preheat and chilled water cooling energy that is used by recovering energy from each MAU’s exhaust airstream.
307 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on six total systems including AHU-1 through AHU-6 and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
RECOVER-EXHAUST: No
ERV-RECOVER-TYPE: n/a
ERV-HX-CONFIG: n/a
ERV-SENSIBLE-EFF: n/a
ERV-RUN-CTRL: n/a
OA-EXHAUST-DT: n/a
ERV-RECOVER-MODE: n/a
ERV-TEMP-CTRL: n/a
ERV-CAP-CTRL: n/a
ERV-FANS: n/a
ERV-FAN-EFF: n/a
ERV-MOTOR-CLASS: n/a
ERV-HX-KW: n/a
Proposed Case
RECOVER-EXHAUST: Yes
ERV-RECOVER-TYPE: Sensible HX
ERV-HX-CONFIG: Counter Flow
ERV-SENSIBLE-EFF: 0.45
ERV-RUN-CTRL: OA Exhaust DT
OA-EXHAUST-DT: 4°F
ERV-RECOVER-MODE: OA Heat/Cool
ERV-TEMP-CTRL: Mixed Air Reset
ERV-CAP-CTRL: Modulate HX
ERV-FANS: HVAC-Supply/Return
ERV-FAN-EFF: Default (Assumes existing supply fan efficiency)
ERV-MOTOR-CLASS: Default (Assumes existing supply fan motor class)
308 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ERV-HX-KW: 6 kW (for each 3-AHU eQuest System)
309 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 82: The Siemens building automation system screenshot below shows one of the eight typical laboratory and vivarium exhaust systems, each with three variable volume fans. The red box inserted in the screenshot represents the approximate location of the proposed exhaust heat recovery coil.
310 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 83: The photo below shows the proposed location for an exhaust heat recovery coil on one of the eight systems, just before the manifold that connects the three exhaust fans. This plenum offers a relatively large cross sectional area that would result in a design coil face velocity of 500 fpm.
311 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The estimate on the following page was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
312 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Exhaust Coil ea 6 $13,735 $82,412 $150 4 8 $28,800 $111,212
2 3 MAU Coil ea 6 $7,849 $47,093 $150 4 8 $28,800 $75,893
3 4 3 hp Pump / Motor Set ea 12 $3,000 $36,000 $150 2 12 $43,200 $79,200
4 3 Piping & Fittings lf 600 $28 $16,500 $150 2 0.2 $36,000 $52,500
5 3 Valves ea 12 $1,775 $21,300 $150 1 6 $10,800 $32,100
6 3 Electrical ea 6 $0 $0 $150 2 16 $28,800 $28,800
7 4 Rigging ea 12 $1,200 $14,400 $150 $0 $14,400
8 3 Sheet Metal / Structural Work ea 12 $3,000 $36,000 $150 2 24 $86,400 $122,400
9 3 BAS Points ea 30 $1,500 $45,000 $150 $0 $45,000
10 3 Programming ea 6 $0 $0 $150 1 16 $14,400 $14,400
11 3 TAB ea 6 $0 $150 2 12 $21,600 $21,600
12 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 40 $6,000 $6,000
13 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 6 $0 $150 1 12 $10,800 $10,800
Subtotal $614,304
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $122,900
3 Other Engineering 10% $73,800
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $36,900
Commissioning 10% $73,800
Construction Observation 5% $36,900
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $36,900
Total $995,504
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.11 (e)-1: Heat Recovery on Make-up Air Units (AHU 1-6)
General Materials Labor
313 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-04.11 (E)-2 INSTALL PASSIVE CHILLED BEAMS IN LABS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.11 (e)-2 Install Passive Chilled Beams in Labs
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
405,347 $40,535 233,302 $27,996 2,120 $21,203 $89,734 $1,862,993 20.8
BASE CASE Historical trend reviews and facility walkthroughs have shown that the laboratories have significant internal loads, causing supply airflow to increase above the minimum 4.6 ACH recently set as part of an airflow reduction. For example, many VAV boxes were observed to be at airflow levels double the design minimum on a typical weekday in order to maintain zone temperature set-points. See Figure 84 for examples of this pattern.
The cooling loads in the labs are suspected to be driven primarily by equipment including freezers, centrifuges, bio-safety cabinets, etc, but also by lighting, occupants, solar gain, and shell conduction.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes installing passive chilled beams in each of the laboratories in order to reduce the amount of make-up air flow needed during occupied periods to meet zone cooling set-points. A chilled beam is mounted in or suspended from the ceiling that works using the principles of convective and radiant cooling. Chilled water is passed through a coil in the beam (heat exchanger) and as the beam chills the air around it, the air becomes denser and falls to the floor. It is replaced by warmer air moving up from below, causing a constant flow of convection and cooling the room.
We recommend sizing the chilled beam system for the cooling load above the capacity supplied by the make-up air units at the existing minimum air change rate (approximately 4.6 ACH for the bay labs, excluding alcoves). Based on the observed minimum make-up unit total supply airflow of 146,000 cfm, and a combined capacity of 420,000 cfm, the chilled beam system would be sized at approximately 400 tons. This calculation assumes an average zone temperature of 72°F and minimum entering primary air temperature of 56°F.
The chilled beams would be used to supplement the cooling supplied by the make-up air units at minimum flows. We recommend configuring the sequence of operation so that the existing laboratory terminal boxes maintain minimum supply and exhaust airflow set-points. Upon a call for additional cooling in any zone, the corresponding chilled beam’s control valve would open to meet the zone set-point. If the beam’s valve opens fully and the zone set-point is still not met, the make-up airflow set-point would be increased. Upon a drop in zone temperature, the
314 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
reverse sequence would occur. If at any time the Aircuity demand-controlled ventilation signal rises above minimum, the make-up airflow rate would be increased according to the existing sequence of operation and any corresponding chilled beam control valves closed.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in fan, steam preheat, and chilled water cooling energy that is used by transferring cooling load from the make-up units to passive chilled beams.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on six total systems including AHU-1 through AHU-6 and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
TYPE-SYSTEM: Variable Air Volume
RETURN-AIR-PATH: Duct
SUPPLY-KW/FLOW: 0.001320
RETURN-KW/FLOW: 0.001298
SUPPLY-FLOW: 210,000
INDUCTION-RATIO: n/a
Proposed Case
TYPE-SYSTEM: Induction Unit
RETURN-AIR-PATH: Duct
SUPPLY-KW/FLOW: 0.001300 (AHU-1,4,5); 0.001100 (AHU-2,3,6)
RETURN-KW/FLOW: 0.001100 (AHU-1,4,5); 0.00090 (AHU-2,3,6)
SUPPLY-FLOW: 65,000 (AHU-1,4,5); 81,000 (AHU-2,3,6)
INDUCTION-RATIO: 1.80
315 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 84: The trend screenshot below shows supply airflow (RED), zone temperature (BLUE), zone temperature set-point (ORANGE), and the VAV box reheat valve position (PINK) over a two week period in September for VAV-260R4, served by AHU-1. This airflow profile is typical of many VAV boxes, where the airflow increases above minimum during the occupied period on weekdays (see periods highlighted in gray). Since supply airflow does not increase significantly during the daylight hours on weekends, solar gain is not suspected to be the driving cause of the cooling load and corresponding airflow demand.
316 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The estimate on the following page was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
317 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Chilled Beam ea 56 $1,500 $84,000 $150 2 8 $134,400 $218,400
2 3 Ceiling Work ea 56 $250 $14,000 $150 1 0.5 $4,200 $18,200
2 1 2" Sch 40 Piping, Valves, Fittings lf 7848 $9.80 $76,910 $150 1 0.25 $294,300 $371,210
3 1 4" Sch 40 Piping, Valves, Fittings lf 324 $49 $15,876 $150 1 0.45 $21,870 $37,746
4 1 2" Insulation ea 7848 $3 $26,762 $150 1 0.094 $110,657 $137,418
5 1 4" Insulation ea 324 $5 $1,568 $150 1 0.107 $5,200 $6,768
6 1 Plate & Frame HX ea 1 $53,500 $53,500 $150 2 52 $15,600 $69,100
7 1 Pump / Motor ea 2 $9,625 $19,250 $150 1 15 $4,500 $23,750
8 3 BAS Points & Programming ea 56 $1,500 $84,000 $150 1 2 $16,800 $100,800
9 3 TAB ea 56 $0 $150 2 2 $33,600 $33,600
10 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 40 $6,000 $6,000
11 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 80 $12,000 $12,000
Subtotal $1,034,993
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $207,000
3 Other Engineering 15% $186,300
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $62,100
Commissioning 15% $186,300
Construction Observation 10% $124,200
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $62,100
Total $1,862,993
General Materials Labor
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-04.11 (e)-2: Install Passive Chilled Beams in Labs
318 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-18.00 (E)-1 STATIC PRESSURE RESET
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (e)-1 Static Pressure Reset
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
321,723 $32,172 89,563 $10,748 -320 -$3,202 $39,718 $54,000 1.4
BASE CASE AHU-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 are variable volume make-up air units that serve laboratories and corridors on Levels 2 - 8. AHU-9 is a variable volume mixed-air unit that serves office and administration areas on Levels 1 - 8. Each of these units features a fixed duct static pressure set-point, as shown in the table below.
AHU Tag Static Pressure
Set-point
AHU-# " WC
AHU-1 1.5
AHU-2 1.5
AHU-3 1.1
AHU-4 1.2
AHU-5 0.8
AHU-6 1.5
AHU-9 1.5
Historical trends show that terminal device airflow is considerably lower during unoccupied periods when laboratory plug loads are reduced, indicating an opportunity to reset duct static pressure during periods of low load.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to reset the duct static pressure set-point on AHU-1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 9 using a new cascading control algorithm. AHU-5 is not included in this measure since the duct static pressure set-point is already at a relatively low level. Every 15 minutes the BAS will perform a damper position “high select” on all VAV boxes served by each AHU. If the average of the top three (user selectable from 1 to 10) “high select” boxes is between 85% and 90% open the system shall hold its current duct static pressure set-point. If the average is below 80% open the BAS logic shall cascade its set-point down to a low of 0.8” WC. If the average of the top five boxes is greater than 90% then the system duct static pressure set-point shall cascade up to a
319 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
maximum of 1.5” WC for AHU-1, 2, 6, and 9, 1.1” WC for AHU-3, and 1.2” WC for AHU-4 . The cascading reset loop shall be tuned to avoid unnecessary hunting.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in AHU fan horsepower needed to maintain a lower duct static pressure set-point when the system is at part load.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on AHU-1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 9, and changed the supply fan “EIR f(PLR)” performance curve that calculates fan input power as a function of airflow part load ratio. The curve used in the base case is the standard curve available from the eQuest library.
A custom curve was developed for the proposed case to model a demand-based duct static pressure reset. At minimum a fan part load ratio of 30%, the proposed fan energy input ratio (EIR) was 0.297 compared to an existing EIR of 0.372, resulting in 20% savings at lowest part load. EIR is defined to be the ratio of electric energy input (Btu/hr) to the rated energy output (Btu/hr) of the fan. The chart below illustrates the existing and proposed can fan curves used to estimate energy savings.
Figure 85: Existing and proposed case fan curves [EIR = f(Part Load Ratio)] used to model demand-based static pressure reset energy savings.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Ele
ctri
c In
pu
t R
atio
Part Load Ratio
AHU-1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9 Static Pressure Reset Curve
Existing Case Curve (No SP Reset) Proposed Case Curve (SP Reset)
320 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 86: The trend screenshot below shows the duct static pressure set-points for AHU-1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 9 between 9/15/2014 - 10/14/2014. All static pressure set-points remain fixed during this period.
321 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Programming ea 7 $0 $150 1 24 $25,200 $25,200
2 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 7 $0 $150 1 4 $4,200 $4,200
Subtotal $30,000
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $6,000
3 Other Engineering 15% $5,400
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,800
Commissioning 15% $5,400
Construction Observation 10% $3,600
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,800
Total $54,000
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (e)-1: Static Pressure Reset
General Materials Labor
Sources
322 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-18.00 (E)-2 DISCHARGE AIR TEMPERATURE RESET
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (e)-2 Discharge Air Temperature Reset
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
-2,510 -$251 462,855 $55,543 -693 -$6,926 $48,365 $17,200 0.4
BASE CASE Historical trends show that AHU-3 and AHU-4 have a discharge air temperature reset that is based on outdoor air temperature. Figure 87 on Page 324 illustrates the reset observed on these units. AHU-1, 2, 5, and 6 were observed to have a fixed discharge set-point of 55°F throughout the spring, summer, and fall seasons.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to implement a load-based discharge air temperature reset on AHU-1 through AHU-6 in tandem with the static pressure reset proposed in ECM-18.00-1. Every 15 minutes the BAS will poll the zone temperature error (zone temperature above/below set-point) on all VAV boxes served by each AHU. If the system duct static pressure set-point is at minimum and the average of the top five zone temperature error values are between 0.5°F - 1.0°F (zone temperature 0.5 - 1.0°F above cooling set-point), the system shall hold its current discharge air temperature set-point. If the average of the top five error values is below 0.5oF, the BAS logic shall cascade the discharge air temperature higher, up to maximum of 60°F. If the average of the top five zone error values is greater than 1.0°F then the system discharge temperature set-point shall cascade down to a minimum of 55°F. The cascading reset loop shall be tuned to avoid unnecessary hunting.
This control sequence may be active primarily during the unoccupied period when internal loads are lowest and is intended to be implemented with a static pressure reset. The recommendations have been made to minimize negative interaction between the two reset strategies.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in cooling energy that is used when a higher supply air temperature can be used to maintain zone temperature set-points. Savings are achieved only when the outdoor air temperature is greater than ~52°F, since the make-up air units will be in a heating mode below this point with a minimum discharge set-point of 55°F.
323 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on AHU-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
Cool Control: n/a
Reset Priority: n/a
Maximum Cooling Reset Temp: 55°F
Minimum Cooling Reset Temp: 55°F
Proposed Case
Cool Control: Warmest
Reset Priority: Airflow first
Maximum Cooling Reset Temp: 60°F
Minimum Cooling Reset Temp: 55°F
324 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 87: The chart below summarizes the discharge air temperature set-point reset observed on AHU-3 and AHU-4. The red line represents actual data points collected between 9/15/2014 - 10/14/2014 and the black trend line is a linear extrapolation of the dataset to the estimated maximum discharge set-point of 60°F.
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Dis
char
ge A
ir T
em
pe
ratu
re S
et-
po
int
(°F)
Outdoor Air Temperature (°F)
AHU-3, 4 Discharge Air Reset
Discharge Air Set-point
325 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Programming ea 6 $0 $150 1 8 $7,200 $7,200
2 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 6 $0 $150 1 4 $3,600 $3,600
Subtotal $11,400
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $2,300
3 Other Engineering 5% $700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $700
Commissioning 5% $700
Construction Observation 5% $700
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $700
Total $17,200
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (e)-2: Discharge Air Temperature Reset
General Materials Labor
326 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-18.00 (E)-3 REPLACE LEAKING PREHEAT VALVES
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (e)-3 Replace Leaking Preheat Valves
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 168,570 $20,228 2,141 $21,406 $41,634 $19,050 0.5
BASE CASE AHU-7 and 8 are make-up air units that serve the vivarium and surrounding 1st floor support spaces. Historical trend data suggests that the steam preheat valves on these AHUs may be leaking by, with an average observed temperature rise of approximately 4-5°F. Figure 88 on Page 328 illustrates this potential issue on AHU-7.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to replace the preheat valves on AHU-7 and AHU-8 to eliminate leak-by.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY The savings associated with this measure were calculated using a customized weather bin spreadsheet model. The magnitude of the leak-by was calculated for each 5°F outdoor temperature bin and the resulting excess heating load was calculated using the formula below:
𝑄𝑆𝑖𝑚 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡/𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙 = 1.08 × 𝐶𝐹𝑀𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦 × ∆𝑇𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔
Where,
Qsim heat/cool = simultaneous heating and cooling load from leakby, in Btu/hr. This load occurs
on both the heating and cooling coils.
CFMSupply = Total supply CFM across preheat and cooling coils.
∆Tpreheat = 𝑇𝐷𝐴 > 𝑇𝑀𝐴 + 𝑇𝑆𝐹 = Magnitude of the temperature drop across the cooling coil
𝑇𝐷𝐴= discharge air temperature
𝑇𝑀𝐴= mixed air temperature
𝑇𝑆𝐹= calculated temperature rise resulting from supply fan sensible heat dissipation
The temperature rise across the fan and motor is calculated with the following equation:
∆𝑇𝑆𝐹 = 2545 ∗ 𝑃 ∗ [(1 − 𝐸𝐹) + (
1𝐸𝑀
− 1)]
1.08𝑄
327 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Where, ΔTSF = Temperature Rise across Motor and Fan 2545 = Btu/hp P = Shaft Power (bhp) EM = Motor Efficiency 1.08 Btu/hr-CFM-°F Q = Air Flow Rate (CFM)
Modeling Assumptions:
Simultaneous load on the cooling coil is equal in magnitude to the leakby load on the preheat coil.
In both the base & proposed case, the unit continuously operates at 100% outdoor air.
328 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 88: The trend screenshot below shows that AHU-7’s preheat discharge air temperature (DARK BLUE) is consistently greater than the outdoor air temperature (RED) while the preheat valve pneumatic signal (LIGHT BLUE) is 14 psig (fully closed). This suggests the preheat valve is either incorrectly positioned or leaking by.
329 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 1 6" Control Valve ea 2 $2,675 $5,350 $150 2 4 $2,400 $7,750
2 3 Insulation Repair ea 2 $150 $300 $150 1 2 $600 $900
3 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 2 $0 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,200
Subtotal $10,450
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $2,100
3 Other Engineering 15% $1,900
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $700
Commissioning 15% $1,900
Construction Observation 10% $1,300
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $700
Total $19,050
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (e)-3: Replace Leaking Preheat Valves
General Materials Labor
Sources
330 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-18.00 (E)-4 REPLACE LEAKING CHILLED WATER VALVE
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (e)-4 Replace Leaking Chilled Water Valve
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 41,958 $5,035 533 $5,328 $10,363 $10,425 1.0
BASE CASE AHU-9 is a variable volume mixed air unit serving the office and administration areas on Levels 1 - 8. Historical trend data suggests that the chilled water valve on this unit may be leaking by, with an average observed temperature drop of 3.5°F observed across the coil. Figure 89 on Page 332 illustrates this potential issue.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to replace the chilled water valve on AHU-9 to eliminate leak-by.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY The savings associated with this measure were calculated using a customized weather bin spreadsheet model. The magnitude of the leak-by was calculated for each 5°F outdoor temperature bin and the resulting excess heating load was calculated using the formula below:
𝑄𝑆𝑖𝑚 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡/𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙 = 1.08 × 𝐶𝐹𝑀𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦 × ∆𝑇𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔
Where,
Qsim heat/cool = simultaneous heating and cooling load from leakby, in Btu/hr. This load occurs
on both the heating and cooling coils.
CFMSupply = Total supply CFM across preheat and cooling coils.
∆Tpreheat = 𝑇𝐷𝐴 > 𝑇𝑀𝐴 + 𝑇𝑆𝐹 = Magnitude of the temperature drop across the cooling coil
𝑇𝐷𝐴= discharge air temperature
𝑇𝑀𝐴= mixed air temperature
𝑇𝑆𝐹= calculated temperature rise resulting from supply fan sensible heat dissipation
The temperature rise across the fan and motor is calculated with the following equation:
∆𝑇𝑆𝐹 = 2545 ∗ 𝑃 ∗ [(1 − 𝐸𝐹) + (
1𝐸𝑀
− 1)]
1.08𝑄
331 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Where, ΔTSF = Temperature Rise across Motor and Fan 2545 = Btu/hp P = Shaft Power (bhp) EM = Motor Efficiency 1.08 Btu/hr-CFM-°F Q = Air Flow Rate (CFM)
332 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 89: The trend screenshot below shows that AHU-9’s cooling coil discharge air temperature (PINK) is less than the preheat discharge air (RED) and mixed air temperature (DARK BLUE) when the chilled water valve pneumatic signal (LIGHT BLUE) is 0 psig (closed).
333 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 1 6" Control Valve ea 1 $2,675 $2,675 $150 2 4 $1,200 $3,875
2 3 Insulation Repair ea 1 $150 $150 $150 1 2 $300 $450
3 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
Subtotal $5,525
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,200
3 Other Engineering 15% $1,100
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $400
Commissioning 15% $1,100
Construction Observation 10% $700
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $400
Total $10,425
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (e)-4: Replace Leaking Chilled Water Valve
General Materials Labor
334 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-18.00 (E)-5 REDUCE AHU-9 MINIMUM OUTDOOR AIR
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (e)-5 Reduce AHU-9 Minimum Outdoor Air
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
16,536 $1,654 14,135 $1,696 1,347 $13,468 $16,818 $8,500 0.5
BASE CASE AHU-9 is a 60,000 cfm variable volume mixed air unit serving the offices and administration areas on Levels 1 - 8. The as-built mechanical schedule for the AHU specifies a minimum outdoor air quantity of 20,000 cfm, or 33%. However, the actual ratio of outdoor air calculated using outdoor, return, and mixed air temperature was 58%. The equation below shows how this ratio is calculated:
% 𝑂𝑢𝑡𝑑𝑜𝑜𝑟 𝐴𝑖𝑟 =(𝑅𝐴𝑇 − 𝑂𝐴𝑇)
(𝑀𝐴𝑇 − 𝑂𝐴𝑇)
Where RAT is return air temperature, MAT is mixed air temperature, and OAT is outdoor air temperature.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to adjust the minimum outdoor air damper position on AHU-9 so that the unit’s minimum outdoor airflow is 11,000 cfm at 100% VFD speed, or approximately 18% of design supply airflow. This is based on the minimum ventilation requirements specified in ASHRAE 62.1-2013, the total floor area served by AHU-9, and the estimated number of occupants in the office areas of the building on a typical day. The following standards and assumptions were used to calculate the minimum ventilation rate:
Total Floor Area Served by AHU-9 = 74,250 ft2
Typical Number of Occupants: 200
Minimum ventilation = 0.06 cfm/ft2 + 5.0 cfm/person = 5,455 cfm
Minimum Observed Fan Speed = 50%
Required Fraction of OA at Min. Fan Speed = 5,455 cfm/(60,000 cfm*50%) = 18.2%
Outdoor Airflow at 100% VFD Speed and 18.2% OA = 60,000 cfm * 18.2% = 11,000 cfm
335 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in heating and cooling energy that is used by reducing the amount of outdoor air that is conditioned when the economizer sequence is disabled.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on AHU-9 and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
MIN-OUTSIDE-AIR: 0.58
Proposed Case
MIN-OUTSIDE-AIR: 0.182
336 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 90: The trend screenshot below shows the return air temperature (RED), outdoor air temperature (BLUE) and mixed air temperature (PINK) for AHU-9. The two periods highlighted in gray indicate when the mixed air damper’s pneumatic signal (ORANGE) was at minimum and the calculated outdoor air ratio was approximately 58% on average.
337 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Programming ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
2 3 TAB ea 1 $0 $150 2 4 $1,200 $1,200
3 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 4 $0 $150 1 4 $2,400 $2,400
Subtotal $5,400
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,100
3 Other Engineering 5% $400
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $400
Commissioning 5% $400
Construction Observation 5% $400
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $400
Total $8,500
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (e)-5: Reduce Minimum Outdoor Air
General Materials Labor
Sources
338 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-18.00 (E)-6 REPROGRAM AHU-10, 11 ZONE TEMPERATURE
SET-POINTS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (e)-6 Reprogram AHU-10, 11 Zone Temperature Set-points
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
618 $62 3,761 $451 20 $203 $716 $3,900 5.4
BASE CASE AHU-10 and AHU-11 are constant volume fan coil units that recirculate conditioned air to the elevator machine rooms. The AHUs feature chilled water coils that are used to maintain a fixed zone temperature set-point of 72°F (See Figure 91 on Page 340). Since the AHUs serve mechanical spaces, it is possible to have a higher set-point without impacting occupant comfort or lab safety.
PROPOSED CASE The measure proposes raising the zone cooling set-points for AHU-10 and AHU-11 to 80°F to reduce their mechanical cooling energy consumption.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in chilled water energy that is used by maintaining the mechanical spaces served by AHU-10 and AHU-11 at higher temperatures.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on 10L-Mechanical1 Zn (served by AHU-10, 11) and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
COOL-TEMP-SCH: Mech Cool AS
o Monday - Sunday 12:00am - 11:59pm: 72°F
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: Mech Heat AS
o Monday - Sunday 12:00am - 11:59pm: 50°F
Proposed Case
COOL-TEMP-SCH: ECM-18.00-6 Mech Cool AS
o Monday - Sunday 12:00am - 11:59pm: 80°F
339 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: ECM-18.00-6 Mech Heat AS
o Monday - Sunday 12:00am - 11:59pm: 50°F
340 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 91: The trend screenshot below shows the chilled water valve position (BLUE) and zone temperature (RED) for AHU-10. The chart shows that the zone temperature is maintained at a fixed set-point of 72°F.
