Daylighting Design Tools -- Do We Have the Right

0 downloads 0 Views 3MB Size Report
Sep 24, 1999 - ☞No ceiling lighting fixtures. ☞Indirect LPD = 4.95 W/m2. ☞Task LPD = 3.55 W/m2. ☞Total LPD = 8.5 W/m2. ☞(ASHRAE 90.1 LPD = 17 W/m2 ) ...
Zero general illumination (ZGI): an energy, comfort, and lighting performance evaluation using an energy simulation model for sustainable office building design PLEA’99 Brisbane, Australia 22-25 Sept 1999 by Larry O. Degelman Visiting Guest Professor Nagoya University [email protected] 24 Sept 1999

© L.O. Degelman, Sept 1999

Objective 

To investigate the viability of using zero general illumination (ZGI) in a critical seeing environment (design and drafting room), with specific reference to: – – – – –

Seeing conditions Lighting power densities Life-cycle cost economics Integration with motion sensors Comfort hours

Procedures  Course

assignment  Simulate a case study building (with a conventional lighting design)  Simulate with ZGI and daylight  Simulate with motion sensors

Course assignment (27 grad students) Arch 633, Env. Controls, Fall semester 1998

1. Calculate number of luminaires to provide 550 Lux in a 10x13-meter office module w/ 12 desks. 2. Calculate the resulting lighting power density. 3. Perform annual energy and cost simulation for lighting & HVAC 4. Design indirect lighting scheme to provide 110 Lux throughout and 440 Lux additional at each workstation. 5. Repeat annual energy simulations and compare energy and life-cycle cost results to no. 3 above.

Student project results

Student’s simulation results

Student’s LCC comparison results

Summary of student results Recessed fluorescents (base case): LPD = 15 W/m2 (ASHRAE Std 90.1 = 17 W/m2)  Indirect lights w/ task lights (new design): LPD = 5.9 to 9.36 W/m2  Annual energy savings = 36 to 45%  Life-cycle cost savings (20-yr life) = 23 to 35% 

Case study building

5th floor office plan

BRW Architects office interior

Case study typical workstation

Adjacent conventional office lighting

Case study building  Area

= 300 sq.m.  No ceiling lighting fixtures  Indirect LPD = 4.95 W/m2  Task LPD = 3.55 W/m2  Total LPD = 8.5 W/m2  (ASHRAE

90.1 LPD = 17 W/m2 )

BRW office plan sketch in Ener-Win

Ceiling-mounted motion sensors

Lighting pattern for 5.5 days

Monte-Carlo on-off simulation model. For any one minute, lights turn on,  If Oncycle > 1 minute, then if – Rand(1) < prob/[1+(1-prob)*(Oncycle^0.9)] – Lights stay on for “Oncycle” minutes.  If

Oncycle = 1 minute, then if

– Rand(1) < prob – Lights on for just 1 minute.  Else

lights are off.

Life-Cycle Cost PROJECT ECONOMIC LIFE ASSUMED IS 20.0 YEARS. TOTAL $/Sq.m. ------------------CONSTRUCTION $ 8787243. 371.94 LIGHTING 549203. 23.25 HVAC 1114774. 47.19 WALLS 846832. 35.84 WINDOWS 57092. 2.42 ------------------ -----TOTAL 1ST COST $ 11355143. 480.64 PRESENT WORTH OF FUTURE ENERGY COSTS GAS 444815. 18.83 ELEC 2260369. 95.68 MAINT 621831. 26.32 --------------- --------TOTAL PW OF O & M 3327015. 140.82 -----------------------TOTAL PRESENT WORTH $ 14682159. 621.46 ------------------------

Discomfort hours > 26C 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500

Texas Brisbane Nagoya ZG I

MS ZG I&

Co nv

en

tio n

al

0

Lighting option results

350

An. En. (MJ/m2)

300

Tot.LCC (/m2)

250

Tot.1st Cst (/m2)

200

HVAC Cst (/m2)

150

An.Op.Cst (/m2)

100

An. Htg (MJ/m2)

50

An. Clg (kWh/m2)

Lighting Option

MS

An. Ltg (kWh/m2)

Indirct

Conv.

0

LCC results in 3 cities 350 300 250 LCC/sq.m in 200 local units 150 100 Nagoya

50

Brisbane

0 Conv.

Texas Indirct

Lighting Option

MS

Conclusions:   

 

Office LPD can be 8.5 W/sq.m. in critical seeing areas (183 Lux general to 1100 Lux on task) This is a reduction of 50% from ASHRAE 90.1 recommended value of 17 W/sq.m. Annual lighting energy savings in range of 36 to 45% in spaces where indirect lighting is applied 20-yr LCC savings of 10% to 13% for indirect lighting scheme and 17 to 22% for motion sensors. Comfort hours improved by 10% in climates evaluated for non air-conditioned spaces.

Acknowledgments

BRW Architects  for their permission to take measurements in their office space and  CIRSE lab at Nagoya University for their support during the analyses and writing phases of this work. 

Building performance simulation using ENER-WIN software.  Download

at Web site: http://taz.tamu.edu/~energy/enerwin.html

 Contact:

[email protected][email protected]