341 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Programming ea 2 $0 $150 1 2 $600 $600
3 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 2 $0 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,200
Subtotal $2,400
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $500
3 Other Engineering 5% $200
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $200
Commissioning 5% $200
Construction Observation 5% $200
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $200
Total $3,900
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (e)-6: Reprogram Zone Temperature Set-points
General Materials Labor
342 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-18.00 (E)-7 REPLACE PREHEAT FACE/BYPASS DAMPER ACTUATORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (e)-7 Replace Preheat Face/Bypass Damper Actuators
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
235,436 $23,544 7,635 $916 3,529 $35,295 $59,754 $14,400 0.2
BASE CASE According to the latest control sequence of operation for the make-up air units (AHU-1 through AHU-8), when the outdoor air temperature is less than 42°F, the preheat valve opens fully and the preheat face/bypass damper modulates to maintain the preheat discharge air temperature set-point. When the outdoor air temperature is greater than 42°F, the dampers open fully to the coil and the coil valve modulates to maintain the discharge air set-point. This sequence is used to prevent coil freezing or freeze stat trips when the outdoor air temperature approaches and is less than the freezing mark. When in the heating mode, the chilled water valve is locked out and cannot open.
Historical trend data available between 9/15/2014 - 10/14/2014 showed four periods when the outdoor air temperature was below 42°F and the preheat sequence described above was activated. However, on AHU-1 and AHU-3, the face/bypass dampers did not properly modulate to maintain the preheat discharge air temperature set-point. The dampers remained fully open to the coil while the preheat valves were open 100%, causing the preheat discharge air temperature to rise significantly. Since the chilled water valve could not open according to the sequence, each make-up air unit’s supply air temperature also increased significantly. This resulted in a rise in zone temperatures and a corresponding rise in airflow; each AHU’s supply fan VFDs went to maximum speed during these instances. Refer to Figure 92 and Figure 93 for examples of this issue.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to replace the preheat face/bypass damper actuators on AHU-1 and AHU-3 so that the units are able to maintain their discharge air set-points when the outdoor air temperature is below 42°F. As part of this measure, the damper linkage and pivots should be inspected for any wear that could contribute to the problem described above.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in preheat energy that is used when the preheat valve opens 100%, but the face/bypass damper does not properly modulate to maintain the preheat discharge air temperature set-point.
343 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a custom weather-bin spreadsheet model. The baseline model was developed using trend data available from 9/15/2014 - 10/14/2014, when this issue was found to occur four separate times. During these periods, the average temperature rise beyond what was needed to meet the discharge air temperature set-point was approximately 20°F, and was positively correlated with outdoor air temperature. In addition, the baseline model accounts for the increase in fan speed observed as a result of the elevated discharge air temperatures.
In the proposed case model, the face/bypass dampers were assumed to perform as intended, modulating to maintain the necessary discharge air temperature set-point. A proposed case fan speed profile was developed based on other make-up air units serving similar spaces that did not show the preheat face/bypass damper issue.
344 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 92: The trend screenshot below shows two instances where the outdoor air temperature (RED) drops below 42°F and the preheat valve (PINK) goes fully open (2 psig). During this period, the face/bypass damper pneumatic signal (LIGHT BLUE) goes to 14 psig, which indicates fully closed to the coil, but the preheat discharge temperature (DARK BLUE) increase between 70-80°F when it should be below 55°F. This may indicate the face/bypass damper actuator is malfunctioning.
345 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 93: The trend screenshot below shows the same time period as the chart on the previous page. This chart shows the supply fan VFD speeds (RED/BLUE) on AHU-1 when the face/bypass damper remained open to the AHU’s preheat coil, causing the discharge air temperature (ORANGE) to rise significantly above the 55°F set-point (PINK).
346 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Damper Actuator ea 8 $300 $2,400 $150 1 2 $2,400 $4,800
2 3 Damper Linkage Repair ea 2 $0 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,200
3 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
4 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 2 $0 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,200
Subtotal $7,800
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,600
3 Other Engineering 15% $1,500
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $500
Commissioning 15% $1,500
Construction Observation 10% $1,000
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $500
Total $14,400
ECM-18.00 (e)-7: Replace Preheat Face/Bypass Damper Actuator
General Materials Labor
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
347 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-18.00 (E)-8 EXHAUST FAN STATIC PRESSURE RESET
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (e)-8 Exhaust Fan Static Pressure Reset
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
213,924 $21,392 0 $0 0 $0 $21,392 $6,600 0.3
BASE CASE Historical trend logs show that the static pressure reset on the building’s laboratory exhaust systems is inconsistent. For example, EX-1, 2, 3, and 5 were found to have a demand-based reset with a minimum static set-point of 1.00” WC and a maximum of approximately 1.80” WC. The following is an excerpt from the Siemens control submittal outlining the intended exhaust fan static pressure control sequence:
The maximum damper position for all terminal boxes on the exhaust system is continuously monitored by the DDC system. If the maximum damper position is above 95% open, and the exhaust static set-point is below the maximum set-point, then the duct static pressure set-point shall be incremented by 0.1” WC. If the maximum damper position is less than 75% open, and the exhaust static set-point is above the minimum set-point, then the duct static set-point shall be decremented by 0.1” WC. The increment/decrement decision is executed at 5 minute intervals.
The trend logs show that EX-4 A/B/C had a constant static set-point of 1.8” WC during the month of July and EX-6 A/B/C had a set-point that reset between 1.60” WC and 1.80” WC, but appeared to reset on a schedule instead of based on control feedback. Since all six exhaust systems serve similar areas and are manifolded into two systems at the floor level, it would be expected for all to have similar reset profiles.
It is possible that one or more exhaust boxes connected to EX-4 A/B/C are constantly open more than 95%, causing the static pressure set-point to remain at maximum. This may be caused by a malfunctioning or plugged airflow station, improper balancing or design, improper thermostat location, or very high internal thermal loads, among others.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to investigate the exhaust boxes connected to EX-4 A/B/C to identify rogue zone(s) that may be contributing to the issues observed with the static pressure reset. Once identified, the root cause should be corrected and the results verified to ensure that the static pressure set-point on EX-4 A/B/C is resetting as expected.
348 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
This measure also includes investigating the static pressure reset sequence on EX-6 A/B/C to determine if it has been changed from the original sequence based on exhaust box damper position. If so, we propose reprogramming the sequence with minimum and maximum set-points of 1.00” WC and 1.80” WC, respectively.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in exhaust fan horsepower needed to maintain a lower duct static pressure set-point when EX-4 A/B/C and EX-6 A/B/C are at part load.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on AHU-4 and AHU-6, and changed the return fan “EIR f(PLR)” performance curve that calculates fan input power as a function of airflow part load ratio. In the baseline eQuest model, the building’s laboratory exhaust fans were modeled as return fans to increase configuration flexibility. The curves used in base case were custom developed to reflect no static pressure reset on EX-4 and a partial reset on EX-6.
In the proposed case, the return fan performance curves for AHU-4 and AHU-6 were replaced to reflect a demand-based reset between 1.00 - 1.80” WC. At minimum fan part load ratio of 30%, the proposed fan energy input ratio (EIR) was 0.2614 compared to an existing EIR of 0.3331 for EX-4 and 0.2873 for EX-6, resulting in 21% savings at lowest part load for EX-4. EIR is defined to be the ratio of electric energy input (Btu/hr) to the rated energy output (Btu/hr) of the fan. The chart on the following page illustrates the existing and proposed can fan curves used to estimate energy savings.
349 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 94: Existing and proposed case fan curves [EIR = f(Part Load Ratio)] used to model demand-based static pressure reset energy savings.
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Ele
ctri
c In
pu
t R
atio
Part Load Ratio
ECM18.00-8 Static Pressure Reset Curves
EX-4 SP Reset Curve (Existing) EX-6 SP Reset Curve (Existing) Proposed Reset Curve
350 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Programming ea 2 $0 $150 1 8 $2,400 $2,400
2 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 2 $0 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,200
Subtotal $4,200
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $900
3 Other Engineering 5% $300
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $300
Commissioning 5% $300
Construction Observation 5% $300
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $300
Total $6,600
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (e)-8: Exhaust Fan Static Pressure Reset
General Materials Labor
351 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-18.00 (E)-9 TEMPERATURE SETBACKS IN LAB CORRIDORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (e)-9 Temperature Set-backs in Lab Corridors
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
3,465 $346 15,823 $1,899 954 $9,537 $11,782 $19,500 1.7
BASE CASE Historical trend data shows that zone temperature set-points in corridors outside the laboratory spaces are typically 72°F and do not set back at night, similar to the laboratory spaces. See Figure 95 on Page 352 for a chart showing key parameters over time for a typical corridor zone outside the laboratories.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to implement temperature set-backs in the lab corridors to reduce airflow demand during unoccupied periods. The zone set-point would be reset to 78°F in 35 zones on Floors 2 - 9 Monday - Sunday between 8:00pm and 5:30am.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in fan, heating, and cooling energy that is used at the make-up air units and exhaust fans when set-backs can be implemented during unoccupied periods.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on all lab corridor zones and changed the following parameters:
Base Case
COOL-TEMP-SCH: S1 Sys1 (PMZS) Cool Sch
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: S1 Sys1 (PMZS) Heat Sch
Proposed Case
COOL-TEMP-SCH: ECM-18.00-9 Corridor Cool Sch
HEAT-TEMP-SCH: ECM-18.00-9 Corridor Heat Sch
352 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 95: The trend screenshot below shows the zone temperature (ORANGE), zone temperature set-point (BLUE), discharge air temperature (RED), and supply airflow (PINK) associated with Room 433R, a corridor zone served by AHU-1 on the 4
th floor. The trend shows that the zone temperature set-point is
constant at 72°F throughout the month of August 2014, and that the supply temperature and airflow are typically consistent as well. The load in this type of zone is primarily driven by equipment such as ultra-low temperature freezers and environmental room compressors and does not fluctuate significantly.
353 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Programming ea 35 $0 $150 1 2 $10,500 $10,500
2 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
Subtotal $12,900
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $2,600
3 Other Engineering 5% $800
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $800
Commissioning 5% $800
Construction Observation 5% $800
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $800
Total $19,500
ECM-18.00 (e)-9: Temperature Setback in Lab Corridors
General Materials Labor
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
354 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
ECM-18.00 (E)-10 HOT WATER SUPPLY TEMPERATURE RESET
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (e)-10 Hot Water Supply Temperature Reset
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
-956 -$96 0 $0 4,304 $43,036 $42,940 $6,600 0.2
BASE CASE The hot water supply temperature set-point on the vivarium reheat loop was observed to be fixed at 160°F throughout the spring, summer, and fall. Refer to Figure 96 on Page 356 for a chart showing the loop supply temperatures. Although trend data was not available for the laboratory reheat loop and perimeter radiant panel loop, the control sequences indicate that the lab reheat loop set-point is fixed at 180°F throughout the year and the radiant panel loop is reset based on outdoor air temperature.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to implement a hot water reset on HE-3,4,5, and 6 to reduce distribution losses on the lab and vivarium reheat loops during periods of lower thermal load. During the summer months, a hot water supply temperature of 160°F may not be necessary to satisfy terminal reheat loads. The table below summarizes the proposed reset parameters.
Outdoor Temperature
Vivarium (HE-5,6) HWST Set-point
Lab (HE-3,4) HWST Set-point
°F °F °F
20°F 160°F 180°F
60°F 140°F 160°F
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from an increase in the hot water distribution system’s efficiency by reducing losses through piping, fittings, pumps, and the heat exchangers at lower hot water supply temperatures.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run was performed on the “Reheat HW Loop” system which models HE-3,4,5, and 6. The following parameters were changed as part of the parametric run.
Base Case
HEAT-SETPT-CTRL: Constant
355 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
HEAT-RESET-SCH: n/a
Proposed Case
HEAT-SETPT-CTRL: OA-RESET
HEAT-RESET-SCH: Schedule RESET-TEMP
o Outdoor Drybulb High Temperature: 60°F
o Outdoor Drybulb Low Temperature: 20°F
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor Low: 160°F (HE-5,6); 180°F (HE-3,4)
o Supply Leaving Temp @ Outdoor High: 140°F (HE-5,6); 160°F (HE-3,4)
356 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
Figure 96: The trend screenshot below shows the hot water supply temperature (RED) and supply set-point (BLUE) for HE-5,6 serving the Vivarium reheats.
357 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: LRB Estimated By: SD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Programming ea 2 $0 $150 1 8 $2,400 $2,400
2 4 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
3 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 2 $0 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,200
Subtotal $4,200
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $900
3 Other Engineering 5% $300
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $300
Commissioning 5% $300
Construction Observation 5% $300
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $300
Total $6,600
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-18.00 (e)-10: Hot Water Supply Temperature Reset
General Materials Labor
358 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Lazare Research Building
OTHER OPPORTUNITIES REVIEWED
CONVERT FUME HOODS TO VAV (84) Of the facility’s total (108) laboratory fume hoods are constant volume units manufactured by Labconco. The majority of fume hoods have been retrofitted with kits that allow for a face velocity of 60-70 feet per minute (fpm) at maximum sash height and have been rebalanced to the airflow level necessary to maintain this design velocity. When researchers close sashes to their minimum positions, the hood face velocity increases since airflow is partially restricted through the hood bypass opening and there is no exhaust flow control.
An analysis of laboratory air change rates and fume hood density has shown that the majority of labs currently have a make-up rate that is driven primarily by air change requirements and not by fume hood exhaust. In addition, the majority of bay lab supply and exhaust VAV boxes are currently at or near the manufacturer’s recommended minimums. As a result, any additional flow reduction at the fume hoods would require retrofitting the VAV and VEV boxes, as described in the ECM 04.09-3 proposed case.
If fume hood exhaust flow rates were reduced by converting to VAV hoods, an analysis of zone level airflow balancing showed that total exhaust in the labs would not change. This is due to the relatively low density of fume hoods in the laboratories compared to the minimum supply airflow required to maintain the necessary air change rates.
A potential VAV hood conversion was also found to have little to no impact on total lab exhaust at the unoccupied period air change rates proposed in ECM-04.09-3. Air change rates would need to be below 2 ACH in most lab areas in order for a VAV fume hood retrofit project to offer net energy savings.
ULTRA-LOW TEMPERATURE FREEZER REPLACEMENT There are numerous low temperature freezers throughout the laboratory areas of the facility that appear to range in age, although many are estimated to be original to the building. We recommend replacing low temperature freezers with Energy Star rated or high efficiency units as equipment reaches the end of its useful life. Energy savings will vary based on existing and new freezer efficiency, condition of the equipment, and the usage characteristics.
359 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
MEDICAL SCHOOL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE
Notes: The cost savings figures in the summary table above assume the following utility rates: $0.10/kWh, $0.12/ton-hour, $10.00/Mlb.
ECM # ECM
Electric
Energy
Savings
CHW Energy
Savings
Steam
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit
Cost
Payback
Before
Incentive
- kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
01.01 (f) Lighting Retrofit 799,421 0 0 $79,942 $1,197,300 15.0
03.01 (f)-1 Retrofit FCU & FPB Fans With EC Motors 105,425 0 0 $10,543 $189,200 17.9
03.01 (f)-2 Retrofit Enviro-Room Evap Fans with EC Motors 93,229 0 0 $9,323 $174,400 18.7
04.07 (f) Upgrade Terminal VAV Mixing Box Controls 693,873 102,433 624 $87,919 $1,827,525 20.8
09.00 (f)-1 Loading Dock Variable Exhaust Controls 317,926 0 0 $31,793 $74,315 2.3
09.00 (f)-2 Reduce Lab Air Changes 1,108,663 505,892 7,047 $242,044 $807,463 3.3
09.00 (f)-3 Install VFDs & CO2 Ventilation Controls on Library ACs 300,790 70,026 2,172 $60,203 $139,565 2.3
17.09 (f) Reclaim Return Air on AC-12 8,483 0 659 $7,442 $39,600 5.3
18.00 (f)-1 Optimize Perimeter HW Reset 0 0 387 $3,874 $31,000 8.0
18.00 (f)-2 Auditorium Scheduling & Occupancy Controls 249,081 32,778 1,234 $41,182 $202,950 4.9
18.00 (f)-3 Repair Heating Valves & Actuators 0 220,569 5,274 $79,206 $59,050 0.7
18.00 (f)-4 Repair Cooling Valves & Actuators 0 74,420 173 $10,656 $18,250 1.7
18.00 (f)-5 Repair Economizer Dampers & Optimize Sequence 61,505 639,057 7,186 $154,700 $259,900 1.7
18.00 (f)-6 Air Sealing Repairs on AC Units 276,499 20,259 -777 $22,310 $442,100 19.8
18.00 (f)-7 Optimize Static Pressure Reset 30,479 7,096 -7 $3,826 $27,800 7.3
21.02 (f) School Solar Hot Water 0 0 929 $9,288 $338,601 36.5
School Subtotals 4,045,373 1,672,529 23,972 $844,962 $5,490,418 6.5
School Building
360 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
FACILITY DESCRIPTION
The University of Massachusetts Medical School (UMMS) building is approximately 900,000 ft2 and was built in the early 1970’s with 10 above grade stories and 2 below grade levels. The above ground Levels 1 – 7 are used for a mixture of research, education, and administrative purposes, with levels 8 - 10 used primarily for mechanical equipment. This facility contains numerous lab areas used for various research and educational purposes, a two-story library and study area, three large auditoriums, and an entry foyer open to multiple levels. The west wing area is referred to as the “Basic” wing, the east wing is referred to as the “Clinical” wing, and the section connecting the Basic and Clinical wings is known as the “Student” wing. The “clip-on” façade space addition was completed approximately 10 years ago and added space to the south side of the building including the lobby area. Sub-level A contains the animal quarters and other research areas and sub-level B is primarily facility engineering/mechanical support space and loading dock area. Some lab spaces in the building have been or are currently being renovated and changed to office areas, primarily in the student wing. The building is occupied 24 hours a day. Some areas have daily schedules, while many research labs and offices can be occupied at any time. Auditorium and library occupancy is variable depending on class schedules. Along with electricity, the campus power plant also supplies chilled water and high pressure steam, which is converted to low pressure steam for heating use.
There are approximately (42) air handling systems, referred to as AC units, that serve the building. Among these, (6) are 100% outside air units. Approximately (25) AC units are dual-duct, and are original to building construction, while the remaining units are single duct and many of these were added after original construction. Most AHUs are zoned vertically, meaning they serve spaces on different floors from 1 – 7 and in most cases the spaces served by a single AC unit are stacked on top of each other. Most ACs serve both lab and office areas as a result of this vertical zoning arrangement. AC units typically have a steam or Hot Water (HW) preheat coil, a hot deck steam or HW coil for heating and a cold deck Chilled Water (CHW) coil. Some ACs are mixed air units and do not have preheat coils. Most ACs are equipped with Variable Frequency Drives (VFDs) that are controlled to meet a static pressure set-point, except for (8) ACs which do not have VFDs. Some ACs are dedicated to environmentally-controlled and containment/pressure isolation spaces. There are several 100% outside air systems providing makeup air to labs and other areas. AC units that are not 100% OA are equipped with return fans and return air from office areas. See the appendix for AC unit details.
The dual-duct ACs serve approximately (900) terminal dual-duct mixing boxes throughout the building. Roughly half are constant volume mixing boxes with one damper that provides a proportion of hot deck and cold deck air which varies based on the zone cooling or heating demand. The other half of the dual duct boxes are Variable Air Volume (VAV) boxes, with individually actuated hot and cold deck dampers. The “clip-on” façade ACs primarily serve single duct VAV fan powered boxes with HW reheat. The animal quarters is the only building area where humidification is used, with humidifiers located both directly in the respective spaces and in AC-5 (100% OA MAU).
361 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
The exhaust duct risers are zoned vertically in a similar fashion to the AC units, and exhaust from both lab hoods and general lab exhaust ducts. Lab area ventilation is once-through; meaning 100% of the air supplied to the space is exhausted. However, the labs are not 100% OA since the AC units supply air to the labs that is mixed with return air from the offices areas. There are approximately (70) fume exhaust hoods in the lab areas, and most are from original construction and are constant volume. The air change/hour rate (ACH) for labs appears to be in 7 – 8 ACH range, except for labs which were renovated and had been designed for 6 ACH by UMMS engineering staff. Half of the approximately (50) exhaust fans are equipped with VFDs that control to maintain a negative duct static pressure set-point.
Each floor contains perimeter Hot Water Base Board divided into four zones based on compass direction. The south zone is no longer in use due to space overheating issues. Each zone is served by a pump with a 5hp, premium efficiency motor. This system is enabled below 38oF. The HW is heated by steam converters. There is also a HW reheat loop serving the “clip-on” VAVs and AC units with HW coils. Domestic HW is provided by a system of semi-instantaneous steam water heaters.
ACs are primarily controlled by pneumatic operators overlaid with legacy Johnson DX-9100 controllers. The DX-9100 controllers are mapped to the Automatic Logic Controls (ALC) digital BAS. The ALC BAS controls the AC unit schedules and sequences. Most AC unit sequences include OA dry-bulb based economizer, cold deck and hot deck supply air temperature reset, and some AC units have static pressure set-point reset. Compressors located in the mechanical spaces provide control air to the ACs as well as to many of the terminal mixing boxes. Approximately 25% of the VAV dual duct mixing boxes are digitally controlled and are on the ALC BAS, while the remaining 75% are pneumatically controlled and are not on the BAS.
Approximately (30) refrigerated environmental rooms are located within the building. Waste heat from the compressors serving these rooms is removed by the condenser water loop, via a heat exchanger with the building CHW loop. Condenser water loop is served by (3) 3 hp inline pumps. The building also contains extensive medical lab and research equipment, such as laboratory vacuum pumps, air compressors, and incubators, and more than 100 chest and cabinet-type refrigerators and low-temperature freezers.
The lighting in the facility consists primarily of 2’ by 4’ one-, two-, and three-lamp 32 Watt T8 fluorescent fixtures. There is also a significant quantity of 1’ by 8’ two- and four-lamp 32 Watt T8 fluorescent fixtures, 65 Watt incandescent flood lights in recessed and pendant cans, and 26 and 18 Watt two-lamp compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) in recessed and pendant cans. The remaining lighting consist of 2’ by 2’ two- and three-lamp 17 Watt T8s, 1’ by 12’ three-lamp 32 Watt T8s, and 1’ by 3’ one-lamp 25 Watt T8s. The lens type on most of the fluorescent fixtures is prismatic, parabolic, or volumetric. With the exception of the 1st floor lobby and common areas, and the Student Affairs area, the recessed and pendant CFL and incandescent flood lights do not have a lens.
362 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
BASELINE ENERGY USE & BENCHMARKING
ENERGY USE GRAPHS
ELECTRICITY Figure 64 on the following page shows electricity use for the School Building for FYs 11 – 14. It can be seen that electricity use is fairly consistent throughout each given year, with slight variations between the years likely due to weather effects. It can also be seen that there is a monthly decrease of about 300,000 kWh between FY12 and FY13-14, possibly occurring because of changes in use profiles, building lighting or equipment upgrades or scheduling changes, or it may be due to some other reason.
Figure 65 shows the electric use averaged over FYs 2011-2013, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. FY2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
363 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 97: Medical school monthly electricity use (kWh) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 98: Medical school baseline electricity use (kWh) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013 that has been corrected to reflect the savings associated with the lighting retrofit in the adjacent parking garage.
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ele
ctri
c U
se (
kWh
)
Med School Electric Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ele
ctri
c U
se (
kWh
)
Med School Baseline Electric Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11+13)
364 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
STEAM Figure 66 shows the monthly steam consumption for FYs 11 – 14. In FY12-13, some pronounced variations can be seen between months, possibly due to differentials in meter read dates. It can also be seen that FY 14 has a noticeably higher consumption during the winter months. This increase was not seen in previous years and was therefore excluded from the baseline.
Figure 67 shows the steam use averaged over FYs 2011-2013, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. FY2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unavailable at the time of this report.
365 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 99: Medical school monthly steam energy use (Lbs) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 100: Medical school baseline steam energy use (Lbs) profile, including averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013 .
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
30,000,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ste
am U
se (
lbs)
Med school Steam Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
30,000,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ste
am U
se (
lbs)
Med School Steam Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11+13)
366 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
CHILLED WATER Figure 68 shows the Medical School’s CHW use from FYs 11 – 14. It can be seen that CHW use is fairly consistent from year to year, with slight variations between years likely due to weather effects.
Figure 69 shows the CHW use averaged over FYs 2011-2013, taken as the utility use baseline for energy model calibrations. FY2014 was excluded from the baseline due to the fact that complete data for that fiscal year was unable at the time of this report.
367 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 101: Medical School monthly chilled water energy use (ton-days) for Fiscal Years 2011 - 2014.
Figure 102: Medical School baseline chilled water energy use (ton-days) profile, using averaged monthly data from Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013.
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
se (
ton
-day
s)
Med School CHW Use FY 11 - FY 14
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Ch
ille
d W
ate
r U
se (
ton
-day
s)
Med School Baseline CHW Use
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
Baseline (FY11+13)
368 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
BENCHMARKING
BENCHMARKING SUMMARY TABLE The table below summarizes the annual energy consumption and performance metrics for the facility. This was done to provide a clear representation of the actual site energy consumption for benchmarking and also for evaluation with energy savings opportunities. Energy use data for fiscal years 2011 – 2013 is shown below, along with an average of data from the three fiscal years.
Energy Use
Annual site electricity (kWh), chilled water (ton-hours) and 50 lb steam (klbs). These figures are not adjusted for central plant efficiencies (site to source conversion).
Performance Ratings
Performance ratings are provided for electricity in three units of measure: total kWh/ft2, equivalent total kBtu/ft2, and annual average W/ft2. Note that since electric demand utility data was not available for the building, an average demand was calculated based on the building’s annual electricity consumption (kWh) divided by the total number of hours in the year (8,760) and converted to Watts (1000 W/kW).
Performance ratings for chilled water and steam are provided in equivalent kBtu/ft2 based on measured site energy consumption. Estimates for equivalent source kWh/ft2 (electricity) and kBtu/ft2 (natural gas fuel) are also included based on the following assumptions:
Site Site Site Source
ft2 FY kWh ton-hrs klbs
kWh
/ft2
W
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
kWh
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
kWh
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
kBtu
/ft2
FY11 21,377,650 7,739,280 127,202 23.6 2.70 80.6 102.61 5.5 12.2 141 0 176 324 287
FY12 22,356,540 7,068,552 101,304 24.7 2.82 84.3 93.71 5.0 11.2 112 0 140 290 252
FY13 19,710,590 6,678,024 122,804 21.8 2.49 74.3 88.54 4.7 10.5 136 0 170 299 271
3 Year Avg. 21,148,260 7,161,952 117,103 23.4 2.67 79.7 94.95 5.1 11.3 129 0 162 304 270
UMass Medical Center School Building Energy Use Data
905,127
CHW Steam Total
Source Source
BLDG INFO ENERGY USE PERFORMANCE RATINGS
Floor
AreaFiscal Year Electricity CHW
50#
SteamElectricity
369 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Fuel-to-Steam Boiler Efficiency: 80%
Electric Chiller Plant Efficiency: 0.7 kW/ton
Steam-driven Chiller Efficiency: 2.1 COP
Annual Chilled Water Load Assumptions: 20% Steam-driven chillers, 80% Electric Chillers
The total site and source performance ratings sum the equivalent source ratings (kBtu/ft2) for electricity, chilled water, and steam,
so that this building can be benchmarked against similar facilities, which may generate steam and chilled water in a central plant
captured in the building electricity and natural gas meters.
370 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
BENCHMARKING COMPARISON This chart compares the School Building with total site kBtu/ft2 averages for several New England academic lab buildings.
In order to compare each of the buildings’ energy use benchmarks, all electricity, chilled water, and steam energy consumption was converted to estimated equivalent source energy (kBtu). For example, Academic Lab 1 is supplied steam and chilled water from district systems, but Academic Labs 2 and 3 have on-site chiller plants and district steam. As a result, a direct site electricity use comparison between these buildings and the UMMS could be misleading.
The table above shows that the UMMS source kBtu/ft2 is higher than all three of the comparison buildings by 10% on average. The kBtu/ft2 metric indicates that the school building is more energy intensive when compared to other academic buildings featuring lab space. Two additional site benchmarks are included in the table: Site Electricity Use Intensity (kWh/ft2) and Average Electric Demand (W/ft2). Average Electric Demand is calculated by dividing the building’s annual electricity consumption by 8,760 hours/year, and multiplying by 1000 W/kW to determine the annual average demand at the facility. It can be seen that the W/ft2 and kWh/ft2 performance metrics are approximately 30% lower for the school building than for other New England academic labs on average, however the kBtu/ft2 performance metric for the school building is 10% higher than the average for selected academic lab areas in this climate zone. This difference is likely due to the chilled water consumption which is included in the kBtu/ft2 metric and not in the site electric use metric for the school building. This combined with the electric use metrics suggest that there is an opportunity for energy savings in the school building by reducing simultaneous heating and cooling energy use resulting from the existing dual duct AHU systems.
New
England
Academic
Lab 1
New
England
Academic
Lab 2
New
England
Academic
Lab 3
Average
of
Lab 1-3
UMMC
School
Building
Gross Area (ft2) 132,998 178,612 81,304 130,971 905,127
Approximate Lab Area % 40% 40% 80% 53% 40%
Total Site kBtu/ft2289 260 271 273 304
kWh/ft237.6 32.5 26.7 32.3 21.8
Average W/ft24.3 3.7 3.0 3.7 2.5
371 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
EQUEST MODEL CALIBRATION
Energy and cost savings were estimated using an existing eQuest model of the facility originally developed by Andelman & Lelek and modified to reflect current equipment characteristics, schedules, and internal loads. The model used the TMY3 weather file for Worcester, MA and was calibrated against monthly electricity use over a three year period from July 2010 – July 2013. The model was also calibrated for chilled water and steam use using monthly data obtained from the UMass central plant staff. The charts below compare the baseline utility use and the calibrated eQuest model predicted utility use.
Figure 103: Medical School eQuest model electricity use calibration chart. The baseline monthly electricity use utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly electricity consumption is shown in red.
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
Ele
ctri
city
Usa
ge (
kWh
)
Monthly Electricity Usage
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
372 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 104: Medical School eQuest model chilled water calibration chart. The baseline monthly chilled water utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly chilled water energy consumption is shown in red. The divergence in the summer months is due to eQuest’s limitations in modeling economizer issues.
Figure 105: Medical School eQuest model steam calibration chart. The baseline monthly steam utility data is shown in blue and the eQuest model predicted monthly steam consumption is shown in red.
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
Ste
am U
sage
(M
lb)
Monthly Steam Usage
UtilityData
eQUESTOutput
373 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
The table below summarizes the annual end-use energy distribution for electricity, steam, and chilled water at the facility as calculated by the baseline eQuest model. The pie chart below illustrates the baseline eQuest model’s electricity end use using the figures shown in the table.
The “Miscellaneous Equipment” category in the table below can include any of the following equipment types: plug loads (such as appliances, computers, peripherals, laboratory equipment, freezers/refrigerators, etc.), transformer losses assigned to the building, exterior lighting, and elevators.
The following parameters were used to model the estimated miscellaneous loads in the School building, based on information gathered during walkthroughs and historical whole-building electricity use:
6. Corridor Plug Loads: 0.1 W/ft2
7. Office, Conference Room, Lecture Hall Plug Loads: 0.5 - 0.75 W/ft2
8. Laboratory Plug Loads: 3.0 W/ft2
In addition, the following parameters were used to model interior lighting loads:
3. Office Lighting Power Density: 0.90 W/ft2
4. Corridor, Conference Room, Classroom, Library Lighting Power Density: 0.90 - 1.00 W/ft2
5. Laboratory Lighting Power Density: 1.20 W/ft2
Table 11: Medical School eQuest model’s annual energy end-use for each meter (electricity, steam, and chilled water).
kWh Mlb ton-hrs
Space Cooling 0 0 6,827,900
Heat Rejection 0 0 0
Refrigeration 0 0 0
Space Heating 0 113,395 0
Heat Pump 0 0 0
Hot Water 0 0 0
Ventilation Fans 11,750,178 0 0
Pumps and Auxiliary 1,663,674 0 0
Exterior 0 0 0
Miscellaneous Equipment 3,175,875 2,196 0
Task Lighting 0 0 0
Area Lighting 4,946,060 0 0
Total 21,535,787 115,591 6,827,900
Annual Energy by End
Use
Baseline Energy Use
374 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 106: Pie chart showing the Medical School eQuest model’s annual electricity end use breakdown.
Area Lighting 23%
Miscellaneous Equipment
15%
Pumps and Auxiliary 8%
Ventilation Fans 54%
Baseline Model Annual Electricity End Uses
375 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES
Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) associated with the major air- and water-side equipment and terminal devices were identified following field investigations and a review of trend data from the facility’s Siemens building automation system. ECMs vary in scope from low cost measures limited to schedule, sequence, and set-point optimization, to more complex measures which may require larger capital investment associated with equipment replacement or retrofit.
376 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 1.01 (F) LIGHTING RETROFIT
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 01.01 (f) Lighting Retrofit
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
799,421 $79,942 0 $0 0 $0 $79,942 $1,197,300 15.0
BASE CASE The lighting in the facility consists primarily of 2’ by 4’ one-, two-, and three-lamp 32 Watt T8 fluorescent fixtures. There is also a significant quantity of 1’ by 8’ two- and four-lamp 32 Watt T8 fluorescent fixtures, 65 Watt incandescent flood lights in recessed and pendant cans, and 26 and 18 Watt two-lamp compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) in recessed and pendant cans. The remaining lighting consist of 2’ by 2’ two- and three-lamp 17 Watt T8s, 1’ by 12’ three-lamp 32 Watt T8s, and 1’ by 3’ one-lamp 25 Watt T8s. The lens type on most of the fluorescent fixtures is prismatic, parabolic, or volumetric. With the exception of the 1st floor lobby and common areas, and the Student Affairs area, the recessed and pendant CFL and incandescent flood lights do not have a lens.
UMass recently upgraded lighting in three buildings on campus, with the entire project consisting of approximately 10,000 28 Watt T8 lamps. An estimated 2,300 of these were dedicated to the Medical School. UMass staff re-lamped a large portion of the fluorescent fixtures that are on during all hours of the year in the halls, entryways, and common areas.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to upgrade existing lamps and ballasts to newer high efficiency units where applicable. Refer to the Opinion of Probable Cost Table on the following page for a breakdown of proposed equipment types and quantities. We recommend replacing 4’ 32 Watt T8 lamps with high efficiency 28 Watt lamps and NEMA Premium (NP) electronic ballasts. We also recommend replacing CFLs and incandescent floods with LED lamps and installing occupancy sensors in some offices. The recommendations do not include fixture upgrades or replacement in an effort to present a more cost effective retrofit approach.
The recent upgrade project described in the Base Case decreased the overall number of 4’ fluorescent fixtures that are candidates for retrofits as a part of this ECM. The impact of the upgrades are included in the in the Measure Economics summary table above and the Cost Estimate table.
377 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in electricity use by installing high efficiency fluorescent lamps and more efficient ballasts. The energy savings calculations make estimates for annual run hours of each fixture based on information obtained from facilities and maintenance staff. The calculations assume that run hours remain the same in the proposed case.
ASSUMPTIONS
A room-by-room lighting audit was performed on 1st, 2nd, and 3rd floors. A higher level, detailed walk-through audit was performed on the 4th through 8th floors. The primary approach to the walk-through audit was to confirm the information from the 1996 audit, and if different, capture those changes and include them in the report. Most of Level A was not accessible. What we could access to mirrored the 1996 audit information, so we used 1996 audit data for the report. We were unable to access Floors 9 and 10. We again used the 1996 data for floors 9 and 10 for the report. Lighting controls have been included in the kWh savings methodology. The recent T8 fluorescent re-lamping project occurred simultaneously with this energy audit. The counts, savings, and costs in this report have been updated from the 50% draft report based on anecdotal input from UMass since new lighting plans are not available at this time.
378 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE
Note: The numbers in red in the table above indicate changes from the 50% report to account for the recent lighting upgrades.
Item Source Item Type Qty
Unit
Cost Total Cost
Unit
Rate Workers
Hours
Each
Labor
Cost Total Cost
1 3-Audit Retrofit - 2 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP Ballast with 2 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 5,279 $55 $290,345 $0 0 0 $0 $290,345
2 3-Audit Retrofit - 1 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP Ballast with 1 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 1,098 $45 $49,410 $0 0 0 $0 $49,410
3 3-Audit Retrofit - 2 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with LP Ballast with 2 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with LP Ballast ea 136 $55 $7,480 $0 0 0 $0 $7,480
4 3-Audit Retrofit - 3 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP Ballast with 3 Lamp 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 1,604 $60 $96,240 $0 0 0 $0 $96,240
5 3-Audit Retrofit - 1 Lamp 2 foot 17 watt T8 with NP Ballast with 1 Lamp 2 foot 17 watt T8 with LP Ballast ea 112 $45 $5,040 $0 0 0 $0 $5,040
6 3-Audit Retrofit - 4 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP Ballast with 4 Lamp 4 foot 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 67 $65 $4,355 $0 0 0 $0 $4,355
7 3-Audit Retrofit - 2 Lamp 2 foot 17 Watt T8 with NP Ballast with 2 Lamp 2 foot 17 Watt T8 with LP Ballast ea 35 $55 $1,925 $0 0 0 $0 $1,925
8 3-Audit Retrofit - 1 Lamp 3 Foot 25 Watt T8 with NP Ballast with 1 Lamp 3 Foot 25 Watt T8 with LP Ballast ea 49 $45 $2,205 $0 0 0 $0 $2,205
9 3-Audit Retrofit 3 Lamp 2 Foot 17 Watt T8 with NP Ballast with 3 Lamp 2 Foot 17 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 199 $60 $11,940 $0 0 0 $0 $11,940
10 3-Audit Retrofit - 6 Lamp 4 foot 32 Watt T8 with NP Ballast with 6 Lamp 4 Foot 28 Watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 4 $65 $260 $0 0 0 $0 $260
11 3-Audit Replace 13 Watt Compact Florescents lamps (CFL's) with 5 Watt LED's ea 7 $5 $35 $0 0 0 $0 $35
12 3 Audit Replace 18 Watt Compact Florescents lamps (CFL's) with 9 Watt LED's ea 48 $5 $240 $0 0 0 $0 $240
13 3 Audit Replace 26 Watt Compact Florescents lamps (CFL's) with 13 Watt LED's ea 385 $5 $1,925 $0 0 0 $0 $1,925
14 3 Audit Replace 7 Watt Compact Florescents lamps (CFL's) with 4 Watt LED's ea 7 $5 $35 $0 0 0 $0 $35
15 3 Audit Replace 5 Watt Compact Florescents lamps (CFL's) with 3 Watt LED's ea 10 $5 $50 $0 0 0 $0 $50
16 3 Audit Replace 65 Watt Incandescent Flood lamps with 32 Watt LED's ea 490 $5 $2,450 $0 0 0 $0 $2,450
17 3 Audit Retrofit - 1 Lamp 8 foot high output 32 watt T8 with NP Ballast with 1 Lamp 8 foot 28 watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 15 $55 $825 $0 0 0 $0 $825
18 3 Audit Retrofit - 2 Lamp 8 foot 32 watt T8 with NP Ballast with 2 Lamp 8 foot 28 watt T8 with LP Ballast ea 687 $65 $44,655 $0 0 0 $0 $44,655
19 3 Audit Retrofit - 2 Lamp 8 foot T12's with Magnetic Ballast with 2 Lamp 8 foot 28 watt T8 with NP Ballast ea 221 $65 $14,365 $0 0 0 $0 $14,365
20 3 Audit Retrofit - 4 Lamp 8 foot 32 watt T8's with NP Ballast with 4 Lamp 8 foot 28 watt T8 with LP Ballast ea 326 $65 $21,190 $0 0 0 $0 $21,190
21 3 Audit Retrofit - 1 Lamp 2 foot 20 watt T12's with HP Ballast with 1 Lamp 2 foot 17 watt T8's with NP Ballast ea 60 $45 $2,700 $0 0 0 $0 $2,700
22 3 Audit Retrofit - 2 Lamp 3 foot 25 watt T8's with NP Ballast with 2 Lamp 3 foot 25 watt T8's with LP Ballast ea 56 $55 $3,080 $0 0 0 $0 $3,080
23 3 Audit Retrofit - 2 Lamp 3 foot 25 watt T8's with LP Ballast with 2 Lamp 3 foot 14 watt T5's with NP Ballast ea 76 $55 $4,180 $0 0 0 $0 $4,180
24 3 Audit Retrofit - 1 Lamp 4 foot 25 watt T8's with NP Ballast with 1 Lamp 4 foot 25 watt T8's with LP Ballast ea 12 $45 $540 $0 0 0 $0 $540
25 3 Audit Wall Switch Occupancy Sensors ea 867 $90 $78,030 $0 0 0 $0 $78,030
$643,500
1 Means Contingency 20% $128,700
2 Vendor Quote Engineering 15% $115,900
3 Other Construction Administration 5% $38,700
4 Vendor Allowance Commissioning 20% $154,500
Construction Observation 10% $77,300
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $38,700
Total $1,197,300
Sources Subtotal
General Materials Labor
379 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 3.01 (F)-1 RETROFIT FCU & FPB FANS WITH EC MOTORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 03.01 (f)-1 Retrofit FCU & FPB Fans With EC Motors
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
105,425 $10,543 0 $0 0 $0 $10,543 $189,200 17.9
BASE CASE There are an estimated 120 fan coil units (FCUs) and fan powered boxes (FPBs) in the school building, all of which are equipped with either permanent split capacitor (PSC) or shaded pole (SP) AC fan motors. This includes FCUs in data closets. According to available documentation, FPBs range in airflow capacity from 800 to 1,200 cfm, and feature motors ranging from 1/4 to 1/3 nominal hp. Fractional horsepower PSC and SP motors such as these typically operate at efficiencies between 30-60% and do not have speed modulation capabilities. Interviews with facility staff revealed that the majority of fans run continuously (estimated to be 96), as only a few zones in the building have setbacks.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to replace the 96 existing FPB and FCU motors that run continuously with high-efficiency, electronically-commutated (EC) motors. These motors have significantly increased fan efficiency, approximately 20% higher than PSC motors and 30% higher than SP motors.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This measure results in fan energy savings at all times when the FPBs and FCUs are in operation due to increased motor efficiency.
This measure was modeled using one-line spreadsheets for each unit. Both the existing and proposed case FCU and FPB energy use was calculated by estimating that each fan runs 100% of the time during occupied periods and that the fans run at full speed whenever active. The calculation also assumes fixed motor efficiencies based on the motor size. Figure 107 below summarizes the efficiency curves used to define each motor’s power consumption.
380 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 107: Chart showing differences in nominal efficiency between PSC, SP, and EC motors for several common motor sizes.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
0 1/10 1/5 3/10 2/5 1/2 3/5
Mo
tor
Effi
cie
ncy
Motor Nominal Power (hp)
FCU & FPB Motor Efficiencies
Shaded Pole Eff
Perm. Split Cap.
EC Motor
381 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE The costs for this measure include the materials and labor to replace each FCU’s and FPB’s motor with an EC motor.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: JD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 New ~1/4HP EC Motors ea 96 $450 $43,200 $150 1 4 $57,600 $100,800
2 3 Testing and Balancing ea 96 $0 $150 1 1 $14,400 $14,400
3 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 24 $3,600 $3,600
4 3 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 96 $0 $150 1 0.5 $7,200 $7,200
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $126,000
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $25,200
3 Other Engineering 5% $7,600
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $7,600
Notes Commissioning 5% $7,600
Construction Observation 5% $7,600
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $7,600
Total $189,200
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 3.01 (f)-1: Retrofit FCU& FPB Fans With EC Motors
General Materials Labor
Sources
382 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 3.01 (F)-2 RETROFIT ENVIRONMENTAL ROOM EVAPORATOR FANS
WITH EC MOTORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 03.01 (f)-2 Retrofit Environmental Room Evaporator Fans with EC motors
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
93,229 $9,323 0 $0 0 $0 $9,323 $174,400 18.7
BASE CASE There are an estimated 30 environmental rooms in the school building, all of which are equipped with either permanent split capacitor (PSC) or shaded pole (SP) evaporator fan motors. These motors are estimated to be fractional or small horsepower and there may be at least two evaporator fans per environmental room. Fractional horsepower PSC and SP motors such as these typically operate at efficiencies between 30-60%. These fan motors run continuously to cool the environmental rooms.
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to replace the evaporator fan motors with high-efficiency, electronically-commutated (EC) motors. These motors have significantly increased fan efficiency, approximately 20% higher than PSC motors and 30% higher than SP motors. This measure requires the replacement of each fan motor. Prior to implementation, an inventory of the evaporator fan motors must be taken to determine final costs and savings. A strategy must be developed to mitigate impact on the materials or samples stored in the coolers during implementation. Consideration should be taken if any environmental rooms are anticipated to be decommissioned in the next 5 – 10 years.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This measure results in fan energy savings at all times when the motors are in operation due to increased efficiency. This measure also results in cooling energy savings by reducing the amount energy from the motors that is added to the environmental room in the form of heat.
This measure was modeled using one-line spreadsheets for each environmental room. Both the existing and proposed case evaporator fan energy use was calculated assuming that each fan runs 100% of the time. The fixed motor efficiencies used in the calculation are based on an assumed motor size of ¼ hp, typical for refrigerated cooler applications. Two fans are assumed in each environmental room for redundancy. Figure 107 in the previous section summarizes the efficiency curves used to define each evaporator fan’s motor power consumption.
383 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE The costs for this measure include the materials and labor to replace each evaporator fan motor with an EC motor.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: JD
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 New ~1/4HP EC Motors ea 60 $450 $27,000 $150 1 8 $72,000 $99,000
2 3 Testing and Balancing ea 60 $0 $150 1 1 $9,000 $9,000
3 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 24 $3,600 $3,600
4 3 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 60 $0 $150 1 0.5 $4,500 $4,500
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $116,100
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $23,300
3 Other Engineering 5% $7,000
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $7,000
Notes Commissioning 5% $7,000
Construction Observation 5% $7,000
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $7,000
Total $174,400
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 3.01 (f)-2: Retrofit Environmental Room Evaporator Fans With EC Motors
General Materials Labor
Sources
384 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 4.07 (F) UPGRADE TERMINAL VAV MIXING BOX CONTROLS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.07 (f) Upgrade Terminal VAV Mixing Box Controls
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
693,873 $69,387 102,433 $12,292 624 $6,240 $87,919 $1,827,525 20.8
BASE CASE There are approximately 450 terminal dual-duct VAV mixing boxes which have pneumatic controls. These mixing boxes serve corridors, offices, storage areas, elevator lobbies, etc.; laboratory terminal boxes are not included in this measure. The VAV box pneumatic operators modulate the cold and hot deck dampers independently to mix and provide heating or cooling air flow based on heating or cooling demand. Cold deck and hot deck air flow minimums are approximately 25% - 30% of maximum design flow depending on the box. Table 12 below gives an example of two mixing boxes and their prescribed flow minimums. The air handlers serving the dual duct mixing boxes, provide hot deck temperatures which reset from 80-100°F and cold deck temperatures which reset from 55-60°F. The resets are based on outside air temperature.
Table 12: Flow characteristics of existing mixing boxes
Box #
Cold Deck
Design Flow
Cold Deck
Minimum Flow
Cold Deck Minimum
Flow Ratio
Hot Deck Design Flow
Hot Deck Minimum
Flow
Hot Deck Minimum Flow Ratio
CFM CFM - CFM CFM - MB16-*1-55 350 110 31% 350 110 31% MB16-*1-56 160 40 25% 160 40 25%
With a dual duct system, there is always some inherent level of simultaneous heating and cooling happening. The existing damper setup and existing pneumatic controls allow for an excessive amount of simultaneous heating and cooling. For instance, during peak cooling periods when 100% cold deck air is being provided, there will still be a minimum 25% of the hot deck air flow at 80°F. Alternately, during the peak heating periods when the hot deck is full open, there will still be minimum 25% of the cold deck airflow being provided at 60oF.
The mixing boxes are not controlled to a schedule and have no night setback except for areas where the supply AC unit is scheduled off.
385 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Another source of simultaneous heating and cooling is the interaction of the perimeter HW loops and the VAV cooling operation. The perimeter heat has no control on the system level and is enabled below 38oF with a temperature reset. Facility staff noted that since there is no zone-level control, some zones with perimeter HW are overheating at times. The dual-duct VAV boxes are controlled via a separate pneumatic wall thermostat that will cause the unit to modulate into cooling mode to maintain the space temperature when spaces overheat. This interaction may be a contributing factor to the building’s winter CHW consumption.
PROPOSED CASE The proposed case is to upgrade the mixing box controls to Direct Digital Control (DDC) by retrofitting with new damper actuators, discharge air temperature sensor, and space temperature sensor. The new DDC mixing box controls will be networked into the Automated Logic building automation system. This could be accomplished by overlaying the DDC on the existing pneumatic controls using electric-pneumatic (E-P) transducers or by installing electronic actuators.
The energy savings are a result of more advanced and precise control, allowing flow minimums of 0% when the box is in full cooling or heating mode and for implementation of advanced scheduling and start time optimization. This will also reduce simultaneous heating and cooling from perimeter VAVs calling for cooling in spaces that are overheated by the perimeter HW radiation.
Minimum air flows will be checked so that adequate ventilation air is always provided during occupied periods. The new controls will also allow temperature setbacks to be scheduled in offices (64°F (Heating) / 78°F (Cooling)) when unoccupied. Digital space temperature sensors can be installed with or without the user-occupancy override function. These VAVs will be added to the BAS graphics, and operators will be able to view space temperatures and hot deck/cold deck damper positions. This upgrade will also include historical trending capabilities that are useful for diagnosing issues and optimizing operation.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY A ‘Global Parameter’ in eQuest was used to assign a hot deck minimum flow of 0.3. The Global Parameter, ‘DD Heating Min’, was assigned at the zonal level for all offices that are served by a dual-duct system and still have pneumatic control on the terminal mixing box. A parametric run was created to change the global parameter from 0.3 to 0.0. This will allow the hot deck side of the terminal mixing box to modulate down to its 0% open position as cooling demand increases.
386 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/29/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Actuator (2 per mixing box) ea 900 $250 $225,000 $150 1 1 $135,000 $360,000
2 3 DDC VAV box controller (note 1) ea 450 $500 $225,000 $150 1 2 $135,000 $360,000
3 3 Space Temperature ea 450 $100 $45,000 $150 1 1 $67,500 $112,500
4 BAS Points & Programming ea 450 $500 $225,000 $150 1 2 $135,000 $360,000
5 As-Builts ea 450 $0 $150 1 0.25 $16,875 $16,875
6 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 450 $0 $150 1 0.5 $33,750 $33,750
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $1,243,125
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $248,700
3 Other Engineering 5% $74,600
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $74,600
Notes 1 NORESCO project = ~450 VAV boxes Commissioning 5% $74,600
2 DDC controller to have 2 DO for dampers, 1 DA, 1 Space temp Construction Observation 5% $74,600
Project Closeout & Expenses 2.5% $37,300
Total $1,827,525
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 04.07 (f): Upgrade Terminal VAV Mixing Box Controls
General Materials Labor
Sources
387 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 9.00 (F)-1 LOADING DOCK VARIABLE EXHAUST CONTROLS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 09.00 (f)-1 Loading Dock Variable Exhaust Controls
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
317,926 $31,793 0 $0 0 $0 $31,793 $74,315 2.3
BASE CASE SF-1 provides unconditioned ventilation air to the loading dock, which is exhausted by EF-36. Both fans are constant volume and do not have VFDs. Table 13 below shows the fan & motor characteristics of this equipment. These fans operate 8,760 hours per year to ventilate the loading dock.
Table 13: Loading dock supply & exhaust fan design data
Motor HP Motor kW Airflow CFM
SF-1 30.0 27.0 53,622 EF-36 40.0 36.1 69,366
PROPOSED CASE This measure proposes to implement carbon monoxide (CO) based ventilation controls for the loading dock. This system will adjust the ventilation rate to meet the levels needed based on vehicle and equipment emissions, controlling to the actual activity in the space. This measure includes installing VFDs and premium efficiency motors on SF-1 & EF-36, a CO sensor network in the loading dock to monitor CO levels, and a programmable controller. The VFDs would be programmed to ramp the fans down to provide a minimum ventilation rate when the CO levels inside the loading dock are below set-point. The VFDs would ramp up to increase ventilation air flow when CO levels increase, indicating that equipment or vehicles are operating in the loading dock. Programming can be incorporated to provide different levels of VFD response and alarming when lower/higher levels of CO are sensed. The fans could also be programmed to turn completely off when low levels of CO allow.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY The energy savings for this measure were calculated using a spreadsheet model. Equipment data obtained on site visits and from NORESCO audit motor survey was used in the calculations. The proposed case energy use is calculated using a ventilation air flow profile that is based on
388 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
assumed loading dock activities. Proposed case motor input power is calculated using the formula below:
𝑘𝑊𝐼𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡,𝑉𝐹𝐷 = 𝑘𝑊𝑀𝑜𝑡𝑜𝑟,𝐹𝑢𝑙𝑙 𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑 × (𝑉𝐹𝐷 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛)𝑘
𝜂𝑉𝐹𝐷
Where, kWMotor, Full Load = measured input power. VFD Speed Fraction = fraction of full speed. k = VFD affinity exponent, assumed to be 2.5. 𝜂VFD = VFD efficiency
The assumed air flow profile is shown in the Table 14 below.
Table 14: Airflow profile used in proposed case calculations
Modeling Assumptions:
Minimum VFD speed of 50% corresponding to minimum ventilation air flow 50% of design.
VFD affinity exponent of 2.5
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
12am-1am 1 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
1am-2am 2 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
2am-3am 3 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
3am-4am 4 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
4am-5am 5 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
5am-6am 6 75% 75% 75% 75% 75% 50% 50%
6am-7am 7 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50%
7am-8am 8 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50%
8am-9am 9 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50%
9am-10am 10 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50%
10am-11am 11 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50%
11am-12pm 12 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50%
12pm-1pm 13 75% 75% 75% 75% 75% 50% 50%
1pm-2pm 14 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50%
2pm-3pm 15 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50%
3pm-4pm 16 75% 75% 75% 75% 75% 50% 50%
4pm-5pm 17 75% 75% 75% 75% 75% 50% 50%
5pm-6pm 18 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
6pm-7pm 19 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
7pm-8pm 20 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
8pm-9pm 21 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
9pm-10pm 22 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
10pm-11pm 23 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
11pm-12am 24 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
Hour of Day
389 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Limited weekend and overnight activity in loading dock.
SF-1 & EF-36 VFDs are ramped in unison.
390 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 CO sensors ea 4 $750 $3,000 $150 1 8 $4,800 $7,800
2 3 SF-1, 30HP Motor & VFD ea 1 $7,553 $7,553 $150 1 4 $600 $8,153
3 3 EF-36, 40HP Motor & VFD ea 1 $9,263 $9,263 $150 1 2 $300 $9,563
4 3 VFD BAS Points & Programming ea 6 $1,500 $9,000 $150 1 4 $3,600 $12,600
5 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
6 3 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 2 $0 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,200
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $39,915
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $8,000
3 Other Engineering 15% $7,200
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $2,400
Notes Commissioning 20% $9,600
Construction Observation 10% $4,800
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $2,400
Total $74,315
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 09.00 (f)-1: Loading Dock Variable Exhaust Controls
General Materials Labor
391 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 9.00 (F)-2 REDUCE LAB AIR CHANGES
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 09.00 (f)-2 Reduce Lab Air Changes
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
1,108,663 $110,866 505,892 $60,707 7,047 $70,471 $242,044 $807,463 3.3
BASE CASE All the labs in the building are designed as once-through ventilation systems. Supply air is provided to the labs by dual-duct air handlers with VFDs and static pressure control. The conditioned hot and cold air is supplied to the labs by constant volume dual-duct mixing boxes and is exhausted by a combination of general lab exhaust in addition to the lab fume hood exhaust. Most of the existing fume hoods exhaust systems are original to the building and constant volume by-pass type hood design. There are approximately 33 exhaust fans for lab exhaust. Seventeen of the fans have variable frequency drives with static pressure controls and the remainder are fixed speed. Based on our investigation of existing air flows and lab sizes, the labs currently operate at approximately 7 air changes/hour (ACH) on average throughout the facility. UMass engineering staff indicated that when lab spaces are renovated they design for 6 ACH and they estimate the original lab design was 8 – 10 ACH. Some AC units serving labs are scheduled off at night, however the air change remains constant whenever the AC units serving the respective labs are operating. For comparison purposes, minimum air change rates in the new LRB building are currently set to approximately 4.5 ACH.
Table 15: Lab square footage and airflow data
PROPOSED CASE The proposed case is to install VFDs on the existing constant volume exhaust fans and rebalance labs to 5 ACH. 5 ACH was chosen as a conservative estimate based on the LRB’s current minimum average air change rate of 4.5 ACH. Also, new duct static pressure sensors would be installed in the exhaust ducts and control exhaust fans to maintain a duct static set-
Lab Gross Square Footage 326,807 ft2 From UMMS SF Breakdown
Interior Walls, Mechanical, etc. 5% Assumed
Net Square Footage 310,467 ft2
Avg Room Height 12 ft Fls 1-2 have 15' ceiling, upper fls are 9'
Total Volume 3,725,600 ft3
Total Measured Exhaust Air 435,819 ft3/min From RGV Air Flow Study
Total Measured Exhaust Air 26,149,140 ft3/hr From RGV Air Flow Study
air changes/min 0.12
air changes/hr 7.02 ACH
392 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
point, which would be set by the balancer to meet the proposed air change rates. Each lab will have the constant volume supply air boxes and exhaust ducts rebalanced to meet the 5 ACH. During the design phase, individual labs will be evaluated for the appropriate flow reduction, such labs with hazardous chemicals, which may not be reduced. Lab fume hoods flows should also be checked to ensure proper airflows are maintained. A reduction in air flow at the box level will result in the supply air handler fan VFD ramping down based on the duct static pressure control. This measure also involves installing new premium efficiency motors on 15 exhaust fans that are not currently equipped with VFDs.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY A ‘Global Parameter’ in eQuest was used to assign an ACH rate for the lab areas. The Global Parameter, ‘Lab ACH’, was assigned at the zonal level for all labs except for animal quarters and specialized containment areas. The ACH Global Parameter was parametrically changed from 7 (base case) to 5 (proposed case). Also, the system airflow for the AC units serving lab areas was adjusted to account for the air change reduction.
393 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 5HP Motor & VFD ea 5 $3,953 $19,763 $150 2 6 $9,000 $28,763
2 7.5HP Motor & VFD ea 4 $4,283 $17,130 $150 2 6 $7,200 $24,330
3 10HP Motor & VFD ea 2 $4,568 $9,135 $150 2 8 $4,800 $13,935
4 15HP Motor & VFD ea 3 $5,333 $15,998 $150 2 8 $7,200 $23,198
5 25HP Motor & VFD ea 1 $6,885 $6,885 $150 2 10 $3,000 $9,885
6 30HP Motor & VFD ea 1 $7,553 $7,553 $150 2 10 $3,000 $10,553
7 BAS programming ea 16 $0 $150 1 8 $19,200 $19,200
8 Testing and Balancing ea 126 $0 $150 2 8 $302,400 $302,400
9 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 24 $3,600 $3,600
10 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 16 $0 $150 1 4 $9,600 $9,600
11 BAS Points for VFDs ea 48 $1,500 $72,000 $150 1 0 $0 $72,000
Subtotal $517,463
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $103,500
3 Other Engineering 10% $62,100
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $31,100
Notes 8 Floors 5-7 = 90 labs and Floors 2-4 = 36 labs Commissioning 5% $31,100
Construction Observation 5% $31,100
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $31,100
Total $807,463
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
ECM 09.00 (f)-2: Reduce Lab Air Changes
General Materials Labor
Sources
394 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 9.00 (F)-3 INSTALL VFDS & CO2 VENTILATION CONTROLS ON
LIBRARY AC UNITS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 09.00 (f)-3 Install VFDs & CO2 Ventilation Controls on Library ACs
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
300,790 $30,079 70,026 $8,403 2,172 $21,721 $60,203 $139,565 2.3
BASE CASE The four air handling units serving the library, AC-22, 23, 24, and 25, are all constant volume and do not have VFDs. Table 16 below shows equipment information on these units.
Table 16: Library Air Handler Equipment Information
Unit Service
Design Airflow Data
Supply Fan Data
Return Fan Data
Schedules: Equipment &/or Occupancy
Total Supply Airflow
Minimum Outdoor Airflow
Motor Namplate
Motor Namplate
cfm cfm hp hp
AC-22 Library 14,035 2,800 20 20 6:30-23:45 Mon-Thu/6:30-
21:15 Fri
AC-23 Library 11,185 2,240 15 15 6:32-23:47 Mon-Thu/6:32-
23:17 Fri
AC-24 Library 18,665 7,350 20 7.5 6:34-23:49 Mon-Thu/6:34-
23:19 Fri
AC-25 Library 17,845 5,530 20 7.5 6:36-23:45 Mon-Thu/6:36-
23:15 Fri
These units generally provide either a fixed quantity of minimum outdoor/ventilation air (%OA) to the library, or provide 100% outside air when enabled to do so by either a single point or comparative drybulb economizer sequence. Slight variation in economizer cutoff is observed between library units, however operation seems to be independent of time-of-day or space occupancy. The economizer operation of typical units is shown in Figure 108 and Figure 109 below.
395 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 108: This trend screenshot below for AC-25, which runs 24/7, shows an example of a single point economizer cutoff. When the outdoor temperature is below 68, the economizer is enabled and the mixing air dampers are set for 100% outside air. When the ambient temperature rises above 68°F, economizer is disabled and the mixing dampers go to their minimum %OA position. Also note that in this screenshot the unit only operates with the mixing air dampers at 100% OA or minimum %OA.
396 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 109: This trend screenshot below for AC-22, which runs during the shaded periods in the screenshot, shows an example of a comparative dry bulb economizer cutoff. When the outdoor temperature more than approximately 6 degrees below the return air temperature, the economizer is enabled and the mixing air dampers are set for 100% outside air. When the ambient temperature rises above this point, economizer is disabled and the mixing dampers go to their minimum %OA position. Also note that in this screenshot the unit only operates with the mixing air dampers at 100% OA or minimum %OA.
397 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
In addition, it was observed based on temperature sensor readings that AC-22 & 24 were fully recirculating and taking in no ventilation air when commanded to take in the minimum air percentage, indicating a potential issue with the mixing dampers or actuators on these units. It was also observed that either mixed or return air temperature sensors on one or more units.
PROPOSED CASE In the proposed case of this measure, VFDs are installed on the supply and return fans, CO2 sensors are installed in the return ducts, and any non-functional dampers and actuators are repaired or replaced on each library AC unit. In addition, a sequence is implemented whereby the outside air dampers are modulated to maintain the return CO2 below a set-point (typically 800 – 1,000 ppm), and the supply fan VFD maintaining a default minimum speed set-point of 80%, ramping up as the return temp rises above 76oF (adj.).
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This measure will result in fan energy savings during low load periods when the fan speed is allowed to ramp down, and will also result in heating and cooling savings during unoccupied periods due to the reduced loads associated with the ventilation air.
The energy savings for this measure were calculated by parametrically changing the AC units serving the library to variable flow with a minimum of 85%. This will allow the air flow to modulate based on the needs of the space. The parametric changes that were made in the eQuest model include changing the units FAN-CONTROL to SPEED, and changing the MIN-FLOW-RATIO to a value 0.85. Additionally, the min-OA was parametrically changed to CO2 control.
398 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable. This measure also includes a cost allocation to repair or replace non-functional mixing air dampers & actuators, along with any inaccurate or non-functioning return or mixed air temperature sensors in the library units.
399 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2 15 HP motor ea 2 $1,800 $3,600 $150 1 8 $2,400 $6,000
2 2 20 HP motor ea 4 $2,200 $8,800 $150 1 8 $4,800 $13,600
3 3 VFD (15HP) ea 2 $500 $1,000 $150 1 8 $2,400 $3,400
4 3 VFD (20HP) ea 4 $350 $1,400 $150 1 8 $4,800 $6,200
5 3 CO2 Sensors in return air ea 4 $1,000 $4,000 $150 1 4 $2,400 $6,400
6 3 Replace OA Dampers ea 2 $1,000 $2,000 $150 2 12 $7,200 $9,200
7 3 VFD (7.5HP) ea 2 $3,383 $6,765 $150 1 8 $2,400 $9,165
8 2 7.5 HP Motor ea 2 $900 $1,800 $150 1 8 $2,400 $4,200
9 3 As-Builts ea 4 $0 $150 1 4 $2,400 $2,400
10 3 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 4 $0 $150 1 8 $4,800 $4,800
11 3 VFD BAS Points & Programming ea 8 $1,500 $12,000 $150 $0 $12,000
Subtotal $77,365
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $15,500
3 Other Engineering 15% $14,000
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $4,700
Notes 1 Line 11 include programing in Material Cost Commissioning 15% $14,000
Construction Observation 10% $9,300
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $4,700
Total $139,565
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 09.00 (f)-3: Install VFDs & CO2 Ventilation Controls on Library AHUs
General Materials Labor
400 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 17.09 (F) RECLAIM RETURN AIR ON AC-12
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 17.09 (f) Reclaim Return Air on AC-12
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
8,483 $848 0 $0 659 $6,594 $7,442 $39,600 5.3
BASE CASE Training rooms in 2nd floor Basic are 100% variable exhaust designed for 2,000 CFM, with no return from the space. This space was repositioned from lab space to training area in the last few years. The space relief remained 100% exhaust because there was no additional capacity in the return air ducts. An ongoing renovation on the 1st floor directly beneath the training rooms is changing the return air for the 1st floor space from AC-12 to AC-30, and the return air duct to AC-12 was capped, reducing the return airflow delivered to AC-12.
Table 17: AC-12 design information
Supply Air Flow CFM
Return Air
CFM
Minimum OA Flow
CFM Minimum
%OA
AC-12 23,022 18,492 4,530 20%
PROPOSED CASE This measure’s proposed case is to convert exhaust to return by installing ductwork to connect the training room ceiling plenum to AC-12’s return air duct. The AC-12 return air riser is located in a nearby duct chase, and the ductwork will penetrate the chase wall to connect with the AC-12 return. This will utilize the recent capacity gain in AC-12 return resulting from 1st floor space renovation. As part of this measure we propose balancing air flows to return approximately 2,000 CFM to AC-12, and cap exhaust duct or modulate dampers fully closed.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY The energy savings from this measure were calculated by changing the AC-12’s percent outside air to account for the increase in return air. The parametric change made in eQuest was decreasing the MIN-OUTSIDE-AIR value from 0.74 (base case) to 0.6768 (proposed Case).
401 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Ductwork modifications ea 1 $5,000 $5,000 $150 2 24 $7,200 $12,200
2 3 Testing and Balancing ea 1 $0 $150 1 16 $2,400 $2,400
3 3 Programming ea 1 $0 $150 1 24 $3,600 $3,600
4 4 General Construction ea 1 $1,000 $1,000 $150 2 16 $4,800 $5,800
5 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
6 3 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $26,400
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 10% $2,700
3 Other Engineering 10% $3,000
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,500
Notes 1 Commissioning 10% $3,000
2 Construction Observation 5% $1,500
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,500
Total $39,600
General Materials Labor
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 17.09 (f): Reclaim Return Air on AC-12
402 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 18.00 (F)-1 OPTIMIZE PERIMETER HW RESET
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (f)-1 Optimize Perimeter HW Reset
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 0 $0 387 $3,874 $3,874 $31,000 8.0
BASE CASE The perimeter HW system serving radiators throughout the school building is separated into three zones – north, east, and west. The south zone is disconnected. The system turns on below when the outside air temperature is 38oF or below. The system has a temperature reset based on outside air temperature and is believed to reset from 180 oF down to 160 oF before turning off. There are no automatic zone valves and the HW pumps provide a constant flow whenever the system is on.
Table 18: Existing Perimeter HW Reset Schedule
Base Case Perimeter HW System
Outside Air Temp
°F
HW Supply Temp
°F
0 180 38 160
PROPOSED CASE This measure is to optimize the existing HW temperature reset by introducing a primary/secondary reset schedule, reducing the low limit supply temperature to 120 oF. A new secondary reset will reset the supply set-point above the outdoor air temperature-based value if necessary based on load to the spaces. The space load in the secondary reset will be indicated by supply – return differential temperature.
403 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Table 19: Proposed Perimeter HW Reset Schedule
Proposed Case Perimeter HW System
Outside Air Temp
°F
HW Supply Temp
°F
0 180 38 120
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY A customized bin-based excel spreadsheet was created to model the energy savings. TMY3 data for Worcester, MA was sorted into hourly 5oF temperature bins and imported into the model. The formula shown below was used to calculate the heat loss from the cylindrical pipe for each bin:
𝑄𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝐿𝑜𝑠𝑠 = 2 𝜋 𝑘 (𝑡𝑖 − 𝑡𝑜)
ln (𝑟𝑜
𝑟𝑖)
Where,
QHeat loss = heat loss through pipe wall per foot of pipe, including insulation (Btu/hr-ft)
k = Conductivity of insulation material (Btu/hr-ft-oF)
ti = Temperature of interior surface of insulation, exterior pipe surface (oF); Assumed equal to HW supply temperature
to = Ambient air temperature (oF)
ro = Outside radius of cylinder, pipe radius plus thickness of insulation material (ft)
ri = Inside radius of cylinder, equal to pipe radius (ft)
ln = Natural logarithm
This formula was used in both the base and proposed cases, and the HW supply temperature is varied in each bin according to the reset schedules shown above. The difference in heat loss between the base and proposed case in each temperature bin is multiplied by the hours in each bin and by the total estimated pipe length, and divided by the steam-HW converter efficiency.
Modeling Assumptions:
HW loop is operating for all hours when the outside dry-bulb temperature is below 38°F.
Average pipe outside diameter is estimated to be 2.5” based on visual observation
404 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Pipe insulation thickness is estimated to be 1.5” based on visual observation
Ambient temperature was assumed to be 70oF based on average space temperatures and that the building thermal mass maintained that temperature consistently
Insulation conductivity was assumed to be 0.023 Btu/hr-ft-oF (www.engineeringtoolbox.com)
Total piping length was estimated to be 22,512 ft. This estimate is calculated assuming the piping follows the west, east, and north perimeter of the building on each floor, multiplied by 2 to account for supply and return piping.
HW converter efficiency is assumed to be 96%.
405 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Programming ea 3 $0 $150 1 24 $10,800 $10,800
2 3 Return water temperature sensors ea 3 $500 $1,500 $150 1 8 $3,600 $5,100
3 3 As-built ea 1 $0 $150 1 12 $1,800 $1,800
4 3 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 3 $0 $150 1 6 $2,700 $2,700
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $20,400
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $4,100
3 Other Engineering 5% $1,300
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $1,300
Notes Commissioning 5% $1,300
Construction Observation 5% $1,300
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $1,300
Total $31,000
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 18.00 (f)-1: Optimize Perimeter HW Reset
General Materials Labor
Sources
406 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 18.00 (F)-2 AUDITORIUM SCHEDULING & OCCUPANCY CONTROLS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (f)-2 Auditorium Scheduling & Occupancy Controls
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
249,081 $24,908 32,778 $3,933 1,234 $12,341 $41,182 $202,950 4.9
BASE CASE There are three auditoriums stacked on top of each other that are served by AC-1. These auditoriums have dual-duct VAV mixing boxes that are pneumatically controlled and do not have any setbacks. Occupancy in these auditoriums is highly variable; it is typically heavy during the school year but changes often and unpredictably based on class & lecture schedules. The auditoriums are also regularly used at nights and on weekends for various events. Table 20 below shows the VAV box airflow serving each auditorium.
Table 20: Summary of Auditorium VAV Boxes
AC-1 operates 24/7 to provide dual-duct supply air to the auditoriums. Table 21 below shows equipment data for AC-1.
Table 21: AC-1 Equipment Data
Supply Air Flow
CFM
Minimum OA Flow
CFM
Minimum %OA
Motor HP
Motor kW
AC-1 23,022 4,530 20% 50 39.3
Auditorium 1 - Level 2-3 Auditorium 2 - Level 4-5 Auditorium 3 - Level 6-7
Box Name CFM Box Name CFM Box Name CFM
MB01* 3-26 345 MB01* 5-26 345 MB01* 7-26 345
MB01* 3-27 330 MB01* 5-27 330 MB01* 7-27 330
MB01* 3-28 1,995 MB01* 5-28 1,995 MB01* 7-28 1,995
MB01* 3-29 975 MB01* 5-29 975 MB01* 7-29 975
MB01* 3-30 330 MB01* 5-30 330 MB01* 7-30 330
MB01* 3-31 2,550 MB01* 5-31 2,350 MB01* 7-31 2,860
MB01* 3-32 345 MB01* 5-32 345 MB01* 7-32 345
MB01* 3-33 1,760 MB01* 5-33 1,760 Total CFM 7,180
Total CFM 8,630 Total CFM 8,430
407 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
PROPOSED CASE This measure’s proposed case is to upgrade controls in the auditorium systems to operate AC-1 & VAV mixing boxes according to actual occupancy needs in each of the auditoriums. This will be done by a mix of advanced programming and using both occupancy sensor and CO2 sensor feedback to optimize energy consumption.
The proposed case also includes the retrofitting dual-duct mixing boxes in the auditoriums with electronic actuators or transducers to control the existing pneumatic actuators and discharge air temperature sensors. Space temperature sensors and occupancy sensors would be installed in each of the auditoriums and CO2 sensors would be installed in the return air duct. A daily equipment schedule would be programmed in the BAS for AC-1 to operate from 6:00am – 10:00pm, 7 days. When no occupants are sensed for 15 minutes (adj.), allow the VAV mixing boxes to go into an unoccupied daytime mode. During unoccupied daytime mode, the VAV box dampers would modulate to minimum position unless the space temperature exceeds a light setback of temperature set-point +/- 4oF (adj.). The outside air dampers would modulate to maintain CO2 levels are below set-point sensed by the return air CO2 sensor. When CO2 levels are below a low set-point and occupancy sensors indicate there are no people in the space for 2 hours (adj), then the auditorium will go into deep setback mode. During deep setback mode, the VAV boxes would modulate to minimum position unless the space temperature exceeds asetback of temperature set-point +/- 8oF (adj.) If all auditoriums are in deep setback mode, shut off AC-1 until the next scheduled start time, or until an occupancy sensor is triggered for more than 5 min (adj.), bringing any auditorium out of deep setback. Keep AC-1 programming & sequences except for the scheduling and deep setback on/off control described above.
Note: Given the effort required to access the VAV mixing boxes UMass may want to consider replacing the boxes or retrofitting new box dampers when the ceiling is open. A high-level estimate would include at least $2,500 - $5,000 per mixing box in addition to the cost of the base retrofit scope for a complete replacement.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY The savings for this measure were calculated by parametrically changing the equipment and space schedules in eQuest. Table 22 below shows the proposed case fan schedule, ‘sFan AN AC-1’, that was created to mirror the occupied schedule. The fans will cycle on during occupied periods, and during unoccupied periods the fan will cycle off.
Table 22: Auditorium Occupancy Schedule Used in eQuest model
AC-1 Proposed schedule
6:00am-6:00pm, Mon, Wed, Fri
6:00am-9:00p Tue, Thu
4:00pm-9:00pm, Sat
eQuest Fan Schedule
408 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
The outside air parameter was also changed to model the CO2 OA control. It was assumed that there was low occupancy during the following periods, Monday – Friday: 6:00am – 8:00am, 12:00pm – 1:00pm, 5:00pm – 6:00pm.
Note: The control upgrades necessary to implement this measure will also inherently implement similar capabilities and functionality as in “ECM 4.07 (f) Upgrade Terminal VAV Mixing Box Controls.” These savings from the DDC upgrade are included in this measure.
409 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/29/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Actuator (2 per mixing box) ea 46 $250 $11,500 $150 1 1 $6,900 $18,400
2 3 DDC VAV box controller (note 1) ea 23 $500 $11,500 $150 1 2 $6,900 $18,400
3 3 Space Temperature ea 23 $100 $2,300 $150 1 2 $6,900 $9,200
4 4 BAS Points & Programming VAV Boxes ea 23 $500 $11,500 $150 1 2 $6,900 $18,400
5 3 Ceiling Occupancy Sensors ea 9 $150 $1,350 $150 1 4 $5,400 $6,750
6 3 CO2 Sensors ea 9 $500 $4,500 $150 1 4 $5,400 $9,900
7 3 BAS Programming - AC Unit ea 3 $0 $150 1 4 $1,800 $1,800
8 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 32 $4,800 $4,800
9 3 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 23 $0 $150 1 4 $13,800 $13,800
10 3 Lift ea 3 $2,500 $7,500 $150 0 0 $0 $7,500
Subtotal $108,950
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $21,800
3 Other Engineering 15% $19,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $6,600
Notes 1 DDC controller to have 2 DO for dampers, 1 DA, 1 Space temp Commissioning 20% $26,200
Construction Observation 10% $13,100
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $6,600
Total $202,950
Materials Labor
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 18.00 (f)-2: Auditorium Scheduling & Occupancy Controls
General
410 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 18.00 (F)-3 REPLACE HEATING VALVES & ACTUATORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (f)-3 Repair Heating Valves & Actuators
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 220,569 $26,468 5,274 $52,737 $79,206 $59,050 0.7
BASE CASE Historical trend logs show that on select dual-duct AC units in the school building, a significant temperature rise occurs across either the preheat or hot deck coil with the unit running and the valve commanded fully closed. On one particular AC unit, a temperature rise such as this was observed across both the preheat and hot deck coils. This may be due to leaking valves or insufficient pressure at the pneumatic actuator to hold the valve closed.
See Figure 110 and Figure 111 for trend screenshots that illustrate the air temperature rise observed across a typical AHU preheat and hot deck coil when the unit is running.
Table 23 below lists the specific AHUs included in this measure and the corresponding average temperature rise across the preheat and hot deck coils observed in trend data.
Table 23: List of Units Involved in Heating Leakby Measure
AHU # Preheat
Temperature Rise Hot Deck
Temperature Rise
AC-4 0°F 38°F
AC-7 0°F 6°F
AC-8 0°F 23°F
AC-9 0°F 7°F
AC-13 0°F 10°F
AC-14 8°F 20°F
AC-16 0°F 15°F
AC-25 0°F 11°F
AC-31 11°F 0°F
PROPOSED CASE For each of the AHUs listed in the table above, we recommend replacement of the preheat or hot deck heating coil valve with a new valve body and replacement of the existing pneumatic actuator to eliminate the hot water or steam leakage observed.
411 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in heating energy used during periods when the heating demand is less than the amount that results from valve leakage. In cases of a preheat leak-by, chilled water savings result from the additional mechanical cooling needed to meet discharge set-points after supply air is preheated more than necessary.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a bin spreadsheet model that calculates the sensible heat gain across each AC unit’s preheat and hot deck coil based on trend data observations.
The average temperature rise across each coil was estimated using trends of mixed or outdoor air, preheat leaving air, and hot deck temperature during periods when the unit was running but the corresponding heating valve was closed. The table in the base case description for this measure above shows the average temperature rise across the preheat and hot deck coils used in energy savings calculations.
Energy savings were then calculated and extrapolated using TMY3 weather data for Worcester, MA. For each AC, if the binned outdoor air temperature was greater than the point at which heating was required, wasted heating energy was calculated using the following equation:
𝑄 [𝐵𝑡𝑢
ℎ𝑟] = 1.08 ∗ 𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦 𝐴𝑖𝑟𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 [𝑐𝑓𝑚] ∗ 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝛥𝑇 [°𝐹]
Where ‘Supply Airflow’ is equal to each AC’s total supply airflow documented in design drawings. Heating energy savings (Btu) were summed across all ACs for the entire year and divided by a steam heating value of 1,000 Btu/lb to calculate the measure’s annual steam savings (Mlbs).
412 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 110: This trends screenshot for AC-14 below shows the large difference between preheat leaving air temperature (BLUE) and outdoor air temperature (RED) when the preheat control valve (ORANGE) is closed. The constant volume 100% OA unit is running continuously throughout the period shown in this screenshot.
413 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 111: This trend screenshot for AC-14 below shows the large difference between the hot deck leaving air temperature (RED) and preheat leaving air temperature (ORANGE) when the preheat control valve (BLUE) is closed. The constant volume 100% OA unit is running continuously throughout the period shown in this screenshot.
414 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 New 3" Valve ea 10 $1,800 $18,000 $150 2 6 $18,000 $36,000
2 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 1 $150 $150
3 3 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 10 $0 $150 1 2 $3,000 $3,000
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Subtotal $39,150
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $7,900
3 Other Engineering 5% $2,400
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $2,400
Notes 1 Assume new valve Commissioning 5% $2,400
Construction Observation 5% $2,400
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $2,400
Total $59,050
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 18.00 (f)-3: Repair Heating Valves & Actuators
General Materials Labor
Sources
415 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 18.00 (F)-4 REPLACE COOLING VALVES & ACTUATORS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (f)-4 Repair Cooling Valves & Actuators
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 74,420 $8,930 173 $1,725 $10,656 $18,250 1.7
BASE CASE Historical trend logs show that on select dual-duct AC units in the school building, a significant temperature drop occurs across either the cold deck coil with the unit running and the cooling valve commanded fully closed. This may be due to leaking valves or insufficient pressure at the pneumatic actuator to hold the valve closed.
See Figure 112 for a trend screenshot that illustrates the air temperature drop observed across an AC unit cooling coil when the unit is running.
Table 24 below lists the specific ACs included in this measure and the corresponding average temperature drop across the cooling coils observed in trend data.
Table 24: List of Units Involved in Heating Leakby Measure
AHU # Cooling
Temperature Drop
AC-7 14°F
AC-8 5°F
AC-40 13°F
PROPOSED CASE For each of the AHUs listed in the table above, we recommend replacement of the cold deck coil valve with a new valve body and replacement of the existing pneumatic actuator to eliminate the chilled water leakage observed.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from the reduction in cooling energy used during periods when the cooling demand is less than the amount that results from valve leakage.
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a bin spreadsheet model that calculates the sensible cooling load across each AC’s cold deck coil based on trend data observations.
416 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
The average temperature drop across each coil was first estimated using trends of mixed air, preheat coil leaving air, and cold deck temperature during periods when the unit was running but the cooling valve was closed. The table in the base case description for this measure above shows the average temperature rise across the cold deck coils used in energy savings calculations.
Energy savings were then calculated using TMY3 weather data for Worcester, MA. For each AC unit, if the binned outdoor air temperature was lower than the point at which cooling was required, wasted cooling energy was calculated using the following equation:
𝑄 [𝐵𝑡𝑢
ℎ𝑟] = 1.08 ∗ 𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦 𝐴𝑖𝑟𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 [𝑐𝑓𝑚] ∗ 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝛥𝑇 [°𝐹]
Where ‘Supply Airflow’ is equal to each AC’s total supply airflow documented in design drawings. Cooling energy savings (Btu) were summed across all AHUs for the entire year and converted to chilled water energy usage to calculate the measure’s annual steam savings (Ton-hrs).
417 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 112: This trend screenshot for AC-7 below shows the large difference between the mixed air temperature (RED) and cold deck temperature (BLUE) when the cold deck valve (PINK) is closed (note that the unit has no preheat coil). The unit is running continuously throughout the period shown in this screenshot.
418 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE The following estimate was developed using estimates for materials, labor, and programming costs. Contingency, engineering, construction administration, commissioning expense estimates are also included where applicable.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 New 3" Valve ea 3 $1,800 $5,400 $150 2 6 $5,400 $10,800
2 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 1 $150 $150
3 3 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 3 $0 $150 1 2 $900 $900
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Subtotal $11,850
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $2,400
3 Other Engineering 5% $800
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $800
Notes Commissioning 5% $800
Construction Observation 5% $800
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $800
Total $18,250
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 18.00 (f)-4: Repair Cooling Valves & Actuators
Sources
General Materials Labor
419 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 18.00 (F)-5 REPAIR ECONOMIZER DAMPERS & OPTIMIZE SEQUENCE
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (f)-5 Repair Economizer Dampers & Optimize Sequence
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
61,505 $6,151 639,057 $76,687 7,186 $71,862 $154,700 $259,900 1.7
BASE CASE Among the AC units in the school building which have return air, a number of issues were observed with the mixing air operations. A comprehensive summary of the issues involved in this measure are shown in Table 25 below. It is unclear if the economizer issues described are due to programming logic, mechanical issues/failures, or both. Note that this measure excludes the four library AHUs, as their mixing air operation is addressed in ECM 9.00 (f)-3 Install VFDs & CO2 Ventilation Controls on Library AC Units.
It was also observed that the written sequences for the clip on AC units have a comparative enthalpy economizer sequence based on AC-39 return air %RH, however a review of ALC logic pages indicate that the economizer sequence in place is dry-bulb based with OA-enable set-points of 60oF for the lobby AC-37 & 70oF for ACs 38, 39, & 40.
420 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Table 25: Economizer sequence characteristics of AC units
Unit
Economizer OAT
Enable Setpoint
from ALC Logic
(deg F)
CDT/DAT
Setpoint from
ALC Logic
(deg F)
Observed IssueEffect on
Unit
Date
Range of
Issue
Trend Data Damper Control Signal Observations
AC-1 70 48-53 MAD - Stuck 100%
Open
Over-
economizing
July - Oct
2014
MAD is remains at 30% when OAT < 70F, but
damper must be stuck open because MAT always
is equal to OAT.
AC-2 70 55-60 Economzier
Sequence
Under-
economizing
April
2014
MAD signal varies from 20 - 30%, and does not
control to CDT setpoint. MAT is consistently
greater (5-10F) than CDSPT.
AC-3 70 55-60 Economzier
Sequence
Under-
economizing
April
2014
MAD signal varies from 20 - 30%, and does not
control to CDT setpoint. MAT is consistently
greater (5-10F) than CDSPT.
AC-4 70 55-60 Economzier
Sequence
Under-
economizing
April
2014
MAD signal varies from 35 - 60%, and does not
control to CDT setpoint. MAT is consistently
greater (5-10F) than CDSPT.
AC-6 70 55-60 MAD - Stuck 10%
Open
Under-
economizing
Sept -
Oct 2014
MAD opens 100% when OAT < 70F, but damper
must be stuck closed because MAT never falls
below RAT
AC-7 70 55-60
Economzier
Sequence
Manual Overrides
Under-
economizing
Sept
2014
MAD only 10% open when OAT < 57F. Suggest
checking manual overrides.
AC-8 70 55-60 N/A N/A N/A MAD signal controls well to MAT set point of 60F.
AC-9 70 55-60 MAD - Stuck 100%
Open
Over-
economizing
Sept
2014
MAD 30% open when OAT > 70F, but damper must
be stuck open because MAT always is equal to
OAT
AC-10 70 55-60 N/A N/A N/A
Cannot determine performance from trend data
due to failed or miscalibrated MAT sensor.
Suggest replacing sensor and conducting field
testing.
AC-11 70 55-60 N/A N/A N/ACannot determine performance from trend data
due to lack of RAT. Suggest field testing.
AC-12 70 55-60 N/A N/A N/A MAD signal controls well to MAT set point of 58F.
AC-13 70 55-60 Economzier
Sequence
Under-
economizing
Sept
2014
MAD signal varies from 20 - 35%, and does not
control to CDT setpoint. MAT is consistently
greater (5-10F) than CDSPT.
AC-15 70 55-60 Economzier
Sequence
Under-
economizing
Sept
2014
MAD signal varies from 20 - 35%, and does not
control to CDT setpoint. MAT is consistently
greater (5-10F) than CDSPT.
AC-16 70 55-57 N/A N/A N/A MAD signal controls well to CDT set point.
AC-17 70 55-60 N/A N/A N/A MAD signal controls well to CDT set point.
AC-19 70 55-60 N/A N/A N/A MAD signal controls well to CDT set point.
AC-20 70 55-60 N/A N/A N/A MAD signal controls well to CDT set point.
AC-37 60 55-95 MAD - Stuck 100%
Open
Over-
economizing
Sept
2014
Trends indicate the damper economizer
sequence is not operating in accordance with the
ALC Logic page or written sequence. Suggest
functional testing.
AC-38 70 55-75 Economzier
Sequence
Under-
economizing
Sept
2014
MAD remains at 10% when OAT < 70F. MAT is
consistently greater (5-15F) than CDSPT.
AC-39 70 55-65
Economzier
Sequence
MAD Cannot Open
Under-
economizing
Sept
2014
MAD remains at 35% when OAT < 70F, but damper
must be stuck closed because MAT always is
equal to RAT
AC-40 70 63-83 Economzier
Sequence
Under-
economizing
Sept
2014
MAD remains at 0% when OAT < 70F. This issue
may be caused by valve leakby. Suggest
functional testing after valve leakby is repaired.
421 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 113: This trend screenshot for AC-9 below shows a mixed air damper that is stuck and fully bringing in outside air. Note that despite the mixed air damper command being switched between the fully open and minimum outdoor air positions, the mixed and outside air temperatures remain essentially equal. The slight difference between the ambient and mixed air temp seen throughout the screenshot period is likely due to sensor error. The unit is running continuously throughout the period shown in this screenshot.
422 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
PROPOSED CASE This measure is to repair the mixing air dampers on units listed as having operational issues in Table 25. This includes the repair or replacement of non-functional outside air, mixed air, and return air dampers & actuators, repair to any damaged air lines to pneumatic operators, and the replacement of any failed signal air receivers, digital-pneumatic transducers, or other control devices. This measure also involves changes being made to the economizer sequence so that the mixing dampers on all applicable units modulate to maintain the cold deck temperature set-point for all dual-duct AC units.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY The energy savings for this measure were modeled parametrically in eQuest. The system over-economizing and added load on the cold deck cooling coil is modeled by setting the base case preheat temperature parameter to 68 oF. This value was arrived at during the calibration process. The proposed case preheat temperature was modeled as 65oF. This value was chosen to avoid overestimating energy savings due to the steam consumption of the dual duct systems while in cooling operation that results from the heating minimum flow of 30% year-round.
423 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Damper Repair ea 8 $500 $4,000 $150 2 8 $19,200 $23,200
2 3 New electric actuator ea 8 $750 $6,000 $150 1 8 $9,600 $15,600
3 3 BAS Programming ea 16 $0 $150 1 4 $9,600 $9,600
4 3 New Damper allocation ea 8 $3,500 $28,000 $150 2 16 $38,400 $66,400
5 3 Testing & Balancing ea 16 $0 $150 2 4 $19,200 $19,200
6 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
7 3 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 16 $0 $150 1 4 $9,600 $9,600
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $144,200
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $28,900
3 Other Engineering 15% $26,000
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $8,700
Notes 1 ECM for 16 AHU's Commissioning 15% $26,000
Construction Observation 10% $17,400
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $8,700
Total $259,900
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 18.00 (f)-5: Repair Economizer Dampers & Optimize Sequence
General Materials Labor
Sources
424 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 18.00 (F)-6 AIR-SEALING REPAIRS ON AC UNITS
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (f)-6 Air Sealing Repairs on AC Units
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
276,499 $27,650 20,259 $2,431 -777 -$7,771 $22,310 $442,100 19.8
BASE CASE The supply air handlers are original to the building (1971). Although they continue to provide adequate conditioned air, the air handlers’ sheet metal boxes have significant corrosion problems caused by chilled water coil condensate. Most of the air handlers lose a notable volume of air through gaps in the lower perimeter of the box where the cooling coil is located. There were also numerous air leaks noted on the supply air ductwork sheet metal seams where the sealant has deteriorated or the seams have just started to slightly pull apart. This air is lost to the 8th floor mechanical space. The air losses around the bottom perimeter of the air handler boxes is so severe that it blows the condensate water out of the drip pans which run around the perimeter of the cooling coil box. Some of the drip pans have been filled with stainless steel wool to prevent the condensate water from being blown around the mechanical room floor (as can be seen in the picture on the following page).
425 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 114: Example of AC unit drip pan condition
PROPOSED CASE Eliminate leakage areas by refurbishing the air handlers. This will be done with a rapid-cure polymer composite coating on the interior of the cold deck. The coating is customized to each air handler during installation, and it will fill in the cracks and seal the sections with air leaks and pitch the drain pan to eliminate standing water. The composite polymer is comprised of a first layer of epoxy that bonds to the metal, a second layer fire-barrier of NFPA-compliant material, and finally an anti-microbial, waterproof topcoat. The air handler is completely isolated during the process by sealing the adjacent duct work and by employing negative air machines. It can be installed in place without the removal of condensate pans. This composite sealant is fully compliant with NFPA, ASHRAE, & EPA requirements for use with HVAC systems and has no VOCs or detectable odors. It is recommended that a TAB contractor be used to measure existing case air flow leakage so savings can be captured for incentive purposes and also to identify the “worst-case” units.
An alternative, lower-cost project would be to target the “worst-case” AC units and make sheet metal repairs to reduce air leakage using in-house labor by UMass facility staff.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY The savings for this measure were calculated in eQuest by modeling the base case AC units with 5% air loss and parametrically changing the proposed case to 1% air loss. This was modeled by changing the following eQuest parameters: SUPPLY-KW/FLOW, MIN-OUTSIDE-AIR, and SUPPLY-FLOW. Savings are primarily a result of reduced fan energy, as the supply fan will need to do
426 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
less work to supply the same amount of cooling air to the spaces. A heating penalty is expected from reduced fan heat - as the fan VFDs ramp down to provide the same cooling to the spaces with less air leaks, the amount of fan heat in the hot deck air stream will also be reduced.
427 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 2 Composite Sealing Material ea 21 $12,000 $252,000 $150 $0 $252,000
2 4 Misc Ductsealing ea 21 $200 $4,200 $150 1 8 $25,200 $29,400
3 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
4 3 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 21 $0 $150 1 4 $12,600 $12,600
5 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $294,600
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $59,000
3 Other Engineering 5% $17,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $17,700
Notes 1 Apply to AC-1 through AC-21 Commissioning 5% $17,700
Construction Observation 5% $17,700
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $17,700
Total $442,100
Sources
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 18.00 (f)-6: Air Sealing Repairs on AC Units
General Materials Labor
428 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
ECM 18.00 (F)-7 OPTIMIZE STATIC PRESSURE RESET
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 18.00 (f)-7 Optimize Static Pressure Reset
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings
Steam Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
30,479 $3,048 7,096 $852 -7 -$73 $3,826 $27,800 7.3
BASE CASE Several ACs appear to have no static pressure reset, although sequence documents indicate they should have static pressure reset. Table below shows AC unit static pressure sequence information and trend observations; the units highlighted in yellow appear indicate opportunities to fix or repair these sequences.
Figure 115: Summary of static pressure sequence observations
SP Control
and Reset?
Min Static
(in wc)
Max Static
(in wc)
SP
Control?
SP
Reset?Trend Review - Notes
AC-1 Y 1.1 2.75 Y Y Resets 2.5 - 3.5 No
AC-2 Y 1.75 2.8 Y N Three manual changes observed, 1.75 to 2.0 Yes
AC-3 Y 2 2.5 Y Y Resets ~1.5 - 2.5 No
AC-4 Y 1.8 2.1 Y Y Resets 0.7 - 1.6 No
AC-6 Y 1.6 2.8 Y Y Reset to 1.5 - 2.5 No
AC-7 Y 1.7 2.75 Y Y Reset to 1.5 - 2.5 No
AC-8 Y 2.5 2.6 Y Y Reset to 1.5 - 2.5 No
AC-9 Y 2.6 2.9 Y Y Reset to 1.5 - 2.5 No
AC-10 Y 1.6 1.6 Y Y Reset to 1.5 - 2.5 No
AC-11 Y 1.2 2.8 Y Y Reset to 1.5 - 2.5 No
AC-12 Y 1.6 2.7 N/A N/A No static pressure data available. No
AC-13 Y 1.4 3 Y N Constant 1.25 Yes
AC-14 Y 2.5 2.5 Y Y Resets to 1.3 - 1.8 No
AC-15 Y 2 2 Y N Constant (Noise) 1 - 1.4 Yes
AC-16 Y 1.5 1.5 Y N Constant 1.9 Yes
AC-17 Y 1.7 3 Y N Constant 1.25 Yes
AC-18 Y 1.3 1.8 N/A N/A N/A, Unit is off during trend period. No
AC-19 Y 2 2 Y N Mostly constant 1.25, dips occasionally to 0.75 Yes
AC-20 Y 1.75 3 Y N Constant 1.25 Yes
AC-21 Y 1.5 2 Y N Constant 1.25 Yes
TREND REVIEW Observations Static
Pressure
Reset
Opportunity?
Unit
Number
NORESCO Sequence
429 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
Figure 116: Summary of design data for units involved in measure
PROPOSED CASE Implement outside air temperature-based static pressure reset for the AC units identified above. The table below shows preliminary reset schedules.
Note: UMass indicated during the 50% draft report review that most of the air handlers with fixed static pressure set-points were adjusted due to pressurization concerns with the adjacent Hospital building. UMass should provide guidance on whether these are temporary or permanent adjustments. There are no savings for this measure if the adjustments for pressurization are permanent.
Figure 117: Summary of proposed case sequences for units involved in measure
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY Energy savings are derived from a reduction in AHU fan horsepower needed to maintain a lower duct static pressure set-point when the system is at part load.
Unit
Number
Measured
CFMMotor HP
AC-2 31,609 100
AC-13 26,111 60
AC-15 23,351 75
AC-16 13,093 40
AC-17 20,293 50
AC-19 20,464 75
AC-20 25,730 60
AC-21 20,856 60
Unit
Number
Static Pressure
Setpoint @ 80 F
OAT
Static Pressure
Setpoint @ 60 F
OAT
∆P
AC-2 2.00 1.50 0.50
AC-13 1.25 0.75 0.50
AC-15 1.40 0.90 0.50
AC-16 1.90 1.40 0.50
AC-17 1.25 0.75 0.50
AC-19 1.25 0.75 0.50
AC-20 1.25 0.75 0.50
AC-21 1.25 1.00 0.25
430 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
The energy savings associated with this measure were estimated using a parametric run of the baseline eQuest model. The run changed the supply fan “EIR f(PLR)” performance curve that calculates fan input power as a function of airflow part load ratio. The curve used in the base case is the standard curve available from the eQuest library. A custom curve was developed for the proposed case to model a demand-based duct static pressure reset.
431 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Medical School
COST ESTIMATE
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: UMass Medical Date: 12/24/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: Medical School Estimated By: KK
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Programming ea 8 $0 $150 1 4 $4,800 $4,800
2 3 Allowance for SP sensor replacement ea 2 $250 $500 $150 1 4 $1,200 $1,700
3 3 Sensor Calibration ea 8 $0 $150 1 4 $4,800 $4,800
4 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
5 3 Contractor Commissioning Labor ea 16 $0 $150 1 1 $2,400 $2,400
6 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
7 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
8 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
9 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
10 ea $0 $150 $0 $0
Subtotal $14,900
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $3,000
3 Other Engineering 20% $3,600
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $900
Notes Commissioning 15% $2,700
Construction Observation 10% $1,800
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $900
Total $27,800
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM 18.00 (f)-7: Optimize Static Pressure Reset
General Materials Labor
Sources
432 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
ECM-21.02 (F) SCHOOL SOLAR HOT WATER
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 21.02 (f) School Solar Hot Water
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
0 $0 0 $0 929 $9,288 $9,288 $338,601 36.5
MEASURE DESCRIPTION Solar water heating is the conversion of sunlight into renewable energy for water heating using a solar thermal collector. The solar hot water system proposed by BEAM for the School includes a glazed flat plate collector system inclined at 35°F facing south with a total surface area of 4,045 ft2. The target loads for the heating system in the School building are showers and bathroom sinks, which are estimated at 5,500 gallons/day. The system would include a buffer tank to be installed in the B-level mechanical room. For more details, refer to the BEAM’s report in the Appendix, which includes additional details on the proposed solar hot water systems for the Hospital and School buildings.
433 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
CENTRAL PLANT CHW PUMPING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Notes: The cost savings figures in the summary table above assume the following utility rates: $0.10/kWh, $0.12/ton-hour, and $10.00/Mb.
ECM # ECM
Electric
Energy
Savings
CHW
Energy
Savings
Steam
Savings
Total
Cost
Savings
Retrofit
Cost
Payback
Before
Incentive
- - kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
04-03 (g)-1 Coversion to Variable Primary Pumping 506,103 0 0 $50,610 $191,575 3.8
04.13 (g)-1 Coordinated Control of Primary & Tertiary Pumping 20,679 0 0 $2,068 $17,000 8.2
526,782 0 0 52,678 208,575 4.0TOTALS
434 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
FACILITY DESCRIPTION Power, steam, and chilled water production have been intertwined since the inception of the UMass Medical School’s Central Plant in 1972. For the first 25 years of operation the plant operated as a 250 psig steam plant that provided heat, electricity, and chilled water to the medical school. Combination condensing and 50 psig extraction steam turbines (STC-1 and STC-2) provide 4,160V power and 50 psig steam used for heating the majority of buildings on campus.
In support of the 2000 expansion at the Medical School, the existing plant was significantly expanded in 2001 and again in 2012 to accommodate the increasing campus load in addition to improving the overall plant efficiency and carbon footprint. The following equipment currently makes up the plant:
One nominal 7.5MW Solar Gas Turbine complete with 60,000 pph 1,100 psig
(superheated) HRSG complete with supplementary duct burner
Two 115,000 pph/each 1,100 psig (~840°F steam supply) boilers B-3 and B-4 augment
steam capacity during periods of high 1,100 psig steam demand
Two 80,000 pph/each saturated steam 250 psig steam Boilers B-1 and B-2
One 5 MW 1,100 psig topping (backpressure) turbine (STC-3) operating with an inlet
pressure of 1,100 psig (superheated) and an exhaust pressure of 250 psig saturated
Two 2.5 MW/each 250 psig inlet combination 50 psig extraction and condensing
turbines (STC-1 and STC-2)
15,410 ton chilled water plant consisting of (5) York field-erected centrifugal chillers
o (3) 2,470 ton York Titan steam turbine driven chillers (250 psig inlet) (CH-1, 2,
and 3)
o (1) 4,000 ton York Titan steam drive chiller (CH-4) with 50 psi extraction
matching condensing turbine (creating a tri-gen steam plant operating mode).
o (1) 4,000 ton York Titan electric centrifugal chiller (CH-5)
o The lead summer chiller is the 4,000 ton 50 psig inlet Chiller CH-5. During the
Fall/winter/spring months (November to ~March) the 4,000 ton electric chiller is
the lead means of cooling.
The following table displays each chillers tonnage, design CHW flow, the differential temperature, the design condenser water flow, as well as the design steam inlet pressure.
435 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
Table 26: Chiller Summary
Each chiller is equipped with its own dedicated primary CHW pump. The following is the control sequence for the primary loop pumps:
Constant speed primary pumps are used to circulate cooling water in the main campus loop. A remote differential pressure sensor located in the basement of the Hospital Building is used to stage “on” or stage “off” a “lag” chiller. The lag machine is started when the Hospital dP approaches 10 psig. A differential bypass valve located chiller plant basement opens to maintain a high limit of 40 psig in the hospital basement.
Loop capacity is based on 1.6GPM per ton of refrigeration.
Chilled water can be introduced to the loop from two locations. Chillers CH-1 thru CH-4 feed a 30” header that feeds the campus loop from the west and CH-5 feeds and 24” header that feeds the main campus loop from the South. Refer to the attached “Campus Chilled Water Schematic”.
During the winter, the electric centrifugal chiller will handle the entire load. During summer operation, the electric chiller is the first stage of cooling, and CH-4 (York-Titan Steam Turbine) is the secondary stage of cooling.
Chiller
Tag
Year
Installe
d
Type TonageCHW
(GPM)CHW (dT) CW (GPM)
Inlet
Pressure
1
York -Titan Steam
Turbine driven
Centrifugal Chiller
(Original Plant)
2470 3952 15ᵒ 7500 250
2
York -Titan Steam
Turbine driven
Centrifugal Chiller
(Original Plant)
2470 3952 15ᵒ 7500 250
3
York -Titan Steam
Turbine driven
Centrifugal Chiller
(Original Plant)
2470 3952 15ᵒ 7500 250
4
York -Titan Steam
Turbine driven
Centrifugal Chiller
4000 6400 15ᵒ 12000 50
5 2009
York -Titan Electric
Electric Centrifugal Chiller
(South Expansion Bldg)
4000 6400 15ᵒ 8000 NA
15410Gross load
UMass Medical Chiller Summary
436 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
The meter location drawing shown in Figure 118 displays the primary CHW loop piping configuration for the UMass Medical Center campus.
Figure 118: Campus Chilled Water Schematic
437 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
The following tables display each primary and tertiary pump location, nameplate horsepower, design head, and design flow.
Table 27: Primary CHW Loop Pumps
Table 28: Tertiary Pump Summary
Pump
TagPump Location Description Chiller/Equipment served VFD HP Head (ft)
Estimated Flow
Req. (GPM)
1 Basement of the CHP Plant Primary CHW Pump CH-1 no 200 175 3,750
2 Basement of the CHP Plant Primary CHW Pump CH-2 no 200 175 3,750
3 Basement of the CHP Plant Primary CHW Pump CH-3 no 200 175 3,750
4 Basement of the CHP Plant Primary CHW Pump CH-4 no 200 175 3,750
5 Basement of the CHP Plant Primary CHW Pump NA no 250 NA NA
61st Floor South Chiller
Expansion BldgPrimary CHW Pump 5 and 6(future) no 300 137.5 6,700
71st Floor South Chiller
Expansion BldgPrimary CHW Pump 5 and 6(future) no 300 137.5 6,700
Umass Medical CHW Pump Summary
Pump
TagPump Location Description Chiller/Equipment served VFD HP Head (ft)
Estimated Flow
Req. (GPM)
CHWP-1 ACC - Penthouse Variable SCHW Pump AHUs, FCUs Yes 7.5 30 700
CHWP-2 ACC - Penthouse Variable SCHW Pump AHUs, FCUs Yes 7.5 30 700
CHWP-3 ACC - Penthouse Variable SCHW Pump AHUs, FCUs Yes 7.5 30 700
PC-IU-1A HSP - Penthouse Variable Booster CHW Pump Induction Units Yes 10 35 630
PC-IU-1T HSP - Penthouse Variable Booster CHW Pump Induction Units Yes 10 35 630
(7) PC-XT HSP - Penthouse Variable Coil CHW Circulators (7) Penthouse AHUs Yes 5 35 300-640, different
for each coil
SCHP-1 LRB Variable SCHW Pump AHUs Yes 125 80 4800
SCHP-2 LRB Variable SCHW Pump AHUs Yes 125 80 4800
SCHP-3 LRB Variable Process CHW (HE-7) Process Yes 15 80 370
SCHP-4 LRB Variable Process CHW (HE-7) Process Yes 15 80 370
Umass Medical CHW Tertiary Pump Summary
438 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
The tertiary pumps in each building modulate to maintain the building’s dP set point. Currently, the primary CHW pumps provide enough flow year-round that the tertiary pumps seldom run. This is due to the primary CHW pumps providing enough flow and pressure that the buildings dP set point is often satisfied with the tertiary pumps staged off.
439 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
CENTRAL PLANT LOAD CALIBRATION The chilled water tonnage and flow was based off of operator logs for the chiller plant. The operator logs contained the minimum and maximum flow and tonnage per each day from January 2014 to October 22, 2014. Outside air temperature for Worcester, MA was obtained from the NOAA website for the same date range as the operator logs. The following graphs display the regression analysis conducted on the central plant load.
Figure 119: OA Temperature vs. Operator Log CHW Flow
Figure 120: OA Temperature vs Operator Log Tonnage
y = 0.0312x3 - 1.7809x2 + 28.511x + 5579 R² = 0.7396
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
GP
M
OA DRYBULB TEMPERATURE (°F)
OA TEMPERATURE VS. OPERATOR LOG CHW FLOW
y = 0.0226x3 - 1.6527x2 + 44.35x + 1003.5 R² = 0.772
-
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
TON
S
OA DRYBULB TEMPERATURE (°F)
OA TEMPERATURE VS. OPERATOR LOG TONNAGE
440 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
The regression analysis curves were used to project the annual tonnage as well as flow. A TMY3 Worcester MA weather file was used to develop the annual cooling and flow profile used for the projection of the annual tertiary pump consumption. The calculation of the tertiary pump consumption was conducted using a bin-based analysis. Design dP set points, BHPs, and design flows were gathered for all buildings equipped with tertiary pumps. The tertiary pump bin analysis was used to project the penalty associated with the variable primary pumping measure, as well as the savings associated with resetting the tertiary pump dP set-points based on building load.
441 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
The two Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) associated with the electric and steam driven chillers, primary pumps, and tertiary pumps were identified following field investigations and a review of trend data provided by central plant staff. The two measures that were identified involve installing VFDs on the primary CHW loop pumps, as well as resetting the tertiary loop dP set-point in all buildings equipped with tertiary pumps as a function of the building’s load.
ECM 4.03-1 – CONVERSION FROM CONSTANT VOLUME PRIMARY TO
VARIABLE PRIMARY PUMPING
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04-03 (g)-1 Coversion to Variable Primary Pumping
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
506,103 $50,610 0 $0 0 $0 $50,610 $191,575 3.8
BASE CASE The central plant operates at a fixed flow rate per chiller and the gross plant flow is set by the number of chillers on line at any one time. A dP sensor in the basement of the Hospital building is used to stage chillers “on” and “off” plus control the chiller plants “high pressure” dP bypass. Plant operators manually added or subtracted chillers to meet the loop the following requirements:
Chiller plant dT less than 15°F
Hospital basement chilled water dP greater than 10 psig
Several of the campus buildings are equipped with tertiary pumps that cycle “on” or “off” to maintain the fixed building dP set point.
Based on a review of the trend data, we observed that the primary CHW loop was being used to provide the hydraulic head necessary to pump the chilled water through all of the buildings. As a result, the tertiary loops in the Sherman, LRB, and ACC facilities seldom ran. The overall plant efficiency could be improved if the large primary CHW pumps were modulated to maintain a fixed loop set point in lieu of using the bypass for flow control, and the tertiary pumps were used to maintain their respective building dP set point.
PROPOSED CASE We propose adding a VFD to the constant speed primary pump associated with chiller #5 and automating the existing VFD control on chiller #6. This will allow the system to maintain a constant 10 psig in the basement of the hospital building at all times thus reducing the flow and static head required to meet a given chilled water load. Every 10 minutes, the new primary
442 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
pump(s) VFD PID control loop shall look at the differential pressure error (dPvalue minus dPsetpoint) associated with each building. An error “high select” shall be performed to find the building that is most below is dP set-point. This value will be used in the primary pump PID control loop. The primary pump speed(s) shall modulate up and down to maintain each building “bridge” dP set-point. Buildings without tertiary pumps would have a 10 psig minimum and buildings with tertiary pumps would maintain dP necessary to provide the required flow target.
Variable Primary Building Loop Polling (or error high select)
o Buildings with and without tertiary pumps shall have their main loop dP compared to their dP set-point every 10 minutes. The central plant based Distributed Control System (DCS) shall perform an error "high select" (Pressure – Pressure set-point) and use the most hydraulically remote point to control the chiller plants variable primary pumps.
o The main chiller plant flow bypass valve shall only be allowed to open to maintain a minimum flow through the chiller(s). We have estimated this to be 50% of the cooler design flow.
Energy savings are achieved primarily due to converting the system from primary (constant flow) to variable primary flow control.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY This savings associated with this measure were projected by using the annual central plant chilled water load created with a regression analysis. The tertiary pump penalty associated with this measure was generated using a bin based approach. Tertiary pump information, including design GPM, BHP, and tertiary loop dP, were used in this analysis to project the total tertiary pump consumption.
443 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
COST ESTIMATE The implementation costs for this project include the installation networking of the chiller plants DCS to the campuses BAS. All new pump algorithms will be located on the DCS platform to allow for single point tuning of the entire loop.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 11/11/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: CHW Plant Estimated By: MM
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 VFDs on Primary CHW Pumps ea 2 $0 $150 2 6 $3,600 $3,600
2 3 DCS Controls Programming $150 1 40 $6,000 $6,000
3 2 300HP VFD ODP PE Motor (18 pulse) ea 1 $18,450 $150 3 24 $10,800 $29,250
4 2 300 HP 12 pulse VFD ea 1 $19,525 $150 3 24 $10,800 $30,325
5 3
VFD connection to DCS (via Modbus) and
terciary pump control to DCS (via new
BacNet bridge) ea 1 $10,000 $150 2 40 $12,000 $22,000
6 3 Shaft Grounding $4,500
7 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $150 1 40 $6,000 $6,000
8 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 8 $1,200 $1,200
Subtotal $102,875
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $20,600
3 Other Engineering 20% $24,700
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $6,200
Commissioning 15% $18,600
Construction Observation 10% $12,400
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $6,200
Total $191,575
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-4.03-1: Variable Primary
General Materials Labor
Sources
444 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
ECM 4.13-1– COORDINATED CONTROL OF THE CHP PRIMARY AND
BUILDING TERTIARY PUMPING
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 04.13 (g)-1 Coordinated Control of Primary & Tertiary Pumping
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
20,679 $2,068 0 $0 0 $0 $2,068 $17,000 8.2
BASE CASE Currently, the Building Automation System (BAS) controls all tertiary building pumps and the distributed control system (DCS) in the main chilled water plant controls the variable primary loop pressure. This strategy has both systems operating independently of each other. As a result, the plant’s pumps tend to work harder during periods of low to intermediate load. They are handling their loop pressure duties plus the building pressure load (necessary to circulate water through the HVAC equipment).
PROPOSED CASE We propose “cascading” (resetting) each building fixed dP set-point based on its chilled water demand. Closing all bypasses and cascading each building dP set-point will reduce each building’s tertiary pumping electrical consumption.
Buildings with and without tertiary pumps shall have their main loop dP pressure compared to their set-point every 10 minutes. All chilled water valves will be polled every 10 minutes and the 10 most open valves position shall be averaged. The “building” dP set-point will be reset based on the following algorithm:
o If the average of the 10 most open chilled water valves position is 90% open, decrease the dP set-point by 0.1 psi in a cascading fashion.
o If the average position is between 90% and 95% open, the dP set-point shall not change.
o If the average position in above 95% open, the loop dP set-point shall be increased in 0.1 psi increments (up to maximum) in a cascading fashion.
In order to protect the pumps, a low limit of 20 Hz shall be used on the pumps. The tertiary pumps shall be staged off when the loop is at minimum for 15 minutes. The tertiary pumps shall be staged back on when the 10 most open cooling coil valves are open 95% for 15 minutes.
445 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
Energy savings are achieved primarily due to the reduction in tertiary pumping when the building is at part load and it can reset the dP set-point while maintaining the space temperatures in their dead-band.
ENERGY SAVINGS METHODOLOGY The tertiary pump savings were calculated using a bin based analysis. Information on the tertiary pump design GPM, BHP, and the tertiary pump dP set points were used. The dP reset sequence was modeled as a function of the building load.
446 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Central CHW Pumping
COST ESTIMATE The implementation cost for this project include all programming required to implement the dP reset on the tertiary loop level as a function of the output of polling all of the chilled water valves in the building.
B2Q Associates, Inc. Customer: Umass Medical Date: 11/11/2014
100 Burtt Rd. Ste. 212 Address: CHW Plant Estimated By: MM
Andover, MA 01810 Checked By: PB
(978) 208 - 0609
Total
Number Source Item Type Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Unit Rate Workers Hours Each Labor Cost Total Cost
1 3 Controls Programming ea 1 $0 $150 1 40 $6,000 $6,000
2 3 Contractor Commissioning ea 1 $0 $150 1 16 $2,400 $2,400
3 3 As-Builts ea 1 $0 $150 1 4 $600 $600
Subtotal $9,000
1 Means
2 Vendor Quote Contingency 20% $1,800
3 Other Engineering 20% $2,200
4 Vendor Allowance Construction Administration 5% $600
Commissioning 15% $1,700
Construction Observation 10% $1,100
Project Closeout & Expenses 5% $600
Total $17,000
Opinion of Probable Construction CostECM-4.13-1: Tertiary Loop dP Reset
General Materials Labor
Sources
447 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Renewables
SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Notes: The cost savings figures in the summary table above assume the following utility rates: $0.10/kWh, $0.12/ton-hour, and $10.00/Mb.
ECM # ECM
Electric
Energy
Savings
CHW
Energy
Savings
Steam
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
Retrofit
Cost
Payback
Before
Incentive
- kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
21-01 (g)-1 Sherman Center Rooftop PV Array 123,864 0 0 $12,386 $331,294 26.7
21-01 (g)-2 Quad Four Dual-Axis Tracker PV Array 83,823 0 0 $8,382 $239,904 28.6
21-01 (g)-3 Plantation Hillside Fixed Tilt PV Array 807,946 0 0 $80,795 $1,783,939 22.1
21-01 (g)-4 South Road Garage Canopy PV Array 416,250 0 0 $41,625 $2,214,300 53.2
21-01 (g)-5 Plantation Street Garage Canopy PV Array 777,394 0 0 $77,739 $4,187,040 53.9
21-01 (g)-6 First Road Garage Canopy PV Array 1,447,701 0 0 $144,770 $7,612,800 52.6
TOTALS 3,656,978 0 0 $365,698 $16,369,277 44.8
448 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Renewables
ECM 21-01 (G)-1 SHERMAN CENTER ROOFTOP PHOTOVOLTAIC ARRAY
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 21-01 (g)-1 Sherman Center Rooftop PV Array
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
123,864 $12,386 0 $0 0 $0 $12,386 $331,294 26.7
MEASURE DESCRIPTION A description of this measure is included below, from Page 10 of the renewables report by Zapotec:
A self-ballasted PV array of 104 kW is feasible for the roof of Sector A of the Albert Sherman Center. Modules would be supported at a tilt of 10° from horizontal on a racking system that is held in place with concrete ballast blocks, eliminating the need for mechanical attachments to the roof. The DC power from the array would be combined to feed a 100 kW inverter. The inverter itself has an outdoor-rated enclosure that would allow its installation on the rooftop to reduce power losses in the DC wire runs and save space in electrical rooms. The AC output from the inverter would run in conduit from the roof to an outdoor AC disconnect, which is required by National Grid, and then to one of the building’s 480 VAC AC distribution panels for interconnection.
The low profile of the modules means that this system is out of sight from the ground, but it will be visible from the upper floors of nearby buildings. The proposed system is expected to produce approximately 124,000 kWh of electricity per year.
449 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Renewables
ECM 21-01 (G)-2 QUAD FOUR DUAL-AXIS TRACKER PHOTOVOLTAIC
ARRAY
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 21-01 (g)-2 Quad Four Dual-Axis Tracker PV Array
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
83,823 $8,382 0 $0 0 $0 $8,382 $239,904 28.6
MEASURE DESCRIPTION A description of this measure is included below, from Pages 24-26 of the renewables report by Zapotec:
Quad Four (Q4) is a grassy area along Route 9 near the South Parking Garage, and is currently under renovation to improve drainage and visual appeal. The proposed configuration includes highly seven Allsun 24-module dual-axis trackers, standing up to 20 feet at their upper edge when tilted toward the horizon. Each table of modules will track the sun across the sky throughout the day for maximum yield. The practical benefit of this dual-axis tracking method is the extension of power production throughout the day, which can cause a 40-45% increase in energy output. Further production advantages over fixed systems can be expected due to the trackers’ superior ability to shed snow and thus operate with no daytime snow coverage throughout the winter. Seven trackers outfitted with high-efficiency modules comprise a 47 kW system capable of producing approximately 84,700 kWh per year.
450 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Renewables
ECM 21-01 (G)-3 PLANTATION HILLSIDE FIXED TILT PHOTOVOLTAIC
ARRAY
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 21-01 (g)-3 Plantation Hillside Fixed Tilt PV Array
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
807,946 $80,795 0 $0 0 $0 $80,795 $1,783,939 22.1
MEASURE DESCRIPTION A description of this measure is included below, from Pages 27-28 of the renewables report by Zapotec:
There is an area of open land up the hill from the new Plantation Street Garage which is owned by Worcester City Campus Corporation (a subsidiary of UMass Medical Center). Conveniently clear of trees, this area is the most feasible location for larger scale PV development on UMass Medical property.
The proposed configuration is a fixed tilt PV system with a high tilt table, which are more practical for this sort of application than lower-tilt or ballasted systems because shading considerations necessitate a significant spacing between rows (in this case, over 20 feet), and this makes vegetation maintenance considerably easier. The lower edge of the array is typically over two feet from the ground as well, requiring less frequent mowing. The proposed 617 kW PV array, installed at a tilt of 20° is expected to produce approximately 808,000 kWh of electricity per year.
451 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Renewables
ECM 21-01 (G)-4 SOUTH ROAD GARAGE CANOPY PHOTOVOLTAIC ARRAY
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 21-01 (g)-4 South Road Garage Canopy PV Array
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
416,250 $41,625 0 $0 0 $0 $41,625 $2,214,300 53.2
MEASURE DESCRIPTION A description of this measure is included below, from Pages 14-20 of the renewables report by Zapotec:
The South Road Parking Garage is located at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center main campus next to Route 9 in Worcester. It consists of 5 levels for patient and visitor parking. The top level is open with a 3-foot tall parapet wall, a few light poles, and two curtain wall staircases located at the south-east and south-west corner of the garage. Two separate car ramps going in opposite directions are at the center of the top floor. There are a total of 93,600 square feet of open parking spaces on the top level. An office building lies adjacent to the west side of the garage at a height of 6 stories above the top floor of the garage.
The PV canopies at the South Road Garage should not extend the width of the building due to the shade cast by the tall building to the west of the garage. The inverters, DC and AC disconnect switches would be located on the same rooftop level as PV canopies. Placing this equipment in a partially shaded area is recommended, as it would not take up the space of completely shaded parking spots created by the canopies. Choosing the northeast corner of the garage would reduce the wire length to the interconnection point in the electrical room on the first level.
452 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Renewables
ECM 21-01 (G)-5 PLANTATION STREET GARAGE CANOPY PHOTOVOLTAIC
ARRAY
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 21-01 (g)-5 Plantation Street Garage Canopy PV Array
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
777,394 $77,739 0 $0 0 $0 $77,739 $4,187,040 53.9
MEASURE DESCRIPTION A description of this measure is included below, from Pages 15-21 of the renewables report by Zapotec:
The Plantation Street Parking Garage is a newly built 7-level parking garage (elevation of 45 feet) located in the northern section of the UMass Medical campus. Its top level consists of a total of 65,000 square feet of area. A ramp sloping down northward is at the center of the top floor. Curtain walls 16 feet tall are located at south-east, north-west, and north-east corners of the garage. No other buildings near the garage cause shading concerns.
The Plantation Street Parking Garage with a photovoltaic canopy system tilted at 5 degrees can accommodate a 698 kW DC-sized system. This system can produce around 777,394 kWh a year.
453 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Renewables
ECM 21-01 (G)-6 FIRST ROAD GARAGE CANOPY PHOTOVOLTAIC ARRAY
MEASURE ECONOMICS SUMMARY ECM # 21-01 (g)-6 First Road Garage Canopy PV Array
Electric Energy Savings
Electric Cost
Savings
CHW Energy Savings
CHW Cost
Savings Steam
Savings
Steam Cost
Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit
Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
kWh $ ton-hr $ Mlb $ $ $ yrs
1,447,701 $144,770 0 $0 0 $0 $144,770 $7,612,800 52.6
MEASURE DESCRIPTION A description of this measure is included below, from Pages 17-21 of the renewables report by Zapotec:
The First Road Parking Garage, erected in the mid-1980s, has 6 levels for parking and multiple ramps at different levels for entering and exiting vehicles. The garage’s effective “roof” is split between the 6th level and the 4th level. The top level (6th) has approximately 80,000 square feet of parking spaces on the west side, overlooking the 4th floor of the east end of the garage, which has an area of 28,000 square feet. A 9-story office building located southeast of the garage on the corner of First Road and Third Road is a likely shading concern. There is also possible shading from trees to the south of the garage. The First Road Parking Garage can accommodate 1,269 kW DC of PV modules tilted at 5 degrees. The energy produced would be 1,447,701 kWh per year.
454 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | ECM Summary Tables
ADDITIONAL ECM SUMMARY TABLES
ECMS BY BUILDING & MEASURE CATEGORY
ECM # ECM
Electric Energy
Savings
CHW Energy
Savings Steam Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
- kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
01.01 (a) Lighting - Lamps, Ballasts, and Fixtures
01.01 (a) Lighting Retrofit 83,832 0 0 $10,060 $116,710 13.9
04.09 (a) EMS and Controls - Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls
04.09 (a)-1 Tighten Occupancy Schedules 40,288 35,207 1,605 $25,106 $30,625 1.2
04.09 (a)-2Install New Occupancy Sensors for HVAC
Control95,875 30,917 1,276 $27,976 $708,110 25.3
09.00 (a) VFD's (Variable Frequency Drives)
09.00 (a) Retrofit AHU-5 Supply Fan with VFD 8,648 0 0 $1,038 $23,000 22.2
18.00 (a) Retro-Commissioning
18.00 (a)-1 Replace Weather Station 251 39,269 -23 $4,516 $12,700 2.8
18.00 (a)-2Calibrate Flow Stations & Reduce
Unoccupied OA-3,015 63,186 2,039 $27,614 $35,100 1.3
18.00 (a)-3 Static Pressure Reset on AHUs 1-4 162,714 27,859 -182 $21,046 $38,200 1.8
18.00 (a)-4Reprogram Discharge Temperature Reset on
AHUs 1-4-3,020 73,412 280 $11,250 $20,300 1.8
18.00 (a)-5 Reduce AHU-2 OA Damper Minimum Position -236 5,654 320 $3,852 $7,700 2.0
18.00 (a)-6 Calibrate Zone CO2 Sensors 0 19,892 0 $2,387 $52,200 21.9
18.00 (a)-7 Replace AHU-4 Return Air CO2 Sensor 0 6,703 0 $804 $3,500 4.4
18.00 (a)-8 Reduce VAV Unoccupied Flow Set-points -4,505 183,954 2,429 $45,827 $389,900 8.5
18.00 (a)-9Reprogram Zone Set-points & Implement
Deadband271,440 123,813 3,595 $83,380 $55,650 0.7
18.00 (a)-10Reprogram Unoccupied Zone Temperature
Control0 0 361 $3,615 $8,613 2.4
ACC Subtotals 652,272 609,866 11,701 $268,471 $1,502,308 5.6
ECM # ECM
Electric Energy
Savings
CHW Energy
Savings Steam Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
- kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
01.01 (b) Lighting - Lamps, Ballasts, and Fixtures
01.01 (b) Lighting Retrofit 57,116 0 0 $5,712 $110,150 19.3
02.01 (b) Lighting Controls - Lighting Occupancy Sensors
02.01 (b) Install Occupancy Sensors 129,208 9,802 -293 $11,171 $67,100 6.0
04.09 (b) EMS and Controls - Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls
04.09 (b)-1 FCU Controls Upgrade 244,142 25,308 3,297 $60,423 $848,600 14.2
04.09 (b)-2 HW Loop dP Reset 7,258 0 -22 $501 $8,100 16.2
12.04 (b) Windows and Doors - Low-E Window Film
12.04 (b) Install Low-E Window Film 5,083 5,661 7 $1,253 $90,800 72.5
Benedict Subtotals 442,807 40,771 2,989 $79,060 $1,124,750 14.2
ECM # ECM
Electric Energy
Savings
CHW Energy
Savings Steam Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
- kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
01.01 (c) Lighting - Lamps, Ballasts, and Fixtures
01.01 (c) Lighting Retrofit 524,392 0 0 $52,439 $1,025,490 19.6
04.02 (c) EMS and Controls - Outside Air Control and Economizer
04.02 (c)Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-
1L, 1R, 1T-7T1,827 168,536 -13 $20,277 $36,850 1.8
04.09 (c) EMS and Controls - Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls
04.09 (c)-1Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Enable
Sequence on AHU-1B-6B3,255 0 0 $326 $11,400 35.0
04.09 (c)-2Reconfigure AHU-15T/16T Preheat
Temperature Control84 20,813 229 $4,792 $5,800 1.2
04.09 (c)-3Increase AHU-10T & 11T Minimum Discharge
Set-point187 8,722 70 $1,767 $5,800 3.3
Ambulatory Care Center (ACC)
Benedict
Hospital
04.09 (c)-4Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset
Schedule120,840 0 -384 $8,245 $12,000 1.5
04.11 (c) EMS and Controls - HVAC Modifications: Add New Systems
04.11 (c)Reconfigure Preheat & Discharge Reset
Schedules on AHU-1B-6B0 281,337 5,468 $88,437 $120,700 1.4
04.14 (c) EMS and Controls - Exhaust Hood Occupancy Controls
04.14 (c) Kitchen Hood Controls 43,857 14,479 2,429 $30,413 $184,800 6.1
17.03 (c) Unknown HVAC - AHU: Replace CV with VAV
17.03 (c)-1Complete VAV Conversion on AHU-1B-6B &
1T,2T,3T,4T,6T,7T5,256,107 2,983,462 41,457 $1,298,198 $6,562,276 5.1
17.03 (c)-2Retrofit Fans with VFDs & Install Branch Duct
Dampers2,429,314 1,165,401 13,359 $516,368 $3,306,679 6.4
17.03 (c)-3Retrofit Fans with VFDs & Reset Speed vs
OAT3,025,217 3,394,859 43,237 $1,142,278 $929,379 0.8
18.00 (c) Retro-Commissioning
18.00 (c)-1Replace Preheat Valves & Actuators on AHU-
1B-6B, 1T-7T0 33,302 400 $7,992 $83,700 10.5
18.00 (c)-2Lock-out Humidification & Calibrate Return
Air %RH Sensors0 0 2,408 $24,081 $38,200 1.6
18.00 (c)-3 Replace Leaking Preheat Valve on AHU-13T 0 12,333 148 $2,960 $5,000 1.7
18.00 (c)-4Duct Static Pressure Reset on AHU-1R,
15T/16T9,665 3,250 14 $1,492 $19,700 13.2
18.00 (c)-5 Adjust AHU-1L Temperature Control 27,088 10,771 36 $4,361 $4,100 0.9
18.00 (c)-6 Optimize Heat Exchanger Reset Schedule -1,566 0 526 $5,099 $12,000 2.4
18.00 (c)-7 Replace Leaking CHW Valve on AHU-11T 0 18,390 223 $4,435 $4,650 1.0
18.00 (c)-8Fix Mixed Air Dampers to Improve
Economizer-213 72,310 -533 $3,327 $22,500 6.8
21.02 (c) Renewable Energy Systems - Solar Water Heating
21.02 (c) Hospital Solar Hot Water 0 0 644 $6,437 $539,439 83.8
Hospital Subtotals 5,985,524 3,627,705 53,120 $1,565,077 $8,694,405 5.6
ECM # ECM
Electric Energy
Savings
CHW Energy
Savings Steam Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
- kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
01.01 (d) Lighting - Lamps, Ballasts, and Fixtures
01.01 (d) Lighting Retrofit 61,418 0 0 $6,142 $133,865 21.8
04.09 (d) EMS and Controls - Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls
04.09 (d)Modify Mixed Air Temperature Control on
AHU 1-100 67,135 3,106 $39,119 $27,900 0.7
04.13 (d)EMS and Controls - Operational
Enhancements
04.13 (d)Install Occupancy Sensors in Operating
Rooms97,720 20,518 721 $19,448 $115,600 5.9
18.00 (d) Retro-Commissioning
18.00 (d)-1Discharge Air Temperature Reset on AHU 1-
10-41,322 810,228 12,559 $218,688 $33,700 0.2
18.00 (d)-2 Static Pressure Reset on AHU 1-8 198,073 49,857 -5 $25,736 $31,700 1.2
18.00 (d)-3Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Control on
AHUs 1-108,175 0 0 $817 $27,900 34.1
18.00 (d)-4 Optimize HWST Reset 4 0 547 $5,475 $8,200 1.5
18.00 (d)-5 Replace AHU-4 Return Temperature Sensor 0 1,074 6 $184 $3,900 21.2
18.00 (d)-6 Replace Leaking CHW Valve on AHU-2 0 131,378 1,651 $32,273 $8,150 0.3
Lakeside Subtotals 324,067 1,080,190 18,585 $347,882 $390,915 1.1
Lakeside
ECM # ECM
Electric Energy
Savings
CHW Energy
Savings Steam Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
- kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
01.01 (e) Lighting - Lamps, Ballasts, and Fixtures
01.01 (e) Lighting Retrofit 1,270,300 0 0 $127,030 $302,250 2.4
03.00 (e) Electric Motors
03.00 (e) Replace Cage Washer Pump Motors 1,252 0 0 $125 $11,500 91.9
03.01 (e) Electric Motors - High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs
03.01 (e)-1 EC Motors on Bio-Safety Cabinet Fans 58,412 0 0 $5,841 $167,148 28.6
03.01 (e)-2 EC Motors on DHW Circulators 35,222 0 0 $3,522 $40,544 11.5
03.01 (e)-3 EC Motors on AHU-10 & 11 23,063 4,527 27 $3,120 $16,500 5.3
03.01 (e)-4 Retrofit RO Water Pumps with VFDs 69,848 0 0 $6,985 $42,770 6.1
04.02 (e) EMS and Controls - Outside Air Control and Economizers
04.02 (e) Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-9 425 2,449 0 $337 $10,650 31.6
04.09 (e) EMS and Controls - Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls
04.09 (e)-1 Scheduling and Set-points on AHU-9 Zones 13,052 6,278 325 $5,306 $39,650 7.5
04.09 (e)-2 Reprogram AHU-7 Preheat Control Sequence 23,886 269,211 2,828 $62,976 $10,000 0.2
04.09 (e)-3 Reduce Air Change Rates in Labs 12,778 129,252 6,732 $84,109 $682,450 8.1
04.09 (e)-4 Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset 940 0 34 $431 $10,000 23.2
04.09 (e)-5Process CHW Loop Differential Pressure
Reset7,874 0 0 $787 $20,500 26.0
04.11 (e) EMS and Controls - Outside Air Control and Economizers
04.11 (e)-1Heat Recovery on Make-up Air Units (AHU 1-
6)-300,403 9,269 20,367 $174,743 $995,504 5.7
04.11 (e)-2 Install Passive Chilled Beams in Labs 405,347 233,302 2,120 $89,734 $1,862,993 20.8
18.00 (e) Retro-Commissioning
18.00 (e)-1 Static Pressure Reset 321,723 89,563 -320 $39,718 $54,000 1.4
18.00 (e)-2 Discharge Air Temperature Reset -2,510 462,855 -693 $48,365 $17,200 0.4
18.00 (e)-3 Replace Leaking Preheat Valves 0 168,570 2,141 $41,634 $19,050 0.5
18.00 (e)-4 Replace Leaking Chilled Water Valve 0 41,958 533 $10,363 $10,425 1.0
18.00 (e)-5 Reduce AHU-9 Minimum Outdoor Air 16,536 14,135 1,347 $16,818 $8,500 0.5
18.00 (e)-6Reprogram AHU-10, 11 Zone Temperature
Set-points618 3,761 20 $716 $3,900 5.4
18.00 (e)-7Replace Preheat Face/Bypass Damper
Actuators235,436 7,635 3,529 $59,754 $14,400 0.2
18.00 (e)-8 Exhaust Fan Static Pressure Reset 213,924 0 0 $21,392 $6,600 0.3
18.00 (e)-9 Temperature Set-backs in Lab Corridors 3,465 15,823 954 $11,782 $19,500 1.7
18.00 (e)-10 Hot Water Supply Temperature Reset -956 0 4,304 $42,940 $6,600 0.2
Lazare Research Building Subtotals 2,410,232 1,458,588 44,248 $858,530 $4,372,635 5.1
Lazare Research Building
ECM # ECM
Electric Energy
Savings
CHW Energy
Savings Steam Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
- kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
01.01 (f) Lighting - Lamps, Ballasts, and Fixtures
01.01 (f) Lighting Retrofit 799,421 0 0 $79,942 $1,197,300 15.0
03.01 (f) Electric Motors - High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs
03.01 (f)-1 Retrofit FCU & FPB Fans With EC Motors 105,425 0 0 $10,543 $189,200 17.9
03.01 (f)-2Retrofit Enviro-Room Evap Fans with EC
Motors93,229 0 0 $9,323 $174,400 18.7
04.07 (f) EMS and Controls - DDC Controllers
04.07 (f) Upgrade Terminal VAV Mixing Box Controls 693,873 102,433 624 $87,919 $1,827,525 20.8
09.00 (f) VFD's (Variable Frequency Drives)
09.00 (f)-1 Loading Dock Variable Exhaust Controls 317,926 0 0 $31,793 $74,315 2.3
09.00 (f)-2 Reduce Lab Air Changes 1,108,663 505,892 7,047 $242,044 $807,463 3.3
09.00 (f)-3Install VFDs & CO2 Ventilation Controls on
Library ACs300,790 70,026 2,172 $60,203 $139,565 2.3
17.09 (f) Unknown HVAC - Add Economizer Capabilities
17.09 (f) Reclaim Return Air on AC-12 8,483 0 659 $7,442 $39,600 5.3
18.00 (f) Retro-Commissioning
18.00 (f)-1 Optimize Perimeter HW Reset 0 0 387 $3,874 $31,000 8.0
18.00 (f)-2 Auditorium Scheduling & Occupancy Controls 249,081 32,778 1,234 $41,182 $202,950 4.9
18.00 (f)-3 Repair Heating Valves & Actuators 0 220,569 5,274 $79,206 $59,050 0.7
18.00 (f)-4 Repair Cooling Valves & Actuators 0 74,420 173 $10,656 $18,250 1.7
18.00 (f)-5Repair Economizer Dampers & Optimize
Sequence61,505 639,057 7,186 $154,700 $259,900 1.7
18.00 (f)-6 Air Sealing Repairs on AC Units 276,499 20,259 -777 $22,310 $442,100 19.8
18.00 (f)-7 Optimize Static Pressure Reset 30,479 7,096 -7 $3,826 $27,800 7.3
21.02 (f) Renewable Energy Systems - Solar Water Heating
21.02 (f) School Solar Hot Water 0 0 929 $9,288 $338,601 36.5
Medical School Building Subtotals 4,045,373 1,672,529 24,901 $854,250 $5,829,019 6.8
ECM # ECM
Electric Energy
Savings
CHW Energy
Savings Steam Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
- kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
04-03 (g) EMS and Controls - Variable Speed Drives
04-03 (g)-1 Coversion to Variable Primary Pumping 506,103 0 0 $50,610 $191,575 3.8
04-13 (g) EMS and Controls - Operational Enhancements
04.13 (g)-1Coordinated Control of Primary & Tertiary
Pumping20,679 0 0 $2,068 $17,000 8.2
Central Plant CHW Pumping Subtotals 526,782 0 0 $52,678 $208,575 4.0
ECM # ECM
Electric Energy
Savings
CHW Energy
Savings Steam Savings
Total Cost
Savings Retrofit Cost
Payback Before
Incentive
- kWh ton-hr Mlb $ $ yrs
21-01 (g) Photovoltaic Modules
21-01 (g)-1 Sherman Center Rooftop PV Array 123,864 0 0 $12,386 $331,294 26.7
21-01 (g)-2 Quad Four Dual-Axis Tracker PV Array 83,823 0 0 $8,382 $239,904 28.6
21-01 (g)-3 Plantation Hillside Fixed Tilt PV Array 807,946 0 0 $80,795 $1,783,939 22.1
21-01 (g)-4 South Road Garage Canopy PV Array 416,250 0 0 $41,625 $2,214,300 53.2
21-01 (g)-5 Plantation Street Garage Canopy PV Array 777,394 0 0 $77,739 $4,187,040 53.9
21-01 (g)-6 First Road Garage Canopy PV Array 1,447,701 0 0 $144,770 $7,612,800 52.6
Photovoltaic Modules Subtotals 3,656,978 0 0 $365,698 $16,369,277 44.8
GRAND TOTAL 18,044,035 8,489,650 155,544 $4,391,646 $38,491,883 8.8
Solar Photovoltaic
Medical School
Central Plant CHW Pumping
455 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | ECM Summary Tables
ECMS BY BUILDING & GROUPED IMPLEMENTATION COSTS
BUILDING MEASURE CATEGORY MEASURE TYPE DESCRIPTION PAYBACK SAVINGS COST
ACC 01.00 Lighting 01.01 Lamps, Ballasts and Fixtures Replacement01.01 (a) Lighting Retrofit 11.6 10,060$
ACC 09.00 VFD's (Variable Frequency Drives) 09.00 VFD's 09.00 (a) Retrofit AHU-5 Supply Fan with VFD 22.2 1,038$ $139,710
ACC 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (a)-1 Tighten Occupancy Schedules 1.2 25,106$
ACC 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (a)-2 Install New Occupancy Sensors for HVAC Control 25.3 27,976$ $738,735
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-1 Replace Weather Station 2.8 4,516$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-2 Calibrate Flow Stations & Reduce Unoccupied OA 1.3 27,614$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-3 Static Pressure Reset on AHUs 1-4 1.8 21,046$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-4 Reprogram Discharge Temperature Reset on AHUs 1-4 1.8 11,250$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-5 Reduce AHU-2 OA Damper Minimum Position 2.0 3,852$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-6 Calibrate Zone CO2 Sensors 21.9 2,387$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-7 Replace AHU-4 Return Air CO2 Sensor 4.4 804$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-8 Reduce VAV Unoccupied Flow Set-points 8.5 45,827$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-9 Reprogram Zone Set-points & Implement Deadband 0.7 83,380$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-10 Reprogram Unoccupied Zone Temperature Control 2.4 3,615$ $623,863
BUILDING MEASURE CATEGORY MEASURE TYPE DESCRIPTION PAYBACK SAVINGS COST
BENEDICT 01.00 Lighting 01.01 Lamps, Ballasts and Fixtures Replacement01.01 (b) Lighting Retrofit 19.3 5,712$
BENEDICT 02.00 Lighting Controls 02.01 Lighting Occupancy Sensors 02.01 (b) Install Occupancy Sensors 6.0 11,171$
BENEDICT 12.00 Window and Doors 12.04 Low-E Window Film 12.04 (b) Install Low-E Window Film 72.5 1,253$ $268,050
BENEDICT 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (b)-1 FCU Controls Upgrade 14.0 60,423$
BENEDICT 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (b)-2 HW Loop dP Reset 16.2 501$ $856,700
BUILDING MEASURE CATEGORY MEASURE TYPE DESCRIPTION PAYBACK SAVINGS COST
HOSPITAL 01.00 Lighting 01.01 Lamps, Ballasts and Fixtures Replacement01.01 (c) Lighting Retrofit 19.6 52,439$
HOSPITAL 17.00 Unknown HVAC 17.03 AHU: Repair/Replace CV (Constant Volume) or IGV (Inlet Guide Vanes) with VAV (Variable Air Volume)17.03 (c)-1 Complete VAV Conversion on AHU-1B-6B & 1T,2T,3T,4T,6T,7T 5.1 1,298,198$
HOSPITAL 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.02 Solar Water Heating 21.02 (d) Hospital Solar Hot Water 83.8 6,437$ $8,127,205
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.02 Outside Air Control, and Economizers04.02 (c) Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-1L, 1R, 1T-7T 1.8 20,277$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (c)-1 Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Enable Sequence on AHU-1B-6B 35.0 326$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (c)-2 Reconfigure AHU-15T/16T Preheat Temperature Control 1.2 4,792$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (c)-3 Increase AHU-10T & 11T Minimum Discharge Set-point 3.3 1,767$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (c)-4 Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset Schedule 1.5 8,245$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.11 HVAC Modifications - Add New Systems04.11 (c) Reconfigure Preheat & Discharge Reset Schedules on AHU-1B-6B 1.4 88,437$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.14 Exhaust Hood Occupancy Control 04.14 (c) Kitchen Hood Controls 6.1 30,413$ $377,350
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-1 Replace Preheat Valves & Actuators on AHU-1B-6B, 1T-7T 10.5 7,992$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-2 Lock-out Humidification & Calibrate Return Air %RH Sensors 1.6 24,081$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-3 Replace Leaking Preheat Valve on AHU-13T 1.7 2,960$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-4 Duct Static Pressure Reset on AHU-1R, 15T/16T 13.2 1,492$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-5 Adjust AHU-1L Temperature Control 0.9 4,361$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-6 Optimize Heat Exchanger Reset Schedule 2.4 5,099$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-7 Replace Leaking CHW Valve on AHU-11T 1.0 4,435$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-8 Fix Mixed Air Dampers to Improve Economizer 6.8 3,327$ $189,850
BUILDING MEASURE CATEGORY MEASURE TYPE DESCRIPTION PAYBACK SAVINGS COST
LAKESIDE 01.00 Lighting 01.01 Lamps, Ballasts and Fixtures Replacement01.01 (d) Lighting Retrofit 21.8 6,142$ $133,865
LAKESIDE 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (d) Modify Mixed Air Temperature Control on AHU 1-10 0.7 39,119$
LAKESIDE 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.13 Operational Enhancements 04.13 (d) Install Occupancy Sensors in Operating Rooms 5.9 19,448$ $143,500
LAKESIDE 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (d)-1 Discharge Air Temperature Reset on AHU 1-10 0.2 218,688$
LAKESIDE 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (d)-2 Static Pressure Reset on AHU 1-8 1.2 25,736$
LAKESIDE 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (d)-3 Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Control on AHUs 1-10 34.1 817$
LAKESIDE 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (d)-4 Optimize HWST Reset 1.5 5,475$
LAKESIDE 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (d)-5 Replace AHU-4 Return Temperature Sensor 21.2 184$
LAKESIDE 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (d)-6 Replace Leaking CHW Valve on AHU-2 0.3 32,273$ $113,550
BUILDING MEASURE CATEGORY MEASURE TYPE DESCRIPTION PAYBACK SAVINGS COST
LRB 01.00 Lighting 01.01 Lamps, Ballasts and Fixtures Replacement1.01 (e) Lighting Retrofit 2.4 127,030$
LRB 03.00 Electric Motors 03.00 Electric Motors 03.00 (e) Replace Cage Washer Pump Motors 91.9 125$
LRB 03.00 Electric Motors 03.01 High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs 03.01 (e)-1 EC Motors on Bio-Safety Cabinet Fans 28.6 5,841$
LRB 03.00 Electric Motors 03.01 High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs 03.01 (e)-2 EC Motors on DHW Circulators 11.5 3,522$
LRB 03.00 Electric Motors 03.01 High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs 03.01 (e)-3 EC Motors on AHU-10 & 11 5.3 3,120$
LRB 03.00 Electric Motors 03.01 High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs 03.01 (e)-4 Retrofit RO Water Pumps with VFDs 6.1 6,985$ $580,712
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.02 Outside Air Control, and Economizers04.02 (e) Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-9 31.6 337$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (e)-1 Scheduling and Set-points on AHU-9 Zones 7.5 5,306$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (e)-2 Reprogram AHU-7 Preheat Control Sequence 0.2 62,976$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (e)-3 Reduce Air Change Rates in Labs 8.1 84,109$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (e)-4 Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset 23.2 431$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls04.09 (e)-5 Process CHW Loop Differential Pressure Reset 26.0 787$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.11 HVAC Modifications - Add New Systems04.11 (e)-1 Heat Recovery on Make-up Air Units (AHU 1-6) 5.7 174,743$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.11 HVAC Modifications - Add New Systems04.11 (e)-2 Install Passive Chilled Beams in Labs 20.8 89,734$ $3,631,748
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-1 Static Pressure Reset 1.4 39,718$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-2 Discharge Air Temperature Reset 0.4 48,365$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-3 Replace Leaking Preheat Valves 0.5 41,634$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-4 Replace Leaking Chilled Water Valve 1.0 10,363$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-5 Reduce AHU-9 Minimum Outdoor Air 0.5 16,818$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-6 Reprogram AHU-10, 11 Zone Temperature Set-points 5.4 716$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-7 Replace Preheat Face/Bypass Damper Actuators 0.2 59,754$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-8 Exhaust Fan Static Pressure Reset 0.3 21,392$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-9 Temperature Set-backs in Lab Corridors 1.7 11,782$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-10 Hot Water Supply Temperature Reset 0.2 42,940$ $160,175
BUILDING MEASURE CATEGORY MEASURE TYPE DESCRIPTION PAYBACK SAVINGS COST
SCHOOL 01.00 Lighting 01.01 Lamps, Ballasts and Fixtures Replacement01.01 (f) Lighting Retrofit 15.0 79,942$
SCHOOL 03.00 Electric Motors 03.01 High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs 03.01 (f)-1 Retrofit FCU & FPB Fans With EC Motors 17.9 10,543$
SCHOOL 03.00 Electric Motors 03.01 High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs 03.01 (f)-2 Retrofit Enviro-Room Evap Fans with EC Motors 18.7 9,323$
SCHOOL 09.00 VFD's (Variable Frequency Drives) 09.00 VFD's 09.00 (f)-1 Loading Dock Variable Exhaust Controls 2.3 31,793$
SCHOOL 09.00 VFD's (Variable Frequency Drives) 09.00 VFD's 09.00 (f)-2 Reduce Lab Air Changes 3.3 242,044$
SCHOOL 09.00 VFD's (Variable Frequency Drives) 09.00 VFD's 09.00 (f)-3 Install VFDs & CO2 Ventilation Controls on Library ACs 2.3 60,203$
SCHOOL 17.00 Unknown HVAC 17.09 Add Economizer Capabilities 17.09 (f) Reclaim Return Air on AC-12 5.3 7,442$
SCHOOL 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.02 Solar Water Heating 21.02 (f) School Solar Hot Water 36.5 9,288$ $2,960,444
SCHOOL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.07 DDC Controllers 04.07 (f) Upgrade Terminal VAV Mixing Box Controls 20.8 87,919$ $1,827,525
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-1 Optimize Perimeter HW Reset 8.0 3,874$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-2 Auditorium Scheduling & Occupancy Controls 4.9 41,182$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-3 Repair Heating Valves & Actuators 0.7 79,206$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-4 Repair Cooling Valves & Actuators 1.7 10,656$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-5 Repair Economizer Dampers & Optimize Sequence 1.7 154,700$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-6 Air Sealing Repairs on AC Units 19.8 22,310$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-7 Optimize Static Pressure Reset 7.3 3,826$ $1,041,050
BUILDING MEASURE CATEGORY MEASURE TYPE DESCRIPTION PAYBACK SAVINGS COST
POWER PLANT 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.01 Photovoltaic Modules 21.01 (g)-1 Sherman Center Rooftop Photovoltaic Array 26.7 12,386$
POWER PLANT 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.01 Photovoltaic Modules 21.01 (g)-2 Quad Four Dual-Axis Tracker Photovoltaic Array 28.6 8,382$
POWER PLANT 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.01 Photovoltaic Modules 21.01 (g)-3 Plantation Hillside Fixed Tilt Photovoltaic Array 22.1 80,795$
POWER PLANT 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.01 Photovoltaic Modules 21.01 (g)-4 South Road Garage Canopy Photovoltaic Array 53.2 41,625$
POWER PLANT 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.01 Photovoltaic Modules 21.01 (g)-5 Plantation Street Garage Canopy Photovoltaic Array 53.9 77,739$
POWER PLANT 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.01 Photovoltaic Modules 21.01 (g)-6 First Road Garage Canopy Photovoltaic Array 52.6 144,770$ $16,369,277
POWER PLANT 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.03 Variable Speed Drives 04.03 (g) Conversion to Variable Primary CHW Pumping 3.8 50,610$
POWER PLANT 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls04.13 Operational Enhancements 04.13 (g) Coordinated Control of Primary & Tertiary Pumping 8.2 2,068$ $208,575
BUILDING MEASURE CATEGORY MEASURE TYPE DESCRIPTION PAYBACK SAVINGS COST
GRAND TOTALS 8.76 4,391,646$ 38,491,883$
456 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | ECM Summary Tables
ECMS BY MEASURE CATEGORY
BUILDING MEASURE CATEGORY MEASURE TYPE DESCRIPTION COST
ACC 01.00 Lighting 01.01 Lamps, Ballasts and Fixtures Replacement 01.01 (a) Lighting Retrofit 116,710$
BENEDICT 01.00 Lighting 01.01 Lamps, Ballasts and Fixtures Replacement 01.01 (b) Lighting Retrofit 110,150$
HOSPITAL 01.00 Lighting 01.01 Lamps, Ballasts and Fixtures Replacement 01.01 (c) Lighting Retrofit 1,025,490$
LAKESIDE 01.00 Lighting 01.01 Lamps, Ballasts and Fixtures Replacement 01.01 (d) Lighting Retrofit 133,865$
LRB 01.00 Lighting 01.01 Lamps, Ballasts and Fixtures Replacement 01.01 (e) Lighting Retrofit 302,250$
SCHOOL 01.00 Lighting 01.01 Lamps, Ballasts and Fixtures Replacement 01.01 (f) Lighting Retrofit 1,197,300$
BENEDICT 02.00 Lighting Controls 02.01 Lighting Occupancy Sensors 02.01 (b) Install Occupancy Sensors 67,100$
LRB 03.00 Electric Motors 03.00 Electric Motors 03.00 (e) Replace Cage Washer Pump Motors 11,500$
LRB 03.00 Electric Motors 03.01 High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs 03.01 (e)-1 EC Motors on Bio-Safety Cabinet Fans 167,148$
LRB 03.00 Electric Motors 03.01 High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs 03.01 (e)-2 EC Motors on DHW Circulators 40,544$
LRB 03.00 Electric Motors 03.01 High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs 03.01 (e)-3 EC Motors on AHU-10 & 11 16,500$
LRB 03.00 Electric Motors 03.01 High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs 03.01 (e)-4 Retrofit RO Water Pumps with VFDs 42,770$
SCHOOL 03.00 Electric Motors 03.01 High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs 03.01 (f)-1 Retrofit FCU & FPB Fans With EC Motors 189,200$
SCHOOL 03.00 Electric Motors 03.01 High Efficiency Motors w/ VFDs 03.01 (f)-2 Retrofit Enviro-Room Evap Fans with EC Motors 174,400$
ACC 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (a)-1 Tighten Occupancy Schedules 30,625$
ACC 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (a)-2 Install New Occupancy Sensors for HVAC Control 708,110$
BENEDICT 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (b)-1 FCU Controls Upgrade 848,600$
BENEDICT 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (b)-2 HW Loop dP Reset 8,100$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.02 Outside Air Control, and Economizers 04.02 (c) Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-1L, 1R, 1T-7T 36,850$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (c)-1 Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Enable Sequence on AHU-1B-6B 11,400$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (c)-2 Reconfigure AHU-15T/16T Preheat Temperature Control 5,800$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (c)-3 Increase AHU-10T & 11T Minimum Discharge Set-point 5,800$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (c)-4 Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset Schedule 12,000$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.11 HVAC Modifications - Add New Systems 04.11 (c) Reconfigure Preheat & Discharge Reset Schedules on AHU-1B-6B 120,700$
HOSPITAL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.14 Exhaust Hood Occupancy Control 04.14 (c) Kitchen Hood Controls 184,800$
LAKESIDE 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (d) Modify Mixed Air Temperature Control on AHU 1-10 27,900$
LAKESIDE 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.13 Operational Enhancements 04.13 (d) Install Occupancy Sensors in Operating Rooms 115,600$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.02 Outside Air Control, and Economizers 04.02 (e) Comparative Enthalpy Economizer on AHU-9 10,650$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (e)-1 Scheduling and Set-points on AHU-9 Zones 39,650$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (e)-2 Reprogram AHU-7 Preheat Control Sequence 10,000$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (e)-3 Reduce Air Change Rates in Labs 682,450$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (e)-4 Hot Water Loop Differential Pressure Reset 10,000$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.09 Re-Commission/Expand Existing BMS Controls 04.09 (e)-5 Process CHW Loop Differential Pressure Reset 20,500$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.11 HVAC Modifications - Add New Systems 04.11 (e)-1 Heat Recovery on Make-up Air Units (AHU 1-6) 995,504$
LRB 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.11 HVAC Modifications - Add New Systems 04.11 (e)-2 Install Passive Chilled Beams in Labs 1,862,993$
SCHOOL 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.07 DDC Controllers 04.07 (f) Upgrade Terminal VAV Mixing Box Controls 1,827,525$
POWER PLANT 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.03 Variable Speed Drives 04.03 (g) Conversion to Variable Primary CHW Pumping 191,575$
POWER PLANT 04.00 EMS (Energy Management System) and Controls 04.13 Operational Enhancements 04.13 (g) Coordinated Control of Primary & Tertiary Pumping 17,000$
ACC 09.00 VFD's (Variable Frequency Drives) 09.00 VFD's 09.00 (a) Retrofit AHU-5 Supply Fan with VFD 23,000$
SCHOOL 09.00 VFD's (Variable Frequency Drives) 09.00 VFD's 09.00 (f)-1 Loading Dock Variable Exhaust Controls 74,315$
SCHOOL 09.00 VFD's (Variable Frequency Drives) 09.00 VFD's 09.00 (f)-2 Reduce Lab Air Changes 807,463$
SCHOOL 09.00 VFD's (Variable Frequency Drives) 09.00 VFD's 09.00 (f)-3 Install VFDs & CO2 Ventilation Controls on Library ACs 139,565$
BENEDICT 12.00 Window and Doors 12.04 Low-E Window Film 12.04 (b) Install Low-E Window Film 90,800$
HOSPITAL 17.00 Unknown HVAC 17.03 AHU: Repair/Replace CV with VAV 17.03 (c)-1 Complete VAV Conversion on AHU-1B-6B & 1T,2T,3T,4T,6T,7T 6,562,276$
SCHOOL 17.00 Unknown HVAC 17.09 Add Economizer Capabilities 17.09 (f) Reclaim Return Air on AC-12 39,600$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-1 Replace Weather Station 12,700$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-2 Calibrate Flow Stations & Reduce Unoccupied OA 35,100$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-3 Static Pressure Reset on AHUs 1-4 38,200$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-4 Reprogram Discharge Temperature Reset on AHUs 1-4 20,300$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-5 Reduce AHU-2 OA Damper Minimum Position 7,700$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-6 Calibrate Zone CO2 Sensors 52,200$
BUILDING MEASURE CATEGORY MEASURE TYPE DESCRIPTION COST
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-7 Replace AHU-4 Return Air CO2 Sensor 3,500$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-8 Reduce VAV Unoccupied Flow Set-points 389,900$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-9 Reprogram Zone Set-points & Implement Deadband 55,650$
ACC 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (a)-10 Reprogram Unoccupied Zone Temperature Control 8,613$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-1 Replace Preheat Valves & Actuators on AHU-1B-6B, 1T-7T 83,700$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-2 Lock-out Humidification & Calibrate Return Air %RH Sensors 38,200$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-3 Replace Leaking Preheat Valve on AHU-13T 5,000$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-4 Duct Static Pressure Reset on AHU-1R, 15T/16T 19,700$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-5 Adjust AHU-1L Temperature Control 4,100$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-6 Optimize Heat Exchanger Reset Schedule 12,000$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-7 Replace Leaking CHW Valve on AHU-11T 4,650$
HOSPITAL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (c)-8 Fix Mixed Air Dampers to Improve Economizer 22,500$
LAKESIDE 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (d)-1 Discharge Air Temperature Reset on AHU 1-10 33,700$
LAKESIDE 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (d)-2 Static Pressure Reset on AHU 1-8 31,700$
LAKESIDE 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (d)-3 Reconfigure Preheat Circulator Control on AHUs 1-10 27,900$
LAKESIDE 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (d)-4 Optimize HWST Reset 8,200$
LAKESIDE 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (d)-5 Replace AHU-4 Return Temperature Sensor 3,900$
LAKESIDE 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (d)-6 Replace Leaking CHW Valve on AHU-2 8,150$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-1 Static Pressure Reset 54,000$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-2 Discharge Air Temperature Reset 17,200$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-3 Replace Leaking Preheat Valves 19,050$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-4 Replace Leaking Chilled Water Valve 10,425$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-5 Reduce AHU-9 Minimum Outdoor Air 8,500$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-6 Reprogram AHU-10, 11 Zone Temperature Set-points 3,900$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-7 Replace Preheat Face/Bypass Damper Actuators 14,400$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-8 Exhaust Fan Static Pressure Reset 6,600$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-9 Temperature Set-backs in Lab Corridors 19,500$
LRB 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (e)-10 Hot Water Supply Temperature Reset 6,600$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-1 Optimize Perimeter HW Reset 31,000$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-2 Auditorium Scheduling & Occupancy Controls 202,950$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-3 Repair Heating Valves & Actuators 59,050$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-4 Repair Cooling Valves & Actuators 18,250$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-5 Repair Economizer Dampers & Optimize Sequence 259,900$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-6 Air Sealing Repairs on AC Units 442,100$
SCHOOL 18.00 Retro-Commissioning 18.00 Retro Commissioning 18.00 (f)-7 Optimize Static Pressure Reset 27,800$
HOSPITAL 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.02 Solar Water Heating 21.02 (d) Hospital Solar Hot Water 539,439$
SCHOOL 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.02 Solar Water Heating 21.02 (f) School Solar Hot Water 338,601$
POWER PLANT 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.01 Photovoltaic Modules 21.01 (g)-1 Sherman Center Rooftop Photovoltaic Array 331,294$
POWER PLANT 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.01 Photovoltaic Modules 21.01 (g)-2 Quad Four Dual-Axis Tracker Photovoltaic Array 239,904$
POWER PLANT 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.01 Photovoltaic Modules 21.01 (g)-3 Plantation Hillside Fixed Tilt Photovoltaic Array 1,783,939$
POWER PLANT 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.01 Photovoltaic Modules 21.01 (g)-4 South Road Garage Canopy Photovoltaic Array 2,214,300$
POWER PLANT 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.01 Photovoltaic Modules 21.01 (g)-5 Plantation Street Garage Canopy Photovoltaic Array 4,187,040$
POWER PLANT 21.00 Renewable Energy Systems 21.01 Photovoltaic Modules 21.01 (g)-6 First Road Garage Canopy Photovoltaic Array 7,612,800$
TOTALS 38,491,883$
457 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Solar Hot Water Report
SOLAR HOT WATER REPORT
Solar Hot Water Heating:Hospital & School Systems
University of Massachusetts Medical Center
55 Lake Ave North, Worcester, MA, 01655
Prepared by:
July 18, 2012
BEAM Energy & Engineering
Chris Beebe, PEJennifer Taylor
Customer Presentation Outline
1. Solar Heating Overview
2. Current Usage Conditions
3. Equipment & Design - School Building System
4. Equipment & Design - Hospital Building
5. Energy Production, Benefits
6. System Costing & Financials
7. Construction Conditions
8. Maintenance and M&V
Prepared by: BEAM Energy & Engineering, www.beamgrp.com
Solar Heating Overview
MA Solar Heating Industry &BEAM
• Residential: Started in May 2011, BEAM is technical consultant to MassCEC.
• Commercial: Starting in May 2011, LEAN/ABCD Solar Thermal Program funded in 19commercial scale project. This program has been renewed for FY 2012 and ananticipated 16 more projects will be built. BEAM conducts all design, bidding, and M&Vfor these projects for LEAN/ABCD.
• Commercial Feasibility Studies: Starting in May 2011, The MassCEC CommonwealthSolar Hot Water Pilot Program funded 41 pre-construction feasibility studies. BEAM hasapproximately 20,100,000 therms of customer usage through Program, all othersprojects total approximately 1,876,000 therms.
• The Commonwealth Solar Hot Water Program has recently been approved for a $10million program that started July 2012 and will run 4.5 years to fund residential /commercial projects and commercial studies.
Overview
• Collector• Storage tank• Pumps, Piping, Valves• Heat exchangers• Control Unit• Freeze Protection• Stagnation Protection• Auxiliary Heat Source• Monitoring Unit
Applications
•Domestic hot water (Residential,hospitals, universities, correctioncenters, hotels, restaurants, etc.)
•Process hot water (Laundromats,food processing, boiler makeup /feed-water heating)
•Solar pool heating (schools,community centers, gyms)
•Space heating (radiant, pre-heat,HVAC air heating)
•Solar assisted cooling (absorptionchiller)
Solar Fuel Resource•TW =Terawatt =1012 watts
•Total powerused byhumansworld widein 2006 was16 TW2
2. www.wikipedia.org
Why Go Solar?
ns
1. Energy security. The sun provides enough energy in one minute to fuel theworld for one year. The amount of solar energy striking the earth over athree day period is equivalent to all of the stored energy in fossil energysources. 1
2. Massachusetts Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA) of 2008: Reduce GHG emissions 10-25% below statewide 1990 levels by 2020 80% below statewide 1990 emissions by 2050. One goal of the MA Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2020 is
developing a mature market for solar thermal water and spaceheating.
3. It’s free, easy to access, and inexhaustible.4. Risk Mitigation - Solar energy doesn’t have price fluctuations5. Solar energy doesn’t depend on politics or country to country relationships6. Solar energy does reduce harmful health and environmental emissio Solar energy is marketable for healthy living
Collector Technologies
• Unglazed Collector
• Flat Plate
• Evacuated Tube
• Concentrating Solar Collector
• Solar Air Heating
Glazed Flat Plate CollectorCost:
$90-$200/ft2
Temperatures:85°F to 160°F
Typical Applications:DHW Heating
Radiant Floor Space Heating
Pros
Proven technology
Long term functionality
High aperture area (0.97)
Cons
Temperature limitations – efficiency drop at high temperatures
Evacuated Tube Collector
Cost:$130-$250/ft2
Temperatures:Up to 300°F
Typical Applications:DHWLow-temp IndustrialSpace Heating
ProsHigher temperature than flat plateImproved efficiency at higher operating temperaturesPipe bursting due to freezing is not such a concern as it is with flat plates
ConsVacuum may be lost over time – efficiency lostSlightly higher initial cost vs. flat plateSmaller aperture area (0.72)
Storage Tank
• Acts as a battery to hold thesystem’s heat
• Up to 6,000 gallons +
• Size depends on desired storagelength and usage patterns
• Constant usage facilities: small sizerequirement
• Daily spikes in water usage: largetank size requirement to storeenough heat for daily spike
• Above or underground storage
• Insulation
Other System Components
• Heat exchangers: Single or double walled depending on fluidcomposition and pressure
• Controls: Turn pumps on to activate the system whencollector temperature exceeds tank temperature, and turnpumps off when collectors temperature falls. Variable speeddrive controls save electricity
• Pumps, Piping, & fitting: Minimize pipe lengths to minimizeheat loss.
• Insulation – Prevents solar heat from escaping to ambientsurroundings
• Auxiliary heat source: Existing fuel source
Overheating & FreezeProtection
Stagnation is the condition in which heat transfer fluid boils off inthe collector, due to prolonged solar exposure with no coolingflow. If Glycol is the heat transfer fluid, it can degrade to glycolicacid which has no freeze protection properties and can degradesystem components.
Freeze Protection - Indirect Forced Circulation(Closed Loop)
• Active closed loop glycol
• Closed loop drainback
System Design
Factors For a Successful Solar ThermalInstallation:
1. Large, consistent demand for hot water2. Structural analysis of building by a structural engineer3. High energy costs4. Energy modeling before installation to protect against
system oversizing / undersizing.5. Strong environmental interest of building
owner/operator6. Site location conducive to installation (i.e. collector
location near integration point, short / direct pipingruns, room for easily accessible storage, etc.).
UMass Med Center – 3D Model
Satellite Photo BEAM 3D Model
Po
un
ds
of
Stea
m
Current Steam Costs & Usage –Hospital & School
20,000,000
16,000,000
Steam Breakdown
12,000,000
8,000,000
4,000,000
0
Jan-11 Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Aug-11 Sep-11 Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11
Month
Steam Generation Costs
Jan ‘11 Feb ‘11 Mar ‘11 Apr ‘11 May ‘11 June ‘11 July ‘11 Aug ‘11 Sept ‘11 Oct ‘11 Nov ‘11 Dec ‘11
Steam
Generated1,179,880 1,034,923 1,004,979 870,277 1,013,209 1,049,264 1,272,345 1,216,470 1,122,207 987,755 972,295 980,811
Hospital
50#152,115 132,523 130,810 101,001 82,404 75,967 75,016 75,965 75,648 91,111 98,354 120,143
School 50# 233,168 216,783 153,986 121,381 72,061 46,223 36,126 40,055 64,359 97,414 123,763 104,393
Table: $/ month on steam usage in $. ($/lb of steam = .011911)
School Hot Water UsageG
allo
ns
Pe
rM
inu
te
Hot water usage: Average of 5,483 gallons per day
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00
Time of Day
Prepared by: BEAM Energy & Engineering, www.beamgrp.com
Hospital Hot Water UsageG
allo
ns
Pe
rM
inu
te(G
PM
)
Hot water usage: Average of 3,540 gallons per day (Hot Water Monitoring Data conducted by UMass Med staff)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00 12:00 0:00
Time of DayHot Water Uses
• Licensed Beds: 781 (plus 69 bassinets)• Active Medical Staff: 1,327• Registered Nurses: 2,409• Employees: 10,695
• Births: 4,115• Hospital Admissions: 42,400• Emergency Department Visits: 140,915• Ambulatory Department Visits: 864,664• Approximately 1,000 students annually
Equipment & Layout
School Project
Satellite Photo BEAM 3D Model
School Building System Integration PipingDiagram
Collector array
Collector Array: Glazed flat plate; 4,045 ft2
Installation: 35° inclination; south facingCold water in
Check valve
Bypass valve
Recirculation/ emergencyshower loop
Target Load: DHW -Bathroom, Showers
GPD: 5,500
Existing shell andtube heat
Thermostatic mixingvalve
To DHW fixtures
exchanger Equipment Location: B-Level Mechanical Room
School Building Equipment Location: B-Level Mechanical Room
Primary Heat Exchanger to TargetLocation in Mechanical Room for Buffer
Tank, Controls, Heat Exchangers
School
Prepared by: BEAM Energy & Engineering, www.beamgrp.com
Collector Layout School Building
School Building
-Distance between collector and edges: 10’
-Arrow shows B-Level Mechanical Rm -where tank, heat exchangers, and controls willbe located will be located
-Individual bank length: 24’
Hospital Project
Satellite Photo BEAM 3D Model
Hospital Building System Integration PipingDiagram
Collector array
Collector Array: Glazed flat plate; 2,697 ft2 (96 7x4’s)
Installation: 35° inclination; south facing
Check valve Typical Warranties
-10 year warranty on the collectors;
-2 year warranty for other components;
-Comprehensive 2 year installation/labor warranty.
Target Load: Showers,Bathroom, Kitchen/café, 3,500GPD
Thermostaticmixing valve
2,700 gallonbuffer tank
Existing shell andtube heat exchanger
Bypass valve
To DHW fixtures
Equipment Location: 9th Floor Mechanical Room
9thHospital Building Equipment Location:Floor Mechanical Room
Location in Mechanical Room for Buffer Tank,Controls, Heat Exchangers
Note: One of the 1,980gallon DHW tanks isdecommissioned andcould potentially be usedas the solar buffer tank. Ifnot, ample open spaceexists.
Collector Layout Hospital Building
Hospital Building
-Distance between collector and roofedges: 10’
-Arrow shows 9th Floor Mechanical Rmwhere tank, heat exchangers, and controlswill be located
-Individual bank length: 32’
-96 total collectors - twelve rows of 8
System Performance - Both
Prepared by: BEAM Energy & Engineering, www.beamgrp.com
School Hospital
Installed Collector Power 898 kBtu/hr 598kBtu/hr
Irradiation onto Collector 2
Surface508 kBtu/ft Annually 508kBtu/ft2 Annually
Energy Delivered by the 2
Collectors218 kBtu/ft annually 229kBtu/ft2 annually
System Efficiency 41% 44%
Solar Fraction 58% 61%
Prepared by: BEAM Energy & Engineering, www.beamgrp.com
School
Solar Fraction
Hospital
Yellow= solar contribution: 580,899 kBtu
Orange = Total energy consumption 948,939 kBtu
Yellow= solar contribution: 838,270 kBtu
Orange = Total energy consumption1,439,714 kBtu
Costing & Financials
Prepared by: BEAM Energy & Engineering, www.beamgrp.com
Energy and Emissions
Hospital School
Energy Savings• 10,199 therms / yr
• 305,970 therms / lifetime
• 19,854 therms / yr
• 576,300 therms / lifetime
Cost Savings• $13,598 / yr
• $646,933
• $30,592 / yr
• $1,437,824
Annual Pollution
Reduction
•100,305 lbs CO2
•128 lbs NOx annually
•200,377 lbs CO2
•257 lbs NOx annually
Prepared by: BEAM Energy & Engineering, www.beamgrp.com
Typical Costs
• Eliminate missedcomponents• Can compare andunderstand bids moreeasily• Allows for independentcomponent cost analysis• Nearly eliminates changeorders
Prepared by: BEAM Energy & Engineering, www.beamgrp.com
Costs
• Average Flat Plate Hot Water System - $158/ft2• School - $133/ft2• Hospital - $123/ft2 Prepared by: BEAM Energy & Engineering, www.beamgrp.com
Cost
Hospital School
Cost of System $539,439 $338,601
MassCEC Incentive $30,000 $30,000
LBE TBD TBD
Total Cost $509,439 $308,601
Simple Payback 13.8 years 14.1 years
Prepared by: BEAM Energy & Engineering, www.beamgrp.com
Other Potential Incentives
School Hospital
Incentives
1. Tax incentives if the university can take advantage of
them
a. Federal Investment Tax Credit: 30% after grants.
b. Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System:
Approx. 26.5%
ITC $152,832 $92,580
MACRS $132,454 $81,779
Prepared by: BEAM Energy & Engineering, www.beamgrp.com
Construction
Prepared by: BEAM Energy & Engineering, www.beamgrp.com
Construction Logistics
Project Prep Intake Description
Utilities Available For Contractor: Public building available to the contractor.:- Source of Temp Utilities Shut down Procedures Require # day notice and detail of how it- Facilities Available On Site will affect the building occupants. Any shutdowns must be- Shutdown Procedures operational by the end of the day
Traffic – Crane Logistics Delivery Traffic and Site Loading requires # day notice anddetail of how it will affect the building occupants.Location:
Parking Location Onsite:
Work Days and Hours Work Days:Work Hours: TBD am allowed on-site, noise allowed TBD am toTBD pm.
Ingress and Egress To Site:
Owner’s Expectations Safety, On-time Delivery, language, and HousekeepingOther:
Real-Time Internet PerformanceMonitoring
• Data stored on server•Know how much heatthe system is producing•Alerts if systemmalfunctions
etc). Automated email alerts can be set up.
Maintenance and PersonnelRequirements
Annual glycol check with a refractometer. Estimated glycol exchanging every 5 years
Visual check for the collectors, piping, and tank for leaks, stains, broken glass.
Monitoring units send notifications if the system malfunctions (Pressure drop,broken valve,
Summary
Substantial Reduction in water heating costs
Carbon goals may be unattainable without solar fuel and heatingtechnologies
Both Hospital and School are excellent applications due to highwater usage, year round loading, and favorable siting conditions
Potentially apply for LBE grant to help offset cost
MassCEC just started new commercial grant program
458 DCAMM UMMC Worcester, MA | AL2 Energy Audit | Renewables Report
RENEWABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGY REPORT